While plenty of other things have been on the news as of late (including a certain virus from China that I will do my best not to mention because it’s being talked about in every other media to an obscene extent), something that has flown under the radar is a slight correction made by the 1619 Project, the New York Times’ attempt at rewriting history for the benefit of an ideological war against this country.
 
Earlier in the month, a historian named Leslie M. Harris wrote an essay for Politico. According to National Review: “Harris claimed that Times fact-checkers reached out to her prior to the publication of the 1619 Project’s seminal essays to solicit her expertise on the relevant history involved. Harris wrote back to the fact-checkers, insisting that she ‘vigorously disputed’ the factual basis of one of the project’s central claims.”
 
What claim was she heavily contesting? The following passage from the Project: “Conveniently left out of our Founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.”
 
This, Harris contends, is not factually accurate (unsurprisingly). The entire reason behind the Project’s absurd claim is because of the Dunmore Proclamation, a proclamation made by the British governor of Virginia, Lord Dunmore, that was meant to preserve his rule as a representative of the monarchy by “drawing the slaves of rebellious colonists into his militia in exchange for their freedom,” according to Phillip Magness of the American Institute for Economic Research.
 
Magness continued: “The Dunmore Proclamation revealed one of the many ways in which slavery cut across the other dividing lines of the revolutionary period, but it did not portend a coming general emancipation from the Crown. Indeed, most slave-owning colonists perceived the measure as an attempt to incite a slave revolt against opponents of the British rule, rather than a sign of slavery’s weakening position. The proclamation conveniently exempted the slaves of loyalist plantation owners, and Dunmore himself left a sordid record as supporter and beneficiary of slavery in the British colonial system. Meanwhile, as the long fight to abolish the institution made all too clear, supporters of slavery maintained a firm majority in the British Parliament at the time – and would continue in power for several decades to come.”
 
So it is not even remotely true that preserving slavery was a reason for the Revolutionary War. The Dunmore Proclamation, as Magness noted, was nothing but an attempt at crushing the rebellion by getting rid of revolutionary colonists’ slaves, promising them freedom if they fought for the Crown, while exempting loyalist colonists from that proclamation. Slaves were nothing but a tool, as they largely were considered back then, at furthering a goal.
 
But even then, the 1619 Project remains arrogant about its claim. While they offered a correction, it’s minimal. Instead of eliminating that factually-ignorant claim from its essays, the Project said that preserving slavery was the purpose of SOME colonists rather than all of them. But that claim IS STILL WRONG!
 
That, combined with the fact that the Project ignored or dismissed historians and fact-checkers who disagreed with their erroneous claims and dismissed the 1776 Project, a counter-project run by conservative African-Americans to maintain the fact that our founding was in 1776 and not when the first slaves arrived in 1619, shows that the point of the 1619 Project was never about simply revising and uncovering hidden histories of this country, but rather, destroying the very founding principles and concepts of this country, declaring everything from its governmental system to its economic system as stained and discredited as a result of its history of slavery (completely ignoring the fact that slavery was found in many other places around the world and still can be found in places like the Middle East and China).
 
The reason I make this assertion is because at the end of the aforementioned National Review article, we find: “[Magness’] piece… is worth reading in its entirety for its portrait of a project that succumbed to ideological ambition and, in so doing, lost a bit in the way of historical accuracy.”
 
The 1619 Project didn’t “succumb” to ideological ambition. Ideological ambition WAS ITS ENTIRE PURPOSE! It was never meant to be a recounting of our nation’s history, it was meant to be a REWRITING of our nation’s history, seeking to delegitimize our nation’s institutions. One of the sociologists brought in by the Project basically admits as much, having essentially argued that the country’s plantation economy stained and discredited modern American capitalism.
 
The entire point of this project wasn’t to offer a plausible alternative to the typical founding story we are taught in school. It wasn’t supposed to be about uncovering a secret truth behind our nation’s founding that has been buried for centuries. It was always supposed to be an ideological piece to fuel a war on American institutions and its very legitimacy. So for the writer at National Review to suggest it succumbed to ideological ambition, losing “a bit in the way of historical accuracy” is not putting it the right way.
 
This is the New York Times we’re talking about; some of the same people that right now (and I am about to break my promise about not taking about the Wuhan virus) are deflecting the blame from China for the damage it has caused the entire world as a result of the Chinese coronavirus that originated in China and has spread because of the CCP’s negligence (at best). The same people that lionized Chinese Communist dictator Mao Zedong in remembering his death back in September and absolved radical Islamic terrorists from any blame for the 9/11 attacks on the WTC during the 18-year anniversary.
 
Do you really think anyone at the New York Times would do honest research and fact-checking for a revising of history like the 1619 Project, leaving any semblance of ideological ambition or politics out of it? They do not care about history, as those two examples with Mao and the 9/11 remembrance tweets show. They care about setting a narrative and nothing more.
 
They cared about one of the most evil people in the history of the world seeming like an innocent son of a peasant farmer rising to the challenge of leading a nation and its people (conveniently leaving out his death toll standing in the tens of millions on the low end). They cared about the radical followers of a deadly religion by absolving them of any guilt on 9/11. They are not going to care about making this country look good or honest or legitimate. Whatever they can do to strip it of its legitimacy, they will do it, as evidenced by the fact that they dismissed any and all dissidents, including fact-checkers, numerous historians and a counter-project run by African-Americans who know the history of this country.
 
Their purpose, from the Project’s very conception, was bashing America and everything it stood for as being illegitimate because of its history of slavery, again, dismissing the fact that slavery has been used by practically every other country and is still widely used in Middle Eastern countries and in China (largely through concentration camps). History and facts were damned by these people and still continue to be. The ONLY reason they issued any sort of correction is because a fact-checker, whom they previously contacted and voiced her disagreement with a particular wild claim, wrote an essay for Politico that drew attention to the Project’s erroneous claim.
 
Their correction was barely even a correction, still implying that protecting slavery was the purpose of some of the colonists involved in the revolution, when there is no evidence to be found of that and the evidence USED by the Project does not show it. Again, the Dunmore Proclamation was just a method of snuffing out the rebellion, not a measure by the Crown and British Parliament to attempt to abolish slavery in the colonies, particularly because slavery wouldn’t be abolished in Great Britain until 1833, nearly 60 years after the revolution.
 
The reason for this Project in the first place is because the Left hates this country and thinks it illegitimate, arguing with whatever load of crap they can to deceive as many people as possible.
 
2 Thessalonians 2:3
“Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

It’s an utter shame that one Hollywood celebrity giving thanks to the United States military is so rare as to be fairly newsworthy, but this is where we are right now, given the communist hellhole that is Hollywood. But when it does happen, even despite the current situation in Hellywood, credit must be given where it’s due.
 
With the Oscars having happened last Sunday night, actress Renee Zellweger did something controversial: avoid attacking Trump, the country, white people or political dissenters. Matter of fact, she did three things in particular that are rare for the Hollywood crowd: thank the military, thank police (as well as firefighters and other first responders, but there is good reason I’m focusing on police) and take notice of the American dream that people, even immigrants (who are coming here legally and do not intend on being a financial burden for American taxpayers), strive to accomplish.
 
Renee Zellweger won an Oscar on Sunday for Best Actress for her role in “Judy”, a movie about acting icon Judy Garland, who is most famous for her role as Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz. This is what she said in her acceptance speech:
 
“Thank you to the Academy. Thank you for inviting me here alongside one of the most special collaborations and meaningful experiences of my life. My immigrant folks, who came here with nothing but each other and a belief in the American dream, how about this? Thank you to you. And I have to say that this past year of conversations of celebrating Judy Garland across generations and across cultures has been a really cool reminder that our heroes unite us – the best among us who inspire us to find the best in ourselves. They unite us.”
 
