I find it difficult to say that the Left can get any lower. That would be to insinuate that they have not hit rock-bottom. Well, they’ve hit rock-bottom and somehow continue to dig further down.
 
An article by PJ Media brings to light some horrendous things Planned Parenthood is doing… aside from leading the world in infanticide.
 
The article is titled: “Parents Stage Walkout Over Planned Parenthood’s Graphic, Violent Sex Ed in Public Schools.”
 
Upon learning just what these sick people are teaching children in schools, you’d want your child to stay home from school as well.
 
The article begins: “Sex education in public schools has gone off the deep end. Gone are the days of handing out birth control and practicing putting condoms on bananas. These days your kid is more likely to come away from school with more sexually deviant knowledge than single gay dudes in New York City have thanks to Planned Parenthood’s comprehensive sex ed program that has somehow made it into public school curriculums. These programs teach dangerous and violent practices like BDSM, asphyxiation, gender-bending, anal sex, and let’s not forget ‘rimming,’ which can saddle your kid with nasty parasitic infections.”
 
Now, I won’t tell you what each of these things mean, lest I corrupt good people’s minds, but these are all pretty terrible things to teach in school. Some of these things are fairly self-explanatory as to what they mean and the others I shall leave you to make the decision of finding out on your own. But upon knowing what they all mean, you’ll likely gag in disgust not only at the fact that these things exist, but more importantly, that they are being taught to CHILDREN!
 
The article continues: “Planned Parenthood has already been caught on video by Live Action advising a girl they think is 15 years old to allow her boyfriend to beat, whip, and gag her.”
 
Even more horrendous than teaching them about it is to invite them to PARTICIPATE in these activities, albeit by taking away the actual “sex” from it.
 
And the irony is not lost on me, though it may be lost on these Leftists, that recently, the Left has been “preaching” about treating women right and not taking advantage of them and would still be willing to subject a teenage girl, who’s a MINOR, in partaking in BDSM with her boyfriend.
 
You must truly be sick in the mind to do something like that. Both partaking in BDSM and encouraging a teenage couple to participate in it.
 
Now, there is some bit of good news to come of this. Not from PP or the Left themselves, of course. They are sick, disturbed people. No, the good news comes from concerned parents, as the title of the PJ Media article suggests.
 
The article quotes organizers of the walkout, called Sex Ed Sit Out: “On April 23rd, parents around the nation will be pulling their children out of school for the day in protest of dangerous and graphic sex education and uniting at various locations to hold press events and field media questions.”
 
Rhonda Miller, Education chairwoman of the Indiana Liberty Coalition and one of the organizers of this protest made a very good and interesting point: “Follow the money. Comprehensive sex ed is being rolled out across America, often sponsored by special interest LGBT groups like Human Rights Campaign, and disguised as anti-bullying programs. If it’s not okay for special interest groups like the NRA to be buying classroom time to push their agenda, then how is it okay for HRC monies to be buying schools off to teach gender-bending ideology and anal sex tutorials?”
 
A very good point, as I just said. There’s not a snowball’s chance in Hell that any government-funded school would allow NRA representatives to buy some classroom time to teach children about the importance of the 2nd Amendment, the importance of arming oneself in order to be safe from harm and how to handle a gun safely. Frankly, I would’ve paid an entire school-year’s worth of lunch money to have an NRA representative speak at my school.
 
I did have a Planned Parenthood representative speaking in one of my classes. Thankfully, I didn’t care to pay much attention and only really remember the representative putting a condom on a banana, which was mentally scarring enough.
 
I don’t know if I would’ve been able to hold my lunch, that I would literally have right before this class, if that representative started speaking about BDSM, asphyxiation, gender-bending (which I don’t know if it was a thing back then… Truthfully, I still don’t exactly know what it is and I refuse to search for it and further corrupt my own mind), anal sex and “rimming”, all of which I didn’t know about at the time, except for anal sex.
 
Now, there’s more to this than just what I’ve shared so far. This “comprehensive sex ed” program teaches abstinence too… in a very warped sort of way. You see, the definition of abstinence is to “restrain oneself from indulging” in sexual behavior. But Planned Parenthood’s definition of abstinence includes “masturbation, anal sex, oral sex, and mutual masturbation.”
 
That’s literally the antithesis of what it means to abstain from sexual behavior. All of those things easily qualify as indulging oneself sexually. How could that be considered abstinence? Then again, that’s a question to ask someone who’s not utterly backwards in their thinking. Someone who uses logic and their brain to think, not their heart or sexual organs.
 
You ask that question to a Leftist and they’ll likely laugh as though you’re making a joke.
 
The article then mentions: “New ‘comprehensive sex ed’ programs do not include any discussion of celibacy as a viable alternative to early sexual activity, which can lead teens into poverty, early pregnancy or chronic illness.”
 
Now that’s not surprising whatsoever. Of course Planned Parenthood isn’t going to encourage kids not to have sex. THEIR ENTIRE BUSINESS REVOLVES AROUND ABORTING UNWANTED BABIES! For Planned Parenthood to encourage kids not to have sex would be the equivalent of Ford Motor Company to encourage people to walk more. Why would they diminish their possible return by teaching celibacy? Because it would be the right thing to do? There’s nothing about Planned Parenthood that is right. Nothing that is redeemable (about their business, not necessarily their employees).
 
I still find it difficult to say that Planned Parenthood, or the Left in general, can sink to new lows, but this will continue happening. They will only get worse. They won’t stop until they get absolutely everything they want. Even then, they likely won’t stop so that they could retain everything they’ve “earned”.
 
They will continue to corrupt young people’s minds. David “I’m a Parkland shooting survivor even though I wasn’t there” Hogg is a good example of their work. They won’t stop until the whole world bends to their will. Until the whole world thinks the way they do. And they’ll accomplish that through one of two ways: utter global corruption through decades and centuries of polluting people’s minds (with sexual deviancy being but one of many ways to accomplish that) or through utter annihilation of opposing points of view through police and military forces.
 
The Left’s ultimate goal is global domination. Not necessarily through warfare like Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or France under Napoleon, but through “diplomacy” using the U.N.
 
I believe I’ve said as much in previous articles, but it’s always important to bring up when it’s relevant. Not to deviate from the topic at hand of the disgusting “education” provided by Planned Parenthood, but to demonstrate the road the world is on and show where we’re headed if the Left succeeds.
 
We need Christ now more than ever and we’ll need him in the future more than we do now. Of course, those who know and understand the Bible, or at least the Book of Revelation, know very well that things will get worse before they get better. And for most of the world, things won’t get better. Thankfully, those who believe in Christ will never have to experience such a dreadful world. As bad as things are today (culturally, that is), it’s truly nothing compared to the foretold seven years of tribulation that lie ahead.
 
Again, thankfully, Christ’s followers won’t be around to experience it, at least those who believe in Christ before Rapture. There’s certainly a possibility, even likelihood, of people coming to Christ after Rapture. But for those who believe in Him now and today, they will never have to experience those seven years even if those seven years began the second after this article is finished being written or read.
 
What the Good News brings is the assurance that, while Evil persists in this world, it is only temporary. God’s Will, not Satan’s, is what will not only stand the test of time, but also the test of timelessness… if that makes sense.
 
Colossians 1:13
“For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

For the next few of paragraphs, I’ll likely be venting some frustration that comes with this bit of news, so please excuse me if I ramble a tad. I’ll still try to stay focused on the overall message, but I’ll likely rant a bit as well.
 
First, I just want to say that it’s days like these that I truly HATE the Republican Party. But I should probably clarify what I mean by that. It’s not the Party itself that I hate, despite what the previous sentence says. It’s the so-called “leadership” that is at the helm of it. Speaker Paul Ryan, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senator John McCain, Senator Lindsay Graham, Loser Mitt Romney, Future ex-Senator Jeff Snowflake.
 
These are merely some of the people that constantly get in the way of the MAGA movement. These are some of the people that are Democrats in disguise. Not a single one of them is a conservative. There’s nothing for which I could possibly defend any single one of them. I would say that I’m thankful for McCain’s service as a member of the military, but his actions as a Senator, particularly as of late, have branded him a traitor to the United States of America in my eyes.
 
He may be considered a military hero, but in reality he’s nothing more than a socialist in disguise. Either that or he’s simply a gutless fool. He’s shown to be either a massive coward as a Senator or a massive and willing traitor to every-day Americans.
 
