Not too long ago, I wrote about how likely voters agree with Trump that this country needs patriotic education, and I also agreed with that notion, knowing that the Left is teaching Marxist communism in our schools, indoctrinating the skulls full of mush into being commie puppets. Well, perhaps unsurprisingly, teaching kids the wrong thing begins by teaching kids nothing.
 
A recent study by the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany showed some astounding and shocking results, to say the least. According to the New York Post, “Nearly 20 percent of millennials and Gen Z in New York believe Jews caused the Holocaust…”
 
How, exactly, do you even manage to do this? What could you possibly be teaching kids about the Holocaust that leads them to believe that the most well-known victims of it WERE THE ONES THAT CAUSED IT?!
 
And this begs the following question: is this a failure of education or is it deliberate spreading of disinformation by the school system?
 
I really don’t know, and I certainly don’t have evidence to support the latter option, but this is, at best, a MONUMENTAL failure by the New York school system.
 
Now, usually, roughly 20% of people believing something isn’t a whole lot, but it is a massive deal when we are talking about this particular subject. You have to be trying really hard to get young people to believe that the Holocaust was caused not by Hitler or Nazi Germany but by the Jews themselves, despite the extremely well-known fact that six million Jews died in concentration camps during that time period.
 
Seriously, that particular fact is up there in terms of most common knowledge, like the Pythagorean theorem, the fact that the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell and that Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 (not that that’s the most common thing taught regarding Columbus in the modern education system). If you’ve finished grade school, you know about how six million Jews died in the Holocaust and that they were the group of people most often killed in that horrific event.
 
Well, at least, I assume that people would know this. Given these news, and the fact that it’s been years since I’ve finished high school, let alone grade school, I’m not even confident that the school systems are even teaching this anymore.
 
Chances are that instead of teaching about the Holocaust, teachers might just be giving their students lectures about how racist this country is, how it was founded by racists and for racists, and how if you are a white kid, you have white privilege, while if you are not a white kid, you are a victim. Chances are that instead of teaching kids about history, the schools are teaching them about gender identity and other bullcrap.
 
I wouldn’t know since I don’t have a kid myself, so maybe a parent with a child in grade school could look over the assignments (as they should, particularly considering Leftist teachers don’t seem to want parents paying attention to what they are teaching the kids) to verify whether or not I am in any way correct, but I really wouldn’t be surprised if I’m not too far off.
 
At any rate, returning to the NY Post, they also reported that “although there were more than 40,000 camps and ghettos during World War II, 58 percent of respondents in New York cannot name a single one.”
 
This one is almost as bad as the nearly 20% who think the Jews are responsible for the Holocaust (and now that I think about it, considering how anti-Semitism has been on the rise in that craphole of a city, perhaps anti-Semitism is at least partly to blame for kids believing that nonsense). Nearly 60% of New York respondents couldn’t name even one concentration camp? Not even Auschwitz, which is undoubtedly the most infamous of them all?
 
But here is another number that is even more astonishing and awful: “60 percent of respondents in New York do not know that 6 million Jews were killed during the Holocaust.”
 
So I was kind of right, then. If that many young New Yorkers don’t know that fact, it’s because the schools aren’t teaching it.
 
How in the world is it that 60% of New York respondents don’t know that six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust? What exactly is being taught in those schools, because it's clear they aren't teaching historical facts relating to it.
 
Now, according to the study, 34% said they believe the Holocaust happened but that “the number of Jews who died has been greatly exaggerated or believe the Holocaust is a myth and did not happen or are unsure.”
 
Let’s begin with the first issue, that they think the number is exaggerated. I believe that one can be relatively explained by misinformation online and things like that, because there are people out there who outright deny that the Holocaust happened, despite the fact that we have people alive today WHO WERE THERE WHEN IT HAPPENED. One of them was even invited by Trump to one of his State of the Union addresses and Trump talked about how our U.S. military freed him and he thought they were angels sent by God (and basically, they were).
 
We have people who are alive today who are actual victims of the Holocaust, who were interned in one of the camps. Auschwitz has been turned into a memorial which one can visit in Poland. How does anyone come to the belief that the Holocaust didn’t happen, or it was exaggerated?
 
How does anyone miss that six million Jews were killed during this time? Well, I suppose by having far-Left teachers more focused on teaching critical race theory or gender fluidity or parroting climate cultist talking points than teach a class that six million Jews died during the Holocaust, and therefore, there is NO WAY the Jews could have possibly been responsible for it.
 
But here is a number that is truly shocking, more so than the others, which even I am at an absolute loss over: “A shocking 28 percent of respondents in New York believe it is acceptable to hold neo-Nazi views…”
 
Considering how much of an effort the American Left and the fake news media makes to paint Trump as “literally Hitler” or as a Nazi, you would think that considerably fewer people would find neo-Nazi views acceptable. Never mind that neo-Nazis are white supremacists who are Nazis themselves, and that alone should lead the vast majority of people to reject them, but it is especially surprising considering that the Left makes a great effort in painting Trump as one such person.
 
My best guess as to why this is is that, like I said before, there has been a massive rise in anti-Semitism in New York. Orthodox Jews have been, more and more often, the target of anti-Semitic attacks, discrimination, etc. Before the pandemic began, back in December of last year, I wrote an article that talked about a number of horrific anti-Semitic attacks happening in New York. Of course, there were a lot more incidents than the one I talked about in that article, but still, it was clear that New York had and likely still has a huge anti-Semitism problem.
 
This, perhaps, can explain some of the numbers we are seeing, but it is still unbelievable to see such numbers. Granted, I wasn’t exactly expecting the best out of New York, but still. Even going by the Leftist narratives that Trump is a Nazi, considering how many Democrats there are in that city, you would think they would be considerably less tolerant of neo-Nazi views (or at least, the ones that are openly neo-Nazi, considering that socialism is something that they seem to love).
 
That so many young New Yorkers think that the Jews are to blame for the Holocaust is baffling. It sounds like satire, but it’s reality. Granted, it’s not a majority and it’s nowhere close to a majority, but nearly 20% of millennials and Gen Zers in New York thinking that the Jews caused the Holocaust is a catastrophic failure in education, at best. At worst, it is a malignant attempt to literally blame the victim for the atrocity in an effort to sow further division and chaos.
 
There need to be SERIOUS changes made in the schools in this country. Not only do we need patriotic education, we need education IN GENERAL because clearly, these kids aren’t learning jack, and the things they are learning are useless garbage that won’t help them in the real world apart from making them communist puppets and useful idiots for the Left.
 
I hope something major is done about this, but changes need to happen at the top. Here’s hoping the people of New York have enough sense to boot their dangerous and lunatic leaders out of office and that the GOP can offer solid solutions for them.
 
Proverbs 8:5
“O simple ones, learn prudence; O fools, learn sense.”

Considering the uncomfortably high percentage of young people who say they favor socialism over capitalism, or would describe themselves as socialists (they aren’t really socialists, they don’t even know what it actually means or does), I’d say I am okay with this reality: young people really just don’t show up to vote.
 
Now, that’s not to say that they don’t vote at all, of course, they just really don’t vote with anywhere close to the same rate as older generations do, and this has been the case for a long time, historically.
 
Census.gov has an article that details elections (1980-2016) that display the turnout rates by demographic each and every presidential election. One of the figures they show is fairly eye-opening:

​As you can see, there are four lines in this line chart that display different voting blocs according to age. From 1980 to 2016, we see that voter turnout for people ages 65 or older is often virtually tied with those aged 45-64. In 1980, 45-64 year olds voted at a recorded rate of 74.4%, those 65 and older voted at a rate of 69.8 and 30-44 year olds were close behind, at 67.2%. But those aged 18-29 are WAY below any of the aforementioned age groups in terms of turnout. In the 1980 election, only 48.2% of people in that age range turned out to vote, 19 less points than 30 to 44-year-olds.
 
And it’s been fairly similar in each and every presidential election from that point on. We can see that the youth vote spiked in 1992, likely to vote for Bill Clinton, but that still was almost 16 points less than the next oldest group and 23.1 points less than those 65 or older.
 
In 1996, turnout rates crashed for pretty much every category, but none harder than 18 to 29-year-olds, who turned out at a rate of only 39.6%. As time went on, the rate began to go back up to its usual rates, once again getting another rate of above 50% in 2008 to vote for Obama, but after that, it went down once again.
 
And this last Super Tuesday was virtually no different, statistically. According to The Inquisitr, “According to results from the NBC News exit poll released at around 5 p.m. EST on Tuesday – two hours before the first poll closings in eastern states – only 13% of Democratic voters in the Super Tuesday primaries are between the ages of 18 and 29. That is 10 percentage points fewer than the second-least likely voters – the 30-44 age group, which made up 23% of Tuesday’s electorate.”
 
Voters between 45 and 64 turned out at 35% and those 65 and older turned out at 29%. While the actual numbers may be vastly different from the Census figure above, we still see that the turnout rate for 18 to 29-year-olds is far less, by 10 points or more, than the older voting ranges. There is a ten-point difference between 18-29 year olds and 30-44 year olds in that Super Tuesday electorate, as the Inquisitr noted. The difference widens to 16 between 18-29 year olds and 65 and older, and the difference stands at 22 entire points between those 18-29 and 45-64.
 
