In many polls for quite a few months, favorability for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, but particularly for AOC, has not really been there, despite how often they are both talked about.
 
Despite the Democrats’ incessant defense of the many horrendous remarks these two make, a notably few amount of people seem to like these two at all (can’t imagine why). And during the weekend, Axios received a Democrat Party internal poll that shows these things to be true.
 
Axios reported: “Ocasio-Cortez was recognized by 74% of (swing) voters in the poll; 22% had a favorable view. Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota – another member of The Squad – was recognized by 53% of the voters; 9% (not a typo) had a favorable view.”
 
So while plenty of people know and can recognize the name of these two Leftist darlings, VERY few people actually like them. Nearly three-quarters of voters could recognize who Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is, but less than 25% of them actually held a favorable view. Perhaps more embarrassing is Omar’s numbers, who despite being recognized by more than half of voters, less than 10% view her favorably.
 
And these kinds of numbers are not a one-off thing, or from some random poll. These numbers are consistent with other polls and come from the Democrats themselves!
 
A poll back in June asked voters inside AOC’s district what they thought of her and here is what they found: “They don’t like her. She has a more than 2:1 ratio of unfavorable (50.88%) to favorable (21.37%) in public opinion. They don’t trust her. Only 10.75% thought she had their best interests in mind in quashing the Amazon deal – 32.60% said she didn’t. They don’t want her. 33.44% are ready to vote against her, and only 13.30% would vote for her.”
 
A Quinnipiac poll from March found that “23% of Americans had a favorable view of the member of Congress (AOC), while 36% had an unfavorable view – a -13 overall approval rating,” according to Vox.
 
A top Democrat running for Congress in 2020 told Axios: “If all voters hear about is AOC, it could put the [House] majority at risk. [S]he’s getting all the news and defining everyone else’s races. Socialism is toxic to these voters.”
 
Those words are not to be taken lightly from this anonymous Democrat running for congressional office (it’s unclear if he or she is an incumbent or challenger). He or she is right about AOC defining everyone else’s races, but that largely is because the vast majority of the Democrat Party is falling in line with people like her. They are beginning to embrace socialism far more openly, seeing the results it’s gotten people like Bernie Sanders and AOC herself (as well as others). There isn’t a single Democrat running for the presidency that hasn’t disavowed socialism or socialistic policies. I keep going back to when every single Democrat raised their hand when asked which one of them would give illegal immigrants free healthcare.
 
Just about whatever position AOC takes, the Democrat Party also takes, for the most part. And while there are those within the Party who disagree sometimes, namely Nancy Pelosi mocking the Green New Deal as “the Green Dream or whatever”, there are plenty of people who see her as the future (for some reason), including former DNC chair Keith Ellison, who outright said that she was the future of the Democrat Party.
 
However, as with AOC’s and Omar’s numbers, socialism isn’t viewed all that favorably. According to Axios: “Socialism was viewed favorably by 18% of the voters and unfavorably by 69%... capitalism was 56% favorable; 32% unfavorable.”
 
It’s precisely because of these reasons that I don’t believe any Democrat running for POTUS has any real chance against Trump. Say what you will about the President (calling him racist certainly doesn’t work anymore and I seriously doubt his tweets regarding Omar’s ingratitude towards America, whether one thinks are racist or not (they aren’t), are going to do anything to hurt him come election time), but he at least can run on results.
 
All Democrats can run on is hating Trump and lying about him. And while that may work with their mindless base (seriously, I had a Twitter debate with someone who legitimately thinks the Mueller report showed collusion, when it adamantly stated there wasn’t and she called me a liar as a result, so some of these people are wacky themselves), that’s not going to work for the vast majority of the American voting bloc.
 
That low favorability for socialism isn’t anything new. Back in March, an NBC News/WSJ poll said that only 25% of Americans would approve of a socialist candidate for President, and in that same poll, only 18% approved of socialism in general, the same number as today (though I would personally hope it gets even lower still as time goes on). In that poll, 50% disapproved of socialism, so that’s a massive, 19-point jump from that poll back in March to this internal Democrat poll.
 
50% viewed capitalism favorably and only 19% unfavorably in that poll, so there’s a bit of a shift in the new poll, with capitalism’s favorability gaining 6 points but its unfavourability also rising significantly, but that might be due to some sampling size differences and other variables.
 
If these trends continue, and if Democrat candidates continue to out-Leftist each other, more and more people will think negatively of them (and these polls are why I don’t buy into the idea that any of these Democrats could beat Trump. I mean, I even saw a poll that said US Women’s Soccer star Megan Rapinoe could beat Trump! Now you know they are definitely crazy) and it will ultimately come bite them in the behind once the 2020 presidential election is here.
 
Not only that, but the House is, in all likelihood, also to go to Republicans if this keeps up. Like the anonymous Democrat candidate said, people like AOC are defining other Democrats’ campaigns. Even if a candidate runs on not being out of his or her mind, AOC’s shadow is going to be a threat to their campaign. Any agreement to anything AOC does will likely be seen as a sort of endorsement of the actions. Any defense of her anti-Semitic, racist or outright insulting and belittling comments regarding illegal immigrant detention centers being in any way, shape or form akin to concentration camps will be seen as a total endorsement of that brand of lunacy.
 
That’s not to say the entire election is in the bag. We don’t want to get complacent here. That’s what Hillary did, believing the election was over before it started, and look at where she is now: doing book tours and signings that barely get covered and hardly anyone shows up. Victory should never be an assumption, but neither should defeat. With everything that I am seeing currently: an America being made great again, Leftists going out of their way to bash it for being America and for being founded in the first place (going so far as to even say this country was founded on slavery, when it was literally founded on liberty, but the Founding Fathers thought slavery was on its way out the door, so they didn’t think they would need to do much apart from keeping ships from importing slaves into the country), and Leftists embracing full-blown socialism and government-takeover of virtually everything they can get their hands on, I really can’t see the Left winning against Trump.
 
These numbers show devastating results to Democrats. And again, this is their own internal polling, so you know there is bound to be some oversampling of Democrats. But despite that possible oversampling (I won’t go so far as to actually accuse them of that without any actual evidence, but that is a common practice for these people, so I doubt they were perfectly objective in their sampling), these numbers show AOC is heavily disliked, as well as Ilhan Omar (quite possibly, the rest of “The Squad”, Rashida Tlaib and Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) show at least somewhat similar numbers, but they don’t tend to be quite as frequently talked about) and that socialism is overall viewed as “toxic” to voters, in the words of the anonymous Democrat candidate.
 
I can only hope and pray that these numbers will continue to show up like this, or get even lower, as time goes on.
 
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.’”
 
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.
 

Ahead of the 4th of July, Gallup released a poll indicating that the number of people who said they were proud, or “extremely” proud, to be Americans is considerably lower today than in previous polls, with trends showing this sort of thing for the past couple of years.
 
However, it is important to note just who exactly it is that is dragging these numbers down: people who identify as Democrats aka people who hate Trump and would love to see this country turn into a socialist country (though as I have explained in the past, most people don’t actually know what socialism is).
 
Gallup said that while, overall, 70% of U.S. adults said they were proud to be Americans, only 45% said they were “extremely” proud of their country, a rather low number not seen in quite some time and the second time in only two years that that number was below 50%.
 
According to the poll, only 22% of Democrats said they were “extremely” proud of this country and that “subgroups that typically identify as Democrats – women, liberals and younger adults,” also showed lower levels of pride in their country. That 22% is the lowest in Gallup’s polling history for Democrats, who have historically never been quite so proud of this country, regardless of who was President.
 
Even while Obama was President, the lowest number for Republicans was 68%.
 
But again, the Democrats are really the ones who drive down these numbers, because 76% of Republicans and 41% of Independents were “extremely” proud of this country. And this really shouldn’t come as much of a surprise at all.
 
Matter of fact, this is quite some wonderful news, when you think about it. The Democrats, a party that has spent over a decade openly bashing this country and going on “apology tours” to other countries and who wish for nothing more than to see this country be turned on its head, are very much not proud to be Americans. Why? Because Donald Trump is President and is Making America Great Again, a slogan that literally causes Leftists to go nuts every time they hear it because they want precisely the opposite.
 