But stepping a bit backwards and looking at his RINO comrades, this omnibus deal just proves that Democrats are still in control. As of the time of writing this article, the bill hasn’t yet passed the Senate, but we all know that it will. This is a deal that heavily favors Democrats.
 
Just to name a few things in this over 2000 page bill (which was given less than 36 hours to be voted on in the Senate), this bill includes funding for Planned Parenthood, funding for Sanctuary Cities, funding for the New York Gateway Bridge project (which is mostly a matter of how much money this project is getting. By the way, it’s $30 BILLION!), and this entire bill will drive the deficit up by $1 TRILLION IN THE NEXT YEAR ALONE! It will include stricter background checks for gun purchases with the “Fix NICS” (the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System) bill without a gun-friendly state reciprocity bill attached to it, no bailout for Obamacare and dumping $687 million on securing U.S. elections against Russians.
 
But you have to think: “There’s no way that Democrats would get so much without Republicans getting something in return!” Oh, they get something, alright. They get a whole 33 miles of fencing along the 700 mile southern border! Whoopee! This new, fancy fence will likely stop one small child from illegally entering the country! And at the low, low cost of $641 million! Notice how we get less money to secure the border (and this money doesn’t cover hiring more patrol agents) than we get to further “secure U.S. elections against Russians”.
 
Aside from that pathetic excuse for border security, we also get $300 billion to increase domestic and military spending, with an additional $90 billion in disaster aid for states affected by last year’s hurricanes and $140 billion for emergency military funds. Now, that’s not too bad, it is an increase in our military and defense spending, but we give up far too much to make this worthwhile.
 
The only other thing that we “get” is no actual resolution on DACA, but that will likely be put in a bill in the future that may be like this one. It seems the Democrats have figured out a way to get their way in a Trump administration: omnibus bills that has them surrendering little while gaining a lot.
 
And the Republicans, at least the RINOs, are more than ok with all of this, considering that it’s already passed the House and will most certainly pass the Senate. This is a horrible deal in almost every way that you look at it.
 
Economically? This is a bill that will drive us over a trillion dollars further into debt in the next year alone.
 
Morally? The very continued funding of the world’s largest child-killing organization tugs at the heart strings of every morally-conscious American.
 
Security? Sure, we get more money for the military, which we really need, but we get peanuts in terms of securing our border.
 
Illegal immigration from the southern border will almost entirely cease with a cement wall. A fence does next to nothing in the way of keeping illegals out of the country. And we don’t get provisions to hire more border agents.
 
As Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) said: “We got about 80% of what we were trying to get…”
 
Now, tell me. How could it possibly be that Democrats get 80% of what they want in a House of Representatives ruled by Republicans, a Senate ruled by Republicans, if even slightly, and a White House led by a Republican?
 
THAT SHOULD NEVER BE THE CASE EVER!
 
And what was the excuse we would constantly get from Republicans? “We don’t have the House!” And so, we gave them the House. “We don’t have the Senate!” And so, we gave them the Senate. “We don’t have the White House!” And so, we gave them the White House. What’s their new excuse? “We don’t have 60 votes!”
 
60 VOTES ARE ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT IN THIS CASE! The Constitution mentions a 60-vote supermajority. But that supermajority is only necessary in specific cases, such as ratification of treaties, conviction of a President in an impeachment trial, overriding presidential vetoes, approving constitutional amendments, and barring a disabled President from regaining power if the President objects to staying on the sidelines.
 
Nowhere does it mention that a ruling party has to have 60 votes to do smaller things. If it did, less than nothing would ever get done in Congress and there’d be no point in even having a Congress.
 
Republicans only need a majority, which they have, in order to pass things. The problem is that they seldom often USE IT! They used it for the tax cuts, and that was great. In fact, because it was so great and it yielded great results, the GOP should see that what they want can easily pass Congress if they stop betraying each other.
 
Of course, that’s not going to happen. These RINOs are evil, not stupid. They understand perfectly that, with the power they have, they are able to pass everything Republicans have been wanting for decades. They could fully repeal Obamacare and watch as Democrats cry in the corner. They could defund Planned Parenthood and save millions upon millions of babies. They could alleviate much of the nonsensical gun control legislation already in place and make people safer. They could fully fund Trump’s wall by just cutting funding to Sanctuary Cities alone.
 
They could fully fund Trump’s wall and make it 100 feet high with Star Wars drones guarding it by just defunding Planned Parenthood (I exaggerate, of course).
 
They have the power to pass every little thing they were initially SENT THERE TO DO! But frankly, we’re merely lucky tax cuts passed. Who knows when will be the next time that every single Republican in Congress will agree on something.
 
The GOP Establishment has turned heel (wrestling term meaning betrayal). They are backstabbing the American people with the passage of this bill. And I even question whether Trump will even veto it (I know that Budget Director Mick Mulvaney has said Trump will sign it, but I’m still not 100% convinced unless he actually does it). He likes the fact that we get more military spending, but he should be smart enough to realize a bad deal when he sees one. HE WROTE A WHOLE BOOK AROUND THAT TOPIC!
 
He should see just how disgustingly bad this bill is. He should see just how spineless the GOP is in passing things that Democrats want.
 
I hope he vetoes this horrendous bill. The very passage of this bill already helps Republicans lose seats in Congress, and I believe that’s precisely what they want. They don’t want Trump as President any more than Democrats do, but they couldn’t possibly write up articles of impeachment based on nothing. That’s a job they want to leave to their Democrat buddies.
 
They understand that if they were to impeach a Republican President, they’d leave next to no reason for people to vote Republican ever again. They want to win, but not with people like Trump.
 
And Trump should have realized this for a long time now. He has no friends within the Establishment, only enemies. RINOs will never fully support him and his agenda. They despise him and his efforts. This bill should offer enough proof of that statement’s validity.
 
It’s clear to me that the very people we voted for to represent us have betrayed us. This is not a sudden realization. I’ve known this for some time. But it’s days like these that remind me of that sort of betrayal. We didn’t vote for Republicans so that they would PASS 80% OF THE THINGS DEMOCRATS WANT!
 
We voted for them to do THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THAT!
 
Now, I’ve come to an actually recent realization. There’s no sense in badmouthing the Party itself. There’s no sense in not calling myself a Republican. Why? Because it’s not the Party that has betrayed us, it’s the leadership. The Party is nothing more than a name and a cause, founded by Abraham Lincoln. We represent our Republic. We fight for it. The Party is worth defending. Its leadership is not.
 
So rather than attack the Party itself, I’ll simply attack the ones in power. The very people I’ve named above and those who stand by them. They are our enemies as well. It’s not just the Democrat Party that is our enemy. It’s the leadership in the GOP as well.
 
We need to drain the swamp completely. Not a shred of it can be allowed to remain. We must never vote for another establishment candidate again. That’s not to say that we should allow Democrats to win, either.
 
We should stick to voting for our beliefs, not our parties. If a Republican candidate like Romney comes along, we should not vote for them. Back in 2012, I was angry with the roughly 3 million Republicans (I think that was the number) that didn’t vote for him. Today, I’m so glad they didn’t elect Romney, because despite the fact that it meant 4 more years of Obama, it also meant 4 to 8 years of Trump.
 
That whole ordeal taught me something: to be patient for God. He was not surprised Romney lost. He was not surprised that Obama won. But He didn’t relinquish any of His power when Obama won. Obama was allowed to do only what God allowed him to do. And God didn’t allow Hillary to continue doing what Obama was doing.
 
What I’m trying to say, politically, is that we should refrain from strictly voting for someone just because of their Party affiliation. Now, saying that, I also have to emphasize the importance of keeping a Republican majority in Congress. I know that this sounds contradictory to my overall message, but here’s my reasoning: I’d rather be insanely angry with the Republican hacks that are betraying us if it means that Trump doesn’t get impeached.
 
The GOP will never impeach their own Republican President just because they don’t like him. They need a legitimate reason. The Democrats don’t. They’ll write articles of impeachment the day they get back to work in Congress if they get the majority.
 
I guess what I’m trying to say is that we should try to do both things here. We should vote for someone who aligns with our beliefs while also trying to keep Democrats and RINOs at bay. This may seem like an unsurmountable task. It’s rather complicated and difficult to pull off. You need the right candidate in the right area to do that. I doubt California will be the place where a true conservative candidate would flourish. But even if one doesn’t, we shouldn’t despair if a RINO or a Democrat wins.
 
