Earlier this week, President Trump was in Davos, Switzerland, where he was set to give a speech in front of the World Economic Forum. The speech he gave is perhaps one of his best speeches of his administration that not only lambasts the climate cult’s ridiculous fearmongering apocalyptic predictions but also gives a positive message of hope for the future of the country, and any country that follows a similar path, as all good presidents do.
Of course, as many speeches go, it is far too long for me to write out the entire transcript of it and make the points that I wish to make, so let us highlight some important parts.
The President began his speech by noting how the U.S. is “boldly embracing American energy independence” in order to protect our security and our economy, and not allowing us to become dependent on imported energy from “hostile nations.” He pointed out how “while many European countries struggle with crippling energy costs, the American energy revolution is saving American families $2,500 every year in lowering electric bills and… prices at the pump.”
He also pointed out that, with this independence and with allowing for innovation, U.S. companies and researchers are leading the way and “we are on the threshold of virtually unlimited reserves of energy, including from traditional fuels, LNG, clean coal, next-generation nuclear power, and gas hydrate technologies.”
This, of course, goes against the climate cult’s narrative that there will be fuel shortages if we continue to depend on fossil fuels and that dependency on such fuels is “not sustainable”. With fracking, we are capable of producing far more energy than before without needing to worry about any sort of “shortage”. Of course, fracking is considered taboo to the climate cult not because it is not a good energy option, but because it IS a good energy option and it helps the fossil fuel industry and helps to continue generating energy without the need of the expensive and ineffective garbage the cult would force upon us.
As a result of these strategies, fuel is cheaper across the board and we are far from experiencing any sort of shortages. And at the same time, Trump noted that he is “proud to report the United States has among the cleanest air and drinking water on Earth… and we just came out with a report that, at this moment, it’s the cleanest it’s been in the last 40 years. We’re committed to conserving the majesty of God’s creation and the natural beauty of our world.”
This is not good news for the climate cult whatsoever. Their entire shtick is that we are killing the planet and making it dirtier and harder to live in, so we must turn over all of our rights and liberties to the government so that they can “solve” this “issue”. But reality is, as I have said time and time again, not what they make it out to be. Despite our usage of fossil fuels, we have clean water and air, which is far more than anyone could say about communist China. This is because we have the ability to use fossil fuels without compromising the environment around us.
But regardless, here is what I think is the best part of the speech:
“This is not a time for pessimism; this is a time for optimism. Fear and doubt is not a good thought process because this is a time for tremendous hope and joy and optimism and action. But to embrace the possibilities of tomorrow, we must reject the perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse. They are the heirs of yesterday’s foolish fortune-teller – and I have them and you have them, and we all have them, and they want to see us do badly, but we don’t let that happen. They predicted an overpopulation crisis in the 1960s, mass starvation in the ‘70s, and an end of oil in the 1990s. These alarmists always demand the same thing: absolute power to dominate, transform, and control every aspect of our lives.”
“We will never let radical socialists destroy our economy, wreck our country, or eradicate our liberty. America will always be the proud, strong, and unyielding bastion of freedom. In America, we understand what the pessimists refuse to see: that a growing and vibrant market economy focused on the future lifts the human spirit and excites creativity strong enough to overcome any challenge – any challenge by far.”
The President is absolutely right about everything he said here. Despite how eternally pessimistic and angry and outraged the climate cult and the whole of the global Left is, this is a time for optimism, not pessimism. At least in the U.S., we are seeing one of the greatest economies this country has ever seen, with unemployment rates the lowest they’ve been in 50 years across all demographics, the stock markets often hitting new record highs, consumer confidence being at all-time highs, and being the furthest away from a recession as an economy can get. Wages are growing, particularly for lower classes, and people are making more money than before, while also saving more than before thanks to tax cuts.
All of the apocalyptic predictions we are hearing lately (the climate puppet recently said we only have 8 years now to fix climate change and Michael Moore also chimed in and said that we only have four years to fix it, probably having said this after eating Taco Bell) are not only scientifically unsound and unwarranted, but they serve the purpose of trying to scare people into giving up their rights. Even the climate puppet, who was also at this economic forum, said “I said I wanted you to panic” and does not feel that that is in any way wrong or dangerous because of the purpose: to drive fear into people’s hearts.
Of course, she failed, as have many others, but the point remains that they are fearmongers. It is only fitting, then, that Trump would point out their ridiculous past “prophecies” that have very obviously not come true because they were not going to come true.
They predicted starvation, mass overpopulation, acid rain, fuel shortages, increase in strength and frequency of storms and mass extinction. In September of last year, I wrote an article detailing *some* of over 40 different predictions these partisan hacks have made over the years with not a single one of them having come true. They have no credibility whatsoever, nor do they have the science backing them up.
Whenever you hear them saying “the ice caps are melting”, you eventually find that there is more ice today than when that prediction was made. Every prediction they have made has not panned out and eventually, people begin to catch on to the b.s., or at least, that’s the desired outcome (indoctrination in our schools does a good job of fooling kids into continuing to believe this nonsense).
And we all know why it is that they make these apocalyptic predictions, even though none of them have any sort of chance of coming true. It’s as the President said and as I pointed out earlier: to obtain absolute power to dominate, transform and rule every aspect of our lives. They want to tell us what kind of lightbulb to use, not because it is good for us (many of the bulbs the Obama administration regulated onto us can be poisonous if broken) or for the environment, but because they want to be able to order us around – to have dominion over our lives as though they were God Himself.
Even the ones who do not believe in any sort of god believe in the power that God has and want it for themselves. This is the aim of the climate cult, but hopefully, reason will win out in the end and these people will be reformed, leaving behind the disastrous and destructive ideologies of the cult in favor of the Light of God.
Regardless of whether or not that will happen (I do believe some people within the climate cult can be saved), returning to Trump, as I said, this is perhaps one of his best speeches as president. Of course, he spoke far more than what I wrote about, but the rest of the speech basically was about recognizing the successes of the past as a result of people’s hopes and their ability to make progress without being impeded by a pesky government.
The message he wanted to give to the people of Davos was one of hope for the future. That so long as the human mind is free and entrepreneurs are not impeded in their desire to enrich themselves and improve people’s lives in however small or large manner, there will be hope for the future. Sure, there is far more hope to be found in the Lord than in Man, but as he was speaking in front of an economic forum, it makes sense that this sort of hope is what he would want to drive.
And he’s not wrong to do this either, as a free market economy is far more capable of granting people hope than a communist economy where few things are private.
“May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may abound in hope.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
When the Left isn’t excusing itself for the horrendous act of killing the unborn, they attempt to do the second closest thing they can: completely pervert and destroy young children’s minds with lies, deceit, and utter perversion.
While they already do plenty of the first two when they indoctrinate kids into believing we are killing the planet, Democrats in Washington State want to do the third thing with young children starting from kindergarten.
Democrats in Washington State are pushing House Bill 2184, which states: “In accordance with the requirements in this section and any recommendations of the sexual health education work group… that are enacted by the legislature, every public school shall provide comprehensive sexual health education to each student by the 2022-23 school year.”
Radio host Jason Rantz of KTTH points out about the bill: “One section of the curriculum for teachers to use as a guide suggests talking to students about the penis as not having ‘any bones in it, but when people talk about an erection as a “boner”, they’re mistaken.’ Girls are taught about a ‘very sensitive little area at the top called the clitoris.’”
I don’t know about girls, but I learned about these sexual things, for the most part, in middle school, not necessarily because we had classes specifically dedicated to teach these things (I wouldn’t have payed much attention anyway) but because that is roughly the age when puberty hits us and we begin to ask questions about ourselves and our bodies.
A FIVE-YEAR-OLD does not wonder about a “boner”. A FIVE-YEAR-OLD does not wonder about the clitoris. When I was around that age, I once went to a beach and saw a girl who was younger who, for some reason, did not have her bottom on. Embarrassing as it is to say this, I saw what she had and briefly made a mental note about how she didn’t have what I have. Then I promptly went about my business because I WAS AROUND FIVE YEARS OLD AND I DIDN’T CARE ABOUT THAT STUFF!