“When we look to our heroes, we agree. And that matters. Neil Armstrong, Sally Ride (an American astronaut), Dolores Huerta (a labor leader and civil rights activist), Venus, and Serena, and Selena (not sure who she is referring to here), Bob Dylan, Fred Rogers, Harriet Tubman, we agree on our teachers. And we agree on our courageous men and women in uniform who serve. And we agree on our first responders and firefighters. When we celebrate our heroes, we’re reminded of who we are as one people, united.”
 
She also went on to talk more about Judy Garland and the fact she was snubbed from getting the same award Renee had just won and mention that Garland was also a hero to her, after which she ended her speech.
 
But the speech, while fairly brief, is not bad at all, especially considering the communist garbage the other award winners gave (with one Oscar winner literally quoting the Communist Manifesto in her speech).
 
Now, this isn’t the first time a Hollywood celebrity has chosen to thank our servicemembers for their sacrifice or overall didn’t give a negative message about America in recent time. Chris Pratt has also done this, thanking servicemen and women, and Gary Oldman thanked the opportunity this country has given him to succeed at the Academy Awards almost two years ago. But given the utter vitriol one sees come from Hellywood on pretty much a daily basis and given just about each movie that has political subtext basically brought to the forefront, it is nice to hear at least one person in one of these award shows give the virtue-signaling a rest.
 
It is appreciated that some people actually do still seek the American dream without crapping all over the concept and the system that allows for people to achieve it. It is appreciated that someone would thank first responders (though she didn’t outright specify cops) due to the fact that many on the Left view police with utter disdain, believing them to all be racists and people who kill black and brown people for fun or for sport. It is appreciated that someone would thank the servicemen and women who choose to lay their lives on the line so that we can enjoy our freedoms and our safety from foreign adversaries due to how the Left often believes this country to be an imperial menace to the world, itching to go out and invade any small country and strip it of its resources, leaving behind dead bodies and people driven to poverty.
 
I doubt I am exaggerating in the way the Left, particularly those in Hollywood, view this country, the economic and political system in place, and the police and military members. The values you and I hold mean absolutely nothing to many of these people at best and are viewed as outright demonic at worst (which is richly ironic, considering their demonic pagan practice of sacrificing children for a golden idol). I don’t think Renee has the same values altogether that you and I do, as much of the speech still contained semblances of secularism (hero-worship was practically all over it and worshipping fellow human beings is, of course, idolatrous), but the fact that she at least gave thanks to those who sacrifice their lives for our freedom is worthy of recognition and praise.
 
The biggest headlines and stories won’t be about her speech. They will be about the “ultra-woke” messages given in the speeches of other Oscar winners. They will be about the same idiotic and erroneous environmental and communist messages that help no one and stand to heavily harm more people than help (as evidenced by literal history that these people refuse to learn from).
 
But Renee taking the time of her speech to thank servicemembers is, like I said, worthy of praise and recognition. She won’t make headlines in places like Vox or Time, etc., but this gesture is appreciated, even if it goes largely unrecognized by people who often hold contempt for those who serve in our military.
 
Matthew 12:35
“The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As I have said multiple times in the past, I believe President Donald Trump will be re-elected this November for a variety of reasons (though with the warning that people should not be complacent here and go out to vote, while also reminding people that a lot can happen between now and the 2020 election). From the booming economy to the weak Democrat field, there is good reason to believe Trump will be re-elected. And according to a Gallup poll, Democrats will have to combat people being generally happier with the state of this country today than by the time Barack Obama left office.
 
Gallup recently released a survey in which they asked people a number of questions relating to their level of satisfaction regarding any particular subject, such as the overall quality of life in America or the position of women in the nation or the acceptance of gays and lesbians in the nation.
 
And the numbers tell a great story for Trump and a frightening one for Democrats.
 
According to Gallup, the following are the issues with which Americans are broadly satisfied at the start of this new year:
 

• The overall quality of life: 84% satisfied, 16% dissatisfied.
• The nation’s military strength and preparedness: 81% satisfied, 13% dissatisfied.
• The opportunity for a person to get ahead by working hard: 72% satisfied, 27% dissatisfied.
• The nation’s security from terrorism: 68% satisfied, 27% dissatisfied.
• The state of the nation’s economy: 68% satisfied, 29% dissatisfied.
• The position of women in the nation: 63% satisfied, 36% dissatisfied.
• The influence of organized religion: 59% satisfied, 38% dissatisfied.
• The acceptance of gays and lesbians in the nation: 56% satisfied, 40% dissatisfied.

 
ALL of these numbers, to one extent or another, should worry Democrats trying to get elected because they completely destroy any sort of argument that they can try to make.
 
Democrats said that Trump would make living life Hell for Americans; Americans are vastly satisfied with their overall quality of life and the ability to attain upward economic mobility through hard work. Democrats said that Trump was “weak” because he wasn’t starting any new wars against our foreign enemies (which they switched to “Trump is a warmonger” because he killed Soleimani, fully expeced that to spark WWIII, when nothing of the sort has occurred); Americans are very satisfied with the strength and preparedness of our country to protect us from foreign enemies and terrorism. Democrats said that Trump’s very election would cause the stock markets to crash and that his policies would lead to economic stagnation, if not a total collapse and recession; Americans are very satisfied with the state of the economy and “fears of recession” were only coming from partisan propaganda outlets in the fake news media. Democrats said Trump would be devastating for women; Americans are very satisfied with women’s positions today.
 
And perhaps one of the biggest ones: Democrats said Trump would be devastating for LGBT people in America because he’s such a “homophobe”; Americans are satisfied with the acceptance of gay people in the country. Of course, homosexuality is still a sin, but considering how often the Democrats like to accuse Trump of being a homophobe, the fact that Americans are satisfied with how gay people are treated is terrible for the Democrats.
 
Now, there are a slew of other issues which Americans show a great amount of dissatisfaction in. For example, “the nation’s laws or policies on guns” where 42% of people are satisfied with the way things currently are while 55% are dissatisfied with the way things currently are. However, this could mean a couple of things: either people are dissatisfied because the current gun laws/policies don’t go far enough aka they want more gun control, or people are dissatisfied because they think current gun laws/policies are too overreaching and think there should be less gun control. Conservatives and liberals both could very easily be dissatisfied with the current gun laws/policies in our nation but for two very distinct reasons and the poll does not ask a follow-up question asking if it is because they want more or less gun control.
 
They just ask the, at times, fairly vague question of whether or not they are satisfied with this issue and, again, there can be different reasons for a particular answer. Meanwhile, the opposite is not the case, because those who are satisfied think that the way things currently are with this level of gun control in America is satisfactory.
 
The same thing can be applied to the question on “The level of immigration into the country today,” where 35% are satisfied with it and 57% are dissatisfied. Leftists want more immigration to the point where it’s basically uncontrollable and conservatives want less immigration to the point where we almost have closed borders (an idea which I think people should consider, though illegal immigration levels have been declining as of late). And again, regarding the issue of “the nation’s policies regarding the abortion issue,” you find 32% satisfied with the status quo and 58% dissatisfied, with one side of the aisle being dissatisfied because they want abortion up to the point of birth and the other side being dissatisfied because killing babies in the womb is somehow legal and considered morally acceptable by people.
 
But regardless of that slight problem with the poll, we move on to what I believe to be the most important part of it and the worst thing for Democrats to see: the issues on which people are more satisfied today than by the time Obama left office.
 