We have seen what God can do for us in our lives. He let Obama win twice so that we would have Trump, possibly for 8 years. But even if we don’t get Trump for 8 years, or even if we don’t get him for 4 and he’s impeached, we still shouldn’t despair.
 
And even if the Democrats get absolutely everything: White House, Congress and Supreme Court, we still shouldn’t despair. And even if the Democrats turn the U.S. into Soviet Russia, ruling in full-on communism, we still shouldn’t despair.
 
Why? Because no power on Earth is strong enough to hold a candle to God.
 
The whole world may turn to Globalism (global communism), but there’s not a reason on Earth that Christ’s followers should despair. This is the mortal world, after all. It’s merely temporary. The world, under Globalism, would be dark for sure. But it would still God’s to control. And God’s to decide when enough is enough.
 
I don’t know when that will all happen. I would hope not within our lifetime, or our children’s lifetimes. But regardless on when it happens (if at all), we should not feel despair. We should not feel hopeless. We should trust in God’s plan and His will. He knows when and how everything will end. He knows that His children will be spared from the lake of fire and sulfur. He knows that when His children suffer on Earth, He will restore and appease them in Heaven.
 
Now, I’m not saying all of this to frighten you. On the contrary, this should make you feel hopeful for the future. Maybe not for the future of the country or for the world, but future for yourself and your fellow Christians. There’s not a single thing that the Devil can do to harm you on Earth or in Heaven if you keep your faith and trust in Christ.
 
You may see and feel struggles in the horizon. You may feel saddened if Democrats win and impeach Trump. But you should remember that it’s not them who have the final say. The one who has the final say is the one who had the initial say.
 
This article is running a little long. Currently well over 2000 words. So I’ll simply end with this: there’s a reason for everything, even for darkness. For in the darkness is where we can find the Light most easily.
 
John 8:12
“Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, ‘I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.’”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

If you needed any more proof than there already is that abortion is evil, I’ll share a story with you about some Twitter comments made by Dr. Leah Torres, an abortionist.
 
To give some context, Dr. Evil… – eh… – Torres was defending the position against pro-life advocates that she didn’t perform abortions for the money of it: “Your ignorance is showing. Look up what docs get paid for delivering babies vs performing abortions. I’ll take $3K for the delivery over $100 for the abortion. Why do anti-choice folks always think it’s for money?”
 
Maybe because the alternative would be that you do it for fun, which is even worse. Doing it for the money doesn’t redeem you at all, but doing it because you like it makes you look far worse. I’d like to think that most abortionists do it for the money, not because they hate babies and love to end their lives. Abortionists are legal murderers, after all. If you don’t go into it for the money, there’s something seriously wrong with you. Even as a child of around 8 years old, I understood that abortion was legal murder.
 
At one point, one Twitter user raised the very point I’m making here. They wrote: “So [if] it’s not for the money, is it because you just like infanticide? Do you hear their heartbeats when you lay down at night? Do you hear their screams?”
 
And to this particular comment is when Leah made the more horrendous comment: “No. You know fetuses can’t scream, right? I transect the cord 1st so there’s really no opportunity, if they’re even far enough along to have a larynx. I won’t apologize for performing medicine. I’m also a ‘uterus ripper outer,’ if that’s how you’d like to describe hysterectomy.”
 
In other words, she’s admitting that she doesn’t hear them scream because she slits their throats first. I hate the fact that that’s somehow normal and should be encouraged.
 
Let me repeat it in case it didn’t sink in entirely. SHE SLITS BABIES’ THROATS SO THEY DON’T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SCREAM!
 
This is not medicine! THIS IS SERIAL KILLER MENTALITY! Since when is medicine a tool to KILL someone? But I’ll likely get to that later since there’s a clear bigger issue at hand.
 
And please excuse my language here, but WHAT THE HELL?! How is that a normal piece of conversation?! How is that an excuse whatsoever?! Those are the kind of words that would warrant someone to be INSTITUTIONALIZED!
 
But you see, for her, that’s not weird or crazy or evil at all. She even follows up what she said with “I won’t apologize for performing medicine”. She FUNDAMENTALLY BELIEVES this is normal! THIS IS NOT NORMAL! IT’S CRAZY! IT’S HEARTLESS! AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, EVIL!!
 
Sorry for yelling here, but I don’t know how else I should respond to such blatant evil. It’s only been a few days since I wrote ANOTHER article about a crazy Leftist who was defending abortion. I called her evil too. This makes that other woman look like Mr. Rogers by comparison!
 
Ok, let’s take a breather. Let’s regather our thoughts. Considering that I’ve long acknowledged this sort of work to be work worthy of Satan, I should not be so surprised at the calmness of this she-devil’s voice in detailing how she kills children. It’s sick, no doubt. But it shouldn’t be so surprising. This is evil. There’s not a darn person in the world who could possibly convince me otherwise.
 
This is NOT medicine. This is NOT women’s rights. This is NOT liberation of women. This is NOT normal. This is NOT something to brag about. This is NOT something to support. You can’t possibly say that “it’s your body, your choice” when it’s the BABY’S throat that is being cut. You can’t possibly say that horrible line to me when it’s the BABY’S body being manipulated, its life ended and its body parts desecrated.
 
It should never be ANYONE’S choice to end the life of another human being. Much less if that life is the life of a woman’s CHILD! Abortion is not merciful. Abortion is not out of love. Abortion is hatred. Hatred for life.
 
Of course, they can’t possibly admit that. No one would support the end of an innocent human being’s life. So they redefine what it means to be alive. They take away the humanity of a baby inside the womb. They declare it to not be alive just yet. That it needs to be outside the womb for it to be alive. And so, they justify taking away their lives. They treat babies in the womb in a very similar way as to how they treated slaves - by dehumanizing them.
 
No, babies in the uterus aren’t forced to pick cotton. But the life of a baby in the womb today equals that of a slave. It’s not alive. It’s not human. But in some ways, the way they treat babies in the womb is even worse than how they treated slaves.
 
Slaves at least were considered “property”. While they were dehumanized and stripped of their basic rights, they weren’t disposed of unless necessary and weren’t flat-out killed either. So a closer comparison for pre-born babies would have to be with Jews inside concentration camps. Or at the least, those inside death camps like Auschwitz.
 
Babies in the womb aren’t considered property. Property at least is something to take some care of. No, babies are treated as nothing more than Jell-O at best and a disease at worst. To the Left, the women who choose to keep their babies choose to keep the “random assortment of crap” growing inside them. And the women who choose to kill their babies choose to get rid of a disease.
 
The ironic thing is that they at least consider a disease to be alive, since it’s a virus and it’s a cell. They consider a single cell to be alive but not a baby inside the womb.
 
The life of a human baby inside the womb is less than property. Less than nothing. Much like Jewish lives were less than nothing for the Nazis, or at least something to rid the world of, babies inside the wombs are less than nothing for the modern-day Left.
 
It’s true when people say that whatever the Left touches becomes corrupted and broken. That extends further than what the government takes over. The Left has touched and shaped our culture. Life is meaningless. This is the corruption of society at the hands of the Left.
 
You can party, get drunk, get high, have sex and utterly shame yourself if you so desire. If your life means nothing outside the womb to the Left, how could we expect them to value life inside the womb? If people don’t value their own lives, they’ll certainly not value others’. And since a fetus is “not alive”, then it’s more than ok to get rid of it like a bad case of the flu.
 
This is the sort of darkness the Left envelopes themselves in. And the ludicrous thing is that they claim to be the light. They claim their cause is that of justice and freedom, not malice, hatred and evil. You can’t outright sell evil to people, so you have to call it good. As the prophet Isaiah said: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” Isaiah 5:20.
 
And there’s no logical reason not to call abortion evil. Normalizing the mutilation of a child’s corpse is just as evil as the act itself.
 
Thankfully for people, even someone like Leah, they’re not irredeemable. Such an act and the defense of it rightfully belongs in Hell. For anyone to do this, that’s exactly where they belong. But even something like this can be redeemed. Even someone like any abortionist can be redeemed. Even the most evil figures in history could have been redeemed.
 
People like Stalin, Ted Bundy, Nikolas Cruz, Osama bin Laden, and even Adolf Hitler could all have been redeemed (in the case of Cruz, he still could be). There’s not a single action coming from their part that would redeem them. Nothing they could do in their own accord. Nothing other than repent; ask for forgiveness. Forgiveness, not from the world, as it would not forgive, but rather forgiveness from God.
 
