Last week, running on the fumes of the massive illegal immigration debate centered around children separated from their “parents”, three Democrats in the House of Representatives introduced a bill calling on the abolishment of ICE. The three Democrats were Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) and Adriano Espaillat (D-NY).
However, House Republicans called their bluff and agreed to bring the measure up to the House floor so the Democrats could be on record supporting the abolishment of ICE. And so, the three Democrat representatives said they would vote “no” on the measure if it is brought up to the House floor.
For their part, they’re also trying to salvage the little dignity they have left, saying: “We know Speaker Ryan is not serious about passing our ‘Establishing a Humane Immigration Enforcement System Act,’ so members of Congress, advocacy groups, and impacted communities will not engage in this political stunt.”
Yeah, it’s not that he’s not serious about such a bill. Whether he is or isn’t is beside the point. The point is that these Democrats wanted to have some good p.r. by seemingly wanting to back the abolishment of ICE but their bluff was called. It’s them who were not serious about the bill, they just wanted some good rep.
Of course, this is not entirely surprising. According to polls, only 25% of Americans think ICE should be abolished (which is still too high, if you ask me). If they were to seriously go for such a measure, while it wouldn’t pass anyway since even some Democrats are against the idea, Republican candidates could use those votes in their campaigns to highlight the damage the Democrats could cause were they to win any seats in Congress.
Now, here’s the thing: we know this is the direction the Democrat Party is headed. Everyone from Keith Ellison to former PP CEO Cecile Richards is insisting that the future of the Democrat Party lies with people like Ocasio-Cortez, the socialist who defeated Democrat incumbent Joseph Crowley. If open socialism is the Democrat Party’s future, the Democrat Party has no future.
Regardless, they believe this is the direction their base wants to go. In this direction lies the destruction of the very fabric of society, as I have said in the past. Abolishing ICE is what socialists like Ocasio-Cortez want and will eventually try to go for, regardless of what the polls say. The only reason these three Democrats even brought up such a bill is because of Ocasio-Cortez’s victory over Crowley. It’s one of the things she’s been looking to do in Congress.
But due to this very act of cowardice on the part of the three Democrats, the Party must face the truth: this kind of rhetoric isn’t going to get them far. As it stands, the Democrat Party is too afraid to actually pull the trigger on supporting the abolishment of ICE. The problem is they’ve been in this kind of situation in the past.
Democrats used to be against gay marriage until they believed people wanted it. Democrats used to be against illegal immigration until they realized illegals mean free votes. As it stands, the Democrat Party is split on the abolishment of ICE, but they will eventually be unified again, likely against ICE and the country.
The only problem for them is that, with the demands the socialists in the Democrat Party are making now, just about any fool can torch them in an election. Let’s review a list I shared with you some articles ago about the demands these socialists are making. These socialists want to abolish ICE, abolish prisons, abolish profits, guaranteed income for everyone, no borders, no deportation of illegals, supposedly free healthcare, supposedly free education, and the complete and utter destruction of the 2nd Amendment, guaranteeing only the government has guns.
In that previous article, I made the case for why these are all terrible ideas (not that it’s not obvious to sane people) and any candidate can use those arguments to destroy these points. Like I said in that article, abolishing ICE means more crime, more drugs, more guns pouring into the country that will land in the hands of criminals and, least of all, more illegal immigrants coming into the country.
The only people who would deny these facts are those who should be considered insane. Which is why I say the Democrat Party has no future if people like Ocasio-Cortez are the future.
Now, don’t get me wrong. The Democrats have wanted a lot of the things they’ve recently been campaigning on for ages. The difference is that they used to lie about what they wanted (don’t misunderstand, they still do in some cases). In the past, in order to get what they wanted, they had to lie about what they wanted.
If Obama had been entirely honest about Obamacare, how likely would it have been to pass? Containing death panels, mandating people to get it or pay a fee and knowing it would increase premiums twice-fold, no one in their right mind would be okay with having Obamacare if they knew about these things.
If Obama had been entirely honest about the Iran Nuke Deal, how likely would it have been viewed as a good thing by the American people and the media? Sending billions upon billions of dollars to an enemy who constantly calls for our deaths in order to help them build the most dangerous weapons known to man? No one in their right mind would say “sign me up!”
But now, with certain things, the Democrats are abandoning any semblance of subtlety. They are, for once, honest with their words. They are looking to do what they say they want to do. Why? Because the emergence of Trump, as well as his sustained popularity, have driven the Left insane. They see Trump as a radical and think their best chance is to fight fire with fire.
They see Trump as far-right, so they believe they must go far-left. The problem is that it’s messing with the formula in a dangerous way. They are exposing themselves as socialists. And while half the Millennial generation may be with them (God knows why), most of America is still sour on the idea of turning into a socialist/communist nation.
We need only see Venezuela, North Korea, China, the Soviet Union, and Europe to see how terrible socialism is. Socialism has amounted to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people and counting. It’s almost too easy to destroy any socialist argument.
Now, I understand that many people vote with their hearts and not their brains. Looking at today’s political climate of Leftist whack-jobs attacking Trump supporters, those people are not very likely to listen to reason when it comes to socialism. But the thing about living life with such unreasonableness is that it can’t last forever.
At one point or another, people are faced with reality and will accept the truth. I’ve used this example before, but I think it’s a good one, so I will restate it.
Picture yourself driving down the road, coming up to an intersection. You see that you have a red light and there’s a big truck about to cross the intersection. Living unreasonably, you theorize that the truck is not actually there, despite all evidence against your theory, and drive through the intersection.
That’s living without reason. But eventually, reason always returns to you, and it can return the easy way or the hard way.
Translating this into political terms, people will realize the horrors of socialism the easy way or the hard way.
The good news is we don’t need to risk learning this the hard way. We have real-world examples that speak against socialism, including simple logic. The other good news is that the people who want full-on communism and socialism and the things written in the aforementioned list are in the minority.
We saw, during the 2016 presidential election, many former Democrat voters voting for Trump because they were disillusioned with the job Obama did and thought Hillary would be more of the same. Recently, we’ve been seeing a quiet movement (which has only been quiet because the MSM wouldn’t dare cover it, as it goes against their narrative) called the “Walk Away” movement in which people expressed their disappointment with the Democrat Party going farther and farther to the Left that they can’t even recognize the Party anymore.
The vast majority of America does not want socialism. It’s for these very reasons that I say the Democrat Party has no future if Ocasio-Cortez is their future. And some Democrats are smart enough to know that.
For the many, MANY dumb things Schumer and Pelosi say, they are actually pretty smart. They have to be in order to survive calls of stepping down. For as Leftist as they are, they still remain somewhat sane and reasonable – particularly compared with Warren, Sanders (although he’s also smart enough, seemingly, to be against abolishing ICE) and the crazy lady I’ve been talking about throughout this article. They represent a Democrat Party that is still not completely screwed. And I think they know that in order to return to power, they need to continue lying about what they want.
So there will be a sort of civil war in the Democrat Party in the near future. That much is for sure.
But returning to the three Democrats “looking” to abolish ICE, it’s quite clear that this was nothing but a political stunt. They want their voters to think they want to go through with abolishing ICE but never had any actual intentions on voting on the measure. Their bluff was expertly called and they were left obliterated.
However, as quiet as this measure was, if things go the way I think they will, there will be another similar measure that will be as loud as any bill could be. Here’s hoping and praying these socialists are soundly defeated and sent home with their tail between their legs.
“If a ruler listens to falsehood, all his officials will be wicked.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Another day, another laughable attack from a Leftist directed towards Trump.
Recently, liberal “comedian” Bill Maher further expressed his hate for Trump and Making America Great Again by saying he’d “gladly give Romney $1 million tomorrow if he would take over America. Swear to God! I will become a Mormon, how about that?”
