Biden Gives Divisive Speech: We Will Steal It and You Will Like It [Or Else]! thumbnail

Biden Gives Divisive Speech: We Will Steal It and You Will Like It [Or Else]!

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.” – Edward Bernays, American theorist, considered a pioneer in the field of public relations and propaganda – 1928

Questioning that is “unlawful.” Biden sounds like Stalin who said, “The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

The Democrat media axis has it marching orders, prepare the American people for delayed election results so they can rejigger the numbers.

And while Elon is a pip, Twitter has joined the latest election putsch. Sign on and you get this:

Twitter: It takes time to count the votes

And yes, Pamela Geller and Geller Report am still banned from Twitter.

Joe Biden: Democracy Itself at Stake if You Vote for Republicans in the Midterms

By: Charlie Spiering, Breitbart News, 2 Nov 202281

President Joe Biden again warned on Wednesday of Republicans taking power in the midterm elections, arguing the “very soul of America itself” was in danger.

“We the people must decide whether the rule of law will prevail or whether we will allow the dark forces and … thirst for power put ahead of the principles that have long guided us,” Biden said during a speech delivered inside Union Station.

Biden began his speech by recalling a deranged individual’s attack on Paul Pelosi on Friday after the assailant could not find Speaker Nancy Pelosi in their home in San Francisco.

The president again tried to connect the attack against Pelosi to January 6, when Trump supporters stormed Capitol Hill to protest the 2020 presidential election.

Biden blamed former President Donald Trump for challenging the results of the 2020 election, which he argued only increased the number of incidents of political violence.

“We don’t settle our differences in America with a riot, a mob, or a bullet or a hammer, we settle them peacefully at the battle box — ballot box,” he said.

Biden’s speech was sharply partisan, ignoring Democrats who protested the results of the 2016 election falsely declaring Trump an illegitimate president elected because of Russian influence. He also ignored incidents of Democrat political violence and political figures who refused to acknowledge legitimate elections.

Instead, he blamed “extreme MAGA” Republicans.

“In this moment, we have to confront those lies with the truth. The very future of our nation depends on it,” he said, calling it a “defining moment” in American history.

He warned that over 300 Republicans running for office had questioned the 2020 presidential election, which symbolized the “appetites of autocracy” versus American democracy.

“We must with one overwhelming unified voice speak as a country and say there is no place for voter intimidation or political violence in America,” he added. “No place period, no place ever.”

Biden repeated many of the talking points about democracy he has pursued since his inauguration, again blaming Republicans for endangering the future of democracy in the United States.

The president argued that the future of democracy was more important than all other issues, implicitly calling for Americans to vote Democrat in order to save the future of the country.

“We must vote, knowing what’s at stake, and not just the policy of the moment,” he said.

Joe Biden’s speech tonight was one of the most divisive speeches ever given by a sitting President.

— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) November 3, 2022

Fixing our fraudulent elections is easy. Paper ballots:

As Geller Report reader SR explains, “France has a good system – voters show up in person on election day, the voter roll is checked and if they are on it they are given sets of cards of candidates for each party. In a curtained compartment they put a pre-printed card with just their own candidate’s name on it into a paper envelope, show their photo ID to an official who reads the person’s name aloud and validates that they just have one envelope, then the voter inserts it into a locked transparent box called an “urn”. At the end of election day, both locks on the urns are unlocked and under supervision the envelopes are put into batches of 100, and then the batches are distributed to several on-site teams who count the votes for each candidate with a lot of supervision and unambiguous “chain of custody”. The same thing is done the prior day by French citizens in foreign territories and living abroad, so that despite the time zone being later, their vote too will be counted and included on election day in France, instead of the final results having to wait until the next day due to the time zone.

On the other hand, electronic systems, provided by sketchy corporations some with links to Venezuela, where piles of ballot batches can optionally be fed in multiple times, or unofficial pre-filled ballots can be shipped in and introduced by partisan operatives, are prone to manipulation. Plus the voting software in some of these systems can “count” in an unconventional way that is hard to track and in theory accessed from outside or have their thumb drive controller swapped out. In addition, the mail-in ballots, unmonitored drop boxes, voter rolls padded with deceased and out-of-state relocated people who miraculously “vote”, and of course the lack of voter ID in many states. Even India has had a mandatory national voter ID card (the Electors Photo Identy Card – EPIC) since 1993. The “icing on the cake” is the scam of having nursing home personnel who routinely collect their residents’ ballots and vote for them.”

Biden says it’s “Unlawful” and “Unamerican” to not commit to blindly accepting the results of an election pic.twitter.com/5lKQ0pV2B7

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 2, 2022

BIDEN: “In some cases we won’t know the winner of the election for a few days, until after a few days after the election.” pic.twitter.com/oaRPAo3XZI

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 2, 2022

Joe Biden’s speech tonight was ugly and cruel and goblin-like to Americans suffering REAL WORLD problems.

Our civilization is on the brink of collapse and Biden used a primetime address from the Union Station DC slum to fear monger in a venal attempt to cling to power.

Demonic

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 3, 2022

LOL – @JesseBWatters nukes Biden: “That was the President of the United States confessing that he’s about to get wiped out a week from now” pic.twitter.com/KVp2uPUCDS

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 2, 2022

BIden calls for unity, hehe.

“We must stand against political violence. We don’t settle our differences with a mob, a riot, or a hammer.”

More about voter intimidation. “It has to stop now.”

Something about not giving in to political violence. pic.twitter.com/ekL4bVu6NZ

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) November 2, 2022

He’s slurring as usual.

“America is under attack,” because of Trump denying outcome of 2020 election. “He abused his power. He made a Big Lie an article of faith in the MAGA Republican Party.”

Biden says 2020 election was the most secure in history. “More than 300 election…

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) November 2, 2022

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Says Illegal Mail In Ballots Will Not Be Counted

Biden Regime Openly Interfered With Brazil Presidential Election As Millions of Brazilians Protest Rigged Results

LESSONS IN HISTORY….

As COVID Hit, Leftist and RINO Elites Traded Stocks ‘With Exquisite Timing’

MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan Brings On Jew-Hater Ilhan Omar to Discuss…Anti-Semitism

Democrat WI Senate Candidate Mandela Barnes Praises Iran’s Supreme Leader For His ‘Black Lives Matter’ Tweet

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Biden Administration’s Proxy War on Free Speech thumbnail

The Biden Administration’s Proxy War on Free Speech

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Skirmish – Liberato.US

Hold on to your hats.  We’re going to be learning a lot more about the Biden administration’s efforts to silence free expression through its proxy stooges in Big Tech.

A federal judge just rejected the Biden administration’s attempt to stop depositions of government officials in a lawsuit alleging a wide-ranging conspiracy by the administration and Big Tech to censor free speech.  Anthony Fauci’s deposition is set for November 23rd.  House Republicans sent a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas calling him out for his agency’s role in censoring free speech.

More details about that role have come to light.  You might remember the agency’s Disinformation Governance Board that got shut down pretty quickly.  But DHS continues its efforts to curb free speech to this day.  Records from the conspiracy lawsuit, leaked emails and memos, and public documents show DHS pivoted to monitoring social media for the purpose of suppressing ‘misinformation’ the government doesn’t like about a wide range of topics, including the origins of COVID-19, COVID vaccine safety, and the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.  Facebook created a portal for DHS and other government agencies to flag posts they don’t like, for quick action.  The portal is still in operation.  Facebook and the FBI won’t comment.  A previous report showed social media companies remove or post warnings on over a third of posts government agencies flag as objectionable.

Other agencies are also involved.  The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) on its own motion formed a misinformation team and expanded the agency’s mission beyond infrastructure to ‘building resilience to misinformation’.  The agency wants social media platforms to be more responsive to its directives.  An FBI official was criticized last year after falsely telling Congress the FBI does not monitor Americans’ social media posts.  The fact of the matter is the FBI has spent millions on social media tracking software.

Hunter Biden’s laptop shows you clearly why we do not want the government in the business of deciding what is true and what is false.  According to polls, many people would not have voted for Joe Biden if they had known the truth about Hunter Biden’s laptop.  But government officials called it ‘Russian disinformation’ and social media companies at the FBI’s urging dutifully suppressed the story before the 2020 election, a decision they now say they regret.  Thanks a bunch.

There’s really no difference between the government suppressing free speech and government officials getting private actors to violate the First Amendment for them.  That’s called the state actor theory and it’s at the heart of the Missouri Attorney General’s ongoing conspiracy case against the Biden administration and Big Tech where depositions are going forward and will soon give us a lot more information about all these bad actors violating your rights.