He is the only One who could possibly redeem anyone’s soul. He sent His son Jesus Christ to the cross not so that the whole world would be saved, but so that whoever believeth in Him would be.
 
Now, do I expect Leah to turn to Christ in repentance? No. While I don’t know the woman personally and she’s already given me a horrible first impression, I don’t know if she will at any point in her life. But let’s not forget that Saul would hunt down and order the execution of Christians before he eventually came to Christ himself - and became the Apostle Paul.
 
If a man as vile as Saul could find salvation, surely anyone could as well. Again, I don’t expect Leah to repent and come to Christ. If she does, I’ll surely never know. But one can only hope and pray that she finds salvation.
 
Romans 10:9
“Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
​

I recall saying in one of my articles that, even after 8 years of Obama, it’s still not cool to be anti-American. Similarly, even after 8 years of Obama and horrible Leftist media making up the mainstream of society, it’s still not cool to attack the Bible.
 
It’s one thing if you don’t believe what it says. It’s another to flat-out bash it, especially as poorly as these Leftists did.
 
Last Sunday, Leftist media publication Salon was forced to delete an article published on their site. The article was originally written on AlterNet, another far-Left publication. The article was titled: “Why Is The Bible So Poorly Written?”
 
Now, while this doesn’t directly attack the claims made within the Bible, it does attack it by trying to make it literally irrelevant. And I mean literally as in the terms of literature. Although, I suppose the other meaning works just as well.
 
The article reads: “Millions of evangelicals and other Christian fundamentalists believe that the Bible was dictated by God to men who acted essentially as human transcriptionists. If that were the case, one would have to conclude that God is a terrible writer. Many passages in the Bible would get kicked back by any competent editor or writing professor, kicked back with a lot of red ink – often more red than black. Mixed messages, repetition, bad fact-checking, awkward constructions, inconsistent voice, weak character development, boring tangents, contradictions, passages where nobody can tell what the heck the writer meant to convey. This doesn’t sound like a book that was dictated by a deity.”
 
Without a doubt, this article received a lot of negative attention and Salon was forced to delete it from their website and sent out this message on Twitter: “Thank you for your feedback. We heard you. Upon further review, we determined that this article, which was republished to Salon from a partner website, did not meet our editorial standards.”
 
Here are some of the negative comments the article got:
 
“It’s a book only smart people can read. You should just stick with Harry Potter,” one user wrote. And one person even replied to this user by saying: “Salon writers only read books with pictures in it. Harry Potter is beyond their mental capacity to understand.”
 
This next user brings about a very good point: “Your article decrying a ‘badly written’ book can’t even bother to quote or cite any scholarly evangelical definitions or defenders of inerrancy or inspiration.”
 
“Was this article written by a fifteen-year-old who just discovered atheism?” wrote another.
 
“Frontiers in Theology By 12-Year-Olds,” mocked another user.
 
This other user also brings up another valid point: “The fact that it is still amongst us after almost 3000 years shows it has the relevance of Shakespeare and all the other things. How many thousands of religious texts have been lost? Yet, the Bible remains. And will long after the factually laughable writing of Salon dies.”
 
I would argue it has far more relevance than the 17th century writer, but I understand his or her point. It’s truly significant that the Bible remains as massively popular today, perhaps even more so considering the multiple periods of time when copies of the Bible were either forbidden from being sold or simply burnt.
 
Now, I would like to add my own two cents on this matter.
 
You’re telling me that just because the Bible is difficult to understand that means there’s something wrong with it or that its contents are irrelevant? The books “Ulysses” and “Finnegans Wake” by James Joyce are among a lot of people’s choice of most difficult books to read. But just because a book is difficult to read doesn’t make it a bad book at all.
 
To believe difficulty means quality is to have the mindset of a moron. And I mean an actual moron. I don’t mean it to be offensive. I mean it to be a description. If someone believes a book is bad because they don’t understand it, that person is an actual moron. To not like it is one thing, but to say it’s objectively bad is ridiculous.
 
The writer then says that God must be a terrible writer due to the Bible being so difficult to understand. I refer you to my previous point. Does the fact that Ulysses and Finnegans Wake are difficult make James Joyce a bad writer? Many would say that those two books are very good books and Joyce a very good writer (to say the least). Again, the point the writer is making here is ridiculous and irrelevant.
 
Then the writer says that many passages in the Bible would “get kicked back by any competent editor or writing professor…” I have no doubt that a typical writing professor is too much of a simpleton to understand the complexity of the Bible. Most college professors are Leftist morons, so I wouldn’t be surprised if a writing professor would give the Bible an “F”.
 
Let’s dive into the specific quarrels this person has, shall we? “Mixed messages, repetition, bad fact-checking, awkward constructions, inconsistent voice, weak character development, boring tangents, contradictions, passages where nobody can tell what the heck the writer meant to convey.”
 
If you were to compare what the New and Old Testaments say God commands His people to do, then, yes, there would be mixed messages. But that’s because the Old Testament people lived with the Old Covenant and New Testament people live with the New Covenant. It’s literally two separate messages that God gives His people, but not because He changed his mind halfway through the Bible. It’s because in the Old Testament, the way to be saved was to have faith (like in the New Testament) but also to make a sacrifice each time you sinned in repentance. You had to perform certain ceremonial acts. Not to mention that the Jewish leaders began adding things they supposedly “had” to do to appease God.
 
Men literally made up laws and commandments that would “grant” them salvation. In the New Testament God offered His own Son as a sacrifice that all who believe in Him shall have eternal life.
 
Regarding repetition, I’ve never known repetition to be a poor writing tool. Often times, I end up repeating myself because the point I’m making is so important I have to say it twice or more. Frankly, the books that I believe have the most repetition in them are the books of Psalm and Proverbs. And the reason they repeat phrases or proverbs is to indicate their significance in our lives. Repetition is used for emphasis throughout the Bible. For example, John 6:47 reads "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life." In this case the repetition of the word "truly" is meant to signify that what follows is particularly important. It was the style in Biblical times.
 
Otherwise, the only other instance of repetition I can think of is the Four Gospels, but those are written in different people’s perspectives of the events that occurred in the apostle’s life with Christ. I don’t believe that to be a bad writing tool at all.
 
“Bad fact-checking”? Are you serious? Notice how she never actually offers any sort of evidence to the claims she’s making. By saying that the Bible has “bad fact-checking” and failing to cite any evidence of it in the Bible is inherently bad fact-checking from this Leftist moron.
 
If you want evidence of bad fact-checking, consider perhaps the entire Climate Change movement that requires more faith to believe in than the Bible itself. I know for a fact that there is a God (the evidence is LITERALLY EVERYTHING AROUND YOU COULDN’T HAVE COME FROM NOTHING WITHOUT GOD), just as I know that there is no Climate Change. And yet, I’m certain this Leftist writer believes Climate Change will kill us all one day.
 
I won’t go into every single “point”, since this article is plenty lengthy as is, so I’ll focus on a few important ones.
 
“Inconsistent voice”. The Bible was written by many people. Around 40 people, in fact. Gather 40 different writers from 7 different nations who spoke 3 different languages across 16 centuries to write different chapters in a book and tell me the voice will be consistent.
 
“Weak character development”. That would only be a valid point if the Bible was fiction. But it’s not fiction. It’s HISTORY! Character development tends to be important in fiction books, not non-fiction histories.
 
“Contradictions”. There’s a big difference between a contradiction and a paradox. A paradox is a seemingly absurd or self-contradictory statement or proposition that when investigated or explained may provide to be well founded or true. And there are plenty of examples of it in the Bible. One such instance appears in the book of Daniel.
 
During King Belshazzar’s feast, God wrote “Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin.” Belshazzar did not know what this meant and called upon wise men to interpret it but none of them could. Belshazzar then called for Daniel to come and interpret what the words meant. He was successful, interpreting the word Mene to mean: “God has numbered the days of your [Belshazzar’s] kingdom and brought it to an end; Tekel, you have been weighed in the balances and found wanting; Peres (singular of Parsin), your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.”
 
Belshazzar had promised Daniel that if he could interpret what the wall said that Daniel would be clothed in purple and have a chain of gold around his neck and made into the third ruler of the kingdom.
 
And that’s where the “contradiction” comes in. If Belshazzar is naming Daniel as the third ruler, who was the second? Well, Belshazzar was. He was technically the second ruler. That may not make much sense but hear me out.
 