This largely explains just why it is that Bernie Sanders lost all but two of the states in this last Super Tuesday (March 10th), just barely winning in the largely socialist state of Washington by 2,084 votes (and both Bernie and Joe got the same number of delegates in both Washington and North Dakota, the other state Bernie won, so those victories didn’t really matter for Crazy Bernie). Bernie’s campaign largely hinges on his ability to attract the youth vote.
 
On social media, you may see plenty of young Bernie Sanders supporters, like that “OK boomer” dancing girl and many others, but they largely do not turn out to vote, even when their guy needs as much youth support as possible in order to beat Joe Biden. All the pro-Bernie hashtags on Twitter, all the pro-communist t-shirts sold, all the pro-socialist memes posted on the internet don’t really matter because the young people behind the hashtags, t-shirts and memes are simply not turning out to vote.
 
Now, forgive me if I sound annoyed at that, because I am not at all annoyed in the least. The fact that young people, those who are fresh out of, or still in, college and have been brainwashed by their college professors to believe communism is good and capitalism is bad, don’t vote is a good thing, in my opinion. If they turned out to vote at roughly the same rates as at least the next older voting bloc, the 30-44 year olds, I believe that would largely skew a lot of elections to the Left. So I am glad that younger people largely don’t go out to vote.
 
The fact that 18, 19 and 20-year-olds can vote, I think, is not even wise at any rate. There are good arguments for RAISING the voting age, as opposed to lowering it to allow for kids who are 16 years old to vote, as the Democrats want to do (seemingly from these figures, it really wouldn’t make that much of a difference). Someone who is 18 years old, one who just recently had to ask permission to go to the restroom (and had to be scolded for saying “can I” instead of “may I”), should not have the responsibility of deciding who runs the country. Arguably, the voting age should be at least 25 years old, as that is the age when the human brain fully develops (I say this, recognizing that would make me ineligible to vote, but I still think that’d be better than what he have now).
 
Kids who are going into college or recently are coming out of college with the Communist Manifesto forcibly drilled into their brains should not be making the decision as to whom runs the country. Thankfully, even while they are allowed to vote, it seems that they largely simply do not go out to vote at the rate that older generations tend to do.
 
Looking back at that line chart, the 2016 turnout rate was two points lower than the rate it was in 1980. From that election to the most recent one, youth turnout has largely not been extremely high or varied. Even in the election where youth turnout was the highest (in the chart), it was still, again, almost 16 points lower than the next oldest voting block and each age range saw at least some increase in turnout rate that election.
 
Young people largely simply do not go out to vote. I don’t know if it’s because they are uninspired (you’d think Bernie’s “revolution” would be fairly inspiring to this Marxist generation) or because they are too lazy or do not know when there is an election or at what time polls close, but they simply don’t show up to vote. This has historically been the case since at least 1980 but more than likely going back further (Joseph Curl of the Daily Wire notes how young people protested against Nixon and the Vietnam War but he still won re-election in a massive landslide in 1972, so that goes to show that this has been the case since even before 1980).
 
Whatever the reason may be, I can’t say I am dissatisfied. I don’t want Marxists in the White House or in Congress, so if Millennials largely aren’t going out to vote for such people, fine by me.
 
Psalm 119:9
“How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to your word.”

​Pop culture. Mainstream Media. Social Media. Politics. All of these things are dominated by the Left to one extent or another. All of these things feature Left-wing ideologies, ideas, policies, beliefs and objectives. All of these things make you believe that the loud voices you hear are the mainstream, popular and majority opinions. But that couldn’t be further from the truth.
 
Gallup recently ran a poll to find where Americans find themselves on the political spectrum and the results can be eye-opening for some, or perhaps, most people. According to Gallup, while there are more Americans who align themselves with the Democrat Party than Republican (47-42%, respectively), the number of conservatives in this country is far bigger than the number of liberals and that gap is growing.
 
Gallup surveyed nearly 30,000 people (so a massive sample size) and found that 37% of Americans view themselves as “conservative”. This number is up from the previous time this survey was taken (2018) when 35% identified as “conservative” so a two-point increase. But while the number of conservatives grew in 2019, the number of liberals SHRANK.
 
According to Gallup, the number of Americans who identify themselves as “liberal” is just 24%, down from 26% the previous year. 35% of Americans identified as “moderate” though it’s possible that a decent number of them are conservatives who were too afraid to say they are conservative out of fear of scorn or persecution and one cannot really blame someone for this.
 
As I said, pop culture, the MSM, social media, etc. are all DOMINATED by Left-wing rhetoric and ideology. You hear the biggest names in Hollywood or in sports often lambasting the President or even the country itself. You watch the news and most of it is negative towards Trump and those who support him. You go on social media and you often see Left-wing babble trending on Twitter or conservatives being censored or conservative videos getting taken down or conservative comments being flagged as “hate speech”, etc.
 
The loud voices of the Left are so overwhelming and frequent that you can’t help but think they are in the majority. And THAT is the reason they are so loud. They don’t have the numbers. The vast majority of people do not agree with everything these self-righteous hypocrites have to say. The vast majority of people do not agree with them. But as they live in their own narcissistic bubble and believe they are the most important and intelligent people on Earth, they believe most people do agree with them and couldn’t possibly stand that most people do not, so they delude themselves.
 
Remember when Rose McGowan tweeted that “52% of us humbly apologize” for the drone strike that killed Soleimani? She sincerely believes that 52% of the country is Left-wing 24/7 and agrees with her and the Left on basically everything. She believes 52% of the country is with her on this, but according to The Hill, 47% of American voters supported the strike against Soleimani, while only 40% disapproved (sample size: 1,995 registered voters). Granted, not every American is a registered voter, but when it comes to election time, these are the people that matter the most.
 
The vast majority of people agreed with the Soleimani strike, even if Rose McGowan and Michael “Higher BMI than IQ points” Moore deeply apologize to the terror-supporting Iranians. This is because the vast majority of Americans DO NOT agree with these idiotic celebrities.
 
Now, when it comes to party lines, most people align roughly with what would be expected. Among Republicans, 73% identify as “conservative”, which ties the highest number in the last 25 years, while only 4% identify as “liberal”. 21% of Republicans also identify as “moderate”. For Democrats, 49% identify as liberal, 36% are “moderate” and 14% are “conservative”.
 
As far as Independents go, 45% identify as “moderate”, 30% are “conservative” and 21% are “liberal”.
 
41% of American men consider themselves “conservative”, 36% of men are “moderate” and 20% are “liberal”. 33% of women are “conservative”, 35% are “moderate” and 28% are “liberal”. If I had to guess at least one reason, even if not the biggest reason, for this disparity, I would guess that abortion would have to be a reason for it. Women are the ones who get pregnant after sex, so it stands to reason that there would be more liberal women than liberal men because liberal women do not want the responsibility of child-bearing and rearing. I’m not sure if this is the biggest reason for this disparity, but I think it’s at least one, fairly major, reason for it.
 
Looking at age, we find that those 18-29 tend to be more liberal than conservative (30-26% respectively), but not by all that much and the vast majority of them are moderate (40%). This makes a lot of sense to me. Plenty of young people naively support socialism and communism, so it stands to reason that more of them are more “liberal” than “conservative”, but the difference is not overwhelming. And it also makes sense that so many are “moderate” because younger people tend to try and find themselves and what they believe, not holding on to anything solid politically just yet, but discovering what they believe for themselves to be morally right (though morality is determined by God, but that’s an argument for another time).
 
Of course, I fall within this age range, being a Millennial, but I would consider myself to be solidly conservative (and I would hope all of my articles would reflect that). For people ages 30-49, 34% are “conservative” as opposed to 26% of “liberals”, with 37% being “moderate”. 50-64 age range, you find 42% “conservative”, 34% “moderate” and 21% “liberal”. 65+, you get 46% “conservative”, 29% “moderate” and 21% “liberal.”
 
This also makes sense, in my opinion. Winston Churchill is (perhaps falsely) attributed for saying: “If you aren’t a liberal by 20, you have no heart. If you aren’t a conservative by 40, you have no brain.” We tend to be most liberal when we are young because our minds are not yet fully developed and we are more prone to act based on emotion rather than logic (which is why the Democrats want to lower the voting age to 16). Young people do not know the truths of the world, at least usually. They have to go out and discover them for themselves, which is why virtually no one takes the 17-year-old climate puppet seriously.
 
As one gets older, one would (hopefully) get wiser as well. If one obtains more knowledge as time goes on, one obtains more wisdom as well. We gain this through time and experience. Young people do not have the experience and wisdom that comes with age that older people do, so they tend to be a bit more liberal because being liberal means being more illogical (sorry to any liberal reading this, but the ideologies of socialism are a pipe-dream and not at all realistic or possible to achieve with zero negative consequence).
 
