This is not the first time this proposal has come up. In the past, some counties in Oregon have looked into leaving the far-Left state and becoming part of the State of Idaho, so as to leave behind the state that is dominated by far-Left Portland. Five counties are seeking to do it once again.
 
According to The Washington Times: “Five Oregon counties will ask voters in the next election whether they want to detach from the deep-blue state and join neighboring red-state Idaho.”
 
“Move Oregon’s Border, also known as Greater Idaho, confirmed Tuesday that the initiative to move swaths of largely rural eastern and southern Oregon into Idaho qualified for the May 18 special election ballot in five counties: Baker, Grant, Lake, Malheur, and Sherman.”
 
“In Baker County, organizers far exceeded the 496 signatures required by submitting 746, with the clerk reporting that 630 were accepted. The county population is about 16,000.”
 
“’Oregon is a powder keg because counties that belong in a red-state like Idaho are ruled by Portlanders,’ said Mike McCarter, president of Move Oregon’s Border, in a statement.”
 
“He cited the impact of Democratic Gov. Kate Brown’s novel coronavirus restrictions; ongoing Antifa unrest in Portland; a state task force’s unsuccessful effort to prioritize ‘Black, Indigenous and people of color’ for novel coronavirus vaccines, and what he described as the state legislature’s bias in favor of Portland over rural communities.”
 
“’This state protects Antifa arsonists, not normal Oregonians, it prioritizes one race above another for vaccines and program money and in the school curriculum, and it prioritizes Willamette Valley above rural Oregon,’ Mr. McCarter said.”
 
And I would have to agree with the sentiment that the state is really dominated by Portland and the most populous areas of the state, to the point where the rest of the state is ignored politically.
 
Look at the following election results image for the state:

Does it look like Oregon is a largely blue state to you? The only reason it’s as far-Left and deep-blue as it is is because of Portland and the generally more populous areas of the state, which are found in the Northwestern portions of the state.
 
And even then, not all Northwestern counties are blue, either. So then, it makes perfect sense that the red counties, which do not have big enough populations to affect the states’ results (and which constantly get shafted by the Left’s policies), would want to move to Idaho, which is a red state.
 
Conservative commentator Jesse Kelly put it best: “A small preview of things to come. We are two different peoples. Absolutely no need to be one nation for the sake of tradition.”
 
He is certainly right. I was of this line of thinking even during the Trump administration, but especially so following the theft of the 2020 election and the dissolution of the union by the Supreme Court.
 
We do not need to stay together as one nation. It would be ideal if we could unify around something, but with Marxist anti-American indoctrination poisoning the minds of kids, that is becoming more and more difficult.
 
It certainly doesn’t help that a recent poll from Echelon Insights shows that while Republicans’ main concerns are issues such as illegal immigration, lack of support for police, high taxes and liberal bias in the MSM, Democrats’ main concerns are Trump supporters, white nationalism and systemic racism in that order.
 
Republicans are worried about the issues while Democrats are worried about their political opponents. They hate us and believe us to be the biggest threat to this country (by which they mean the country they want to turn this country into).
 
The Left hates us and we should not feel differently towards the Left. But before we go through a perhaps needless second civil war, it might be more prudent to attempt a national divorce.
 
Like Jesse said, there is no need to remain as one nation for the sake of tradition. I don’t like what this country has turned into largely because of the Establishment and The Party. And unlike the secession of the 1860s, it’s more likely that both parties involved would be okay with the separation.
 
The Democrat South seceded to protect the institution of slavery (and don’t tell me they did it to “protect states’ rights”. Protect their rights to what? It makes no sense that Republicans in the South want to maintain the pride and honor of the actions of Democrats) and the Republican North, led by Abraham Lincoln, wanted to maintain the Union while also ensuring the human rights of slaves.
 
This time, the Left hates the Right and the Right is more willing to split the country into two. The question becomes: does the Left want to maintain the Union just to ensure that the Right receives the punishment the Left wants to issue? I’m more willing to believe the Left would be this sadist, but it’s even more of a reason to attempt this, even if it would almost certainly lead to another civil war.
 
The path, as far as I can see, leads us down three roads: capitulation and slavery of the Right, revolution from the Right, or national divorce by the Left and Right.
 
The first option is self-explanatory, the Right becomes as limp-stick as the old GOP and does nothing to fight for the country’s founding principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and the rights afforded to us by God. This is what the Liz Cheney’s and the Adam Kinzinger’s of the current GOP desire because they are establishment rats who thrive from people’s slavery.
 
The second option is more complicated and harder to picture. Who knows where such a revolution would begin or how it would begin, or if it would even be remotely successful?
 
The third option is the most appealing and perhaps the best chance we have at preserving the Union’s founding principles. Like I said in a previous article, I don’t mind the Left’s policies so long as they affect only the Left. The problem comes in the fact that it never only affects the Left, particularly when they are the ones with power, electorally and otherwise.
 
So to avoid the total destruction of the States and our being sold off to China, Russia and Iran, it’s best to attempt a peaceful national divorce. The Left gets the communist dystopia that they want in their own little sections of the continent, and the rest of us get left the hell alone by these crazy people. Ideally, anyway.
 
But if the options are as I pointed out, this is by far the best option available. Maybe there is a fourth option which is to try and slowly take our country back electorally and otherwise (meaning draining the entire swamp) which might be possible as well, though a far more daunting task with, in my mind, a smaller chance of succeeding.
 
This is where we are now and some of the options we have ahead of us. I sure as hell do not feel like capitulating to the Left and becoming their slave, so that first option cannot be the one we take.
 
We must be able to think of ways to protect our nation from the Left, even if it means allowing them to have some pockets of it in a national divorce. We need to seriously consider the option of forming the Republican States of America (proper name pending) and the Democrat States of America. And, like people in Oregon are trying to do, that doesn’t necessarily mean splitting up the country by the established state borders.
 
There are many counties in California which are red which I think ought to be included in the Republican States. Likewise for many blue states. It’s about figuring out how to best ensure the country’s founding principles of liberty are preserved while also maintaining, as best as possible, our place on the world stage. I want a free America and a strong America. That ought to be the priority.
 
So I hope that the citizens of many Oregon counties begin to vote to leave the blue state which is screwing them and become part of a state which is considerably friendlier to them. Change needs to happen for the sake of the country.
 
Romans 8:21
“That the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.”

I want to begin this article by making a couple of disclaimers. First, and perhaps most importantly, I am not a lawyer. I cannot give legal advice or counsel, nor can I give expert opinion on the procedures and logistics of possibilities for the Trump legal team to seek legal action against a clearly rigged election result. However, I will be largely quoting actual lawyers, who themselves have already written plenty about the legal options of the Trump team, both back in late November and more recently on Christmas Eve.
 