Belshazzar wasn’t the first, he was the second. His direct father, King Nabodinus, who ruled from 556-539 B.C., was known as the last king of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. He was the first. (Another "contradiction" would be that the Bible says Nebuchadnezzar is Belshazzar's father, but Belshazzar has a bloodline connected to Nebuchadnezzar and the Hebrew word for "father" can also be "ancestor".)
 
Then how could Belshazzar be king at the time of Babylon’s fall to the Persians? Well, the Hebrew word for king is “melek” which can also mean “royal”. And Belshazzar was certainly a royal figure.
 
Besides, at the time, Babylon was at war with Persia (given that Persia conquered Babylon soon after the events in that section of the book of Daniel). Kings would often go to war with their soldiers to directly command them. This means, of course, that a member of the royal family had to stay behind and rule the nation. That’s what made Belshazzar the second ruler and, therefore, made Daniel the third (not that it lasted).
 
As you can see, that’s more of a paradox than a contradiction.
 
But enough about that. This article is already very long, so I’ll simply end things with this.
 
I’m very glad to see that attacking the Bible, even in this sense, will still result in negative attention for a far-Left publisher such as Salon. It gives me hope to see people so unabashedly defending the Truth.
 
Titus 1:9
“He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.”
 
Author: Freddie Drake Marinelli.

Let me make that title a little bit more clear. If you’re a Christian, there’s no reason to not support what Trump stands for. Even if you were to have a problem with his character (which there’s really no reason to have such a problem), then that’s fine. You may not like him personally, but you also have to realize that he’s leagues better than just about anyone in Washington when it comes to character, not to mention ideals.
                                                                        
But you may be asking, why am I writing about this? Well, I was looking through some conservative websites recently and came across an article written by Dennis Prager titled: “In Defense Of Evangelicals Who Support Trump”.
 
That title got me thinking. “Why would he need to defend evangelicals who support Trump? If you’re a Christian, it only makes sense to support him or at least prefer him over the scum of the Earth known as the Washington Establishment.”
 
And so, I got to reading. In his article, he mentions a number of evangelical Christians who refuse to support Trump, not because of his policies or ideas for this country, but because of the content of his character.
 
Prager mentions a mere few. Ross Douthat, a columnist for the New York Times (of course, he writes for the MSM), wrote: “Whether the subject is the debauched pagan in the White House, the mall-haunted candidacy of Roy Moore or the larger question of how to engage with secular culture, there is talk of an intergenerational crisis within evangelical churches, a widening disillusionment with a Trump-endorsing old guard, a feeling that a crack up must loom ahead.”
 
Debauched pagan? What in the world are you talking about? What has he said or done to make you think he’s a debauched pagan? If you’re referring to the Access Hollywood tape, is that really all you can point to to make this claim? I can tell you that he’s said the word “God” more often than he’s said “p***y”.
 
Besides, who are you to be pointing out the splinter in his eye? Are you not a sinner? Are you as righteous as Christ Himself? Have you never had a sinful thought or desire? If you claim to not be a sinner, then I can’t tell you you’re much of a Christian.
 
Besides, who else would you rather support? Hillary? A woman who’s happily and knowingly defended a child rapist? A woman who’s MARRIED to a rapist and defends him whenever she must? A woman who would attack the women her husband’s defiled against their will? A woman who had to cheat in an election just to end up losing it?
 
Linda Sarsour? A woman who believes a hijab “empowers” women? Bernie Sanders? A man who openly believes in socialism and wants this country to turn into Venezuela? Obama? A man who’s spent 8 years in the White House turning every government department into a political weapon to be used against conservatives?
 
All of these people are AGAINST CHRISTIANITY! Against everything Christians stand for! We stand for the right to life. The right to worship our Lord openly and peacefully. The right to speak our minds.
 
They don’t even stand for black unemployment being at an all-time low!
 
Tell me, then. Who would you rather be running this country? The people that will work to utterly transform it away from its CHRISTIAN founding or the people that understand who we are, what we stand for as a nation and will work to Make America Great Again?
 
Trump isn’t perfect. No one other than Christ who’s walked the Earth has been perfect. But there are clearly better people and worse people. Good people and evil people. To not support someone who’s literally risking his life, reputation and popularity with the world in order to do what’s right and good is to side with evil.
 
And that’s just one of the people Prager quotes. He also quotes Jared Wilson of The Gospel Coalition. “From the same believers who raised us to believe that standing for the truth was more important than anything, that being persecuted for your integrity was better than compromise, that morality was not relative, that ethics are not situational. And now these same teachers are wanting us to believe that a little ‘R’ by a man’s name covers a multitude of sins.”
 
All of the things he mentioned – from believing that standing for the truth was more important than anything to everything else in that quote about priorities – does that not sound like it would describe Trump?
 
Does Trump not stand for the truth? HE EXPOSES THE LEFT ALMOST EVERY DAY FOR THE LIES THEY SPEW! He’s being persecuted for his integrity, is he not? He’s solidly conservative, is he not? His morality has not skewed depending on the situation, has it?
 
A little “R” next to his name is not the reason I support him. Had he run as a Democrat (probably would’ve lost for more than one reason), I would’ve still been inclined to support him. I would’ve had my doubts about him actually wanting to do the things he wanted, yes. I tend not to trust what Democrats say. But his message was far more conservative than anyone in the Democrat Party would ever offer. More conservative than even many Republicans!
 
Jared believes the only reason people like us support Trump is because he’s a Republican. To believe that is to be naïve and, frankly, thinking with a Leftist mindset.
 
He says the letter “R” next to his name supposedly covers a multitude of sins. And while I do believe Trump’s a sinner just as much as we all are, no one is making the claim that we should give him a break because he’s a Republican.
 
I don’t give any Republican a break if they don’t support the MAGA agenda. Because those people tend not to be the kind of people a Christian would want running the country!
 
Besides, what does it matter if he’s a sinner? Aside from the fact that we are all sinners, why does that matter? Historically, God has a tendency of choosing sinners to follow His commandments and be great Biblical heroes.
 
Noah got drunk and committed incest with his daughters (though his daughters are the ones who got him drunk and slept with him).
 
Abraham lied about his wife Sarah being his sister, slept with a woman who was not his wife and had a child with her simply because he couldn’t wait for God to give him a child; Jacob was a deceiver; Moses murdered an Egyptian; Rahab was a prostitute; Samson was lustful and angry; David committed adultery; Paul persecuted and EXECUTED Christ’s followers and Peter thrice denied Christ.
 
Everyone in the Bible, except for God, His Son Jesus and the Holy Spirit was a sinner in his or her own right. Everyone in HISTORY is a sinner in his or her own right.
 
Yet, all of the aforementioned people are regarded as great Biblical heroes. As great followers of God, and that, they were. So when someone with Trump’s vision comes along and works hard every day to Make America Great Again and, even if he won’t downright say it, Make America Blessed By God Again, why attack him? Why despise him? Why side with EVIL?!
 
I’m not saying Trump’s flawless. Of course he’s not. But he’s exponentially better than just about everyone in the government right now. He’s certainly better than Cryin’ Chuck and Apocalypse Nancy.
 
Better than Crazy Bernie and Pocahontas. Better than Lyin’ Ted, Little Marco, Loser Romney, Snow Flake, and Traitor McCain.
 
Would you rather support any of these guys? Are they not sinners as well? Do they not have character flaws as well?
 
To expect someone to come along and be as sin-free as Christ was and wait for him to run for office is ridiculous. No mortal being will ever be free of sin. Only Christ ever was. And Christ isn’t going to come down from Heaven and start running for office.
 
If that’s what these so-called evangelicals are waiting for, they’ll be waiting all the way to Rapture.
 
Daniel 2:21
“It is He who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings; He gives wisdom to wise men And knowledge to men of understanding.”
 
Author: Freddie Drake Marinelli.

For those who have been reading these articles for quite some time, you’ll know I’m not a big football fan. I’m more of a basketball fan, myself. And with the recent protests by NFL players kneeling during the National Anthem and NFL Commissioner’s Roger Goodell being a massive hypocrite allowing these protesters to protest but not allowing a veteran’s group to air an ad during the Super Bowl urging people to stand, I have little reason to like the NFL.
 
However, one team in particular has caught my attention and admiration. That team is the Super Bowl LII champions Philadelphia Eagles. But it’s not the fact that they beat the juggernaut that is the Patriots that’s gotten me to like them. It’s not that they played some fantastic football (that I would’ve missed had it not been because no one took a knee during the anthem).
 