There’s more, but let’s focus on this for a moment. How exactly does Maher believe our government system works? If you could give someone money to take over America, then George Soros and the Left would win every single election. I understand he’s joking, but it’s an unfunny joke. It doesn’t even make sense. A joke, for it to be funny, at least has to make some sense.
But he’s not done: “Although honestly, doesn’t everything about [Trump] scream microd**k? The bragging, and the buildings with my name on it! And the debates. He was talking about his d**k at the debates! That guy is president.”
Really? That is an argument? Maybe in the 7th grade, but not here. But fine, if you want to go down the immature route, let’s do that. Isn’t it more indicative of Maher’s own concerns over his size if he’s talking so much in length (pun not intended) about Trump’s manhood?
Ok, let’s abandon this immature conversation because I’m not a liberal and I prefer to have more mature conversations with people.
Perhaps one rather interesting part of his show is when he had some advice for Democrats. “[Democrats] just gotta win; we cannot blow more elections. So, next time, a little more about ‘We’re going to bring your jobs back’ and a little less about ‘We’re going to make you pee next to a guy in a dress.’”
But here’s the problem with this: Trump has already brought many jobs back as POTUS. Unemployment rates are still near record-lows, with Hispanics setting a record low in unemployment with a rate of 4.6%, according to the June jobs report. Overall unemployment rates have gone up to 4.0%, but that’s still near the record lows we’ve been seeing. Not to mention that June is typically when school ends, and high school seniors graduate and join the labor force, or at least begin looking for jobs.
Billy, do you want to know why the Left’s narrative isn’t “we’re going to bring back your jobs”? Because no one will honestly buy it. People can see Trump is almost solely responsible for these great jobs numbers and Democrats do not have their fingerprints anywhere near these jobs reports. They can’t win on “we’ll get you jobs again” if virtually everyone already has a job.
But this does speak to the larger concept of fighting in the realm of ideas versus using narratives. However, another reason Democrats don’t fight in the realm of ideas is because they simple can’t. Their ideas are dangerous and stupid. Just look at the Democrat Socialists’ desires for this country. Abolishing ICE, abolishing prisons, abolishing profits, guaranteed income for all, no borders, no deportations of illegals no matter what, “free” healthcare, “free” education, no one except the government and police allowed to carry guns or weapons, etc.
There’s not a single item on that list that wouldn’t destroy a nation and an entire system. Abolishing ICE means less secure borders, more illegals coming in, more drugs, more guns, more crime in general. Abolishing profits entirely destroys anyone’s incentive to work or do anything, so an entire system is destroyed. Guaranteed income for all is unsustainable and, frankly, goes against the prior item of abolishing profits. What’s the point of guaranteed income if money holds no value and no one makes a profit?
No borders, as I said in regards to abolishing ICE, means no security at the border, more illegals coming in at record pace. Although, these people are leaving socialist s**tholes and would be entering a newly formed socialist soon-to-be-s**thole. Maybe the Left’s ideas of turning the country socialist is secretly a genius way to keep illegals out, if they’re trying to leave socialist countries anyway. No, what am I saying, there’s nothing genius about the Left. Moving on.
No borders means more guns (which also goes against the idea of only government and police having weapons), it means more drugs and it means more crime. Civilization, thus, would deteriorate and crumble.
No deportations for illegals means allowing terrorists, murderers, rapists, child molesters and such to remain in the country. And since they also want to abolish prisons, there’s nowhere for criminals to go except for the streets. I remember when I was a kid, I would watch this show called The Powerpuff Girls. In one episode where the girls made their own sister (I realize that sounds weird without the context. The powerpuff girls were artificially created in a science lab) and that sister wound up freeing all prisoners and releasing them to the streets, while putting in police and even the mayor of the city in prison. Because of that, criminals ran amok in the city of Townsville (where the show takes place).
Criminals running amok is precisely what abolishing prison alone would bring us, let alone no deportations for illegals.
When it comes to “free” healthcare, we already understand that nothing in this world is truly free. If you don’t pay for something in once place, you do it somewhere else. That somewhere else is through taxation of the citizens. How exactly is it equal and fair to someone who doesn’t get hurt but needs to pay for someone else who does? Same goes for “free” education. People already pay taxes for elementary, middle and high schools. Adding college and grad school means higher taxes.
And, of course, it comes full circle when it comes to guaranteed income. If just about everyone is paid by the government, how do they pay taxes? By lowering the income given by the government? So, in essence, the government needs more money for all of these extra things, but the government pays people a guaranteed income. How is the government getting the money to give people money? Money that goes around in a circle, never being increased, but needing to in order to cover the “free” amenities? That is a government that will go bankrupt within a decade. And that’s being generous.
Do you see what I mean when I say the Democrats can’t fight in the realm of ideas? This is what the Democrats have secretly wanted for ages, but are starting to openly DEMAND for these things. All of these ideas are atrocious that would lead to the downfall of the United States, not just as it was founded, but in general as well. These ideas are killers of society and any form of civilization. And the funny thing is that they can’t possibly all be implemented at the same time. Like you saw with many of these ideas, they clash with one another. Realistically, it’s tough to apply and maintain any one of them without your system getting seriously damaged. But all of them? It’s just not possible.
And now, I’m not saying this because I supposedly “hate the poor” or “hate blacks” or “hate women” or “hate gay people”. It’s because no reasonable person could believe these things would work individually, let alone put together.
Regardless, returning to Maher, it’s interesting seeing the type of “comedy” the Left uses today. I guess the opposite of comedy is still funny? Nah.
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Prior to this 4th of July, former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino appeared on Fox & Friends, where he stated very true and undeniable words: “Socialism is a disaster. The only people who support Socialism are people who don’t know what it is or people who want to win elections.”
This prompted pseudo-celebrity Sarah Silverman to retort, saying: “Forgive me but you are daft. Socialist democrats are for socialized programs within our democracy. Like, education & healthcare available 4 all, making sure all kids have the same opportunities… U don’t like socialized programs? Do you like the police dept? The fire department?”
Thanks for proving his point, Sarah. You’re a real trooper.
Seriously, though, how dumb is that? Ok, one thing I apparently feel must be mentioned: America is not a socialist country. By her definition, socialist countries are the ones that have education, healthcare, police, fire protection and everything a government provides.
Well, I guess my education diplomas are null and void, since we don’t have education here, in a non-socialist country. I guess if I get hurt, there are no hospitals around me because a non-socialist country doesn’t have healthcare. If my house is burning down, I should probably try to take care of that myself, since there is no fire department in a non-socialist country.
Oh, and Black Lives Matter, you guys can go home now. If there is no police department, there is no police brutality. NFL players, you guys can stand for the flag again.
Apparently, socialism is the only form of government out there. If there is no socialism, there is no government and thus, no government-controlled agencies and programs such as police, fire, etc.
You really have to wonder if these people ever actually think before they speak or write anything online.
Sarah, if you want a Google definition of socialism, here it is: a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
In other words, it’s a governmental system in which the community (government) gets to decide just about every aspect of someone’s life. They control how things are made, how they are to be distributed, and how they are to be exchanged. In other words, under a socialist rule, an iPhone would be made by the government to be distributed to whomever the government wants and the government gets to decide what to charge for it.
Now, a socialist might believe that example to be a good thing. The problem is that nothing is ever quite black and white. Nothing is ever quite so simple with the government. And realistically speaking, the government can’t afford to give everyone new iPhones once they come out without risking economic collapse.
That’s why Mark Zuckerberg’s idea of the government giving everyone a set income, even if they do nothing at all, is unrealistic and dangerous. If you can live by doing nothing, what incentive does anyone have to do anything? The reason capitalism is so great is because it gives people a constant incentive to work hard. Because if they don’t, they’ll fall behind and suffer for it. If there is a safety net such as guaranteed government-issued income, no one has to do anything for money.
