I personally do not blame you if you had to read that title more than a couple of times. It makes as little sense to me as it does to you. However, this is where we are today.
 
In an open letter by nine Cuban democratic socialists, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) received major condemnation for their support of the Castro regime.
 
The letter read: “The support for Castroism revealed in resolution 62 of the recent Convention of the Democratic Socialists of the United States, held in Atlanta, Georgia, can only be explained by two reasons: either the American Socialist Democrats do not know the Cuban reality or they are not socialist or democratic.”
 
I can guarantee that they do not know the “Cuban reality” and are certainly not democratic, but I just have to ask: do these people not know what socialism is?
 
I will get back to that point momentarily. To give you some context, Resolution 62 is a resolution by the DSA to support the Castro regime and condemn American and allied sanctions against the communist state.
 
Resolution 62 states:
 
“Be it resolved, the DSA formally declares itself in solidarity with the Cuban socialist struggle. The DSA unequivocally condemns the economic blockade imposed on Cuba by the United States and its allies, the American military presence in Guantanamo Bay, and any sanctions and actions that would undermine the self-determination of the Cuban people. Be it further resolved, the DSA will move to join the National Network on Cuba (NNOC), an American progressive organization dedicated to opposing acts of imperialist aggression against the Republic of Cuba. Be it finally resolved, within thirty days after passing, the DSA will submit its application for full membership to the National Network on Cuba (NNOC), and will take active measures to pursue full membership status.”
 
In other words, these communist scumbags support the communist regime of Castro and his enslavement of the Cuban people. There is no “Cuban socialist struggle” because the socialists are the ruling class there and all dissenters are either imprisoned or executed. The Cuban people are not allowed to self-determine their fate because the communist regime determines that – that’s the whole point of socialism. There is no “imperialist aggression” against Cuba; it’s a state that murders and enslaves its own citizens. America is sort of against that kind of practice which is why there are economic sanctions placed on it. What’s more, it’s far from a “Republic.” The U.S. is a Republic. Cuba is a communist slave state.
 
But what is interesting about this whole situation is, again, the letter sent by the Cuban socialists who are seemingly against the communist Castro regime and against the DSA regarding their support of it… somehow.
 
Returning to the letter:
 
“You (the DSA) have been in solidarity with a regime maintained by force of arms, murder, imprisonment, repression and compulsory exile of the opponents, which has not held free and democratic elections for more than 60 years, which systematically violates massive [sic] and blatantly the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Cuban people and is sustained by the repression and monopoly of the economy, information, education and public health.”
 
“They have supported a regime that appropriated by force all lands, industries, factories and large, medium and small companies, private or associated and made them property of a bureaucratic state, which exploits the Cuban workers in slavery and it blocks the economic development of the country, of independent companies of the state of all sizes, whether private or cooperative and the welfare of Cubans.”
 
Reading just these two paragraphs, you would think they were written by capitalistic people making a very good case against socialism/communism. But nope. Immediately following these paragraphs, we find the rest of the letter:
 
“A regime with these characteristics cannot be considered democratic or socialist. The Cuban independence apostle, Jose Marti, envisioned in his article the Future Slavery, the Cuban reality of today, where the all-powerful state and every decision maker would exploit the Cuban workers as if they were slaves, without rights and dependent on the gifts of a totalitarian government.”
 
“In Cuba, there is a system of modern slavery, undemocratic, Stalinist. Is that the social justice that the democratic socialists of the United States claim for that brother town [sic]? Whoever stands in solidarity with that regime does not know him, does not know what is happening in Cuba or is as imposter as Castroism.”
 
“Several Cuban democratic socialists, who have been facing the anti-popular, totalitarian and anti-socialist policies of Castroism for decades, for which some of us have suffered repression and exile, we reject any kind of solidarity with the Castro regime and we do not share the defense of it carried out in that convention for supposed or poorly-informed American democratic socialists.”
 
A scathing, if rather confusing, letter from such Cuban socialists to the DSA. But I just have to return to the question I asked earlier: do these people not know what socialism is?
 
They seemingly claim to be socialists, standing for socialist policies. And yet, they excoriate the communist, totalitarian and all-powerful government, condemn the forceful appropriation of private land and businesses and even go so far as to accuse the DSA members of not actually being democratic or socialist.
 
I agree that they are not democratic. If they were, they would call for Cuba to have democratic elections (much of a sham as they might be) and it hasn’t had one in over half a century. But there is no doubt in my mind that they are socialist, or at least support socialist policies. The desire and mission to make every single industry and land belong to the government is what socialism is all about. Communism is no different, and neither is Fascism.
 
I would say they are all different sides of the same coin, but that analogy doesn’t quite work because there’s three of them (socialism/communism/fascism). But fundamentally, they all strive for and attempt to achieve the same goal: government control of everything, every industry, every land, even every person.
 
Socialism, communism and fascism all make slaves out of their citizens. Case in point is Cuba, but Venezuela is no different, neither are North Korea or China or any other current communist country, and neither was the Soviet Union.
 
I suppose the only thing I could point to as being the reason for these socialists to be against communism is the forceful appropriation of lands and industries, but that still doesn’t make much sense to me. For one, if given the chance, socialists in America would take any and all industry and land by force. It’s the primary reason they are so against the Second Amendment and wish to strip us of our right to bear arms. Secondly, is the argument that the people should’ve given the land and industries willingly as opposed to forcefully taking it from them? Would that somehow make it less communist and more “socialist” as though there is much of a difference at all?
 
While I certainly appreciate anyone, particularly on the Left, attacking the DSA or socialists like AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, etc., I was frankly taken aback by this letter, the condemnation and the accusations against the DSA.
 
These Cuban socialists, again, were making a terrific case AGAINST socialism/communism, not for it. Everything the communist regime in Cuba has done, from Che Guevara to the current Castro brother, is befitting of socialism/communism. There is no fundamental difference between the two and the result of both are the same: government control of everything.
 
Venezuela is no better off than Cuba is just because they voted socialism in as opposed to the Cubans who had an armed revolution to bring communism in. The end result is government ownership of every industry, land and person. All citizens of a socialist/communist country are subject to whatever the state determines is allowed and legal. Any dissent can and will be punished, being perceived as a threat to the communist state.
 
I find it very ironic that these Cuban socialists would excoriate the Castro regime and the DSA for sidling up to the Castro regime when they, themselves, ideologically believe in the same exact thing. Choosing between Castro and any other socialist is tantamount to choosing between Stalin and Hitler. The two hated each other and were enemies, but were ultimately one and the same: communist/socialist authoritarians, not because they chose to be but because that’s what their ideology naturally leads to.
 
Isaiah 32:6
“For the fool speaks folly, and his heart is busy with iniquity, to practice ungodliness, to utter error concerning the Lord, to leave the craving of the hungry unsatisfied, and to deprive the thirsty of drink.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

If you’ve been reading my articles for a while, you will know that I am a big basketball fan. My favorite NBA team is the Miami Heat, followed by the Portland Trail Blazers as I have lived in both cities in the past. Though I do not often talk about it because the basketball world and the world of politics do not intercept very often, when they do, I feel the need to speak at least to some extent.
 
Some time ago, for example, I discussed what Golden State Warriors Forward Draymond Green said regarding racism in America and pointed out that we are in a far better state racially than before if people have to make up racial attacks.
 
But recently, another political moment can be found in the NBA when Houston Rockets’ General Manager Daryl Morey tweeted out his support for the pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong. He simply tweeted a graphic that said: “Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong.”
 
As a result, many Chinese businesses, including the Chinese Basketball Association, and the Chinese government “quickly denounced Morey and moved to sever ties with the Rockets,” according to The Ringer.
 
It should be noted that this is particularly important because the Rockets have a lot of fans in China given that one of the team’s best players in franchise history was Yao Ming, a former Chinese basketball player and the first Chinese player taken with the first overall pick in the NBA draft. It’s perhaps because of this that Morey had to backpedal so quickly regarding his comments, but I doubt it would’ve made much of a difference had any other NBA executive done the same.
 
The Chinese government is utterly dictatorial and threatened to boycott the Rockets in China, which would mean damage to the team’s and the NBA’s bottom line. The tweet, which has since been deleted, reportedly prompted Rockets ownership to debate whether or not to fire Morey as a result.
 
NBA chief communications officer Mike Bass issued the following official NBA statement: “We recognize that the views expressed by Houston Rockets General Manager Daryl Morey have deeply offended many of our friends and fans in China, which is regrettable. While Daryl has made it clear that his tweet does not represent the Rockets or the NBA, the values of the league support individuals’ educating themselves and sharing their views on matters important to them. We have great respect for the history and culture of China and hope that sports and the NBA can be used as a unifying force to bridge cultural divides and bring people together.”
 