No, my attention and admiration came after the game ended and the Eagles secured their victory.
 
While Eagles’ fans celebrated their big win by literally tearing apart their city, Eagles’ Head Coach Doug Pederson took stage during the post-game celebration where he said he gives thanks to “my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” Eagles QB Nick Foles also gave thanks by giving “glory to God.” And, according to the Daily Wire, they weren’t the only ones as a number of Eagles players such as Tight End Zach Ertz also gave glory to the Lord.
 
According to the Daily Wire: “This unapologetic display of Christianity is nothing new. The team has been outspoken about its faith convictions all year. Carson Wentz said that Christ was the ‘binding force’ in the locker room, keeping the men together and helping them to be an effective and cohesive unit on the field. Other players, like Wide Receiver Torrey Smith, have also spoken powerfully about their spiritual beliefs.”
 
In a league dominated by self-serving morons such as Colin Kaepernick, Michael Bennett and Marshawn Lynch (who I used to like when I was living in Oregon and was a Seahawks fan), it’s humbling to see these people give thanks to the only being in existence who could make it possible for them: God.
 
While most players would thank their teammates (something everyone should do in a team sport, but not the only people they should thank), these guys chose to humble themselves before the Lord and praise His name before a live audience.
 
And despite the fact that three Eagles players will not be going to the White House to meet Trump, one of them being Torrey Smith, it really doesn’t matter to me. I would hope they'd like Trump, but it's more important that they love Christ. (Of course, I don’t know if the other two are Christian. One of them doesn’t seem to be since his reason for boycotting is simply that he hates Trump while the other two didn’t express any hatred of Trump.)
 
According to the Daily Wire, Safety Malcolm Jenkins told CNN: “My message has been clear all year. I’m about, you know, creating positive change in the communities that I come from, whether it be Philadelphia, New Jersey, Ohio, Louisiana or this entire country. I want to see changes in our criminal justice system (considering the memo and the Deep State corruption, I'd rather it be put into effect, rather than be changed). I want to see us push for… [economic] and educational advancement in communities of color and low-income communities. And I want to see our relationships between our communities and our law enforcement be advanced.”
 
Ironically, that sounds to me like Jenkins wants to Make America Great Again. Almost all of these things are positive in their own right and Trump is trying to do that for everyone in the country.
 
Torrey Smith took a different approach by defending the anthem protests, saying they’re not actually anthem protests, just “a protest during the anthem.” I won’t get into this largely because I appreciate him being a Christian and also because I could go on and on about this subject, so I’ll cut it short.
 
My point is that, despite these three choosing not to go to the White House to meet with the President, I still appreciate the team’s outspoken faith.
 
I don’t care if Smith doesn’t like Trump (what he said didn’t exactly indicate that he doesn’t like him). What matters is that he loves Christ. What matters is that he loves God. Everything else is secondary.
 
And the Eagles are aware of that. Frankly, if I could, I’d be more inclined to watch more Eagles games due to this. Due to the protests, I wasn’t inclined to like any of the NFL’s teams. Not even my Seahawks and Dolphins. I was more inclined to disliking the 49ers, even without Kaepernick. Inclined to dislike the Raiders due to Lynch. And even inclined to stop being a fan of the Seahawks thanks to Michael Bennett.
 
I’m inclined to heavily disliking the Steelers due to that whole Alejandro Villanueva incident in which he decided to leave the locker room, stand for the anthem and was forced to apologize for it.
 
I’m also inclined to dislike the Patriots because of the deflate-gate scandal (that I still think robbed my Seahawks of a title) and because Elizabeth Warren is a Patriots fan. No surprise, really, given that Warren seemingly supports cheaters.
 
But now, I’m inclined to like the Eagles, at least the ones who profess their faith unapologetically.
 
Even in a league dominated by hatred, the Light of the Lord shines brightly when these players offer thanks to Him.
 
John 14:21
“Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.”
 
Author: Freddie Drake Marinelli.

The President had recently endorsed Sen. Luther Strange for election to the U.S. Senate later this year. Strange had replaced Jeff Sessions when he was appointed by the President to be Attorney General.
 
But even though Luther Strange lost his Party’s nomination for Congress (now, the race is between (R) Roy Moore and (D) Doug Jones) and was endorsed by the President, this is not really a loss for the POTUS.
 
Luther Strange was the Establishment candidate for Congress between him and Moore. And Strange is the sitting senator, who will stay there until a new candidate is elected in December. So, for as long as Strange is there, Trump wants to be on his good side. For as long as Strange is in Congress, he will count as one vote to help Trump pass legislation. And Trump wants Congress to pass the Graham-Cassidy bill which will do a little bit to repeal and replace Obamacare (though not too much). That’s really the BIGGEST and likely ONLY reason he chose to endorse Strange as opposed to Moore.
 
And even though Moore is against the bill for not being conservative enough (and I agree), his primary election victory is actually very good for Trump. No, Trump didn’t endorse him, but he knows what Moore wants. And he, too, wants to Make America Great Again.
 
Moore was called the “more conservative” candidate and for good reason. According to the Washington Post, “In three books, Moore has described his legal opinion that the United States was founded a Christian nation that ultimately answered to the ‘laws of nature and nature’s God.’… As a judge, Moore refused to obey a federal court order to remove from his courthouse a monument to the Ten Commandments he had installed to underscore his belief. He was removed from his job as a result.”
 
So he agrees with us that this country was founded A CHRISTIAN NATION and that our laws are based off of God’s laws. And when he was removed from his job for defying the court order to remove the Ten Commandments, he followed one of God’s rules! Acts 5:29: “But Peter and the apostles answered: ‘we must obey God rather than men.’”
 
So he knows that God’s law is far more important to follow than any country’s law. Which brings us to another time that he was removed from his post. According to the Washington Post: “In a 2002 legal opinion, he described homosexual conduct as ‘an inherent evil’, and he has argued that the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage should not be considered the rule of law.” So he’s AGAINST the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize gay marriage and believes that homosexual conduct is inherently evil.
 
So, he’s very clearly a conservative and someone I can get behind. He’s very clearly a Christian and someone who wants our nation to go back to our Christian roots. In his victory speech after the primary election, he said: “We have to return the knowledge of God and the Constitution of the United States to the United States Congress. We have become a nation that has distanced ourselves from the very foundation.”
 
Do you know what that sounds like to me? He seems like he wants to Make America Great Again. And part of Making America Great Again includes Making America Christian Again. Making America God’s Again. So that we can truly say “God bless America”.
 
So then why would people think that Moore’s election victory is a loss to Trump? According to CNN, Trump was infuriated that he backed the loser of the election. “Returning from a high-dollar fundraiser in Manhattan on Tuesday evening, an infuriated President Donald Trump watched aboard Air Force One as Fox News called the Alabama Senate primary for Roy Moore against Trump’s favored candidate, Luther Strange.”
 
Really, “infuriated”? Then how do you explain that he said that he “might have made a mistake” at a STRANGE rally the Friday before the election? According to the Washington Post: “If Moore won the primary, Trump said to applause, ‘I’m going to be here campaigning like hell for him.’” That doesn’t sound like someone who would be too heartbroken about his endorsed candidate losing.
 
Trump knows that Moore is one of the good guys. He’s anti-establishment, Christian and very conservative. And he KNOWS that that’s the kind of person he wants in Congress. The Republican Establishment has been completely USELESS in passing any significant legislation in Trump’s first year as POTUS. He doesn’t want to deal with and appease Establishment candidates and Congressmen. He doesn’t want to deal with the Democrats either, as I’ve said in a previous article. He wants people who will be on his side on MANY issues.
 
Trump wants to repeal and replace Obamacare. Moore wants much of the same, so he will vote for a VERY conservative repeal bill. He won’t vote for a “let’s get rid of this one tiny thing so that the media isn’t too mad at us” bill. Moore is as close to Trump’s perfect candidate as you can get. He’s certainly as close to a grass-roots Christian conservative as you can get. And if the people of Alabama can get him into office (which I believe will happen), then I certainly think that we’ll be dealing a serious blow to the Establishment and will be getting closer to Making America Great Again.
 
Strange’s loss isn’t a loss for Trump. It’s a loss for the Establishment, and potentially a MASSIVE loss for the Democrats. Alabama is very conservative. Liberal policies and candidates are VERY difficult to sell there. But even more so if that liberal candidate is going up against a very CONSERVATIVE candidate.
 