But there’s more.  The federal government paid four private companies to flag so-called ‘misinformation’ on social media during the 2020 election, resulting in the censorship of election coverage from conservative news outlets.  The CDC told Facebook COVID vaccines for young children are safe and effective when there was no evidence of that, all so the CDC could suppress contrary information through Facebook in a campaign to overcome ‘vaccine hesitancy’.  Twitter has a portal for CDC officials to flag COVID-related posts it deems ‘misinformation’.  Documents from inside Twitter show the White House pressured Twitter to ban a New York Times writer who was raising questions about phony government COVID narratives.  Facebook spies on private messages and reports users to the FBI for expressing ‘anti-government sentiments’, whatever that means.

The Biden administration is waging a proxy war on our free speech.  The social media giants are only too happy to play along.   But with 47 more government defendants recently added to the conspiracy lawsuit, the day of reckoning is drawing closer and I, for one, can’t wait to see these overbearing authoritarian government officials and their fascist buddies in Big Tech get hammered for messing with the First Amendment.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED TWEET:

LOVING THE NEW DNC AD!!!🤣🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/0P8xl0mK0a

— il Donaldo Trumpo (@PapiTrumpo) November 2, 2022

Why Do Big Cities Tend to Have Bigger Government? thumbnail

Why Do Big Cities Tend to Have Bigger Government?

/in , , , , , /by

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

Like any place that generates significant wealth, cities also generate significant incentives to capture the wealth.

Last week I answered a question from a FEE reader on how the Federal Reserve creates money. This week, Aaron, a FEE Daily reader, asks a very different question:

“Why is it that more populous cities seem more inclined to adopt laws and regulations that restrict individual autonomy, and attract residents more likely to vote for representatives who advocate such policies?

What can residents in growing cities do to avert this tendency?”

This question is a little less straightforward than a typical economics question. As we learned last week, there’s a clear relationship between interest on reserves and the supply for money. But there’s no clear direct channel which explains why cities skew anti-autonomy.

Nonetheless, economics is a valuable tool we can use to explain all kinds of behavior. We’ll begin by considering Nobel prize-winning economist James Buchanan’s dichotomy of the romantic view of politics versus politics as exchange.

There are two potential views of politics. The first is a romantic view. In this view, politicians are altruistic, sacrificial public servants. Voters are well-informed and always choose those candidates who have the best interest of the public at heart.

In other words, politicians are angels. If the romantic view of politics is true, there’s a simple explanation to why cities seem more inclined to adopt laws that restrict individual autonomy. People who live in cities believe that is what’s best, and politicians cater to that desire.

There are clear problems with the romantic view of politics, but the biggest is that it is inconsistent with how we analyze most institutions.

Take businesses, for example. If businesses have the opportunity to increase profits by polluting, what will they do? Generally, economists will assume they will choose to pollute. Firms are assumed to be interested in making the most profits and will pollute if they don’t bear the costs of doing so.

So we assume business owners are selfish. This begs the question, why would we assume politicians are selfless?

It would be arbitrary and unconvincing to take a sober view of business but a romantic view of politics. Nothing about existing in government confers angel wings on individuals. If anything, we should expect the opposite.

It would be more symmetric to assume politicians, like business-owners, are pursuing their own ends which will not necessarily align with the ends of the public as a whole (though there is good reason to believe businesses will align with the public more often).

For example, it will sometimes be in the best interest of politicians to restrict liberty. They could do this by passing higher taxes to increase their budgets, doing favors for special-interest groups, or lobbying political actors to increase their influence.

In this alternative view, politics involves self-interested exchanges between politicians and, for example, interest groups.

But this still leaves us the question, why do big cities tend to have more of this seemingly selfish political exchange, assuming that’s often what’s going on with big-government policies?

Wealth is a dangerous thing to flaunt. When I have to run into a store quickly, and I have my laptop bag with me, I’m always careful to place it out of sight in the car. Sometimes I put it under a seat cover, sometimes I move it into the trunk, and, on occasion, I decide to take it with me.

It’s not difficult to understand why. I hide my laptop when I leave it for the same reason people store their valuables out of sight. When you have more wealth, and people know it, you are a bigger target for extortion and theft.

It’s no secret that cities tend to have a lot of wealth concentrated in a small area. This isn’t to say everyone in the city is rich, but all the production and exchange in cities make them hubs of wealth.

And, like any place that generates significant wealth, cities also generate significant incentives to capture the wealth.

Consider, for instance, that a group of taxi cab drivers is seeking to keep its would-be competitors out of the market. In order to do this, the company might lobby for regulations (like a limited number of permits) that would restrict competition.

What sorts of cities would be the best places to create this kind of monopoly? Big cities with a lot of customers would seem like a good target. The return to cutting out competition by lobbying the government is pretty low when your potential customer base is in the hundreds rather than the thousands.

So, the group of cab drivers could form an association which donates to the mayor’s campaign and lobbies for a permit system.

But if politicians did something so egregious as this, couldn’t citizens vote them out? They could, but it’s unlikely that they will. Let’s say the city has one million people and there are one hundred drivers in the cab driver association. If the regulation adds $10 of cost to the one million people, that generates $10 million to be divided among the one hundred cab drivers. That’s $100,000 per cab driver.

So the cab drivers can earn a lot more money by getting the regulation passed. The citizens only lose $10 each. They don’t like this, but it’s hardly worth the time to organize against the regulation (or even learn about it in the first place). This is known by economists as the logic of special interest groups.

Smaller cities are different. First, there are less people to take money from. Second, the average income is probably lower. Lastly, it’s easier for a small number of people to organize and oppose regulations like this than a large number.

Admittedly, this increased lobbying of big municipal governments would increase competition for lobbying, but as long as there’s some fixed cost of lobbying that exists without regard to city size, I’d expect this problem would be bigger in large cities.

Another group that has more ability to capture wealth in big cities is bureaucrats. If we assume bureaucrats are only interested in the welfare of citizens, they would keep the size of their bureaucracy down. But if bureaucrats care about power and prestige, they may seek to grow in size beyond what makes sense.

It seems obvious that bigger cities will need more workers than smaller towns. Services like road maintenance, utilities, sewage management, courts, fire departments, and administrative workers will grow as the population grows.

If the number of bureaucrats merely kept up with the growing population then there’s no problem. But if each of the new bureaucrats lobbies for larger budgets, bigger office buildings, and more coworkers, we can imagine bureaucratic growth feeding on itself.

Each new government worker brings with them demands for an even larger government (and the taxes necessary to fund it).

In big cities, this sort of growth can be hard to track. How many bureaucrats are needed to successfully manage the budgets of the municipal water provision in New York City? I haven’t the foggiest.

In my town, I know exactly where the office for that manager is. There is one employee there and I know her by name. If they added another employee it wouldn’t be a big deal. But if I walked in and there were five new people working there, I’d probably be a little suspicious about why that was necessary.

It’s much easier for voters to gauge bureaucratic bloat when they live in small towns.

If my above thinking is right, then government overreach is to some extent a function of what makes a city, a city. A very dense, large number of people seems to result in this sort of overreach.

The fact that this question was asked in the first place is a good indication that big cities and big governments go somewhat hand-in-hand (at least in the US).

But not all is hopeless. I’m not keen on political solutions, but I’m very optimistic about bottom-up entrepreneurial solutions.

For example, the taxi medallion cartel in New York City wasn’t broken up by regulatory change. Uber, Lyft, and rideshare apps juked regulators and their special-interest cronies.

This seems to me to be a model of the best way forward. Rather than spending resources trying to overcome bad political incentives, I trust entrepreneurs’ profit incentive to keep innovation one step ahead.

AUTHOR

Peter Jacobsen

Peter Jacobsen teaches economics and holds the position of Gwartney Professor of Economics. He received his graduate education George Mason University. His research interest is at the intersection of political economy, development economics, and population economics.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

TAKE ACTION: Tell Biden ENOUGH Regulations! thumbnail

TAKE ACTION: Tell Biden ENOUGH Regulations!

/in , , , , , /by

By Heritage Action

Between these two regulations, millions of franchise owners and workers will be in jeopardy of losing their jobs as the franchise business model would be destroyed.

Furthermore, independent workers such as truck drivers, freelancers, Lyft and Uber drivers, and more will be forced into an employer-employee relationship that strips away the advantage and appeal of being an independent worker. They will lose the ability to choose their hours or choose their clients.