While Republicans, Independents, and the few sane Democrats that are extremely proud of this country spend their time in joy over what is happening around them, embittered and hateful Leftists spend their time making bogus claim after bogus claim about many aspects of America, be it “running concentration camps” at the southern border, or “Trump’s military parade was literally never done before”, or “white people’s very existence is a threat to brown people” or “Border Patrol is biased against minorities” (even though 51% of CBP agents are Latino), they have just about everything negative to say about this country, from its founding to today.
 
Just look at Nike’s Betsy Ross flag scandal. One socialist, third-rate former quarterback complained to them about a flag (that literally was on the side of the Union when fighting the Confederates) that was supposedly racist because it was made when there was slavery and Nike folded like a wet piece of paper. People like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers are marred because they lived when slavery was allowed, or owned slaves themselves, and created a nation supposedly with the idea that only “white men” would be free.
 
All a massive load of b.s. Slavery was in place in this country WELL before this country’s founding, and it’s not like no other country had slaves. I don’t see people lambasting Egypt or many other African or Middle Eastern countries despite the fact that they have all allowed slavery to exist (and there are still some countries that allow for slavery to exist). England also had slavery, and they didn’t just enslave Africans, but also enslaved Irish people too, sending them to the New World to be sold to English settlers in the West Indies.
 
But the Left completely abhors America because slavery was a thing that happened when it was founded. Despite the fact that we took care of that problem LESS THAN A CENTURY LATER, the fact that it was even a problem at one point in the first place is cause for scorn towards this country.
 
Despite the fact that most of the racial problems that existed in America were A) largely due to Leftists and B) were resolved eventually, the fact that these problems existed and caused people ire is seen as a justifiable enough reason to hate this country and turn to a system that LITERALLY ENSLAVES ITS OWN POPULATION in socialism.
 
Ignorant fools will complain about how minorities and homosexuals are treated in this country while wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt (in case you are unaware, Che Guevara was a massive racist and homophobe who opened Cuba’s first ACTUAL concentration camp and among many considered to be “counter-revolutionaries” were gay people, who were seen as bourgeois).
 
They will decry the Constitution as being rigged against black people and completely ignore the fact that Frederick Douglass, a former slave himself, said of the Constitution: “The Constitution is a glorious liberty document. Read its preamble, consider its purposes. Is slavery among them? Is it at the gateway? Or is it in the temple? It is neither,” and “Now, take the Constitution according to its plain reading, and I defy the presentation of a single pro-slavery clause in it. On the other hand it will be found to contain principles and purposes, entirely hostile to the existence of slavery.”
 
The plain truth is that this country is the greatest nation on Earth. It is not perfect, of course (the fact that abortion and homosexual marriage are legal is a testament to that). No country founded and ruled by men can ever be perfect due to our very nature of imperfection. But I dare any Leftist who hates this country, someone like Colin Kaepernick, to live somewhere like Venezuela or Cuba, and not among the bourgeois like he does today, but among the proletariat, among the masses, where he would be treated like any other person and still say that that is better than America at any capacity.
 
People FLEE other nations to COME INTO THIS COUNTRY for a very good reason. Whether that reason be for economic opportunity (like my family did), for religious or another kind of freedom, or to take advantage of the welfare system in place in this country like so many illegals (and, truth be told, a fair amount of legal immigrants) do, they all come into this country because the one they chose to leave behind was utter garbage.
 
If this country were anywhere near as bad as the Left said it was, no amount of George Soros’ money would convince people to form caravans and march into America like an invading army.
 
If this country were anywhere near as bad as the Left said it was, people would be LEAVING this country in droves rather than coming into it.
 
The truth of the matter is that America is the best country in the history of the planet because it was founded with the greatest economic system (capitalism) under the greatest form of government (a Constitutional Republic) and blessed by the almighty Lord. The Left absolutely abhors all three of these things, so it comes as no surprise that so few Democrats are proud, or extremely proud of this country.
 
If the people who view abortion as liberation, homosexuality as a must-have for any society 24/7 to the point children are forced to learn it and forced to love it, view age as “just a number”, view Christian religious freedom as a violation of another person’s rights but view Muslim religious freedom as perfectly acceptable (even if they actually violate another person’s rights), view guns as sentient killing machines, view gun owners and the NRA as terrorists but view Islamic terrorists as “misunderstood”, view fascist protesters who claim to be against fascism and commit violence on a regular basis as “angels”, view this country as not something to be proud of, then Hallelujah because we are doing something right.
 
These people are the incarnation of what Isaiah was talking about in the 20th verse of the 5th chapter, when he talked about those who substitute evil for good and good for evil.
 
If they were to meet God, they would consider Him the devil. So if these people hate this country that much, then Trump is doing something marvelously right.
 
Still, apart from that, there are some things that are positive in the Gallup poll. Gallup put in a question asking people what they were proud of about American society. 91% said they were proud of scientific advancements in this country, 89% said they were proud of the military, 85% said they were proud of American culture and arts, 75% were proud of the economic achievements, 73% proud of achievements in sports and 72% proud of the country’s diversity in race, ethnic background, and religion.
 
So despite how much the Left hates America, even they have to recognize the areas in which we are doing particularly well, even if they disagree about other aspects.
 
Still, this doesn’t take away the fact that they are not very proud at all of this country, even if just for the fact that it elected Donald Trump, whom they view as the embodiment of Hitler (despite how far he actually is from such a Satanic historical figure).
 
Of course, they are certainly entitled to their own opinion. And they are certainly entitled to be wrong. They may wallow in misery over the “bad” things this country is doing. Meanwhile, I will delight in the great things this country has done and continues to do, thanking the Lord for blessing this country and begging for Him to continue to do so.
 
Psalm 33:12
“Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom he has chosen as his heritage!”
 
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.

A few of months ago, Democrat candidates began their own races to the Democrat nomination in an effort to unseat President Trump come November of 2020. Part of the big headlines that were made apart from the actual announcements by the various candidates was just how much money they all raised in the span of a single day and even a single quarter.
 
For example, former Vice President Joe Biden made headlines for having raised $6.3 million on the first day of his candidacy. Failed Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke raised almost as much, at $6.1 million in his first day. Lunatic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-USSR) raised $5.9 million in his first day.
 
And in the first quarter, Joe Biden bragged about having raised almost $20 million in that time span, in a fundraiser full of Wall Street donors, saying: “With your help, you’re going to allow me to be able to compete in a way that I’ve never been able to do before. We’ve raised a great deal of money.”
 
Well, if we are to consider money raised as a sign of excitement and enthusiasm for a candidate (and we will), then I suppose raising $24.8 MILLION in the span of 24 hours is a pretty great sign of enthusiasm.
 
GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel tweeted: “[Trump] has raised a record breaking $24.8M in less than 24 hours for his re-election. The enthusiasm across the country for this President is unmatched and unlike anything we’ve ever seen!”
 
Tim Murtaugh, the Director of Communications for the President’s 2020 campaign also tweeted: “Jaw-dropping numbers from the 24 hours of the day [Trump] announced his re-election campaign: $24.8 million raised. Do the math: that’s more than a million dollars an hour for an entire day. On top of an electric rally in Orlando, this shows huge Trump enthusiasm.”
 
And that last part also brings up a very good point: Trump has been filling up whole stadiums ever since 2016 and that doesn’t seem to have changed at all.
 
The President announced his bid for re-election in Orlando, Florida, in the Amway Center. That’s the same Amway Center where the Orlando Magic, an NBA team, play. And let’s not forget that back in October of last year, while holding rallies for Republican candidates for the midterm elections in Houston, Texas, Trump also filled up the Toyota Center, where the Houston Rockets, another NBA team, play.
 
The President fills up entire stadiums where sports teams play, while Democrat candidates struggle to fill out their own areas for speaking.
 
Now, I know what you’re thinking. “Well, Trump is the incumbent in this race. Of course he’s going to raise more money and fill up more seats. He’s the only Republican running!” And you would be correct in your thinking if it weren’t for the fact that this has basically been a trend ever since 2015, when Trump first announced his candidacy. He was still drawing huge crowds and raising plenty of money, despite the fact there were another 16 or so candidates also running.
 