I can’t wait for the December special election in Alabama. It will mark another step forward to Making America Great Again and Making America WE THE PEOPLE’S Again.


Colossians 3:23
“Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men.”
 
Author: Freddie Drake.

We’ve often times compared Donald Trump to former President Ronald Reagan on this website. I’ve even written a whole article on that subject! “Could Donald Trump Be The Next Ronald Reagan?” And it seems as though I’m not the only person that has drawn comparisons between the two Republican Presidents.
 
Venezuelan Representative Jorge Arreaza gave an interview after the assembly, in which he said: “For a moment, we didn’t know if we were listening to President Reagan in 1982 or President Trump in 2017.” That sounds like a pretty nice compliment, wouldn’t you think? Well…
 
The Venezuelan Representative actually thought he was insulting Trump rather than complimenting him. Naturally, being from a nation that’s been socialist for decades, he probably thought Reagan was a terrible human being and that comparing Trump to him was some sort of insult.
 
Little does he know that people like me actually appreciate his “insult” towards Trump. If he thinks Trump is like Reagan in that respect, I know we chose the right person for the job.
 
To compare Trump to Reagan would be the equivalent of comparing Obama to FDR. The Democrats LOVE FDR, so to say Obama would be like FDR would actually be a compliment even if intended as an insult. Likewise, to compare Trump to Reagan is a compliment, not an insult.
 
And do you know what is interesting? The Left almost NEVER makes that comparison between the two. Why? Because Reagan’s legacy was that of making America great. He made America incredibly powerful and rich. He is one of the reasons the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. And he’s remembered as the ideal Republican President. So to say Trump is like Reagan would not be advantageous to the Left.
 
Yes, the media has attacked “Reaganomics” or trickle-down economics, not knowing that it’s because of those economic plans and policies that America is so powerful. But they never go so far as to say Trump is like Reagan. Because too many people, including some democrats even today, like and have liked Reagan and think of him as one of the best presidents we've had.
 
Democrats certainly don’t want Trump to be remembered in such a way and are doing the best they can to make certain of that. Or at least make the illusion of it. Trump’s legacy is entirely up to him. What he does and doesn’t do is on him. There will be obstacles in the way (the Establishment being the biggest of them all), but the media can’t destroy Trump’s legacy. Because they couldn’t destroy Reagan’s.
 
Returning to the Venezuelan Representative, he certainly has plenty to learn. Above all things to learn is that his country is an utter hellhole in the world and it’s because of the very socialist government he’s defending. But other than that, he should learn one important lesson given to him by John Roberts in an interview on Special Report: “If you’re going to try to insult a Republican, don’t compare him or her to Ronald Reagan.”
 
Like I said, comparing Trump to Reagan is a massive compliment to him. And I certainly appreciate it, even though it was meant as an insult.
 
And the funny thing about the whole thing is that I agree with him on that instance. Even though it’s entirely likely that this representative was taught that Reagan was the closest thing to the actual devil, most people don’t see Reagan that way. And if he’s comparing the two Presidents, then most people will take it as a compliment, even with the context of the insult.
 
And, actually, let’s focus more on the meaning behind those words. To this representative, Reagan was probably a degenerate and evil person. And he clearly sees Trump that same way. The media certainly sees Trump that way. Hollywood certainly sees Trump that way. And the Leftist base certainly see Trump that way. They think he is the definition of evil. When in reality, they are the ones that follow and idolize evil people.
 
Kathy Griffin is clearly evil and messed up in the head, and yet people like her? Obama did his absolute best to destroy the country, and yet people like him and wish he was still President? The people on the Left are all evil, and yet people like them?
 
Do you wanna know why? It’s not just because evil people tend to like evil people. It’s not just because Leftists are evil and love the evil deeds of the Left. It’s also because there are people that have a misconstrued idea that evil is good and good is evil. As Isaiah 5:20 says: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”
 
These people think evil is good and good is evil. They think freedom for everyone is evil and freedom for only a few is good. They think Trump and Reagan are/were evil and think Obama and Hillary are good. They think following Christ and being a Christian is evil and following Mohammed and being an atheist is good. They think being white is evil and being a minority is good, when being a specific race shouldn’t matter. They think killing unborn babies is good and protecting them is evil.
 
These people are thoroughly messed up in the mind to think these things. There is a remedy, but they ignore it and mock it. They avoid listening to conservatives and think conservatives shouldn’t be allowed 1st amendment rights. They avoid listening to Christians. They avoid going to church and avoid reading the Bible. They avoid FOLLOWING CHRIST as though it would kill them.
 
And in a sense, it would. It would kill the evil within them. It would save them from eternal damnation. It would save them from the wrath of God that will inevitably fall upon them. It would educate them on how the world really works. It would turn them against socialism and communism. It would thoroughly change them, and they don’t want that.
 
They don’t want that because they don’t think it would be right. Like I said, they think being a Christian is evil and that Christians are evil. They’ve been fed that garbage since they were born, or at least started attending public school. Why would they follow Christ if they think doing so would be evil or not the right thing to do? I know the devil is the very definition of evil, therefore I wouldn’t follow him. But I also know that Christ is not just good, but is GOD, and so, I follow Him. Likewise, if I were a Leftist and have believed my entire life that being a Christian is evil, why would I become a Christian? Why would I follow Christ?
 
These people don’t know the true definition of good and evil. Whenever they can blame God for something bad happening, they will. I’ve seen people on social media blaming God for Hurricane Irma and Harvey. I’ve seen people ask “If God is so good, why does He allow bad things to happen?” They don’t know that when bad things tend to happen to people, they seek God for shelter and protection and He provides.
 
They don’t know that God is in full control of everything, even evil. They don’t see disasters as opportunities for people to get closer to God. They see them as opportunities to blame God and accuse Him of being evil and try to convince people to turn away from Him.
 
They don’t know God, and yet, they make accusations of Him and His character as though they did. They haven’t read the Bible and avoid it at all cost and yet, believe it’s a pile of garbage and shouldn’t be trusted and read.
 
The point I’m getting at is that they don’t truly believe they follow evil people or that they are evil themselves. They see sin as something to be celebrated, not to be repented of. They don’t know the Truth, and will do whatever they can to avoid learning it.
 
John 14:6
“Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’”
 
Author: Freddie Drake.

Do you know what a feminazi is? A feminazi is a woman who believes her gender is sociologically still insanely unequal to men, even though facts say otherwise and she is typically someone who wants female supremacy while claiming it’s for “equality”.
 
But why am I bringing this up? Because of a story I read on AffinityMagazine.us. Here’s the title of the story: “Why the Term “Feminazi” Should Never Be Used”. In this story, Clara Sparwath tells of the time when she was “sitting in my English class listening to the boys behind me talk about the election right after Trump was announced to be our next president… I couldn’t take it anymore when one boy said, ‘Trump was elected! They need to just get over it!’ As the words left his mouth I spun around and looked at the two boys and said, ‘We can’t get over it because he’s an a**hole.’ They looked at me, stunned for a moment before one of them began to chuckle before saying, ‘Looks like we got a feminazi on our hands.’ Immediately rage built inside me.”
 
I would like to know what college those boys attend so I could shake their hand and become their friend. But I also want to point out her reason for liberals not being able to get over Trump getting elected. So she thinks he’s an “a**hole”? Let me tell ya, I thought Obama was a communist spawn of Satan, but I got over him becoming president… TWICE!
 
The article continues: “How is wanting gender equality anything like committing genocide? The answer is: it’s not. People have started calling feminists ‘feminazis’ in order to invalidate the movement and our arguments (not to mention the word nazi is not one to be thrown around carelessly).”
 
This girl has much to learn. Committing genocide is not strictly a Nazi thing. ISIS commits genocide as often as they can, but no one calls them Nazis. Nazis are those inherently hateful of other people simply for being different and are willing to go to any extreme to eradicate them.
 
Huh, I guess ISIS actually could be classified as neo-Nazis, according to my definition.
 
But anyway, that’s not the reason we call them “feminazis”. We call them “feminazis” because they HATE men who are men, HATE women who are women and HATE women who don’t hate men.
 
Secondly, what does this girl mean by “gender equality”? I thought men and women already were equal? Are they not? Are women not able to vote in elections like men do? Are women not allowed to drive like men can? Are women not allowed to have jobs like men can? Do we live in the early 1900’s still? You see, I thought women ARE equal to men, but I guess they’re not, since this girl says they’re not.
 