Biden’s plans have all failed to help our economy, but as President Reagan also said “The more the plans fail, the more the planners plan.”

In the middle of an economic downturn restrictive regulations are the absolute last thing we need.

Help your fellow Americans—take two minutes to submit two comments to oppose these two rules!

Use our action center—Submit your comments now!

Janae Stracke

Director of Grassroots

Heritage Action

©Heritage Action. All rights reserved.

Covid Vaccines Injure the Heart of ALL Vaccine Recipients and Cause Myocarditis in Up to 1 in 27, Study Finds thumbnail

Covid Vaccines Injure the Heart of ALL Vaccine Recipients and Cause Myocarditis in Up to 1 in 27, Study Finds

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

And still the Democrats are mandating this poison for our children.

mRNA Vaccines Injure the Heart of ALL Vaccine Recipients and Cause Myocarditis in Up to 1 in 27, Study Finds

By: Daily Sceptic, October 27, 2022:

New evidence has emerged that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are routinely injuring the heart of all vaccine recipients, raising further questions about their safety and their role in the recent elevated levels of heart-related deaths.

The latest evidence comes in a study from Switzerland, which found elevated troponin levels – indicating heart injury – across all vaccinated people, with 2.8% showing levels associated with subclinical myocarditis.

The official line on elevated heart injuries and deaths, where they are acknowledged, is that they are most likely caused by the virus as a post-Covid condition rather than the vaccines.

However, expert group HART (Health Advisory and Recovery Team) has pointed to Australia as a “control group” on this question. HART notes that even though Australia had not had significant Covid (only 30,000 reported infections and 910 deaths) prior to mid-2021, it still saw a trend in excess non-Covid deaths beginning in June 2021 (see below). HART notes that Australia “did not have prior Covid as a reason for seeing this rise in mortality and hospital pressure from spring 2021”. Instead, “the results from this control group indicate that the cause of this rise in deaths, particularly in young people, must be something in common with Australia, Europe and the USA”.

Click here to view All deaths, COVID-19 infections, Australia, 31 May – 29 May 2022 vs baseline benchmarks.

In New Zealand, economist John Gibson found a temporal association between boosters and excess deaths, estimating “16 excess deaths per 100,000 booster doses” (see below). He noted that the age distribution of the deaths corroborated the hypothesis: “The age groups most likely to use boosters show large rises in excess mortality after boosters are rolled out.”

Click here to view B) Cumulative Excess Deaths and COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout: April 2021 to March 2022

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

VIDEO: COVID Jab Deadlier Than COVID for Anyone Under 80

Fourth Country Stops All Covid Vaccinations

Science Tests Positive For COVID

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Oregon Prepared To Institute ‘One Of The Most Extreme’ Gun Restrictions In The Country thumbnail

Oregon Prepared To Institute ‘One Of The Most Extreme’ Gun Restrictions In The Country

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

Oregon voters are considering passing one of the most restrictive gun control measures in the country that would raise the barriers to purchase a firearm and place gun owners on a searchable database.

Measure 114, often referred to as the Reduction of Gun Violence Act, is a ballot measure that will require background checks, firearm training, fingerprint collection and a permit to purchase any firearm, according to the legislation. Oregon already requires background checks for gun owners, and the new legislation will cost the state $49 million annually while also placing an expected 300,000 residents on a gun owner database, according to Fox News.

“This is the most extreme gun control measure in the country, or at least one of the most extreme. It will virtually eliminate firearm sales in Oregon as written,” Oregon State Shooting Association President Kerry Spurgin told Fox News.

The legislation would require those who wish to own a firearm to complete a gun safety course regulated by the police. The measure also would restrict magazine capacity to ten rounds, an issue gun control groups have prioritized for many years.

“This measure will not make our community safer. It will put our communities at greater risk for violence because it requires that every sheriff’s office and police agency divert scarce public safety resources to background systems that already exist,” Deschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson said in a video statement, according to Fox News.

Canada’s Prime Minister Just Banned All Handguns

I always say there is no such thing as common sense gun measures. Every time you hear that phrase from a politician, it means they want to ban all guns.

Canada Proved it!

Full Videohttps://t.co/72Egzk24xK pic.twitter.com/Ccxp3RVBVz

— Colion Noir (@MrColionNoir) October 24, 2022

California maintains a similar database for owners of concealed carry permits, yet the Reduction of Gun Violence Act aims to place all gun owners on a database, according to the legislation. Data on gun owners from the California database was leaked in June, and gun rights advocates have argued that a centralized gun database will lead to an abuse of power.

The legislation was pushed on to the Nov. 8 midterm ballot by Lift Every Voice Oregon, which obtained over 130,000 signatures, Fox News reported. A Oct. 4 poll by The Oregonian shows that 51% of likely voters will support the measure in November.

Lift Every Voice Oregon did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

BRONSON WINSLOW

Contributor.

RELATED VIDEO: Stop the Looting, Vandalizing and Crime in America Now!

RELATED ARTICLE: California DOJ Breaks Silence After Massive Leak Of Gun Owners’ Private Info

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Survey: Health of Democracy and Rising Costs Are Leading Midterm Voter Concerns thumbnail

Survey: Health of Democracy and Rising Costs Are Leading Midterm Voter Concerns

/in , , , , , /by

By Dr. Rich Swier

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire/ — As the midterm elections near, a new national survey released today by Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) shows a society divided between moving toward a more inclusive democracy and turning back the clock to the 1950s, as well as grave concerns about the health of our democracy.

PRRI’s 13th annual American Values Survey, released in partnership with the Brookings Institution, examines the dissatisfied state of American public opinion regarding the direction of the country and illuminates the partisan and cultural divides on midterm election priorities, abortion, immigration, education, gender identity, and LGBTQ rights.

“On questions related to American identity, the parties today are worlds apart—not just politically, but culturally. They increasingly defend different histories, live in different realities, and promote two essentially incompatible views of America’s future,” says Robert P. Jones, president and founder of PRRI. “The survey shows a hardening rightward stance among Republicans, anchored by a white evangelical base, which is increasingly out of step with the values of most other Americans.”

The following are highlights from the 2022 American Values Survey:

  • Consensus that America is headed in the wrong direction, but large partisan and religious divides about the future: Nearly three-quarters of Americans (74%) feel the country is going in the wrong direction, including almost all Republicans (93%) and a majority of Democrats (53%). Americans are divided, however, about whether the country’s culture and way of life has changed for the better (49%) or worse (49%) since the 1950s. Additionally, nearly a third of Americans (31%) say that God intended America to be a new promised land for European Christians, including approximately half of Republicans (49%) and white evangelical Protestants (50%).
  • Health of democracy and economy top voter priorities in the midterm elections: Among Americans who plan to vote in this year’s midterm elections, the issues most critical to them are the health of our democracy (57%) and the increasing costs of housing (57%) and everyday expenses (57%). However, the parties have very different ideas of what safeguarding our democracy means. Partisans hold mirror-opposite opinions, with 85% of Republicans saying voter fraud is the bigger problem and 83% of Democrats saying voter disenfranchisement is the bigger problem. One especially troubling finding is that one third of Republicans who say they are most concerned with the health of our democracy (33%) say true American patriots might have to resort to violence to set things right; among Democrats most concerned with the health of democracy, only 7% agree.
  • Americans oppose the Dobbs decision, Republican support for abortion bans drops by half: In June 2022, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organiza­tion, which overturned Roe v. Wade. Six in ten Americans (61%) oppose overturning Roe, while 35% favor it. More than eight in ten Democrats (82%) oppose the court decision, including 71% who strongly oppose it. Only 40% of Republicans oppose the decision, compared to 58% who favor it. Majorities of all major religious groups except white evangelical Protestants (37%) oppose the decision to overturn Roe. Nearly four in ten Republicans (37%) say abortion should be legal in most or all cases, compared to 86% of Democrats and 62% of all Americans.
  • Republicans are outliers on immigration and educational curriculum: More than three quarters of Democrats (77%) support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, up six percentage points since 2013. By contrast, only four in ten Republicans (40%) support a path to citizenship, a 13-point drop since 2013. On education, two thirds of Americans (66%) say public school teachers and librarians provide students with appropriate curricula and books that teach the good and bad of American history. A majority of Americans who most trust Fox News (60%), Republicans (54%) and white evangelical Protestants (51%) believe public school teachers and librarians are indoctrinating children with inappropriate material. Conversely, only 7% of Democrats believe this.