There’s no doubt that Trump holds an advantage as the incumbent and being the only Republican running, but if Trump were in as much trouble as multiple polls claim he is, the amount of enthusiasm shown in Orlando alone wouldn’t have been quite as much.
 
The people of Orlando, as well as just about everyone who voted for Trump in 2016, still know for sure that CNN sucks, that Hillary Clinton should be locked up (and honestly, so should Barack Obama) and that we need to build the wall (which Trump is working very hard to do but there’s only so much he can do without Congressional help, something that falls on both parties). So the people who supported Trump in 2016 are still here, and more are likely to show out to vote, considering who he is running against and what he has had to face in the last couple of years.
 
Even The Daily Wire’s Erick Erickson tweeted that he’d rather vote for Trump (don’t know if he did in 2016, but I doubt it as he has always been a NeverTrumper to some extent) than for any of the “baby-killing socialists”, as he put it, currently running on the Democrat ticket.
 
Given that I have already stated that I believe this race will, in large part, be about the very soul of this nation, I think there will be some people who look at what the Democrats are running on – higher taxes, “free” everything which only leads to higher taxes, restricted free speech for political opponents of the Left, restricted religious freedom for bakery shop owners, legalizing actual infanticide, forcing female students to compete with males, etc. – and recognize the actual threat these people possess and come to the realization that they ought to be as far from political office as one can get. Because for all of people’s personal gripes with Trump (which are entirely petty, but to each their own), he is Ronald Reagan, Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower and George Washington put together on steroids in comparison to Karl Marx’s All-Star team of Democrat candidates.
 
All of this is yet another reason not to trust the fake MSM polls that show what the Left hopes is reality. Never mind that these polls showed even worse numbers for Trump all throughout the 2016 campaign and were all incredulously wrong, never mind that the polls always tend to over-sample Democrats, an already well-known tactic used by Democrat pollsters, never mind that these are the same people who claimed for two and a half years that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 Presidential election away from Hillary without any actual evidence, salivating at the idea that they might one day actually get something solid so they could impeach Trump. The fact that Donald Trump has raised a record-breaking amount of money for a single day as a candidate, far beating out their original $7 million goal and far beating out Joe Biden’s numbers from an entire quarter, AND he is still filling out entire stadiums used for sporting events shows the amount of enthusiasm for Trump hasn’t wavered in the least.
 
Of course, as I’ve been saying for some time now, it’s still too early to determine anything happening right now as being a big factor in 2020. An awful lot of things can change from here and Trump will eventually be facing one candidate, not making generalizations about what the Democrats are proposing (which he still can do if Biden is A) the nominee as most people expect him to be and B) runs on the same socialist crap all the others are running on because he’s a serial plagiarizer and does not have the mental capacity to formulate a single original thought).
 
But as things stand currently, Trump is off to a pretty great start for his re-election bid. I just hope and pray things stay like this and even get better as we go forward.
 
1 Timothy 2:1-4
“First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”
 
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.

I hold the belief that the 2020 election cycle will be about the following things: immigration, the economy, and the very soul of this country. Granted, the first two things are usual in elections, especially in this day and age, but that last one ought to make people realize just what it is we are facing.
 
Much like 2016, we are at a crossroads: we either elect a conservative like Trump, who loves America, or we elect a socialist like (insert literally any of the Democrats currently running), who hates America as it was founded and wishes to turn it into a nation where the government controls just about everything aka a socialist country.
 
And if you’ve been keeping up with multiple polls, you see the terrifying rise of people who consider socialism to be better than capitalism. While those people are still the minority (roughly 40%), the trends are seemingly terrifying. But there is good reason I say “seemingly” in that sentence.
 
You see, according to Rasmussen, 84% of people have a favorable opinion of free markets and 41% say the same about socialism.
 
It is at this point that your brain might be trying to do some seriously challenging mental gymnastics to understand the logic behind that. The vast majority of people like free markets, but about 41% also like socialism? That doesn’t make any sense! And if we were strictly talking about economic ideologies, then yes, you would be correct. But that is not what we are talking about.
 
Before I get to that, however, let’s look at all the numbers.
 
Within the poll that talked about free markets, 87% of Republicans favored it, 85% of Independents said the same as did 81% of Democrats.
 
“Voters strongly believe that Free Markets are better than Socialism when it comes to promoting economic growth (55% to 12%), creating quality jobs (52% to 13%), and giving everyone a chance to succeed (44% to 19%),” according to Rasmussen. “Voters give Free Markets a more modest advantage on helping people in poverty reach the middle class (37% to 22%), creating a fair society (35% to 25%), and reducing poverty (33% to 24%). Voters are close to evenly divided on which system will be better at reducing health care costs: 30% say free markets and 26% socialism. However, it’s worth noting that there is very little support for requiring all Americans to get health insurance through a government program.”
 
So what is it that we are looking at here? We’re looking at people who, economically, agree with capitalistic, free market ideologies, but don’t think socialism is the opposite of those things. They don’t view socialism through the lenses of economic ideology, like you and I do, but through the lenses of the government being an avenue capable of helping people who are in need. They like the idea of government-issued health insurance like Obamacare, but largely do not like the idea of that being the only option.
 
So what we have here are a bunch of people who are largely misguided as to what socialism actually is. The definition of socialism/communism is the government being the one who owns the means of production. Meaning there is no such thing as private property because the government controls and/or regulates everything, from your home, to your car, to your job, to your phone. Absolutely everything is controlled and regulated by the government. You cannot get something that is outside of the government’s control. It’s part of the reason China is so adamant about getting Google to censor things in that region for their citizens.
 
But as we can plainly see, that is not the definition self-proclaimed socialist voters tend to follow. Matter of fact, when it comes to the economy, the less government involvement, the better. This is something even those “socialists” believe in, as we can see from how many people, INCLUDING DEMOCRATS, prefer free markets over socialism.
 
For the record, these self-proclaimed socialists do not include people like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. They know perfectly well what socialism is, that’s why they’re in the government. They get to expand their own power if they back socialism and in turn, deceive others as to what socialism is to make it more appealing. Why else do you think they adamantly avoid talking about Venezuela and even California? Apart from being precise examples as to what socialism does to a country or even a state, they will often claim that that’s not “real” socialism, and that “real socialism” has never actually been tried.
 
Of course, that’s a load of garbage, but people will believe it. That’s why there are people who call themselves socialists but will often times support capitalistic economic policies. They don’t truly know what socialism is.
 
Not that I blame them for their ignorance. Socialism was not really a topic that was covered when I was in school (likely because the term itself was still fairly taboo at the time) and I wouldn’t have learned about socialism had I not done my own research or talked with family about politics. Granted, I also have the advantage of having lived in a fairly socialistic country before (I’ll take “words that have never been spoken before in the history of the world” for 1000, Alex), so I know what socialism is like in a sort of first-hand manner, but still. Schools don’t tend to teach about socialism, and if they do, they don’t actually teach what it really is and what it has led to.
 
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: if people knew what socialism truly was, most people would completely drop it. We know this because Scott Rasmussen himself, in a recent interview with The Daily Signal, said that “only 1 out of 3 people who say they like socialism think it leads to higher taxes and a more powerful government.”
 
Meaning only 1 out of 3 people who say they like socialism actually know what socialism is. Still a scarily high number, but taking that in relation with just about everyone in the country, and the percentage of people who both like socialism and know what it is shows to be far lower than what polls show. That’s 33% out of the 41% of people who support socialism - that's only 13.5% people. One can easily see how truly few people there are out there who want to see this country be turned into the Soviet Union.
 
But for the most part, the vast majority of Americans far prefer the current economic system we have of free market economics, regardless of political party affiliation or political ideology. Most people are free-market capitalists and simply see government as an option, not as a deterrent, to that system. Really, that’s where the problem lies, as the more government there is, the less individual freedoms there are, including economic freedoms, and the task is really to educate people as to what socialism truly is (and most people are shocked when they find out what it really is, so that tells you something).
 