Third, she says we started calling them feminazis to “invalidate the movement and their arguments”. Honey, history already invalidates your arguments, you don’t need us for that. And to “invalidate the movement”? The “movement” is not for equal rights. It’s for the right to get free contraceptives that TAXPAYERS have to pay for so that you can have sex all you want without worrying about getting pregnant. Oh, but then what does it matter if you do get pregnant? Because you also claim that abortion is a right and since it’s “your body”, therefore it’s “your choice”.

THAT IS THE GENOCIDE PART! ABORTION!
 
Abortion is the reason they're feminazis. Nazism is synonymous with genocide...and 55 million unborn babies killed since Roe v Wade are the evidence of the Feminist Movement genocidal character.

That’s what the feminist movement is. The WOMEN’s movement was successful in making women equal to men. The FEMINIST movement seeks to emasculate men and have women be SUPERIOR to men. The feminist movement seeks to get people to pay for them to just have fun having sex without worrying about having to take care of an “annoying child”.
 
In my opinion, the only important thing that is left to take care of is the wage gap. If a woman is perfectly qualified to do a job that a man can, she should not be getting payed less for that job. THAT is the only thing I could possibly agree on. THAT is the only area that is still an issue. A REAL issue, that is. The rest is not for equality between both sexes, it’s about free contraceptives, the right to kill their own children and being dominant over men.
 
Lastly, I want to point out the irony of the statement “(not to mention the word nazi is not one to be thrown around carelessly)”. I can bet you any amount of money that she’s called Trump a Nazi on more than one occasion. The Left calls us Nazis all the time now, if not “white supremacists”, so I find it deliciously ironic that she has a problem with getting called a “feminazi”, when she has, undoubtedly, called conservatives Nazis in the last few weeks.
 
But to return to the previous point, do you know exactly who has made it so that men have the roles they have and women have the roles they have? It’s not the government. It’s not society. It’s GOD.
 
He is the one that has explained the roles of men and women. Ephesians 5:22-24 says: “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.”
 
The wife is to submit to her husband, as they are to submit to the Lord. Does that mean that she is his slave? Not in the least! Because Ephesians 5:25-30 says: “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of His body.”
 
God told men that they should LOVE their wives as Christ loved the church. Should a wife submit to her husband, even if he is abusive towards her and/or the children? OF COURSE NOT! A man who abuses his wife and/or children is no man at all! And she should not submit herself to a man who refuses to be a godly man. But if the man loves his wife as Christ loved the church (which actually is a great task that, without God, we would fail), then the wife, commanded by God, should be submissive to him, knowing that she will be taken care of by his love.
 
Does that mean that she shouldn’t get a job if she wants to have one? No, she can do as she pleases in that regard, provided that the husband is ok with that decision as well, particularly if there are children involved. Marriage is a compromise, as they say. Equal partners in love. The husband may be the head of the household, but in no way does it mean that he is the owner of the wife.
 
The point is that the women’s movement has already accomplished much of what feminists claim they want to accomplish. And God has already commanded that women have a certain role, provided the husband also does what He commands he does. If the husband does not love his wife as Christ loved the church, the wife is in no way to be submissive to such a poor excuse for a man.
 
Ephesians 5:22-30
“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of His body.”
 
Author: Freddie Drake.

Whenever a hurricane occurs, whether it be a major hurricane or not, the Left is always quick to blame climate change and, by association, Republicans and mankind for the damage we do to our poor planet. Last year, some of the southeastern states were hit by a weaker hurricane than Harvey, named Hurricane Matthew. This year, the people of Texas have been the ones to suffer the effects of the hurricane, particularly Houston.
 
And it’s particularly BECAUSE of Houston getting flooded as much as it is that the Left wants to make a stronger case for climate change with this hurricane. Even though Houston has a long history of flooding by relatively minor rain, the Left will never miss an opportunity to point out climate change wherever they can.
 
But one climatologist acknowledges the fact that, even though it’s uncommon for the hurricane to have stalled over Houston and caused so much rain in the area, it’s not a sign of our climate getting worse.
 
Dr. Roy W. Spencer wrote an article on his personal site titled “Why Houston Flooding Isn’t a Sign of Climate Change”. Now that title alone could easily trigger a liberal. He writes: “In the context of climate change, is what we are seeing in Houston a new level of disaster which is becoming more common? The flood disaster unfolding in Houston is certainly very unusual. But so are other natural weather disasters, which have always occurred and always will occur.”
 
He’s basically saying that natural weather disasters aren’t all typically the exact same. Which is rather obvious. A hurricane striking, say, Florida is going to be different to one striking Texas or New Jersey. And that’s because different variables are in place for each storm in each location. Even location itself is a variable. But just because a hurricane is doing things others typically and historically haven’t done doesn’t mean that climate change is at work here, or that Mother Nature is getting her revenge.
 
Dr. Spencer continues by saying that “floods aren’t just due to weather.” “Major floods are difficult to compare throughout history because the ways in which we alter the landscape. For example, as cities like Houston expand over the years, soil is covered up by roads, parking lots, and buildings, with water rapidly draining off rather than soaking into the soil… The Houston metroplex area has expanded greatly and the water drainage is basically in the direction of downtown Houston.”
 
As humanity expands and technology becomes more advanced and readily available, cities and towns start to become altered by new advancements in our civilization. Urban development naturally means that the landscape in the area will be changed, meaning that the way the water caused by rain or major storms is taken care of is changed. As Dr. Spencer said, with the city of Houston expanding, the water is steered in the direction of downtown Houston rather than being soaked up by the earth. Don’t ask me why the water is directed to downtown Houston, it’s just the way the city was built.
 
He continues to say “There have been many flood disasters in the Houston area, even dating to the mid-1800s when the population was very low. In December of 1935, a massive flood occurred in the downtown area as the water level height measured at Buffalo Bayou in Houston topped out at 54.4 feet. By way of comparison, as of 6:30 a.m. Monday morning, the water level in the same location is at 38 feet, which is still 16 feet lower than in 1935. I’m sure that will continue to rise.”
 
So we even know, as I said earlier in this article, that Houston has a history of getting flooded, with the worst of it seemingly happening in 1935. And that flood wasn’t even the result of a hurricane. It was just constant rains in the area causing the flood. Besides, this is 1935. The automobile at the time was largely steam-powered, with diesel engines beginning to be made only 5 years prior. Not to mention that the population was significantly less than today. So I highly doubt the Houston flood of 1935 was caused by mean, capitalist men polluting the planet.
 
Dr. Spencer goes on to talk about whether the rainfall totals were unprecedented, in which he says that the only thing unprecedented about the totals is WHERE they landed, not the amount of rainfall that happened.
 
He also talks about whether Harvey’s intensity was unprecedented, which he says that it’s really not, since in the last 44 years, we’ve had 4 Category 4 hurricanes strike the U.S., with 14 more in the last 88. Basically, we’ve actually had LESS intense hurricanes in the past half-decade.
 
He concludes his article by saying: “Weather disasters happen, with or without the help of humans.” And he’s completely right about that. Hurricanes have always happened in the history of the Earth in areas that get hurricanes. Some have been completely devastating, particularly one that hit Galveston in 1900, which killed between 6,000 and 12,000 people. While some have been without much fatality (particularly BECAUSE of technological advancements and innovation that the Left seems to despise).
 
The point is that hurricanes happen in the intensity they occur simply because God ordains it so. We have nothing to do with the frequency or intensity of any particular hurricane. If we actually COULD affect the weather in which the Left claims we can, then California would never go through any drought. We would increase all the factors that “contribute to climate change” in that area to solve California’s drought problem… at least in 50 to 100 years, according to the Left.
 
To me, the Left’s claims that we are capable of severely altering the weather is basically the equivalent to believing a rain dance would actually cause rain. The logic is about the same in both cases.
 
And, interestingly enough, both cases exclude God’s sovereignty on the Universe. It makes sense, since the Left doesn’t believe in God, they think we can become like gods. But we are mere humans, with mortal flesh. We can’t accurately predict what the weather will look like by the end of the week, and we can’t do anything to change what will happen. Only God has that power.
 
Psalm 135:6
“Whatever the Lord pleases, He does, in Heaven and on Earth, in the seas and all deeps.”
 
Author: Freddie Drake.