So whatever legal opinions are shared here, they will largely either be quotes or paraphrases of these lawyers, or at least backed up by what these lawyers are sharing.
 
The second disclaimer I want to make is that I am not saying that Trump only has this option for resolving the issue of a stolen election. This one is a little less important, since I don’t think too many people would interpret that title as whittling down Trump’s options for victory, but I still want to make this perfectly clear simply due to my not trusting the Supreme Court at this point (for good reason) and not believing that they are willing to actually do anything to save the Republic or even themselves, not to mention that I also don’t trust the current Acting AG.
 
But regardless of those things, allow me to share with you the thoughts of a couple of prominent conservative legal scholars who are giving their opinions about the SCOTUS having rejected the Texas suit against four “swing” states (generally titled Texas v. Pennsylvania), and who make a suggestion (which they have gone so far as to formally submit to President Trump himself) about what legal steps the president can take to right the many wrongs committed during this election that have resulted in a fake president-elect.
 
First, they give their opinions of the ghastly decision by the SCOTUS to reject the Texas suit:
 
“In refusing to hear Texas v. Pennsylvania, the U.S. Supreme Court abdicated its constitutional duty to resolve a real and substantial controversy among states that was properly brought as an original action in that Court. As a result, the Court has come under intense criticism for having evaded the most important inter-state constitutional case brought to it in many decades, if not ever.”
 
“However, even in its Order dismissing the case, the Supreme Court identified how another challenge could be brought successfully – by a different plaintiff…”
 
The lawyers, named William J. Olson and Patrick M. McSweeney, note that the SCOTUS made a massive mistake which could have huge ramifications if not corrected. In rejecting the suit, the Court committed wrongs against Texas and the roughly 20 states which supported its suit (which includes Arizona, for some reason), the United States itself, the President, and We the People.
 
You see, Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist No. 78, wrote that courts have “neither force nor will, but merely judgment.” Courts have the obligation to explain their decisions satisfactorily to the People, else the reasoning behind the decisions can easily be seen as partisan or corrupted. In its refusal to take up the case, the Court (all nine justices, though it was a 7-2 decision, technically) only issued the reason of “lacking standing”, explaining that reason with one sentence: “Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its election.”
 
That is simply not enough to issue reasoned judgment. It arbitrarily says “yeah, we’re not taking it up because I don’t really think you care about how other states do their elections.” I don’t know the exact wording of every page of Texas’ suit, but I can hardly imagine they went so far as to sue those four states (and be joined by around 20 other states) without providing much of a reason. Texas is most certainly interested in how another state conducts its election because the results of that election affect Texas, or at least, the process of that election’s result.
 
The winner of that election can institute policy which could harm Texas (Biden’s “green” policies would hurt the Lone Star State), but even more important than that, it would affect Texas illegally. No, a state cannot sue another state for having voted one way or another, as that would pretty much destroy the entire system of the Republic. Texas can’t sue Pennsylvania for having gone to Biden instead of Trump like California can’t sue Texas for having gone to Trump instead of Biden. However, Texas can sue Pennsylvania for having clearly and overtly (to the admission of Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court) gone against both its state constitution and the U.S. Constitution by implementing and executing rules that are not legal or constitutional.
 
Because those rules were unconstitutional, and they helped Biden “win” that state, that is an illegal result, and so Texas has standing based on that, since they would be illegally and unconstitutionally affected by the result of the election. Furthermore, by doing what Pennsylvania and those other states did, they are utterly corrupting the electoral process by which we select our president. If those states are allowed to do what they did with impunity, then Texas’ voice, as well as all other states, don’t matter in this election. Their electoral power and voice are eliminated entirely because of an illegal and fake result in those states.
 
Like the lawyers said: “If the process by which Presidential Electors are chosen is corrupted in a few key states, like Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin by rigging the system in favor of one candidate, it becomes wholly irrelevant who the People of Texas support.” Again, if it were all legal, Texas, Trump and his voters would all have to suck it up and admit defeat. But because it was blatantly illegal, we cannot simply accept the result because we know it is not legitimate.
 
So it’s not only absolutely unacceptable for the SCOTUS to have issued a one-sentence explanation for their decision regarding what is perhaps the biggest suit in the history of the country, but the explanation itself is illogical and constitutionally unsound.
 
The lawyers put it pretty well: “In the vernacular, the Supreme Court blew it, threatening the bonds that hold the union together.”
 
If a state cannot be allowed to sue another state which has clearly broken not only its own constitution but also the constitution of the United States, what exactly is the reason for the union to remain? The Constitution is a contract which all states sign on to. If one of them breaks that contract and gets away with it, what reason is there for the others to keep honoring it? What reason is there for the states to remain unified under a broken contract?
 
It’s why I am not against secession if Biden ends up being the occupier of the oval office. Secession, ironically, would be the only way to preserve the union. We’re not quite there yet, and I pray to God we never get there, because secession would definitely lead to another civil war at one point or another. War is sometimes necessary, but it’s never ideal, and I would much rather avoid it if it can be avoided. But if it’s the only way to preserve the union, it cannot be taken off the table, due to its alternative: full-on communism.
 
At any rate, after disparaging the Supreme Court for its cowardly actions to defend the constitution at a crucial moment, the lawyers went on to note a way in which this legal case can still be made and be heard by the Supreme Court:
 
“A strategy exists to re-submit the Texas challenge under the Electors Clause to the Supreme Court in a way that even that Court could not dare refuse to consider. Just because Texas did not persuade the Justices that what happens in Pennsylvania hurts Texas does not mean that the United States of America could not persuade the justices that when Pennsylvania violates the U.S. Constitution, it harms the nation… Thus, the United States can and should file suit against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin.”
 
That strategy could theoretically work because the majority of the Supreme Court (two of which are solidly conservative and the others less so but appointed by Trump) could hardly argue that the United States of America does not have a standing or interest in defending the United States constitution.
 
My only worry is in the fact that it would be up to Acting AG Rosen to file such a suit, which I am not sure he would be willing to do. And at this point, having had great hopes for both Jeff Sessions and William Barr to seek justice wherever they can, without politics being involved in the decision-making process, and being completely disappointed by both of them when they were of great need, I cannot say I have much hope in Acting AG Rosen to seek this option, even under direct order from President Trump.
 
Trump’s legal team can’t issue this suit since that would have to make it a private suit as opposed to a federal one, and there would be almost zero chance that the SCOTUS would take it up.
 
Olson and McSweeney’s suggestion could be plausible, and if actually performed (that is, Rosen actually files that suit), would pretty much be guaranteed to have its day in court, but there is reason to be cautiously optimistic about it, at best. I do not trust anyone in the swamp, and while I don’t know a lot about Rosen, do not outright trust him to be willing to go through with this.
 