Sure, maybe some things would still be made, such as art, t.v. shows and such, but that’s only because there are people who are passionate about those things. A socialist government would then decide whether or not the artist can publish his art. But how many people can say they are passionate about building houses and buildings? Not designing them, but building them. How many can say they are passionate about plumbing? About delivering food? About driving people around? About maintaining power plants, water treatment plants and other basic utilities to supply cities? About trash collecting? About mowing lawns?
Take away any incentive to do these basic things, and modern society is severely affected. If I can get paid around the same amount of money for doing nothing as I would for doing menial labor or something I’m not passionate about, I’d rather do nothing.
Which also brings up another point: if no one is doing anything and everyone is dependent on the government, an economic collapse is inevitable and it would lead to chaos. The government runs on tax-payer dollars. If just about everyone relies on the government, including for an income, that system is unsustainable and the government runs out of money. If the government runs out of money, the people run out of money. And don’t tell me the government can just keep printing money. That creates hyperinflation that would eventually make that currency utterly worthless, meaning you still run into the same problem where the government and the people don’t have money.
Such a system leads to chaos. It’s unsustainable by any realistic measure. That’s why I scratch my head at those on the Left who know what socialism really is and leads to. For those people, they know socialism isn’t sustainable. Even without implementing that horrible “fixed-income” idea, socialism relies heavily on other people’s money. If the government grows and grows, that means higher and higher taxes to pay for the bigger government. Eventually, the people are left with such little money that they can’t sustain their livelihoods and have to downgrade. Eventually, they will not be able to give the government much or any money and the big government pops like a balloon because they can’t afford to keep the government so big.
In such a case, unsustainability is the least of people’s problems. In such a system, the government gets so big and powerful that tyranny and corruption are certain. Such power corrupts all human beings. This is why we conservatives keep saying socialism is a disaster. Not only is it unsustainable, but it’s also wildly dangerous for the citizens of the socialist country. Just look at Venezuela for proof that what I say is true.
Socialism’s worst enemy isn’t Capitalism. It’s Socialism. It’s self-destructive. It’s oppressive, even for the people who support it.
Ronald Reagan said it exactly right: “Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don’t need it and Hell where they already have it.”
The reason he’s so right is because he takes into account the imperfections and mortalities of humanity. In Heaven, people already have all they need: God. They need nothing else, for He provides everything they need. In Hell, Satan’s reign is pretty much unending (until God throws him into the pit of fire and sulfur, at least). It’s sustainable there because Satan doesn’t need money or anything from the people he rules over.
Outside of Heaven, where there is no imperfection, and thus, no corruption, and Hell, where Satan rules without the need of anyone else, Socialism doesn’t work. It relies too heavily on the kind-hearted nature of one singular figure, or an entire government structure. Man isn’t naturally good; he is naturally evil. Socialism relies on the goodness of its leaders. But when its leaders are rotten and evil, everyone suffers.
And this is without taking into account the unsustainability of it all. Even in the case of a massive government led by entirely good people, the fact remains that a big government relies on tax-payer money. Eventually, as I mentioned earlier, people run out of money. If people run out of money, the government runs out of money. If the government runs out of money, chaos ensues.
Good or evil, big government does not work; it’s not sustainable.
Now, I’ve said what I felt was necessary. Returning to Silverman, she is the precise kind of person Bongino talks about: someone who doesn’t honestly understand what Socialism is. And unfortunately, there are many people out there who are on the same boat. They say ignorance is bliss. But those people forget to mention that ignorance eventually leads to sorrow. That bliss is short-lived. The people who advocate for socialism don’t understand that what they want is not sustainable and has led to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people in recent history. Socialism is dangerous and they are unaware of that fact. Eventually, if they get what they want, they will face the truth. The truth always comes out eventually.
But it is for that reason that we do what we do. We inform people and teach them so that they do not have to learn what we tell them the hard way. We can only hope they will listen and learn.
“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
In the world of politics, the one thing that can absolutely destroy a political campaign is the attack of an opponent’s supporters or future voters. Hillary Clinton made the mistake of calling Trump supporters “deplorables”, prompting us to proudly wear merchandise that calls us that and further support Trump.
Even Hollywood has, at least in the past, understood the importance of not attacking another candidate’s supporters, but rather try to bring them in to your own camp and convince them that your candidate is the better choice, if the movie “Our Brand Is Crisis” starring Sandra Bullock is anything to go by.
Well, it seems nobody remembered to tell MSNBC commentator Donny Deutsch last week.
On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”, co-host Mika Brzezinki prompted her guest by talking about the “family separation” hoax outrage and unapologetically attacking Trump (as per usual).
Deutsch had this to say: “What has to happen now is this can no longer be about who Trump is. It has to be about who we are, if we are working towards November. We can no longer say Trump’s the bad guy. If you vote for Trump, you’re the bad guy. If you vote for Trump, you are ripping children from parents’ arms. The mistake we’ve made in the past is ‘Look at that bad guy over there. Look at that bad guy’. What the Democrats have to do is make the next election a referendum on not who Trump is, but who you are. That’s the big difference. You can no longer as a voter – because it’s not about taxes, it’s not even about some abstract term of immigration or nationalism; if you vote for Trump then you, the voter, you, not Donald Trump, are standing at the border, like Nazis, going ‘You here, you here.’”
Boy am I gonna have fun with this one.
First, as I mentioned earlier and as is the whole topic of the article, attacking a candidate or a person’s supporters is perhaps the worst mistake you can make in politics. It’s not the voters who are on the ballot. And calling them “Nazis” unless they vote for you will not get you any votes. Wanna know what happens when someone says “If you don’t vote for me, you’re a Nazi”? The response is: “screw you, moron.” And that’s sugarcoating it, as I don’t write curse words unless I’m quoting someone. And even then, I make sure to censor the words.
I get that the Left is basically out of ideas on how to take down Trump, but the way you separate him from his supporters isn’t to attack the supporters. Calling someone who won’t vote Democrat an “idiot” or a “Nazi” will only get them angry at you, not at their favored candidate.
Second, Obama and Bush were enforcing the same law Trump (prior to the EO) was enforcing. Does that mean that Obama and Bush voters are also evil because they were voting for someone who was ripping children from their parents’ arms?
Third, what do you mean it’s not about “taxes… some abstract term of immigration or nationalism”? It’s PRECISELY ABOUT THOSE THINGS TOO! If Democrats get control of Congress, they will RAISE people’s taxes. We want to vote for MAGA candidates because they will KEEP TAXES LOW and even perhaps LOWER THEM AGAIN! And what do you mean by “some abstract term of immigration or nationalism”? It is not abstract in the least. If Democrats get control of Congress, they will do what they can to open our borders. They will do what they can to destroy this country as founded and reshape it into their own socialist utopia (though, a dystopia for everyone else).
Finally, with everything we know about the National Socialist German Worker’s Party that Hitler founded, we know very well that the only people who come close to accurately describing Nazis are the Democrats and the entire Left. Sure, they may not be calling for the deaths of the Jews (even though they effectively are if they support Palestine), but everything about the Nazis from the Nuremberg Laws shaping after the Democrat South’s slavery laws to the brown shirts’ confiscation of all civilian weapons, to even the calls for environmental awareness perfectly describes the modern-day Democrat Party.
That even includes the Antifa thugs who organize and destroy and attack similarly to the brown (and even Fascist black) shirts of the 20th century. Not to mention their harassment of conservatives in restaurants, as with the cases of Kristjen Nielsen, Sarah Sanders and Eugenior Joseph (the black Trump supporter who was harassed in a Cheesecake Factory in Florida back in May).
Replace Hitler’s hatred for Jews with hatred for Trump supporters and conservatives and you have these unhinged Leftists.