But moving on from age, we also find distinctions in levels of education. Those with a postgraduate degree are, to no one’s surprise, more liberal than conservative (36-26%, respectively) though an equal number of people to liberals are also “moderate”. Those who have graduated college find a shift, however, where 32% are “conservative”, 38% are “moderate” and 28% are “liberal”. Those with only “some college” education are 38% “conservative”, 37% “moderate” and 22% “liberal”. Those without any college education are 43% “conservative”, 33% “moderate” and 19% “liberal”.
 
I’ve said this countless times before and I’ll say it again: college is where logic goes to die. The effects of Marxism in college campuses are clear for all to see. This plays at least some role in the liberalism of young people, and a particularly big role in the socialist and communist romantization in young people’s minds. Despite the fact that communism is an ideology of death and destruction, it’s been romanticized by Marxist college professors seeking to mold young people’s minds the way that they want and create more and more Marxist puppets. How else can one come to find someone as economically illiterate as AOC having an economics degree?
 
The longer people subject themselves to college indoctrination, the more likely they are to come out the other side a mini-Lenin.
 
Regardless, next we find people with different incomes and something fairly surprising. Those who make $100,000 or more are 36% “conservative”, 37% “moderate” and 26% “liberal”. Income range from $40,000 to $100,000, you find 38% are “conservative”, 35% “moderate”, and 25% “liberal.” For those who make less than $40,000, you find 36% “conservative”, 36% “moderate” and 24% “liberal”.
 
This is interesting to me because of just how close together each of them is. The entire schtick of communism, at least as Marx put it, was all about class warfare and the “inequalities” of income between the proletariat and the bourgeoise. Of course, he was mostly talking about Germany and the U.K., not about the U.S., as it wasn’t a world superpower at the time, but still. For all the talks in communist circles about class warfare, the numbers seem to be roughly the same regardless of income. Actually, according to these numbers, you are more likely to be liberal if you make MORE money than less. This, I suppose, is where one would tend to find the term “limousine liberal” to make a lot of sense.
 
Regarding race, Non-Hispanic whites are 41% “conservative”, 33% “moderate” and 23% “liberal”. Non-Hispanic blacks are 23% “conservative”, 44% “moderate” and 28% “liberal”, which makes sense considering black people tend to vote Democrat (as self-destructive and damaging as that is for the black communities around the country). Hispanics are 35% “conservative”, 37% “moderate” and 25% “liberal”, which makes sense because Latinos tend to be more closely tied to the nuclear family (though plenty do also tend to vote Democrat, most likely because many are here illegally and the Democrats are the open borders party).
 
Finally, when it comes to region, you find that those living in the East are 32% “conservative”, 36% “moderate” and 28% “liberal.” In the Midwest, you find 38% “conservative”, 35% “moderate” and 23% “liberal”, which makes sense and aligns well with usual electoral maps. In the South, you find 41% “conservative”, 35% “moderate” and 21% “liberal”. And in the West coast, interestingly enough, you find 34% “conservative”, 36% “moderate” and 27% “liberal”.
 
That last one is interesting considering the West coast is often considered the “Left” coast because of the tendency of those states to vote Democrat. But there are a good number of farmers and land owners in those states, and farm and land owners tend to be conservative, even if the biggest population centers in those states are heavily liberal.
 
But regardless, it is interesting to note just how truly few people in this country actually would consider themselves “liberal”. There are far more conservatives and “moderates”, generally people who are “center-right” in this country than there are Leftists, even if what we often see and hear does not outright reflect that.
 
Again, Leftists need to be loud because they don’t have the numbers. They infect every organization they can to appear to be the mainstream and popular opinion, when that generally isn’t what they are. Most people are either conservative or at least do not agree with most, all, or even some liberal policies or ideologies. And I can only hope that the gap between conservative and liberal continues to grow, not only for the sake of the country, but also so that many might turn their lives over to Christ.
 
Matthew 7:7
“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.”

In this world, seculars and Christians find two distinct ways of being happy. Christians find joy in Christ, even when they find themselves going through a period of tribulation. Christians understand there is a purpose and meaning to life – to serve God and enjoy Him – and find comfort through difficulty in prayer, a direct connection to the Lord.
 
Seculars, on the other hand, believe in making your own happiness and finding your own meaning in life apart from God. That is naturally a bad idea, as we cannot divorce ourselves from God, much as we might try. The fact we have a conscience, have aspirations, dreams, and other logical abilities that are not shared by animals points to our relationship to God, as we were created in His own image.
 
But those who try and stay as far away from God as possible tend to find themselves unhappy, unfulfilled and without any meaning and purpose in their life. It is for this reason that seculars encourage people to “find their own meaning and purpose in life.” Separate from God, they don’t have much in the way for hope. It’s also why they attach themselves to causes like the climate change movement. It’s utterly unscientific, but it gives people meaning and a purpose, as misguided as it may be. As a result, they get attached to it and will defend it, even against reality.
 
But the side effect of encouraging people to “find their own meaning” in life is that people find themselves without meaning and are told to find it basically on their own. They sink themselves in drugs, alcohol, sex and other carnal desires, not knowing they are sinning and not knowing that that is not the purpose for their existence.
 
It’s no surprise, then, that Galaxy Chocolate, in running a study of generational happiness, found the millennial generation the least happy generation in Great Britain. Granted, for the most part, the reasons they give are working too much (Brits work the second most amount of hours in Europe, only behind Greece) and that they are stressing over money and employment, but there is another important aspect to this entire thing: secular vs. Christian beliefs.
 
A poll from early August found that nearly 90% of millennial Brits believed their lives have no meaning or purpose. The poll also found that 84% believed they were failing to “live their best life.” And across every age group, 51% believed the purpose of life is to be as happy as one can be, 37% believe the purpose is to make others happy and 31% said that it was simply to do good.
 
These numbers are depressing, but make sense when you consider that the amount of Brits who consider themselves Christians is at its lowest recorded level: 38%, and only 1% of millennials say they belong to the Church of England.
 
Christ is fading away from Brits’ lives, so is it any wonder the younger generations are feeling miserable? As I talked about in an article about why young people are drawn to socialism, it is the socialization of the economic system in America (and subsequently blaming it on capitalism) that has allowed younger generations to fall through the cracks and wish for radical change to the status quo. But for as much as the American economic system has been socialized, it is dwarfed by the socialization that has been occurring in Europe.
 
The very existence of a European Union should be a warning sign of globalism having been on the rise in the past few decades. The governments of Europe are trying to replace God (whether or not they admit it), but fail spectacularly in every single aspect, but especially for the purpose of joy. Because the government cannot provide joy to anyone. Have you seen any European politicians? Most of them are bitter, angry and resentful. They can’t even bring joy to themselves, so of course they would not be able to bring joy to others.
 
And it shows plentifully in this survey. The younger generations are being taught that their life has no meaning because of “evolution” and that they have to find their own meaning in life. In doing so, they get attached to the first thing they can find: climate activism.
 
The fact that some people have confessed their sins to plants is an indication of the kind of religious cult the climate change movement is. They find a meaning in such activism… but they don’t find joy.
 
Climate activism brings the opposite of joy and happiness. Back in January, the climate change movement’s youngest puppet, Greta Thunberg, gave a speech in front of the World Economic Forum where she said “I want you to panic” and that “I want you to feel the fear I feel every day.” Obviously, the Left is abusing her if she feels this much fear over something that is not exactly a problem. But she gives away the entire point of climate activism: it’s not about hope or happiness or joy for a better future. It’s about fear and panic and dread.
 
The girl is 16 years old and I believe she legitimately fears what she has been taught. Why? Because of a distinct lack of Christ in her life, let alone her heart.
 
Aside from the logical and scientific reasons to not panic about climate change, the reason I don’t believe the world is in the kind of danger the Left says it is (apart from the fact these people have no credibility in my eyes and it’s largely a political ploy to attain more power) is because I trust God and His plan for the world.
 
I know that He is sovereign over the entire universe. I know that everything happens for a reason. I know that He has already sent His own Son to die on the cross for the elect, that whoever might follow His Son might not perish but have everlasting life. If God’s plan for the judgment of the world were about burning the planet to a crisp slowly over time, then it becomes all-the-more important to try and find the elect and help them to find salvation in Christ.
 
Of course, I have biblical reasons for not believing that to be how the world will be judged and ended, but the point remains: God is sovereign and holy, holy, holy. No evil is found in Him.
 
I know God’s character enough to understand His love for us and to trust Him no matter what, even if that is tested sometimes in life. But people like Greta, or like the other 62% of Brits, they don’t know God in this way. They either actively avoid Him or have been taught to ignore Christianity as “fanatical” or “mythological” or “unscientific” or “bigoted”.
 
As a result of being so separated from God, they feel like their lives are meaningless and worthless. Even worse, they find meaning in things that are bad for them and only further poison the soul. Climate activism is one of the most toxic ideologies out there currently, but it gives people a heavily-misguided purpose.
 
The first of the Shorter Catechisms in the Westminster Confession of Faith is to answer what the chief end of Man is. The answer is “Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.”
 
This is the purpose God has put into our lives. This is the meaning of life. We are to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. We might go about it in different ways in as far as how to accomplish it goes (for example, some people were meant to preach in church, others to write articles, others to lead countries, others to do business. All different professions but that all should seek to glorify God and enjoy Him forever), but this remains the chief purpose of Man.
 