Wanna know what I cared about at that age? Watching cartoons while eating a sandwich and drinking orange juice. I cared about playing with my toys; playing with my Max Steel action figure; playing with my toy cars (I really liked cars back then, so I had a lot of them); going to friends’ houses to play with them and their toys. I cared about watching old Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network or Disney Channel shows (that were not old at the time) and generally watching and enjoying TV. I DID NOT CARE OR KNOW ABOUT SEXUALITY BACK THEN BECAUSE THAT’S NORMAL FOR SOMEONE THAT AGE!
But the Left cares not for the normal. They care not for what is right. They want to mold and manipulate young people’s minds, as evidenced by the fright they give them about climate change. They want to teach young kids about sexual things and, what’s worse, about how “some” boys don’t have penises and about how “some” girls don’t have a vagina aka about transgenderism, in an attempt to normalize it.
According to The Daily Wire, the curriculum has statements such as the following: “This lesson does, however, acknowledge that ‘there are some body parts that mostly just girls have and some parts that mostly just boys have. Being a boy or a girl doesn’t have to mean you have those parts, but for most people this is how their bodies are.’”
Rantz also noted how the curriculum suggests for 1st grade students, “teachers should have their students read ‘My Princess Boy’ before teaching the six and seven-year-olds about reproduction.”
That revolting book is about exactly what you think it is about: a gender-confused boy. On Amazon, the description says: “Dyson loves pink, sparkly things. Sometimes he wears dresses. Sometimes he wears jeans. He likes to wear his princess tiara, even when climbing trees. He’s a Princess Boy.”
This is the sort of filth Washington State Democrats want young kids to read and I doubt this sentiment is contained within the borders of that particular state. The Left is EXTREMELY disturbed and this is one of the MANY reasons I say that they are evil. There’s just no other way to explain this sort of disturbing behavior. Wanting young kids to learn about sex and transgenderism is SICK and DEPRAVED and anyone who defends this perversion is just as twisted as the people pushing for it at the State’s capital.
This, by the way, goes against the will of the people, who 54% say that “sex education for children in grades K-5 should not be required,” according to The Daily Wire. But public opinion be damned, these perverts want to destroy young people’s minds and they will do everything within their power to do it.
And unfortunately, they will likely get their way, barring some miracle, as both legislative chambers in the State of Washington are controlled by Democrats, with the House having 57 Democrats to 41 Republicans and the Senate having 28 Democrats to 21 Republicans, so the disgusting bill will, in all likelihood, be eventually passed (if before the 2020 election) in both chambers of State Congress.
Despite the fact that most people do not want young kids to be taught about sexual education (though 54% is about 46 percentage points too low for my liking) and despite how clearly evil and disgusting it is, the Democrats in this State will push to teach young kids about things they couldn’t care less about and things that will only end up either confusing them further about a subject they couldn’t care less about or end up messing them up profusely, which is likely the desired outcome for the Democrats, though they would never admit it.
But beyond everything else, these sons and daughters of Satan will seek to cause these young children to sin against the Lord, because that is their desire, even if they don’t know it or believe in a God to sin against in the first place.
In Matthew chapter 18, the disciples asked Jesus “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” Jesus called a child to him, put him in the midst of them and said: “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world for temptations of sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes!”
Now, before anyone says it, yes, I know that this is not about a literal child, but about a Christian being humbled, like a child, but being led astray by someone who is evil and forcing the Christian to sin against God. That teaching from Jesus was about “the greatest in the kingdom of heaven” being those who humble themselves before the Lord, similar to how a child humbles himself and is ready to be taught, not necessarily about actual children being led astray. However, there is no doubt in my mind that there are children in the State of Washington who go to public school and are believers of the Lord Jesus. And with this sort of curriculum, they are being led astray so as to sin against the Lord.
In this case, the Bible passage’s meaning takes a bit more of a literal meaning than it was originally intended, but the point remains: the evil Left is causing believers in Christ, who humble themselves in His name, to sin against the Lord. This is the great evil that the Left is doing, following their father the devil in his evil deeds.
The Left, in all their evil, believes God has no place in school, but that it is perfectly acceptable to teach young kids about sexuality and about transgenderism as being perfectly normal and moral. Unsurprising to me, but revolting nonetheless.
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who turn darkness to light and light to darkness, who replace bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
As I was reading financial and technology news I came across this article from Fox Business News. I have to admit that I felt a little sick to my stomach when I read this report of Hollywood bringing James Dean back to life….to give him a role and a career! Can you believe it?
Here’s what Fox Business recently reported:
“The men bringing James Dean back to life for a forthcoming film are aiming not just to give his digital likeness a role, but a whole new career.
Dean’s planned appearance in the Vietnam War movie ‘Finding Jack,’ and the possibility of future parts, comes as digital de-aging and duplication of real actors has tipped from cinematic trick into common practice. And it's giving new life to old arguments about the immortality and dignity of the dead.
‘Our intentions are to create the virtual being of James Dean. That's not only for one movie, but going to be used for many movies and also gaming and virtual reality,’ said Travis Cloyd, CEO of Worldwide XR, who is leading the design on the Dean project. ‘Our focus is on building the ultimate James Dean so he can live across any medium.’”
If you’re feeling uneasy about what these people are trying to do, it’s because God put in you His morality so that you can discern right from wrong.
You see, these people are justifying their actions by what some of their predecessors in other movies did:
“’This is disruptive technology,’ Cloyd said. ‘Some people hear it for the first time and they get shaken by it. But this is where the market is going.’
The revival of the dead, often done clumsily, has been happening for much of Hollywood's existence.
Footage of Bela Lugosi, combined with a double holding a cape over his face, was used in 1959’s ‘Plan 9 From Outer Space,’ released after the horror star's death. Bruce Lee’s film ‘Game of Death,’ left unfinished before his 1973 death, was completed using doubles and voice overdubs and released five years later. ‘The Fast and the Furious’ star Paul Walker died in 2013 before shooting was done on ‘Furious 7.’ His two younger brothers and others acted as stand-ins so his scenes could be finished.
Even Lennon, and many other dead historical figures, were digitally revived in 1994 in ‘Forrest Gump.’
But the technology of recreation and resurrection has taken a major leap forward in quality and prestige, with the extensive de-aging and re-aging used in Martin Scorsese’s ‘The Irishman’; a young Will Smith digitally returning to play opposite the current version in last summer's ‘Gemini Man’; and Carrie Fisher, whose younger self briefly returned digitally in 2016's ‘Star Wars: Rogue One’ and appeared again after her death, in ‘Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker.’
Let me decode this for you. What they mean to say is they’re going to push for this “new normal” in technology until you accept it as normal as if normal meant “right”.
So what if Bela Lugosi was brought to “life” by a double in 1959 to finish a project? So what if Bruce Lee’s “Game of Death” film was completed by doubles after his death? So what if Lennon appeared next to Forrest Gump? In the first two cases, doubles were used for one particular purpose: to finish a film, and the practice stopped there. Nobody else brought Bela Lugosi or Bruce Lee back to life to give them careers. Even Lennon appearing with Forrest Gump (or any other doctored video of actual people, such as JFK, for that matter) is not really a moral problem when it’s done this way.
Doctoring a video to place yourself in the swearing in of, say, JFK or Donald Trump as President, can be artistic, but not morally wrong. Even making yourself look younger or older in a photo or video can be artistic but not morally wrong (unless you’re using it to fool people into thinking you’re younger or older than you are for a larger purpose, such as fraud). The key is: what’s your motive? Vanity? Just trying to look better? Or fraud where you’re actually trying to steal something from someone?
But let’s face it, bringing a dead man to life for PROFIT is EVIL. They’re doing this for MONEY. Not to mention the idea that they’re going to CREATE a digital image of James Dean, not use old footage as was the case with John Lennon in Forrest Gump, is morally wrong.
Morality cannot be based on what's normal at the moment! Slavery was normal, but it was wrong. Abortion is somewhat normal, but it’s still wrong. Transgenderism is also somewhat normal (or they’re trying to normalize it), and it’s still wrong. Having males compete against women in sports is being pushed as normal, but it’s still wrong. And bringing people back from the dead, pretending they’re alive and giving them a role in a movie is as wrong as talking to dead people, or the Ouija board game, which attempts to contact dead people and having them talk to you!
What I find fascinating is what Pablo Helman said:
“Pablo Helman, the visual effects supervisor behind the de-aging of Robert De Niro and others in ‘The Irishman,’ said he considers that moral dilemma in his work.