To view the full report, including survey methodology, visit prri.org

PRRI is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to conducting independent research at the intersection of religion, culture, and public policy.

©PRRI. All rights reserved.

U.S. Has ONLY 25 DAYS OF DIESEL SUPPLY—Shortage Could Cripple Economy thumbnail

U.S. Has ONLY 25 DAYS OF DIESEL SUPPLY—Shortage Could Cripple Economy

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

This is intentional. The Democrats are on a rampage to destroy America.

Diesel fuel shortages will disrupt the entire US transportation supply chain. Not only do the trucks run on diesel but so do trains. Airports get their jet fuel by trucks. Think about that. That means gasoline, food, Thanksgiving and Christmas supplies all will get disrupted. Delivery of home fuel oil supplies by truck will be impacted. Think supply chain shortages were bad before, you ain’t see nuthin yet. And it will hit after the election.

Our only hope is to stop the treasonous Democrats from routing the will of the people through election fraud….. again.

Get out and vote. Overwhelm the system. This is the last election before the final assault of the left destroyers.

RELATED: If you think the price of energy and food has reached the limit, I have bad news for you: All signs are it’s going to be much worse

US Has Only 25 Days of Diesel Supply; Shortage Could Cripple Economy

By: Jack Phillips, Epoch Times, October 24, 2022:

The United States is down to 25 days of diesel supply as a top White House official declared the stockpile levels to be “unacceptably low.”

Data provided by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) show that diesel stockpiles are at their lowest level for October in records that date back to 1993, according to a Bloomberg News analysis. EIA data show that the United States, as of Oct. 14, has 25.4 days of supply—down from 34.2 days of supply four weeks prior.

National Economic Council Director Brian Deese, a top adviser to President Joe Biden, told Bloomberg News last week that current diesel levels are “unacceptably” low and that “all options are on the table” to increase supplies.

The diesel crunch comes just over two weeks before the November 2022 midterm elections and will likely drive up prices even more. Diesel is the fuel used by freight trains and commonly used by long-haul truckers to transport goods and food.

“Most of the products we use are transported by trucks and trains with diesel engines, and most construction, farming, and military vehicles and equipment also have diesel engines,” the EIA’s website states. “As a transportation fuel, diesel fuel offers a wide range of performance, efficiency, and safety features. Diesel fuel also has a greater energy density than other liquid fuels, so it provides more useful energy per unit of volume.”

Prices, meanwhile, remain relatively elevated, according to AAA data. The average price for a gallon of diesel stands at around $5.33 nationwide, or up nearly $2 since the same time in 2021, the data shows.

Wholesale diesel prices at the New York spot market spiked last week to more than $200 per barrel.

It comes as the Biden administration recently announced it would release another 15 million barrels of oil from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, part of the 180 million Biden authorized in March, that Republicans say is a bid to keep Democrats politically afloat ahead of the midterms. But Biden and his allies say that it’s not a political tactic, and the administration says it will refill the reserve when prices drop to $67–$72 per barrel.

“The United States government is going to purchase oil to refill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve when prices fall to $70 a barrel,” Biden said on Oct. 19. “And that means oil companies can invest to ramp up production now, with confidence they’ll be able to sell their oil to us at that price in the future: $70.”

The move came after the International Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries Plus (OPEC+) announced that it would cut oil production.

“Now, after draining our emergency reserves to a 40-year low, Democrats want billions more of taxpayer dollars to refill the [Strategic Petroleum Reserve] at more than double the price,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) told the New York Post last week. “This is a direct attack on every single American struggling to fill their tanks and heat their homes.”

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: Pelosi Crows: “When People Talk About Inflation…Change That Subject!”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

US Has ONLY 25 DAYS OF DIESEL SUPPLY; Shortage Could Cripple Economy thumbnail

US Has ONLY 25 DAYS OF DIESEL SUPPLY; Shortage Could Cripple Economy

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

This is intentional. The Democrats are on a rampage to destroy America.

Diesel fuel shortages will disrupt the entire US transportation supply chain. Not only do the trucks run on diesel but so do trains. Airports get their jet fuel by trucks. Think about that. That means gasoline, food, Thanksgiving and Christmas supplies all will get disrupted. Delivery of home fuel oil supplies by truck will be impacted. Think supply chain shortages were bad before, you ain’t see nuthin yet. And it will hit after the election.

Our only hope is to stop the treasonous Democrats from routing the will of the people through election fraud….. again.

Get out and vote. Overwhelm the system. This is the last election before the final assault of the left destroyers.

RELATED: If you think the price of energy and food has reached the limit, I have bad news for you: All signs are it’s going to be much worse

US Has Only 25 Days of Diesel Supply; Shortage Could Cripple Economy

By: Jack Phillips, Epoch Times, October 24, 2022:

The United States is down to 25 days of diesel supply as a top White House official declared the stockpile levels to be “unacceptably low.”

Data provided by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) show that diesel stockpiles are at their lowest level for October in records that date back to 1993, according to a Bloomberg News analysis. EIA data show that the United States, as of Oct. 14, has 25.4 days of supply—down from 34.2 days of supply four weeks prior.

National Economic Council Director Brian Deese, a top adviser to President Joe Biden, told Bloomberg News last week that current diesel levels are “unacceptably” low and that “all options are on the table” to increase supplies.

The diesel crunch comes just over two weeks before the November 2022 midterm elections and will likely drive up prices even more. Diesel is the fuel used by freight trains and commonly used by long-haul truckers to transport goods and food.

“Most of the products we use are transported by trucks and trains with diesel engines, and most construction, farming, and military vehicles and equipment also have diesel engines,” the EIA’s website states. “As a transportation fuel, diesel fuel offers a wide range of performance, efficiency, and safety features. Diesel fuel also has a greater energy density than other liquid fuels, so it provides more useful energy per unit of volume.”

Prices, meanwhile, remain relatively elevated, according to AAA data. The average price for a gallon of diesel stands at around $5.33 nationwide, or up nearly $2 since the same time in 2021, the data shows.

Wholesale diesel prices at the New York spot market spiked last week to more than $200 per barrel.

It comes as the Biden administration recently announced it would release another 15 million barrels of oil from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, part of the 180 million Biden authorized in March, that Republicans say is a bid to keep Democrats politically afloat ahead of the midterms. But Biden and his allies say that it’s not a political tactic, and the administration says it will refill the reserve when prices drop to $67–$72 per barrel.

“The United States government is going to purchase oil to refill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve when prices fall to $70 a barrel,” Biden said on Oct. 19. “And that means oil companies can invest to ramp up production now, with confidence they’ll be able to sell their oil to us at that price in the future: $70.”

The move came after the International Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries Plus (OPEC+) announced that it would cut oil production.

“Now, after draining our emergency reserves to a 40-year low, Democrats want billions more of taxpayer dollars to refill the [Strategic Petroleum Reserve] at more than double the price,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) told the New York Post last week. “This is a direct attack on every single American struggling to fill their tanks and heat their homes.”

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: Pelosi Crows: “When People Talk About Inflation…Change That Subject!”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

2023 Federal Tax Brackets Are Out. See Which Bracket You Fall in—and Why Tax Rates Are so High thumbnail

2023 Federal Tax Brackets Are Out. See Which Bracket You Fall in—and Why Tax Rates Are so High

/in , , , , , /by

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

The sad truth is, the average American works four months a year just to cover tax bills. How did we get here?

The Internal Revenue Service released new federal income tax brackets last week. Though marginal tax rates did not change, under federal law the brackets are adjusted for inflation, and they shake out like this.

Marginal rate Individual income Married couples filing jointly
10% $11,000 or less $22,000 or less
12% $11,000 to $44,725 $22,001 to $89,450
22% $44,726 to $95,375 $89,451 to $190,750
24% $95,376 to $182,100 $190,751 to $364,200
32% $182,101 to $231,250 $364,201 to $462,500
35% $231,251 to $578,125 $462,501 to $693,750
37% $578,126 or more $693,751 or more

The adjustments are designed to avoid “bracket creep”—a merciful measure that came out of the Reagan administration—and some media celebrated that many Americans may see a slightly lower tax bill as a result.

“The new brackets for 2023 mean paychecks for many Americans could see a boost, which will help consumers who are being hit hard by inflation and aren’t seeing raises that keep pace with price increases,” Herb Scribner reported in Axios.