Make no mistake, the Left wants to silence us regardless of method. Whether through banning us on social media or flat out having us arrested and/or killed, this is what they want to do. Their behavior more closely resembles Nazi Germany’s than they could ever claim we do. Not to mention they’ve already held internment camps for the Japanese during World War II under the orders of FDR, one of the Democrats’ favorite Presidents (who was honestly the closest thing we ever had to a Mussolini, given what he did).
But returning to Deutsch, all of this is the reason such a tactic would never work. Not only does it not help to attack someone’s supporters, but given the nature of the Left as being far more Nazi-like than they could ever claim we are, not enough people will ever buy it… well, if people are educated, that is. The Left has done a good job at promulgating a big lie that the Nazis and Italian Fascists were right-wing.
I don’t know if I’ve shared this with you in the past, but I will do so here. I remember having taken a political leaning quiz in high school. The quiz asked me all sorts of questions about political topics and the results would show my own political standing on an X-Y chart, in which the farthest left in the X-line is communism (which makes sense), farthest down on the Y-line was anarchy, farthest up on the Y-line was authoritarianism and farthest right on the X-line was Fascism. And on this chart, there were other notable people in history/politics such as Adolf Hitler, Obama, Stalin, and interestingly enough, Rush Limbaugh.
The chart placed me, of course, pretty far-right and “anarchist”.
Anyway, the chart also placed Hitler relatively right-wing, albeit more to the authoritarian side. If it were entirely honest, it would have put Marxism at the very left (since Communism, Nazism, Fascism and Socialism all derive from Marxism), totalitarian at the very top, anarchy at the very bottom and conservative at the very right.
And if it were honest, it would’ve put Stalin, Obama, Hitler and Mussolini pretty close together on the left, with Rush Limbaugh, Ronald Reagan, Eisenhower and Lincoln on the right.
But due to this assignment, I was led to believe, and legitimately believed until I learned better, that Hitler and Mussolini were right-wingers. That Communism was big government on the Left and Fascism was big government on the Right. That’s, very clearly, a lie. But as a high school student, this is what I was taught. And this is what other students are taught as well.
And it’s all a huge lie. Nazism and Fascism are not right-wing ideologies, they are their own interpretations of Marxism, which is entirely Left-leaning and anti-capitalist.
Regardless, returning to Deutsch, I honestly do hope this is a method they employ. Calling us Nazis will yield them the same result as in 2016. Not only am I ready to destroy each of their arguments, but I’m also ready to more strongly support pro-Trump candidates this November and fully support Trump in 2020.
My only worry is that this will eventually lead to a sort of civil war, in which Antifa terrorists and unhinged radical Leftists will harass more and more conservatives and perhaps eventually actually start killing us. Of course, I’m ready to destroy anyone who wishes to harm me and my family thanks to my 2nd Amendment rights, but that could definitely make things ugly out there.
Still, seeing as most gun owners live in red counties and consider themselves conservative, I doubt any actual civil war with the Left would last longer than a week. While I hope and pray we never reach that point, red-blooded Americans will be ready to fight for our freedoms once again.
“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.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
On Tuesday, California (and other states, but we’ll just focus on CA) held their primaries to determine what two candidates will be facing each other in the midterm elections this November. The results don’t look too good for Democrats.
John Fund wrote an article for Fox News explaining the results of these primaries.
He tells us that “Democrats see their path to control of the House running through two dozen districts across the country that sent a Republican to Congress in 2016, but voted for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. A full seven of those districts are in California.”
Now, California’s primary election system works differently from most other states. They have what is called the “top-two” system, in which the top two vote-getters in the primaries face off against each other in the general election regardless of political party. While it is strange and quirky, it usually offers solid data on the strength of the parties. Fund explains that “the total primary vote for all Republicans versus the total primary vote for all Democrats has almost always been within a couple points of the November result.”
In other words, the results of these elections offer some accurate insight into what the general election results will be. Frankly, they are more accurate polling methods than the polls the fake news media tend to run.
And it is for this very reason that the likelihood of a blue wave, at least in California, is not very high.
Fund then goes over each of the seven districts in California that Democrats were hoping to take over.
“Of their seven targeted GOP seats carried by Hillary Clinton in 2016, the combined total of all Democratic candidates exceeded those of all Republican candidates in only one – the 49th District, vacated by Republican Representative Darryl Issa. And in that district, Democrats currently have only 50.2 percent of the total vote.”
So even in the one district where they got the majority vote, it is still a slim margin. Still, I won’t get my hopes up about this. Despite the polls in Alabama, I fully expected Roy Moore to win in 2017, particularly since the polls had Doug Jones winning by a slim margin of victory. Usually, if it’s that close, I tend to assume the Republican is the one in the lead and the fake news media is simply trying to discourage conservatives. Well, they turned out to be right and it was a close race, but the Democrat won, so I expect the Democrat to win in that district as well. We’ll see what happens.
Fund then goes over the rest of the districts:
“The 10th District, which includes Modesto, backed Hillary Clinton by 49 percent to 46 percent. But Republican incumbent Jeff Denham and another Republican won a combined total of 52 percent of the vote. That’s a good sign Denham can hold his seat.”
“Republican David Valadao represents the Hispanic 21st District near Fresno. Hillary Clinton trounced Donald Trump there by 55 percent to 40 percent. But Valadao took a stunning 63 percent of the primary vote, putting him in solid shape to win in November.”
“In the 25th District, which includes the Antelope Valley north of Los Angeles, Hillary Clinton won by 50 percent to 43 percent in 2016. But GOP incumbent Steve Knight won 53 percent of the primary vote on Tuesday.”
“In the Orange County’s 39th District seat held by the retiring Republican Ed Royce, Hillary Clinton won 51 percent to 43 percent. But the Fullerton area seat is now heavily Asian and former Royce aide Young Kim won an impressive 22 percent to outpoll all other candidates and secure a spot on the November ballot.”
“The Orange County-based 45th District, which includes Irvine, was carried by 50 percent to 44 percent by Hillary Clinton in 2016. But this year freshman GOP Rep. Mimi Walters won 53 percent of the primary vote, while all Democrats only carried 44 percent.”
“Democrats can be pleased that they avoided being boxed out of the November ballot in the Huntington Beach-based 48th District, which voted 48 percent to 46 percent for Clinton. They had worried that incumbent Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher and his estranged protégé Scott Baugh would secure the top two places on the ballot. But Democratic leaders in Washington spent money to ensure a Democrat would face Rohrabacher in the fall. Their problem is that 2018 primary voters gave a total of 53 percent of their primary ballots to GOP candidates and only 47 percent to Democrats.”
“Finally, the suburban San Diego 49th District is the most vulnerable to a Democratic takeover in November, having voted 51 percent to 43 percent for Hillary Clinton just two years ago. But even here Democrats captured just 50.8 percent of the total vote despite having a more energetic primary than Republicans who captured 48 percent of the vote.”
“Together, all the Republicans running won 53 percent of the vote, Democrats won 45 percent and other parties won 2 percent.”
This means trouble for Democrats in California. And it only gets worse.
“Significantly, Republicans won a major victory in this part of Orange County. They easily recalled from office Democratic state Senator Josh Newman, who had provided a crucial vote to raise the state’s gasoline tax last year.”
“… Newman’s recall shows the anti-tax fervor that Orange County is famous for is alive and well.”
Despite the constant negative press about Trump and Republicans, despite the constant attacks on the GOP tax cuts by Democrats and the media, the Democrats can’t escape the fact that they are nowhere near as popular as they would want to be.
While each of these races is relatively close (except for one of them), you really have to remember that this is California that we are talking about. Despite the fact that all of these districts sent Republicans to Congress in 2016, the assumption is always that Democrats will win, close or landslide. And the assumption, if you only watch the MSM, is that Republicans are cowering in their boots and are about to be kicked out of office. That Democrats everywhere will defeat the GOP candidates and will win a supermajority and impeach Trump.