Of course, another problem comes in the fact that these people, despite their own personal opinions, will vote for those who actually are socialists and will implement actual socialist policies that intrude on people’s economic freedoms (and other types of freedoms) and that can cause severe harm to the country. The task then becomes properly defining socialism and exposing the fact that the people running for office are not the same kind of socialist the people voting for them claim to be. Bernie Sanders wants Medicare for All in the form of only the government being the option for health insurance. A lot of people like the term “Medicare for All” because it suggests an option for people to take, but recoil when they learn that it would actually take away people’s options for health insurance.
 
Actual socialism is not popular in this country, but what needs to be done is to properly define socialism. Most people who claim to be socialists aren’t actually socialists. They are just as capitalistic as you and me, just view the government as a force for good and not as a force for evil that can destroy economic and other kinds of freedom.
 
I just hope we can properly define socialism for the vast majority of Americans before we turn into Venezuela.
 
Colossians 2:8
“See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”
 
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.

For those of you who have been reading my articles for some time, you know pretty well that I do not like Pope Francis. I mean, sometimes he says the right things, but most of the time, his socialist self can’t help but come out of him and use God to perpetuate the idea that socialism is good, as often do many Leftists who have absolutely no idea about the character of God and only use Him as a political weapon when they can all-the-while they treat Him like He is, at best, an imaginary friend for people who are “stupid”.
 
Pope Francis isn’t all too different, and recently, in a message for the third annual World Day for the Poor, the supposed head of the Catholic Church disparaged the idea of countries building walls, claiming it was to keep those poor, defenseless, oft-exploited immigrants out. Of course, that couldn’t be further from the truth as the purpose of walls is to PROTECT THE CITIES AND NATIONS THEY SURROUND! Just look at Israel. Is it wrong that they want to protect themselves from radical Islamic terrorists who daily promise they will destroy, sack, pillage and rape the nation of Israel until there’s nothing left?
 
But in any case, here’s specifically what the Pope said:
 
“We can build any number of walls and close our doors in the vain effort to feel secure in our wealth, at the expense of those left outside. It will not be that way forever… The ‘day of the Lord,’ as described by the prophets, will destroy the barriers created between nations and replace the arrogance of the few with the solidarity of many.”
 
Okay, a few things here. First of all, while I already talked about Israel’s wall, there is one wall that is close to home for Il Papa. Vatican City itself is surrounded by a wall. Technically, Vatican City is its own nation, as well. So why isn’t the Pope suggesting they tear down that oppressive and wealth-separating monstrosity that separates Vatican City from the rest of Rome? And if wealth disparity is as big a deal to this guy as he says it is, why doesn’t he open the doors of the Papal Palace (or Apostolic Palace, if you wish to call it that) and let all those poor, starving immigrants in?
 
Of course, the answer is obvious: he’s a socialist. Socialists don’t believe they have to live by the rules they set up. Other people have to take care of the less fortunate, not they themselves. Bernie Sanders doesn’t have to give up any of his three huge homes to any poor person because he’s a socialist. Leonardo DiCaprio, Al Gore and all these other environmentalist wackos don’t have to reduce their carbon footprint, one of the biggest “threats” to the planet, because they are socialist themselves. They tell other people they have to reduce their carbon footprint, so they don’t have to do it themselves! See? It’s only logical and equal! (Legit, I’ve seen that argument be made that they don’t have to do anything about their own carbon footprint because they are talking about other people doing it, completely missing the irony in that hypocritical acknowledgment).
 
But I believe there are a couple of Bible verses that ought to speak to the Pope’s heart if he truly is a Christian. First, Matthew 7:5: “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.”
 
I’ve used this one plenty of times when talking about hypocrites. But of course, hypocrites don’t think of themselves as hypocrites. When called out on it, they will vehemently deny it, thinking they are doing the right thing.
 
But this next verse really ought to make the Pope think, especially considering where he gets to live: Romans 2:3: “Do you suppose, O man – you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself – that you will escape the judgment of God?”
 
You see, the Pope doesn’t gain the Grace of God by telling other people they are selfish and should be more welcoming of immigrants when he himself LIVES IN A LITERAL PALACE PROTECTED BY THE VERY WALLS HE SUPPOSEDLY IS AGAINST!
 
The Pope is the Holy Book definition (was going to say “textbook”, but thought this made more sense) of a hypocrite: he lives in a palace, a house that an elite and wealthy few can claim they have lived in, in a city that is technically its own sovereign nation and surrounded by walls.
 
Meanwhile, he dislikes the idea of other countries building walls? Trump shouldn’t build a wall at the southern border so as to not keep out the dangerous criminals that take advantage of the poor infrastructure and traitorous Democrat legislators? Israel shouldn’t have a wall so as to not keep out the radical terrorists who wish to destroy them?
 
And what’s more, God is supposedly going to destroy those walls come judgment day? Not evil, not the unrighteous, not Satan, but the walls? That’s the other thing I wanted to talk about with that quote about the day of the Lord.
 
Hey, here’s another Bible verse for you, Frankie: Matthew 15:7-9: “You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: ‘This people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”
 
Often it is that we see people like Pope Francis doing this sort of thing – teaching the commandments of men as though they were doctrine from God.
 
Now, let’s move on to what the guy said about the poor in particular. For the sake of time, I will only quote a few things that are important:
 
“The marginalization painfully experienced by millions of persons cannot go on for long. Their cry is growing louder and embraces the entire earth… The inequitable distribution of wealth created a significant number of poor people, whose condition appeared all the more dramatic in comparison with the wealth attained by a privileged few… the poor are always poorer, and today they are poorer than ever.”
 
Just what in the world is he talking about? Wealth did not create poor people. PEOPLE ARE POOR BY NATURE! When born, someone’s net worth is zero. They don’t get money until they either start working or they are lucky enough to have parents who will give them an allowance. People create wealth, not the other way around. Out of poverty comes wealth if a person works smart and hard for it.
 
The Brookings Institution reported late last year: “2019 will start with the lowest prevalence of extreme poverty ever recorded in human history – less than 8 percent. In all likelihood, this level will set the ‘ceiling’ for a new era of even lower single-digit global poverty rates for the foreseeable future.”
 
The international poverty line defines someone as living under extreme poverty as being someone who lives on less than $1.90 per day or its equivalent. Today, less than 10% of the world lives in extreme poverty compared to just 30 years ago (1990), where around 37% lived in extreme poverty and compared to 200 years ago when almost EVERYONE lived in extreme poverty. Beyond that, poverty itself ($10 a day) is lower today than it ever was. So the poor are not getting poorer, they are becoming fewer.
 
Pope Francis is not only a massive hypocrite for telling other people to take care of poor, little immigrants when he doesn’t have to make any adjustments for himself to live by that very example, but he is also completely wrong and inaccurate in his claims.
 
Not that I think any of this will change his mind. I sincerely don’t think this guy is a Christian, just says he is out of convenience. He focuses far more on the works of Man than the works of God. Being socialist, he views governments as the solution to things like poverty, etc. He thinks it’s up to the government of other nations to take in these immigrants who will take advantage of the economic opportunities and not care to even try to assimilate into a new society and culture, clinging to their old ones and bashing the countries that take them in, harming its citizens, etc.
 
Newsflash: we are called to serve, not to be abused. I’d rather prioritize poor Americans over poor and ungrateful immigrants who are in all likelihood here illegally.
 
James 1:26
“If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless.”
 
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.

For some time, I’ve been one to point out the dangers of globalism essentially being a more Trotsky-like version of communism, where the point is not to attach oneself to an individual nation-state (like Stalin did), but rather, to allow for the whole world to be inundated in communism under global leaders.
 
However, in recent time, we’ve seen a noticeable shift on the global scale regarding this. For example, look at the most recent E.U. elections, where despite the fact pro-EU parties reportedly maintained two-thirds of parliament seats, nationalist and other “euroskeptic” parties solidified their strength and made gains, indicating future challenges to the E.U.
 