Of course, as I mentioned towards the beginning, this legal challenge is not all Trump has to right the wrongs of this election. One Republican representative and Senator objecting to the results of the election on January 6th are all that’s needed to send Congress (presided by Pence) into deliberation and activation of the 12th amendment, leading state legislatures in those states to having one representative voting for the party they have to vote for, leading to Trump’s victory.
 
But I write this to remind people that there are still a number of options out there, both politically and legally (Martial Law and the use of the military should be last resorts, but not off the table options), to ensure that the rightful winner of this election actually ends up winning this election.
 
The SCOTUS should absolutely be ashamed of itself for potentially destroying the Republic with that heinous decision, and the people involved in attempting to steal this election should face extreme consequences for their treason.
 
Psalm 106:3
“Blessed are they who observe justice, who do righteousness at all times!”

​Today is a day of Thanksgiving - of expressing gratitude to our Lord for the blessings that we have received this year and the blessings that are still in store for us. God is a good God - in fact, the goodness of God is not just a character trait that God has, but rather God IS goodness. He's the source of goodness. All good things come from Him and Him only. That's what it means that God is good. And when bad things happen, you know what the Bible says: "And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose" (Romans 8:28). So if you love God, be thankful because anything bad that may have happened to you this year God will use for your good. 

But the pilgrims, when they celebrated the first Thanksgiving in what would some day be called America, had a lot to be thankful for. Just the previous year, much of the population had died of starvation, and the cause of such a terrible catastrophe was none other than the communal experiment that Governor Bradford had attempted - an experiment that can only be described as the first Socialist experiment in the Americas.

You probably have heard time and time again the official version of the story of Thanksgiving: in the autumn of 1621, the Pilgrims and the Wampanoag gathered to celebrate the colony's first successful harvest after the Indians taught the Pilgrims how to catch eel and grow corn, and the success of the Pilgrims' first harvest was the direct result of Indians teachings. 

But this is only a limited version of what actually happened. The truth, as always, is a little bit more complicated - and richer - than that.

Here's what really happened:

The Church of England, under King James I, was persecuting everyone who didn't recognize his Church's absolute authority. The punishment for those who challenged its authority was imprisonment and, sometimes, death.

A group of separatists decided to emigrate, first landing in Holland to establish a community. After 11 years, about 40 of them decided to embark on a dangerous journey to the New World.

We have to remember, these were very religious people, who left their home country so that they could worship as they pleased, without risking their lives. In their hearts, such long and dangerous journey to America was similar to the Israelites' journey to the Promised Land. Much like the Israelites, the Pilgrims never doubted that they would make it. They trusted God...

Once in the New World, the first winter was devastating - half the Pilgrims died of starvation, including the colony's governor William Bradford's wife.
​
According to the story that you've been taught in school, this is when the Indians came in to help the Pilgrims, which is all true. 

What follows is the part that's omitted from history textbooks - the part that the Left doesn't want you to know.

The first economic system implemented in the Colony was what we would now call socialism.

You see, before the Pilgrims left England, they signed a contract which seemed fair and stipulated that they were to pool, for the common benefit "all profits and benefits that are got by trade, traffic, trucking, working, fishing, or any other means of any person or persons" for 7 years, during which time colonists were to "have their meat, drink, apparel and all provisions out of the common stock of the said colony".

Once they reached land they implemented the system as per the contract they had signed - but in the first winter half the people died as a direct result of this system.

The problem with the system was people didn't put too much effort laboring the common land and as a result, output wasn't enough to feed all of them.

                                                    Socialism killed half the Pilgrims.

Governor Bradford realized the "commune" system didn't work - he wrote the experiment "was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to the benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labour and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense".

Bradford recognized that this form of collectivism was destructive to them - as the first harsh winter had proven. Half the people weren't carrying their weight - they didn't have to.

                                                             Socialism produced LACK

What did Bradford do?

He scrapped socialism forever! 

He assigned a plot of land to each family to manage, thus introducing for the first time what we now know as free enterprise - capitalism.

Now, with the capitalistic principle of private property, there was incentive to work - now there was abundance.

                                                  Capitalism produced ABUNDANCE

Abundance that the free market system enabled, and that they then shared with the Indians - to give thanks to God for their safety and discovery of the new system, and thanks to the Indians for their help.

Don't let the Left lie to you. Learn our history.
​
Happy Thanksgiving!

Proverbs 1:7
"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction"

This year has so far been rather challenging, to say the least, for a lot of people. What with the Chinese coronavirus pandemic, the strict and idiotic lockdowns that came as a result of it, the social and racial unrest that has led to wanton destruction of property and numerous deaths, all leading up to an election which if won by Trump will almost certainly lead the Left to… continue doing the things they’ve been doing so the threat of riots is not quite as effective as it otherwise would have been.
 
One silver lining in this dark cloud of a year, however, is what I believe to be the potential revival of Christian America. It is often at our lowest point that we seek the Lord for comfort, and while some might be angry at God for allowing these things to happen, many more will come to God in search of refuge from the evil one. Many more people will begin praying to God, or pray more often, that their current situation – both personal ones and larger, social ones – will turn around. As a guest pastor for a church I often watch online said, “If it’s not good, God’s not done.”
 
This has not been a good year for many of us, but since it’s not good, that means that God’s not done. Good things will come out of all of this. We may not see it now, or understand how it could possibly come to be, but even while we don’t see a way, God most assuredly does.
 
Undoubtedly, there will be plenty of people who won’t change no matter what. Who will refuse to acknowledge God’s existence (for the most part; they acknowledge Him when they have something to be angry with Him about) and who will foolishly even declare themselves an enemy of God (as I have met one such fellow on Twitter who has outright said that he would kill God if he met Him, as though he had any power at all to stand against the omnipotent One).
 
Such people will reject and even mock prayer. We often see it whenever a tragic event like a shooting or natural disaster occurs, there are those who offer prayers and those who mock those who offer prayers, declaring it to be a waste of time and effort which accomplishes absolutely nothing and that we must seek evidence-based solutions to the problem.
 
The thing about prayer is that it absolutely works and multiple studies show it is an evidence-based solution to problems.
 
For example, one study of older adults found that “the negative effects of financial problems on health were significantly reduced among those who regularly prayed for others,” according to National Review.
 
In other words, the people who regularly prayed, and prayed for other people, were noticeably less affected by the strains of financial problems than those who did not pray. When you turn your trust and faith over to God, you recognize that your job is not your income source, the economy is not your income source, but God is your income source.
 
And hallelujah for that because of the following passage:
 
Luke 11:9-13: “So I tell you: Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? So if you who are evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!”
 
One could say: “Well, Freddie, the context is clearly about the Holy Spirit, not about finances or other things.”
 
And one would be half right.
 