‘The main question that you need to ask yourself is why do it?’ Helman said. ‘You know, just because you can do it doesn't mean you should, you know? That would be one thing that I'm always questioning: Is it in service of the story?’”
Why you do it, is the question. “Is it in service of the story?” HA! So now morality is based upon a certain action being in service of the story? Slavery was definitely in service of the Southern economy. Was it right? So what if a few make hundreds of millions of dollars, in service of the story out of this?
The question of morality is not decided by the majority and it’s not decided by economics or arts – it’s decided by God Himself.
In Deuteronomy 18:10-12 we read: “anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD”.
By doing these things – creating digital beings of people who have died so that these images assume a role in a movie (not even acting as self!) is an abomination to the Lord. There’s a reason people have a negative reaction to these things, as Cloyd confessed. It’s occultism. It’s Satanism. They don't need to do any of this - they can just hire a real, living actor. So why do this unless you're working knowingly or unknowingly for Satan himself!
God has written His law in our souls. It’s wrong what Hollywood is doing. People know it. The authors of this evil know it. You know it and I know it. It’s simply wrong. And it’s always wrong to do wrong.
1 Chronicles 10:13-14:
“So Saul died for his breach of faith. He broke faith with the LORD in that he did not keep the command of the LORD and also consulted a medium, seeking guidance. He did not seek guidance from the LORD. Therefore the LORD put him to death and turned the kingdom over to David the son of Jesse.“
Author: Danielle Cross
Politics has infected a lot of things, but perhaps the worst thing that it could have infected was the field of science, as science relies on empirical data and facts, but now has been reduced to nothing more than a sort of democracy, where the mob rules what is considered “science”. It is extremely difficult to have an honest scientific conversation about the climate without someone bringing up talking points from the climate cult that make zero sense to those who are not intellectually deficient.
However, speaking to the House Committee On Science, Space and Technology, a sincere climate scientist absolutely shredded the talking points of the climate cult, though without necessarily naming any names (though you and I both know the two people he likely was talking about).
Michael D. Shellenberger, President of Environmental Progress, got to speak in front of this House committee regarding the science of climate change. He began by explaining his background in the field:
“I am an energy analyst and environmentalist dedicated to the goals of universal prosperity, peace, and environmental protection. Between 2003 and 2009, I advocated for a large federal investment in renewables, many of which were made as part of the 2009 stimulus. And since 2013, I have advocated for the continued operation of nuclear plants around the world and thus helped prevent emissions from increasing the equivalent of adding 24 million cars to the road.”
“I also care about getting the facts and science right. I believe that scientists, journalists, and advocates have an obligation to represent climate science accurately, even if doing so reduces the saliency of our concerns.” For this, I predict the man will be labeled a “climate denier” despite the fact that he does believe in man-made climate change. The guy, unfortunately, does not quite understand the very reason as to why it is that some scientists, journalists and advocates do not represent climate science accurately. They don’t claim that Miami, Los Angeles or other cities around the world will be flooded in the next 10 to 20 years because they believe it to be true, but rather, so that people will be scared enough to the point where they will vote for the people who claim to have an answer to this “issue” in the form of hardcore communism.
But regardless, he continued: “No credible scientific body has claimed climate change threatens the collapse of civilization, much less the extinction of the human species. And yet, some activists, scientists, and journalists make such apocalyptic assertions, which I believe contribute to rising levels of anxiety, including among adolescents, and worsening political polarization.”
That part was particular great, because we all know what ridiculous climate cultish “warnings” he was referring to. AOC has advocated that we only have about 12 years to implement the socialist GND before the world ends, and the now-17-year-old climate puppet has famously declared that humanity was facing “mass extinction” as a result of climate change, both of which are nonsensical apocalypse warnings that are only meant to scare people to the point where they will willingly give up their rights and freedoms in exchange for “safety” from climate change.
But as it usually works out, those who give up freedom for safety gain nothing. Benjamin Franklin once famously said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” And he’s certainly right, but that’s not where it ends. Those who would give up their liberty for some safety deserve neither and will receive neither.
Just look at Venezuela. They were told to give up their weapons and that doing so would make the country safer, but the country is more dangerous today than it was back then and now, they have no liberty either.
Look, also, at China, or in specific, Hong Kong. I remember, back when the Hong Kong protests were still a major story, watching a video of a woman asking the Hong Kong protesters why they wanted freedom if they would lose their safety (not putting that in quotation marks because I don’t remember the exact wording of the question, but that was the general point: why give up safety in exchange for freedom?) What the woman fails to understand is that liberty GIVES THEM safety.
Remember, the protests began because the Chinese government wanted to pass an extradition bill that would allow them to take people from Hong Kong and arrest them and send them to mainland China if they “perceived” that person to be a threat to the State. What part of that gives the people of Hong Kong any sort of safety?
But regardless, bringing this long tangent to an end, the reason people like AOC and Greta Thunberg make such ridiculous claims is to get people to be scared enough to vote into power those who claim to have an answer to the problem they create. They don’t have a vested interest in the truth.
But Shellenberger does appear to be interested in the truth, at least, as much as he understands it. “My colleagues and I have carefully reviewed the science, interviewed the individuals who make such claims and written a series of articles debunking them.”
Again, it’s possible that some in the climate cult will brand Shellenberger a “climate denier” but they don’t have a real reason to. He does believe in climate change, particularly man-made climate change as he suggests in the following quote: “While climate change may make some natural disasters more frequent and extreme, the death toll from extreme events could and should continue to decline, as it did over the last century by over 90 percent, even as the global population quadrupled. Does that mean we shouldn’t worry about climate change? Of course not. Policymakers routinely take action on non-apocalyptic problems. And the risk of crossing unknown tipping points rises with higher temperatures.”
The guy does believe in man-made climate change and believes policymakers have the ability to pass into law certain policies that will help to “fight back” against climate change. Of course, the guy is definitely wrong here. I’ve already discussed, at length, how there is no discernible link between climate change and extreme weather events, so the first sentence in that last quote is technically incorrect. As far as “unknown tipping points” rising “with higher temperatures” goes, this one can also be tackled by the fact we’re living in the Modern Warm Period and that there have been two other warming periods like this, at least as far as we know (and in all likelihood, there are many more), that occurred about a thousand years ago or so (known as the Medieval Warm Period) and one that occurred while the Roman Empire existed (known as the Roman Warm Period).
The sort of “higher temperatures” we experience today are nothing new, particularly for this planet, and the advancement of technology allows us to survive any sort of dynamic climate patterns, so it is unlikely that this planet will face a “tipping point” as Shellenberger and others worry about. Not that there is a link between hurricanes and climate change, but technology has allowed us to better survive hurricanes that occur. The places where we find the highest death tolls in this day and age are places that are fairly behind in technology and infrastructure (i.e. poor countries in the Caribbean).
So Shellenberger is perhaps unaware of the erroneous statements he made there, but if anything, they go to show that he’s not some random scientist that “was paid off by big oil”, as conspiracy theorists on the Left might try and argue.
This is why I say that he is a sincere scientist. He is not outright telling the truth on this matter, but it could very well be because he is simply ignorant to the truth. But at the very least, errors and all, he is sincere and honest enough not to take what many other scientists and, in particular, climate cultists are saying at face value and say “yeah, they’re right. We’re screwed unless we employ this long wish-list of socialist policies that will totally not be ineffective at combating climate change”.
Shellenberger then also went on to advocate in favor of nuclear energy, arguing that solar and wind energy, while popular, are unreliable and make electricity expensive as a result of large land use and large material requirements, all for the fact that they cannot replace the energy output of fossil fuels.
Regardless, it is nice to see someone who tries their hardest to be objective on an issue that has been so politicized that it’s practically impossible to be, or be perceived as, entirely objective. Again, he isn’t right about everything, as I have said. But at least he’s honest enough not to join the mob and demand action be taken out of fear of complete global annihilation.
He believes climate change is a threat, but he doesn’t believe it will kill us all, particularly in the extremely short timespan that insane cultists have presented.
“Better is a poor person who walks in his integrity than one who is crooked in speech and is a fool.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
There are times when I think I understand what the Left is trying to say and do, and there are times that I just can’t. This is one of those times, as I have no idea how anyone could be stupid enough to report this the way CBS News is currently doing.
According to CBS News, “a photo of fire department recruits possibly using a racist hand gesture is being investigated by District of Columbia Fire and Emergency Medical Services… [The photo] shows some recruits in a group picture flashing a possible ‘white power’ hand gesture, but the gesture is similar to the ‘OK’ hand sign.”