In Italy, Interior Minister Matteo Salvini’s party, Lega Nord Party, won 28 seats, with Salvini himself celebrating this victory by saying: “A new Europe is born… As far as I’m concerned, if the League wins nothing changes in Italy, everything will change in Europe, starting from tomorrow.”
 
In the U.K., Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party (which was only 6 weeks old at the time of the election) had a nice victory, “securing a majority with 31.7% and 29 seats,” according to The Daily Wire.
 
In an interview with Good Morning Britain, Farage said that if the U.K. doesn’t leave the EU by October 31st, the Brexit Party would “go on to a general election and stun everybody there too.” He repeated his warning on Twitter by tweeting: “Never before in British politics has a party just 6 weeks old won a national election. If Britain does not leave the EU on October 31, these results will be repeated at a general election. History has been made. This is just the beginning.”
 
In France, Marine le Pen’s party slightly outperformed Macron’s party, winning 22 seats to Macron’s 21.
 
In Germany, Angela Merkel’s party had to hold “crisis talks” following the results of the election, where they were given their worst score in European election history thanks to the environmental party, the Greens.
 
Voter turnout also rose from the 2014 elections from 43% to 51%.
 
And this is just in Europe. Let’s not forget that just weeks before, Australia’s conservative Prime Minister Scott Morrison won a “surprise” re-election after national polls predicted he would lose (where have we heard that one before?). In Brazil some months ago, the Donald Trump of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, also won his election.
 
And of course, we can’t forget about the big one that has likely propelled, if not led, this sort of nationalist movement to occur throughout the world: Donald Trump being elected President of the United States in 2016.
 
There is a global nationalist movement occurring and it’s posing a massive challenge to the globalists.
 
Now, allow me to explain just why I say this is a new Cold War. As you know, the Cold War was a war of words and policy between the United States and the Soviet Union. It was capitalism vs. communism, with the two leading world super powers at each other’s throat under the threat of nuclear annihilation if either nation blinked.
 
While I wouldn’t say we are under quite such a threat here, the concept of a Cold War is simply in the fact that there is conflict between two (or more) entities where one could escalate things and get them hot, but the preference would be to fight each other through other means, because one party heating up the war would lead to certain mutually-assured destruction.
 
This new Cold War I am talking about isn’t between two countries. It’s not between America and Russia, or America and China, or America and North Korea, or America and Iran (man, there are a lot of countries that want us gone). Matter of fact, this hold America on both sides of the Cold War… as well as every other country in the world.
 
This Cold War is between Globalism and Nationalism, as I mentioned in the title. No, there is no underlying threat of total nuclear devastation, but it is still a struggle between two entities fighting for control of the populace.
 
You can call this battle between Globalism and Nationalism as more of a battle between communist-like elites who believe they know better than everyone else and believe should be in charge of how other people live, and the rest of us who wish to maintain our freedoms and autonomy at the national level.
 
Globalists, as the name suggests and as I have explained before, do not attach themselves to any one nation. They see nations as a way to divide people and would wish nothing more than to do away with them, forcing people to live how they want them to live, cultural differences, religious differences and overall differences that cannot be forcibly eliminated be damned. They want as much control and power as possible and nations limit them in their power.
 
So, entities like the European Union exist, where policy is made for the countries by people who do not live there. Don’t want migrants to be shipped to your country en masse? Too bad, you don’t get to make that decision. You want to leave the Union? Well, your leaders don’t and we don’t, so tough.
 
So the battle isn’t between two countries, but between two types of people: the stuck-up elites and the rest of us.
 
Donald Trump’s campaign (and subsequent administration) was/is about Making America Great Again, putting America First and overall prioritizing American interests. That was strictly a nationalist message, a message that sent globalists everywhere (and I do mean everywhere considering British agents tried to undermine a U.S. election) into a frenzy, feeling the direct challenge to their power.
 
Despite their best efforts, the U.S., even under 8 years of Obama, was still the most powerful and influential country in the world and such a radical change in Presidents – from one who would bend over backwards for their amusement to one who would take charge – would heavily disrupt their status quo.
 
So the globalists in America – the American Left – launched effort after effort to destroy Trump and get him impeached, failing time after time. Globalists everywhere else deeply hated Trump. Rush Limbaugh largely chucks this deep hatred for Trump as him simply being so different from them in his mannerisms, his style and in the ideological differences between them. It goes farther than that. Trump presents a direct challenge to the globalists.
 
“America First” and “MAGA” are attacked precisely because they do as advertised: put America first and make it great again. Making America great again means making it powerful again. Making it powerful again means making it more independent again; more free again.
 
However, this has led (perhaps unexpectedly for some, but perhaps not so for others) to other countries’ people wanting their own governments to prioritize them. Such is the case for Brazil, Australia, and even the people of Great Britain during Brexit (which, yes, happened before the 2016 election, but that only tells you of how grand the desire for liberty against globalism is, and that is the reason I said Trump’s election likely propelled, if not necessarily led, the nationalist movement).

Throughout the world, and with more and more mounting evidence, we are seeing globalism being pushed back and nationalism taking hold. The EU elections were simply the most recent massive win and a great indicator of this.
 
This is a struggle between those who wish to be able to rule themselves (or at least their countries to be able to rule themselves and prioritize the citizens of the countries and not of another’s) and those who wish to be able to rule all people.
 
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the communists didn’t simply disappear. They regathered and planned for their rise once again. They invaded other countries not with guns but with papers and spread their communist ideals. And in time, communism took on a new name: globalism. Same basic concepts, same ideas, same end, but different means to those ends.
 
And now, they are facing a new challenge. In essence, they view Trump as this generation’s Reagan. And there exists the possibility of people like Bolsonaro, or le Pen, or Farage as being this generation’s Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II. It was those three who largely helped destroy the Soviet Union. Today’s nationalist leaders could and likely will challenge the globalists.
 
At the risk of kind of sounding like AOC, I would have to say that this is our generation’s Cold War. A war not of guns and blood, but of ideology and words. Thankfully, there is no threat of nuclear annihilation (apart from some chicken nugget countries that like to puff up their chests and pretend they are big boys *ahem* North Korea *ahem* Iran *ahem*), but the struggle still exists.
 
It’s the elites vs. the rest of us and we are fighting back.
 
Galatians 5:1
“For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.”
 
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.

There exists within socialism a simple cause and effect relationship: socialism causes misery. The Venezuelan people have experienced this misery for a couple of decades now and they are sick of it.
 
According to a Venezuelan polling firm, Meganalisis, 87.9% of surveyors agreed with the statement: “socialism is the worst and most destructive political ideology to lead the government.” Again, as they’ve been living with this form of government for a couple of decades, they certainly know and understand just how terrible socialism is.
 
What’s more, the people also overwhelmingly believe (89.5%) that the federal legislature, the National Assembly, “should authorize foreign military missions in the country,” according to Breitbart, with another 91.2% saying they “did not believe it was possible for Venezuelans to remove Maduro without foreign military intervention.” 88% also said they weren’t trustful of the nation’s armed forces.
 
That last one makes a lot of sense seeing as the military, at least top officials within it, are still on Maduro’s side and recently launched a campaign against the protesters that resulted in the deaths of five people so far, the youngest of which being a 14-year-old protester. And despite the fact that the country’s interim President Guaido has insisted there would be a military uprising to oust Maduro and that he’s getting members of the military on his side, the Venezuelan armed forces appeared to still be on Maduro’s side, if not at least split between the two.
 
Rush Limbaugh remarked on his radio show last week that the Venezuelan armed forces had no reason to oust Maduro, since they are the ones living comfortably and well. In a sense, he insisted that they had no reason to bite the hand that feeds them. And I only half-way agree.
 
Some of the people in the armed forces probably do think this way. That they are living comfortable lives and afford their own families such comfortable lives, so they have no reason to upset the status quo. However, I imagine there are also those who recognize that they won’t be in the military forever and cannot provide for their family with whatever they receive out of being soldiers forever. Some must be thinking long-term, knowing that those who are not in the military don’t have good lives, so in order for their families to have better lives, the socialist dictator must be ousted.
 