The context of the passage is clear: Jesus is talking about salvation and receiving the Holy Spirit. Indeed, whomever asks for forgiveness, they will be forgiven. The Lord is merciful to such people. But recognize that God doesn’t only give His children the Holy Spirit. In the rhetorical questions, Jesus talks about parents giving their children fish or eggs if they ask of it. While, obviously, human parents cannot give the Holy Spirit and Jesus needed an analogy that would be understandable to His audience, God also gives us many other blessings. The proof that God is happily willing to give other things to His children is in the fact that He DOES and we express our thanks to Him as a result.
 
Why else would we give thanks to God for, say, getting a new job or a promotion, or doing well on a test, or finding the love of someone’s life, if God only gave His children the Holy Spirit? When we ask God for things, a number of things can happen:
 

       1. God gives us exactly what we want. 

   2. God doesn’t give us what we want because what we want is not what we should have, or God is protecting us from something. 
 
     3. Or, God doesn’t give us what we want because He has something even better in store, giving us more than what we even asked for. 


God is delighted in giving us things that we ask for when those things help us achieve our God-given destiny. So when praying to God, He is even more delighted by the faith and trust that is placed on Him by us.
 
We pray not merely to ask for things like children asking for a new toy. We also pray for help, we pray for clarity, we pray for strength, for wisdom and understanding, as well as for others that they might get those things.
 
And studies have shown, like I mentioned earlier, that prayer is extremely helpful. One research study found that prayer is of great psychological benefit to those who perceive God to be a loving God. They also found that, on the flipside, it caused anxiety and distress for those who perceive God to be distant and uncaring.
 
Which is why it’s important to also know who God is. I remember seeing on social media a post that quoted someone about how many (too many, according to that person) Christians view God as all-loving, forgetting the wrathful side of God. The thing about that is, while God is wrathful, He is only wrathful to sinfulness which was not forgiven by Him; which was not asked to be forgiven.
 
God doesn’t express His wrath against His children. His children are forgiven! His wrath is reserved for those who are unrepentant and unsaved – those who deny Christ consciously or subconsciously.
 
In understanding who God is, putting one’s trust and faith in Him, and having been saved by His Son, prayer is a great reliever of stress and it helps people spiritually, psychologically, and often times, physically.
 
Like I said, there are a number of studies that show such things, and that National Review article I mentioned earlier talks about many of them.
 
I hope that in reading this, you will come to better understand (if you haven’t already) just how important prayer is. In terms of both helping people feel better, such as in a group of cancer patients who were instructed to pray focusing on thankfulness and concern for others and were found to have the least symptoms of depression, and in terms of better accomplishing tasks, such as a study which found that those who prayed for 10 minutes about a personal life issue (even those who are less religious) were better able to accomplish focus-driven tasks than those who were instructed to think about the personal issues or were distracted with a puzzle, prayer is a magnificent and efficient way to solve problems.
 
When ignorant people criticize prayer, they don’t realize that prayer actually has value and effectiveness which has been backed by empirical evidence.
 
Prayer is extremely helpful, not only for our own souls but also for life in general. I firmly believe that if we prayed more as a country, things would be a lot better than they are.
 
Mark 11:24
“Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.”

I have, for a long time, said that the biggest way in which the Left has managed to make relatively mainstream economic and political ideologies like socialism and communism (one and the same, really), is through the indoctrination of children in public schools.
 
Children are very malleable and the things that they learn early on are things that they carry with them the rest of their lives, even subconsciously. While not all children who are subjected to this indoctrination end up as little Marxist puppets later on, it does negatively influence a lot of people and that has major implications for the future of this country.
 
One of the pillars of power I have talked about in the past is education. The side which controls the education system controls the future of the country and the Democrats have controlled it for more than half a century now.
 
And things are only getting worse and worse in that respect, with freedom of speech being stamped out in college campuses by both staff and fellow students. Holding a conservative point of view in a college campus is bound to get one heavily reprimanded or perhaps even outright expelled.
 
Which is why it’s so important to have patriotic education in our schools which undo the heavy damage the Left has caused over the past few decades. Kids today are taught that America is a hellish landscape born out of racism and bigotry, created by slave owners for the benefit of slave owners, when nothing could be further from the truth.
 
Great men in history like George Washington, Christopher Columbus and Thomas Jefferson are marred as bloodthirsty bigots looking out only for themselves, when history shows that to not be the case at all.
 
The Left is straight up lying about the history of this country (it took me doing research on my own to discover that Columbus didn’t genocide Natives or that the first Thanksgiving was held by the pilgrims celebrating a successful harvest after having tried and failed with a socialistic system) so that people believe it is not worth defending against the idea of globalism or against the idea of fundamentally changing it.
 
After all, if you’ve been taught all your life that this country is fundamentally and systematically racist, then naturally, you would come to the conclusion that it should not exist or that it should be fundamentally changed. This is the ignorance that many carry with them because the modern school system is not designed to teach them the truth of our history (or other subjects, as even math is becoming politicized). However, there is good news on this front.
 
A recent Rasmussen poll showed that a majority of likely voters agreed with President Trump on the idea of instilling patriotic education into our schools.
 
According to the poll, 57% of likely voters agree with the following statement issued by Trump: “The only path to unity is to rebuild shared national identity focused on common American values and virtues of which we have plenty. This includes restoring patriotic education in our nation’s schools, where they are trying to change everything that we have learned.”
 
Only 30% disagree and 14% are undecided on this issue.
 
Unsurprisingly, this issue is largely a partisan one, as 78% of Republicans agree with Trump compared to just 43% of Democrats and 49% of unaffiliated voters.
 
This sort of split is completely unsurprising, though it is rather interesting that that many Democrats agree with this. I can only imagine those are the types of Democrats seeing where their party is headed and cannot bear to go along with it.
 
Furthermore, 53% of Republicans and 49% of unaffiliated voters (a plurality) think most school textbooks are more preoccupied with being politically correct as opposed to teaching accurate information. 51% of Democrats think the books are more focused on providing accurate information.
 
What’s more, 73% of all voters (different from likely voters) agreed with President Trump when he made the following statement in his Independence Day speech last year: “[T]ogether we are part of one of the greatest stories ever told – the story of America. It is the epic tale of a great nation whose people have risked everything for what they know is right.”
 
So clearly, the Left hasn’t completely won in the fight regarding education, which is as I thought. There are still plenty of people out there who are patriotic and who love this country, even if they are drowned out by those with megaphones who scream obscenities about this country and those who support it.
 
When professional athletes are paid tens of millions of dollars under this capitalistic system of ours kneel in a sign of defiance against the country that afforded them such lives of leisure, many will boo those actions because they are worthy of being booed.
 
This is not a nation that deserves such hatred and scorn. And no, I don’t buy it for a second that they aren’t protesting against the country as a whole. I don’t buy it that they are kneeling for the “injustices” of the current justice system. They kneel only during the national anthem. Not at any other point. They do it to disrespect the flag and the country.
 