CBS News’ D.C. affiliate WUSA-TV tried to explain that “the gesture in the photo might be seen as ‘WP’, for ‘White Power’, since extending three fingers is a possible ‘W’ and the ‘circle’ coming off an arm is a possible ‘P’ – ‘WP’”.
DC Fire and EMS also told WUSA that its investigation could “include interviews of everyone in the picture.”
Sometimes, the sheer stupidity of the Left is mind-boggling. We literally had this conversation a month or so ago regarding West Point graduates DOING THE EXACT SAME HAND SIGNALS and some idiots also got all uppity about that too for no real reason, only to try and smear people as “racist”.
And here is where I stand at a cross-roads. I am actually not sure if this is utter stupidity on the part of the fake news media, particularly CBS News, or if they really are just making a concerted effort to make the “OK” hand signal and the circle game a symbol of “white power” or racism. I really don’t know if this idiocy is deliberate or accidental, but by God, it’s still insane regardless of the purpose.
Do we REALLY have to have this conversation again? Do we really have to look back at EVERYONE who has made the “OK” hand symbol? Do I really have to bring up the pictures of Obama, Pelosi, the Clintons, AOC and Bill de Blasio again? Or do I now have to bring up pictures of Chuck Schumer, Oprah Winfrey, Beyonce, Elizabeth Warren and Pope Francis making the same exact hand sign? Do I have to make a case as to why each of them isn’t a racist for making this hand sign (though they are racists for other reasons)?
It’s actual insanity that these idiots would report this as though it’s a major story full of controversy WHEN WE DID THIS WHOLE ROUTINE A LITTLE OVER A MONTH AGO! Is it that they just really want to make that hand sign “racist” because Trump often makes that hand sign? Is it yet another example of the Left trying to find fault and guilt where none lies, trying to be offended by something that no one in their right mind would get offended by?
And as with the last time I covered this insanity, the people in the picture aren’t even making the ok hand sign anyway! Not that it would make any difference, as the hand sign is not racist, but still. As with the last time, the people in the picture are playing the circle game.
This is something CBS News themselves point out at the end of their story (but of course, not before trying to smear these recruits as racists because otherwise, there’d be no point in reporting this):
“The investigation comes about a month after military officials said hand gestures flashed by West Point cadets and Naval Academy midshipmen during the televised Army-Navy football game weren’t racist signals. Officials said the students were participating in a ‘circle game’ in which someone flashes an upside-down OK sign below the waist and punches anyone who looks at it.”
A couple of points here. First, I’m glad that these idiots remember the last time the fake news media tried to do this. At least, their mental capacity isn’t so pathetic as to have forgotten.
Second, I cannot commend these idiots any more than that precisely BECAUSE they remember the last time this b.s. was pulled and still tried to pull it again. This is what leads me to believe that it wasn’t an idiotic mistake, but that they REALLY want to make the ok hand signal and circle game symbols of white supremacy.
Despite the stupidity of it all, they really want to try and paint anyone who makes those hand signs as “racists”. They view dissenters as Nazis and Nazis are supposed to make particular signs with their hands/arms. In today’s age, hardly anyone would be willing to make the Nazi gesture anymore, so the media has to paint people who make a particular hand sign, such as “OK”, as people who are racists and deserve the public’s scorn.
No one in their right mind would think that those hand signs are symbols of white supremacy. Virtually EVERYONE has made that hand sign at one point or another in their lives. It’s why there are so many pictures of various different politicians, celebrities, and just random people making that hand sign: it’s NORMAL.
But one final point I would actually like to make about the fake news that is CBS is how scummy they are. They fully acknowledge the fact that it’s just the circle game and even go out of their way to explain the rules of the game: you flash that sign below the waist and whoever sees it, you can punch. They KNOW that this isn’t about race and yet, make it their mission to smear anyone who does this as a “white supremacist”.
THEY KNOW that this is nothing more than a harmless game from the early 2000s that has ZERO ties to race or anything of the sort, but they just have to try and make this country look like it’s filled with racists. That’s the larger agenda anyway. In their minds, this country is irreparably racist to its core. It was founded by racists, for racists and a racist currently sits in the White House. That is the sort mindset these people have and the sort of outlook they have on this country. But since this country ISN’T inherently racist to its core, they have to make up some serious b.s.
Want a secure border? You’re a racist. You’re white and have an opinion that doesn’t coincide with the Left? You’re racist. You want people to be able to protect themselves? You’re racist. You support Israel and the Jewish people? You’re racist. You doubt the literally incredible story of Jussie Smollett being assaulted by MAGA people who shouted “this is MAGA country” in Chicago during 7° weather? You’re racist. You think black people shouldn’t kill their own children? You’re racist. You make the OK hand sign or play the circle game? You’re racist.
Labelling people as racists is a SPORT to these people. Anyone and everyone the Left targets is a racist and the only way to be forgiven for that is to vote straight blue and donate to and support Democrats during elections.
I’m pretty sure I don’t need to explain why everything about this is utter bullcrap.
Just like I said when the media tried to smear the West Point graduates: this is why no one likes the media.
“Woe to those who devise wickedness and work evil on their beds! When the morning dawns, they perform it, because it is in the power of their hand.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Social media was abuzz earlier this week shortly following the seventh Democrat debate and the last one before the Iowa caucuses were set to begin due to how CNN treated Crazy Bernie with some of the questions asked.
There was one particular moment during the Democrat debates that had Bernie supporters actually agreeing with Trump supporters that CNN is garbage. But this moment likely was set up from the start of the week.
You see, back on Monday, CNN reported that Sen. Bernie Sanders told Sen. Elizabeth Warren during a private 2018 dinner where it was just the two of them that he didn’t think a woman could win the presidency. CNN’s source? Their usual b.s. of “anonymous sources”.
Of course, Bernie denied such an accusation and again did so during the debate when he was asked if he did actually say that to Elizabeth Warren:
“CNN reported yesterday and Senator Warren confirmed in a statement that in 2018, you told her that you did not believe a woman could win the presidential election. Why did you say that?” asked debate moderator Abby Phillips.
“Well, as a matter of fact, I didn’t say it. And I don’t want to waste a whole lot of time on this, because this is what Donald Trump and maybe some of the media want. Anybody [who] knows me knows that it’s incomprehensible that I would think that a woman cannot be president of the United States. Go to YouTube today. There’s a video of me 30 years ago talking about how a woman could become president of the United States. In 2015, I deferred, in fact, to Sen. Warren. There was a movement to draft Sen. Warren to run for president. And you know what… [I] stayed back. Sen. Warren decided not to run, and I… did run afterwards. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million votes. How could anybody in a million years not believe that a woman could become president of the United States?”
I do not like Bernie whatsoever and thoroughly believe that all of his ideas would destroy this country almost immediately. Funny enough, in a rare moment of journalistic integrity (at least, somewhat), a couple of chyrons from CNN during the debate read: “Sanders’ proposals would double federal spending over a decade; how will he avoid bankrupting the country?” and “Does Sanders owe voters an explanation of how much his health care plan will cost them and the country?” These are the types of questions journalists NEVER are supposed to ask Democrats, but they did for Bernie (although they didn’t ask the same of Warren, who is pretty well-known for stealing Bernie’s terrible ideas).
However, these chyrons, as well as another one that read: “Warren supports a new trade deal with Mexico and Canada; why is Sanders’ opposition to it wrong?”, lead us to believe that the fix is in for Bernie and that CNN is sidling up to Warren. But none of these compare to the actual moment during the debate when they blatantly took Warren’s side.
Immediately following Bernie’s answer, Abby Phillips said: “So Sen. Sanders, I do want to be clear here, you’re saying that you never told Sen. Warren that a woman could not win the election?” Bernie, of course, said: “that is correct.”
But then, Phillips turned to Warren and asked: “Sen. Warren, what did you think when Sen. Sanders told you that a woman could not win the election?”
The question wasn’t “Did Bernie tell you what you said he told you?” It wasn’t “Do you have any proof that he said what you accuse him of saying?” They just assumed that Bernie was lying and that the burden of proof fell on Bernie, not Warren, which is, of course, ridiculous as one cannot prove something didn’t happen, only that it did. One cannot outright prove that Bernie didn’t say something, only that he did, and the burden of proof falls on Warren.