• The state of the nation’s economy: Jan. 2017: 46% satisfied. Jan. 2020: 68% satisfied. +22
• The nation’s security from terrorism: Jan. 2017: 50% satisfied. Jan. 2020: 68% satisfied. +18.
• The nation’s military strength and preparedness: Jan. 2017: 66%. Jan. 2020: 81%. +15.
• The state of race relations: Jan. 2017: 22%. Jan. 2020: 36%. +14
• The nation’s policies to reduce or control crime: Jan. 2017: 38%. Jan. 2020: 47%. +9.
• The position of blacks and other racial minorities in the nation: Jan. 2017: 37%. Jan. 2020: 46%. +9.
• The way income and wealth are distributed in the U.S.: Jan. 2017: 35%. Jan. 2020: 43%. +8.
• The opportunity for a person in this nation to get ahead by working hard: Jan. 2017: 66%. Jan. 2020: 72%. +6.

 
Meanwhile, the overall quality of life, influence of organized religion, the nation’s energy policies, our system of government and how well it works, government regulation of businesses and industries, the size and influence of major corporations, and the moral and ethical climate have all also gone up in the last three years, though by nowhere near as much as the ones listed above, with quality of life having increased by 4 percentage points, the size and influence of major corporations increasing by 2, the moral and ethical climate increasing by 1 and the rest increasing by 3 points.
 
But if you would care to look back at the issues that increased by a lot over the last three years, what stands out to you? Well, to me, a lot of things stand out, such as the state of the economy, though I was not surprised by that at all. What I am specifically talking about here are two things: the state of race relations and the position of blacks and other racial minorities in the nation.
 
And here I thought Trump was supposed to be a horrifying racist who will put black people back in chains, segregate everything and send us back to pre-emancipation eras of racial relations. Well, that’s what the Democrats were telling everyone, at least. Perhaps the single most preferred word for the Left to throw at Trump (and his supporters) is the word “racist”. They love calling him that despite not having any real reason to do so. Hollywood, despite having known him for decades, hadn’t called Trump a racist even once until he decided to run for POTUS as a Republican. All Democrats, when they hear Trump and his supporters wanting a wall at the southern border, can’t help but react with scorn and hatred, believing that desire to be for racist reasons rather than security ones.
 
Trump was supposed to be the “racist-in-chief”, as many on the Left (at least on Twitter) choose to call him, and yet, racial relations are better off today than they were when THE FIRST BLACK AMERICAN PRESIDENT was in office. Race relations, by the end of Obama’s tenure, were awful. And no one was surprised by that, considering how often Obama would support black thugs or criminals when they were, unfortunately, shot and killed by police officers. Showing just about no remorse when police officers in Dallas were shot and killed by a BLM supporter also didn’t help race relations any.
 
But Donald Trump, the guy most often smeared as a racist by the true racists in the Democrat Party, has helped race relations over the last three years. And not by a little bit, but by a lot. A 14% increase in it is quite good. Granted, the bar was already fairly low by the time Trump entered office, but again, he was smeared as a racist and the Left assured people that he would be awful for blacks and minorities in general. And yet, the complete opposite is true, as is often the case when we are talking about Democrats predicting the future.
 
Democrats predict we will die in 10 years? A load of crap. Al Gore has been predicting we’d all die in 10 years for 30 years. Democrats predict the economy will collapse with a Trump presidency? The opposite wound up happening. The funny thing is that some Hollywood celebrities and Leftists are trying to tell people “we are screwed” if Trump wins AGAIN.
 
Just about every prediction the Left has made about anything, let alone about Donald Trump, has been utterly wrong. The economy has gotten better, the country is getting stronger, our enemies fear us again, our “allies” know they can’t take advantage of us anymore, and race relations are better today than when Obama left office. These are all things that should terrify and demoralize the Democrats, particularly if those numbers stay about the same, or even improve, by the time of the election.
 
Deuteronomy 28:7
“The Lord will cause your enemies who rise against you to be defeated before you. They shall come out against you one way and flee before you seven ways.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

In an article where I defended the idea of Christians defending President Trump, I noted how it was sinful to lie and to bear false witness against someone. In this case, I am certainly not surprised that South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg would lie and bear false witness against the Founding Fathers, but I still feel the need to clean the stain that he is trying to leave behind.
 
Speaking to children in a school (making sure they grow up to hate America just as much as he does), Mayor Pete tried to convince the children present that the Founding Fathers were silly, ignorant troglodytes who did not understand right from wrong and did not understand that slavery was not good.
 
“Similarly, the amendment process; they were wise enough to realize that they didn’t have all the answers, and that some things would change. A good example of this is something like slavery, or civil rights. It’s an embarrassing thing to admit, but the people who wrote the Constitution did not understand that slavery was a bad thing. They did not respect civil rights, and yet they created the framework so that as the generations came to understand that that was important, they could write that into the Constitution too and ensure true equal protection for all,” said the fake Christian.
 
While it sounds like he is praising the Founding Fathers in some places, he is doing nothing but passive aggressively insulting them when he is completely wrong about this.
 
Of course, the fake Christian Democrat was blasted online for his words, with people like historian and columnist Jay Cost saying: “The ignorance is astounding” on Twitter.
 
To further emphasize just how ignorant and wrong Mayor Pete is, he elaborated that the guy who wrote the Constitution, Governor Morris, “gave an amazing series of speeches in Philadelphia denouncing slavery.”
 
James Madison, on August 8th, 1787, made notes of the debates regarding the text of the Constitution featuring Morris and wrote:
 
“Mr. Govr. MORRIS moved to insert ‘free’ before the word inhabitants. Much he said would depend on this point. He never would concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a nefarious institution. It was the curse of heaven on the States where it prevailed. Compare the free regions of the Middle States, where a rich & noble cultivation marks the prosperity & happiness of the people with the misery & poverty which overspread the barren wastes of Va. Maryd. & the other States having slaves. Travel thro’ ye. whole Continent & you behold the prospect continually varying with the appearance & disappearance of slavery. The moment you leave ye. E. Sts. & enter N. York, the effects of the institution become visible, passing thro’ the Jerseys & entering Pa. every criterion of superior improvement witnesses the change. Proceed south widely & every step you take thro’ ye great region of slaves presents a desert increasing, with ye. increasing proportion of these wretched beings.”
 
“Upon what principle is it that the slaves shall be computed in the representation? Are they men? Then make them Citizens and let them vote. Are they property? Why then is no other property included? The Houses in this city [Philada.] are worth more than all the wretched slaves which cover the rice swamps of South Carolina. The admission of slaves into the Representation when fairly explained comes to this:  that the inhabitant of Georgia and S. C. who goes to the Coast of Africa, and in defiance of the most sacred laws of humanity tears away his fellow creatures from their dearest connections & damns them to the most cruel bondages, shall have more votes in a Govt. instituted for protection of the rights of mankind, than the Citizens of Pa. or N. Jersey who views with a laudable horror, so nefarious a practice.”
 
Suffice to say, as Madison’s own words can be considered, many of the Founding Fathers were vehemently AGAINST slavery and found it to be an abhorrent practice. When Madison writes: “Are they property? Why then is no other property included?”, he is basically talking about the discussion and debates they had been having over this matter. No one was debating whether someone’s house was property, or whether someone’s dog as property or whether someone’s furniture was property. They were debating whether slaves, fellow human beings who very much look like human beings, even if they have a different skin color, are property or are to be considered their fellow Man, and it’s quite clear where James Madison stood on this.
 
And Madison is far from the only Founding Father to hold slavery with such disdain. Thomas Jefferson, the Founding Father most often demonized for having owned slaves at one point, had originally written this in a draft of the Declaration of Independence but eventually took it out: “He [King George] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred right of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither.”
 