What a load of crap. The NBA only cares about people’s political beliefs when it aligns with their own. They have no problem with Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, Warriors coach Steve Kerr or Lakers franchise player LeBron James lambasting and attacking President Trump, but the minute an NBA executive shares PRO-DEMOCRACY beliefs aimed at the situation in Hong Kong, that becomes a problem and his job is put into jeopardy.
 
The NBA does not have any values at all. They consider themselves a bastion of morality when they pull the All-Star game out of Charlotte because of the transgender bathroom law (and no, that wasn’t moral either) but utterly cower to the whims of a dictatorial regime that has killed tens of millions of people due to Zedong’s “Great Leap Forward” and that currently imprisons millions of people for being Christians or Muslims.
 
These are not values. This is whoring yourself out for Chinese money. It’s utter hypocrisy and the NBA deserves every bit of the criticism it’s receiving State-side.
 
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) tweeted: “So let me get this straight. Houston Rockets GM Daryl Morey expresses support for Hong Kong democracy movement & Chinese government pressures NBA to fire him? Moment of truth for NBA. Will they bow to pressure from repressive, authoritarian govt?”
 
He followed that up by tweeting: “Chinese govt has a million people locked in concentration camps & is trying to brutally repress Hong Kong demonstrators – and NBA wants to ‘bridge cultural divides’? Cultural divides?”
 
He wasn’t alone in his criticism of the NBA. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) tweeted: “As a lifelong Houston Rockets fan, I was proud to see Daryl Morey call out the Chinese Communist Party’s repressive treatment of protestors in Hong Kong. Now, in pursuit of big $$, the NBA is shamefully retreating.”
 
He added: “We’re better than this; human rights shouldn’t be for sale & the NBA shouldn’t be assisting Chinese communist censorship.”
 
Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) piled on, tweeting: “It’s clear that the NBA is more interested in money than human rights. Tonight’s statement from Commissioner Silver is an absolute joke. The NBA is kowtowing to Beijing to protect their bottom line and disavowing those with the temerity to stand with Hong Kong. Shameful!”
 
Federalist co-founder Ben Domenech also tweeted: “I hope a player, just one, is brave enough to speak out against this corporate [b.s.] bending of the knee.”
 
Considering the NBA fines players for even slightly criticizing bad referee calls, I doubt they would allow for players to speak out against the Chinese communists without getting a fine, so I don’t see any player speaking out against this crap.
 
But the NBA isn’t just getting criticism from the Right or from conservative news media. Sports analyst Clay Travis tweeted: “ESPN is set to broadcast from China this week. The woke league with the woke broadcasting network. All shilling for Chinese communists. Y’all think they’ll say anything at all? Ha ha. The hypocrisy is crazy. When the NBA pulled out of Charlotte, ESPN praised them to high heavens.”
 
TIME columnist Ian Bremmer also tweeted: “I get the NBA not wanting to side with Hong Kong because it’s politically uncomfortable. But apologizing to the Chinese dictatorship against the democracy they’re repressing? As an American sports league? That’s unconscionable.”
 
Vox’s Aaron Rupar, a far-Left columnist, also piled on, tweeting: “This is a hostage video. What an embarrassment for the NBA.” He was referring to Daryl Morey having to tweet out a two-tweet apology for his stance.
 
Even Barack Obama’s old speechwriter Ben Rhodes tweeted: “Just consider that the NBA is suggesting that supporting democracy and human rights ‘does not represent’ the NBA or the values that the league supports. What values does the league support?”
 
It’s a huge deal when I read a Ben Rhodes tweet and don’t feel like throwing up. I honestly have nothing to argue with here, because I wholeheartedly agree with Rhodes. In doing this, the NBA is suggesting that the support of democracy and human rights is not something the NBA wants to attach itself to simply due to the bottom line.
 
It’s utter corporate shilling at some of its worst. I have no doubt in my mind that the NBA would’ve found no trouble working with Nazi Germany if it meant turning a profit there. China is doing much of the same thing, sending people to concentration camps, many of whom likely die there, and utterly represses its people to the point where expressing any non-state approved thought is bounds for some sort of punishment.
 
The NBA has no values, only pretends to have them when it will give them good PR and some sort of profit. Standing against the banning of men inside women’s restrooms is perfectly okay in their eyes. Standing in favor of democracy and human rights is troublesome when in the context of China denying said democracy and human rights.
 
It’s utterly despicable, and while I understand the NBA is a business and it will always try to do what’s best for business, that doesn’t excuse this. Any money the NBA receives from China ought to be considered dirty, perhaps even bloody, money, given what the authoritarian government does to its people.
 
Interestingly, though, this puts the NBA in the precise position it didn’t want to find itself in: jeopardizing profits.
 
If even Aaron Rupar and Ben Rhodes, some of the farthest-Left people on Twitter, are siding against the NBA, what exactly does that mean for the NBA in the States? Could be that some people, particularly Rockets fans, choose to boycott the NBA themselves as a result. And if so, depending on how long it lasts and how big that boycott is, it could lead the NBA to lose more money than they would’ve otherwise.
 
The NBA hosts a few pre-season games in China with a number of teams, not even all of them. But while the pre-season nets them a good amount of money outside the U.S., the NBA only has 2 pre-season games scheduled in China out of a total 79 games in the pre-season schedule. And the regular season has 82 games per each team (totaling 2460 total games played in the regular season for all teams combined), all of which are played in the United States (except for the Toronto Raptors, who play 41 games in Toronto, Canada).
 
If a boycott of the NBA were to happen in the States, that would matter a whole lot more for the NBA’s bottom line than a Chinese boycott of the NBA.
 
But regardless of what happens, whether any boycott of the NBA happens whatsoever, it’s pretty clear that the NBA is full of utterly spineless cowards, even down to Morey himself. He easily could have kept the tweet supporting the Hong Kong protesters and explaining in a follow-up tweet that he has to make it clear that that is his own view and belief and they don’t necessarily reflect the team or the NBA, but nope. He was forced to apologize and mention that he had to consider “other views” on the matter.
 
The other view, in case one can’t tell, is support of the murderous, dictatorial regime that clearly has a lot of power on the NBA (it’s not helped by the fact that the Brooklyn Nets’ new owner is Alibaba co-founder Joseph Tsai).
 
The NBA should be utterly ashamed not only of trying to silence an NBA executive for saying something they disagree with, which is utterly un-American, but also for kowtowing to the Chinese communists out of fear of lost profits.
 
The NBA and Commissioner Adam Silver are the very corporate cronies their supposed ideology hates.
 
Proverbs 28:5-6
“Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand it completely. Better is a poor man who walks in his integrity than a rich man who is crooked in his 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.

With Robert Francis O’Rourke and other Democrats desperately showing just how “woke” they are by sharing their totalitarian intentions surrounding gun ownership, it is important to understand just how much of a non-issue homicide by firearm is, at least on average. Of course, every shooting and every death is a tragedy, don’t misunderstand, but rifles are far from the most common means of murder in America, despite how many there are in the country.
 
The FBI’s 2018 report on crime in the United States shows us clearly the number of reported murders per weapon type.
 
In 2018, firearms killed over 10,000 people. However, over 6,000 of those deaths came from handguns, with nearly 3,000 deaths coming from non-stated firearms, 297 from rifles and 235 from shotguns.
 
Keep in mind also that these numbers are completely dwarfed by the Defensive Gun Use statistics from Florida State University criminology professor Gary Kleck, who reported that there are at least 760,000 defensive gun use cases every year. So in contrast, taking the specific number of 10,265 total firearm murders in 2018, dividing that by 760,000 DGUs (again, that is the minimum amount Kleck showed and it’s theorized most people tend not to report these types of things anyway because they don’t want to reveal they’ve used a gun to defend themselves out of legal fears), and you get 0.01%. Meaning that the total number of firearm deaths every year is 0.01% in contrast to the total number of defensive gun uses every year (minimum). In other words, guns are used for defensive purposes 99.99% of the time, at least in contrast to murders.
 
And take note that only 297 deaths came from the use of rifles, which includes all rifles, not just semi-automatic ones. 0.03% (rounding up) of firearm deaths came from all types of rifles in 2018.
 
Out of the total 14,123 murders reported in 2018, 1,515 came from knives or other cutting instruments. 443 reported deaths from blunt objects such as clubs or hammers, 672 total reported deaths from personal weapons such as hands, fists and feet, and 900 other weapons not specified.
 
There were far more deaths from objects like knives, hammers or even fists than there were from the ever-so-scary rifles. And these are completely overshadowed by vehicular deaths, which the NSC estimates were over 40,000 deaths related to vehicles in 2018.
 
And it’s not like this is all specific to 2018. The FBI’s page on 2018 deaths by weapons also includes 2014, ’15, ’16 and ‘17.
 