It also doesn’t help them when they stand in solidarity with a sexual assaulter (Jacob Blake) or people who were defiant against the police, in some cases, to the point of trying to harm them. It doesn’t help when they support a Marxist organization which does not actually care about black lives.
 
But even the examples that I have shared here are examples of a system of indoctrination. These athletes have been told that this country is racist from an early age and they believe it. They keep hearing it over and over again and assume it must be true. They see particular situations through the lenses that have been given to them by the evil Left.
 
This is among the many reasons why we need patriotic education in our schools. We need to teach our kids the TRUTH about this country: that it’s not racist, it was not built by racists or for racists, and that it is the single best nation in the world and can be even better if there were no Leftist communists here to try and ruin it.
 
I’m glad that so many likely voters (the people that actually have some amount of influence in elections) are in agreement with Trump’s statement. I just wish that the number was considerably higher, but I suppose that would come once such patriotic education is actually implemented and the anti-patriotic education is completely stamped out.
 
Psalm 33:12
“Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom he has chosen as his heritage!”

In this day and age, with the dominance of social media and its censorship of conservatives, not to mention poll after poll indicating a rise in popularity for socialism and communism among America’s youth, it is easy to get discouraged about the future of this country.
 
However, a recent poll by Young America’s Foundation (YAF) and Echelon Insights, reported by TownHall, shows a rather interesting picture about the way in which America’s youth views this country.
 
According to the poll, 82% of surveyors held a “very” or “somewhat” favorable opinion of the American flag, with 91% of high-school students and 73% of high school graduates saying the same. This tells us something very interesting which I will get to in a minute, though I doubt you haven’t figured it out yet.
 
In any case, 57% of respondents said “they believe America is ‘exceptional and unique’ and is a country that ‘values liberty.’” 54% also felt that America offers “opportunity for all who work for it,” and 46% said America is both a “good example for other countries” and that the nation “values justice”; 43% said the country “values equality.”
 
63% of respondents said they felt “extremely” or “very” comfortable standing for the national anthem and 58% were comfortable with reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
 
80% of surveyors also reported a “very” or “somewhat” favorable view of war veterans, 75% favor the military, 72% the Constitution, 65% the Founding Fathers, and 57% favored the history of this country as a whole. Interestingly, 34% of respondents said they would be “extremely” or “very” willing to serve the country if we were to be attacked, 31% said they would serve if we went to war and 30% said they would serve during “peacetime.”
 
Now, there is a very important aspect to this poll, which takes me back to one of the figures earlier: the 91% of high school students and 73% of graduates who have a favorable opinion of the American flag. This is an indication of the sort of Marxist indoctrination that students go through post-high school, specifically in college.
 
The demographical makeup of the poll is as follows: 47% of respondents were male, while 53% were female. 42% of surveyors were high schoolers, or high-school aged, 13% were students working towards an associate’s degree, 31% working towards a bachelor’s degree and 7% towards a graduate degree. 21% of respondents reported being either “very” or “somewhat” conservative, 33% said they were “very” or “somewhat” progressive and 33% said they were moderate.
 
Perhaps the most important figure here is the number of high schoolers. A sizeable majority of the people surveyed here are still in high school, and while it’s been a long while since I have been in high school, I don’t exactly remember it as having been extremely Leftist to the point where I felt they were essentially indoctrinating me. Now, this was some time ago, as I said, and I was a bit more liberal at the time, so maybe I just didn’t really notice it too much, but I have no doubt that high schools generally indoctrinate kids less than universities do.
 
For example, there is this story about the daughter of a Republican Congressional candidate from Michigan who went on Twitter and outright begged for people to not vote for her father because he and she disagree on issues like socialism, communism, “systemic racism”, and other Leftist garbage. With the candidate being a conservative, I doubt he didn’t teach his daughter the right things. But whatever he may have taught her, it’s clear that the college he sent her to erased all of that and rewired her brain to be more like their desired communist puppet.
 
It’s no surprise at all that “college-educated” voters tend to vote Democrat, since colleges all attempt, to one extent or another, to indoctrinate kids to be against Republicans, conservatives, God and the country itself. So it really is no wonder to find such numbers in the YAF poll, considering that a sizable portion of the surveyors were still in high school. This is no knock on YAF, of course, but rather a warning of what sort of damage colleges do: they are meant to destroy any and all patriotism found within kids.
 
Parents tend to teach their kids to love this country, but colleges undo all of that. The ONLY reason the Left wants to make college free for anyone is so that more and more people attend and so that more and more people get indoctrinated.
 
People, including young generations, tend to be more patriotic when they are not subjected to mass indoctrination in colleges. Of course, government schools still try and do that, albeit to a lesser extent, but protecting oneself from the indoctrination of colleges is really the best solution, in my opinion.
 
Leftists might be calling to defund the police, but conservatives should be calling to defund universities (for a variety of reasons, not simply because they indoctrinate children, considering many colleges have ties to China, and that alone poses a massive national security threat for this country).
 
But apart from that, I am happy to see that even younger generations still typically hold conservative, patriotic beliefs. We must ensure, however, that the Left does not succeed in eroding such beliefs from our youth.
 
Happy Independence Day!
 
Psalm 119:9
“How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to your word.”

Amid the wave of insane demands by the Leftist mob, such as calls for the defunding/abolition of police departments, the “social justice” mob is now after black people who appear on famous brands, such as Aunt Jemima’s pancake mix and syrup, and Uncle Ben’s rice. In an apparent effort of fighting racism, the Left is trying to do away with black characters on brands. Yes, they are just that stupid.
 
But with this stupidity comes the actual danger that it poses: they are eliminating not only part of this country’s history, as they were/are doing with the statues of various historical figures - from both people who were pro- and anti-slavery showing that either A) these protesters just want chaos regardless of politics or B) they don’t actually know any history or C) a bit of both - but they are also eliminating the legacy and memory of someone who honestly ought to be considered a role model for black people (and anyone, really, but particularly for black people).
 
As you could probably tell, I will talk about the story of the first “Aunt Jemima” and why she is an inspiration for everyone, particularly for black people.
 
The woman who would be recognized as “Aunt Jemima” was a black woman named Nancy Green. She used to be a slave, born in 1834, and eventually became “Aunt Jemima” when in 1890, the R.T. Davis Milling Company bought the formula of a ready-mixed, self-rising pancake flour and sought a black woman to become a living trademark for the product. Davis found Nancy Green in Chicago and employed her to be said living trademark.
 
Nancy Green, at the time, was a cook for a family in Chicago, and helped raise the children of said family (African-Americans often were hired, after the abolition of slavery, by wealthy families to help raise the children, cook and overall be basically maids/butlers in the house).
 