This is the type of faith that is either completely absent in most young Britons (and generally many young people) or is outright replaced by the cult of climate change.
 
So I ask again: is it really so surprising to find these types of numbers in generations of people who are mostly ignorant to God? Is it really so surprising to find so many young people without meaning and a purpose in their lives, feeling inadequate and without hope?
 
I’ve already said time and time again about the need for America to return to God if we wish to continue to be blessed by Him. This can also apply to literally any nation on Earth. If God is to save the Queen, God needs to be a considerable part of British life.
 
It’s no surprise that the countries that are faithful to God tend to be so successful. America and Great Britain (and others) succeeded against the Godless Nazis (yes, there is no denying the contribution of the equally-godless Soviets, but they happened to have chosen the right side at the time. They were really no different, ideologically, from the Nazis apart from particular details. They were not exactly friendly to Jews). America, Great Britain and the Vatican, led by an actually good Pope in John Paul II, succeeded against the Godless Soviets in bringing down the USSR.
 
Abandoning God tends to be a self-imposed death sentence against a nation and this is not realized until after the fact. Trusting and having faith in the Lord, though it does not mean absence of trouble, means taking God’s side and being by His side on particular matters.
 
Nations may rise and fall, but God lives forever.
 
1 Corinthians 2:5
“That your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.”
 
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!

Perusing over the different news outlets for me to find something to write about, I found a very interesting piece by Rachel Bovard on The Daily Caller titled: “The Kids Are Right: Our Economic System And The Threats To Freedom.”
 
In the article, she says the various supposed reasons for millennials to be turning to Socialism, such as “They’re ungrateful and greedy, they don’t understand what it is, Instagram makes us covet other people’s stuff, or… millennials pick dumb and unemployable majors in the liberal arts when they should study math or learn to code,” are really unfounded and not actual reasons that tackle the overarching problem.
 
I understand where she’s coming from here, but I don’t totally agree with what she says. Regarding the “ungrateful and greedy” reason, I agree. It’s not that kids are ungrateful and greedy. There are plenty of people who are, indeed, ungrateful and greed has been around for millennia, so it’s not strictly a flaw unique to this young generation, but that ungratefulness, which does appear at least in a good amount of people, stems from the second reason: ignorance.
 
“They don’t understand what it is” and it’s entirely true. If you remember, Rasmussen had a poll back in June, which I talked about, that found 84% “of voters nationwide have a favorable opinion of free markets,” while 41% also “have a favorable view of Socialism.” Like I said in the article talking about this, it becomes clear that the problem here is ignorance as to what Socialism actually is because the Left promotes it as this fantastic system where everyone does great, has everything they need with no excess, is very happy and fulfilled. That is, as proven by history, a massive lie, but it keeps getting told generation by generation.
 
So while ignorance may not necessarily be the only factor here, it is important to note that it is, in fact, a considerable factor because ignorance on a subject opens the way for misinformation. If you don’t know what Socialism is, you could be told the wrong thing about it and believe it, particularly at an early age when you trust the information given to you by authority figures such as parents and teachers unquestioningly.
 
As far as covetousness goes, I agree with her that that “reason” is no reason at all because covetousness has been around for ages (and is part of the Ten Commandments not to covet that which is not yours), though I have personally never heard anyone use that argument, but fair enough if she has.
 
And picking unemployable majors is, I think, also a factor, once again disagreeing with her. When you pick to learn about “Gender Studies” as a major, you find yourself hating men (even if you are, yourself, a man), hating capitalism and wishing for a full-on communist takeover of the government and our lives. That, again, stems from ignorance on socialism. But more importantly, that also means that no good and useful skills have been learned by the students apart from how to play the victim at every turn, so no real employment opportunities rise up.
 
But moving on, Rachel says that “channeling self-interest into capitalism, allowing free consumer choice, letting the market respond naturally to demand, has served us well.” This comes after acknowledging the fact that the average American earns 10x more than the rest of the world. However, she argues that “there are cracks. And it is incumbent upon us to acknowledge that people – especially millennials – are falling through those cracks, and that scoffing that the system is fine, and they should stop whining and read more Milton Friedman, ignores the problem that parts of the system may indeed be out of whack.”
 
This is where I also have to disagree, but the interesting thing is that she also sort of disagrees herself later down the line. Before I come to the defense of capitalism (which I will, so don’t worry), allow me to share the arguments Rachel makes that are actually valid.
 
The millennial generation, she writes, “came of age just as the economy was slipping over the cliff of the Great Recession. We watched as the government took pains to care for the billionaire bankers and auto giants, but not the 401k’s of our parents and grandparents. The left told us to Occupy All The Things, and the right told us to sit down and mind our betters. Neither made sense.”
 
“We are very likely the first generation who will not create more wealth than our parents. In fact, we’re struggling to even make it to the middle class. After years of being told that college was the ticket to success, we’re drowning in debt, thanks to tuition increasing over 100% since 2001. We still can’t afford health care. In fact, we can’t even make enough money to get married, have kids, and buy a house – the very steps conservatives say will save us, and save civil society. Perhaps relatedly, suicide is now the second leading cause of death among ages 10-34. And we’re killing ourselves on opioids. Given all of this, is it any wonder even a vague understanding of socialism sounds better?”
 
However, as she herself acknowledges literally following that paragraph, these are the effects of government intrusion into the free market. You see, Rachel follows that by saying: “Socialism is no cure, but if we’re going to win back millennials, it has to start acknowledging the problems. Saying ‘free market’ really loudly isn’t going to suffice when much of what plagues millennials is linked to government manipulating the so-called free market – in many cases, with backing from the right.”
 
And THAT is the real crux of the problem. We are a capitalist nation, no doubt. However, slowly but surely, we have socialized our system more and more through government intervention. As Rachel herself acknowledges, the reason for hikes in tuition, and therefore, student debt, can be traced back to federal involvement in student loans.
 
And while a college education may have been considered a meal ticket back when the generation that lived through the Great Depression was saying this, it’s no longer the case for a variety of reasons. For one, it’s simply supply and demand. There is quite the supply in college degrees and graduates, so the demand for it goes down. A college education used to be a meal ticket because most people were NOT college-educated.
 
Another reason is actually the reason ignored earlier: that kids are picking dumb degrees. While I don’t know how many people actually pick those out of the number of people who opt instead for economics degrees or law degrees, etc., the fact that they are so encouraged is an indication that that’s a problem. No one is in need, or demand, of someone with a degree in “Gender Studies” or “Women’s Studies” or “LGBT Studies” or whatever else there may be. Those jobs, if there are any out there, are very few, and so, the people with those degrees don’t find the employment that they want, instead having to settle for minimum wage jobs and as such, subsequently demand higher wages for those jobs because they can’t get the jobs they hoped they would get.
 
But the biggest hurdle in young people’s way is student loan debt, which is why 2020 Democrat candidates have made it a top issue (even though they helped create the problem).
 
Rachel also goes on to acknowledge that health care is “an uncompetitive cluster made worse by the government. Financiers on Wall Street benefit and manufacturing jobs disappear as our economic policies allow China to use the dollar against us. The government-backed housing giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, egged on by lawmakers who did nothing in response to their role in the market crash a decade ago, are again loading up financial markets with subprime mortgages. Protecting the status quo is a wholly inadequate answer to the socialist surge when it’s the status quo that has utterly failed millennials.”
 
And I can’t really argue against that because she’s right. What has caused the Great Recession, and what has caused millennials to turn to a different idea, a different “solution”, is in large part due to the socialization of our capitalist system of economics.
 
The problem is that not enough people realize this. There are people who think everything is fine and the status quo should remain (usually, these are the NeverTrump types) and there are those who say the “system is broken” regarding capitalism when the system itself is not broken either in theory or in practice, but it’s being slowly replaced by a system these people argue is not broken: socialism.
 
There are people who will argue that capitalism no longer works, or that while it may have worked for a while, it’s “outstayed its welcome.” Both are explicitly untrue. Capitalism works, but not when it gets infected by socialist policies.
 
For the most part, as it stands, we are doing quite well economically. With record-low unemployment rates across the board, people are living better off today than at any point during the Obama presidency. That is not by accident. Trump’s sweeping deregulations, coupled with tax cuts passed back in late 2017 that went into effect in 2018 and are still around today – all of which are capitalistic policies – are helping our economy.
 
What needs to happen is the reverse of what millennials think needs to happen: we need to be even MORE capitalistic, not less and we certainly need to avoid socialism like the plague that it is.
 
Now, Rachel finishes her article by saying the following: “Capitalism has made us the richest and freest country in the world. But those on the right need to confront the flaws and excesses in the system – and posit means to address them – if they have a prayer of defending it with the rising generation.”
 
I agree with her first point, but she makes the mistake of conflating the socialistic policies she herself acknowledged were the cause for the problems millennials face as being part of the capitalist system itself. That is a fatal flaw if one is to defend capitalism and excoriate socialism.
 