In every single year, there were far more deaths by all of the other weapons previously mentioned than by all types of rifles combined. In 2014, of only 7,803 total firearm deaths, only 235 came from rifles. In 2015, only 215 deaths came from rifles despite the fact that there were more total firearm deaths that year, at 9,103. In 2016, it ticked up a bit, with 300 rifle deaths, but still nowhere close to the total 10,372 firearm deaths that year and in 2017, there were 390 rifle deaths out of a total of 11,006 firearm deaths.
 
Every single year for the past 4 (recorded) years, there were far more deaths by handgun than any other type of gun, with rifles always competing with shotguns for the least amount of recorded deaths. And in every single one of those years, knives or other weapons in general were more used than rifles.
 
In 2014, 1,545 deaths came from knives or other bladed weapons. 431 came from blunted weapons and 668 came from personal (hands, feet, etc.) weapons. In 2015, 1,525 deaths came from bladed weapons, 436 from blunt weapons, and 647 from personal weapons.
 
In 2016, 1,558 deaths came from bladed weapons, 464 from blunt weapons and 664 from personal weapons. And finally, in 2017, 1,609 deaths came from bladed weapons, 472 from blunt weapons and 710 from personal weapons.
 
And yet, despite these numbers, rifles are the Left’s biggest target. Statistically speaking, it makes no sense. There are fare more dangerous and deadly weapons out there than rifles. But the Left’s objective isn’t to protect the people. It’s only to empower, enrich and protect themselves.
 
Like I’ve said in the past, the Left can only grow the government as far as the 2nd amendment will allow them. They can’t achieve the communist level of power they desire without first disarming the population. Every communist, socialist totalitarian in world history has understood their need to disarm the people. For a government to be totally unopposed, it cannot allow the risk of a revolution. The people can only be pushed so far before they rebel.
 
The people of Venezuela currently wish they hadn’t given up their guns to the government. An armed revolution is likely the only thing that can help the people of Venezuela to be free from the socialist regime of Nicolas Maduro.
 
And as I’ve said before, what is happening in Venezuela is what the American Left wants in the States, even if they don’t necessarily broadcast that to the people. The kind of power Maduro has is the kind of power the American Left salivates and strives for. This is the reason for their targeting of rifles, and it definitely wouldn’t end with just that.
 
So long as the people can defend themselves, the government’s ability to retain power is in some level of jeopardy. The Framers of the Constitution knew this and wrote the 2nd amendment knowing full-well what tyranny was like and what the threat of government on the God-given freedoms of mankind were.
 
Gun control advocacy, much like climate change alarmism, is not rooted in facts. Guns are heavily demonized when they shouldn’t be. Even taking the fact that most murders came from guns, 61% of all firearm related deaths in America came from suicide, with the rest being homicide, death by law enforcement (1.4%) or unintentional shootings (1.3%), according to the Giffords Law Center.
 
So the maligning that guns get is totally unjustified and the real target should be mental health and what people believe in.
 
Because let me tell you something: no Christian would ever even consider doing something like this – killing another person – unless it came in self-defense.
 
1 John 4:8
“Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.”
 
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.

Yesterday, I talked about a poll that said a good amount of people thought America’s best days were ahead of us, and that a good majority of people thought that if any changes were to be made to the Constitution, that they should further limit the power of the federal government, as opposed to giving it more power. Though I did not strictly mention this in that article, that is a very conservative ideology that is still shared amongst the majority of American voters.
 
Similarly, a recent Harvard/Harris poll showed that nearly three in four swing state voters, the kind that Democrats need to get in order to win elections, are against the idea of giving illegal immigrants driver’s licenses.
 
But wait, there’s more. It’s not just a policy that is rejected by swing voters. Across the country, and even across the political spectrum, the idea is widely rejected. According to the poll, 72% of all U.S. voters said they opposed the idea of giving illegals driver’s licenses, which includes 74% of swing voters, as mentioned previously, 85% of Republican voters, 73% of moderate voters and even almost 60% of Democrats.
 
Across racial lines, nearly 66% of African Americans oppose the idea of giving licenses to illegals, as well as 76% of whites, and 57% of Hispanics.
 
And it’s not like this was a small survey. The sample size exceeded 2500 registered voters, which is a pretty big sample size for a survey.
 
This just goes to show just how out-of-touch and divorced from reality the Democrat Party is in terms of the policies they espouse. Even in the state of New York, where they made it legal for illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses, 61% of New York voters opposed the idea, according to a Siena College poll from March 2018.
 
In that poll, 45% of Democrats opposed the idea of giving licenses to illegals, alongside 84% of GOP voters, 71% of swing voters, 73% of upstate residents, 60% of those in the working or middle class, 70% of Jewish New Yorkers, and 66% of Catholic New Yorkers.
 
Virtually every demographic is hugely opposed to the dangerous idea of giving licenses to illegal immigrants, which basically allows them to go to polling places and vote, even if they are not registered (and, of course, ARE NOT SOVEREIGN CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY).
 
Illegal immigration, and the fact that California has been giving illegals licenses since 2015, is what I think is a considerable part of the reason for the GOP to basically not exist in Commiefornia (as well as ballot harvesting and mysteriously finding more ballots with votes for the Democrat candidates after the polls closed).
 
Not that the Democrat Party cares one wit. If their policies aren’t popular with Americans, they’ll just import voters from Latin America, who are begging to come to the States and be taken care of by the government, and the Democrat Party is all-too happy to oblige them.
 
Like I have said multiple times in the past: their voting base is diminishing. They are pushing away longtime Democrat voters like union workers and working class white people in favor of illegal immigrants. They don’t care to get these people’s votes anymore because they can easily be replaced both in the job field and in the polls. As long as the Democrat Party has a permanent underclass that they can exploit and abuse, they don’t really care what most people think.
 
Back in May of this year, I shared an article talking about a poll that said that 90% of Venezuelans wanted Maduro ousted and for socialism to be eradicated in their country. Nine out of ten Venezuelans want a complete overhaul of their political and economic system. Do you think Maduro cares? NOT AT ALL!
 
He’s the guy in charge. So long as the military is on his side, he will be dictator in Venezuela until he dies, similar to Hugo Chavez. And after his death, an equally-socialist dictator will take his place. These people in power in Venezuela couldn’t give half a damn about what the people they rule over think. So long as their power is not at stake, they could not care less if almost 100% of Venezuelans hated their guts.
 
The same thing applies to the Democrats. It doesn’t matter if American voters disagree with a particular policy of the Democrat Party. Any policy that gives them more power is a policy they will fully embrace. And any person who disagrees with them will be cast out of the Party and replaced by either a brainwashed millennial or a family of illegal immigrants (and even some legal immigrants) seeking a hand-out.
 
The Democrat Party cares not for the environment, for women’s rights or freedom, for Latinos, for blacks, for minorities in general. They use all of these things to get as much power as they possibly can. Just look at the GND and the fact that AOC’s former chief of staff admitted that it wasn’t about climate change but economic change in America. All they care about is power and they will put on a face to fool people into following them and voting for them.
 
They claim to care for the illegal immigrants coming into the country. They do not, as evidenced by Obama putting them in cages. They only care about their ability to get these uneducated people to buy into everything the Democrats are selling. In the meantime, they can be put into ghettos and be forgotten until the next election.
 
These people thirst for power and are corrupted by it. Everywhere you see socialism, you see these people’s true colors. Maduro cares not for the people of Venezuela. Kim Jong-un cares not for the people of North Korea. Xi Jinping cares not for the people of China. The only difference between people like Maduro/Kim Jong-un/Xi Jinping and the Democrat Party in countries like the United States, or the ideological equivalents in Canada, the U.K., Germany, etc. is that Maduro, Kim Jong-un and Xi Jinping have enough power and stability in their power to not have to pretend to care about people.
 
Left-wing politicians in the States, in Canada and in Europe have to pretend that what they are doing is for the “greater good.” Communist dictators do not have to do that because they have all the power they can have.
 
This is the reality of the Left; this is who they are. They care only for themselves and their own power. They may say they care for other people, and they might actually believe they do, but at the end of the day, all that matters to them is how much power they have over the people they can rule over.
 
Illegal immigrants do not care for the American culture or way of life. This is something they share in common with the American Left. It’s a match made in Hell and these people should not be in charge of a lemonade stand, let alone entire cities, counties, states and the country.
 
Proverbs 29:2
“When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan.”
 
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 recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey shows us some rather disturbing news regarding our modern culture’s views regarding various subjects.
 
21 years ago, a “strong majority” of Americans said that principles of hard work, patriotism, commitment to religion and the goal of having children were all very important issues for them. But since then, three of the four have seen a considerable downturn.
 
