For the past couple of months, President Trump has been trying to keep the Coronavirus from being anywhere near as devastating here as it has been in Italy, South Korea, Iran and China, where the virus has been at its worst, while also attempting to calm down a panicked stock market that has seen days of thousand-point crashes and thousand-point surges (most recently, it’s just been crashing). Regardless of what the President does, however, it is utterly wrong in the eyes of a bloodthirsty media who had been desperate for something, anything, that would destroy Trump, even if at the cost of Americans’ livelihoods and lives.
And this last Wednesday, the President issued an address from the Oval Office in which he detailed what steps his administration had already taken, what steps it would heretofore be taking both health-wise and financially, and reassuring the American people that this is merely a temporary setback in what has been, for the past three years, a booming economy (and the economy is still doing well outside the stock market, as weekly jobless claims fell to 211,000 v 218,000 expected, so more good economic news that would otherwise lead to market rallies).
But what has the enemy of the people, the fake news media, talked about as a response? The fact that President Trump noted that the virus came from China, which Jim Acosta and Joe Biden believe is racist and xenophobic to point out (even though it’s an irrefutable fact and China is to blame for the virus spreading as bad as it has within the mainland and in the rest of the world due to trying to shut people who would talk about it down and keeping the WHO and CDC from helping them back in December), and, funny enough, that he wasn’t specific enough about what the American people should do (even though he was).
Here are the most important parts of the President’s address:
“Our team is the best anywhere in the world. At the very start of the outbreak, we instituted sweeping travel restrictions on China and put in place the first federally mandated quarantine in over 50 years. We declared a public health emergency and issued the highest level of travel warning on other countries as the virus spread its horrible infection.”
For those who said that Trump wasn’t doing enough (which the media had been saying pretty much all of February and early March before the address), that is patently untrue. Chuck Schumer had offered his opinion on that travel restriction on China and believed it was fueled by Trump’s “racism” and “xenophobia”. They thought he was overreacting in January but switched it up to “he’s not doing enough” when they accused him of saying that the virus was “a hoax” when in reality, he was referring to the Democrats’ and mainstream media’s politicization of the virus as being his fault (remember when an NYT op-ed suggested people call it the “Trumpvirus”? Because I do).
The President was the first one to take this seriously, appointing VP Pence as head of the Coronavirus Task Force, which members of the media and Democrats mocked because he supposedly “doesn’t believe in science”, coming from the people who believe in anthropogenic climate change and that there are a bazillion genders.
Anyone claiming he had not been doing enough or that he was underreacting to the coronavirus is simply either wrong or lying.
Continuing: “To keep new cases from entering our shores, we will be suspending all travel from Europe to the United States for the next 30 days. The new rules will go into effect Friday at midnight. These restrictions will be adjusted subject to conditions on the ground.”
“There will be exemptions for Americans who have undergone appropriate screenings, and these prohibitions will not only apply to the tremendous amount of trade and cargo, but various other things as we get approval. Anything coming from Europe to the United States is what we are discussing. These restrictions will also not apply to the United Kingdom.” (Worth mentioning that the President misspoke here and the prohibitions won’t affect trade and cargo, only travelers).
“Earlier this week, I met with the leaders of health insurance industry who have agreed to waive all copayments for coronavirus treatments, extend insurance coverage to these treatments, and to prevent surprise medical billing.”
“Additionally, last week, I signed into law an $8.3 billion funding bill to help CDC and other government agencies fight the virus and support vaccines, treatments, and distribution of medical supplies. Testing and testing capabilities are expanding rapidly, day by day.”
“My administration is coordinating directly with communities with the largest outbreaks, and we have issued guidance on school closures, social distancing, and reducing large gatherings.”
“For all Americans, it is essential that everyone take extra precautions and practice good hygiene. Each of us has a role to play in defeating this virus. Wash your hands, clean often-used surfaces, cover your face and mouth if you sneeze or cough, and most of all, if you are sick or not feeling well, stay home.”
Someone should tape that last part of his address to Brian Stelter’s office door (if he has one) because following the address, he tweeted: “Trump’s Oval Office address was exactly what his Fox wingmen needed – now Sean Hannity et al can celebrate the new travel ban – while evading the real scourge of community spread within the US.”
He also replied to someone, saying: “Get specific, dude. Have you heard Trump or Hannity fully address what the US should do to stop community spread?”
I get the feeling Brian wasn’t actually paying attention to what the President was saying, otherwise he wouldn’t be qualified to work at CNN. The President was very specific, right at that point where I stopped quoting him, about what people should do to prevent themselves from getting the virus: practice good hygiene, wash your hands, maintain cleanliness in your home, cover your face and mouth when sneezing or coughing so as to not harm someone else, and stay home if you are feeling unwell.
What part of that was not specific, Brian?
In any case, the President continued by saying: “To ensure that working Americans impacted by the virus can stay home without fear of financial hardship, I will soon be taking emergency action, which is unprecedented, to provide financial relief. This will be targeted for workers who are ill, quarantined, or caring for others due to coronavirus.”
“[T]o provide extra support for American workers, families and businesses, tonight I am announcing the following additional actions: I am instructing the Small Business Administration to exercise available authority to provide capital and liquidity to firms affected by the coronavirus.”
“Finally, I am calling on Congress to provide Americans with immediate payroll tax relief.”
Could you believe that the Left and fake news media is taking issue with people keeping more of their money and limiting travel to areas that have been horribly affected by the virus?
They really do want us all sick, dying and poor if it helps them defeat Donald Trump. These people are sick and I don’t mean with the coronavirus.
When sparing the CCP’s feelings by avoiding recognizing the virus came from China is more important than taking this seriously; when attacking the President for “not doing enough” and then attacking him for “doing too much” is more important than people’s health and safety; when any narrative that helps them, even at the expense of the American people, is more important than the health of said people, you know you are dealing with some scum-of-the-earth type of people.
At no point was Trump downplaying this and it’s better for him to overreact with travel restrictions (I still don’t know how that is an overreaction) and financial aid to people who could be affected than to actually downplay it and underreact (as the media and the Left believed he should’ve done back in January, when he was leading everyone else on this).
The destruction of their political opponent is more important than your health and safety. And they want to claim he is the tyrant and that he is Putin-like?
“Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
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.
“How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to your word.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
I often find that the people who are most offended by racist things aren’t people that belong to the race that is being targeted, but white people who white knight around and claim to be offended on the part of an “oppressed” minority. For example, almost no one outside the United States has any issue calling the Coronavirus “Wuhan Virus”. The only people outside the U.S. who say that calling it that is “racist” is the Chinese government that royally screwed everything up and is trying to absolve themselves from any blame or responsibility. But aside from that, I’ve only seen Leftist white people get offended by that name, not the people of Wuhan or the citizens of China.
Similarly, Leftist white people (though not all) tend to prefer “politically correct” language, such as referring to Hispanics as “Latinx”, a term that, as both a Hispanic and as one who does not give a darn about political correctness because I see it for the communist censorship tactic that it is, I thoroughly loathe. And according to a recent Politico poll, I am far from the only Hispanic that is not fond of that ridiculous (and frankly racist, which I will explain in a moment) term.
According to Politico’s Marc Caputo, in a survey of 800 Hispanic DEMOCRAT voters (so it’s not even Independent or Republican Hispanics), 69% prefer the term “Hispanic”, 23% prefer “Latino”, 9% cite they have no preference and only 1% say they prefer the Leftist, gender-less term “Latinx”.