The only flaws, as far as I can tell, within the system of capitalism reside in the people that employ it. We are an imperfect people, and as such, cannot create and certainly cannot perfectly employ a perfect system. But capitalism is far and away the best economic system and as close to perfection as one can get. A pure, free market is without a doubt the best way for a society to become wealthy and live well, not only freely.
 
Now, before you call me a hypocrite because I want the Trump government to intervene regarding social media, allow me to reiterate my overall point regarding that particular problem: there is no free market when it comes to social media. Facebook, Twitter, etc. are all monopolies and can basically do whatever they want to whomever they want. If they want to silence someone on the Right, they very-well can. No other social media company will prop up and be able to reasonably compete with these tech giants precisely because of the type of monopoly status and power they hold.
 
Monopolies are, by definition, anti-free markets. Monopoly definition: “the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.” It’s corporate socialism, which is why I argue in favor of regulation regarding these tech giants.
 
Capitalism, free market economics, are the absolute best way for people to live. But ignorance, coupled with misinformation and the gradual socialization of our system to cause the problems we are seeing and blaming it on the system itself is the reason for people to be turning to socialism: it SOUNDS like a better alternative to the status quo.
 
But again, it’s that precise system’s policies that have led to these problems in the first place. Not enough people know this and so, it becomes difficult to challenge the ideologies of the Left, at least in as far as successfully convincing people goes.
 
Capitalism isn’t the problem. The gradual socialization of Capitalism, aka Socialism itself, is the problem. And as such, Capitalism, and more of it, is the solution (as well as returning to God, but that’s a topic for another time).
 
James 3:17
“But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.”
 
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!

Going through conservative media sources to find inspiration for an article, I found a piece on the Daily Wire talking about a study that shows about a quarter of Millennials (sample size less than 800) reportedly show symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Let me tell you, I can count on one hand the amount of times I found immediate inspiration by an article.
 
I will explain what I mean by that in a moment. First, I will give you the context of the situation.
 
A recent psychological study from San Francisco State University suggests that 25% of Millennials attending Arizona State University “reported experiencing ‘clinically significant’ levels of stress, along with other symptoms of PTSD,” according to the Daily Wire.
 
According to the Daily Wire, the students “were evaluated using an ‘Impact of Event’ scale, which measures stress levels at various times following a major traumatic event…”
 
It’s used for events such as a shooting, a terrorist attack, etc. So we already see some indication of the overreaction that is coming from these millennial students, having to use a scale that is typically used for tragic events to evaluate someone’s level of stress after an ELECTION.
 
Melissa Hagan, the lead researcher, said in a statement accompanying the release of the study: “The scale is used to gauge the extent to which individuals have been impacted by an event in such a way that it might lead to diagnosable post-traumatic stress disorder. What we were interested in seeing was, did the election for some people constitute a traumatic experience? And we found that it did for 25 percent of young adults.”
 
The study found that those who identify as a minority, are female, are Democrat, and/or are non-Christian reported having the highest stress levels.
 
The study says: “Black and nonwhite Hispanic students scored higher on the assessment than their white classmates, for instance. Gender, political affiliation and religion all played even larger roles. Females scored about 45 percent higher than males on the assessment, and Democrats scored more than two and a half times higher than Republicans.”
 
Now, I can understand (to an extent) Democrats being stressed about that. When Barack Obama was reelected President of the United States in 2012, the first election I actually payed attention to, I was sad, depressed and even stressed and worried for the future of the country.
 
At the time, I was a Mitt Romney supporter (the first and last time I will support an establishment Republican), and I was confident that he would win. But given that he was pretty soft with Obama after the first debate, even calling him a “good guy”, that gave little reason for Republicans to vote for the guy. I was disappointed at the time, and definitely sad and stressed out over Obama’s victory. But I would never, in a million years, even pretend to believe I suffered from PTSD because of that.
 
Earlier in the article, I mentioned that there have been few times when an article inspired me this easily. This is why. Because no one suffers from PTSD BECAUSE OF AN ELECTION!
 
Here’s a quick list of people who justifiably suffer from PTSD:

• Military veterans
• Rape/sexual assault victims
• Victims of an abusive relationship (boyfriend/girlfriend, mother/father, etc.)
• Survivors of a shooting
• Survivors of a devastating natural disaster (earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc.)​

 
Nowhere on that list will you find “snowflakes who don’t like the guy who became President.”
 
To say that these children, and I mean that in every sense of the word, suffer from PTSD, even a little, because of the results of an election is asinine and is making a mockery of those who actually suffer from PTSD.
 
A hundred years ago, kids my age would be fighting in trenches during WWI. Nearly 80 years ago, kids my age would be fighting Nazis and Japs. 40 years ago, kids my age would be fighting Vietcong.
 
By comparison, my generation is pathetic, and that’s putting it lightly. The people who fought in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc. all were not much older than us, and all went through things we could not even imagine.
 
When I was in high school, one of my teachers told the story of his dad speaking at my teacher’s school when my teacher was a kid. My teacher’s dad was there to tell the children stories of what he did while in Vietnam. However, my teacher’s dad insisted and ensured my teacher would not hear those stories. Obviously, this made my teacher curious and asked his dad why he wouldn’t tell him those stories.
 
His dad replied: “Because I don’t have to look those kids in the eyes every day.” And that was the end of that. My teacher never again asked him about that.
 
The reason I tell you this is because that made me think “what horrors did his dad go through to not be able to look his son in the eyes if he told him?” Just hearing the story from my teacher’s side reached me to my core. I felt sorry for my teacher’s father and made me a bit more aware of the unspeakable horrors that can be found in this world if we look for them.
 
What my teacher’s dad did in Vietnam was probably horrendous. What he saw was probably horrendous.
 
But seeing the results of this study, I can’t help but laugh in disdain, thinking about these millennials: “You fools. You have no idea how good you have it if THIS is stressing you out.”
 
I could spend another article talking about how I’m not surprised that Democrat students feel this way (again, to an extent) but that I find it incredulous, and a bit suspicious, that only the white, Christian, Republicans were not stressed out about it, but I felt the need to bring some perspective to the mix, rather than argue smaller things like “Hispanics shouldn’t be stressed out over this” or “black people/women/leprechauns should not be stressed out over this”.
 
I wanted to focus mostly on the fact that it’s soldiers and those who fought and saw unspeakable horrors, maybe even committed some unspeakable horrors, who actually and justifiably suffer from PTSD.
 
I can’t imagine the kind of thing war veterans have gone through. The things they’ve seen and done. So for these kids to take PTSD so lightly that they think they can get it from being upset over an election that did not go their way honestly pisses me off.
 
And I do not mean to swear like that; I typically try to say “tick off” rather than that word, but that’s just how angry this sort of thing makes me. I truly meant that earlier thought of “these kids have no idea how good they have it.”
 
They would not survive a war. And I do not mean that they would get killed. That’s a probability, yes, but I mostly mean they would not have the character necessary to withstand the hardships that come with war. Even I probably could not. I have lived a fairly privileged life. The most stressful thing that I’ve had to deal with this week is writing a 750-1000 word essay where I needed to use 5 scholarly sources instead of the usual 2-3.
 
That tells me I do not have the mental fortitude to withstand what people in the military go/have gone through. What people in war have gone through. But at least I do not pretend that I have PTSD over that assignment. And at least I understand the fact that veterans have gone through things I could not even imagine and would have to personally experience to understand.
 
I’m not trying to say I’m better than these snowflakes, but I am stressing the point that we have a lot to thank our military, past and present, for.
 
Now, I will relegate to feeling sorry over my pathetic generation, who are now earning the antithesis of the nickname given to the generation that went through the Great Depression and fought in WWII. If that generation is called “the greatest generation”, then mine is “the worst generation”. And it’s completely earned given the results of this study.
 
Romans 15:13
“May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may abound in hope.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles delivered right into your inbox. And since you are not a millennial (or at least one that gets easily triggered by the dumbest things) you won’t get PTSD from reading my articles, which are full of conservative, Christian, pro-Trump and pro-America messages. And the best part is that it comes completely free of charge. So make sure to check it out today!

There are multiple polls out there that try to signify one thing or another. Polls that signify utter defeat for Republicans, not such big defeats for Republicans, and perhaps considerable gains for Republicans. Polls that show extreme levels of enthusiasm never before seen in American politics. And as is always the case, both parties wish to gain the young people’s vote. However, one reporter from NBC News discovered something that perhaps should not come as so much of a surprise: Millennials are not all that interested in voting.
 
Recently, an NBC News correspondent went to the University of California-Irvine campus in Orange County, an area known for being rather conservative, and asked some students there if they were going to vote this November. Of the roughly 20 students that were gathered by a bus stop, only one of them told the MSM correspondent that they would vote. The rest either did not suggest they would vote or flat out ignored the guy. He actually had to ask the question three times before one of the students said they would vote, so that tells you the level of enthusiasm in these kids.
 
After that rather embarrassing spectacle, the correspondent asked a couple of students what they cared about. Their answer should really not come as a surprise to anyone: “school.”
 
Who knew college students cared mostly about school?
 