Jefferson is charging King George III with waging war against HUMAN nature and violating the sacred right to life and liberty of PERSONS in Africa that he sent to the colonies to turn into the slaves of the highest bidders. If he didn’t consider African slaves to be people and humans, he wouldn’t have written this in his draft and the only reason I could consider for having taken it out is because some people were debating in favor of holding slaves and did not want that part in the Declaration of Independence, as it would’ve delegitimized their slave-owning practices.
 
In a letter to Lawrence Lewis on August 4th, 1797, our nation’s first president, George Washington, wrote: “I wish from my soul that the legislature of this State could see a policy of a gradual Abolition of Slavery.”
 
Washington, by the way, was another target of the hateful Left as being demonized for having owned slaves at one point, but he clearly loathed the practice.
 
Our nation’s second president, John Adams, wrote on June 8th, 1819: “Every measure of prudence, therefore, ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States… I have, throughout my whole life, held the practice of slavery in… abhorrence.”
 
Our Founding Fathers minced no words about how they felt about slavery. Now, Leftists could say “but if they hated it so much and thought it so evil, why didn’t they do something about it?” and I’ve already explained elsewhere why this is: slavery, as a practice, was dying at the time, not to mention that they did do things to end slavery.
 
From December 2nd, 1793 to March 3rd, 1795, the 3rd Congress debated and eventually passed a bill to suppress slave trade and prohibiting the U.S. from trading with foreign countries. What’s more, multiple sessions in the Senate and House held debates regarding the abolition of slavery for a very long time.
 
For a time, the U.S. prohibited slave trading ships from entering and limited the number of slaves. Again, the practice was dying and Congress, at least the Senators and Representatives who wanted to end the practice and had the power to do so, worked towards killing the practice faster. The only thing that made slavery worse and caused a resurgence of it, particularly in the South, was the invention of the cotton gin, which made picking cotton (which used to be extremely difficult and hardly worth the hassle) a far easier thing to accomplish. This drove up demand for slaves to pick cotton and as a result, slave trade continued and, as I said, got worse until the Emancipation Proclamation.
 
The notion that our Founding Fathers “did not understand that slavery was a bad thing” is completely erroneous and ignorant. The Founding Fathers, particularly the notable ones, ABHORRED the practice of slavery and hoped that it would be put to an end one day, having done what they could with the time that they had. And the work they did in limiting and prohibiting slave trade would’ve been quintessential to ending slavery altogether in the country if the cotton gin had not driven up demand for slavery and caused Congress to amend and lift those prohibitions.
 
The Founding Fathers made their views on slavery perfectly clear and it is wrong for anyone, let alone a Presidential candidate, to smear them as these ignorant Neanderthals who hardly knew right from wrong and stumbled their way to allowing for future generations to change things for the better. Not that I expect any different from Pete Buttigieg or anyone else on the Democrat Party. Their hatred for this country, particularly for its founding principles, is no secret. Failed Presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke also tried to smear the country’s very founding as racist and bigoted. No Democrat running for president, and no Democrat holding any sort of electoral seat, can be said that they hold any love for this country.
 
And with ignorant statements such as the ones by Buttigieg, it’s becoming increasingly clear to the American people.
 
Psalm 101:7
“No one who practices deceit shall dwell in my house; no one who utters lies shall continue before my eyes.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

If this seems like a familiar topic, that’s because it kind of is. Back in late September, I wrote an article detailing five polls that should scare the Democrats going into 2020. Today, we will be looking at ten polls, instead of five, that should do the same.
 
Without further ado, let us begin with:
 
Poll #1: only 36% of registered voters support a House attempt to impeach President Trump.
 
According to a recent USA Today/Suffolk poll, only 36% of respondents support the House attempting to impeach the President, with 22% saying Congress should continue the impeachment inquiry but not remove the President, 37% saying the House should end the impeachment probe and 4% are undecided. 46% also report being in favor of convicting President Trump if impeached in the House, with 47% being against.
 
While these numbers are not exactly great for Trump either, they are terrible for House Democrats seeking to impeach Trump, an effort they have been salivating at ever since Trump won the presidential election of 2016. When looking to impeach a president, the number one thing you need is public support, which is why Adam Schiff had been leaking carefully selected excerpts of the highly secretive testimonies from people supposedly testifying against Trump. If the Democrats are unable to successfully raise people’s desire to impeach Trump, they will only come out of this effort as absolute losers.
 
Poll #2: Rasmussen’s Daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows Trump’s approval rating at 46%.
 
Without a doubt, that number is not exactly spectacular for Trump, given his history in this particular poll. However, that number is far from the lowest it’s ever been and not even the lowest it’s been since the impeachment stuff began. As it stands, comparatively speaking, his approval rating is the same as Obama’s was at the same time in his own presidency. This is important to note because, while Trump has usually done better than Obama in recent months, being tied with Obama, who handily won his own re-election, is not a good thing for Democrats looking to unseat Trump come next election.
 
Impeachment won’t work, so their best bet would be to beat Trump at the polls. However, this is an uphill battle for them. None of their current candidates stands much of a chance against Trump at this point. And while we are a little over a year away from the 2020 election, so a lot can happen in that time, it’s unlikely things will improve much at all for Democrat hopefuls.
 
Poll #3: Most Americans believe government is the problem, not the solution.
 
In his inaugural address in 1981, President Ronald Reagan said: “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” In a recent Rasmussen poll, 59% of Americans agree with that statement.
 
This is important simply because of who the Democrats are and what they believe. They believe in expansion of government, government-run programs, government-run everything. They believe in the Marxist ideology of communism, even if they wouldn’t outright admit it, and every proposal they give is in an effort to expand government power and influence over the American people, rather than diminish it.
 
Everything from Medicare-for-All, regardless of whose version it is (and it literally cannot be afforded by taxing the rich even 100% of everything they have), to the Green New Deal to every single proposal by the Democrats is an attempt at growing the size and scope of the government – a government which 59% of Americans agree is the PROBLEM, not the solution to people’s problems.
 
Poll #4: Most likely voters believe most politicians want to expand the government more than the American people want.
 
In a similar, but older poll as the last one, we find 66% of likely U.S. voters believing that most politicians want the government to have more power and money than it already has. This one should really be common sense to most people: most politicians in the government are in it to enrich and empower themselves, not help other people. Regardless of what campaign promise or contribution any given politician might make, most will go into government not to actually help their communities and their voters but help themselves and their donors.
 
Government power often entices people and leaves them lusting after it. It’s for this reason that so many politicians break their promises so easily, quickly and often. The promises they made do not serve their selfish interests past the point of election. Making their communities wealthier and better does not help them retain power because that means more people are financially independent from the government. As long as people are dependent on the government, such politicians will remain in power for life.
 
Poll #5: Most voters believe government is too powerful.
 
In another Rasmussen poll that is similar in nature to the last two, we find that 58% of likely voters say that there is too much government power and too little individual freedom. We should note that this poll comes from December of 2018, so it is rather old, but considering how little changed the government’s size has been, I doubt current sentiment is all too different from these numbers.
 
But this is another poll that goes against what the Democrats wish. Again, the Democrats are all about increasing government power. But most voters believe it already is too powerful as it is and there should be more individual freedom than there is.
 
Poll #6: Most voters fear a government that is too powerful.
 
Quickly moving on to the next poll, we again find something similar to the last one. A Rasmussen poll from July of last year finds that 62% of likely voters believe that a government that is too powerful is more dangerous that one that is not powerful enough.
 
These last two polls really coincide with one another pretty well, I’d say. It is understood by most voters that a government that is too powerful is a bigger threat to people than a government that is not powerful enough. It is also widely believed by nearly as many voters that the government we currently have is too powerful – too big – for our own good. And the Democrats only seek to further expand the power of the government, not reduce it. Granted, many Republicans also seek the same thing, with few actually being able to do much at all to reduce its size and power (Trump’s trying with deregulation, but he can only do so much on his own), but the Democrats don’t even pretend they wish to reduce the size of the government.
 