This, as I said, is not surprising. The Spanish language is heavily reliant on gender. Words like “el” and “la” are used to precede a word that is determined to be either masculine or feminine, respectively. For example, “el Rey” means “the king”, while “la Reina” means “the queen”. Even for things that do not necessarily have a gender in itself, like a shoe, have a gender in Spanish, as we call it “el zapato”. “La comida” refers to “the food”, “el burrito” refers to “the burrito”, “la biblioteca” refers to the library, etc. So it’s natural for us to have terms like “Latino” and “Latina” to refer to a Hispanic male or a Hispanic female, respectively.
For the Left white knights to come in and say that those two terms are “sexist” and “not inclusive” and that the term “Latinx” should instead be adopted spits in the face of the Spanish language and those who use it (and this is the racist part, since the Left declares themselves “protectors” of Hispanics in doing this, when they come off as nothing but “burros”).
Again, that poll was from Hispanic DEMOCRATS. Even Hispanic Democrats say that it’s dumb to use that term and that they prefer alternatives. Not that it matters to actual Democrats, of course. Despite the fact that they are not Hispanic and the fact that Hispanics don’t like the term, failed presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have opted to exclusively use that term, with the former having had a campaign shirt that read: “Latinx for Warren”.
To their credit, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders don’t tend to use that term, but I suspect it’s only a matter of time until they are forced to use it by a “woke” Leftist base and Democrat Party that has no understanding of real life, narcissistically believing their way to be the only way.
I mean, an entire dictionary was coerced into adding that word and even declaring it their “word of the year” in 2018. It’s not a word and it never will be a word. Latinos LOATHE that word and it only shows how out of touch these Leftists are with real people. Not to mention their outright racism, as they believe they know better than us regarding what is “good” for us in terms of OUR OWN LANGUAGE AND HOW WE USE IT.
Far more Leftist white people use the false term “Latinx” than do actual Hispanics. And, speaking of Hispanics, why even use the term “Latinx” when Hispanic IS ALREADY GENDERLESS?! A “Hispanic” can refer to both men and women of Latin origin. A “Latino” does the same in some contexts, such as referring to “Latino” voters, but even if you want to pretend to be “progressive” and “woke” and “inclusive”, why not just use the term “Hispanic”? It both serves the “genderless” quota, because apparently, anything that is gendered is offensive in this day and age and can “harm” someone (seriously, I’ve seen someone use the word “Germxn” to refer to the language of Germany just because it had “man” in it and it offended them) and it’s popular among Latino voters, at least Latino Democrats, so there is no harm in using it.
The term “Latinx” is just an attempt by these “ultra-woke” idiots to pretend to be inclusive and open-minded and all that garbage. It serves no other purpose than to allow for Leftist white people who have never experienced a shred of adversity to feel good about themselves and pretend they are this generation’s Martin Luther King Jr., only in the form of a white person. It’s a selfish desire to pretend they are doing something meaningful and that there is as much injustice in the world as there was in the past, even though that is exceedingly untrue.
Such people read of the trials and tribulations of people in the past, of the almost heroic peaceful activism of MLK Jr, Malcolm X, Gandhi, etc., people who actually faced hardships in their lives, and wish to be remembered in a similar way. But since the troubles of the past are largely no longer around, such desires cannot be accomplished, so new troubles are created to pretend to fight. For example, the entire “climate activism” idiocy we see today. There is no evidence that suggests we are responsible for a warming or cooling climate, and yet, people feel the need to “come together” to “achieve something greater than ourselves” in order to “save the planet”.
It’s faux-scientific and utterly fictional lunacy, but people feel like they need to matter. In a culture that doesn’t believe in the God of the Bible, worth has to come from somewhere, and people find it in this idiotic activism, regardless of whether or not it’s actually good for people in the long-run (it isn’t, as it’s a tool for global communism).
And so, fictitious “struggles” of Hispanics are brought to the forefront of people who have no actual hardships to fight against and no actual struggles to thrive over, so that they might pretend to be an “ally” for us. It’s disingenuous and it’s insulting. Gendered language is not an issue to the vast majority of Latinos. It’s a fundamental part of our language. To suggest that it must be changed, particularly from the people who have no actual adversity to tackle, is racist and insulting.
Not that I expect anything less from these people. Racism and bigotry are staples of the Left, have been for ages and continue to be to this day. Often enough, we find that it’s the Left that creates the problems and adversities past generations have had to overcome, and yet, the try to take credit for victory when no such credit is due to them in the least. It’s the Left that fought for slavery. It’s the Left that fought for continued segregation. It’s the Left that is now demanding HISPANICS change our own language to be more “inclusive”.
The Left is absolutely horrible and they show that each and every day of our lives.
“’There is no peace,’ says the Lord, ‘for the wicked.’”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
I am not even a little bit surprised that the Left is seeing this virus, which puts people’s health at risk and causes literal DEATHS to some, to be an opportunity to attack Trump relentlessly regardless of what he does, what measures he takes, what he says and what his response is at any point. These people are fundamentally rotten and view anything that is bad for people as a positive if the current administration is one they do not like. Any catastrophe is celebrated by these people and they want the Coronavirus to be as devastating as the Plague, provided they do not contract it or suffer from it in the slightest.
So, when the President, who has been taking the virus seriously and taken measures to mitigate its spread in the country since January in moves that have been attacked by the Left as “too radical” and “based on his racism” or dumb crap like that, tweets numbers that are used to put into perspective how needless the panic driven by the media has been, it’s equally as unsurprising that the Left would have a problem with it. Let me briefly explain just what it was that the President tweeted that has these people reacting so negatively.
Recently, Trump tweeted: “So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu. It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year. Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on. At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus, with 22 deaths. Think about that!”
Obviously, this has led some on the Left to say that he is downplaying the virus (again, he acted with seriousness far earlier than these people did) and claiming that he is saying that it’s “just the flu” even though at no point did he ever say that.
Here are the facts regarding Coronavirus. First, there is no vaccine or medicine that outright prevents or cures it. Efforts should be made towards achieving that, but Coronavirus is nothing like the Plague or anything that would be a threat to our civilization as the Left has suggested. While there is no vaccine that prevents it or medicine that cures it, people are recovering from it just fine, as we will soon see.
The incubation period, or the time someone usually has the disease, is 2-14 days with an average of 5.2 days, according to Worldometers’ page on the Coronavirus. The maximum recorded incubation period is 27 days.
Second, there are 554 confirmed cases in the U.S. (a few more than the President said, but again, according to Worldometers), with 22 dead (with 15 of those people having died in a single retirement home in the failing communist State of Washington) and 15 people who have recovered. 472 tests have been carried out, though the last tallied test was in March 1st. The cases per 1 million residents is pretty low in comparison to other nations. Cases per 1M residents in the U.S. is 1.7.
In Italy, 23,345 tests have been made, 7,375 confirmed cases have been found, 366 people have died, 622 have recovered and cases per 1M residents stands at 122. In Iran, there is no data to be found about the number of tests (because it’s Iran), 6,566 confirmed cases, 194 dead, 2,134 people recovered and cases per 1m is 78.2. In South Korea, 109,591 tests have been carried out, 7,382 confirmed cases, 53 dead, 116 recovered and cases per 1m is 144.
These are among the highest in the world, so they are a bit of an outlier, but the U.S. is also really low, so it is also a bit of an outlier. The U.K. has seen 278 confirmed cases, with 3 dead and 18 recovered, with cases per 1m being 4.1.
In China, the origin of the Wuhan Virus (which some people on the Left claim calling it that is “racist” showing just how unserious they are about this virus), we find that there are 80,738 confirmed cases, 3,120 people have died, 58,624 have recovered and cases per 1m stands at 56.1. Now, we should take these figures with a grain of salt because the Chicoms likely want to make the numbers seem better than they might actually be so that their markets don’t take so much of a hit, but I doubt these numbers are all that far away from the truth.