Interestingly enough, hard work remains a top value, but the other three have all dropped considerably, with the numbers being driven down by younger and younger people.
 
In 1998, 59% said that having children was a top value. That’s down 16 points since then, to 43%, and considering multiple people are beginning to preach about having less children, or not having children at all in order to “save the environment”, I expect that number to continue dropping if that philosophy becomes a bit more mainstream.
 
As far as religion goes, in 1998, 62% said it was very important. Today, that number stands at 50%. Not a terrible number, per se, but a worrying trend, especially considering the implications it brings. This is part of the whole “turning away from God” issue I had been mentioning recently. We can’t ask God to bless America when America is turning its back to God, and as time goes on, the problem seems to only worsen. It is also why I have, time and time again, spoken about the need for another Christian revival.
 
Finally, patriotism also went down from 70% in 1998 to 61% today, a 9-point drop. Not quite as bad as the other two, but still not a good thing, particularly considering the downward trends.
 
And again, the biggest driver of this comes from younger generations. Only 42% of those aged 18-38 said that patriotism was very important. By comparison, almost 80% of those 55 and older said the same.
 
Less than a third of those aged 18-35 said religion was important in contrast to two-thirds of those who are 55 and older.
 
But one can’t really be surprised considering what exactly is being taught in schools. Democrats have had control of the education in this country for the past 50 years. As time has gone on, more and more radical Leftist ideologies began to be not only taught, but encouraged to be embraced by the students. Instead of simply teaching what The Communist Manifesto says and allow for students to critically think and discern whether any of it makes sense (which it doesn’t), it is embraced as Gospel and taught that the values held in that book are truthful and correct.
 
Instead of teaching both the theory of evolution and Creation in the classroom, only evolution is taught and is largely taught as being true and factual, when it isn’t. Now, personally, my 10th grade Biology teacher was fairly chill and mentioned that we didn’t necessarily have to believe the theory of evolution, but when the curriculum doesn’t teach any alternative to it, it leads students to only really believe in what is being taught, especially for students who are not taught other things by their parents.
 
When students no longer have to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, that leads them to not feel very much love for their country. It also doesn’t help that schools (and the media, but this begins in schools) demonize the flag as not being “inclusive” enough for everyone else, as though it’s supposed to be. The American flag represents American values. It’s obviously not going to represent Mexico or Guatemala or any other country (of which schools have no problem showing their flags). It also doesn’t help when America is generally taught as having “robbed the poor” in order to become as powerful as it is and is taught as being the “bad guys” in pretty much every affair it finds itself in.
 
And when God, the Bible, prayer and the Cross are all taken away from the classrooms, you find yourself being driven away from Him and focusing on the things of Man and not on the things of God. So is it any wonder we are seeing the numbers we are seeing?
 
Ben Shapiro writes that this is all largely a failure of education. That polls suggesting a rise in socialism, but with almost no one being able to define it apart from what Bernie Sanders says it is (which isn’t socialism at all), is largely a failure of education alongside the fact that there is no “evil empire” like the Soviet Union against which to contrast the virtues of capitalism against the failures of socialism. But there are two major problems with that take.
 
One, it’s not a FAILURE of education when the Left controls the education in this country and students are being led Left-ward. It’s exactly WHAT THEY WANTED TO ACCOMPLISH when they first set out to take over the education system in the early 1960s. It began with eliminating God from the classrooms and everything else followed. An America that hates itself and wishes for an entirely new system of economics and government, even if it can’t define it and even if when explained, they reject it (most people reject Medicare for All when told that it would raise the middle-class’ taxes and eliminate private health insurance), is what the Left wants. Because in that America, THEY get all the power and all the benefits and get to live like kings because they basically are. So this isn’t a failure in the education system. The system has worked exactly how it was supposed to so far, it’s just supposed to bring about all of this.
 
Second, while a bit more difficult to compare, there IS an evil empire out there: China. What’s more, the failures of socialism can be clearly seen in Venezuela and North Korea, which are what we often use to contrast capitalism and socialism. The problem comes in the fact that Venezuela and North Korea were never all that powerful to begin with and people say “that can’t possibly happen to us”, which is a fool’s argument. The way it’s happened in Venezuela and North Korea has happened in LITERALLY EVERY OTHER SOCIALIST COUNTRY EVER. First, take away the guns, then take away the rights and freedoms of some people, then everyone else’s, all-the-while nationalizing everything under the sun from energy production to the press, both of which are things Bernie Sanders is on record for wanting to do.
 
While China, Venezuela and North Korea generally aren’t put in the same spotlight as the Soviet Union, they are all notable socialist states that all show us the failures and dangers of socialism.
 
Capitalism isn’t being attacked because there is no other system out there to contrast it to or because there is no notable “bad guy” out there but because the Left HATES Capitalism and sees it as a threat to their socialist ideals. Owning children’s minds has a MASSIVE effect on the future of a nation. You own children’s minds, you own the future. The Left has known this for a very long time and has worked to own it for quite some time.
 
As it stands, there are really only two ways for this country to heal from the sort of damage currently happening. One, we wrestle away control of the education system from the communist Left. Easier said than done, for certain, but not impossible and something to at least try, in whatever way it might come.
 
And two, as I have said time and time again, including in this very article: we have another Christian revival. I don’t know when the Day of Judgement will occur, when the Rapture will happen, when God will say “enough” and destroy this world and all of its sin, but if that is not to happen for centuries or millennia, I don’t doubt there will eventually be another Christian revival. Whether America is still here or not by the time it happens, I also don’t know, but if there is any place that has the potential to have another one, it is here, particularly considering how many Christian revivals there have been in this country alone.
 
Having been founded with the principles it was, America has great potential to be home of multiple Christian revivals, even in the middle of social decay worldwide. While the evil Left might argue that our “true” founding was in 1619, we all know that our TRUE founding was in 1776, under the principles of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness all being inalienable rights given to us by our Creator.
 
This country’s founding is special and wonderful, much as the Left might try and say it isn’t. And while I would love to say that everything will be alright for this country and the Left will be thrown into the trash-heap of history, I do not know for certain what is to happen. Upon exiting the Constitutional Convention, Ben Franklin was asked what kind of country we would be after fighting for our liberty against England. Franklin said: “A Republic, if you can keep it.”
 
We have kept it thus far and we certainly CAN keep it moving forward, but freedom isn’t free and a Republic cannot be maintained if left on its own, undefended against opposition. This is why I say what I say: we must return to God as a nation in order for Him to bless us once again. We must fight against socialism and what would restrict our freedoms. We must ensure that information and education of truth, first God’s Truth and then the truth regarding socialism, is spread out like a wildfire.
 
Again, these things are easier said than done, particularly in an age when the Left also owns social media, and in a sense, people’s ability to communicate and express themselves. But if we are to keep our Republic as Ben Franklin said, we must do everything in our power to do so. And that power comes, first and foremost, from the Lord. Because if He is for us, who could possibly be against us?
 
Romans 8:31
“What then shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?”
 
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.

Eco-fascists love pointing the finger at anyone and everyone who could be deemed as bearing blame for any harm caused to the environment, and with the Amazon fires damaging the rain forest, they jumped at the story very quickly. But, as with many other stories, they jumped at it WAY too quickly.
 
Celebrities like Madonna, Cristiano Ronaldo and Leonardo DiCaprio, as well as foreign leaders like Emmanuel Macron have all peddled fake news regarding the Amazon fires. For example, French President Emmanuel Macron tweeted: “The Amazon rain forest – the lungs which produce 20% of our planet’s oxygen – is on fire.” Ronaldo peddled the same claim, saying it produces 20% of the world’s oxygen and DiCaprio (and Macron) both shared a photo of blazing fires destroying the Amazon… that’s 20 years old. CNN and the NYT also used the same term of “lungs of the world”, but denied that the cause was climate change (not that that matters to the eco-fascists).
 
So what is the truth? First, like the NYT said, this wasn’t caused by climate change. “Natural fires in the Amazon are rare, and the majority of these fires were set by farmers preparing Amazon-adjacent farmland for the next year’s crops and pasture. Much of the land that is burning was not old-growth rain forest, but land that had already been cleared of trees and set for agricultural use.” In other words, farmers are doing this to control pests, weeds and to encourage growth in pastures.
 
Second, the Amazon is not the “lungs” of the world. I came across conflicting information regarding the “20%” figure, with some sources saying it doesn’t produce 20% while others say it does. However, regardless of however much it produces, it also respirates it anyway. According to Amazon forest expert Dan Nepstad, “the Amazon produces a lot of oxygen but it uses the same amount of oxygen through respiration so it’s a wash.” Basically, it uses as much oxygen as it produces in a closed system, so to claim it’s “the lungs of the world” is a lie. In fact, Nepstad went on to say: “The Amazon produces a lot of oxygen, but so do soy farms and [cattle] pastures.”
 