Even when talking about our deficit and our national debt, they just try and place the blame on Trump rather than come up with an actual solution to the problem because they don’t care about this problem at all.
 
Poll #7: Most voters don’t trust the government with their tax money and want a smaller government.
 
Once again, we find a poll that tells us something similar to the last two. According to Rasmussen, 57% of likely voters want “a smaller government with fewer services and lower taxes over a more active one with more services and higher taxes.”
 
This one comes from May of this year, so it’s not too old, but not that recent either. This also came around the time Democrat candidates were trying to outbid each other to try and see who could come up with the most expensive and government-power-increasing new system that would be marketed as being completely paid for by the infamous rich people of America. But as we are noticing, the trend is that more government expansion is not what most voters want.
 
Poll #8: Most Americans believe they are taxed more than their fair share.
 
A Rasmussen poll from March of 2019 finds that 57% of Americans “believe they are paying more than their fair share of taxes.” Now, obviously, this comes after the 2017 GOP tax cuts were passed and implemented, so people are not paying close to as much as they used to, but people believe they are paying more than they honestly should.
 
I believe that this comes in some part to Pelosi and Democrats trying to convince people that the Republican tax cuts were actually only tax cuts for the wealthy and most people’s taxes went up, but I don’t think that is much of a contributor here. Even if it was, it’s not like Democrats are promising to lower people’s taxes. We literally have Bernie Sanders trying to convince people that while he will be raising taxes on both the wealthy and middle-class Americans, that it would be okay because they would be “offset” elsewhere (which is a complete and utter lie).
 
Democrats never promise to lower taxes and that is an action only Republicans have done, even if some people naively and ignorantly believe their taxes were actually raised, not lowered (though they should be noticing the impact of the tax cuts from their paychecks being higher).
 
Poll #9: Most voters not convinced taxing the wealthy into oblivion will benefit the economy.
 
Rasmussen asked surveyors in February of 2019 what they thought about raising taxes on the rich and the impact it would have on the economy. 39% believe it would help the economy, 39% say it will hurt the economy and 14% say it won’t have any impact on the economy.
 
While this poll is not quite so devastating to Democrats as the last few have been, it does present a problem for them. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and virtually every other Democrat has proposed highly expensive and outright unaffordable new programs for a variety of things, which they argue will be fully or at least mostly paid for by the rich. However, just as many people are convinced that doing so would hurt the economy as there are who think that it would help it. Again, this is not something the Democrats would want to see.
 
Finally, we reach poll #10: 89% are proud to be an American, with 70% believing in putting America first.
 
There are few things that Democrats hate more than the United States of America, regardless of what they might try and argue. They heavily fault America and consider it to be a demon-spawn of a nation, ignoring the overall good it has done for its own people (in large part thanks to its own people) and for the world. They attack it for having allowed for slavery to be legal, despite the fact that virtually every other nation in the world has allowed for slavery and many countries in the Middle East still allow it to this day.
 
They fault it for its perceived discrimination but will ignore China arresting and often executing Christians, Muslims, Jews and political dissenters. They consider it a threat to the global climate despite the fact that Asia contains the world’s biggest polluters in China and India. So to find so many people being proud to be an American and so many people wishing to prioritize the health, stability and prosperity of our nation ahead of others goes against the globalist Left’s ideals.
 
These numbers, by the way, don’t come from Rasmussen either. They come from a Grinnell College poll that has Trump’s overall approval rating at 40% (43% with likely voters). It’s not exactly a right-wing poll.
 
This same poll also said that 87% of people are tired of the political circus we are all witnessing, 33% consider themselves to be politically incorrect, 41% say they are gun enthusiasts, 38% say they consider themselves feminists, 19% say they are socialists, 54% say they consider themselves to be “progressive” and 62% are afraid for the future (reasons not specified). It also says that 63% believe they are moving closer to their personal financial hopes and that 55% believe the economy is better now than it was at the beginning of 2017, when Trump took office.
 
All of these polls, to varying degrees, should really make Democrats afraid. Impeachment is nowhere near as popular as they would want it to be in order for it to be successful; Trump’s job as POTUS is mostly good; most Americans believe the government is the problem, not the solution; that most politicians want to expand the size and scope of the government; most voters believe the government is presently too powerful; that such a powerful government is a threat to its people and to individual liberty; most voters are distrustful of the way politicians spend tax payers’ money; that people pay more than their fair share of taxes; that taxing the wealthy to poverty will not be helpful to the economy (this is taking the 39% of those who say it will hurt the economy and the 14% who say it wouldn’t do anything to it); and most people are proud to be an American and wish for our leaders to prioritize the country and put America first, as Trump often says.
 
None of these things are good news for Democrats as they go into 2020. I hope and believe that these numbers will hurt the Democrats completely, as well as this phony and illegitimate impeachment effort they are hellbent on crusading on.
 
Ephesians 6:12
“For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

I’ve said this multiple times before, but I will say it again because it’s particularly true: if you were to just watch the mainstream media, you would think we were on the brink of total collapse. From the MSM, we hear stories about climate change and how it’s all our fault; we hear stories about how Trump colluded with Russia (not anymore, really, but the attitude is still there); stories about how Kavanaugh sexually assaulted multiple women while in college (all of which are not corroborated by witnesses or evidence); and generally, that the world is getting worse and worse.
 
However, a considerable majority of Americans believe that the country’s best days are ahead of us, not behind us.
 
According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 59% of nationwide voters believe America’s best days are ahead of us, in contrast to 41% who believe they are behind us (thanks, Obama).
 
This number includes 60% of conservatives AND liberals who say this, as well as 57% of moderates. 60% of Republicans and Democrats believe the future looks bright and so do 55% of Independents. Across racial demographics, 60% of Hispanics, 58% of whites and 53% of blacks agree with this optimistic idea.
 
And it’s not like this is new. The trend has shown this to be around the average, with 58% of people saying the same back in June and 57% back in March.
 
Interestingly enough, this comes in spite of the fact that only 35% of voters believe the federal government is doing a good job in terms of being a government of the people, by the people and for the people. What’s more, 71% believe the political system in America is broken, while only 16% disagree.
 
This is good news, when you think about it. Yesterday, I wrote an article talking about why socialism was so attractive and came to the conclusion that our capitalist system of economics has been socialized to the point where young people are suffering and the blame is put on capitalism itself. Similarly, one could argue that the socialization of our political system has bastardized it.
 
Yes, the Electoral College is still working wonders, but the fact that California is now an eternal shade of blue when only a few decades ago it at least had the capability of going red is quite the indication of political malpractice (as far as illegal immigration goes, let alone the other kinds of voter fraud present in states like Commiefornia). It also doesn’t help any that Congressmen on both sides of the aisle can be bought by lobbyists like Planned Parenthood and Wall Street, as well as other organizations.
 
Now, one might also be able to assume that at least some of those people who say the system is broken are socialists who claim Capitalism itself is broken. One might be able to do that, but they actually would be wrong to do so.
 
You see, Rasmussen also found that 81% of voters believe the reason for our system being broken is that our elected representatives AREN’T FOLLOWING THE CONSTITUTION. And while 30% believe the Constitution needs a major overhaul, a considerable majority (56%) believe that any changes that occur should FURTHER PLACE LIMITS ON THE POWER OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, which is the very thing the Constitution was written to do.
 
The framers of the Constitution all knew what tyranny was like and knew that the best way for people to live free is for the federal government ruling over them to be as limited as possible without making it completely useless.
 