Third, the mortality rate is rather low, at least for healthy people under 70. Male mortality rate for COVID-19 stands at 2.8%, while female mortality rate stands at 1.7%. By age, those 80 and older have a mortality rate of 14.8%. 70-79, 8.0%. 60-69, 3.6%. 50-59, 1.3% and those younger than 50 have less than half a percentage point of mortality rate. This means that the vast majority of people who contract the virus will be fine, provided they are relatively young and healthy. (Also, rate of infection seems to be plateauing in China and in many places in the world).
There have been a total of 3,892 deaths around the world according to Johns Hopkins University. This year, 91,125 people have died from the seasonal flu. Some might try and argue that comparing the two is illogical since one of them has a vaccine, can be treated by antibiotics and statistics are fairly predictable while the other does not have a vaccine, has no known cure and statistics are not predictable, but I disagree that they are incomparable. These are two illnesses that have fairly similar symptoms and can cause health problems and death, but one of them has far fewer deaths, far lower a mortality rate (the flu's is counted as the whole population as opposed to the number of people who get it) and is somehow a bigger story than the other, despite it being far less fatal.
I’ve said in the past that I don’t know what will happen with Coronavirus in the future. However, the low mortality rate and the fact that plenty of people are recovering from it tells me this virus is not as bad as the Left and those in the media would want us to think. It’s far from a death sentence, as far more people have recovered (62,392) than have died (3,892) from it. Even if we do not take China’s numbers to be accurate, we can still see decent recovery rates from countries like Italy, South Korea and the U.K., who are not as likely to manipulate their numbers to benefit their economies, so recovery rate should still be good.
The point the President was trying to get across is that panic is what is driving the stock market down far more than the virus itself and he is trying to calm people down with some figures because it’s clear that the Coronavirus is not as big a deal as the media and the Left pretend it is. Make no mistake, neither he nor I are saying it’s a nothingburger or that it’s completely irrelevant. People are suffering from it, people are dying from it and it’s affecting plenty of people. However, there are diseases that have affected far more people with far less of an impact on the stock market. Trump sees what this coronavirus scare is for what it is: a scare. A scare that the media is all-too happy to put into people’s lives if it means getting rid of Trump come November (and I predict this entire thing to be over before the summer). And it’s that scare that Trump was referring to when he used the word “hoax.” He didn’t call the virus itself a hoax, but the scare and panic the Left was driving. THAT is the hoax.
Trump isn’t downplaying the Coronavirus. Again, he’s taken action to mitigate this in the U.S. since before there was even a confirmed case in the country and the Left was saying he was propagating “racism” with imposing travel bans to and from China and other countries that have the virus. So don’t tell me Trump isn’t taking this seriously or hasn’t been taking this seriously. For crying out loud, Ted Lieu told people not to call it the “Wuhan Virus” because people might take offense to it, despite the fact that naming a virus after the place it came from is common practice (need I point out that Ebola, the Spanish Flu, MERS and a slew of other diseases are named after their place of origin?). If we are prioritizing political correctness, then we aren’t taking it seriously and that is what the Left is clearly doing here (apart from clearly trying to politicize the virus).
What Trump is doing is telling those who are panicking to put things into perspective so they stop panicking so much. Take caution, practice good hygiene and avoid going places where you have a high risk of contracting the virus, but don’t pretend this is the Bubonic Plague and panic about what this will mean for the economy. The economy apart from the stock market is flourishing. 273,000 jobs were created in February and almost the same amount in January, despite what the Coronavirus is doing. Unemployment is still at 50-year lows. Oil prices are going down, which will hurt oil companies and states that benefit from oil like Texas and Louisiana, but the consumer and other companies will benefit from lower prices (if oil costs less, manufacturing and transportation will increase, which will increase supply, drive down prices of goods, drive up demand, and drive up profits).
Trump is simply fighting back, as he always does, against the narrative the media wants to drive.
“Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
The very same people that tell us what the temperature will be in 100 years and the people that tell us the Green New Deal and Medicare-for-All are both affordable government measures are incapable of doing math (which is likely why they believe the things they believe).
Last week, MSNBC’s Brian Williams, the guy who practically embodies the term “fake news”, and NYT Editorial Board Member Mara Gay showed their inability to do even basic math or even have the intuition to check someone else’s atrocious math with a quick calculation on their phones.
The two were discussing a tweet made by someone (who originally also made a mathematical error and these two went along with it) regarding the amount of money failed presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg spent on his campaign.
This is what the tweet said: “Bloomberg spent $500 million on ads. The U.S. population, 327 million. He could have given each American $1 million and have had lunch money left over.” Instead of pointing out how disastrously wrong that math was, Williams and Gay went along with it. Williams said: “It’s an incredible way of putting it.” Gay parroted that statement, saying: “It’s an incredible way of putting it. It’s true. It’s disturbing.”
And now we know why unaffordable proposals like the GND and M4A are so attractive to these people: they literally cannot do the math to find that those things really are unaffordable. They will simply hear Bernie say that he has a $40 trillion or so plan to pay for these communist proposals, even though there would still be another $30-50 trillion that would need to be spent in order to cover everything, and will believe Bernie found a way to pay for it all.
No, Brian and Mara, it’s not an “incredible way of putting it” because it’s a mathematically illiterate way to put it. It’s not “true” or “disturbing”. What’s really disturbing is these people’s clear inability to do basic math.
Even worse than that, though, is their unwillingness to verify facts (then again, this is Brian Williams and a member of the NYT editorial board, so what do I expect?). $500 million divided amongst 327 million people equals $1.53. An easy way to find this is using the calculator function in one’s own phone, inputting “500/327” and you will find the result being 1.5290, etc., 1.53, rounding up. This is because when we are discussing numbers in zeroes, those zeroes get cancelled out. 500,000,000 divided by 327,000,000 will cancel out all the zeroes, leave 500/327, and you get 1.53.
This is so simple to do that I did it in less than 5 seconds on my phone. But these two imbeciles saw that that erroneous tweet, regardless of how mathematically illiterate it is, pushed their anti-billionaire narrative and presented them with an opportunity to “dunk” on Bloomberg and his greed or whatever.
The narrative is always what’s important to these people, as shown by the fact that the person who originally tweeted that erroneous mathematical tweet DOUBLED DOWN on his error and tweeted: “blah blah math blah blah people are telling me my numbers are wrong but the point still stands: he could easily afford to give everyone $1 million and literally never notice.”
Let’s do the math, then, shall we? What’s 327 million times 1 million? If you put it in your calculator, it would show the following: 3.27x1014. That’s $327 TRILLION. According to World Population Review, the total world GDP is only $91.98 trillion. If Mike Bloomberg had $327 trillion, he would have more than 3.5 TIMES the total world GDP BY HIMSELF. So the guy is so wrong in so many ways. Primarily, in terms of his calculations. He didn’t even admit that he was wrong about his original tweet, just said that others pointed out his error. He just assumed everyone else was stupid and that Bloomberg really could give everyone in the country a million dollars and not suffer a dent in his bank account.
But here’s the funny part: even if Pythagoras over here actually was right and Bloomberg did have $327 trillion, he’d still be wrong to say it wouldn’t do anything because it would take ALL OF THAT MONEY to give everyone in the country a million dollars. So it’s absolutely wrong that Bloomberg could give everyone in America that kind of money and not suffer financially.
But again, it’s not exactly surprising that these people are so mathematically illiterate. They rely on “experts” to tell them what is and is not affordable, and generally, the “experts” on the Democrat side will say that pretty much everything is affordable and that there shouldn’t be any worries nor questions about the math being used.
Brian Williams and Mara Gay fully believed the easy-to-catch mathematical error because they either A) really did believe the math checked out, B) the narrative worked in their favor or C) a little bit (or a lot) of both. They didn’t question the math or even think to verify if it was right. Again, this is MSNBC’s Brian Williams and a member of the NYT, so facts are entirely irrelevant to these people, but still.