Third, while the media and foreign politicians are wagging their fingers at Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro (who is a right-winger), they are blatantly ignoring the fact that there is also a wildfire raging in socialist Bolivia. Bolivian President Evo Morales has been very open about telling farmers that “it’s fine to set [fires] to gather charcoal to sell for fuel or clear the land of brush for planting.” The only real reason Bolsonaro is being attacked here is because he is a right-winger president. There have been a lot of fires in the Amazon over the years, yet this is the first time we’re hearing people attacking the Brazilian president for it.
 
Finally, while people are claiming that the Amazon fires are a “record high”, NASA declared that the fires are only “close to the average in comparison to the past 15 years.” There is nothing adamantly special about this year’s Amazon forest fires apart from the fact that Jair Bolsonaro is now President of Brazil and has been attacked by the media for not subscribing to their cult of doom and gloom surrounding climate change.
 
While 2019 has been the most active year for fires in the Amazon since 2010, what the media doesn’t mention is that “about ½ the years BEFORE 2019 are higher, and about ½ are lower,” according to Climate Depot. In other words, the 2019 fire is nothing particularly special throughout the last decade and is mostly a nothingburger being made into something more than what it is by eco-fascists who claim a particularly hot day is a sign of “climate change”.
 
And even then, the “hot days” aren’t particularly special either. According to the U.S. Climate Reference Network, there hasn’t been any warming in the U.S. dating back to 2005. What’s more, 2019 has been, on average, cooler than 2005.
 
The eco-fascist movement requires people to have really short, selective memory. They pretend that particularly hot days in the middle of SUMMER is somehow not right and an inherent threat to our planet and our very own lives. Ignore the data that shows us there’s nothing particularly special about any particular day or any particular record-high, you’re feeling hot, you’re feeling uncomfortable and it’s all capitalism’s fault.
 
The eco-fascist movement requires lazy people to do as little research as possible and just accept what is being told to them from the fake news media and little kids who think they know everything about the climate throwing the biggest temper tantrums since Trump became President. It requires as much disinformation as possible, which is why we see mentally-challenged celebrities like Madonna and DiCaprio showing pictures of an Amazon forest fire FROM 20 YEARS AGO.
 
As I’m sure you’ve noticed, I’m calling these people “eco-fascists”. The reason being that it’s entirely accurate. Calling them “environmentalists” doesn’t sound proper enough. These people are every bit as fascistic as Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong, etc. They use the argument of climate change in order to gain more and more power for themselves.
 
It’s why AOC’s former chief of staff noted that the GND wasn’t really about fighting climate change but about changing the entire economy of the United States. In other words, changing the U.S. from a capitalist-based economy to a socialist-based one.
 
The issue of climate change can cover pretty much every single issue. From abortion to religion to gun violence to poverty to immigration, climate change can be infused into every single argument, which is why Democrats say illegals are “environmental refugees”.
 
These people are the very definition of an eco-fascist, and as such, I believe they deserve to be called that way. We all know they love to use the word “fascist” against Trump and anyone who disagrees with them. Let’s see how they like it when the word is used against them.
 
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.

If colleges are where education and logic go to die, a college’s Women’s and Gender Studies program is the River Styx for logic. So it comes as no surprise to me that an NYU Women’s and Gender Studies program released a paper in which it suggested the breeding and milking of cows is the same thing as rape and sexual abuse.
 
The paper reads as follows: “Throughout our lives, we are offered an idealized image of dairy cows where these animals graze on beautiful pastures, have room to sow and play, and are comforted in spacious areas in which to sleep. We are presented with images of a life well lived, but when it comes to the deaths of those same animals, the picture-perfect story comes to a grim reality.”
 
“The outdated stereotype about women being caretakers and most importantly child bearers remains consistent in the dairy industry, especially when we take into account the means through which these animals are exploited. A few brief examples include rape or sexual assault, nonconsensual hormone treatments, and emotional trauma related to pregnancy. Dairy cows are forcibly impregnated, or raped, in order to constantly produce milk for humans to consume.”
 
“The dairy industry is a host for sex-based discrimination. It is a site where sexual assault and objectification based on biological makeup are highly prevalent but ignored as we choose to neglect non-humans with whom we share a planet.”
 
The author concludes: “While we fight against the sexual abuse of women, why are we still allowing the same treatment to be thrust upon other living bodies when there are other, more sustainable ways to live that do not involve harming millions of female bodies? With simple lifestyle changes that promote reproductive justice towards animals available to many, why are we picking and choosing which pots of capitalism, sexism, and patriarchy to stir, when we could dismantle it all?”
 
I apologize sincerely for all of the brain cells you just lost reading this Marxist garbage, but please consider I had to read it multiple times and write it out myself, so I came up with the short end of the stick here.
 
While this piece reads like a hotbed of communist talking points, from suggesting something is rape when it isn’t to ordering people to eat differently to even bringing up capitalism and asserting we “dismantle it all”, I would briefly like to cover some of the “arguments” made in this dumpster fire of a “research paper”.
 
First, addressing the “outdated stereotype” of women being caretakers and child bearers, it is not a stereotype whatsoever. Historically, women have been caretakers of children and that still happens today. Ideally, the wife stays at home with the kids while the husband goes to work. Often times, that doesn’t happen, with the wife also working and leaving the children to be taken care of by a babysitter (and anyone wonders why so many people are blaming the previous generations for crap when the parents of these young people largely left them with babysitters because the moms CHOSE to prioritize their careers over their own children because they’ve been told it’s “harmful” for women to stay at home with the kids).
 
And as far as child-bearing being a “stereotype”, exactly which of the other gender is capable of bearing a child? The male gender? Or the male gender? Perhaps the male gender? MEN CAN’T HAVE CHILDREN, ONLY WOMEN CAN! To suggest it’s a stereotype that women are child bearers is utterly moronic, as only women can be child bearers.
 
Second, breeding animals isn’t rape. Animals can’t give consent to anything. They mate whether man forces them to or not. So why is it rape when a farmer breeds cows or other animals but not when the animals do it themselves? And that’s only when they mate normally. Animals like sea otters, bottlenose dolphins and other animals have been recorded to perpetuate what us humans would call rape, gang rape, pedophilia, necrophilia and other things. Sea otters, for example, have been recorded literally raping baby seals to death and sometimes continue even after the baby seal has died. Bottlenose dolphins have been recorded to rape other animals like porpoises (small, toothed whales), as well as forming gangs of dolphins to “kidnap” and rape female and even sometimes male dolphins.
 
But sure, breeding a female for the purposes of making more animals to grow and profit from is apparently tantamount to rape.
 
Finally, when the author writes about dismantling capitalism, sexism and patriarchy in a paper about ANIMAL RAPE, the author loses what little credibility she may have had. She was basically interjecting her own political ideologies that would’ve belonged on a Facebook post into an official research paper to be studied. And anyone wonders why Women’s and Gender Studies programs are a massive joke?
 
But do you want to know the worst part? Aside from the massive waste of time and IQ points it took READING the b.s. paper, to suggest that breeding and milking of cows is tantamount to rape and sexual abuse SERIOUSLY undermines and trivializes actual cases of sexual abuse.
 
As I was going through topics to cover, I checked The Daily Wire, which I often times do. Almost side by side, I saw two stories: this one about the research paper and one about sexual assault and abuse cases happening in various Boys & Girls Club of America facilities throughout the last half century. Prior to reading the moronic piece, I chose to read some of the cases detailed by the Connecticut Post, where The Daily Wire got their information to write their piece.
 
The cases included cases of rape, statutory rape, molestation, forceful impregnation and all-around pedophilia. In-all, over roughly 70 years, there were 95 cases of sexual assault reported, all of which the Connecticut Post has links to. The cases vary from civil cases, criminal cases or both. In many, the actual Boys & Girls Club didn’t share any of the blame for it, but there were cases where a DIRECTOR of a local Club would groom and sexually abuse and assault young boys ages 7-12 and was NEVER FIRED, but became MAYOR OF SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO IN 1982.
 
Hundreds of children were sexually assaulted and/or abused either in Boys & Girls Clubs or by staff members of the Boys & Girls Clubs. To completely seriously and unironically suggest that MILKING AND BREEDING FARM ANIMALS IS AKIN TO RAPE AND SEXUAL ABUSE IS AN INSULT TO ACTUAL VICTIMS OF THIS!
 
That garbage paper SPITS IN THE FACES of actual sexual abuse and assault victims. Not that anyone on the Left cares, of course. The comrades at NYU’s Women’s and Gender Studies program did their part in the revolution against capitalism, and that’s all that matters. Who cares if their points are ridiculous at best and insulting at worst? Who cares if they literally make no sense? They help spread the ever-so-important message that animals are more important than (most) people and we must continue to attack capitalism at every turn.
 