But reality always sets in eventually. Here’s the reality: the Trump administration is keeping each of its promises. America is being made great again. It’s being made rich again. It’s being made safe again. The economy is booming, unemployment is tumbling, there are more jobs available than there are workers (according to The Hill), wages are going up even for minimum wage workers, ISIS has largely been obliterated off the face of the Earth, North Korea is willing to negotiate for peace, we are no longer in a stupid deal with Iran to give them nukes (although I fear a lot of damage has already been done by Obama and his administration), and plenty of people can safely say that they are living better off today than at any point during the Obama presidency.
The reality is that California is one of the only states that essentially still lives in the Obama years. They have a very socialist governor who has essentially made California a socialist state. This unrestrained socialism is taking its toll on the people of California and many of them have had enough of it. That much is clear if we are even talking about the possibility of Democrats being crushed in November in the worst state to live in.
The reality is that socialism has failed everywhere it’s tried and everywhere it will be tried. Point to any socialist nation in the world and I will show you a nation that has deprived its citizens of some of the most basic human rights, let alone Constitutional rights. Point to any country that features a huge government influence and I will show you a government that oppresses its people. You need only look at Venezuela, where their best hope for survival is having enough pets to eat in rations and finding the occasional brand-name bread in desolate markets. Look at North Korea, where you and your family can literally be imprisoned for three generations simply for not cleaning up the dust off of a portrait of Kim Il-Sung.
Look at China where the government tells its people how many children they are allowed to have and that they should abort daughters.
Look at England where freedom of speech is nonexistent for anyone the government doesn’t like or agree with. Sure, England may not be considered an official socialist country, but it might as well be. That’s certainly the direction it’s going (until it becomes an Islamic country, at least). The same could be said about many countries in Europe.
And if California were its own sovereign nation, you could bet any amount of money that they would consider themselves a socialist country. As it stands, it’s a socialist hellhole and many people are tired of it. They’ve seen what socialism brings: equal sharing in misery.
“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Last Sunday, Venezuela held Presidential “elections” in which dictator Nicolas Maduro won with 6 million votes and a 46% turnout rate, according to the government’s official National Electoral Commission. However, it was reported by multiple independent outside observers that over 80% of Venezuelan voters did not turn up to vote.
What makes this “election” an utter sham, aside from the false turnout rates, is the fact that Maduro scheduled the election back in January, giving little time for other candidates to arise and campaign. Even then, Venezuela’s courts banned the Democratic Unity Roundtable, the main opposition to Maduro, from fielding a candidate, instead saying that party members must “each nominate a candidate, forcing the opposition to divide,” according to Breitbart News.
Even the candidates allowed to run were socialists themselves, so there would really be no change in leadership in the country.
Of course, given how illegitimate that election was, the Venezuelan people were not pleased, to say the least. Most of them chose to boycott the election altogether, and when Maduro “won”, chose to hold protests throughout the country.
The Venezuelan newspaper “El Nacional” reported on Tuesday that “protests sprung in at least four states: Carabobo, Tachira, Merida and Bolivar,” according to Breitbart News. El Universal also reported a large protest occurred on Monday afternoon in Nueva Esparta.
Anti-socialist leader Maria Corina Machado wrote on Twitter (translated from Spanish): “Venezuela awoke GROWN, on its FEET. Our people defied the tyranny and DISOBEYED. Today the people are UNITED. The PATH is to advance until we achieve the ouster of the dictator.”
In Caracas, protesters, many of whom were young students, were seen marching through the streets, holding a sign that reads: “There is no time left! The time for the courageous is here, together we are more.”
National broadcaster NTN24 showed a video of the protesters in Caracas, reporting: “’The streets belong to the people, not to the dictator.’ Venezuelans protest against the ‘fraudulent elections’ in Altamira.”
In Aragua state, youth opposition leaders also protested against Maduro. The opposition group “Soy Venezuela” (I am Venezuela) shared some pictures of the protest and wrote on Twitter: “SoyVenezuela in the streets of Aragua on May 21st because the farce of an election held yesterday is more motivation for fighting for our liberty.”
In Nueva Esparta, Margarita University – Unimar students took to the streets, demanding free and fair elections and that Maduro step down. Of course, knowing the character of socialists and mankind in general, it is unlikely someone as evil as Maduro would be so willing to step down from the power he holds.
Unfortunately, not all protests were peaceful ones, with the most violent protests reportedly occurring in San Cristobal, the regional capital of Tachira state, the state that has long been the nation’s hub of socialist resistance. According to Breitbart News: “The mayor of San Cristobal, Daniel Ceballos, has been in prison in Caracas for nearly two years for speaking out against Maduro. By official CNE estimates, over 70 percent of Tachira did not participate in Sunday’s election.”
The Venezuelan outlet Runrunes reported that protesters began blocking roads in San Cristobal, burning debris and amassing tree branches in protest. Police responded to the protests, according to the outlet, with tear gas and rubber bullets. The outlet also reports that a couple of children no older than 14 were struck by some rubber bullets. In the incident, two people were arrested and 8 were injured. El Nacional reports that another teenager was also arrested, bringing the total up to three.
In Bolivar, protesters began banging pots and pans in protest, a common form of protest in South America. Police reportedly “hurled tear gas bombs at the buildings” where the noise was originating in response to the protests.
It is utter chaos happening in Venezuela. This, combined with the fact that Venezuela is economically bankrupt and the people have had to resort to eating their own pets in order to survive, and I can’t help but call into question Bernie Sanders and other Democrats’ mental health in regards to viewing the Socialist nation as a role model for the U.S.
The only real options on the table are that these people are either mentally sick, or evil… maybe both.
When you look at Venezuela, you can see in real time the consequences of Socialism. That is the kind of country the Left wants to rule over here in the United States. Venezuela is precisely what Democrats and Leftists want for us.
The only people who live in luxury are people in the government and those who are friends with people in the government. For all their talks about hating or opposing the 1%, they sure seem to be okay with the MASSIVE gap in standard of living between the 1% and the rest in Venezuela.
At least in the United States, just about anyone can be in the 1%, without needing connections to the government. Granted, that is becoming less and less common, given the damage the Left has already made. For example, Donald Trump, as a real estate mogul, simply HAD to be on the government’s good side in order to build his buildings where he wanted them.
Mark Zuckerberg MUST be friends with people in the government in order to avoid losing his company and his wealth.
The unfortunate reality is that the Left has done plenty of damage to move us in the direction of Socialism. Thankfully, we are nowhere close to where they want us to be. For as much damage as they have already done, it is still possible to live in comfort, even outside of the top 1%, in the U.S. Not only is it possible, but very attainable as well. Those who work hard and smart tend to be successful regardless of what they do.
Unfortunately, the people of Venezuela don’t have that luxury. According to The Guardian, 82% of people in Venezuela live in poverty. Contrast that to the poverty rate in the U.S., which according to PovertyUSA.org, in 2016, stood at 12.7%.
Most people in Venezuela live in poverty, with scarce resources to feed themselves, and the situation will only continue to worsen as the established Socialist power continues to maintain a chokehold on the country.
Whenever Bernie Sanders speaks highly of Venezuela, remember these facts. Remember these facts the next time you hear a liberal say that Trump is a dictator. And remember these facts as you choose who to vote for in future elections. Because, at this point, you will either be voting for people who want to Make America Great Again (or at least claim they do) or people who want to Make America Venezuela Forever.
I will simply end by saying that I pray for the people of Venezuela. It is clear to me that they have woken up and are taking a stand against Socialism altogether. I hope and pray that they will eventually be able to take back their country from the hands of those who have utterly destroyed it and that the lesson of how bad Socialism is remains engrained in their minds going forward.
“The Lord is a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Throughout multiple articles, I have repeatedly talked about the Millennial generation and their socialist/wussy tendencies. So it’s easy to forget that there is an entirely newer generation that is younger than them and has not made much noise (aside from the lunatic anti-2nd Amendment Parkland students), largely because they are still rather young.