This only goes to show the failure of the education system in this country. GROWN ADULTS are incapable of doing basic math and are so politically biased that they don’t even think to check if a mathematical calculation could be wrong because doing so would rob them of the opportunity to spread their agenda.
Look, I wasn’t expecting either of these two to be able to do the math on their head immediately and come up with that $1.53 answer without a calculator or their phone. I, myself, had to rely on my phone to check the actual answer. But they didn’t even question it, no red flags were raised about it, nothing. They took it at face value. They didn’t stop to think “hey, that doesn’t sound right.” And it’s not just them, it’s everyone involved in that panel who also didn’t think to check because they also had an opportunity to verify and still went ahead and ran with that segment.
Not one of them thought that 500 million divided by 327 million shouldn’t still end with a million anything. Again, those zeroes cancel out when doing division. No such alarms blared in their heads at any point in time. And yet, they say they “believe in science”, or at least the “science” that pushes their Left-wing narratives, like anthropogenic climate change, the theory of evolution, and “men can be women and vice versa”.
Again, it’s plain to see just why these people support things like the GND and M4A: they literally cannot do the math to verify that they are utterly unaffordable and that heavy tax burdens and increases would have to take place in order to even remotely hope to attempt to pay for a fraction of this communist garbage.
This is also fairly clear in the fact that, when people are told that their taxes would have to increase in order to pay for Medicare-for-All, support for the socialized medicine program sinks like a rock.
And make no mistake, this is all by design. Earlier, I said it was the failure of the American education system, but given it’s been run by Leftists for half a century at this point, it clearly was intended for people to be this mathematically illiterate. Insane and unaffordable communist proposals don’t seem so insane and unaffordable when people have this level of educational deficiency.
We see that they can’t do math, and we also see that young people believe communism is a good thing because its reality is not being taught. They aren’t learning about the famines or the hardships of the Soviet Union under Stalin, Khrushchev, etc. Heck, I didn’t learn about those things either until I HAD TO LOOK THEM UP MYSELF! Wanna know what I was taught? That the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell, A2 + B2 = C2, and that Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 (and given his infamous status among students in this day and age, I doubt that last one will even be taught anymore). That’s it, we didn’t learn about the horrible nature of communism and its authoritarian and dictatorial nature. Everything I know about communism, I had to learn outside of school because the Marxist teachers wouldn’t dare tell the truth about that garbage philosophy: that it’s total garbage.
Williams and Gay (and Mr. Pythagoras) aren’t simply the result of a failed education system; they’re its goal. The system in place doesn’t educate our youth, it indoctrinates them.
This is why the fight against communism on American soil must begin, first at home, but then also at schools because that is where these young communists are coming from.
2 Timothy 3:13
“While evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
After the big Super Tuesday results surprisingly showing Joe Biden with a delegate lead over Bernie Sanders, two of the, at the time, remaining five candidates dropped out: Michael Bloomberg, who dropped out soon after winning American Samoa (and spending the equivalent of 76% of the territory’s GDP in ads) and more recently, Elizabeth Warren, who dropped out the day the previous article came out.
Unsurprisingly, a CNN panel pondered if the reason Warren performed so poorly (as well as the other women who were in the race) is because of blatant sexism, very conveniently leaving out the part that this is entirely a Democrat process and the vast majority of people voting in the Democrat primaries are Democrats.
Don Lemon, the dumbest and most racist man on television, began by saying: “I want to bring it now to the women who are here to talk about that. You have these women, these very strong, very powerful, very smart women in this race. You had Hillary Clinton, who is defeated despite winning the popular vote. You have Elizabeth Warren who didn’t do well, Amy Klobuchar who has dropped out of this race. You had this very diverse Democratic Party and then you have the women, you have all the white guys who have the delegates. What’s going on here?”
The Daily Beast’s Jackie Kucinich said that Klobuchar lost because she was lacking in funds, but then said this for Warren: “If just the fact that this ground game did not turn out votes for her, did not get people to the polls for Elizabeth Warren is really – there’s really a lot of digging as to why that didn’t happen, whether it’s sexism, whether it’s the fact someone did just change their mind. I heard women when I was in Iowa tell me ‘we’re Warren fans,’ we’re worried that people – they liked Warren, they heard her speak. They went to the polls and then they were worried that a woman couldn’t beat Donald Trump.”
If they really were worried that a woman couldn’t beat Trump, doesn’t that speak more about DEMOCRATS’ sexism than anything else? This isn’t about the entire country. In 2016, Hillary lost because she was unlikeable, was a terrible candidate and ultimately lost the electoral vote, with the vast majority of the country voting in favor of Trump over her. Elizabeth Warren was Hillary if she sounded like the most annoying librarian in the world. Elizabeth Warren lied through her teeth and stabbed “her friend” Bernie Sanders in the back with a tomahawk by saying he said things that she had no proof he said. Elizabeth Warren practically stole every policy idea from Bernie, from the GND to Medicare-for-All, with just a few details changed.
But by all means, claim that it was sexism that destroyed Warren, because it falls entirely on the Democrat Party and its socialist base.
Karen Finney, who was also on the panel and was a spokesperson for the Hillary campaign in 2016, said: “When it comes to executive office, our country is still very uncomfortable with women in power, and that’s part of why women have to over credential again and again. So in ‘16, we said, she would be – Hillary Clinton would have been the most qualified, right? You’ve heard – and you also have heard both Klobuchar and Warren and certainly Kamala when she was still talking about their electability and remember that for women what goes into electability is ‘do I think she – I like her?’ We don’t care if we like male candidates or not. Men come into a race with the expectation that they’re qualified. Women have to prove themselves…”
What a load of crap. First, as I have said time and again here, this is not a matter of the entire country, but of the DEMOCRATS being sexist, if that’s the angle you’re going for. It’s not that Americans aren’t comfortable with a female president, because that’s not the case whatsoever. I’d be more than happy to vote for a female conservative Republican to be President of the United States. But funny enough, a female conservative Republican is not someone Leftists would ever want to vote for because she’d be a “traitor” to her gender, as though women belong to the Democrat Party (much like black people and Latinos are supposed to belong to the Democrat Party, a belief very much in line with the Party’s pro-slavery history).
Second, let’s look at all the people that have, at one point or another, been a Democrat candidate this primary cycle. We have Joe Biden, who is still in and in the lead, Bernie Sanders, who is also still in, and Tulsi Gabbard, who is also still in but the Democrats think she’s too “right-wing” despite how utterly laughable that is (and let’s not forget she’s also a woman, and a woman of color, at that, and yet, the sexist and racist Democrats don’t want her).
The people who withdrew after the Iowa caucuses include: Elizabeth Warren, the aforementioned woman who apparently can’t get a fair shake; Michael Bloomberg, the guy practically no one liked; Amy Klobuchar, Mayor Pete, Tom Steyer, Deval Patrick, Michael Bennet and Andrew Yang. Among these people, one of them is black, another one is Asian, and another one is gay. Surely, with the line of thinking the CNN panel is using, Democrat voters are also racist and homophobic, as well as sexist for Warren and Klobuchar dropping out!
The people who withdrew before Iowa include: John Delaney, Cory Booker, Marianne Williamson, Julian Castro, Steve Bullock and Joe Sestak. We find two men of color, two women and one of those women is a woman of color.
Finally, the people who withdrew before appearing on any primary ballots include: Wayne Messam, Beto O’Rourke, Tim Ryan, Bill de Blasio, Kirsten Gillibrand, Seth Moulton, Jay Inslee, Kamala Harris, John Hickenlooper, Mike Gravel, Eric Swalwell and Richard Ojeda. Out of all these people, only two are people of color and two are women. The rest are all white men (with one pretending he is Latino with his name).