At NFL games? Kneel for the capitalist flag. On late night “comedy” shows? Bash the capitalist president. In video games? Bash the capitalist hicks. In t.v. shows and movies? Bash and push for a fantasy of hunting down and murdering capitalist pigs. Every medium and every aspect of life has to have politics, specifically Left-wing politics, injected into it in order to fight against capitalism.
 
If actual sexual abuse victims get caught in the crossfire, that’s fine.
 
This is the sickening and evil mentality of the Left. They have claimed everything and everyone is racist, so that term has lost its power (to the point they’re now switching to a fancy new term: white supremacist… until that gets used to the point of irrelevancy). They’ve claimed Right-wingers are Nazis for years, so that has lost its luster. Similarly, sexual abuse and assault will be so over-used that actual cases of it will be overlooked and taken as the norm instead of as disturbing and horrifying as they should be.
 
The Left literally ruins everything it touches. They’re like the anti-Midas of politics. Entertainment and comedy have been subdued and making risqué jokes will get people “cancelled”. Pretty much everything the Left touches gets turned to utter crap.
 
In doing this, sexual assault victims – actual ones – will be largely ignored or overlooked. When everything is a crisis, nothing is. And the souls subjected to it have no one to reach out to but to God, because Man no longer cares.
 
Ephesians 5:11
“Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

On Wednesday, there were two stories largely being talked about: a man in Philadelphia shooting at cops, wounding 6 of them; and economic news that supposedly spelled doom and gloom and would lead us into a recession (which didn’t happen, but the Left is trying to see if they can take away Trump’s best weapon, the economy, by causing a recession which they will blame on him).
 
However, the media has largely stopped talking about at least the first thing for a couple of reasons.
 
But before I get to those reasons, allow me to give you the context of the situation.
 
The Philadelphia Inquirer reports: “The standoff [between officers and the suspect] began Wednesday about 4:30 p.m. when a Narcotics Strike Force unit attempted to serve a search warrant at a house on the 3700 block of North 15th Street.” After the suspect began to fire at the officers, the suspect and Philadelphia PD were engaged in a seven-hour-long standoff which ended once the suspect surrendered himself after calling his lawyer “in a panic”, who suggested he should surrender.
 
Following the incident, the suspect’s lawyer, Shaka Johnson, told CBS that his client would likely be charged with 6 counts of attempted murder and aggravated assault against the police officers.
 
But this is hardly the first time the suspect had any sort of run-in with the law.
 
The suspect has a lengthy criminal record dating back to 2001, when he was 18 years old and was arrested for possessing a gun with an altered serial number.
 
The Philadelphia Inquirer takes note of the suspect’s lengthy criminal history:
 
“Public records show that he has been arrested about a dozen times since turning 18, and convicted six times on charges that involved illegal possession of guns, drug dealing, and aggravated assault. He has been in and out of prison; the longest sentence handed him came in 2010, when a federal judge gave him a 55-month term. And, his record would indicate, he does not like to go to prison. In 2008, he was convicted of escaping, fleeing from police, and resisting arrest. Along the way, he beat criminal charges on everything from kidnapping to attempted murder.”
 
That aforementioned 2010 sentence came from pleading guilty in 2008 to illegally possessing a Smith & Wesson .357 (a classic revolver) and a Taurus PT .45 semiautomatic handgun. In 2013, he was convicted of perjury and given 7 years probation, but continued racking up more charges such as evading police officers and endangering civilians on an unregistered scooter, but those charges were eventually acquitted. In 2014, he was arrested on charges of drug possession and false imprisonment but also beat those charges as well.
 
The Inquirer also reports that: “According to court filings, his accuser told police she had agreed to sell marijuana for [the suspect] but then later changed her mind. When he summoned her to his house on the 6900 block of Greenway Street in Southwest Philadelphia days later, she says, she overheard [the suspect] and an associate discussing killing her. Fearful for her life, the woman said, she called 911. When officers arrived, she fled as [the suspect] and his associate hid the crack cocaine and marijuana in a tire out back. Investigators discovered 83 grams of marijuana.”
 
Due to the suspect’s lengthy criminal history involving several charges with illegal gun and drug possessions, as well as other things, it is safe to say that this story does not suit the Left’s narrative. The guy was involved in a standoff against the police officers, wounding 6 of them (though we have to thank God that none were killed), when he is one of those people who absolutely should not have a firearm and it is illegal for them to have one.
 
The suspect carried on a seven-hour-long standoff, obviously with firearms, but it’s pretty obvious not a single gun control law being discussed would’ve kept this from happening.
 
This is the reason the media and Leftist politicians often talk about gun control so soon after, or even during, a shooting occurs. Because once more information comes out and it’s discovered that the shooter should not have had said weapon or it was illegal for them to have one, the Left’s opportunity to push their anti-Second Amendment agenda is gone.
 
2020 Democrat candidate Kamala Harris went on CNN DURING THE PHILADELPHIA SHOOTING to push gun control policies BEFORE THE INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE THAT NO GUN CONTROL POLICY WOULD’VE PREVENTED THIS! The reason for this is, again, because they have a small window of opportunity to push this crap.
 
And often times, once enough time passes and more information is made available, you have situations where the MSM or even politicians admit that no gun control legislation would’ve prevented any particular shooting.
 
Following the El Paso and Dayton shootings, CNN admitted no gun control policy would’ve prevented them. Following the Las Vegas shooting (of which we still know pretty little about), Diane Feinstein also admitted no gun control legislation would’ve prevented that shooting, which was the single deadliest shooting in U.S. history, taking 58 people’s lives.
 
As far as this shooting standoff goes, the guy is legally incapable of purchasing weapons. And yet, he had them to fire at police officers serving a search warrant. No amount of gun control would’ve prevented this shooting; no amount of gun control would’ve made it illegaler for him to get weapons, and so, the media doesn’t talk about it because there is no point.
 
They follow the Rahm Emanuel dogma of “never let a tragedy go to waste”. If there is a reported shooting happening, talk about it immediately, facts be damned, and ignore it completely if it’s no longer opportunistic. A good example of this is when there were reports of a shooting at Oregon State University and Hillary Clinton’s VP pick, Tim Kaine, immediately started talking about gun control. It later turned out that the attack was a knife attack, not a shooting, and no one cared from that moment on.
 
So now that enough time has passed for us to know more details surrounding the situation, we know for certain that no gun control measure would’ve prevented this from happening at all, so the media is moving on to other things.
 
But that’s not the only reason they don’t particularly care about this. That’s a major reason, yes, but not the only one.
 
The other reason they don’t care is because of who the target was: police officers.
 
The media can’t shed crocodile tears when they’ve been demonizing police officers for years. They can cry crocodile tears for children in schools or minority victims in Walmart, but not for the people they’ve been virtually at war with: cops.
 
For the past few years, any incident involving a white police officer and a black suspect that resulted in the suspect’s unfortunate death has led the police to be called “racist” for it. Take the example of Michael Brown. The Left claims he was “murdered” but he himself tried to assault and steal a cop’s weapon, presumably to use it against the cops. This was where the “hands up, don’t shoot” hoax came to exist because the Left, to this day, claims he was unjustly shot at when he begged the cops not to shoot him, even though that’s not at all what happened.
 
That hoax, alongside others like it, have led to organizations like Black Lives Matter forming up to “fight back” against the cops, who are in the right in these kinds of situations for the most part (though there are some times when the cops unjustly fired at unarmed suspects). The BLM movement was heralded by the Left and the media as a great thing and further demonized the police, leading to the Dallas police shooting of 2016, where 5 police officers were killed “as payback”, according to Dallas Police Chief.
 
That shooting also was not very widely covered by the MSM because the target were cops and because the motive was revenge against cops.
 
After years of demonizing all police officers for the actions of a few (who for the most part were justified in the actions they partook), when shooters target police officers, the media barely cares about it, apart from trying to spread gun control propaganda within the first few hours of learning about it.
 
The combination of the story not benefiting the Left and the target being police officers leads to the media not really caring one wit about the incident. And the demonizing of police officers leads to CITIZENS OF A CITY TO TAUNT AND HARASS THE POLICE OFFICERS WHO JUST GOT DONE DEALING WITH THE STANDOFF!
 
After Philadelphia police got done taking care of the suspect and arresting him, Philadelphia citizens were seen taunting and harassing officers, some of whom almost got into a fight with some officers and some who threw unidentified objects at the officers.
 
Do you think the officers would’ve received such hatred coming from (granted, only some) people in that city if police weren’t so routinely attacked as being racist?
 
The same really could be said of ICE facilities and workers. Earlier in the week, ICE facilities were outright SHOT AT and no one in the media talked about it at all.
 