It really all depends on the individual soldier’s morals and mindset. If a soldier is against socialism, he will likely look to help oust Maduro. If a soldier does not much care for his country or his people, apart from his family, he has no reason to betray Maduro.
 
And as I’ve said in the past few weeks: you need the military in order for a coup to be successful. If Guaido does not have the military on his side, and it’s clear he does not have at least a solid majority of it, he will fail. Which is why the people do not trust the armed forces, as they’ve killed some protesters recently and hold hundreds of political prisoners, and it’s why 90% of them wish for a foreign military to come in and oust Maduro.
 
That is especially the case considering that roughly 90 percent (87.9) agree with the statement: “Venezuela has been intervened and controlled by Cuba and Russia.” Maduro’s Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza traveled to Moscow last weekend and said the Maduro regime was thinking about asking Russia for more troops to help against the protesters.
 
What’s more, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that the U.S. potentially sending troops to Venezuela was “catastrophic and unjustified”, suggesting that Russia is “categorically against military intervention. The use of force can only be authorized by the U.N. Security Council, or used in response to aggression by a sovereign state.” Which is a whole lot of caca considering Russia has already sent armed forces into the country, likely illegally.
 
Personally, I’ve gone back and forth on the idea of sending U.S. troops to Venezuela. I see both sides of the argument: this sort of insurrection and foreign meddling has usually led to the country being worse off than before (see Lybia with open slave markets that were not there when Qaddafi was in power), but socialism must be defeated and pushed back at every turn; we have our own problems, particularly at the Southern border, which we must prioritize, plus we should not send our own to die for other people, but at the same time, socialism is a worldwide problem that is also here and causing human suffering, not to mention that not helping Venezuela could likely just create more refugees (actual refugees, though) and have them join more and more caravans as time goes on.
 
I really am not certain, even today, what the best course of action is. I think the right thing to do would be to help the Venezuelans oust Maduro, but that could bring about other problems as well, and we already have enough on our plate having to deal with evil Democrats and Republicans who refuse to allow for a border wall to be built.
 
But in any case, the poll finds that the Venezuelan people are sick and tired of socialism. They overwhelmingly hate Maduro, with less than 5% acknowledging him to be the country’s president, but they are also not great fans of Guaido, who despite the fact that 50% say he’s the legitimate head of the country, those numbers are down and they are not exactly fond of the fact that his party, Popular Will, is a formal member of the Socialist International.
 
Personally, I would also be fairly wary of that fact if it weren’t for the fact that Argentina’s (where I was born) most conservative and best president it ever had, Carlos Menem, ran as a socialist, with socialist policies that he did a complete 180 on, opting instead to reduce the size and scope of the government and denationalizing industries during his administration.
 
If I had to give an explanation as to why Popular Will is part of the Socialist International it is likely because of the election laws set in place in Venezuela. Socialists don’t want non-socialists running for office and would only be okay with another socialist eventually taking their place.
 
Guaido himself has been very vocal about his disdain for socialism and love for capitalism, so I don’t hold it against him that his party is part of the Socialist International.
 
Still, that is yet another example of the people living under socialism being utterly sick and tired of it. They don’t want more socialism and certainly don’t want another socialist to take Maduro’s place. This is the cause and effect relationship of socialism: socialism causes misery. It causes suffering.
 
Margaret Thatcher didn’t say, “the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money” for nothing. Winston Churchill didn’t say, “Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy” and “the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries,” for nothing.
 
They knew perfectly well what socialism was and how awful it was without even having to live under socialist rule. People like Trump also understand how awful socialism is. Reagan and JFK were staunchly against socialism/communism in all of its forms.
 
Venezuelans know perfectly well what socialism is and how awful it is because they unfortunately have to live under it. They have electricity on a good day, little to no water, no food, whatever “free” healthcare they have is from the Dark Ages at best and are attacked, harassed and killed if they speak out against such miseries.
 
Foreign journalists are detained and stripped of their equipment if they dare show Maduro the reality that his administration brings to the Venezuelan people. Such journalists should count their blessings that they are not from Venezuela.
 
In this poll, the Venezuelan people make it perfectly clear: socialism sucks. They send out a message to other people not to try it, thinking that it might work for them. It never does. All it does is bring about oppression and suffering. Not all of it is immediate, of course. Venezuelans at least had electricity a year or so ago. But the more socialism is applied in a country, the worse things get. That’s because socialism is utterly nonsensical and does not conform to reality well.
 
The idea of people being equally blessed is heavenly because that is the only place it actually happens. Government is no substitute for God. A socialist country is no substitute for Heaven.
 
Those who live under socialism understand that socialism is utterly terrible. But those who do not live in it don’t have to find that to be the truth the hard way. Socialism should not be tried anywhere as it works nowhere because you cannot have a thriving country with a system of destruction of wealth.
 
Argentina’s best years were when it wasn’t socialistic for like a decade. America’s best years have been when socialist policies were completely fought back against, which thankfully has been the vast majority of America’s history.
 
And even within America, the worst and most rotten places are where socialist policies are faithfully implemented such as California, New York, Chicago, Detroit, Atlanta, etc. It’s honestly funny and sad at the same time when AOC talks about how bad things are in poor areas of New York, not recognizing that that’s what happens after decades of Democrat/socialist rule.
 
There is a reason I say that the only two kinds of people who want and advocate for socialism are ignorant people and evil people. You either have no idea what socialism is or know perfectly well and seek to become part of the government that would have all the power in the country.
 
Of course, sometimes I’m tempted to include a third option: stupid people, those who see what’s happening in Venezuela, refuse to accept that socialism did all of that and continue to advocate for it saying “it’ll be different this time”.
 
In any case, I hope and pray that the people of Venezuela will not have to endure socialism for much longer, whether that means a coup or foreign military ousting Maduro. I also hope and pray that people see what is happening in Venezuela and come to understand that that’s what will happen here if we let socialism win.
 
Deuteronomy 31:6
“Be strong and courageous. Do not fear or be in dread of them, for it is the Lord your God who goes with you. He will not leave you or forsake you.”
 
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.

It is not that often that I write super obvious titles like that. Almost all of you, if not all, would read that title and mentally say: “no duh!” because that might as well say: “Socialism Is Bad”. It’s just that obvious that cities and states artificially (and I’ll get to why I’m specifically using that word in a moment) raising the minimum wage to any rate ends up hurting the very people such raises are supposed to help.
 
But why exactly am I talking about this? Because recently, New York City has seen “the greatest plunge in restaurant jobs in almost 20 years”, which comes as a result of New York’s Fast Food Wage Board making a “recommendation” to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour back in 2015.
 
A survey from the New York City Alliance, published by the end of 2018, found that “76.50% of full service restaurant respondents reduced employee hours, and 36.30% eliminated jobs in 2018… 75% of limited service restaurant respondents report that they will reduce employee hours, and 53.10% will eliminate jobs in 2019 as a result of mandated wage increases that took effect on December 31, 2018… When the tip wage increased 50% in 2015, and since doubled, annual employment growth dropped from 6.67% to less than 1% as of November 2018.”
 
But wait, there’s more. Back in mid February, economist Mark Perry from the American Enterprise Institute wrote:
 
“December 2018 restaurant jobs were down by almost 3,000 (and by 1.64%) from the previous December, and the 2.5% annual decline in March 2018 was the worst annual decline since the sharp collapse in restaurant jobs following 9/11 in 2001… it usually takes an economic recession to cause year-over-year job losses at NYC’s full-service restaurants, so it’s likely that this is a ‘restaurant recession’ tied to the annual series of minimum wage hikes that brought the city’s minimum wage to $15 an hour at the end of last year.”
 
And it’s not just New York City that is getting hurt by these wage hikes. Back in August of 2016, Seattle was in much the same spot when they raised their own minimum wage. The same thing happened to San Francisco, when they raised their minimum wage, leading more and more restaurants to close and workers to subsequently lose their jobs.
 
Altogether, having the government raising the minimum wage is a terrible thing for the people it’s supposed to help.
 
There is no “livable wage” when the effects of artificially raising the minimum wage are that people get reduced work hours, lose their jobs altogether, or entire businesses close down to try and offset costs.
 