While it’s nice to see Axios recognize that a lower tax bill is actually a good thing, the elephant in the room went unnoticed. The tax rates are eye-popping. Why are working families shelling out so much of their money— a fifth of their income, a quarter of their income, a third of their income or more—to the government? The sad truth is, the average American works four months a year just to cover their tax bills.

This invites a few important questions. Who authorized the pillaging of our paychecks and what exactly are we getting in return? And why do we pay taxes in the first place?

Most Americans probably don’t ask themselves these questions. The truth is, most of us pay taxes not because we want to, but because we’ll go to prison if we don’t. (And because our wages are garnished, which is another story.) Some will say they pay taxes because it’s their civic duty, but a funny thing happens when you ask these same people to pay more than they have to. They don’t.

Right answer. pic.twitter.com/67PUC7xjTO

— Jon Miltimore (@miltimore79) October 21, 2022

Others will argue taxes are necessary to fund all the programs and departments of the federal government, and they’ll have a point. The Pentagon’s budget is $767 billion alone. The Department of Treasury is not far behind with a $704 billion budget, and the Department of Transportation’s is $128 billion. The Department of Agriculture has a $208 billion budget. It goes on and on. Indeed, the list is so long that few Amerians could name all the federal departments and agencies, and even fewer could explain what these agencies actually do.

This invites an important question: what is the purpose of government?

Again, it’s probably a question few people ask, and answers will vary because it’s a subjective question. The question is easy to answer, however, if we look back to John Locke (1632-1704). In the eyes of Locke, whose ideas influenced the founding fathers and underpin the American system, the role of government is clear: it exists to protect life, liberty, and private property.

“…every Man has a Property in his own Person. This no Body has any Right to but himself. The Labour of his Body, and the Work of his Hands, we may say, are properly his,” wrote Locke in his Second Treatise on Civil Government. “The great and chief end therefore, of Mens uniting into Commonwealths, and putting themselves under Government, is the Preservation of their Property.”

Locke argued the purpose of government is to secure the individual rights of people and nothing else. Its purpose is not to redistribute wealth, provide services to the people, or educate children. Government should be limited to its sole purpose, which is why the framers of the Constitution enumerated specific powers to the federal government spelling out exactly what it was permitted to do and stating in the Bill of Rights everything the federal government could not do to citizens.

When one looks at what the Constitution authorizes the federal government to do and compares it to the alphabet soup of federal agencies, it’s clear that both the Constitution and the principle of limited government have been largely abandoned.

In the absence of these restraining mechanisms, the size, scope, and expense of government have exploded. The federal government is now $31.2 trillion in debt. The institution created to protect our rights has become the greatest violator of our rights, an irony that would not have surprised the French economist Frédéric Bastiat.

“Instead of checking crime, the law itself [becomes] guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!” Bastiat wrote in The Law.

All of this explains why those marginal tax rates are so high. It stems directly from the size of government.

Instead of being excited that the inflation eating away their wealth might have a small silver lining—a slightly lower tax bill than last year—Americans should be asking why they’re paying so much in the first place. It might help them rediscover the lost principle of limited government.

This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

AUTHOR

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The case for nuclear power thumbnail

The case for nuclear power

/in , , , , , /by

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

Despite its lethal past, nuclear energy is the clean and cost-effective power source we need.

In the fall 2022 issue of the technology-and-society journal The New Atlantis, authors Thomas and Nate Hochman examine the pros and cons of building new nuclear power plants in the United States.  The case of nuclear power is fraught with political issues that are inextricably tied up with technical issues, but the Hochmans do a good job of laying out the problems facing nuclear power and some possible solutions.

If nuclear power had not been invented until 2010, say, it would probably be welcomed as the keystone in our society’s answer to climate change.  Imagine a source of the most fungible type of energy — electricity — that takes teaspoons of nuclear fuel compared to carloads or pipelines full of fossil fuels, emits zero greenhouse gases, and when properly engineered runs more reliably than wind, solar, hydro, or sometimes even natural gas, as the misadventure of Texas’s Great Freeze of February 2021 showed.  What’s to oppose?  Well, a lot, as the Hochmans admit.

Deadly history

It is perhaps unfortunate that the first major use of nuclear technology was in the closing days of World War II, when the US became the only nation so far to employ nuclear weapons in wartime, killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese with bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  The long shadow of nuclear war has cast a darkness over the technology of nuclear power ever since, despite optimistic but misguided attempts to promote peaceful uses in the 1950s.

The Hochmans describe the golden era of US nuclear power plant construction, which ran roughly from 1967 to 1987, as a period in which the two major US manufacturers — General Electric and Westinghouse — offered “turn-key” plants that were priced competitively with coal-fired units.  The utilities snapped them up, and the vast majority of existing plants were built in those two decades.

The turn-key pricing turned out to be a big mistake, however.  Manufacturers expected the cost per plant to decline as economies of scale kicked in, but for a variety of reasons both technical and regulatory, the hoped-for economies never materialised.  The particular pressurised-water technology that was used was adapted from early nuclear submarines, and in retrospect may not have been the best choice for domestic power plants.  By the time the companies realised their mistake and switched to cost-plus contracts, they had lost a billion dollars, and utilities became much less enthusiastic when they had to pay the true costs of building the plants.

In the meantime, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was passed in 1970, making it much harder to obtain permits to build complicated things like nuclear plants.  In the pre-Act days, permitting a plant sometimes took less than a year, but once NEPA passed, such speediness (and the resulting economies of fast construction) was a thing of the past.

Then came the Three-Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979 and the Chernobyl plant fire and disaster in 1986, further blackening the reputation of nuclear power in the public mind.  Add to that the not-in-my-back-yard problems faced by attempts to find permanent storage locations for nuclear waste, and by 1990 the US nuclear industry was in a kind of coma from which it has not yet recovered.

The Hochmans point to France as a counterexample of a nation that made a conscious decision to go primarily nuclear for its electric power, and even today about 70% of France’s power is nuclear.  But even France is having problems maintaining their aging plants, and French nuclear promoters face the same sorts of political headwinds that prevail in the US.

Viable option

Now that climate change is an urgent priority for millions of people and dozens of governments, the strictly technical appeal of nuclear power is still valid. It really does make zero greenhouse gases in operation, and when properly engineered, it can be the most reliable form of power, providing the essential base-load capacity that is needed to stabilise grids that will draw an increasing amount of energy from highly intermittent solar and wind sources in the future. Eventually, energy-storage technology may make it possible to store enough energy to smooth out the fluctuations of renewables, but we simply don’t have that now, and it may not come for years or decades.

In the meantime, there are plans on drawing boards for so-called “modular” plants.  If every single automobile was a custom design from the ground up, including a from-scratch engine and body, only the likes of Elon Musk could afford to drive.  But that was how nuclear plants were made back in the day:  each design was customised to the particular site and customer specifications.

If manufacturers had the prospects of sales and freedom to develop a modular one-size-fits-all design, they could turn the process into something similar to the way mobile homes are made today:  in factories, and then shipped out in pieces to be simply assembled on site.  And newer designs favouring gravity feeds over powered pumps can be made much safer so that if anything goes wrong, the operators simply walk away and the plant safely shuts itself down.

Standing in the way of these innovations are (1) the prevailing negative political winds against nuclear power, enforced with more emotion than logic by environmental groups and major political parties, and (2) the need to change regulations to allow such technical innovations, which currently are all but blocked by existing laws and rules.

In the Hochmans’ best-case scenario, the US begins importing modular plants from countries where an existing base of nuclear know-how allows efficient manufacturing, which these days means places like China.  Even if the US nuclear industry turned on full-speed today, it would take a decade or more to recover the expertise base that was lost a generation ago when the industry collapsed.  Regulations and regulatory agencies would change from merely obstructing progress to reasoned cooperation with nuclear-plant manufacturing and installation.  And we would derive an increasing proportion of our energy from a source that has always made a lot of technical sense.

On the other hand, things may just go on as they are now, with old plants closing and no new ones to take their place. That would be bad for a number of reasons, but reason hasn’t been the only consideration in the history of nuclear energy up to now.

This article has been republished from the author’s blog, Engineering Ethics, with permission.

AUTHOR

Karl D. Stephan received the B. S. in Engineering from the California Institute of Technology in 1976. Following a year of graduate study at Cornell, he received the Master of Engineering degree in 1977… More by Karl D. Stephan

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Here’s How To Secure America’s Energy Future thumbnail

Here’s How To Secure America’s Energy Future

/in , , , , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

We live in a dangerous world starved for energy.