According to The Barna Group, a religious research company, 13% of Gen Z (those born between 1999 and 2015), identifies as Atheist (as seen above). That may not seem like a whole lot, but you can see from the chart that that number has doubled from the Millennial generation.
Church Militant, another religious research group, reports a “decrease in the number of professed Christians. Over the course of four generations, the percentage who call themselves Christians dropped from 75% among Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964) to 59% in Generation Z.”
Barna also reports that: “More than one-third of Gen Z (37%) believes it is not possible to know for sure if God is real, compared to 32% of all adults.”
However, as bad as those numbers may seem, there are also very good numbers.
According to a 2016 study by Dean & Provost, 41% of Gen Z report attending weekly church services, compared to 18% of Millennials who said they went to church at that age, 21% of Gen X saying the same, and 26% of Boomers.
The American Conservative also shows that Gen Z tends to be more morally conservative than the previous generations.
“According to a study released this month by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), sexual intercourse among high school students had decreased in the United States by quite a bit. Among males, 43.2 percent of high schoolers surveyed admitted to having sexual intercourse, while 39.2 percent of females answered the same. While that may seem high, it’s a stark decrease from 2005, when 47.9 percent of males and 45.7 percent of females admitted to having sex. And it’s an even bigger dip from the more than 50 percent that the CDC counted in 1995. According to a 1998 Los Angeles Times article, high school sex started to rise in the ‘70s, hit its peak in the ‘80s, then began to slowly decrease in the ‘90s.”
What all of this tells us is that, while more Gen Z kids say they don’t believe in God, the ones that do believe in God do so very strongly. Not only that, but they are also having sex a good deal less as well. And even Forbes tells us that Gen Z tends to be more competitive.
In an article on Forbes, the writer detailed 8 different ways in which Gen Z will differ from Millennials in the workplace.
The first way that they share is that “Gen Z is motivated by security”. What they mean is that Gen Z, having grown up during the Great Recession and Obama’s terrible economy, tends to put more of a focus on financial and job security than Millennials. “While millennials are often seen as more idealistic, and more motivated by purpose than a paycheck, Generation Z may lean more toward security and money.”
They are essentially Yuppies 2.0.
The second way Gen Z is different is that they “may be more competitive”. “As a cohort, millennials are said to be collaborative and teamwork oriented. They want to work in an environment where inclusion is a priority, and where everybody works together to advance goals. Gen Z, on the other hand, is said to be defined by its competitiveness. They want to work on their own and be judged on their own merits rather than those of their team.”
“Gen Z also understands that there’s a need for constant skill development in order to stay relevant.”
The third way Gen Z is different, which actually ties in to the second, is that “Gen Z wants independence”.
“Gen Zers’ independence ties into their competitiveness, but they generally like to work alone… Many also want to manage their own projects so that their skills and abilities can shine through. They do not want to depend on other people to get their work done.”
Another way, which is actually even more surprising and endearing, in which they are different is that “Gen Z is more entrepreneurial”.
“Generation Z is 55% more likely to want to start a business than millennials. In fact, a full 72% of Gen Z high school students say that they want to start a business.”
All of this information is indicative that Generation Z is more truly fiscally conservative than many of the previous generations. Not to mention that, while more Gen Zers claim to be Atheists, the ones that do claim to be Christian are very solidly Christian if that 41% weekly church attendance is any indication.
If the Millennial generation is the socialist generation, Gen Z is the generation that will fight the previous generation to keep this country capitalist.
Now, I don’t know that for sure, of course. A lot can change in an entire generation. Frankly, knowing only what Millennials want to accomplish, I was all but sure that America would almost entirely crumble as a capitalist nation. That’s a thought that really scared me as I’m part of that generation and I will have to deal with their imbecilic values being transformed into actual legislation one day.
But with the numbers and statistics that we are seeing from Gen Z, as well as that competitive drive that Forbes is talking about, I can have at least some hope that Gen Z can truly take the fight to these socialist children (who are older than Gen Zers, but somehow also less mature, seemingly) and at least keep this country from going full-on communist over the course of this century.
“But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
In recent time, I’ve been surprisingly speaking positively about California, or at least the citizens of California. About a week ago, I had spoken about the possibility of California being split up into three different states with their own governing bodies.
And more good news keep coming from one of the least likely places.
A survey, surprisingly conducted by UC Berkeley’s Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society (by the name alone, you can tell how Leftist they are), showed that there was strong support for some of Trump’s immigration agenda in even the state’s most left-leaning areas.
“About 24 percent of the survey’s participants said it’s ‘very important’ for the U.S. to increase deportations of undocumented immigrants, while 35 percent said it’s ‘somewhat important,’ according to the poll. That viewpoint even held true in the Bay Area, were 25 percent of those surveyed said increasing deportations is very important and 35 percent said it’s somewhat important.”
“And about 49 percent of Californians support temporarily banning people from Muslim-majority countries, according to the poll. In the Bay Area, 44 percent of residents support the ban, the least out of any region in California.”
When you put together the number of people who think it’s very or somewhat important to increase deportations, that number equals 59%, meaning 59% of the people surveyed wanted an increase in deportations.
Need I remind you that this is CALIFORNIA?!
And like I mentioned in the title, that’s not all. The report says that 49% of Californians support the travel ban on Muslim-majority countries.
58% said that increasing taxes on corporations would hurt or make no difference to the California economy.
54% said the government should play a minor role or no roll at all in reducing income inequality.
Only 54% of Californians have a positive view of Muslims (I say only because, again, this is California. You’d think that number would be at least decently higher).
“73% of Californians hold positive views toward Asian Americans; 73% say that members of the group are intelligent”, which is honestly kind of funny and kind of racist when you think about it. One major stereotype of Asian people is that they are super smart or at least very good at math. So for this number to come out is actually kind of funny.
They also have numbers about views on Latinos (75% positive) and their intelligence (57% think they’re intelligent), as well as African Americans (70% positive) and 51% think they’re intelligent, and white people (69% positive, which is not surprising that it’s lower than the others, but still decently high) with 59% saying they think white people are intelligent.
Now, it’s not all fantastic news. 79% support a pathway to citizenship for DREAMers, 66% reject the idea of a wall as a priority, and 68% say big businesses and corporations aren’t paying their fair share of taxes (and yes, I, as well as UC Berekely, recognize the paradox with that and the statistic saying 58% think raising taxes on corporations hurts or doesn’t affect the state economy).
But all of these things were already expected out of California. With the way the media and the Democrats paint DREAMers, I’m not surprised at the support for them.
It’s all the other numbers that are the real story here. They’re absolutely mind-blowingly in support of things that Trump is looking to do or at least what conservatives want. Let me remind you that Trump lost California by 29 points. So it’s really fantastic to see these numbers.
But we’re not done sharing good news.
“Nearly half of Californians (45%) report that being Christian is an important part of being American”, “73% think that blending into larger society is an important part of being American” and “88% think speaking English is important”.
Let me remind you also that California is the nation’s only sanctuary state. A state that happily welcomes illegal immigrants and shields them from the Trump administration seeking to impart justice upon them.
I’m particularly surprised at the number of people who think being Christian is important to being an American. I have all but given up on the state in terms of Christianity. I believe I’ve even gone so far as to say that it’s a sort of Sodom 2.0.
That certainly was my view, at the very least.
Now, I’m not saying that things will immediately improve for the state. If they hope things will improve, they will first have to get rid of Gov. Jerry Brown. Thankfully, this is Brown’s assured final term as Governor because he’s ineligible to run for re-election this November thanks to term limits in the California Constitution (Brown has been Governor of California since 2011 and was also Governor from 1975 to 1983).