When the target of gun violence is someone the media hates, they have no intention on pretending to be shocked or disturbed by it. They LOVE IT when cops get attacked like this. They LOVE IT when domestic terror organizations like ANTIFA attack people they perceive to be “alt-right” aka people they disagree with. They LOVE IT when ICE officers, who are often compared to the Nazi SS, get attacked and targeted.
 
They LOVE IT when lunatic politicians like AOC call ICE detention facilities “concentration camps” and when those facilities are subsequently attacked by people who believe that crap.
 
As long as the target is someone the Left hates, they have no problem with gun violence. They only care in as far as they can try and push more gun control legislation that would take LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS’ WEAPONS FROM THEM.
 
Because to reiterate, there is not one piece of gun control legislation that would’ve prevented this situation in Philly. The guy is not legally allowed to possess or own a firearm, and yet, that’s what he had. Wanna know why? BECAUSE CRIMINALS DON’T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT WHAT THE LAW SAYS, THAT’S WHY THEY’RE CRIMINALS!
 
I sound like a broken record saying that over and over again, but the Left is adamant about not caring about that sort of logic. And it’s not like they are that moronic, they know that criminals don’t care about the law. It’s just that they don’t care about the criminals. They know they can’t do anything about illegal weapons, but they can try to take away yours. If they can get away with getting rid of the 2nd Amendment and take away your guns, they can throw away the entire rest of the Constitution and fully turn this country into the communist state that they want.
 
So long as the people are armed, there is a limit as to how far the Left can go to the left. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Soviet Russia, Communist China, Socialist Venezuela, all had to disarm their citizens in order for them to be fully in control and without opposition. That’s the aim of the American Left and that’s why they always have knee-jerk reactions whenever a shooting happens, so that they can further that goal.
 
According to a recent Rassmussen poll, 64% of likely U.S. voters say we need stricter gun control laws, even though they also admit that gun control won’t stop all mass shootings like the ones in El Paso and Dayton. This is what fuels traitorous Republicans to push for more gun control legislation and foolishly support “red flag” laws (yes, I know Trump says he supports this too, which if he does, is a disappointment and I heavily disagree with him, but I have my doubts that he really does support it). The people are being told by the Left that gun control is a good thing when it’s at least part of the reason we are where we are today.
 
Places like Chicago, Detroit, L.A., etc. have heavy gun control legislations in place and yet are some of the deadliest places in the country.
 
But that sure as Hell doesn’t matter to the Left, who run those places. For as much as they talk about being worried about gun violence, the Left doesn’t talk about Chicago an awful lot. That’s because that mess is entirely theirs to own, and since they can’t broadcast that their gun control agenda is literally counterintuitive to the goals they claim they have, they ignore it like math homework.
 
The Left’s ultimate goal is to fundamentally change this country, as was admitted by Bernie Sanders very recently. In order to do that, they have to take away our guns so that we can’t fight back against them and revolt.
 
And while I know there will be moronic Leftists who will argue “how are AR-15s going to help you against tanks and helicopters?”, allow me to refer you to the Vietnam War, the War of 1812 and the Revolutionary War. All examples of a massive military being beaten by relatively small rebels (except Vietnam, where the Soviets largely helped the North Vietnamese in what really was a conflict between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. but localized). According to a Pew Research survey from 2017, 42% of people live in a household with a gun and 30% currently own a gun themselves.
 
Let’s go with the smaller number of 30% of people who own a gun. The U.S. currently has a population of 327.2 million people. That means there are at least 98 million gun owners in America (relatively speaking, I imagine there are more now since 2017 was some time ago).
 
That’s 98 million people vs. the roughly 2 million soldiers the U.S. currently has either in active duty or in reserve (and of course, I imagine many American soldiers would leave the military if the U.S. faced an anti-communist revolution, but there could be those on the Left who would wish to join the military in turn, so let’s assume the number is roughly the same anyway). Even if a small percentage of those gun owners were to be willing to fight against a tyrannical government (exercising the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment), that’s still an awful lot of patriots for the military to fight against. And before you talk about the military being more organized, which they would be, allow me to refer you to the Goths, who were a band of raiders and barbarians who sacked Rome in 410 and were a terrifying force in ancient Europe.
 
So the best way for the Left to truly turn this country into a socialist one is to, at the very least, disarm Americans, as they are trying to do with “assault weapons” bans that really seek to ban any semiautomatic weapon they can.
 
In order to achieve that, they have to insist to the American people that things like the Philly shooting could have been prevented with more gun control, even if it eventually turns out that nothing of the sort would’ve happened.
 
The Left and the media never let a tragedy go to waste. Any shooting at all makes them happy because it allows them to spread b.s. to further their communist goals. But when a story no longer benefits them, such as the one in Philly, they drop it entirely and pretend nothing substantial happened. “If cops got shot at, who cares, they were probably racist anyway”, is their line of logic.
 
Finally, to reiterate a point I made in my article discussing what Oprah Winfrey thought about the El Paso and Dayton shootings, until we return to God, these things will only continue happening. People will target others for any given reason until we return to God as a nation.
 
Galatians 3:9
“So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.”
 
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 isn’t often that I talk about what is happening in China. For the most part, I either talk about some Chinese Millennials not having the desire to worship Xi Jinping as their communist god, or talk about how the ChiComms have no real chance in a trade war with us when our economy is roaring like it is. However, given that there currently are protests happening in Hong Kong, I feel the need to emphasize something that I find rather amusing.
 
During the protests, a number of Hong Kong protesters (though far from a large number) have chosen to fly the American flag in protest to the Chinese extradition bill directed at Hong Kong which would undermine their freedoms and the city-state’s democracy.
 
The American-flag-flying protesters issued relatively similar, though fairly different responses as to the reason behind flying the Stars and Stripes. According to the Asia Times, one person explained he was flying the American flag to “urge the U.S. Congress to pass the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act as soon as possible.” The mentioned bill would, if passed, impose sanctions “on individuals from the mainland and the city-state who violated human rights and require the U.S. government to annually review whether Hong Kong is democratic enough to merit lucrative U.S. trade privileges not afforded to the rest of China,” according to TownHall.com
 
Another protester insisted the reason he was flying the American flag was so that the Chinese government would be infuriated enough to employ military action against the protesters and get the U.S. to, in turn, take more concrete, likely military, action against China.
 
Truth be told, I have a bit of a problem with that second reason. I don’t think it’d be a good idea to risk the lives of other protesters, risking them getting either imprisoned or outright executed, just to advance your own goals. That is pretty much one step below Leninist revolution, ironically. What’s more, I am not sure the U.S. would actually do anything militarily if the Chinese were to do that. The Venezuelan government has had a Gestapo-like police force in place for two years now, where they arrest, humiliate and/or execute those whom the government deems to be in opposition to the Maduro regime and the U.S. isn’t doing anything militarily about it (not that I’d want us to at the moment). We are implementing more and more sanctions on Venezuela, but not much more than that. Trump doesn’t want an unnecessary war.
 
So to hope for American military action in response to Chinese military action against its own protesters is unwise. Even if the Chinese were to take action against the protesters in that manner, as long as the Chinese don’t attack us, the U.S. won’t see much of a reason to act through military force, especially considering that taking such force could lead to a larger conflict, maybe even a third World War. And considering Trump wants to get reelected, getting us into World War III would not help him out (and he would be blamed for starting it, even if it were not necessarily the case).
 
Now, funny enough, the fact that some protesters were flying the American flag has led to a spokesperson for China’s foreign minister to make the claim that America has something to do with the protests. Hua Chunying, spokesperson for China’s foreign minister, said: “I hope the U.S. will answer this question honestly and clearly: what role did the U.S. play in the recent incidents in Hong Kong and what is your purpose behind it?... We advise the U.S. to withdraw its dirty hands from Hong Kong as soon as possible.”
 
Can’t say I’m surprised that the brainwashed communists are asserting, without evidence, that the U.S. is in any way involved with the protests. However, reality is far different from what the ChiComms are suggesting. One protester insisted that he is “just expressing myself, I’m not paid by anyone. The Chinese government wants to attribute [protests] to foreigners, not to Hong Kong people.”
 
Not that that will matter much to the ChiComms, of course. Even if the U.S. were to send the ChiComms a message answering their ridiculous allegation, they would probably misinterpret something and claim the U.S. was admitting fault, considering this literally happened in early 2001 when the Chinese received a letter from the U.S. saying they offered their condolences to a Chinese pilot’s family when the pilot’s plane collided with a U.S. spy plane, leading to his death, but the U.S. did not outright apologize for the incident, saying it was not their fault. Still, Chinese translators misinterpreted the sentiments expressed to the pilot’s family as a form of apology to the ChiComms.
 