Americans are grappling with sky-high inflation and high energy prices and yet the Biden administration and the Democrats in Congress continue to spend money we don’t have, driving inflation higher and making us all poorer.

Should the Republicans take over the Congress this November they have a tough, but straightforward task ahead of them. They need to improve our economy, our energy security and that of the whole world by limiting spending and promoting energy abundance.

The new Congress can help rein in inflation by reducing federal spending. The first order of business should be to pass a federal budget on time and within our means. Congress has failed to do that for a number of years, including when Republicans were in charge of the House and Senate because of the political expediency of appropriating federal dollars for partisan priorities.

Instead of tinkering with budget line items, it would be far better to pass a budget that reduces spending by ten percent across the board.

Beyond cutting the budget, Congress needs to take back most of the insane amounts of money this Democrat led Congress has given the Biden administration to spend through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act.

Congress should rescind these laws and recover and repurpose the hundreds of dollars these bills have authorized but the Biden administration has not been able to spend.

While working to restore its role as a co-equal branch of the federal government, Congress needs to expand our energy abundance and improve our energy security. Europe’s energy starvation shows us what happens when countries put climate concerns ahead of energy security. Prices in the European Union are sky high, businesses are closing and consumers are suffering.

Unlike Europe, the United States is the world’s energy superpower. We are the world’s largest producer of oil, the largest producer of natural gas and we have the largest coal reserves.

We are also the largest producer of geothermal energy, the second largest solar energy producer, the second largest in wind production, and the second largest producer of energy from biomass and waste.

We have vast energy resources, but the Biden administration has worked to throttle natural gas, oil and coal production as much as possible.

Over the past 10 years, the vast majority of new oil on the market came from the United States — not from Saudi Arabia, or Russia, or OPEC. According to BP’s Statistical Review of World Energy, from 2011 through 2021, global oil production increased by 5.8 million barrels a day, but the U.S. alone increased production by 9.6 million barrels a day.

Oil production fell in some countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Norway, United Kingdom, Nigeria, but the United States more than made up the difference.

We have vast energy resources, but only if American companies can access them. To improve our energy abundance and grow our economy, Congress must require the Biden administration to issue leases for natural gas, oil and coal production on federal lands and waters.

The Biden administration is not just throttling back natural gas, oil, and coal, but also minerals and mining. The Biden administration has not allowed any new mines, despite wishing to have mineral-intensive technologies such as electric vehicles, stationary batteries, as well as wind and solar power.

Congress needs to make it possible to start new mines in the United States.

Broadly, the next Congress also needs to reform the permitting processes for energy projects. There is a wide consensus from the left and right that we need real permitting reform. The rules of the road need to be clear with definite timelines. Congress needs to mandate real streamlining and firm deadlines. The Manchin permitting reform effort fell way short of what is needed because it did not amend the laws which slow down permitting.

Congress should also vote up or down on every new major regulation from the Environmental Protection Agency. Congress should also repeal the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). This year is the last year Congress mandated biofuel volumes in the RFS, so it makes sense to sunset the law instead of allowing EPA to set mandates going forward.

Unelected bureaucrats shouldn’t be choosing which fuels and which cars Americans can have. The American people should decide for themselves.

Another thing the new Congress should do is immediately prevent future presidents from tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to solve a political problem, in this case high gas prices.

In short, the new Congress must focus on economic growth and energy abundance. They must rein in inflation by limiting federal spending and work to improve our energy security and tap our abundant energy reserves.

It’s a simple recipe, but if they fail in either direction we will end up with high energy prices and businesses that are closing like what is happening right now in Europe.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

AUTHOR

THOMAS PYLE

Thomas Pyle is the president of the American Energy Alliance and co-host of The Unregulated Podcast.

RELATED ARTICLES:

BASTASCH: China Is Laughing At Us

Climate change activists throw mashed potatoes on Monet painting in Germany

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

It’s Really About Just One Thing Isn’t It? The Truth or Censorship! thumbnail

It’s Really About Just One Thing Isn’t It? The Truth or Censorship!

/in , , , , , , , /by

By Vlad Tepes Blog

1. British doctor on the Made-in-Boston chimeric virus which killed 80% of the Chimeric mice. (I think Alex Berenson may be totally full of it on this one. This newest gain-of-function work may really be dangerous.)

Given that the news is basically nothing but leader material for what you are to think about what you are to experience, I wonder a couple of things about this story. Assuming it is true, and our stalwart British doctor explains it is, when did they really make it? And when did they release it, and who funded it? Because if they told us this much, what they didn’t tell us has to be that its already in the public and widely spread. And although the doctor explains that the vaxx cannot provide any protection from it, and even more bravely he explains that natural immunity will be better than the vaxx but still not very good, its still probably meant to frighten people into massive vaxx uptake this fall and winter. Halloween come early.

2. Dr. Theresa Tam does her part to scare the crap out of everyone to prepare us for the usual BS. Masks, vaccines, no socializing. The new WEF normal. Lots of lying about the effectiveness of the mRNA gene therapies and most comically, claiming what MANY doctors and scientists say are vaxx damage symptoms are actually from  Covid.

3. Let’s compare and contrast a communist Canada and its propaganda with what the elected leader of a democratic province of Canada (at the moment) of a free minded people say about Covid and covid measures imposed by authoritarian governments.

As an aside, not that it has anything to do with results, but for fun I looked up the method of counting the votes in Alberta, who got a fairly rational, Western thinking more or less libertarian leader, and it appears to still use human scrutineers to determine who voted for what, as opposed to a closed-source computer that consistently seems to select far left authoritarian candidates. No relation though, between the vote counting and the results I’m sure. Rather, I’m sure there is no way to verify the results of closed-source Dominion voting machines.)

4. Judge grants depositions of Fauci, Jen Psaki and other high ranking Biden officials in case over ‘collusive relationship’ between administration and social media companies to ‘censor free speech’

A federal judge has ordered Dr. Anthony Fauci and a slew of other high-ranking Biden officials to be deposed over the government’s alleged collusion with social media companies to ‘censor free speech.’

On Friday, the court granted the request brought by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, both republicans. 

Both accused the Biden administration of having ‘worked hand-in-hand’ with social media giants to ‘censor’ news stories that reflect negatively on the White House and called it an ‘egregious attack on our First Amendment,’ a report said.

(We all must watch this closely. The results of this may show exactly how corrupt the judicial and executive branches might be)

5. Let me be as clear as I can about this. “Diagolon” is a joke. A meme. It was one Canadian veteran who came up with the idea for a new country where freedom minded classical Canadians from the West would form a new polity with Florida and other US Constitutionally minded people from the US. The resulting new polity on a map would have diagonal borders on both sides and as a joke, they called this new fictional place, “Diagolon.” It is as much a threat as is Lilliput. And as far as I know, (barring some other activity or charge about which I have no knowledge), the man they jailed for coming up with the meme is no more a threat than is Johnathan Swift. The groups he interacted with, also invented another nation called “Circulon”. It was to contain all the lefties who wanted to force everyone to take experimental and dangerous gene-therapies and force masks on people and forbid the sick from getting effective and safe therapeutics. I myself am looking at a map and connecting smaller communities hoping to make a new country without having to move anyone anywhere. I plan to call it, “Checkertopia”.

It’s was the Council for Govt of Canada that brought it up🙄🤦🏻‍♀️of course it was🤡 pic.twitter.com/zb2gRwfBEt

— heather (@howisthismylif) October 20, 2022

Thank you all for reading these pages and considering these ideas against the onslaught of enemy propaganda intended to obliterate all your concepts of reality as you have held them for your life so far.

In the video we posted yesterday of Dr. Chris Shoemaker, he gave some astonishing statistics in his speech. One of which, was that sperm counts dropped in men who had the mRNA gene-therapy shots, (allegedly for Covid19 although they seem to do nothing whatsoever to prevent it or lower the outcomes from having it), by a whopping 50% and for 6 months. So is it any surprise that the government wants us to take these shots every six months even though any protection you get from the shots lasts maybe 3 weeks?

This goes a long way towards the thesis of this site, that all policies from Covid measures, the forced vaxx, deifying homosexuality, making having children and marriage itself to be not worth the effort, and many many more policies and cultural shifts are really about one thing. Stopping people from having children. Watch his video again if you have already for more stunning statistics.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column posted by  is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Climate Extremism Is Making America Mentally Ill. Here’s How thumbnail

Climate Extremism Is Making America Mentally Ill. Here’s How

/in , , , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

America is floundering in an epidemic of anxiety, depression and drug use.