Three years after she was first hired, the Davis Milling Company began “an all-out promotion of ‘Aunt Jemima’ at the World’s Colombian Exposition in Chicago,” according to the African American Registry. Green demonstrated the pancake mix and made and served thousands of pancakes. “Green was a hit, friendly, a good storyteller, and a good cook. Her warm and appealing personality made her the ideal ‘Aunt Jemima,’ a living trademark. Her exhibition booth drew so many people that special policemen were assigned to keep the crowds moving. The Davis Milling Company received over 50,000 orders, and Fair officials awarded Nancy Green a medal and certificate for her showmanship.”
 
Green was signed to a lifetime contract to continue promoting the brand and be its face as “Aunt Jemima” (the name, by the way, was taken as “inspiration” by a vaudeville show where Chris Rutt, one of the people who made the formula and sold it to the Davis Milling Company, heard a song called “Aunt Jemima” sung by black singer Billy Kersands).
 
Unsurprisingly, this made Nancy Green very rich, making millions (for the time) and helping to organize a number of charities and programs from organizing the Olivet Baptist Church and “[h]er career allowed her the financial freedom to become an activist and engage in antipoverty programs,” according to Rush Limbaugh.
 
She was a missionary and an advocate against poverty and for equal rights. She helped many people in many ways.
 
Nancy Green was one of the many people who embody the American Dream. Making something of yourself out of nothing is the American Dream. This country is the only one where you can really start with nothing but the clothes on your back, and given the right amount of hard work, dedication, focus and savvy, you can make it far (kowtowing to the Left and being a particularly loud voice also helps, unfortunately).
 
Nancy Green was literally born a slave and she went on to make millions and be very wealthy for her time. She went from being considered property to owning property and having the financial freedom and muscle to help with causes she saw as valuable and important.
 
Now, I know what some might try and argue: “Wasn’t she given the opportunity to be rich by some white dude who wanted to use her as a living trademark? Isn’t that a bad thing for black people to view in a role model, needing the help of a white person to succeed?” To which I say a few things.
 
First of all, it’s not like Green was just given all her money. She had to work for it. She had to use her natural charisma, yes, but it’s not like success simply fell on her lap. She was given an opportunity by the owner of a company, but being given an opportunity, in and of itself, isn’t enough to get one to succeed. If I were given the opportunity to play for the Miami Heat, that doesn’t mean that I will become a superstar player and become extremely wealthy. I would need the right skill set and the dedication to work hard to succeed. That is the case for just about everything, including Nancy Green’s story.
 
Secondly, realize my earlier point that making something of yourself out of nothing is the American Dream. Nancy Green isn’t the only person to have done this. She’s not even the only black person to have done this. People like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Barack Obama, Rush Limbaugh, Howard Schultz, Ben Carson, Oprah Winfrey, even George Soros, despite not necessarily liking the vast majority of these people, all embody the American Dream (regardless of whether they love or hate this country).
 
They all started with little to nothing and worked their way up to make something of themselves. Nancy Green is no different and someone who ought to be considered a role model for black people – a reminder that, even coming from what is considered the lowest possible place in the social totem pole, you can become a massive success in many different ways.
 
You see, something I have mentioned in the past is that African-Americans are being essentially “trained” by the Left to believe that their skin color will systematically predispose them to be discriminated against, racially profiled against and overall mistreated by others who do not look like them or think like them. They are taught, from a very young age, to live with a chip on their shoulder, believing the world, and this country in specific, to be automatically against them and there is little to nothing they can do to fight back.
 
That the only real way to success is by tearing others down and taking what is theirs as your own. That the people who are wealthy today are only as wealthy as they are because they stole and took from the little guy – which is themselves (many people, not just black people, are trained to think this way). Black people are taught that the system in the United States was created for the purposes of keeping black folk down, elevate white people and that your success was largely determined by the color of your skin.
 
And so, organizations and slogans like “Black Lives Matter” emerge, which are basically true (black lives do, indeed, matter and very few people would disagree, but this is because all lives matter), but exclude everyone else whose lives are theretofore assumed to either not matter or not matter as much as black lives.
 
Black lives matter because all lives matter. It’s not an either-or thing when talking about the idea itself. The idea that all lives matter naturally includes black lives. But many black people are basically forced to chant that slogan because they are taught to have a mindset of inferiority. The Democrat Party of the past is no different than the one from today: they still try to tell black people they are inferior beings to white people. The only difference is that they used to frame that inferiority as a good thing. But they still teach black people that they are inferior when they, in actuality, are not.
 
However, many black people do feel inferior and it shows. The way the Left frames things is how they cause so much damage. For example, what is being considered as the reason for PepsiCo to drop the “Aunt Jemima” brand is a TikTok video of a black woman claiming the character to be racist. A black woman is possibly the reason that another black woman’s story and legacy is essentially being eliminated. This is the damage the Left has caused to the black community over the past few decades: blacks eliminating the history of other blacks.
 
Black people feel inferior when they really shouldn’t. There are plenty of stories of great success by black people that should tell them they are not inferior. Even Charlamagne tha God (real name Lenard Larry McKelvey), who spoke with Rush Limbaugh about racial problems in America, believes wholeheartedly that this country is racist and is predisposed to put black people down, even though he himself has a net worth of $10 million and a yearly salary of $3 million for his show. He is someone who had a troubled past (multiple stints in jail for a number of things) and yet, he has made something of himself out of basically nothing.
 
He is someone who believes this country systematically keeps black people down despite himself being an example that that is not the case at all (and the fact that so many other black people are also wealthy shows that he is the example to the rule, not the exception).
 
Nancy Green, like Charlamagne, made something out of herself from basically nothing. She should be a role model for black people, particularly young black kids, that it is very possible for them to succeed in this country. And yet, her story and legacy are essentially being erased by Leftists claiming to fight for racial progress.
 
Nancy Green is an inspiration to anyone who wishes to succeed. I hope the damage the Left has caused to the black communities for centuries now will soon be undone. Only then, would we see true racial progress and justice.
 
Proverbs 16:3
“Commit your work to the Lord, and your plans will be established.”

Over these last few days, many American cities, particularly Democrat-owned cities, have been practical warzones with endless cases of looting, arson, vandalism, assaults and even a few murders here and there.
 
Given all the destruction and chaos we have witnessed over social media, television, etc., I cannot help but thank the Lord for our 2nd Amendment rights. I mean, good grief, if there ever was a better reason to own a gun, it is this insanity.
 
Amidst this chaos, we have seen people looting and burning businesses. But not just any businesses. The businesses that these animals have been looting and destroying all have one thing in common: they were not being protected by armed people.
 
Take for example a place called Corbo’s Italian Bakery, located in downtown Cleveland, Ohio. The rioters very well could have ransacked the place for its food or just burned it to the ground. However, two armed individuals made sure that there would be no looting or pillaging of the store. That place was not ransacked and razed to the ground precisely BECAUSE of armed people protecting it.
 