Of course, this led to many people both on the Left (at least those who support Bernie) and the Right to call out CNN for their blatant bias.
Andrew Egger tweeted: “It’s WILD that CNN didn’t ask Warren to positively state that Bernie told her ‘a woman can’t win,’ seconds after he positively denied that it happened. Just ‘what did you think when he said that to you?’ Absolute malpractice.”
Saagar Enjeti from The Hill tweeted: “Seriously it is outrageous that CNN would take Warren’s accusation as a statement of fact.”
Tim Carney from the Washington Examiner said: “Bernie was mistreated by CNN.”
Reason magazine senior editor Robby Soave said: “It was a very telling moment when Bernie said he didn’t say a woman couldn’t win and then in the very next moment, the moderator just asserted that he had.”
Of course, I have my own opinions regarding this. Bernie absolutely got mistreated by CNN there. He was accused of saying something, is being lied about it, smeared about it, and he is being indicted in the court of public opinion by at least Warren supporters and others in the media. Presumption of innocence is not being granted to him by some people. In other words, he received the Brett Kavanaugh treatment from CNN.
But then again, Brett Kavanaugh is also the reason I don’t particularly feel bad for Bernie. Sure, he was wronged by CNN, but he took Dr. Ford’s side entirely when it came to the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.
Back when Kavanaugh was being confirmed by the Senate, various senators got the chance to weigh in and give their two cents on it. This is what Bernie said:
“I listened to Dr. Ford, and I listened to Judge Kavanaugh. I believe Dr. Ford. Brett Kavanaugh does not belong on the Supreme Court. If Judge Kavanaugh wants to clear his name on these very serious charges he should immediately demand a thorough FBI investigation. If not, the Senate should reject his nomination.”
Dr. Ford provided zero evidence and the witnesses that she named either did not actually witness anything, had no recollection of anything, or adamantly CONTRADICTED Ford’s testaments. There wasn’t a single shred of evidence that Brett Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her or any of the other women that the Democrats called up to accuse him and smear him. His reputation was forever ruined from that day and even now, people believe Dr. Ford and the other accusers, despite the total lack of evidence.
Bernie got a SMALL TASTE of that injustice. Warren didn’t accuse him of sexual assault. CNN and the other propaganda organizations aren’t running hit piece after hit piece smearing Bernie as a serial sexual offender. His political future (short as it might be) is not heavily threatened by these accusations of sexism. Yes, he was wronged by CNN for assuming he said something when there is no proof he did, but Bernie was on the same side as them just a little over a year ago.
He did not presume Kavanaugh’s innocence and believed the statements of an obviously trained Democrat operative who provided zero proof, only a seemingly sympathetic crying face and seemingly innocent manner of speech. That wench tried to ruin a man’s entire LIFE just because she perceived him to be a threat to Roe v. Wade and Bernie took her side wholeheartedly.
CNN absolutely sucks. They are garbage. The hashtag “CNNisTrash” was trending on Twitter following that moment and for good reason: it’s the truth. This “news” organization recently settled with a 17-year-old because they lied about him being a racist in an attempt to ruin the kid’s life just because he supports Trump. For the first two and a half years of Trump’s presidency, CNN ran story after story of nothing but lies and deception about Russian collusion, assuming Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election away from Hillary and reporting that as though it was truth.
CNN is a garbage propaganda organization with zero truth in anything they report. But I do not feel bad for Bernie at all. This is what happens when truth and justice is overtaken by political agendas. There wasn’t one bit of evidence to suggest Kavanaugh did what he did to any of the women who accused him of sexual assault. Not one could provide corroborating evidence or witnesses to back up their claims. And yet, for a few months, the media made sure to forever ruin an innocent man’s reputation and life, like they tried to do with Clarence Thomas, just because he was a political enemy. Bernie played a part, even if a small one, in presuming guilt rather than innocence despite all the evidence AGAINST the accusers’ testimonies.
Bernie got a small taste of what it feels like to be on the receiving end when idiots say “believe all women”. There is no reason to believe someone who, for decades, lied about her heritage to get an advantage and constantly lies about virtually every aspect of her life, policies etc. There is no reason to believe this simply due to the lack of evidence that Bernie said what he is accused of having said. But there was also never a reason to believe any of the Kavanaugh accusers, but Bernie abandoned truth and reason for political points and convenience.
If you ask me, he got only a little bit of what he actually deserves. Still, I am amused at the fact that Democrats might be trying to screw Bernie again. Only makes Trump’s win all the easier come November.
“Affliction will slay the wicked, and those who hate the righteous will be condemned.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
We all know that the Left lives in a perpetual state of anger, outrage and offense, where they look for any and all reasons to be angry at something or someone and feel like some sort of tragic victim who is due some sort of justice. But recently, Leftists have been outraged at something particularly odd: the fact that an openly conservative Hollywood star shows that he is openly conservative.
You see, recently, President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump attended the College Football National Championship game between LSU and Clemson University, where he received great cheers and standing ovations from the crowd, with the crowd also chanting “USA” upon seeing him.
However, that is not what the Left will choose to cover (can’t show that Trump is popular, because that would go against the narrative that the vast majority of this country hates and detests him). Also in attendance of this game was Hollywood star Vince Vaughn, who got the opportunity to have a conversation with the President of the United States and First Lady during the game and even shake the president's hand as shown above.
A camera recorded this occasion and sports “journalist” Timothy Burke tweeted out the video with the caption: “I’m very sorry to have to share this video with you. All of it, every part of it,” as though he was mourning the fact that a Hollywood celebrity who is not shy about his conservative beliefs was holding a civil conversation with Trump.
Of course, I do actually know why he and other Leftists were outraged. Hollywood is supposed to be THEIRS. At every awards show, in every movie, Leftist ideology must be not only shared but shoved down our throats and any contradicting ideology must be pushed down and obliterated. Hosts who make jokes at the expense of the woke celebrities must be lambasted (such as Ricky Gervais) and celebrities who dissent from the Leftist ideology in any way must be blacklisted and publicly shamed.
The “journalist” appeared to be mourning because he essentially was. Vince Vaughn is a beloved actor in Hollywood, having appeared or starred in many great comedies like Anchorman, Dodgeball, Wedding Crashers, and other movies. He is still working as an actor and producer in various films to this day, so his open conservatism hasn’t derailed his career like it has for other actors.
Vince Vaughn is still popular and beloved, so it apparently hurts the snowflake Left when they see him amicably and civilly speaking with the POTUS. You see, in their mind, even if you are a conservative, you should hate Trump. Even if you are a conservative, right-winger, you should still be on the side of the Left, at least when it comes to Trump, and given the opportunity, you should be seen yelling and screaming like a madman at Trump or cursing him out, or at least, actively avoiding him and/or trying to embarrass him. No one is allowed to like Trump, no one is allowed to have a dissenting opinion. Everyone is supposed to hold the same views as the Left, or they should be cancelled.
Of course, Burke got blasted for his inability to believe that someone, particularly someone like Vince Vaughn, would actually have the gall to be civil in the presence of Trump:
“You’ve successfully proven that Vince Vaughn is a Republican, that thing he has taken no effort to hide,” wrote Alex Griswold. He followed that up by saying: “DM me dude, I have a GIANT scoop about Jon Voight,” who is also another prominent conservative in Hollywood.
Marc Thiessen tweeted: “OMG the humanity! This is terrible! We must all hate Vince Vaughn! You would have done great under Stalin.”
Carpe Donktum, a known conservative meme-maker whose memes often get retweeted by conservatives and sometimes even by the President, tweeted: “Man, I just can’t believe how bold some of these Hollywood people are becoming, first Ricky, and now Vince. If this keeps up people might realize that they live in a free country, and it’s ok to have different opinions than the ones shouted at you on TV.”
If you remember, I recently wrote an article showing us just how few liberals there actually are in this country, with that number being just below 25%. In Hollywood, one would assume that at least 90% of the people there are liberal, so it can be rather rare to see a conservative Hollywood celebrity or star, but they do exist. And in the Left’s mind, that is horrible. As I said in the article about the number of liberals in the country, they are few in number so they have to be loud to pretend to be the mainstream opinion.