One in six Americans takes some kind of psychiatric drug, mostly antidepressants, a medical study concluded, and some of them (Prozac and Paxil) are linked to acts of violence. A third of high school students cannot shake feelings of sadness or hopelessness, another report found, and nearly 2 0% of teens have contemplated suicide.

Still more frightening, both studies are based on data collected before the COVID pandemic sent college, teenage and younger children into lockdowns, social isolation, minimal physical activity, hours spent playing video games and reading censored and self-selected online media — and rampant depression and “chronic incapacitating mental illness.” Nor is the problem confined to America.

Researchers and psychologists are constantly finding new reasons to explain the growing inability to cope. Their newest “explanation” is — climate change!

“Climate grief” is “real,” they insist, and it’s spreading rapidly among young people. “The future is frightening,” 77% of 10,000 young people aged 16-25 from the USA and other countries told analysts who investigate “climate anxiety.” Large numbers of children are having climate nightmares.

“The climate mental health crisis” already affects people who have “lost everything in worsening climate infernos,” laments a NASA scientist and climate activist fear-monger who’s convinced we face “the end of life on Earth as we know it.”

“I don’t want to be alive anymore. The animals are all going to die, and I don’t want to be here when all the animals are dead,” a four-year-old child wailed.

Parents fantasize about killing their children, over fears of the “climate-ravaged future” they face. Parents and children alike consider suicide. Indeed, there’s a clear link between increased global temperatures and suicide rates, a Stanford economist asserts.

Dr. Thomas Doherty has built an entire psychology practice around climate psychoses, the Climate Psychology Alliance provides an online directory of “climate-aware therapists,” and a “peer support network” offers grief therapy modeled on twelve-step drug addiction programs.

There’s only one real solution to this epidemic, “experts” insist: Governments must act immediately to “fix” the climate, and eliminate “the death knell of climate chaos hanging over people’s heads.”

Excuse the bad pun — but this is insane! The hysteria and histrionics have gotten completely out of hand. They have no basis in reality.

We do not have a climate “crisis.” We have a climate fear-mongering and cancel-culture crisis.

The solution to the climate drug and mental health crisis is not to “fix” grotesquely exaggerated climate problems. It is to end the indoctrination and censorship that dominate discussions about climate change, from kindergarten through graduate school, and in almost every realm of science, politics and news.

The supposed climate crisis exists in computer models, headlines and hype about “unprecedented” temperatures, extreme weather, floods and droughts that have scant basis in Real World evidence. Viewpoints, evidence and experts questioning and challenging these claims are banned from classrooms, school curricula, news and social media, and government policy discussions – starting at the top.

The White House “national climate adviser,” for example, works hand-in-glove with Big Tech and news organizations, suppressing facts about climate change reality. Most federal (and many state) government agencies have similar officials and programs. Meta (Facebook), Twitter, YouTube and other Big Tech companies routinely, consistently and happily assist with this deplatforming and censorship.

The so-called Next Generation Science Standards feature climate alarmism as a guiding principle for students K-12, and determine what is being taught in over a third of America’s classrooms.

Meanwhile, as America and Europe are propagandized and prodded to eliminate their fossil fuel use — with enormous costs in jobs, living standards and lives — China, India and 100 other countries are rapidly expanding their oil, gas and coal use, to lift people out of rampant poverty.

Worse, China increasingly dominates raw material and “green tech” supply chains — and gets a free pass on its fossil fuel use, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental destruction, and slave and child labor.

All these realities are studiously and systematically ignored and cancelled.

Fortunately, millions of parents are becoming more involved in their children’s homework and school boards. Fight for Schools and other such efforts are working to bring science, honesty and accountability back to education. They recognize that we desperately need diversity of political and scientific thought.

Without it, the United States and Western Civilization will see their liberties and living standards rolled backward by decades.

The shrill, alarmist cries of climate extremists must be confronted and doused with sound reason. This, for the sake of the children and everyone’s peace of mind.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

AUTHOR

CRAIG RUCKER

Craig Rucker is president of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org).

RELATED ARTICLE: Tens Of Thousands March Against Rising Energy Costs, Inflation Across Germany

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

STOP THE INSANE ‘WOKE WAR’ ON OUR POLICE: Stop the Looting, Vandalizing and Crime in America Now! thumbnail

STOP THE INSANE ‘WOKE WAR’ ON OUR POLICE: Stop the Looting, Vandalizing and Crime in America Now!

/in , , , /by

By Dr. Rich Swier

A reader sent us the video below created by the group Citizens for Sanity.

Citizens for Sanity’s mission is to return common sense to America, to highlight the importance of logic and reason, and to defeat “wokeism” and anti-critical thinking ideologies that have permeated every sector of our country and threaten the very freedoms that are foundational to the American Dream.

Please watch this video and then share it with family, friends, your elected representatives at every level, to your local, county and state police, to your governor and share it with the media and post it on all of your social media.

It’s time for common sense to prevail. We need a professional, highly trained and loyal police at every level who will enforce the law and not become tools of their political masters.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

California Entrepreneur Who Was Fined $1000 for Drawing Informal Maps without a License Takes Regulatory Board to Court thumbnail

California Entrepreneur Who Was Fined $1000 for Drawing Informal Maps without a License Takes Regulatory Board to Court

/in , , , , , /by

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

Ryan Crownholm’s story perfectly illustrates how occupational licensing laws stifle competition.

Ryan Crownholm is a self-described “serial entrepreneur” and the founder of a California-based business called MySitePlan.com. Founded in 2013, the business creates unofficial “site plans” for various clients using publicly available imagery. Hotels and resorts will sometimes use the plans as maps for their guests. Homeowners and contractors often use the plans in their permit applications when they are preparing to make minor changes to a property, such as building a shed or removing a tree.

Over the years, MySitePlan.com has built a strong reputation for itself, and customers are consistently impressed with the quality of the work and the short turn-around times (often within 24 hours).

“I had the first draft within 8 hours and they made changes to accommodate what the city needed. Good service!” writes one recent reviewer. “Amazing service! So incredibly quick! I will recommend this company to anyone in need of a site plan,” writes another.

Crownholm and his customers are certainly happy the business has been successful, but it seems not everyone feels this way. In December 2021, Crownholm was given a citation from the California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists. The order demanded that he “cease and desist from violating” the law and pay a fine of $1,000.

What was Crownholm’s crime? According to the Board, Crownholm and his company were illegally practicing land surveying without a license. In the Board’s view, “preparing site plans which depict the location of property lines, fixed works, and the geographical relationship thereto falls within the definition of land surveying,” and thus requires a license.

It’s worth noting that MySitePlan.com never claimed to create official land surveys by licensed surveyors. In fact, a banner at the top of their website plainly states, “This is not a legal survey, nor is it intended to be or replace one.”

Now, it’s tempting to say Crownholm should just get a license and move on, but it’s not that simple. Obtaining a land surveying license is an arduous process. In the state of California it requires six years of higher education and practical experience, passing four exams, and earning references from four existing licensees.

So rather than getting a license or shutting down his business, Crownholm has chosen to take the Board to court. On September 29, Crownholm joined with the Institute for Justice to file a federal lawsuit against the Board, claiming that the regulation violates his First Amendment right to free speech.

“California regulators are strangling entrepreneurs, like me, with red tape even though customers are pleased with the valuable services we provide,” Crownholm said. “Prosecuting my company hurts homeowners, contractors, landscapers, farmers, wedding venues and others who depend on my service.”

“California’s regulations go far beyond what other surveying regulators think is appropriate,” said Institute for Justice Attorney Mike Greenberg. “This is yet another example of an established industry using the government to shut down popular, innovative competition. If read literally, California’s laws could harm services everyday people use such as Uber and Google Maps. It would even criminalize drawing a makeshift map on a napkin to help a lost tourist find the way to their destination.”

The question on everyone’s mind, of course, is why? Why would this regulatory board go after an entrepreneur when he’s clearly not in the business of official land surveying?

The simplest explanation is that they’re just really eager to enforce the law to the letter. That seems to be the argument they’re going with. But if that’s the case, why don’t they also crack down on the homeowners and contractors who regularly make identical site plan drawings? As the Institute for Justice press release notes, “California’s own building departments teach [unlicensed] homeowners and contractors how to make the exact same drawings Ryan makes.”

So if litigiousness is the goal, why single out MySitePlan.com?