Those two individuals are doing good work. Better than some police departments, too. I have seen some attempts by law enforcement to quell the riots, but clearly they are being rather ineffective (not everywhere, of course). Matter of fact, Raleigh Police Chief recently said: “I will not put an officer in harms way to protect the property inside of a building.”
 
In other words, you’re on your own. While no one would disagree that a person's life is more valuable than property, it is the job of the police to protect both life AND property. We are not asking her to send "an officer", implying only one. We are asking her to send however many officers it takes to make sure PEOPLE'S BUSINESSES AREN'T RUINED AND THEIR LIVES DESTROYED AS A RESULT! THAT is the job of the police, otherwise they are not worth the tax money we pay them.
 
Your business could be facing a massive threat, be it via people looting it AT BEST or people outright setting it on fire, supposedly as a means to “honor” George Floyd. The police won’t be there to stop them, that much is clear. The police won’t protect your business. You have to do it yourself and you sure as heck are not going to be able to do it with words of “peace” or whatever liberal nonsense one might try. You’re not going to convince rioters not to destroy your business because you are also outraged at Floyd’s death; they don’t care about George Floyd, else they would not be doing this. You’re not going to convince them not to destroy your business if you tell them you are their “ally” or are also “progressive,” as Left-wing news outlets like CNN have also been attacked. Not even a knife or a melee weapon would be enough to stop them, since the rioters are generally equipped with such weapons of their own.
 
The only thing standing in the way of these savages and your business is you and your ability to wield and use, if necessary, a gun. A big one would be preferable, and one that intimidates people. These people are ANTIFA, after all, and they scare easily at the sight of a gun that looks scary. An AR-15 would be pretty ideal.
 
But considering the gun control legislations in place, it can be difficult for one to acquire a gun to protect themselves or their business. Why else do you think that these riots have occurred pretty strictly in Democrat-controlled cities, counties, states, etc.? And why even in red states like Georgia and Texas, these riots have only occurred in blue cities and counties?
 
John Nolte from Breitbart put it best: “Antifa knows Democrats are cucks who will allow them to riot. Antifa knows Democrat-run cities have gun control laws that ensure you remain defenseless… Antifa knows you’re stupid enough to vote for the same Democrats who coddle them, who fund them, who aid and abet them by looking the other way (clearly talking about the Democrat voters who live in the Democrat cities that have riots going on). Antifa knows you’re stupid enough to vote for Democrats who disarm you so you cannot defend your family or business. Antifa knows you’re stupid enough to vote for Democrats who arrest people who go to church in their car but not the predominantly white left-wing Antifa thugs who loot and burn black neighborhoods (because white Democrats have been looting and burning black America since Reconstruction).”
 
In sum, Antifa is rioting in cities that they KNOW won’t put up much resistance. The ONLY reason they were successful in destroying Minneapolis’ 3rd police precinct is because they knew that the city’s limp-stick, Trudeau-Chinese-knockoff mayor would order the police to allow them to do it. When they attack any other police station that is allowed to fight back, they get quickly taken down and they don’t try the same stupidity again.
 
Moral of the story is that when people are allowed to fight back, the insane and violent people in the world tend to screw off. They know perfectly well that if a particular target of theirs is armed and is not afraid to fight back/doesn’t have orders to stand down, that person is not one that they should target or try anything with.
 
Wherever these insane and dangerous people meet resistance, particularly of the lethal weapon variety, they tend to be a bit more cautious. They want to riot, destroy and kill, if they can get away with it, but they won’t risk their lives in the process.

Of course, there are those who are just insane enough to get a gun themselves and open fire on people, such as in Oakland, California, where a BLACK police officer was shot and killed last Friday night (I guess his black life didn’t matter) and a second officer was reportedly wounded as well. But that only further demonstrates We the People’s need to be able to defend ourselves.
 
These people are bad guys and they are particularly threatening and scary when they are the ones with guns. Few of them do, but still, they are too dangerous to be allowed to do this sort of thing. Gun control law doesn’t keep bad guys from getting guns, it only keeps good, law-abiding citizens from getting them.
 
And such gun control laws show some of their horrible effects in these rioting cities, which generally feature gun-control-heavy laws and police officers being told to stand down to one extent or another.
 
These last few days have utterly butchered the Leftist idea that “you don’t need a gun” because “the police will be there to help you.” That was never true before, but that talking point was utterly annihilated these days. The only person you can ever trust with your life and your safety is yourself, and that comes through the means of arming oneself.
 
Even assuming that there aren’t a LOT of bad apples in police departments (and I’m not just talking about racist cops, since a WaPo database shows that, out of 41 unarmed people who were shot and killed by police, 19 were white, 9 were black, 6 were Hispanic, 4 were other and 3 were unknown, so police brutality extends past race), the idea that calling the police is all you need to protect yourself would be laughable if the subject matter weren’t so serious. Often times, the cops aren’t there on time.
 
Sometimes they might be, sometimes they might be nearby or inside a store being robbed, or something, but the average police response time in the U.S. is TEN MINUTES, according to American Police Beat (ignore the unfortunate name). Police can’t realistically be everywhere and help everyone. In the case of an emergency, where you need prompt action, you simply CANNOT rely on the police to handle everything for you.
 
For example, if your home were to be intruded and you weren’t armed, you stand the risk of losing your life. Most people would seek some sort of hiding place, like a bedroom closet or a bathroom, etc. However, unless you are living by yourself in a massive mansion (and such places are usually well-guarded by people with GUNS), it’s only a matter of time before you’re found out, at which point you are at the mercy of less-than-reputable individuals.
 
In high-stress situations, ten minutes feel like an eternity and a lot can happen. Only the fortunate ones live through such experiences without being discovered.
 
The police simply cannot be one’s lone lifeline in case of an emergency. There is a reason it is a RIGHT for people to protect themselves and their property. When someone kills another person, if it is proven that it was in self-defense, the “killer” is allowed to walk because they were being attacked and they have the right to defend themselves.
 
Guns are the means through which millions of Americans rightfully and justly defend themselves and their families and property. I can guarantee that if each of the places that were looted and/or burned had armed guards posted on them, be it a small mom-and-pop shop or even Target itself, rioters would think twice about causing mayhem there.
 
The police, even when allowed to work uninhibited, can only do so much to help even when they want to.
 
So I don’t want to hear anyone on the Left tell me that I don’t “need” guns because this past weekend has PROVEN otherwise. I need any and all kinds of guns. I need as much ammo as I possibly can have for them. I need to be able to defend myself from clearly disturbed individuals who have little to lose other than their lives and would love nothing more than to see my own end in an instant.
 