The literal preamble of the Constitution reads as follows: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
 
The entire point of the Constitution is to insure the liberty and power of the PEOPLE of the United States, not the government.

• The first amendment is, first and foremost, about the freedom of religion, followed by freedom of speech, of the press, to peaceably assemble and to petition the government.

 

• The second amendment is about the people’s rights to keep and bear arms and it shall not be infringed.

 

• The third amendment is about allowing people not to be forced to quarter soldiers into their homes if they do not wish it (it really was more relevant back in the days of the Revolution when the Red Coats were allowed to stay in people’s homes even if the people did not want it, but still important).

 

• The fourth amendment is all about people’s right to not be unfairly searched without a warrant, both on their person or in their property.

 

• The fifth amendment is all about people’s right to remain silent and not incriminate themselves and not being deprived of life, liberty or property without due process.

 

• The sixth amendment is all about people’s right to a speedy and fair trial

 

• The seventh amendment is all about a right to a civil trial by jury.

 

• The eight amendment is all about protecting the people from cruel and unusual punishments not befitting the crime they committed.

 

• The ninth amendment is all about the rights of the people not being limited to the ones simply listed in the Constitution. Or in other words, people have liberty and rights even if they are not particularly mentioned in the Constitution.

 

• The tenth amendment is all about powers that are not delegated to the federal government (that are listed in the various articles before the amendments are listed) belonging to the States and to the people of those states (the reason why states can have a constitution of their own, so long as the state constitution does not infringe on the national constitution).

 
In each of the first ten amendments, what is known as the Bill of Rights, we find rights and freedoms and powers that belong exclusively to We the People of the United States of America, if not to the state governments to protect the states from the possibility of a tyrannical President.
 
This is why I say that no matter how socialist the Left wishes for us to be, the United States Constitution stands in the way. So long as there are people in power who are just, the Constitution will remain relevant to everyone.
 
Of course, there are more amendments to the Constitution than the ones talked about in the Bill of Rights, but the general principle still applies: the federal government is necessarily limited in power.
 
The Founding Fathers knew that it had to be limited in order to keep it from becoming tyrannical like the King of England they had fought and beaten. The Bill of Rights is there in order to limit the power the federal government can have on the individual states and on the people of the United States.
 
And with 56% of people saying if any changes are to be made, they should be to FURTHER limit the government, as we think it has gotten too big, that only tells you the type of mentality we still have.
 
So the overall climate in people’s minds, despite all the doom and gloom stuff shared by Democrat politicians and parroted by Left-wing media sources, seems to be that America’s best days are ahead of us, the government is cripplingly flawed and it should be limited in power.
 
This only further tells me that the far-Left people you see so often on Twitter and other social media are extremely fringe groups that do not reflect the overall mindset and views of America.
 
Romans 15:13
“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.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Among the many fake news stories surrounding the Trump presidency is the insistence by the fake news media that Trump shouldn’t be trying to fight a trade war with China because it only ends up hurting us more than it does them. However, a recent Harvard/Harris poll shows us just about the exact opposite of what the fake news media would want to see.
 
According to the poll, 67% of voters said it was “necessary” for the U.S. to confront China regarding trade, with only 33% saying it is “unnecessary”. This number includes nearly 70% of swing voters, 50% of Democrats, 86% of Republicans and 66% of “moderates” saying it was necessary to confront China on trade.
 
What’s more, 80% of voters said “the trade issues with China must be fixed now rather than put off in order to not rock the boat,” according to Breitbart News. This also includes 82% of voters saying they would rather fix trade issues with China now as opposed to later.
 
80% of Republican voters also support tariffs on Chinese imports, with 51% of swing voters and 53% of rural voters (the voters that would most be getting hurt by this, according to the media) agreeing.
 
This comes even despite the fact that conservative voters are the only ones saying that China is hurting more than the U.S. in this trade war, with the rest saying the U.S. was being hurt more. That is really the only “good” news for the fake news media in insisting that we are being hurt more than China. However, that is far from the truth.
 
While no one escapes a trade war unscathed, China will be more hurt from this trade war than the U.S., especially considering that the U.S. had, for years, been losing millions of manufacturing jobs to China since it joined the World Trade Organization.
 
But there is a very important aspect to the WTO agreement that Trump is very much taking advantage of in order to help Make America Great Again and fight back against China’s unfair trade policies: Section 232.
 
Section 232 reads as follows: “If cheaper imports result in lower employment and a decrease in government revenue, the importing country can impose high tariffs on those products.”
 
Basically, it’s a provision to countries who might be getting shafted by a trade agreement to punish the other country on the products. And the interesting thing about this is that it is helped an awful lot by the fact that we do not have a VAT, or a value added tax.
 
Countries like Canada, China, Germany, Russia, Mexico, and others have different VAT rates for products they import. Basically, if you are a manufacturer and want to export your product to any of these countries, you have to pay a tax. The U.S. does not have such a tax, and so, it becomes exponentially cheaper to get products into the U.S. In doing this, and in the fact that, as stated previously, millions of manufacturing jobs have gone from the U.S. to China, Section 232 can be implemented and that’s what Trump has been doing.
 
Now, that’s not to say that not having a VAT is a good thing for us altogether. The cons outweigh the pros, and having no VAT on imports means that we essentially become the dumpster of the world’s products. It’s also why products seem to be dropping in quality, at least in terms of durability. I had bought a push mower a while back (made in China, because of course it was) and one of the wheels broke off after only a month of use (the overall mower is still usable, as the wheel that broke off was not really necessary, but it’s still a testament to the poor quality of Chinese imports).
 
But as a result of getting so much product, and through the loss in manufacturing jobs, Trump is able (and in the right) to use Section 232 to fight back against China.
 
The fact that China also steals American products and makes bootleg copies of those products also gives Trump good reason to use Section 232.
 
Over the past couple of decades, China has been taking advantage of the U.S. Be it from stealing IPs (intellectual property) and not being held accountable to stealing away manufacturing jobs due to extremely lax environmental and humanitarian laws (which really marks corporations like Apple and Google as huge hypocrites, given their insistence on “fighting” climate change and at the same time working with a government that doesn’t care one wit about the environment), the past few decades have hurt American manufacturers far more than these tariffs ever could.
 
According to the IP Commission Report, China is responsible for almost $600 BILLION in losses to our economy from patent infringement alone. That is an obscene amount of money that could have helped the United States an awful lot. So why isn’t that being talked about in the news as harming farmers and manufacturers? Why are the tariffs being talked about as being the only source of economic pain for these people?
 
And why are we pretending like we are the only ones hurt by these tariffs? The media basically reports this trade war as follows: if China imposes tariffs on us, we are hurt by them; if we impose tariffs on China, we are hurt by them. How in the world does that make any lick of sense? The answer is: it doesn’t.
 
China’s economic growth has slowed the most in 27 years, largely due to the tariffs. Now, it’s not by a huge amount by any means, but it slowed down even more than was actually forecasted. And bear in mind that this is an economy largely built on the Chinese government spending tons of money in tracking their citizens, making deals with Google to spy on them and much other government spending like building ghost towns. Even with the status quo remaining as it is, that is not a sustainable economy and bound to collapse eventually (the situation in the States isn’t much better, as we still spend like there’s no tomorrow and the Left wants to spend trillions of dollars we don’t have on a climate project that will achieve nothing more than the total restructuring of the country into a new Soviet Russia). A big reason the Soviet Union fell was because of the Space Race: they were forced to spend more money than they had and eventually, they had to fold. The U.S. stuck around simply due to our economic system of capitalism, wherein we create wealth rather than steal and destroy it.
 
But returning to China, a trade war only accelerates China’s economic collapse. Take away their ability to steal IPs and you take away a means for them to make money. Return the jobs that went there and you increase their unemployment rates.
 