The reason for me bringing this up is that there are PLENTY of men who voters did not want or support and did not think would be a good candidate to run against Trump. Elizabeth Warren made it to the final four and there is still a woman in this race but these people don’t want to cover her whatsoever. The idea that women have to over-credential themselves and sell themselves more than men do is idiotic. And, even if that really were to be the case here, and women do really have to over-credential themselves, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DEMOCRATS! So if there is unfairness and sexism and bigotry here, it’s THE DEMOCRATS that are showing it, not the country as a whole.
For all of the minority candidates who dropped out, we had story after story asking if people were racist because those candidates failed in their effort to be the Party’s nominee. But each and every time, the question was poised as though it was THE ENTIRE COUNTRY’S FAULT THAT SUCH PEOPLE FAILED IN THE DEMOCRAT PARTY PRIMARIES!
Now, I’m not going to defend the Democrat base whatsoever because they are a bunch of communist loons. However, if the media is going to try and excuse these candidates’ pathetic efforts at being the party’s nominee by saying that it was racism and sexism’s fault, I am not going to let them get away with pinning the blame on the entirety of the country.
Like I pointed out, Tulsi is still in and she checks the “person of color” and “woman” boxes, and yet, they refuse to talk about her and cover her. Now, it’s down to two old white men, the demographic Democrats are supposed to hate, because of no one’s racism and sexism but the Democrats’, if that’s what you want to blame this on.
In any case, Finney then also went on to say that the electorate didn’t like that Warren was too harsh on Bloomberg, and Patty Solis Doyle, chief of staff for Joe Biden when he was Obama’s running mate, said: “I have to say this whole dynamic really upsets me. The fact that we’re even still talking about, ‘well, she can’t go too far, she can’t hit too hard.’ You know, in 2018, more women than ever before in our history ran for public office. More women than ever won public office. Women are going to be pivotal in this election. We started this presidential election with six women running, more than ever before in an election cycle. We’re down to two, and it really upsets me that someone like Elizabeth Warren, who was stellar on the debate stage, had a great organization, smart, tough, had resources, somehow just seemed to – has been like shoved aside and we don’t know why.”
I find that argument rather interesting, as women make up a decent portion of the Democrat Party and are the majority in this country at roughly 51% of the population. If Warren performed so poorly (even in her own state) then that means women were not particularly supportive of her. Maybe a good amount of them were, but considering how many women there are in general, if Bernie and Joe did better than her, wouldn’t one find more fault in the women who didn’t vote for Warren?
Doyle was acting as though Warren was THE candidate for women, and she may have tried to promote herself as that, but that clearly didn’t work and plenty of women didn’t go for her. Does that make those women sexist?
But to reiterate my overall point, I find it hilarious that these fake news people would try and pin this on “systemic sexism and racism” in the country when it is THE DEMOCRATS’ primaries that displayed people not voting for minorities or women. If these people really want to talk about voters being racist or sexist or whatever, they have to talk about the fact that these are DEMOCRAT voters, not all Americans.
Obviously, they aren’t going to do that. They never believe Democrats can be racist or sexist, even though that’s where we tend to find such bigotry. But even when they try and pin this on voters in general, avoiding talking about Democrats, they can’t help but invite people like me to call out their b.s. If “systemic racism and sexism” are what brought down the minority and female candidates, it’s all to be found exclusively on the Democrat side of things.
“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 Marinelli.
A series of events have occurred during and immediately following the results of this week’s Super Tuesday primary delegate race. For one, Mini Mike dropped out of the race after spending roughly $12 million per delegate (he got 53) and decided to join Amy Klobuchar, Mayor Pete and Beto O’Rourke in endorsing Joe Biden, the Obi-Wan Kenobi of the Democrats, as he is their only hope of beating Darth Bern.
With that, one of the biggest stories coming out of Super Tuesday is that Joe Biden is seemingly back in the race, even when he can’t figure out where he is half the time, can’t remember who our Creator is, and pulls the male version of Ilhan Omar, confusing his wife for his sister and vice versa. Despite the multiple months, caucuses and debates where it seemed Joe was completely dead in the water, he has regained his standing as the frontrunner, currently holding a lead over Bernie in delegate count.
While that is a worthwhile story for “The Comeback Grandpa”, there is another story that few are covering: President Trump’s impressive turnout despite his status as an incumbent president.
President Trump has primary challengers, though none of them are really worth discussing, but the incumbent usually is expected to outright win the primaries for their party. No incumbent has ever lost their party’s nomination (though there were some fairly close calls like Taft vs. Roosevelt and H.W. Bush vs. Buchanan) so it was fully expected for President Trump to win the primaries for the GOP. However, as an incumbent president, the turnout is particularly impressive, as incumbents usually don’t have as many people turning out to vote in the primaries.
GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel tweeted the following, as the Super Tuesday results came in for the GOP: “We are seeing proof of the huge enthusiasm for Donald Trump in several states: In NC, POTUS has already blown past the # of votes he got in 2016. In OK, POTUS is on pace to receive 4 TIMES the # of votes of the last two incumbent presidents.”
“In AR, POTUS is on pace to receive DOUBLE the # of votes of the last two incumbent presidents. In MN, with just two-thirds of the vote in, POTUS has already received nearly 4 TIMES the # of votes as he did in the 2016 caucus. #WINNING.”
“MORE: Essex County, VT went for Obama in ’08 and ’12, but swung for Donald Trump in ’16 (aka “a Pivot County”). POTUS just received more votes there than all the Democrat primary candidates got in 2008. Update on NC: POTUS has received 150% MORE votes than he did in ’16!”
Chief of Staff for the GOP Richard Walters tweeted: “With 100% reporting in OK, Donald Trump has received over 270,000 votes. The President has not only surpassed his own vote total of 130,267 votes in 2016, he has over quadrupled the vote totals received by President Obama in 2012 (59,577) and President Bush in 2004 (64,389).”
What’s more, in North Carolina, with 95% reporting in, President Trump won the state with 93.5% of the vote, which far blows out of the water previous presidents. In 2012, Obama received 79% of the vote in that state. In 1996, Clinton received 81%. In 1988, Bush received just 45% and in 1980, Reagan received 68%.
Comparing Trump to Obama in 2012, we find the following figures:
Let’s begin with New Hampshire, since Iowa’s Democrat vote count is very weird, as they do not show the actual number of votes for each candidate but the number of “State Delegate Equivalent” votes, which shows up as a very small number. For example, Mayor Pete won the primary with 563 votes, with Bernie garnering 562 votes, but the GOP’s primary didn’t have this confusing vote count and shows Trump got over 30,000 votes, so I won’t compare the two parties’ vote count for Iowa. In NH, Bernie won the state with 76,324 votes, Mayor Pete received 72,457, Amy Klobuchar got 58,796, and Elizabeth Warren got 27,387.
President Trump got 129,696, as previously stated. That is far more than what Obama got in 2012 (like I said earlier) and by far defeats Bernie Sanders and the rest of the Democrats. Even if you put the top two winners together, they get less than 20,000 more votes than Donald Trump.
Let’s now look at California. The communist-run state was won by Bernie Sanders on Super Tuesday, with him garnering 992,304 votes. Joe Biden came in second with 733,086. Bloomberg got 424,670 votes and Fauxcahontas got 357,306.
Pretty good, right? Well, President Trump got 1,441,031. Obviously, he got far less votes than all the Democrats put together, but there is a good reason I’m talking about this. Far-Left socialists are currently ticked off at Elizabeth Warren for staying in this race, taking votes away from Bernie, and allowing the “moderate” Democrat Establishment to rally around Joe. However, even if Warren wasn’t in this race, and assuming 100% of the votes that went to her would go to Bernie instead, that’s still not enough to defeat Donald Trump.