Virtually every Hollywood movie and every TV show produced today must bear a hyper-liberal message. A new Star Trek is being made? It should tackle Trump and Brexit (even though it’s literally set hundreds of years in the future, but I guess Trump is still going to be president in the 2360s and Britain will still be trying to leave the European Union) and point out how both of those things are not only bad, but are dangerous and violent for literally everyone. Trump is president and he continues winning electorally? Let’s make a movie about hunting and killing conservatives. More people tend to be okay with homosexuality as time goes on? Good, let’s overrepresent gay people as much as possible in films and tv, even though they are about 5% of the population, if that, and have “gay rights” organizations yell at us for not representing gay people enough anyway.
Movies that present a different ideology, or even just don’t shove the Leftist ideology down people’s throats, are labeled as “problematic”, “controversial” or “irresponsible”, such as the movie “1917”, which is about WWI but it doesn’t feature transgender military generals ordering a sufficiently marginalized, foreign, strong and independent woman of color to singlehandedly beat the Nazis (I know Nazis are from WWII, but the enemy would be treated as Nazis, as we generally are) all while flying the rainbow flag and denouncing white privilege and the United States and a president who wouldn’t be born for roughly another 30 years, so it’s labeled as “irresponsibly nationalistic”.
Any semblance of dissent must be culled, in the Left’s mind, and this has been the modus operandi for ages. The Chinese do it to this day. The Iranians do it. The Russians do it and did it often when they were the Soviet Union. In any dictatorship, where there is dissenting opinion, there are mysterious disappearances and killings. The American Left wishes they could be the dictators of the U.S., as dictators rule harshly in other countries. (Project Veritas recently released a video showing Bernie Sanders campaign staffers wishing to send Trump supporters to “reeducation camps” to “de-Nazify” us, so these people are no different from the commies in the USSR).
For Vince Vaugh to not only be conservative but also to be civil in the face of Trump, it is to be treated as a tragedy. Which is a little odd because, again, he is openly conservative. Back in 2013, he gave an interview where he said: “I think that… as you get older, you just get less trust in the government running anything. And that you start to realize when you really go back and look at the Constitution and the principles of liberty, the real purpose of government is to protect the individual’s right to sort of think and pursue what they have interest in. And that when you start drawing the lines, saying, as a society, we think this is inappropriate, we’re going to pass laws to protect them from themselves and/or take things away to protect themselves or move money from here to there, that you realize that you wake up with corruption and… you’ll wake up with a lot of problems that didn’t exist prior.”
It really shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that Vince Vaughn is a conservative, but again, the tragedy, I suppose, is that he didn’t yell at Trump like a decent human being would… or something dumb like that.
Thankfully, considering so many people already know that Vaughn is a conservative, and considering he still gets work in Lefty Hollywood, to the dismay of this particular sports “journalist”, I doubt he will be cancelled over this. Someone might get angry with him and lambast him or bash him on the internet, but he will be fine. But this does, sadly, go to show just how valueless basic civility is nowadays when being seen holding a conversation with someone the Left hates is considered some sort of devastating tragedy and when the expectation by the Left is that the President would be verbally assaulted.
“A worthless person, a wicked man, goes about with crooked speech, winks with his eyes, signals with his feet, points with his finger, with perverted heart devises evil, continually sowing discord; therefore calamity will come upon him suddenly; in a moment he will be broken beyond healing.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
While the global Left will undoubtedly choose to call anyone who is against the overrunning of one’s own country by immigrants “racist”, a good majority of people in Great Britain are against giving amnesty to illegal aliens and are worried about what immigration will do for population growth in the country over the next decade.
According to a Deltapoll survey commissioned by Migration Watch UK, 51% of Britons do “not support a proposed amnesty for illegal aliens.” 38% are in favor, but only 11% are “strongly” in favor among that 38%.
This comes after a rise in illegal boat migrants landing in Great Britain throughout 2019 and the U.K. government suggesting giving amnesty to illegal aliens who had been in the country for 15 or so years.
According to a Migration Watch UK spokesman: “Those who enter the UK illegally make their first act in Britain a criminal one and should be returned from whence they came. While those who enter legally and stay on when their visas run out should not be able to run down the clock thinking they will eventually be granted residence.”
This is what many who are against illegal immigration (such as myself) often point out. When Donald Trump first pointed out the various types of criminals that illegal aliens often are: murderers, rapists, drug, sex and gun traffickers, etc., he was lambasted by the Left as being racist for saying that “most” of them were criminals. But the reality is that ALL OF THEM, BY VIRTUE OF BEING HERE ILLEGALLY, ARE CRIMINALS. Their very entry into the U.S. in an illegal fashion brands them as criminals, as they should be, because it is ILLEGAL to do that. The same can easily be applied for any illegal immigrant entering any other nation, it’s just that the U.S. and the U.K. are just about the only ones who have brought this issue to light.
And even then, it’s not necessarily the governments of these countries that point out the problem. Again, it’s the U.K. government that is seeking to implement an amnesty for illegals who had been living in the country for many years. The people of the country are the ones who are against that and who are pointing out the problem.
The spokesman continued: “Amnesties send out entirely the wrong signals, they are a slap in the face to all those who play by the book and simply don’t work – as the Italians, Spaniards and French have all found out. Most importantly, as our Delta polling has clearly shown, the bulk of the British people are also against them.”
Exactly as he says, amnesty sends out the wrong signals, is a slap in the face to anyone who does things the right way and doesn’t help out a nation. Amnesty is basically the government giving up on enforcing their own established immigration laws and saying “meh, do what you want, no one’s gonna stop you”. It sets a dangerous precedent, as we have seen not only in the U.S., but in many countries worldwide. If the government doesn’t care about its own laws, why should the people who are entering the country, or even the people already in the country? Why should immigrants, hoping to leave to a (for now) better country, play by the rules, pay their dues and wait their turn in line when the government isn’t going to punish those who don’t abide by the rules and do things the right way? What reason is there to do what is right when those doing things the wrong way don’t get punished for it?
And the reasoning behind amnesty is beyond stupid as well. Boris Johnson has said in the past “we effectively have [amnesty]… If you have been here for 10 or 12 years, I’m afraid the authorities no longer really pursue you. They give up. Why not be honest about what is going on?”
You would think, then, that he would take steps to avoid people illegally going into the country and taking advantage of this “effective” amnesty, but no, his strategy is “we’re already basically doing it, let’s just make it actually part of the books,” which is extremely moronic, as it doesn’t solve any problems. It incentivizes immigrants to forego the established system of immigration in favor of forcing themselves into the country because they know they won’t be punished for it if they can hide long enough.
Doing this also presents problems as population grows in the country, which the Britons are also worried about. According to Deltapoll, 68% of Britons expressed concern about the rate of immigration into the U.K. and its effect on the country’s overall population. Out of this 68%, 36% expressed “great concern” and 32% expressed “some concern”. But regardless, a notable size of the population of Britain is concerned over the rate of immigration and what it would do to the population of the country in the future.
Migration Watch UK Chairman Alp Mehmet said: “As ever, the British people, with their usual common sense, have shown themselves to be way ahead of the political class. Their concern about population growth and the scale of immigration that drives it is clear. They also see that the only way to deal with this unsustainable and damaging growth is for a significant reduction in immigration. Why can’t the political class not see that?”
I would wager it’s because they largely don’t care, which is ironic considering the massive pro-Brexit victory British people handed to “Amnesty Boris” Johnson last December and considering one of the biggest, if not the biggest, reason for the British people having voted in favor of Brexit (more than once) is because they want to take control of their borders and keep illegals from entering and staying.
Illegals will tend to (illegally) vote in favor of those who allow them amnesty, which is why so many politicians all over the world tend to think of this as a favorable position. This allows for such politicians to remain in power for just about as long as they want, since they don’t really care about the people they are supposed to represent, but care about their own well-beings. Why do you think it is that the Democrat Party has practically abandoned the blue-collar, white class of voters? They lambast them as being “racist” for being concerned over illegal immigration because they are certain that enough Latinos and illegals in general will support them, as well as the white people who feel the idiotic “white guilt”.
But the British people, it seems, are mostly not idiotic. Unlike the Germans (who are quickly going back to their Nazi ways, though through a more globalist outlook), the British don’t want immigrants galore in their country. They don’t want their own government to ignore the law that is in the books that is meant to protect their borders and their people.
I suppose we will need to wait and see if the U.K. government wakes up to the will of the people, though I don’t expect this to happen any time soon.