The gun control debate is over. Forever.
 
Psalm 144:1
“Of David. Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle.”

One aspect of people’s lives that largely goes unnoticed is the emotional well-being of people as they have to go through collective hardship, such as the Chinese coronavirus, and the subsequent restrictions to limit its spread. We have talked extensively about people’s health and about people’s financial well-being, but an important aspect of humanity itself is our ability to feel emotions and as of late, things have started to make a turn for the better.
 
According to a recent Gallup poll measuring people’s emotions from April 27th to May 10th, U.S. adults are beginning to worry less and be a little bit happier now that the worst is (hopefully) over.
 
Gallup reports that, from April 27 to May 10, 72% of surveyors reported “happiness” “during a lot of the day yesterday.” This is up 5 points since March 23-April 5, when the restrictions began to be put into place and the economy began to be shut down.
 
Similarly, 47% reported feeling “worried”, which is down 12 points from late March/early April, when 59% of people reported they were “worried”. “Boredom” has also fallen from 46% to 41% in that same time span and loneliness has remained the same, though it slightly went up two points in the middle of April.
 
This shows a pretty good turnaround from the doom and gloom many people (especially on the Left) were harping about with relation to our current situation. Things are beginning to get better as we are opening back up and they will improve further once we are completely open once again.
 
Splitting things up by demographics, we find that those who earn less than $36,000 are less likely to be happy than those who earn between $36,000 and $90,000, as well as those who earn over $90,000 a year.
 
Only 56% of people who earn less than $36,000 said that they were “happy” as opposed to 74% of those earning between $36,000 and $90,000, and 75% for those who earned more than $90,000. This is not even a little bit surprising for a number of reasons.
 
Generally, when you have more money, you tend to be happier. Whoever said that “money can’t buy you happiness” has clearly never been on a jet ski. All jokes aside, the numbers generally show that wealthier people tend to be happier than those who are poorer and when the economy is shut down, those at the bottom suffer the most.
 
Which is another reason as to why lower-earners are less happy than higher-earners. Millions upon millions of people have lost their jobs. The first to go are usually the ones who are least valuable/have the least experience and those tend to be at the bottom. Aside from general financial worries that lower-income people have to contend with when there isn’t a pandemic that got our leaders to shut down our economy, they now have to contend with exactly that scenario which is overall bad for most people, but especially for bottom-earners.
 
Which is also why it’s not particularly surprising to see those earning less than $36,000 be more worried (58% compared to 44 and 48% for the other two higher income brackets respectively), experience more boredom (49% compared to 41 and 39) and are more lonely (38% compared to 23 and 19 percent) than those who earn more than $36,000.
 
Thankfully, as restrictions are being lifted and people are capable of returning to work a little bit more, people will begin getting some of their jobs back, including low-income people.
 
Along party lines, we find that Republicans experience the most happiness (77%), while Independents are close behind (74%) and Democrats are the least happy (66%). Not that this is surprising in the least. Leftist ideologies require one to be perpetually outraged, angry, distraught, disheartened and generally unhappy. The Left is never happy even when they get everything they want. They cry about injustice in America when it is one of the most just countries in the world, at least relatively speaking.
 
Pandemic or not, the Left is never happy. Matter of fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Leftist happiness WENT UP as the economy began to be shut down, the stock market fell and they could try and blame Trump both for the number of deaths due to the virus and the unemployment rate. As we are beginning to open back up for business, I wouldn’t be surprised if happiness among Democrats FELL.
 
In any case, staying with the party demographics, we find that 38% of Republicans express feelings of “worry”, as opposed to 44% of Independents and 58% of Democrats. This is not surprising either because the Left chooses to listen to the fake news media to be “informed” and the fake news media sows nothing but discontent and “reports” nothing but bad news. This has generally been the case for the last three and a half years, but it’s been particularly bad in recent time. People who watch the fake news media believe that there is no hope at all, that the economy will never recover, that believing drugs like Hydroxychloroquine could help with treating the virus is just “false hope” and that this period of economic downturn is “the new normal”, like Obama had insisted after his tenure being the worst economic president of all time.
 
When it comes to getting feelings of boredom, everyone was about as equally bored, with 40% of Republicans, 43% of Independents and 42% of Democrats all experiencing boredom. As far as “loneliness” goes, only 19% of Republicans experienced “loneliness”, while 23% of Independents and 28% of Democrats said the same.
 
That one is also not particularly surprising. I imagine Republicans generally had less concerns with the virus and were more willing to meet up with friends and family, so that would naturally translate to not feeling quite as lonely.
 
Dividing things up by marital status, we find that 77% of married people and 76% of widowed people reported feeling “happy”, while 61% of single/never married people and 62% of divorced people said the same. This one is also not too surprising, except for the widowed people part. Considering this pandemic has resulted in around 100,000 people dying, most of which tend to be older people, one would expect a number of people have recently become widowed and I am surprised that widowed people in general would report as much happiness as they do.
 
Of course, I’m not saying that widowed people can’t feel happy, it’s just surprising that it’s as close to what married people report as it is. I don’t know what that says about the married people.
 
In any case, 45% of those who are married reported feeling worried, while 38% of widowed reported the same, and 50% of both single/never married and divorced people responded the same. When it came to boredom, surprisingly both married and divorced people reported feeling this at the same rate (39%), while 45% of widowed said they were bored and 46% of single/never married people said the same.
 
And when it came to loneliness, completely unsurprisingly, those who are married reported the least amount of loneliness at just 17%, while those who are widowed reported the same at a rate of 26%, divorced people were lonely at a rate of 35% and single/never married people were the most lonely at 36%.
 
By gender, we find that 73% of men reported being happy, which is two points higher than women. 44% of men reported being worried as opposed to 51% of women. Both were close when it came to boredom, with 43% of men and 40% of women reporting feeling this. And when it came to loneliness, women were lonelier at a rate of 27% as opposed to 20% of men.
 
But of course, the biggest takeaway from all of this is the fact that people are beginning to feel happier as time goes on and as restrictions begin to be lifted.
 
We find a pattern of increased happiness and decreased worry and boredom from late March/early April to mid-April and now.
 
Happiness went up by two points in mid-April from late-March/early-April (67 to 69%), while worry went down by a lot from 59% in late-March to 53% in mid-April, while boredom had only slightly decreased in that timespan.
 
My point here is that it’s not a simple fluke to find the numbers that we are. There is a pattern of American adults beginning to feel better and more comfortable as time goes on, being happier and less worried about the situation with more of the restrictions being lifted and more people being able to do the things they could do before the restrictions were put into place, be they outdoor activities or simply going to work.
 
Here’s hoping we continue down this road, see this trend going in a positive direction and we can get back to the economic prosperity we were experiencing pre-Chinese coronavirus.
 
Romans 12:12
“Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer.”

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.”