Putting the “two” socialists in this race together in California (Bernie and Warren), they amassed 1,349,610 votes. That’s still almost 100,000 votes shy of Donald Trump. Now, I’m not saying that California is all that likely to go to President Trump in 2020, but it is fairly interesting that the “two” socialists here still got less votes together than Trump in total.
What’s more, Matt Vespa from TownHall.com asks the fairly rhetorical question: “Did Democrats Just Create a Path for Trump to Take California?” That is the title of his article and the reason he speculates this is because of a bill that recently went into effect that will likely kill millions of jobs in the state, as it disallows businesses contracting people without counting them as full-on employees (something that would absolutely kill ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft, which rely on contracting drivers as opposed to hiring them to a position). Vespa also quotes a writer at Red State who said the following:
“I’m about to make a purely anecdotal statement, so take it for what it’s worth but… I’ve never seen so many Californians willing and eager to cross the aisle to vote Republican as I have in the last two months… Do they want to vote for the California GOP? No. Do they want to vote for Trump? No. That being said, more than anything they want to be heard and since the California Democrats are willfully ignoring their voices, many feel a GOP vote will be the only way to make an impact. They’ll go back to voting for the party they love and are loyal to, but they’re for sure not going back to it if they don’t have jobs or are forced to move out of state because of AB5 (the aforementioned job-killing bill).”
“The stakes are real and critical and I’ve never seen so many people throwing aside political divisions for a unified cause. We vote with our wallets and Newsom and Gonzalez (the author of AB5) have taken the last dollars out of our wallets and then thumbed their noses at us for complaining about it.”
The Red State writer, Kira Davis, also says that Trump can benefit a lot by simply pointing out the atrocious bill and the impact it’s having on Californians and the state’s economy.
The fact that Trump got more votes than the “two” socialist candidates still in the race (by Super Tuesday, that is) is also significant. Again, I don’t think California will go to Trump and it’s largely a pipe dream that it will, but it’s worth pointing this out: even in California, plenty of people like Trump.
In any case, let’s now look at Alabama, where Trump won BIG. On the Democrat side, Biden won 286,630 votes, Sanders got 75,326, Bloomberg got 52,844 and Warren got 26,125. As previously stated, President Trump won 708,883 votes, far exceeding the vote count of all other Democrats (though it’s Alabama, so that’s to be expected).
In Arkansas, Biden got 92,584 votes, Sanders got 51,117, Bloomberg got 38,212 and Warren got 22,860. President Trump got 237,826 by comparison.
In Texas, Biden got 661,231 votes, Bernie got 591,952, Bloomberg got 289,340 and Warren got 227,422. President Trump got 1,883,799. As with Alabama, it’s rather expected for Trump to win big in Texas, but again, this is a massive number, particularly when comparing it to Obama.
What we find in all but two states (Massachusetts and Vermont) is that Trump, despite him being an incumbent and running basically unopposed (as the other GOP primary opponents are basically nobodies), is drawing in massive turnout for himself in what are essentially guaranteed races. There is just about zero chance for any GOP primary challenger to defeat Trump in any of these states, and yet, the President receives far bigger turnouts in many of these places than the current Democrat candidates and his predecessors.
This is the big story coming out of Super Tuesday that practically no one will cover: Trump’s base keeps growing and growing. His re-election, while not an absolute guarantee, is looking more and more likely as time goes on and as people keep dropping out.
The only people left in the Democrat race are two white men who are, at minimum, 77 years of age, with one of them believing the Soviet Union was good and that breadlines were a good thing for people, and the other believing his wife is his sister and that Super Tuesday was Super Thursday (among a slew of other gaffes that are equal parts funny and sad). Elizabeth Warren is basically a non-factor (UPDATE: She's out) and Bloomberg has already dropped out after wasting half a billion dollars annoying us in ads and winning less than 60 total delegates.
The fact that Biden might be the nominee will also annoy the heck out of Bernie supporters who might actually burn Milwaukee to the ground and essentially gift Trump with his second term come November, be it by directly voting for him (or simply against the Democrat establishment) or just not voting at all, leaving Joe with less voters.
The Democrats don’t stand a chance in 2020, do they? (Note that this is not an invitation to not go out to vote on November 3rd, 2020. Complacency on the part of an overly cocky Trump base would sink him, so make sure to go out to vote so that the Left truly doesn’t have any chance to win at all).
“Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Before I begin, let me elaborate that what I mean by “obsolete” is not that I think it ought to be re-written or updated by any stretch of the imagination. I want that damned thing out of U.S. law books and every practicing abortionist in this country thrown in jail for the genocide that they willingly and knowingly perform day in and day out, with Planned Parenthood thrown into the dustbin of history alongside the KKK and forever marred as an utterly evil, soulless organization. What I mean by “obsolete” is that the language it uses in supporting a woman’s “right” to abortion is no longer enough to try to justify it.
Allow me to explain. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear today a case considering whether or not a Louisiana abortion law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges (the ability of a doctor to admit a patient to a nearby hospital) for hospitals within 30 miles of an abortion clinic is constitutional. The reason for this is that abortionists are currently not required to admit patients into a hospital and can simply perform an abortion pretty much immediately. Wouldn’t you know it, pro-murder people find trouble with this and believe it interferes with a woman’s “right” to kill her own baby.
The Court, according to Breitbart News, “will also consider whether abortion businesses have the legal right to file lawsuits that challenge abortion health and safety laws in the name of their own abortion patients.”
The Illinois Right to Life (IRL) is among many pro-life organizations that have filed an amicus brief at the Supreme Court. IRL’s program director, Dr. Steven Jacobs, wrote the brief for the organization. He told Breitbart News:
“Most briefs have argued that abortion organizations and clinics shouldn’t have standing to sue, but our brief is among the briefs of the Senators and Congressmen arguing that Roe v. Wade should be re-examined.”
“While they argue that the undue burden standard has been found unworkable, we argue that legal, scientific, and social developments show that the factual underpinnings of Roe have so changed as to have made it obsolete and argue for the constitutional rights of fetuses.”
What the good doctor is getting to is that the language used by Roe to justify abortion, specifically about how ambiguous the definition of “person” was at the time (1973), is utterly obsolete in this day and age for a variety of reasons.
As Jacobs explained, there is scientific consensus regarding the point at which life begins. That’s right, unlike the ridiculous climate change “consensus” of 97% or whatever the figure was, there actually is a REAL consensus among biologists about when life begins.
You see, according to Jacobs, “Roe dismissed Texas’ argument that fetuses had rights because there was no consensus on when life begins in 1973 and fetuses were not recognized as persons in most legal contexts, back then. Today, we know there is a scientific consensus that shows a human’s life begins at fertilization and fetal homicide laws show that most states recognize fetuses as human persons at fertilization.”
The argument Roe had made about a fetus not being a person is that the 14th Amendment did not clearly define a person (though I have talked about this in the past and argue that it still protects human fetuses). However, since 1973, scientific advancements have been made that clearly show the humanity of a person in the womb. We have sonograms, both in 2D and 3D, that show us a live feed of the baby in the womb. We have proven that a fetus can feel pain and scream when it is being aborted. If you remember, back in March of 2018, I wrote an article about someone I considered to be evil incarnate, Leah Torres, an abortionist who said she transects “the cord first so there’s really no opportunity [to scream].” They don’t scream because she DOESN’T LET THEM, not because they have a physical inability to do so (provided they have a larynx).
But we know that they feel pain beginning at the 20th week of conception, maybe even a bit before (some say roughly around 18 weeks). Abortion is murder and science has proven it, but people reject the science they don’t like for their personal feelings or benefit where it applies.