Never mind the fact that a minimum wage was never meant to be a “livable” wage. It literally can’t be made into a livable wage, especially by the government!
 
Now, I mentioned earlier that I would explain just what I mean when I talk about artificially raising the minimum wage. I’m really talking strictly in an economics sense.
 
The government forcing a wage increase is an artificial way to have wages increase. And as we can plainly see, it only brings pain to those it affects. Businesses have to reduce employee hours or outright lay people off because they can’t afford to pay their low-skill workers such high wages. If a business hopes to survive, it has to do that sort of thing under such poor economic policies.
 
However, I am not against raising the minimum wage altogether because there is an economically sound way of doing it. It’s what we saw soon after the GOP tax cuts were put into place. Businesses like Walmart, in multiple locations nationwide, were gaining so much money from heavily reducing the corporate tax rates that they decided to raise the minimum wage of their workers to that magic number the Left wants to force on everyone: $15 an hour.
 
This is the economically sound, pro-market, and real way to raise the minimum wage. If a business can afford to pay its employees more, it doesn’t have much reason not to. So the minimum wage worker gets a nifty little raise, the same wage the Left claims to want for people, AND their work hours are not cut, thus letting them make more money than they otherwise would have AND they are most definitely not laid off AND the business they work for can continue growing more and more, allowing its employees to also be paid more and more.
 
If anyone wonders why there is any sort of “pay gap” between the NBA and the WNBA is because the WNBA’s revenue sits at $60 million according to Forbes, while the NBA’s revenue at the end of the 2017/18 season sat at just over $8 BILLION. The NBA shares with its players 50% of their revenue while the WNBA shares only 25% of their revenue because the WNBA makes far less money than the NBA does.
 
What I’m trying to say here is that a business that makes more money is able to pay its employees more money than a business that makes less money. That’s just common sense. It’s logic. The CFO of a huge company like Microsoft, Apple, Intel, etc. will make far more money than the CFO of a smaller business. The same is the case for many of the lower-earning and lower-ranking jobs.
 
So if a business can make more money, it can afford to pay its employees more money as well, and it almost always will do that, lest the employees resign and work for another company that will pay them more money.
 
This is the capitalist and only real good way to raise the minimum wage. The socialist way of raising the minimum wage, in which the government forces companies to pay its low-skill employees more money, is how businesses close and employees are either left with fewer work hours, so they don’t make more money anyway (and that’s the best case scenario) or are outright laid off because the businesses can’t afford to pay such a salary for a job literally anyone can do.
 
The socialist way of raising the minimum wage is what happens in liberal cities like Seattle, New York City, San Francisco and anywhere it’s tried. It’s one of the many reasons socialism doesn’t work. It’s an ideology that requires perfection in order to work.
 
On paper, the idea of raising the minimum wage is not bad. But we don’t live on paper. We live in the real world. And in the real world, real world things like profit margins and offsetting costs have to be factored in. As a result, if a business can’t afford the minimum wage hikes, it simply will reduce its work force, leaving people to not make any more money than they otherwise would at best and completely out of a job at worst.
 
Advocating for having the government raise the minimum wage is completely devoid of information and common sense.
 
Of course, the point of advocating for the government to raise the minimum wage isn’t that people are able to have “liveable” wages, but so that people DON’T HAVE liveable wages and have to rely on the government to pay for things.
 
The point of having the government raise minimum wage is that people DO GET FIRED so they have to rely on the government.
 
When news came out that businesses like Walmart were WILLINGLY raising their minimum wage, Democrats either were completely silent or were outright furious. They don’t actually care about the people and whether or not they have a liveable wage. In fact, they’d rather they would not have a decent wage so that they can fall prey to the government’s crippling social programs.
 
It further goes to show that the Left does not care one little bit about people, particularly those they say they support. They couldn’t care less about anyone other than themselves and their own power, so they advocate for things that will screw the little guy and force him to depend largely or solely on the government.
 
Proverbs 28:1-5
“The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are bold as a lion. When a land transgresses, it has many rulers, but with a man of understanding and knowledge, its stability will long continue. A poor man who oppresses the poor is a beating rain that leaves no food. Those who forsake the law praise the wicked, but those who keep the law strive against them. Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand it completely.”
 
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.

Some time ago, I wrote an article talking about how insanely hypocritical it was for Democrats and Leftists to say that they are “doing the Lord’s work” or something to that extent when opposing Trump, or simply being their Leftist selves. Well, that also applies to establishment Republicans who for some reason feel as though they can speak for God now.
 
In an interview with CNN, John Kasich said the following:
 
“You know, we have a caravan coming north. We don’t want all those people coming across our border, and there are ways to deal with it. I believe if we could check those who are legitimately in need of asylum, could be vetted before they even get to the border. But you know what? We’re born in America. You know how lucky we are to be born in America and not be born in Guatemala where they would say to your daughter, you know, if you don’t do what we want, we will rape your daughter or we will kill your son if he’s not a drug mule? Now they’re marching north, and you know what? It could easily have been all of us, that we’re in the caravan, that we’re marching north trying to save our families and save our children… If we have been spared… by the grace of God, let us be appreciative, let us count our blessings, and let us reach out to those who have less. And let’s stop putting up walls around ourselves and not understanding the plight, the trouble, and the problems of others. It is not right. And the Lord doesn’t want it…”
 
That is a lot to cover, so let’s go little by little. Overall, I both agree and disagree with what he is saying.
 
People born in the U.S. SHOULD count their blessings for being born in the greatest nation on Earth. And we SHOULD try and help people who need help. In fact, doing so is very much a Christian thing to do.
 
However, there is a difference between helping people and being forced to take care of them.
 
Not to mention that the border wall isn’t meant to drive away immigrants. It’s meant to drive away ILLEGAL immigrants.
 
John Kasich believes that we should “help” these people. The problem comes in the fact that it’s likely dangerous people, like members of MS-13, are part of this caravan. Letting these people in means many, and I mean MANY, dangerous people seeing our compassion and exploiting it, entering the country and hurting Americans.
 
We should not be helping people if that comes at the expense of America and Americans. And we certainly should not be guilt-tripped into helping people who very well could come in to exploit our system at best and harm Americans at worst.
 
Besides, let’s not ignore that we do help people, or at least their countries of origin. We give over $120 million to Honduras alone annually (though that number is bound to come down after this). So our government does try and help other countries.
 
But it shouldn’t fall on us to babysit them. It shouldn’t fall on us to take these people in, particularly in this way, and sacrifice Americans’ livelihoods, jobs, etc. We have to take care of our people first, and that’s not what the Democrats and establishment Republicans seem to want.
 
We especially should not be made to believe that it is our fault that other countries are poorer than us. Socialism is killing Venezuela. It’s also slowly, but surely killing other countries as well. I’ve mentioned in the past that the only time Argentina was prosperous was when it abandoned socialism at least economically, through deregulation and such.
 
We are as rich and plentiful as we are because our capitalist system of government and economics are built to help people be prosperous. Key word “help”. It doesn’t guarantee or make it a right that people be prosperous. You have the right to the PURSUIT of happiness, not a right to given happiness.
 
But let’s focus a bit more on Kasich bringing God into the mix. He claims that God doesn’t want us to surround ourselves in walls. He’s wrong on this as well. You have to keep in mind what the wall is meant to do. Like I said earlier, it’s not meant to keep immigrants out. It’s meant to keep ILLEGAL immigrants out.
 
It’s meant to secure our border and protect our people. It’s a national security issue just as much as an immigration issue. Not to speak for God, but I believe He would want us to be safe. After all, He instructed and led Nehemiah to build a wall too. And Jerusalem currently has a wall that keeps Hamas and other Islamic terrorists out of the promised land (that was promised to the Jews, not Muslims or any other type of Gentile).
 
Why have those walls? To protect the people inside. That’s what Trump’s border wall is meant to do.
 
We are a country that welcomes immigrants. Heck, we ARE a nation of immigrants. But the difference between the immigrants that came from Europe and the ones that are marching to our border is that the world was far different, with far different laws and dangers to be met.
 