In any case, it should be noted that the U.S. flag is far from the only flag that the protesters have flown. In conjunction, the protesters have also flown a flag with a white orchid on a red background, signifying democracy and peace in the city-state, as well as Britain’s Union Jack and the flag that was used when Hong Kong belonged to Britain. One protester, according to the Japan Times, said: “I miss the British-Hong Kong government before 1997. The British helped us build a lot of things: separation of powers, our rule of law, our entire social system.”
 
Even the Brits themselves responded to the protests, saying: “We stand behind the people of Hong Kong in defense of the freedoms that we negotiated for them when we agreed to the handover in 1997 and we can remind everyone that we expect all countries to honor their international obligations,” said Jeremy Hunt, then-foreign secretary of the British government, when he spoke to Reuters early last month.
 
Still, I have no idea as to why the British government decided to let the ChiComms have Hong Kong, even under the agreements they reached. I understand that Hong Kong was to be left alone in its governance, for the most part, but considering the Chinese government is run by LITERAL COMMUNISTS, I’m surprised no one saw this extradition bill as a possibility in the future. Of course they would eventually try and attempt a communist, if legislative, takeover of Hong Kong! I don’t think there is much the British would be able to do against the Chinese in such a case, apart from announcing their disagreement to it!
 
But in any case, what’s done is done. One can only hope that the protesters succeed (if at all possible) in their bid to keep Hong Kong from being completely under communist control. Personally, I will stand with the protester who urged Congress to pass the aforementioned bill. If, indeed, it can do something to keep the ChiComms from taking over Hong Kong, I see no reason for the bill not to pass (then again, considering just who is running the House right now, I’m not entirely certain that it would pass there).
 
Liberty is always worth fighting for and I hope and pray for the best for these protesters. The fact they are waving the American flag is only more endearing to me.
 
Galatians 5:13
“For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.”
 
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.

Over the past couple of years, we have heard plenty of the supposedly anti-fascist group called Antifa using violence and intimidation to advance a political agenda. And despite that literally being the definition of terrorism, we have seen the mainstream media defend this domestic terrorist group time and time again, saying they are “angels” and lying about their repeated use of cement-laden milkshakes that they throw at people and cause harm to them.
 
However, as time has gone on, and particularly as one Antifa member tried to destroy and cause harm to ICE agents and vehicles a few weeks ago, Sens. Ted Cruz and Bill Cassidy have proposed a resolution that would label the group as an official domestic terrorist organization. Definitely the right thing to do, as I have explained in the past, but Campus Reform wanted to get the input of some college students, specifically those attending George Mason University, regarding the actual labeling of the radical Leftist group as being a domestic terrorist organization.
 
When Cabot Phillips and his associate, Gabriel Nadales, whom used to be an Antifa member himself, explained the definition of terrorism to the students, all of them said they thought Antifa is a terrorist organization.
 
One student, when asked if Antifa was a terrorist organization under the aforementioned definition, said: “I think if they’re starting violence and things… at Trump’s rallies then I think so because people get hurt… people get killed. Those rallies can get very dangerous, so if people are going there with the purpose to incite violence, I think that’s definitely a terrorist organization.”
 
This is a sentiment that all the students shared: if the purpose of Antifa’s presence in any particular place is to intimidate or incite violence, or actually commit violent acts, then they definitely fall under the category of terrorist organization.
 
Obviously, this isn’t to say that all of these students are conservatives or Trump supporters by any means. One of them specifically mentioned how she doesn’t support Trump but that violence wasn’t the answer here, and another mentioned how Antifa reflects poorly on Leftists like himself. However, what this shows me is their ability to reason and understand when a group is doing the wrong thing, even if they politically agree with said group.
 
If the situations were reversed and there was a right-wing group that would intimidate people and incite violence or commit violent acts, there’s no doubt in my mind that virtually every common-sense conservative would disavow such a group. So I would certainly hope that young liberals such as some of the ones featured in the Campus Reform video (it’s unclear the political leanings of some others, but one made an interesting observation that I will cover later) would have the rational capacity to understand how Antifa is a domestic terrorist organization under the definition of terrorism.
 
We can disagree all day long about whether or not they are actually the ones who are fascist (they are, but the Left has brainwashed almost everyone into believing fascism is a right-wing ideology, when anything that relates to big government stems strictly from the Left), but there should really be no disagreement about Antifa being terrorists. The only ones who would disagree are the Antifa members themselves who will explode and try and intimidate or commit a violent act on someone who disagrees with them at any capacity and perhaps the MSM and the elected Left, who see Antifa as their military arm like the KKK once was.
 
But as far as these college students go, they demonstrate more common sense than I tend to see in the media and in Washington D.C., for the most part.
 
Now, one of them initially disagreed with the notion that they are a domestic terrorist organization, but upon having explained to him what the definition of terrorism was, he couldn’t help but to ultimately agree that if that is what Antifa is doing (which it is, very much so), then they are definitely a terrorist organization.
 
This is important to note because for just about every other student, Phillips or Nadales started their dialogue by defining what terrorism was, but not with this particular student. So if this student, having originally been ignorant about the definition of terrorism, didn’t think Antifa ought to be considered a domestic terrorist organization, then I just have to wonder what these other students, or even other people in general, would say about it being equally ignorant about the definition. Without the definition of terrorism, would people say that Antifa ought to be considered a terrorist organization?
 
But this only further expresses the need to educate the masses. When people don’t have correct information in front of them, they will take what deceitful people say as the truth and as fact. Man-made climate change is a huge example of this, despite all the evidence showing us that climate change has been a thing ever since the planet was created and there is nothing we are doing that affects it positively or negatively, people are convinced we are killing our planet. Granted, part of this is an emotional attachment to the idea of “saving the planet” and a fearful response to the idea that we might be responsible for the death of our planet and our children will have to live with the consequences, but when an objective and logical person gets the facts on this, they will tend to understand how much of a farce man-made climate change is.
 
But getting back to the students, I was pleasantly surprised to see them agree that, given the definition of terrorism, Antifa ought to be considered a domestic terrorist organization. Of course, there will be those who, despite knowing the definition, will contend that they shouldn’t be considered as such because that would essentially be putting them on a similar level to ISIS and al-Qaeda, but all I have to say to that is: “Do we really want to wait until they commit massive terrorist attacks with bombs and guns – wait until they start killing people – to call them terrorists? One of them literally tried to assault an ICE facility with a gun and Molotov cocktails, so it’s not like things are being de-escalated here.”
 
Most logical people will understand what ought to be considered a terrorist organization, and considering what Antifa has been doing fits the definition to a tee, I perhaps shouldn’t be so surprised to see these college students agreeing as to what their label ought to be.
 
But in any case, I promised I would get to a particular observation, and that’s what I will do now.
 
Towards the end of the video, the first student that had been featured went on to make the following remark: “Fascism. I mean, it’s not like we had a revolution. President Obama was President, we had an election, and now we have a new President. The government didn’t change. The whole concept of fascism, that’s ridiculous… it’s like comparing Trump to Hitler. It’s impolite, rude. It’s not the right words.”
 
This is rather interesting to me because it poses a direct challenge to what Antifa *claims* to stand for. Antifa insist that Trump is basically Hitler, that he is a fascist and every single person who disagrees with them in any way is also a fascist. But the student is right, it is ridiculous. Trump was elected President of the United States fair and square. Despite the two and a half years of investigations and allegations about Trump-Russia collusion, absolutely nothing turned up to even insinuate that that’s what happened. The American people elected Donald Trump. As he said, this wasn’t a revolution, at least in terms of an armed coup against the Obama administration. It was the exchanging of power from one Party to another, as it has happened TIME AND TIME AGAIN IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY!
 
The way Antifa acts, it’s as though Trump came into power illegitimately and is preparing to exterminate millions of minorities, when nothing could be further from the truth. Antifa cries out that Trump is authoritarian and dictatorial, yet support candidates who are far-Left, to the point where they either are openly socialistic or communistic. No government on Earth has ever been more authoritarian than a government ruled by communism, because communism means that the government owns the means of production. In other words, the government owns just about everything and there is no private ownership of anything.
 
Antifa’s hypocrisy is, of course, their most tolerable aspect, considering how violent and extremist they are. There are plenty of hypocrites. The Left and much of the Republican Party are filled with them. Hypocrites, I can tolerate. Dislike heavily, but tolerate. People who would openly commit acts of terror against other people, for whatever cause, is something none of us should tolerate. And we shouldn’t wait until they start killing people to designate them as a domestic terrorist group, particularly considering they perfectly fit the definition of the word “terrorism”.
 
Major props go to Sens. Ted Cruz and Bill Cassidy for standing up to such hateful terrorists. Here’s hoping their resolution succeeds.
 
Romans 2:9-11
“There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality.”
 
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.