Getting back on track, the correspondent asked the same kids what would be the topic that would ultimately garner their vote. Their answer was not very different. Their biggest concern was how much school cost, which is a problem we can all understand.
 
Might I offer a suggestion for lowering school tuition? How about colleges stop paying exorbitant amounts of money to people pretending to be a different race in order to meet a racial diversity quota only to have those people teach a class every once in a blue moon? *ahem* Elizabeth Warren *ahem*. Or how about no longer paying crazy people to stand on a stage and yell at white people for the suffering of minorities (that Democrats cause) and that there are as many genders as there are flavors of ice cream?
 
Either way, let’s get back to the surprised NBC News correspondent.
 
He mentioned to the two students who said their biggest concern was school that they had not mentioned the biggest issues that “people talk about on the news all the time – the Russia investigation, the Supreme Court.”
 
The students answered that they simply did not watch the news, which is why they do not concern themselves with that sort of stuff.
 
The correspondent moved on to two more students. He told them that it could fall to them whether or not Congress was in the hands of Republicans or Democrats and asked them if they were currently thinking about that. Their answer, at this point, should not come as a surprise. They are not very enthusiastic or concerned about voting or even who Congress goes to. The student who answered also mentioned that he assumes that “the people voting have probably some idea of who they are voting for.”
 
The correspondent then turned to the other student, a girl, and asked her if she was going to vote. She says: “I should,” and mentions that “we are the most unreliable people [for] Democrats…”
 
The correspondent finally conceded that they might not vote and asked them, in a disappointed tone, that the Democrats “can’t count on you guys necessarily.” The students answered with a relatively uncaring “no”.
 
Of course, this all comes as relative good news and bad news. The good news is that these kids aren’t being poisoned by what the media says. The bad news is that they are also not getting themselves informed of how diabolical the Democrat Party is and the horrendous behavior they have shown throughout the Kavanaugh confirmation process and even before that.
 
They actually kind of remind me of the Chinese millennials who were not interested in communism, in a way.
 
And all things considered, I am not so surprised that these kids are not all that interested in voting. Most people, believe it or not, are not all that political. This includes even millennials. But I will admit that I, myself, was about as surprised as the NBC News correspondent. Knowing what’s been going on in this country, the fact that millennials (at least these ones in the video) are not all that interested in voting is actually pretty surprising.
 
Of course, you also have to take into consideration that these are college kids who have other things in mind. Things like midterms (exams, that is), projects, part-time jobs, events, clubs, friends, relationships, etc., so it is understandable that maybe who wins the 2018 midterm elections might not be at the forefront of their minds.
 
Generally speaking, midterm elections are not as popular or considered to be as important as presidential elections. And even though both Republicans and Democrats make it a case to point out how important this next election is (for different reasons, obviously), there are still people who will not really care all that much and stay at home on November 6th.
 
Even I make the point that this midterm election is a lot more important than the ones in the past. In my honest opinion, the 2018 midterms are just as important as the 2016 presidential election. I consider this next election a turning point. Either we fall back to the socialism that ravaged the country during the Obama years, but on steroids, or we push back against the destructive Left and possibly send them over the edge of complete and total insanity.
 
Insanity that could lead to even more violence that makes the kind of violence we are witnessing now look like a tea party by comparison.
 
But I digress. From what I can gather with this funny NBC video, I take it that people are not quite as fired up to kick Trump out of office as the Left thought they were. With how they’ve been portraying Trump, they believe the vast majority of the country agrees with them. That Trump’s supporters regretted voting for him the minute he won and are ready to toss him on his behind. That all of America hates that Trump cheated to win and wants to rectify that.
 
That is so far from reality, the Left might as well be 2D cartoons.
 
That’s not to say deranged Leftists aren’t fired up to vote down-the-line Democrat this November, but that is to say that there is likely an equal or greater amount of Americans, not just conservatives but Independents and former Democrats too, who are fired up to punish these unruly children calling themselves a political party.
 
All I know is that this millennial right here is ready to vote down-the-line Republican and keep, if not grow, the GOP majority in Congress. Not necessarily because I believe these Republicans are great and care about what I think or are ready to pass MAGA agenda items, but because I know full-well what the alternative would be.
 
If I have to choose between a human being with flaws or literally Satan, I would choose the human.
 
Ephesians 6:16
“In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one;”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. It contains a compilation of the week’s articles delivered right into your inbox. And as the name suggests, it’s entirely free. Unlike the Left who promise free things but screw you in the end, this subscription has no hidden fees. So make sure to subscribe today!

There’s something to be said surrounding this very topic: results matter.
 
But before I get too ahead of myself, allow me to set up the context for this article.
 
Recently, Cabot Phillips of Campus Reform went to Michigan State University to ask college students about Obama’s ludicrous attempt at taking credit for Trump’s economic success.
 
As a reminder, here’s what Obama said: “When you hear how great the economy’s doing right now, let’s just remember when this recovery started.” Oh, I remember. It started the day Trump got elected, with the stock market soaring to new heights as a result of the election. Remember how the Left said Trump would cause the market to crash if he got elected? I definitely do.
 
Now, while some on the Left such as anyone within the Leftist media or anyone who dons a “D” next to their name in Congress might believe this ridiculous idea that today’s economic success is even partly due to Obama, it seems that the college students Cabot interviewed did not share the same views.
 
In the video (below), Cabot asks multiple students about what Obama said and their overall opinions on the economy and Trump’s job regarding it.
 
One student said: “[Obama’s] been out long enough now, [the economy] is not on him anymore, it’s more on Donald Trump. I guess he’s a little bit in the wrong.”
 
Another said: “I would, unfortunately, side with Trump on this one. I think he has done a lot for the economy that Obama didn’t do such a good job on, so I’ll side with Trump on that one.”
 
One student noted that “I feel like once a President’s done, they hand it off… in terms of [economic] confidence and changing people’s attitudes, I would say that’s mostly Trump.”
 
Now, that’s not to say that these students are going to start supporting Trump. Pretty much every single student interviewed either visibly or verbally showed that, while they agree with Trump over Obama on this issue, they do so with some dismay. You can see that when one of the students said that she “unfortunately” sided with Trump on this. One of the female students went as far as to say that she finds Trump’s tweets “because I’m a girl and a lot of [the tweets] are against us.”
 
I don’t want to get too much into this, as I’d rather relish in the idea that college students actually agree with Trump on SOMETHING, but I will quickly say that not a single Trump tweet is against women. If they call someone out, they call a particular someone out (be it Pelosi, Feinstein, Warren, etc.) but do not make any sort of generalized sexist comment towards women. So, obviously, I disagree with the student on this.
 
That being said, she does follow up her comments, getting back on topic, that “economically, I feel like he’s really helping us.”
 
Now, I don’t know who “us” is in this scenario. Since she mentioned the fact that she’s a girl (do I call her out for not saying she’s cisgender, thus offending transgenders? Kidding.) she could mean he’s helping women economically, since female unemployment rate is hovering in the low 4% according to the website statista.com. She could also mean millennials, in which case the overall unemployment rate also shows promise for this age group. Or she could mean Americans altogether, in which case I would refer you to the overall unemployment rate, the African-American unemployment rate sitting below 6%, the female unemployment rate, the Hispanic unemployment rate sitting at 4.7% according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, as well as the overall growing GDP hitting over 4%.
 
To summarize, yeah, Trump’s doing pretty good for all of us.
 
Now, let me return to the initial sentence of this article. Earlier, I mentioned that results matter. What exactly do I mean by that? Well, think about it. When else are we going to see Leftist millennial college students agree with Trump on anything?
 
The mainstream media “reports” everything that is happening (or not actually happening) as though it’s doomsday, it will doom Republicans in November and will lead to Trump’s impeachment. The media loves to pretend the world is on fire when a Republican is President and they make sure that they blame this "doomsday" on him, but when a Democrat is President, they go out of their way to ensure things that are actually going bad aren't blamed on the Democrat President.

Just think about the way the media reported things during Obama's presidency. They would report that things were bad, but they made the effort to drive any blame away from Obama and instead, placing it either on the Republican majority in Congress when they had it, or the Republican minority in Congress when they had it. Either way, everything wrong that happened was not the result of Obama’s socialistic rule that naturally and intentionally destroys societies but the result of the Republicans either pretending to fight or even being completely complacent.
 
In the case of Trump, it’s 180 degrees backwards. Everything bad that happens is Trump’s fault, even if he has no control over it. I mean, for crying out loud, they were blaming HURRICANES on him. That shows you the mental state of the media is quite poor if they blame THE WEATHER on Trump. It’s really no different from the crazies in the Muslim world who blame Israel for, well, the weather. It’s almost literally the exact same thing.
 
With the constant reporting of Trump basically being Hitler, it really is a marvel that these Leftist college students, who themselves do not necessarily like Trump, go as far as to properly give credit to Trump for the success he’s had regarding the economy.
 
And that’s why I say that results matter. These students, despite the fact that they agreed with Trump with varying levels of dismay, and even go as far as to mention what they don’t like about Trump (seemingly, it was mostly his tweets), can all see that Trump is actually doing a good job with the economy. Even if they don’t think he’s a good President, they can’t help but agree that he has helped with the economy.
 