But that won’t really matter if California elects another socialist Democrat, so conservatives in California will have to vote either for a conservative candidate (say, Travis Allen, who boasts about having voted for Trump, according to the LA Times) or will have to vote to split up the state in three ways.
Regardless, that will be left for Californians to deal with in the Fall. It’s up to them to decide what kind of future they will have.
But all things considered, I’m actually pretty happy to see some of those numbers. For as far-Left as the media, Hollywood, and the California government paint the state, the people there are seemingly a good deal more conservative than we give them credit for.
I’m reminded of jokes people would make at California’s expense, such as when Trump says we should build a wall, we should also build it along California’s national border, not just the international border; or when Kim Jong-un would threaten to blow up the country, people would joke that California should be target practice for him.
When making those jokes, obviously, people would think about the Hollywood liberals and the Leftists running the state into the ground. It’s easy to forget that there are plenty of conservatives there as well, at least living outside of the big cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and others.
Even I had forgotten about them, when I believed California had long reached a point of no return. But all is seemingly not lost. Yes, the Left has a stronghold in California, but the people there are seemingly waking up.
Which is honestly not a surprise, really. The Left’s policies are always detrimental for everyday people. You can put as much sugar on crap as you want, but at the end of the day, it’s still crap.
I think people are beginning to realize this, given these numbers. Don’t misunderstand, they are still very Left-leaning in other areas. I didn’t see anything about abortion or “sexual identity” in the survey, and even in some things, most people still responded with Left-leaning answers.
But considering how far gone I had naively come to believe California was, I’d say these are pretty good news. I’m just hoping that this trend away from socialism continues to grow and people can Make California Great Again.
“Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
When you think about it, that title really is an oddity. For any Leftist to worry about the millennial generation voting Republican in the future is rather stunning. But why does Phillip Reines, former Hillary Clinton advisor, worry that millennials might vote more for Republicans in the future? Short answer: tax cuts.
At a panel with the Washington Center, Phillip said that he doesn’t “know how millennials think… It’s unclear what will get them going… Someone like Sanders and Warren seem to tap into that… But you can’t just assume that people last year (2016 election) would’ve gotten what Hillary Clinton got and add it on to it… But I think millennials have to, they more than anyone, have to say this is not normal and there’s a lot of pressure to shut up… Donald Trump and his people want everyone to shut up, get over the election, Hillary Clinton go away. That’s in their best interest. But that’s not how it works. We’re supposed to oppose what we disagree with. And I hope millennials don’t fall into a lull of accepting this is what it is. God knows how many will see their taxes go down and base it just on that… They are a key demographic that voted oddly in 2016… I’m not sure that people understand how to get them to vote productively in 2020.”
Ok, that’s an awful lot to talk about.
Let’s go step by step. First, of course he doesn’t know how millennials think. He himself is not a millennial. But he’s right in saying that someone like Sanders and Warren seem to tap into that. Sanders and Warren know (at least to a decent extent) how millennials think. The way millennials think, unfortunately, is very much socialistic. They want everything to be free, not want to work for anything and want things to just be given to them.
Millennials want to be taken care of by their parents for as long as they live. But since parents can’t do that, that’s where the state comes in. I remember Mark Zuckerberg giving a speech to a graduating class at Harvard. In that speech he talked about how everyone should have a fixed income no matter what, even if they don’t have a job. That the government should just give people money for living.
I don’t think I have to go into too much detail on why that’s a very stupid idea, but to millennials, that’s a great idea! They don’t consider the economic consequences of such an idea. They just want free money for doing nothing. No nation can afford to do that and survive. Moreover, no CIVILIZATION can afford to do that. If no one works, nothing gets done. If you’re going to get paid for doing nothing, you might as well do nothing.
Society was made by people who DID stuff. If no one worked anymore, no more iPhones would be made, no servers would be maintained, there’d be no running water, no electricity. Millennials, if you want to know a sure-fire way to actually kill the internet, it’s not through repealing Net Neutrality. It’s through no work being done by anyone.
But ideas like those sound good to millennials because they can’t really be bothered to think too hard about it. Without a doubt, if there’s any Deadly Sin that plagues the millennial generation, it’s sloth.
Second, he says that millennials have to understand that this (I’m presuming, world) is not normal. That “there’s a lot of pressure to shut up.” And that “Donald Trump and his people want everyone to shut up, get over the election, Hillary Clinton go away.”
I would like to respond by saying that no one is pressuring anyone to shut up, especially Trump. Doing so would call for a violation of people’s first amendment rights, which is why he doesn’t do that. Wanna know who pressures people to shut up? The Left. They pressure Christians to shut up about God. Pressure conservatives to shut up about how great our country is.
I can’t begin to tell you how many times I’ve seen or watched a story about a kid somewhere in the country being ordered by teachers to take off a shirt with the American flag on it because it’s “offensive”. And don’t get me started with college students and their “safe zones”. Every time someone mentions Donald Trump in a college campus, the kids will begin to freak out and run to the “safe zone” to be away from things that “could severely impact someone’s mental health.” No joke, I’ve seen that b.s. excuse thrown around to protect these children.
And yes, I call them children despite the fact that I, myself, am 21 years old and college-aged.
But Donald Trump most certainly does not pressure anyone to shut up.
Phillip mentions getting over the election. To which I say, yes, we have told people to do that. Why? Because there’s no point in still being upset about it anymore! Sure, just after the election, I can’t blame any liberal for being upset about the results. But after A WHOLE YEAR?! If people haven’t gotten over the election results yet, they have some serious problems to deal with. Even the Russia probe has lost almost all traction.
I was upset about the 2012 election results for a week at the most.
And about Hillary Clinton going away, Phillip couldn’t be more wrong. I, for one, LOVE IT whenever Hillary Clinton makes any sort of public appearance. Why? Because she’s essentially a ghost haunting the Democrat Party. She’s a candidate the Democrat Party wants to forget. Even they realize Hillary is far too much of a liability for them to still support unabashedly.
I don’t want Hillary Clinton to go away simply because she always manages to make the Democrat Party look bad. And if there’s anyone I can say has any right to still be upset about the election, it’s her.
Next, he talks about opposing what you disagree with. Ironically, I actually agree with him on this. I wanted the GOP to oppose Obama on everything he did, but they barely even tried. I don’t expect the Democrats to simply back down.
Then, he talks about hoping millennials don’t fall into a lull of accepting this is what it is. Now what does he mean by that? That he hopes millennials won’t just accept the results of the election? Quite possibly. But one thing comes to mind that could also be a strong possibility.
He doesn’t want millennials to think this Make America Great Again campaign is normal for the country. He doesn’t want them to think there’s any chance of making America great. With ISIS being almost entirely defeated, the Dow Jones at record-highs, a tax cut that benefits nearly everyone and massive drops in unemployment rates, these are things that are not normal to millennials.
Us millennials didn’t get to experience the Reagan years. Many of us were born in the 90s, when Bill was President. We grew up in the 90s and 2000s. Those were our childhood years. Children tend not to pay too much attention to the world. For many of us, Obama’s America was normal. And that’s saying a lot.
For us, difficulty getting jobs was normal. A declining economy was normal. America getting disrespected by both Americans and non-Americans was normal. We truly believed that America’s best days were behind her. And I think Phillip wants millennials to continue believing Obama’s America is normal, not Trump’s.
And he clearly shows that he’s afraid millennials will see a new standard of normalcy with Trump’s presidency. He’s worried that the tax cuts letting them keep more of their money will lead them to vote more Republican.
Personally, I don’t know about that. I’m not going to raise my hopes and believe they will start voting more Republican (or at least more conservative). Like I said, my generation is more socialistic. One piece of legislation like tax reform won’t do that much. Millennials tend to believe the Left, which is a scary thought. If the Left claims credit for millennials keeping more of their money, millennials might believe them.