Not to mention that the pilgrims set out for America to be free to express their religious beliefs without fear of persecution from the Crown.
 
On the other hand, these illegals are fleeing their crappy countries to enter the country illegally and forcefully, very much like an invading force.
 
A border wall can stop such an invading force, and there is no honest person who should oppose prioritizing the safety of our people.
 
I won’t be too harsh on Kasich here because he is not completely wrong with what he’s saying. He’s wrong about the purpose of wanting a wall. He’s certainly wrong about what he thinks Trump’s intentions are with a wall. But he’s not wrong that we should help people.
 
However, that’s what we’re already doing. Allowing an invading force to enter the country like this will not help those people and certainly will not help us. If we don’t help ourselves, how could we possibly help others?
 
Regarding the caravan itself, I have already written an article surrounding that topic, so there’s not much else for me to say that would be too different from what I said in that article.
 
The larger point I wanted to make here is that Kasich is wrong in believing God doesn’t want a border wall. I won’t claim to know what God does or does not want. I cannot fully understand what God wants because I cannot fully understand Him, being one of His creations with a limited mind. However, I do believe He wants us to be safe from the dangers of this world and a border wall would help towards that end.
 
Not to mention that, in order to help people, they also have to help themselves. The governments of Central America, maybe with some exceptions, are largely central in their power. Meaning that government is everything and they keep expanding it, bringing in more socialism into the mix. We want to help other countries, but those countries also have to do their part in implementing a system where they are not reliant on us for so much.
 
I’m all for helping others. But that help should not be a one-way street. That help should not be rewarded with being invaded by illegals, likely many of whom look to exploit our system all-the-while trashing it and us, and maybe even harming people by raping young girls and/or killing them.
 
America and Americans must always come first. I want to help Americans first. Otherwise, how could we help anyone else?
 
Luke 6:38
“Give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.”
 
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 delivered right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Back in August, I wrote an article that detailed the fact that only 25% of Democrats would support abolishing ICE after the illegal immigration debate heated up once again and somehow was hurting Trump to a degree.
 
While I do not necessarily have any news surrounding Democrats’ support of abolishing ICE, I do bring some news surrounding Latino voters’ views on ICE. And they don’t look good for Democrats.
 
A recently released poll by NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Telemundo found that, of 300 interviewees who were registered Latino voters, 36% would be less likely to vote for a candidate who supports abolishing ICE compared to 33% who would be more likely to vote for such a candidate.
 
26% said there was “no difference” either way and 5% said they were “not sure”.
 
Now, the poll doesn’t just focus on this one item. The poll is actually quite extensive, for example:
 

• When asked if they approve or disapprove of Trump’s performance as POTUS, 26% approved while 65% disapproved (this, however, is challenged by a Harvard/Harris poll that had Trump’s approval with Hispanics at 47%, but that poll was taken in late July, early August, but that would be a horrific drop-off for Trump that I do not think is correct, but I digress)

• When asked if they had a positive or negative view of the GOP, 22% held a positive view, 45% held a negative view, while 43% held a positive view of the Democrat Party and 20% held a negative view of the Dems.

 

• When asked if they had a positive or negative view of Obama, 67% held a positive view while only 14% held a negative one.

 
But perhaps most interestingly, though not necessarily shocking:
 

• When asked if they had a positive or negative view of Capitalism, 41% held a positive view, with only 21% holding a negative view.

• When asked if they had a positive or negative view of Socialism, 21% held a positive view while 42% held a negative view.

 
So we really should take everything in this poll with a grain of salt. This is a relatively small sample size, with only 300 registered Latino voters being surveyed.
 
But there are a number of things to take away from all this. Primarily, while the vast majority of Latino voters understand socialism and despise it, they do not recognize it in Democrats… somehow. Despite the fact that they do not like socialism at all, they still seemingly hold a negative view towards Trump and the GOP and would prefer the Democrats to win in November.
 
So what this poll tells me is that there is a severe lack of knowledge out there for Latinos. Now, don’t misunderstand, I’m not saying Latinos are stupid. Ignorance and idiocy are two different things. People can cease being ignorant simply through learning and acquiring knowledge. However, people can’t cease being stupid even with knowledge.
 
It’s clear to me that these Latino voters understand that Capitalism is good and Socialism is evil. They are not stupid. However, they are ignorant if they still prefer Democrats over Trump and the GOP. They do not recognize that the Democrats would only bring about the same kind of Socialism that they despise and some might even had fled from.
 
Regardless, that is a topic for another time. Right now, I want to focus on the fact that even within the same poll that has Latinos adamantly rejecting Trump and the GOP, Latinos also report being less likely to vote for someone who would support abolishing ICE.
 
It’s this sort of inconsistency that leads me to take everything this poll says with a grain of salt, even the things that are positive in my eyes. Latinos prefer Obama over Trump, the Dems over the GOP, all the while supporting Capitalism over Socialism and keeping ICE over abolishing it?
 
Taking aside the fact that this is a poll from an MSM source, this poll does not seem very consistent and might not be entirely credible.
 
However, the fact that the poll shows Latinos favoring ICE and being less likely to vote for a candidate that would support abolishing it speaks volumes, regardless of credibility.
 
I can understand if the poll wanted to skew certain things to make Trump and the GOP look bad and like they are about to get kicked out of Washington. I don’t know how many of the registered Latino voters are Democrats compared to Republicans. But I would be naïve to assume there is no overlap of Democrat voters in an MSM poll. However, I won’t speculate further.
 
All I’m saying is that it is remarkable that, despite many of the other things the poll shows, the voters would prefer ICE stay than be abolished. That goes against many other things the poll indicates and the Democrats claim. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ran, among other things, on the promise of abolishing ICE. Upon her upset victory over Joe Crowley, other Democrats picked up on some of the things she was saying and moved farther Left, also calling on ICE to be abolished.
 
Now, as I said at the beginning of the article, support for abolishing ICE has dropped off massively since Ocasio-Cortez’s victory even within Democrats. So perhaps I should not be so surprised that Latinos tend to have a more favorable view of the agency. But that’s not what has me intrigued. Frankly, it’s not that surprising.
 
For the most part, registered Latino voters are legal immigrants (though I don’t know if there were any illegals who were considered “registered voters” in the poll or actually are “registered voters” as illegal as that is, but I won’t speculate further on that issue… for now). Legal immigrants tend to not have positive views on illegal immigrants.
 
You see, legal immigrants go through the process the right way. They (we, since I am a legal immigrant and now proud U.S. citizen) pay what needs to be paid, wait the amount of time that needs to be waited, sign and complete all the forms that need to be signed and completed, and overall go through the extensive process of attaining legal status to immigrate and become a legal U.S. resident.
 
Illegals basically crap all over that.
 
So, when legal immigrants such as myself see what illegals are doing and the preference they receive from the Democrats, we tend to not like that. Now, I do realize the poll shows Latinos prefer Democrats over the GOP, but as I insinuated, that’s relatively questionable right now.
 
When we see a government agency properly enforcing the immigration laws we ourselves were subjected to, we tend to like that. No one should be able to come here through illegal means and those that do should immediately be considered criminals. And don’t tell me that’s harsh. If you break the law, you’re a criminal. If you break immigration law, you’re a criminal. Simple as that.

This is a view that, from what logic and seemingly data from an MSM poll, most legal immigrants share. So what has me surprised is not that registered Latino voters seemingly marginally support ICE. What has me surprised is that the MSM poll would show that.
 
Either way, I would imagine the MSM would focus more on the numbers that help reflect their narrative that a blue wave is incoming and inevitable than to focus on the fact that Latinos would be less likely to support a candidate that wants ICE abolished or the fact that Latinos tend to despise Socialism and prefer Capitalism.
 
But regardless of what the fake news media has to say, they have given me no reason to believe what they say on multiple occasions.
 
John 8:32
“And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. It’s a compilation of the week’s articles and easy access to our online store delivered straight to your inbox. All you have to do is click on the box on the right, type in your e-mail address, click on the subscribe button and you’re good to go. No money to be paid, no data to be shared apart from your e-mail address, no hassles.
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.