2 Timothy 2:15
“Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Pop culture. Mainstream Media. Social Media. Politics. All of these things are dominated by the Left to one extent or another. All of these things feature Left-wing ideologies, ideas, policies, beliefs and objectives. All of these things make you believe that the loud voices you hear are the mainstream, popular and majority opinions. But that couldn’t be further from the truth.
Gallup recently ran a poll to find where Americans find themselves on the political spectrum and the results can be eye-opening for some, or perhaps, most people. According to Gallup, while there are more Americans who align themselves with the Democrat Party than Republican (47-42%, respectively), the number of conservatives in this country is far bigger than the number of liberals and that gap is growing.
Gallup surveyed nearly 30,000 people (so a massive sample size) and found that 37% of Americans view themselves as “conservative”. This number is up from the previous time this survey was taken (2018) when 35% identified as “conservative” so a two-point increase. But while the number of conservatives grew in 2019, the number of liberals SHRANK.
According to Gallup, the number of Americans who identify themselves as “liberal” is just 24%, down from 26% the previous year. 35% of Americans identified as “moderate” though it’s possible that a decent number of them are conservatives who were too afraid to say they are conservative out of fear of scorn or persecution and one cannot really blame someone for this.
As I said, pop culture, the MSM, social media, etc. are all DOMINATED by Left-wing rhetoric and ideology. You hear the biggest names in Hollywood or in sports often lambasting the President or even the country itself. You watch the news and most of it is negative towards Trump and those who support him. You go on social media and you often see Left-wing babble trending on Twitter or conservatives being censored or conservative videos getting taken down or conservative comments being flagged as “hate speech”, etc.
The loud voices of the Left are so overwhelming and frequent that you can’t help but think they are in the majority. And THAT is the reason they are so loud. They don’t have the numbers. The vast majority of people do not agree with everything these self-righteous hypocrites have to say. The vast majority of people do not agree with them. But as they live in their own narcissistic bubble and believe they are the most important and intelligent people on Earth, they believe most people do agree with them and couldn’t possibly stand that most people do not, so they delude themselves.
Remember when Rose McGowan tweeted that “52% of us humbly apologize” for the drone strike that killed Soleimani? She sincerely believes that 52% of the country is Left-wing 24/7 and agrees with her and the Left on basically everything. She believes 52% of the country is with her on this, but according to The Hill, 47% of American voters supported the strike against Soleimani, while only 40% disapproved (sample size: 1,995 registered voters). Granted, not every American is a registered voter, but when it comes to election time, these are the people that matter the most.
The vast majority of people agreed with the Soleimani strike, even if Rose McGowan and Michael “Higher BMI than IQ points” Moore deeply apologize to the terror-supporting Iranians. This is because the vast majority of Americans DO NOT agree with these idiotic celebrities.
Now, when it comes to party lines, most people align roughly with what would be expected. Among Republicans, 73% identify as “conservative”, which ties the highest number in the last 25 years, while only 4% identify as “liberal”. 21% of Republicans also identify as “moderate”. For Democrats, 49% identify as liberal, 36% are “moderate” and 14% are “conservative”.
As far as Independents go, 45% identify as “moderate”, 30% are “conservative” and 21% are “liberal”.
41% of American men consider themselves “conservative”, 36% of men are “moderate” and 20% are “liberal”. 33% of women are “conservative”, 35% are “moderate” and 28% are “liberal”. If I had to guess at least one reason, even if not the biggest reason, for this disparity, I would guess that abortion would have to be a reason for it. Women are the ones who get pregnant after sex, so it stands to reason that there would be more liberal women than liberal men because liberal women do not want the responsibility of child-bearing and rearing. I’m not sure if this is the biggest reason for this disparity, but I think it’s at least one, fairly major, reason for it.
Looking at age, we find that those 18-29 tend to be more liberal than conservative (30-26% respectively), but not by all that much and the vast majority of them are moderate (40%). This makes a lot of sense to me. Plenty of young people naively support socialism and communism, so it stands to reason that more of them are more “liberal” than “conservative”, but the difference is not overwhelming. And it also makes sense that so many are “moderate” because younger people tend to try and find themselves and what they believe, not holding on to anything solid politically just yet, but discovering what they believe for themselves to be morally right (though morality is determined by God, but that’s an argument for another time).
Of course, I fall within this age range, being a Millennial, but I would consider myself to be solidly conservative (and I would hope all of my articles would reflect that). For people ages 30-49, 34% are “conservative” as opposed to 26% of “liberals”, with 37% being “moderate”. 50-64 age range, you find 42% “conservative”, 34% “moderate” and 21% “liberal”. 65+, you get 46% “conservative”, 29% “moderate” and 21% “liberal.”
This also makes sense, in my opinion. Winston Churchill is (perhaps falsely) attributed for saying: “If you aren’t a liberal by 20, you have no heart. If you aren’t a conservative by 40, you have no brain.” We tend to be most liberal when we are young because our minds are not yet fully developed and we are more prone to act based on emotion rather than logic (which is why the Democrats want to lower the voting age to 16). Young people do not know the truths of the world, at least usually. They have to go out and discover them for themselves, which is why virtually no one takes the 17-year-old climate puppet seriously.
As one gets older, one would (hopefully) get wiser as well. If one obtains more knowledge as time goes on, one obtains more wisdom as well. We gain this through time and experience. Young people do not have the experience and wisdom that comes with age that older people do, so they tend to be a bit more liberal because being liberal means being more illogical (sorry to any liberal reading this, but the ideologies of socialism are a pipe-dream and not at all realistic or possible to achieve with zero negative consequence).
But moving on from age, we also find distinctions in levels of education. Those with a postgraduate degree are, to no one’s surprise, more liberal than conservative (36-26%, respectively) though an equal number of people to liberals are also “moderate”. Those who have graduated college find a shift, however, where 32% are “conservative”, 38% are “moderate” and 28% are “liberal”. Those with only “some college” education are 38% “conservative”, 37% “moderate” and 22% “liberal”. Those without any college education are 43% “conservative”, 33% “moderate” and 19% “liberal”.
I’ve said this countless times before and I’ll say it again: college is where logic goes to die. The effects of Marxism in college campuses are clear for all to see. This plays at least some role in the liberalism of young people, and a particularly big role in the socialist and communist romantization in young people’s minds. Despite the fact that communism is an ideology of death and destruction, it’s been romanticized by Marxist college professors seeking to mold young people’s minds the way that they want and create more and more Marxist puppets. How else can one come to find someone as economically illiterate as AOC having an economics degree?
The longer people subject themselves to college indoctrination, the more likely they are to come out the other side a mini-Lenin.
Regardless, next we find people with different incomes and something fairly surprising. Those who make $100,000 or more are 36% “conservative”, 37% “moderate” and 26% “liberal”. Income range from $40,000 to $100,000, you find 38% are “conservative”, 35% “moderate”, and 25% “liberal.” For those who make less than $40,000, you find 36% “conservative”, 36% “moderate” and 24% “liberal”.
This is interesting to me because of just how close together each of them is. The entire schtick of communism, at least as Marx put it, was all about class warfare and the “inequalities” of income between the proletariat and the bourgeoise. Of course, he was mostly talking about Germany and the U.K., not about the U.S., as it wasn’t a world superpower at the time, but still. For all the talks in communist circles about class warfare, the numbers seem to be roughly the same regardless of income. Actually, according to these numbers, you are more likely to be liberal if you make MORE money than less. This, I suppose, is where one would tend to find the term “limousine liberal” to make a lot of sense.
Regarding race, Non-Hispanic whites are 41% “conservative”, 33% “moderate” and 23% “liberal”. Non-Hispanic blacks are 23% “conservative”, 44% “moderate” and 28% “liberal”, which makes sense considering black people tend to vote Democrat (as self-destructive and damaging as that is for the black communities around the country). Hispanics are 35% “conservative”, 37% “moderate” and 25% “liberal”, which makes sense because Latinos tend to be more closely tied to the nuclear family (though plenty do also tend to vote Democrat, most likely because many are here illegally and the Democrats are the open borders party).
Finally, when it comes to region, you find that those living in the East are 32% “conservative”, 36% “moderate” and 28% “liberal.” In the Midwest, you find 38% “conservative”, 35% “moderate” and 23% “liberal”, which makes sense and aligns well with usual electoral maps. In the South, you find 41% “conservative”, 35% “moderate” and 21% “liberal”. And in the West coast, interestingly enough, you find 34% “conservative”, 36% “moderate” and 27% “liberal”.