Now, I could sit here and list the other achievements that show that Trump is a fantastic President not just in terms of the economy but many other aspects of leading the country, but that’s for another time. As it is, I want to take note of the fact that, despite the media and the Left’s best efforts to pin Trump as the worst President to have ever served office, they can’t successfully convince people to ignore every facet of reality.
 
The reality is that Trump’s economy is the best I have ever seen (being 22-years-old, that’s not saying much, particularly since I only have Obama’s economy for comparison) and that it’s showing no signs of slowing down.
 
From what I can gather, the only way the economy will slow down is if the Democrats win the House (especially if they win Congress). The disruption they would cause would send us back to the economic stagnation we were all too familiar with during the Obama administration. Sure, Trump can do some other things that will certainly help the economy (I still don’t believe Democrats could impeach Trump without a supermajority in the Senate), but things would definitely slow down significantly.
 
While I don’t necessarily believe that any of the interviewed college students will vote for a Republican candidate, the fact that they go as far as to acknowledge this is Trump’s economy and his to claim success over is significant.
 
Who knows? Maybe one of them will have a change of tune about the Democrat Party and vote Republican, either this November or sometime down the line. There certainly have been a lot of lifelong Democrat voters who have had enough with the Party of the ass and have decided to vote for Trump and/or other Republicans.
 
One can hope.
 
Proverbs 18:15
“An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. With it, you can receive in your e-mail inbox a compilation of the week’s articles, as well as access to our online website. And the best part is that it’s completely free. With our current economic climate thanks to Trump (and more importantly, to God) it’s not like people couldn’t afford to pay for such a thing. However, I will not charge you a single cent for this sort of access. So make sure to sign up for our free weekly newsletter today!

The biggest stories in the news media for this week have been about Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen and, surprisingly, Mollie Tibbetts. However, there was a story that came out before these things that I really should have covered then, but will cover it now because it really is a worthwhile story that I believe can stand the test of time.
 
That story, of course, is when New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo attacked Trump’s MAGA slogan, saying that America “was never that great”. Naturally, he received some backlash, even from the Left, but Campus Reform decided to take it to the streets of New York to ask people if they agree or disagree with the Governor’s statement. Specifically, Campus Reform asked college-aged millennials this question. (video below)
 
I think you can guess what they collectively thought.
 
Most of them said things like: “I don’t believe America has been great for all folks, ever, even today”, “I would have to agree with Governor Cuomo.”
 
When asked if they could point to a time when America was great, they said things like: “Not particularly”, as well as one particularly opined young man who had some harsh words to say: “The idea that there was a once great America is pointing towards this false sense of nationalism… What, it’s talking about white America? Yeah, it’s not great.”
 
It’s worth pointing out this particular young man is, himself, a white man.
 
Another young Millennial said something similar: “I think it has been great for straight, white men for a very long time.”
 
Overall, it is interesting to see the sentiment shared by these kids about how they feel about our country. However, it’s both surprising and not very surprising.
 
The reason it’s not surprising is because Millennials are not well-educated, even if they get degrees from Ivy League schools. They are indoctrinated into believing America sucks, has always sucked and always will suck unless we turn to socialism. And even then, they might still believe it sucks, since the Left is even attacking and hating America for at one time having allowed for slavery and segregation. That America is not great because we allowed those things in the past (guess which political party fought for those things) despite the fact that we have made true progress when it comes to those things.
 
So I’m not surprised at all that these young ignoramuses believe America was not great in the past and is not great now. And I shall return to this soon.
 
I also mentioned that I was surprised that they said this. Why? Because saying America was never great ignores the 8 years of Obama.
 
Of course, Obama spent 8 years to ensure America was as crappy as it could possibly be, so most of the country was seeing America not being great, which prompted Trump to use the “Make America Great Again” slogan. During Obama’s 8 years, America was not great. But when it comes to these socialist Millennials, you would think they would answer: “Yes, America was great, but only when Obama was POTUS” or something along those lines.
 
Saying that America was never great, as untrue as that statement is, completely ignores the Obama years in these Leftists’ own minds.
 
You would think they would bring up Obama in any way, or say that America was only great when Obama was running the show, but no. Not one mention of the communist traitor.
 
THAT is what has me the most surprised. Now, the video offered by Campus Reform is only 3 minutes long, and they didn’t get to that many people, but it is still surprising that even the few millennials who explained their reasoning apart from just saying “no, America was never great” did not think to mention Obama in the least.
 
Alas, that is mostly a tangent for this article. While still surprising and noteworthy, it’s not the main point of this article. As promised, I would return to why I wasn’t surprised these kids said America was never great.
 
Part of the reason these kids think this way, apart from being indoctrinated by academia and the MSM, is that they have all lived fairly privileged lives.
 
I would doubt any one of them has spent much time living and residing outside the U.S. or any other first-world nation.
 
The people who most often shout that we are an oppressive system have never experienced actual oppression. The people who most often shout that we are racists have never experienced actual racism. The people who most often proclaim guns kill people are the ones who are most protected by people with guns.
 
And the people who most often shout that capitalism kills people while socialism brings equality to people have never lived in a socialist country.
 
It’s no secret that I come from Argentina. It’s also no secret that I am fairly young. But just because I am young does not mean I cannot learn from history. And Argentina’s history is not a pretty one.
 
While America was being rebuilt and regaining its strength in the 50’s, Argentina experienced a military coup to overthrow their authoritarian president Juan D. Peron. However, this military coup led to a military dictatorship not very dissimilar to Peron’s own dictatorship. This lasted decades, until in 1973, Peron returned to power, only to die the following year, and his wife, who was elected vice president, took power.
 
The ‘70s were troubling times for Argentina, when they suffered terrorist attacks at the hands of communists, leading to another military coup that imposed martial law and arrested (and most likely executed) an unknown number of suspected communists.
 
Amidst all of this chaos, the country’s economy, naturally, was horrid, with inflation hitting 900% by 1983, according to a website called infoplease.com.
 
However, there was one point in Argentina’s history that isn’t all chaos and unrest. That point was the presidency of Carlos Menem, who was elected in 1989 and who was essentially Argentina’s version of Ronald Reagan. He did what no other figure in Argentina’s history thought to do: reduce the size of the government. He deregulated businesses and privatized industries that were owned by the state.
 
However, in 1998, the economy hit another recession, and in 2001, the country defaulted on $155 billion in foreign debt payments. The largest default in history. Then, in 2002, President Duhalde devalued the Argentine peso, which “had been pegged to the [American] dollar for a decade” according to infoplease.com. This devaluation sent the banking industry plummeting to a crisis and purged the savings of middle-class people, sending millions of Argentinians into poverty.
 
Like I said, I am young, but I remember very well what my family went through. We had lost just about everything. No, we were never on the streets, and I honestly do not know what my parents did to rebound us out of that financial trouble brought about by the government. But thank the good Lord they figured something out, otherwise, I don’t think I’d be here talking to you right now.
 
What the people of Argentina had been going through – THAT was oppression. What the people of Venezuela are currently going through – THAT is oppression.
 
What these college-aged millennial kids are going through is the world’s longest temper tantrum.
 
This is a country that knows how to do things the right way. The founders of this country built a near perfect system that is so hard to corrupt, it’s taken the Democrats centuries to get to this point. And even then, they haven’t completely won, if Trump’s election is any indication to their limited power.
 
The leaders of this country (at least most of them) fully understood that the government doesn’t rule the people, the people rule the government. The government works for us, not the other way around.
 
What happens when the people rule the government is what you see during Trump’s and Reagan’s and many other President’s administration: a nation that quickly grows into a superpower to be reckoned with.
 
What happens when the government rules the people is what you see in Venezuela, Argentina, China, North Korea, Russia, etc.
 
THOSE countries see oppression. THOSE countries are not great. THOSE countries can only be great if they employ capitalistic policies, not socialistic ones.
 
In all of Argentina’s history, the only period of economic stability, growth and PROSPERITY was during Menem’s administration, when he employed capitalistic policies of deregulation, denationalization of industries and reducing the size and scope of the government. Apart from that, Argentina has only seen economic instability, civil unrest, riots, violence, terrorism and military coups.
 
I don’t care if these kids spend an entire week non-stop telling me why America isn’t great and has never been great. I know for a darn FACT that America has always been the golden standard for exceptionalism in the world. America has always been better than other countries.
 
Yes, it’s had its dark past with slavery and segregation, but if you want to talk about that, talk about how it was the Democrat South that segregated for their “right” to own another person. Talk about how Democrats in the North opposed Lincoln and Republicans in the South supported him. Talk about how House Democrats tried to kill the 13th Amendment bill in 1864, but Lincoln’s reelection in 1864 and significant Republican control of Congress passed it in 1865, when the bill passed 119-56, with several Democrats abstaining.
 
Talk about how Republicans were unified in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 while the Democrats were far more divided on it.
 
If you want to bring up the sins of the past, I will ensure you know they’re not America’s sins, they’re DEMOCRATS’ SINS!
 