Back in 2019, Jacobs authored a bombshell of a study that found 80% of Americans believe biologists should decide the question of when life begins. Well, among more than 5,500 biologists (a massive sample size), 96% of them affirmed that life begins at fertilization, or conception.
I wonder if the Left, who apparently loves scientific consensus, would drop their evil arguments for abortion upon finding this out. Actually, I don’t wonder that at all because they would not. Abortion is a big political issue for them and it helps them out in some cases. They are trying to normalize it and justify it, even when increasing scientific evidence showing that fetuses are human piles up. But there is no mistaking it: Roe v. Wade should be overturned on moral, just and scientific grounds.
Jacobs continued in his comments:
“Since Roe said that abortion rights collapse if it is shown that fetuses are persons (p. 29 of the brief), since Justices have said that fetuses would have rights if it is shown that fetuses are humans (p. 29 of the brief), and since Planned Parenthood v. Casey said that the Court would have to overturn Roe if a change to the facts robbed it of its original justification (p. 8 of the brief) – fetuses’ constitutional rights should be recognized and Roe should be updated or overturned.”
Jacobs also summarized: “things have changed since fetuses were not recognized as biological humans at fertilization or legal persons in 1973.”
Jacobs also observed that situations have changed for women since the 70s. “The Court was told that ‘a woman, because of her pregnancy, is often not a productive member of society. She cannot work. She cannot hold a job. She’s not eligible for welfare. She cannot get unemployment compensation’ (p. 6 of the brief). However, recent legislation and government programs have addressed many of those issues (p. 23-24 of the brief) and women can give their children up for adoption or use the protection of safe haven laws to leave their infant at a police station or a fire station.”
Legislation like the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 allows working mothers to take maternity leave, being paid in full, and take care of their children in that time period. Women have plenty of financial and other abilities to take care of their children, and even if they still feel they cannot afford a child, giving children up for adoption is also an alternative. Simply put, there is no medical, financial or social reason for a mother to kill her own child.
If Roe were to be a court decision today, there would be absolutely no reason for the Court to say it is constitutional. There is no medical reason to say that a fetus is not human, as science has proven that it is and that its personhood lies under the personhood described by the 14th Amendment. There is no social or financial reason to allow for abortion given the advantages women have in those areas in this day and age, as well as the options apart from killing the baby.
It is no person’s right to kill another, unless for self-defense. When an abortionist aborts a fetus, he or she is committing murder. When a woman goes to an abortion clinic seeking to abort her child, she is trying to get someone to kill her baby. When someone argues in favor of abortion, they advocate for the genocide of millions of children in the womb.
Roe v. Wade is evil, should be overturned and be remembered with the same horrified and disgusted scorn as we view the Dredd Scott decision, if not more.
“Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
This is something I have said before, but it bears repeating: the Left HATES Christians, hates Christianity, hates Jesus and hates anyone who follows Him, believing such people to be nothing but foolish and naïve science deniers who believe in fairy tales. They loathe our worship of the Lord and view it with nothing but contempt and mockery.
That is the precise response some Leftists in the mainstream media had to President Trump appointing Vice President Mike Pence to lead the Coronavirus Task Force and to Vice President Pence praying alongside the CTF in a photo (above).
The New Yorker, after President Trump appointed VP Pence to lead the Coronavirus Task Force, shared a cartoon of the Vice President with the caption: “We remind everyone that the first defense against this outbreak is vigorous handwashing and repentance.”
Days later, a contributing writer for The NYT Magazine tweeted out the picture of Pence and the CTF praying, stating: “Mike Pence and his coronavirus emergency team praying for a solution. We are so screwed.”
Do you see how little these heathens think of Christians and those who pray to God? Funny how they would never dare say the same if they saw a picture of Muslims praying to Allah about the same thing. They would applaud their commitment to their religious beliefs, but when Christians pray to the Lord, we are mocked. Not that this comes as any surprise.
These godless people do not understand the power of prayer. They outright mock it whenever a mass shooting occurs (which is nowhere near as often as they would want us to believe) and people offer prayers for those affected. They are devoid of any sense of reverence to God in their unbelief, somehow believing that everything came to be out of pure chance, and have the nerve to claim that we are the illogical ones for believing in God.
Verses such as Philippians 4:6: “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God,” and Mark 11:24: “Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours,” and others that highlight the power of God through prayer are utterly meaningless to these people.
They legitimately believe that we came from MONKEYS despite all of the massive holes in Darwin’s theory and even its origin, and yet, do not believe in the God of the Universe.
It’s worth pointing out that, obviously, prayer is not the only thing the vice president and the CTF are doing. Unlike what some Leftists might sarcastically suggest, they are not “praying the virus away”, or at least, that’s not all they are doing. They are praying to the Lord, who has total and absolute control over everything that happens, that He give them strength in dealing with this, wisdom in how to tackle it, and success in minimizing the influence and effect of the virus so that as many people may survive it and so that this can be put behind us.
The seventh question of the Westminster Confession of Faith asks “what are the decrees of God?” The answer is: “The decrees of God are, His eternal purpose, according to the counsel of His will, whereby for His own glory, He hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.” This means that God has, for His eternal purpose and His own glory, preordained whatever comes to pass, such as a coronavirus outbreak. It wouldn’t happen if God did not ordain for it to happen. That is not the same as saying God caused it or it’s His fault, because God is the Healer, whereas Satan is the destroyer. However, He has allowed it and the Vice President, as well as the others in that picture, understanding the power of the Lord, are praying that He give them the tools to deal with it and that He would allow for this virus to be defeated.
And while I know that the Westminster Confession of Faith is a Presbyterian document, I don’t think too many Christians would disagree with the notion that God is absolutely in control of everything that happens, because if even one molecule in this universe were not under the complete and utter control of God, He would cease to be God.
Unfortunately, this is where many on the Left and general unbelievers would retort with “if God is so good then why does He allow these things to happen” which can be difficult sometimes to explain. I couldn’t imagine trying to explain to someone who has suffered throughout their life why God, who is so good, or is regarded by Christians as being so good, would allow for such suffering to happen. The best I could imagine myself doing would be pointing out the story of Joseph, how he was betrayed by his brothers, hated by them, thrown into a pit, be rescued by them only to be then sold into slavery, be falsely accused of trying to have sexual intercourse with his master’s wife and be thrown into prison for years and how if anyone had any “right” to be angry at God, it was him, and yet, he never abandoned his faith in God. Eventually, as we all know, through the path that he took, despite how rocky it was, Joseph became the second-leading ruler of Egypt only behind Pharaoh, and saved millions of lives as a result of that appointment.
The point of that is to say that, even when things are at their bleakest and we wonder where God is, we have to remember that God is there, working behind the scenes, for our good. Some may look at what’s happening with the coronavirus and mock Pence and the others for praying to a God who would allow this to happen, but the VP and other fellow Christians know the goodness and the love of God, know who He is and that He wouldn’t allow for this to happen for no reason. Whether that reason be an individual one where someone with the virus or someone who has family with the virus turns to the Lord and repents of their sins, or a larger reason, such as forcing companies to understand the perils of being so dependent on a communist nation that can’t do jack to protect itself and turn away from it to keep their businesses from being hurt like that in the future. I mean, 80% of our medicine comes from China! Maybe this will force some businesses to reevaluate their desire to work with the Chinese and focus on other countries (if not the U.S.).
People who do not know the Lord look at us Christians in contempt and think of us as monkeys who believe in fairy tales. They think prayer, despite the power that it has, is completely worthless. But God, as previously stated, is the one in control. It is through Him that anything at all happens. And God is delighted when His children pray to Him, asking for salvation of their soul or simply to be strong in the face of trouble.