That last one is interesting considering the West coast is often considered the “Left” coast because of the tendency of those states to vote Democrat. But there are a good number of farmers and land owners in those states, and farm and land owners tend to be conservative, even if the biggest population centers in those states are heavily liberal.
But regardless, it is interesting to note just how truly few people in this country actually would consider themselves “liberal”. There are far more conservatives and “moderates”, generally people who are “center-right” in this country than there are Leftists, even if what we often see and hear does not outright reflect that.
Again, Leftists need to be loud because they don’t have the numbers. They infect every organization they can to appear to be the mainstream and popular opinion, when that generally isn’t what they are. Most people are either conservative or at least do not agree with most, all, or even some liberal policies or ideologies. And I can only hope that the gap between conservative and liberal continues to grow, not only for the sake of the country, but also so that many might turn their lives over to Christ.
“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
In this day and age, if you dare tell the truth about biological gender, you stand the risk of being lambasted, cancelled or both. Any semblance of scientific truth regarding the issue of transgenderism must be culled in favor of science fiction so that a miniscule sector of society will not feel offended and so that Leftists can politicize and attack people for some sort of bigotry as though it’s a sport. But what happens when America’s first legal “non-binary” person discovers the truth about so-called gender identity and returns to his original gender of male?
This is what James Shupe is attempting to do, fighting legal fights in multiple states (namely Florida and Oregon) to get back his original gender of male and put it back on all legal documents which currently legally state that he is “non-binary”.
PJ Media had an extensive piece regarding this issue that I recommend you check out yourself, as I will likely not be able to cover everything here.
Shupe told PJ Media: “The charade of not being male, the legal fiction, it’s over. The lies behind my fictitious sex changes, something I shamefully participated in, first to female, and then to non-binary, have been forever exposed. A truthful accounting of events has replaced the deceit that allowed me to become America’s first legally non-binary person.”
He added: “The legal record has now been corrected and LGBT advocates are no longer able to use my historic non-binary court order to advance their toxic agenda. I am and have always been male. That is my biological truth, the only thing capable of grounding me to reality.”
He also said: “I hope that [a woman who is fighting to legally change her legal designation to non-binary] and all the others are denied the right to change their sex to non-binary because it’s fraud and legal fiction based on pseudoscience. I was indoctrinated to believe that I had this thing called a gender identity and that suppressing it was causing my mental health problems. It was all a lie.”
Obviously, this is a complete 180 from what he used to believe. Though he has mental health problems, he was led to believe that these problems were a result of suppressing a gender identity that was different from his biological sex. He was easy prey for anyone with an agenda to destroy as many lives as possible. As I said in the title, he used to be a hero in the LGBT community because of not only his transition into a woman, but particularly for becoming the first legally “non-binary” person in America. His own case has been and currently is being used by other people to legally transition their own legal gender status to “non-binary” as well, which he sincerely hopes to fight against.
Shupe later told PJ Media about the sort of physical and psychological harm his transitions have caused him:
“I ended up in the psych ward three times because of hormones. I had blood clots in my eyes because my estrogen levels were 2,585 instead of 200 (normal estrogen levels for women ranges from 15-350 picograms/milliliter, while for men, it ranges from 10-82 pg/mL. A man receiving roughly THIRTEEN times the normal amount for a woman is bound to lead to terrible health problems), low bone density, problems controlling my bladder, and emotional instability. Blood tests indicated I was dropping into kidney disease territory (eGFR below 60%) for about 18 months, I had chronic dermatology issues and skin reactions to estrogen patches, I passed out on the kitchen floor from Spironolactone (a drug meant to treat heart failure, high blood pressure or hypokalemia (low potassium levels in blood)).”
In all, while James was led to believe that transitioning into a different gender from what he is would be helpful, it only ended up hurting him more than anything. He had mental health issues before and these issues were only exacerbated by the sort of hormone treatment he was receiving, on top of the various drugs he was taking. The high-strength marijuana he was taking also made him hallucinate:
“The gender transitions were supposed to fix my mental health problems, but I kept getting worse instead. The high-powered marijuana made me psychotic. I started hearing booming noises and having visions of being some Indian woman. I started believing I was some kind of chosen one who was picked to restore the third gender to North America, that’s what I thought the visions were telling me.”
It’s not surprising at all that the Left, who are like the devil, would try and convince James to destroy his own life using lies and deceit. NO ONE gets better by exacerbating mental health issues and no one who claims to be “loving and tolerant” could come off as such when they suggest that people physically and psychologically harm themselves by lying to them about what would happen.
The serpent lied to Eve about her dying if she were to eat the fruit from the forbidden tree and lied to her about being “like God”. He convinced her that she would be “like God, knowing good and evil” to get her and Adam to destroy their very own lives and get them kicked out of literal paradise. The Left is exactly the same way, telling people lies so that they will willingly destroy their own lives. “No, socialism doesn’t lead to death and starvation. It leads to prosperity!” “Yes, your mental health issues will all go away if you make the transition into a different gender entirely.” “No, your unborn child is not a human; it’s nothing more than the equivalent of Jell-O.” “Yes, you should give up your rights and freedoms to the government. It’s for the environment!” “Yes, little Timmy, anyone who has guns is a bad person and will only seek to hurt you.”
All destructive lies that can alter, ruin or outright end people’s lives. And the Left repeats them with zero remorse regardless of the consequences.
Despite what this ideology has gotten James, any attempt to fight back against it has been met with scorn from the very people that considered him a sort of “hero”. Once he began to disagree with the transgender ideology, the various media sources that would love to hear what he had to say all of a sudden were uninterested in his opinion. They didn’t care that he agreed with Trump’s transgender military ban. They didn’t care that he was worried about the effect of this ideology on young children and their growing bodies. They didn’t care about the harmful effects this lifestyle has had on his life and on his health.
“Not a single Oregon media outlet has been willing to talk to me, let alone report that I’ve reclaimed my birth sex and have denounced gender ideology. They dropped me after I supported Trump’s ban on gender dysphoria in the military. That got me canceled.”
The Left doesn’t care for the truth. James finding out this truth is harmful to their twisted and sick ideology that seeks to destroy as many lives as possible. His landmark case allows for people to transition into legal non-binary status and they definitely are not going to let it be known that the very person that sought and attained the first legal non-binary status in this country has come forth with his testimony about the entire process and that he is now seeking to regain his male status (which he says is legally challenging, as the Social Security Administration reportedly refused to accept a doctor’s letter stating he was a biological male and that they forced him to claim that he had undergone a transition to male, despite the fact that that’s not the case at all, but the ideology is more important than the individual to these people).
Shupe also called out the doctors and judges who facilitated the transitions because they were aware of his mental health problems and ignored them in favor of being “woke”: “Why didn’t they (the doctors) force me to go to mental health for an evaluation about why I felt the sex change (to female) was a failure instead of giving me yet another one (to non-binary)?” And regarding the judge that allowed him to transition to “non-binary”: “The Oregon judge physically and mentally harmed me by silently rubber-stamping the non-binary court order to advance a transgender agenda, to which she has ties.” According to PJ Media, before the proceeding had begun, “Shupe’s lawyer told him not to worry because the judge herself had a transgender kid.”
The entire thing is very messed up from top to bottom. He was lied to about the reason he had mental health issues and pushed him down a slope of further psychological but also physical and emotional issues and pain.
Do you wonder why I so often call the Left “evil” and “of the devil”? Because of this kind of stuff. And while no actual political party was mentioned here, we all know what side of the political aisle supports this kind of stuff. Only the Left would be willing to lie to someone about the reasons for their problems and put them down a road of self-destruction all for the sake of a political agenda meant to divide and destroy the American culture and the nuclear family, not to mention any sense of reason and the definition of truth.
The Left are the ones to destroy people’s lives. The Left are the ones to say “my truth” or “his truth” or “her truth” as though truth were entirely subjective. The Left are the only ones who would be heartless enough to destroy people’s lives all for the sake of political dominance and the advancement of their agenda.
I sincerely hope and pray that James wins his legal cases and, following this, he will turn his life to Christ, who is the only one who can actually help him with his mental health issues, let alone his other life issues.
“And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Freddie Marinelli and Danielle Cross will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...