America is known as the greatest nation on Earth for good reason. All other countries who do not employ capitalism and have an over-grown government ruling people’s lives absolutely suck.
 
The truth is: America is a blessing. America has always been great. It’s the Democrats who have never been great.
 
Ephesians 1:3
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places.”

In recent time, tech giants in Apple, YouTube and Facebook have all decided that Alex Jones’ InfoWars could no longer express themselves in their platforms. Naturally, this has created backlash and brought to the forefront the larger issue of what the First Amendment should and should not protect (I am aware that InfoWars’ First Amendment rights were technically not violated since the First Amendment protects people from the government, not companies).
 
So, Campus Reform decided to head to Columbia University to ask Millennials if they could even name all five freedoms protected under the First Amendment (speech, religion, press, assembly and petition). This is largely based on a recent Freedom Forum Institute survey that says 40% of people surveyed could not list any of the five freedoms protected by the First Amendment, and 36% could name only one.
 
Campus Reform offered $20 to any person who could successfully name all five First Amendment freedoms (video below). Not a single one of them got the money, unfortunately. Actually, many could hardly come up with a single freedom, while most could come up with 1 or 2 and only a handful could come up with three.
 
One of them even confused the Second Amendment with the First and thought the First Amendment protected people’s right to bear arms. I am both surprised and not so surprised at this. I am surprised because earlier this year, there has been a lot of talk about gun violence and the 2nd Amendment, so you would think just about everyone was aware enough of what the 2nd Amendment guaranteed and not confuse it with another Amendment. On the other hand, I am not so surprised because these are Millennials attending an Ivy League school where knowledge and truth go to die and are replaced with narrative and falsehood.
 
Now, Campus Reform also asked what should and should not be protected by the First Amendment. The answers from these Millennials were the precise ones you would expect: you don’t have the right to offend people and make them feel uncomfortable.
 
Now, before the liberal readers shout: “So you think we should be able to offend people and make them feel uncomfortable?!” This is not such a simple matter that bodes down to a yes or no answer here.
 
In short, here’s what the First Amendment guarantees: your right to speak your mind, your right to express and practice any religion, your right to print anything you want and share it with others, your right to peacefully assemble to express a unified thought and your right to petition for things such as holding rallies, parades, etc. These are all freedoms that shall not be infringed by the government. Meaning that the First Amendment protects us from being prosecuted by the government in any way.
 
However, there are logical limitations to this. For example, you have no right to threaten someone’s life or the life of their family. Doing so logically results in police investigation and possible prosecution. THAT is simply common sense, because a crime is involved. Threatening to kill someone is in and of itself a crime. However, what is not common sense is taking away someone else’s freedom of speech simply because you don’t like what they’re saying or disagree to any amount.
 
On the outset, I think most people would agree, even liberals. The problem arises when people look to do that by saying it’s offensive to express such a thought. The problem arises when you redefine what it means to use offensive language. For example, if I call a black man the N-word, that is understandably offensive. Do I have the right to do it? Yes. IS it right to do it? No. Should I have the right to do it? I certainly believe limiting free speech based entirely on offense is wrong. Does that mean, then, that I would do it? Of course not. I’m not a Democrat, after all.
 
So the overall problem exists with what constitutes offensive language. Me writing these articles, calling out the Left’s hypocrisy, proclaiming my love of Christ, praising the Lord and noting the significant achievements of the Trump administration should not constitute offensive language to any degree, and it does not. However, there are those who disagree.
 
Earlier, I mentioned Alex Jones and InfoWars as a whole. I have watched Alex Jones in the past and I can say that I do not necessarily agree with everything he says and the way he says it. He usually is fairly paranoid about everything and seems to be quite the conspiracy theorist. However, if you’re going to shut down people for being paranoid or throwing out conspiracy theories, then why is the entirety of the Mainstream Media still allowed to operate? Why is Rosie O’Donnell allowed to claim Trump’s rallies are fake and the people there are paid to be there (which is honestly stupid, given the size of the rallies and the fact that if they were paid, that would mean a whole lot of money to pay each of them)?
 
Alex Jones was not shut down for floating conspiracy theories but for saying things that Facebook, Apple and YouTube disagree with. It’s the same reason YouTube has cracked down on pro-gun channels that help people learn how to safely operate guns. They disagree with what Jones was saying and felt compelled to shut him down, but using their vague “terms of service” as an excuse.
 
While the First Amendment does not protect you from companies, it is entirely bogus and ridiculous that he would be shut down for saying things these corporations disagreed with. And before you bring up the NFL and anthem protests, know that these are different occasions. The players have the Constitutional right to kneel to the flag that gives them that right, but the NFL did not implement their new policy to crack down on protests altogether. They just don’t want people kneeling during the anthem on other people’s dime. The players can protest all they want, but they should do it differently and during a different time when they don’t look to be disrespecting the flag and the country. I think if they really did not want to mean disrespect, they would find a different way to protest and say the same things, but without being disrespectful.
 
Regardless, that’s a different matter entirely that I believe has been talked about enough and only comes down to what has been summarized in the prior paragraph.
 
Returning to the overall argument of what constitutes offensive language and what should and should not be limited by the First Amendment, I think it’s pretty clear what it says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
 
Meaning that the government cannot and should not keep people from expressing their beliefs, even if those beliefs are seen as offensive (legitimately or illegitimately offensive) or if they make people uncomfortable.
 
The college Millennials all expressed similar beliefs that the First Amendment should not be able to protect people from offending others or making them feel uncomfortable. Of course, this led Cabot Phillips (the interviewer from Campus Reform) to ask the question: “who gets to determine what is offensive?”
 
That question is really what trips people up, naturally. Who can honestly proclaim to be the sole moral judge in this world? Only God has such a power. Only God can honestly proclaim to be the epitome of morality, given that morality comes from Him.
 
No person here on Earth can honestly make such a proclamation. Of course, the Nazis, fascists, communists and socialists all make and have made that proclamation as often as they breathe, but they cannot make that proclamation honestly. These are the same people who will claim to be feminists while simultaneously abusing women on the sidelines. The same people who claim to be pro-choice so long as that choice is killing your baby. Aside from that, and even including that, you really have no choice. No choice in what religion to practice unless it’s anything other than Christianity and maybe even Judaism. No choice in what political candidate to support and what political ideas to stand by if that candidate and/or ideology is apart from Leftism.
 
The Left cannot be allowed to be the moral arbiter of society. If it comes to that, morality is completely dead.
 
If left up to the Left, every thought that is remotely different from the groupthink would be eliminated. These people envy the Iranian regime, the North Korean dictatorship, the Chinese communists. They envied Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, fascist Italy. They want people to only have access to one voice: theirs. To have access to only the information they provide and nothing else.
 
Our Forefathers knew exactly what tyranny looks and feels like. They knew exactly what the nature of Man is. They knew that they had to set up a system that puts restrictions on the government, not the people.
 
And before you feel any sort of grief over the fact that there was no possible way our Forefathers could have predicted these tyrannical companies doing what they feared government would do, let me put your mind at ease. Capitalism is truly a glorious thing. Not only does it help people prosper, but it naturally protects people.
 
What I mean is that we should not come up with a legislative answer to these tech giants shutting people down. It would be wrong and it would go against everything we believe in. Instead, let’s use the capitalist system we have in place.
 
A company’s first priority is the consumer/customer. If the consumer is unhappy, they leave for a competitor. That’s the nature of business. Now, I fully understand that there is no real competitor to Facebook, YouTube and all these other tech giants… yet. The nature of capitalism, combined with the fact that enough people are pissed off at these tech giants for their censorship, will lead to new companies rising and flourishing that will serve as real competitors. It’s a business inevitability.
 
If you are skeptical, just think about Uber or Lyft. Sure, they are not in the same business, but they are in a business that we thought only the government could control: the ride-sharing business. Just a decade ago, the thought of people using anything other than cabs or buses if they had no access to their own personal vehicles was hard to imagine. Now, you have Uber and Lyft competing with the government regulated cab and bus systems.
 
That’s the nature of capitalism at work. Just because it’s hard to imagine a new company rising and flourishing despite of the tech giants of Facebook and Google does not necessarily mean that they will not rise. Facebook itself was essentially what I described when it first began to be a social media website apart from online dating. It had to compete with MySpace, didn’t it?
 
So capitalism is the answer to these tech giants’ exploits. And yes, that even includes Apple. Yes, it’s nearly impossible to compete with Apple’s products, but it’s far easier to compete with their services, which is the reason they are even being talked about right now. If their podcast service won’t allow for speech they disagree with, someone else will come up with a podcast service that is actually tolerant of other people’s beliefs.
 
Now, this article is getting plenty long already, so I think it’s best to wrap things up here. The larger point I want to make is that the First Amendment should not be regulated apart from the earlier example of threatening someone, regulation which is already in place. The fact that 40% of people could not come up with a single First Amendment right both worries me about the future and allows me to set my sights in our current education system.
 
I mean seriously, this sort of thing should be covered in the 1st grade, for crying out loud! There is no excuse for anyone to not know what the First Amendment guarantees.
 
John 16:33
“I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.”