If millennials don’t think too hard about the consequences of a fixed income for everyone, they likely won’t think too hard about who they should thank for them having more money.
I might be a bit too harsh about my generation, but they’ve barely given me any reason to have high hopes for them. Although, one thing is for certain: millennials are a wildcard.
During high school, I’ve met some millennials (not a lot) that are rather socialistic but, funny enough, support the 2nd Amendment and the troops. That revelation stunned me. I would’ve expected these millennial classmates of mine to be full-on socialistic, particularly on issues like guns and our troops.
Of course, these are rather individual cases. I’ve met just as many millennials who are opposed to guns entirely. But these classmates have made me think that this generation isn’t all that different from previous ones. Each individual has their own opinion and beliefs.
What I’m trying to say is that not all is lost with my generation. We’re an odd bunch, but there’s some hope for us yet. The very fact that I myself believe and know these things, that I’m a Christian conservative, gives me hope for the future.
The Left has done a lot of damage to my generation. It’s up to us, conservatives of all ages, to reverse that damage as much as we can.
“We will not hide them from their children, but tell to the coming generation the glorious deeds of the Lord, and His might, and the wonders that He has done.”
Author: Freddie Drake Marinelli.
I believe I’ve mentioned before how the Left has absolutely no sense of humor. Apparently, that extends to waste-of-time hypotheticals like “what would happen to the Earth if superheroes were real?”
The Washington Post, funny enough, actually has published TWO articles regarding superheroes in real life. One of the articles talks about the cost of commuting if the heroes didn’t have powers but still went everywhere they went in their recent film adaptations (although that kinda defeats the purpose of them being called “superheroes” if they have no powers).
But we’ll be focusing on the second of these articles. The one that actually would blame superheroes for causing damage to Earth by simply EXISTING! Yep, it’s not enough that they blame humanity for climate change. They also have to blame superheroes in this hypothetical.
The article is titled: “Superheroes might save the world, but they’d totally wreck the environment”.
The author of the article talks about some research done by Miles Traer, a Stanford University geologist, and two of his colleagues.
“Traer and two colleagues have calculated the carbon footprint for nine heroes from the comic book canon – and realized that Earth might be better off if they stopped trying to save it,” reads the article.
Yeah, it’s better for the world to be under the control of the Legion of Doom than for the superheroes to supposedly damage the Earth fighting the supervillains, I guess.
“Barbara Gordon, the computer wizard also known as Oracle (or more commonly known: Batgirl), is by far the worst offender: Even if her servers ran on a combination of clean energy sources – nuclear, hydroelectric, solar, wind and geothermal – running them would still release more than 1.3 billion pounds of carbon dioxide per year.”
“But Gordon’s DC Comics associates are hardly better. To run at the speed of light, the Flash would need to consume [around 60 billion] calories per second – the rough equivalent of a 12-foot tall hamburger every week. That adds up to nearly 90 million pounds of carbon dioxide per year. Meanwhile, flying alone would require Batman to burn the fossil fuel equivalent of 344 plane rides from New York to San Francisco.”
Look, I won’t waste my time debating these figures. I’m not a comic book nerd and so I can’t really debate these with facts and information that I usually present with other topics. But I’m not here to do that. This article isn’t about debating the logic (or lack thereof) of the “realistic” consequences of having these superheroes. This article is about demonstrating just how dull and lacking in any sense of humor the Left is.
Aside from flat out wasting your time calculating how much Batman screws the Earth with his Batmobile, this also takes all the fun away from a hero such as Batman.
Almost all kids (mostly boys) play superheroes. I used to own a Batman costume when I was younger and would often play with my best friend who would play another version of Batman. I wasn’t exactly worried about the implications of using the Batmobile or the Batplane (is that what it’s called?) would have on the Earth. I wouldn’t imagine myself using these vehicles and having them run on corn or something more “eco-friendly”.
So thinking about these implications not only are a waste of time, but they also make Batman and other superheroes less fun.
I look at these superheroes as sources of entertainment. I don’t rack my brain thinking about just how much damage they do to the environment. I think of the Flash as a guy that runs very, very fast. Not as someone who needs to eat a king’s feast worth of food to function.
But the Left, being the massive killers of fun that they are, can’t help but to waste their time saying that these heroes would quickly kill the Earth. Not just that, but they even make suggestions. Of the Flash, they say that “by going vegetarian, the Flash could reduce his emissions from 90 million pounds of carbon dioxide to just 3 million.” Of Batman: “If Bruce Wayne stopped spending money on Batman gear, he could pay for carbon offsets for the entire population of downtown Chicago.”
And here’s possibly the most Leftist part of the entire article: “The implied message: If a masked vigilante with too much money and a shortage of good judgment can redeem himself, you can, too.”
THERE IT IS! There’s the Leftist message this article was missing! Not only did they make these heroes less fun, but they also point the blame to real people. First, there’s no such thing as an individual having “too much money”. But of course, being a Leftist, this writer is insanely jealous of A FICTIONAL BEING and believe he shouldn’t have the money that he has.
Second, I love how she (the writer of the article is a woman) also believes we have to redeem ourselves of anything to do with the climate. How very Leftist of her.
She just has to remind you that you have “a hand in destroying the planet and have done next to nothing to redeem yourself of this horrendous crime against nature.”
But it’s not just the writer of the article that points the blame to people. The researcher does as well.
“’In learning how to make this better’ – Traer points to a circle on his poster (yes, they made a poster of this joke of a research work) illustrating the carbon footprint of the Flash’s hamburger-based diet – ‘we can learn how to make this better’ – he points to a much smaller circle representing the footprint of an average American: 44,093 pounds of carbon dioxide per year.”
I just love how the scientist attempts to justify the work put into this research by saying if we learn how to make the Flash more eco-friendly, we can learn how to make ourselves more eco-friendly.
Mr. Scientist, make no mistake, this research is a massive waste of time that only takes the fun out of superheroes. No one honestly cares that Batman would essentially destroy the planet with his fuel consumption if he were real. I think people would honestly be more excited if there was a real-life Batman.
And let’s not forget that there’s really no bigger enemy of the planet than the Left. May I remind you that Obama made a climate change video while aboard Air Force One? May I remind you that “eco-friendly” Leonardo DiCaprio and Al Gore have MASSIVE carbon footprints themselves? The funny thing about that is that the Left even EXCUSES them because they’re climate change advocates… kinda like they excused Harvey Weinstein for 30 years of sexual assault because he was a feminist activist and Democrat Party donor.
If the Left wants to point the finger at anyone, it should be themselves. If they want people to start living a certain way, they themselves should be living the lifestyle they demand we have.
It’s part of the reason I don’t consider people like Bernie Sanders and just about everyone on the Left to be true socialists. They preach about socialism yet they live like the very capitalists they claim to hate.
Bernie Sanders is an “open socialist” who constantly tells us we have to be like Venezuela while at the same time he is the proud owner of FOUR HOMES! He’s not a socialist, he’s a hypocritical moron with no knowledge of economics. A socialist in ideology only and not in practice.
The point is that these people may make claims all day long, but they are in fact more responsible for “destroying the Earth”, as they say, than the average American. If they truly want Americans to live a certain way, they have to begin with themselves.
Bernie Sanders clearly has “too much money”, so he should sell, or better yet, donate, three of his homes to people in need. Nancy Pelosi clearly has “too much money” since she has to pay SIX mortgages, the cheapest of which is a mortgage of at least $250,000, according to Red State. The Clintons clearly have “too much money” since they have amassed around $240 million since leaving the White House in 2001, according to Forbes.
All of them Leftists in thought and capitalists in practice (in personal finance, at least).
Yet another example of Leftist hypocrisy, wouldn’t you agree?
“Do you suppose, O man – you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself – that you will escape the judgment of God?”
Author: Freddie Drake Marinelli.
Danielle Cross and Freddie Marinelli will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...