Of course, the Chinese government largely doesn’t care about its people. If there were a famine that kills a million or so people, they will see it as less people they will have to keep track of rather than as a tragedy.
 
But there is no denying that the tariffs stand to hurt China more than the U.S. considering that we are still (for the most part) a capitalist nation and we create our own wealth as opposed to stealing it and destroying it.
 
Of course, there will be those who disagree and think we are hurt by these tariffs more than China, but a considerable majority still backs Trump regarding trade with China regardless of who they think is hurt more by these tariffs. Eventually, China will blink and ultimately fold. That’s what communist countries do.
 
Proverbs 22:16
“Whoever oppresses the poor to increase his own wealth, or gives to the rich, will only come to poverty.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Multiple times throughout the past couple of years, particularly since Donald Trump became President of the United States, the American Left has insisted that Trump in some way worked with Russia to steal the election away from Hillary Clinton. Specifically, they say, time and time again, that the guy is a “threat to Democracy”. But therein lies an erroneous presupposition: that we are a Democracy at all. However, a Democracy we most definitely are not, given the institutions we have in place and given what the Founders thought about Democracies.
 
First, it is crucial to identify exactly what a Democracy and a Republic are, because both seem to be used interchangeably, which is a detrimental mistake.
 
A Democracy is a system of government in which the entire population or the eligible members of a state, usually elected representatives, rule. In other words, it’s a system where the majority, or the mob, rules. Where the laws are entirely decided by the majority, through a vote, regardless of what may have been there previously.
 
A Republic, however, is a system of government where, yes, people have a vote and they elect representatives, but where the majority does not inherently rule in a nation. The Electoral College is an indication of our status as a Republic.
 
One of the Left’s most recent complaints (of which there are plenty because these are perpetually angry people) has been that the Electoral College is a “scam” and that that’s the only reason Trump won. And while Hillary did win the popular vote, there is a good reason the Electoral College is what is used to decide elections: so that big states with bigger populations don’t choose the president of the entire country.
 
Let’s look at a couple of things. First, the popular vote. Hillary Clinton received 65,853,514 votes as opposed to Donald Trump’s 62,984,828 (granted, many of those Clinton votes were most likely from illegal aliens, so the real number probably isn’t that, but for the sake of the discussion, let’s say they are all legitimate). Rather close, but Clinton is the clear winner here. However, let’s move on to the counties: Donald Trump won 2,622 counties as opposed to Hillary Clinton’s 490. Donald Trump also won 30 states, as opposed to Clinton’s 20. Looking at an electoral map, be it by county or by state, you mostly see red.
 
So while Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, far more states and especially counties voted for Donald Trump. The reason for Clinton winning the popular vote is largely attributed to California and New York, states with some of the biggest populations. California alone has nearly 40 million people living in it (obviously, not all are citizens, but still).
 
The Electoral College allows for states with lower populations to have a say as to who they want to be their President. With it gone, despite how many more counties and states Trump won, Clinton would’ve become President, even though the vast majority of the country (again, by counties and states) wanted Trump.
 
In a Democracy, Hillary would’ve won with the simple majority because that’s all a Democracy does: rule by majority. But since we are a Republic, we have systems in place to keep that from happening.
 
Now, you might be asking why it is we are a Republic and not a Democracy. Well, apart from the reasons I just gave, the Founding Fathers absolutely LOATHED Democracies.
 
Thomas Jefferson is attributed for saying: “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”
 
John Adams said: “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”
 
Benjamin Franklin said: “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.”
 
And Alexander Hamilton said: “We are a Republican government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy.”
 
Our Founding Fathers understood the dangers of a democracy: mob rules. If the majority wanted, they could have voted to remain a part of the U.K. following the Revolutionary War (unlikely, but there were those who were anti-federalists and loyalists to the crown in the colonies who were against the rebellion).
 
Likewise, a Democracy can vote on just about anything else with impunity. If the majority wanted to arrest people wearing MAGA hats, they would be able to in a Democracy, but not in a Republic where we have basic Constitutional rights pertaining to things like freedom of speech, etc.
 
So every time I hear an idiotic Democrat insisting that Trump is a “threat to Democracy” or that we are a Democracy at any capacity (might I also mention that our Pledge of Allegiance says “to the Republic for which it stands” not “to the Democracy for which it stands”?), I can’t help but think how ignorant one can be.
 
We are not a Democracy by any means. We use facets of Democracy, such as voting, in our Republic, but we are not ruled by the majority. The Constitution is the backbone of our legal system and the Bible is the foundation upon which Western society is built. A simple majority cannot add onto or eliminate an amendment in the Constitution because we are not a Democracy. In order to ratify a Constitutional amendment, it takes two-thirds of the House and the Senate, and then three-fourths of the states in order to change the Constitution at all. A simple majority does not rule here.
 
This is because we are a REPUBLIC, not a Democracy. And thank God for that.
 
Amos 5:24
“But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Logic and reason have almost completely left the Democrat Party, but one 2020 candidate hasn’t been so idiotic as to sign off on employing ideas that will 100% destroy the country. That candidate is Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH).
 
While he is one of the extremely few candidates on the debate stage who did not want to go so far Left as to go off a cliff, he once again demonstrated the ability to be reasonable by sounding the alarm on what the Democrat Party’s agenda could potentially bring them: a landslide defeat comparable to 1984.
 
Appearing on last week’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”, Rep. Tim Ryan was asked by Rev. Al Sharpton whether the Party was moving too far to the Left.
 
Ryan responded by saying: “I think some of the lead candidates have taken positions that will lose 48 states, and I’m trying to figure out what the two are we’re going to win. I mean, if you’re talking about free healthcare for undocumented workers, and the average person in some of these states that we have to win are busting their rear end to provide health care for their own families and paying a lot of money for it (he didn’t really have a point to end that sentence, but is saying that that’s a bad idea)… I think decriminalizing at the border is a mistake. If you want to come into the country, you’ve got to ring the doorbell and it should be a crime to just walk into the United States. I think the single-payer idea of telling people they can’t have their private health insurance, you’re going to go to all these union people in the industrial Midwest and tell them they’ve negotiated away wages to get really good health care, and you’re going to tell them we’re going to take that health care from you because we’ve got a better idea in Washington, D.C.? I think that’s a mistake.”
 
It’s rare when I find myself agreeing with a Democrat, but he is completely right here. While I haven’t really talked much about it, the idea of providing healthcare for illegals is a massive insult to the American people in more ways than one.
 
First, there are Americans who still need healthcare. How exactly is it going to look for the average American when an illegal immigrant gets healthcare that Americans had been wanting for ages? What’s more, shouldn’t Obamacare have fixed this issue? I thought it was affordable healthcare. And yet, the Democrats are still talking about healthcare as though Obamacare hasn’t been in effect for the past 9 years. So what’s up with that?
 
Second, *I*, a naturalized citizen, get annoyed when illegals get a pass for their criminal acts. How much more will a native-born American citizen be annoyed that illegals get the “free” healthcare that had been promised to the American people?
 
Next comes the decriminalization at the border. Now, I haven’t talked much about this either, but this is honestly one of the signs that tells me these people are desperate to beat Donald Trump. They are throwing everything at the wall, seeing what sticks, and running with it. They can’t beat Donald Trump in the realm of ideas, certainly after two and a half years of a successful presidency that has brought about great results for the American people, so they have to throw out wild ideas that no sane person would agree with just to make some headlines and some noise. Decriminalizing border crossing is incredibly stupid, not to mention dangerous for the country. And while the idea of having open borders (this is a term the Democrats dispute being in favor of, but what else would decriminalizing border crossing mean apart from having open borders?) might be beneficial for the Democrat Party in terms of bringing in as many low-skilled, uneducated people to make up their permanent underclass of voters and workers, effectively a legal slave class, this would completely destroy the country and get the American people to run away from the Democrat Party.
 