We pray, not because we are without hope, but because we are full of hope, knowing the goodness of God. We humble ourselves before Him, bowing our heads to Him in prayer. The simple looks at these actions and thinks little of them, while God looks at them and is delighted.
Do I know what will happen with this coronavirus? No. I am not God, after all. However, we know from Romans 8:28 that “God works all things together for the good of those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose.” Like Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, we will obey the Lord and trust that He will deliver us from earthly perils, and that even if He doesn’t, we will not be shaken in our faith.
Those three were threatened to be thrown into a blazing fire so hot that it killed the Babylonian guards that were trying to put them in there. The only thing that burned upon being thrown into the fire was the rope that bound them together, with Nebuchadnezzar questioning why there were four people in the cauldron and not three, with the extra person looking like one who was like “the Son of God”.
We trust in the Lord and His ways, knowing that they are greater than ours, and thus, we pray to Him both in times of great need and of great abundance; in times of suffering and times of joy. I am so glad that Vice President Pence is a man of faith, one who knows God and His goodness, and leads his CTF team in prayer while searching for ways to mitigate the problem.
God is good; remember that.
“When the righteous cry for help, the Lord hears and delivers them out of all their troubles.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
For about four years now, we have heard virtually every major and minor fake news publication make the claim that Donald Trump was “like Hitler” or “worse than Hitler”, which serves nothing more than to criminally minimize the dreadful impact Hitler had on tens of millions of people. In that time, we have also heard some others on the Left claim that Trump was like Stalin or Mao Zedong. Well, one writer for The Atlantic tried to compare Trump to Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro.
Allow me to explain just why it is absolutely ABSURD to claim that Trump is in any way, shape, manner or form akin to any of these communist dictators of the past and the present.
Let’s first begin with The Atlantic’s article. Anne Applebaum writes this article and I have to say, apart from the obvious attempt at painting Trump like a communist dictator, it is actually a pretty good article, as it describes the process Chavez underwent to become Venezuela’s dictator, the power that he consolidated for himself, and even attacks Venezuela as being the “endgame” for ideological Marxism.
I know, I found that strange as well. Apparently, this woman is not a fan of ideological Marxism and recognizes that Venezuela is its natural result, and yet, hates Trump and believes Trump to be like Chavez. Ridiculous, if you ask me. But let me share some excerpts from the article.
After attacking Trump for inviting the legitimate president of Venezuela, Juan Guaido, to his State of the Union address and claiming he was essentially just being used a prop by the POTUS (even going so far as to claim Trump has never advocated for the liberty of other people before that point), she writes:
“Regardless of what actually happens there, Venezuela – especially when it was run by Maduro’s predecessor, the late Hugo Chavez – has long been a symbolic cause for the Marxist left as well. More than a decade ago, Hans Modrow, one of the last East German Communist Party leaders and now an elder statesman of the far-left Die Linke party, told me that Chavez’s ‘Bolivarian socialism’ represented his greatest hope: that Marxist ideas – which had driven East Germany into bankruptcy – might succeed, finally, in Latin America.”
“Jeremy Corbyn, the far-left leader of the British Labour Party, was photographed with Chavez and has described his regime in Venezuela as ‘an inspiration to all of us fighting back against austerity and neoliberal economics.’ Chavez’s rhetoric also helped inspire the Spanish Marxist Pablo Iglesias to create Podemos, Spain’s far-left party. Iglesias has long been suspected of taking Venezuelan money, though he denies it. Even now, the idea of Venezuela inspires defensiveness and anger wherever dedicated Marxists still gather, whether they are Code Pink activists vowing to ‘protect’ the Venezuelan embassy in Washington from the Venezuelan opposition or French Marxists who refuse to call Maduro a dictator.”
“And yet – Venezuela is not an idea. It is a real place, full of real people who are undergoing an unprecedented and in some ways very eerie crisis. If it symbolizes anything at all, it is the distorting power of symbols. In reality, the country offers no comfort for youthful Marxists or self-styled anti-imperialists – or for fans of Donald Trump.”
Why would it offer comfort for fans of Trump? ALL OF US ARE LITERALLY AGAINST EVERYTHING VENEZUELA HAS BECOME! We are against the socialist system that has driven it to this point. We are against the socialist system BERNIE SANDERS wishes to impose on us because we recognize IT’S THE EXACT SAME FREAKING ONE!
As the writer of this piece points out, Chavez consolidated power through changing the rules of elections, packing the courts and altering the electoral system so that no one has any chance at beating him. Does that more closely describe the desires of Trump OR THE DEMOCRATS WHO CRY “RUSSIA, RUSSIA” AND WANT TO ELIMINATE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE AND MAKE D.C. A NEW STATE WITH SO MANY DELEGATES THAT IT OVERRIDES VIRTUALLY EVERYONE ELSE!? DEMOCRATS want to do exactly this. THEY are the ones that want to change the rules of elections, eliminating the electoral college, and pack the courts so that everything they do becomes legitimized by these courts.
The piece also points out the health crisis going on in Venezuela, particularly with food and water shortages. Who exactly wants to socialize medicine in the States, much like Chavez did in Venezuela, Trump or the Democrats?
The idea that Donald Trump is in any way like Chavez is so ignorant, it hurts. The piece even points out that “Venezuela is the endgame of ideological Marxism”, as I mentioned earlier, and still believes TRUMP to be more like the dictators following this ideology than anyone else in American politics. It’s absolutely LUDICROUS.
Every dictator that they say Trump is like, from Hitler, to Stalin, to Mao, to Mussolini, to Chavez, to Maduro, was/is from the FAR-LEFT, COMMUNIST SIDE OF THE POLITICAL AISLE.
Each of these dictators increased the size of the government, nationalizing entire industries. For crying out loud, Volkswagen was created as a STATE-OWNED COMPANY BY THE NAZIS! Each of these socialist/communist dictatorships nationalized healthcare, insurance, banks, EVERYTHING!
The bread lines that people in the Soviet Union had to stand in, or people in Venezuela currently have to stand in, have been PRAISED by Bernie Sanders! Just last week, I wrote an entire article talking about how much of a communist Bernie Sanders is, espousing the exact same ideologies that these communist dictators espouse/espoused, some of which Bernie has PRAISED like Fidel Castro! Don’t even remotely try and tell me that TRUMP has anything in common with these communists because that is a take pretty much NO ONE on either side of the aisle will agree with.
Communists hate Trump because he isn’t a communist. Capitalists love Trump for the exact same reason. Anyone arguing Trump is anything like these fascist thugs is a liar. Matter of fact, the most Applebaum can claim Trump has in common with Chavez (things that are still ridiculous) are the claims of “assault on democracy, courts, and the press.”
Like I said, the Democrats are the ones trying to change the rules of our electoral system and packing our courts. As far as the press goes, keep in mind that they make no effort to be unbiased or even show they are unbiased. They falsely claim to be objective but show none of it and work to directly undermine Trump. The press in Venezuela, China, the USSR, Nazi Germany and any other socialist nation works FOR the government and the leader of those nations. You will never see the press be critical of the government because THEY WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT.
The leaders of communist nations CONTROL the media. The media in this country works at the behest of THE DEMOCRAT PARTY, something that’s long been the case since before Trump became POTUS. I mean, they ran with everything John Kerry and Obama were telling them about the Iran nuke deal, and still do to this day to try and defend Obama’s sorry and diminishing legacy. For those eight years, much of the media acted like the media in these dictatorships because if they went against the president, there would be negative consequences.
One simply cannot excoriate the far-left Marxist ideology and somehow tie it to Donald Trump. There is no basis for such an action and, again, no one on either side of the aisle would agree with this sentiment.
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Freddie Marinelli and Danielle Cross 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...