It's political suicide to throw out entire voting blocs. There is a good reason why no Republican candidate has ever won by abandoning the Republican base and trying to attract Independents and Democrats. The Democrats are effectively doing the same, getting rid of many white voters in the Midwest United States, in states they NEED to win to beat Trump. And while there may be white voters who will always vote Democrat, white voters who detest the fact they are white (and these are some of the saddest people on Earth), they are a fringe group of people in America. The point is: you don’t win elections by throwing out votes.
 
And as far as single-payer goes, again, Ryan is right. Eliminating private health insurance isn’t something people want. They want options. There is a reason Medicare-for-All isn’t so widely talked about right now. The reason is that Bernie Sanders, in the second debate, gave the game away when he said that he would increase the taxes of middle-income Americans in order to pay for Medicare-for-All. As it turns out, people don’t want to be told they will have to pay higher taxes on something, so they stop supporting that something when that is the case.
 
The same principle applies to people being told that they’d be given LESS OPTIONS as to what healthcare provider they can choose. Single-payer healthcare forces people to work with the government and only the government. When it comes to people’s health, the more options, the better, which is why people like things like Obamacare and Medicare-for-All. On the outset, it looks as though people are given an extra option as to what healthcare provider to sign up with. But with single-payer healthcare, that option goes away. And with Medicare-for-All, people like it until two things are told to them: their taxes would go up and they wouldn’t have the option to sign up for private healthcare options.
 
Tim Ryan is at least reasonable enough to understand that these policies, as utopian as they make them out to be, would 1) be detrimental to the American people and 2) be rejected by the American people.
 
In Tim Ryan’s mind, the Democrats could lose as many as 48 states. I think the max (in an absolute best case scenario, that is. I doubt it will be that much) would really be 47, with the three being California, New York and Hawaii, but I could be wrong. After all, I don’t know how many people expected Ronald Reagan to win 49 states in 1984. Not that I think anything like that will ever happen again, particularly with an influx of illegal immigration and the ruining of education, but I do expect Trump to win and win by a good bit.
 
Of course, it’s far too early to tell, but again, with the way things are going, and with the policies the Left is adopting, I really see no reason for Trump not to be reelected (not that it’s going to be a breeze; no one has ever won expecting a fight to be easy). The fact that there’s at least one Democrat candidate acknowledging that the vast majority of Americans aren’t going to subscribe to the ideology of “sure, make me pay more so that you can give healthcare to illegal alien criminals” is, I think, good news, but there’s a reason Tim Ryan is polling at less than 1%. The rabid Democrat base is insane and thinks all of these crazy things are reasonable, but they are far from the majority of Americans.
 
Tim Ryan, in acknowledging this, will only further hurt his chances at being the Democrat nominee. The Party no longer cares for reason, logic, truth, facts or civility. They are out for bloody revenge and will deceive as many people as they possibly can and will do everything they can including cheat, to try and beat Donald Trump. They don’t want civil discourse. They want blood. Their rhetoric makes this clear enough, let alone the policies they espouse.
 
Ezekiel 18:20
“The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

On its own, the media can’t speak a recession into happening. They can say whatever they want, have financial “experts” say that a recession is looming, look at particular metrics that could be warning signs of a recession and predict one will definitely happen sometime soon, but they cannot speak a recession into happening if they don’t convince people.
 
And with recent news surrounding some of the most important metrics, consumer confidence and assessment of current conditions, it appears that the whole recession narrative is nothing more than that: a narrative.
 
From Bloomberg, who tend to write headlines that are negative to hurt Trump, they write: “Americans’ View of the Current Economy Is The Highest in 19 Years.”
 
“U.S. consumer confidence declined in August by less than forecast as Americans’ assessment of current conditions climbed to the highest level in almost 19 years, helped by a job market that remains robust,” writes Bloomberg.
 
While consumer confidence did dip down a little bit from 135.8 (the index used by The Conference Board) to 135.1, it is nowhere near what was forecasted, and what’s more, Americans’ views for the current economic situation is at 177.2, the highest it’s been since November of 2000.
 
“The reading shows hiring and income gains are keeping consumers upbeat and assuaging concerns about the economy’s prospects in light of slowing global growth, volatile financial markets and escalating U.S.-China trade tensions. The level of confidence could allow for sustained household spending that remains a mainstay of the economy. The share of respondents who say jobs are currently plentiful jumped to 51.2%, the highest since September 2000, while the share saying jobs are hard to get declined to the lowest in three months,” according to Bloomberg.
 
This is all important to note because these are some of the most important metrics in predicting a recession. As it stands, unemployment levels are at record-lows, wages are rising, taxes are lower, and there are more jobs than there are people available, which is always a good problem to have. But what matters more than these things is how people are feeling about the current economy.
 
It’s for this reason that the Left and the MSM have embarked on a mission to try and bring about a recession. Again, on their own, they can’t do that. But if people’s confidence drops significantly, that spells trouble for the economy. The media has been trying to get people to worry about the economy and fear a looming recession that wouldn’t come without those sorts of storylines being written. What the media is doing is trying to make a recession a self-fulfilling prophecy. The Trump economy is very good and stable, certainly growing, and that presents a problem for any Democrat candidate.
 
For the most part, people don’t care about what the narrative is about Trump. His approval numbers have been climbing and are pretty steady in large part due to how well the economy is doing. When people feel they are doing well, they care more about that than what Trump said on a particular day about a particular subject or person. If the economy is doing well, people don’t see much reason to change the status quo, so Trump’s prospects for reelection are only improved by a strong and growing economy.
 
This is a problem for the Left, and so, they are trying to scare people into thinking there is going to be a recession when plenty of indicators don’t show it. If they can convince people there will be a recession, there will be one. However, it doesn’t appear to be working so far, if these numbers are any indication.
 
Yes, consumer confidence dropped a bit, but less than was forecasted, so it’s probably a rather normal dip that happens all the time in economies (the line graphs aren’t exactly straight in any direction. You have to look at trends).
 
Bloomberg further writes: “U.S. consumers spent more in July than economists expected, the federal government said on Thursday, as retail sales rose 0.7% vs. the 0.3% estimated. Excluding automobile sales, a more volatile component, retail sales rose 1% - double what economists anticipated. Why it matters: Consumers were largely unfazed by the increasing economic uncertainty in July, defying other indicators that point to a global slowdown or recession. The data also comes as Walmart, one of the world’s biggest retailers, posted strong financials for its most recent quarter.”
 
Yeah, who exactly is saying there is “increasing economic uncertainty”? Look at these people, claiming there is such a thing all-the-while reporting that consumer confidence and perception are PRETTY GOOD RIGHT NOW, with a normal dip for consumer confidence at a time when families end their summer vacations and an economic perception that is the highest it’s been since the beginning of the new millennium.
 
In any case, this is, obviously, pretty good news not only for Trump but also for the economy and the people involved with it. No serious dip in consumer confidence means no likelihood for recession. No recession means people won’t be financially hurt, but it does mean Leftists and elitists like Bill Maher, Bill Kristol, etc. will be hurt because it won’t help them get rid of Trump. I just hope and pray these metrics will continue showing good news and continue improving, not only for the benefit of the President’s chances for reelection but also for the benefit of the American people.
 
To wish for a recession to occur like these Leftists are doing is to hope the American people will be hurt to the point they will point the finger at Trump. It helps no one but the heartless Left and it’s sickening.
 
1 Peter 5:8
“Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.