Perhaps they think he’s taking safety shortcuts, but that makes no sense. There’s nothing dangerous about what he’s doing. Maybe they’re concerned he’s a fraud, and that the quality of his product doesn’t match what he promises? It’s possible, but a quick glance at his glowing reviews ought to set the record straight on that. Maybe they think he’s misrepresenting himself, pretending to have a license when he really doesn’t? Again, that makes no sense. He’s very explicit on the website that he doesn’t do official land surveys.

Perhaps they just think it’s unfair that everyone else has to go through an arduous licensing process while he gets to avoid it despite doing very similar work. That would be understandable, but if it was really just about fairness, wouldn’t it make more sense to push for scrapping the burdens on everyone else rather than imposing those burdens on him?

None of these motives make much sense.

There’s another possible motive, however, and that’s the malicious one. Perhaps the regulators were simply looking to protect licensed surveyors from competition. After all, less competition means higher prices and more business for those who have jumped through the hoops. I’m sure many licensed surveyors weren’t particularly happy to see MySitePlan.com taking away potential clients.

Even assuming the absolute best of intentions, one must admit the decreased competition would be at the very least a convenient side-benefit for the established special-interests.

Oh, and did I mention that the the guy who issued the citation—Richard B. Moore, the Board’s Executive Officer—is himself a licensed land surveyor?

This isn’t the first time entrepreneurs have been impeded by these kinds of regulations. Occupational licensing requirements like this are ubiquitous, not just for doctors and engineers, but also for jobs that have little to do with safety like hair braiding.

Every industry has a similar story. Decades ago there was an accident, maybe a series of accidents, or some fraudulent practitioner. As a result, people pressured the government to “do something,” and the government responded by creating a licensing scheme.

The thinking is pretty straightforward. We make it illegal for someone to practice a trade unless they have a government-approved license, and the government only gives licenses to people who can prove they are trustworthy and capable. Ostensibly, the system protects consumers. But that’s just the official narrative.

Whether by design or by accident, licensing laws also have the effect of limiting competition, resulting in higher prices and fewer options for consumers.

I say “by design or by accident” because it isn’t always clear what the intentions were of the people who promoted these schemes. Though it’s nice to think they were all motivated by an altruistic desire to help consumers, it’s more realistic to see this as a classic “Bootlegger and Baptist” alliance—a phrase that was coined by economist Bruce Yandle in a 1983 paper in reference to the Prohibition era.

The “Baptists” are the true believers. They are motivated, in their desire for government regulation, by genuine—though often misguided—concern for consumers. The “Bootleggers” are the special-interest groups who stand to benefit should these laws pass. The strategy of the Bootlegger is simple and surprisingly effective: simply paint yourself as a Baptist and push for the regulations with altruistic arguments, even though your real goal is to hurt your competitors.

“A carefully constructed regulation can accomplish all kinds of anticompetitive goals,” Yandle wrote, “while giving the citizenry the impression that the only goal is to serve the public interest.”

In 2014, Yandle expanded on his theory in a book titled Bootleggers and Baptists that he co-authored with his grandson Adam Smith (not to be confused with the original Adam Smith). In a review of the book, economist Art Carden summarized the theory rather succinctly.

“Public policies…emerge because a moral constituency (the Baptists) and a financial constituency (the bootleggers) come together in support of the same policies,” Carden wrote.

Quoting the book, Carden notes that special interests looking to pass anti-competitive regulations often seek out “a respectable public-spirited group seeking the same result [in order to] wrap a self-interested lobbying effort in a cloak of respectability.”

Carden goes on to identify occupational licensing in particular as a good example of the Bootleggers and Baptists theory playing out in real life.

While the drawbacks of occupational licensing laws are difficult to deny, some may still have reservations about abolishing them. If we let just anyone practice these professions, wouldn’t there be a proliferation of fraudulent and dangerous practitioners? Isn’t that why these laws were needed in the first place, to protect us from the evidently disastrous results of free markets?

This is a common line of argumentation, but it’s missing some key nuances. First, it’s important to keep in mind that the mental picture many have of the pre-license market is likely distorted. The special-interest groups pushing for these laws have a strong incentive to exaggerate how bad things used to be; it would be naive to simply take them at their word.

Further, it’s important to remember that people were much poorer back when these laws were first introduced, so we shouldn’t be surprised that the general standard of living—including the quality and safety of services available on the market—was far lower than it is today. The fact that “things used to be bad” is much more a reflection of our ancestors’ relative poverty than an indictment of unregulated markets.

For another point, clearly it’s tragic when people get injured or killed because of incompetent workers, but there is always a trade-off between cost and safety. Sometimes people prefer slightly less safe options (such as workers with less training) because those options are cheaper. And if that’s a risk they want to take, we’re only making them worse-off by taking that option away.

The other thing to consider is that businesses that are downright dangerous or fraudulent get weeded out very quickly. As a business owner, if you don’t provide a reasonable level of quality and safety in your products, you’ll be out of business in no time. Since entrepreneurs know this, they have a strong incentive to avoid hiring dangerous and fraudulent workers. Economists call this the discipline of continuous dealings. This, not licensing, is the reason we can trust most of the businesses we patronize.

Besides, there are plenty of ways to ensure product safety and quality that don’t involve licensing laws. Workers can get voluntary certifications and consumers can look at reviews to help them decide who they can trust. Just think about MySitePlan.com and their reviews we saw earlier. Did you really need them to have a license to know they were a trustworthy business?

Though government licensing may seem like a good way to protect consumers, the reality is that these schemes unnecessarily restrict competition, with fewer options and higher prices being the inevitable result. In other words, they mostly end up hurting the very consumers they were supposed to help.

The best way to help consumers is to give them lots of choices and a rigorously competitive market. And the way to achieve that is not by protecting established special interests from new players. It’s by letting the Ryan Crownholms of the world compete.

This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

AUTHOR

Patrick Carroll

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

California’s Economy Heading For Disaster As Companies Flee Socialist Insanity In Droves thumbnail

California’s Economy Heading For Disaster As Companies Flee Socialist Insanity In Droves

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

If you want to know what the left wants to do to the entire nation, look at California: unsustainably high taxes, soaring crime rates, filthy, dangerous cities full of insane and criminal homeless people — California is a leftist’s paradise. If Gavin Newsom is the Democrat nominee in 2024, as many are whispering now, and becomes the next president, that will be it for America. The companies that are fleeing California in droves now will flee all of America, and with good reason, as all they will be able to expect here will be robberies that go unprosecuted, confiscatory taxes, immense economic burdens due to climate fantasies, and worse.

California’s Economy Could Be Heading For Disaster After Companies Fled In Droves

by Arjun Singh, Daily Caller News Foundation, October 20, 2022:

California officials are sounding the alarm after recent statistics showed that fewer corporate and start-up activity in the state was leading to a decline in tax revenue, according to a report by Bloomberg News.

This year, just nine companies based in the state had held initial public offerings (IPOs), which is when a company first lists shares for sale on the stock market – considered a milestone in its growth after strong activity and high valuation, the report revealed. In 2021, California – whose start-up ecosystem in ‘Silicon Valley’ is considered the most prodigious in the world – saw 81 companies conduct IPOs, making 2022 a year of a nine-fold decrease.

Moreover, the value of these IPOs was far lower than in the past, raising merely $177 million, or 2% of the total amount of money raised by U.S. companies that went public in 2022. By contrast, in 2021, California’s share of the revenue generated by IPOs was 39%, by far the largest of any state.

Over the last few years, many companies have departed from California for other states run by Republicans, with Texas being the top destination, gaining 44% of companies that left according to a report by BuildRemote, a business consultancy. These include high-profile departures such as that of electric carmaker Tesla, Inc., led by CEO Elon Musk, which moved its headquarters to Texas.

Musk and other entrepreneurs cite the state’s left-wing policies, enacted by a heavily Democratic state administration, of high taxes, permissive bail reform and drug-use laws, chronic homelessness and stringent COVID-19 regulations as reasons for leaving. Musk called the state the “land of overregulation, overlitigation and overtaxation” when describing his decision to leave….

California has some of the highest tax rates in the nation, with a 7.25% sales tax and a top income tax rate of 13.3%, both of which outrank all other states. The revenues it gathers far exceed the state’s regular expenditures, and it ran a budget surplus of $97.5 billion in 2021.

Read more.

AUTHOR

Atlas Shrugs

RELATED VIDEO: Biden: ‘Good News On The Economy’ Will Save Democrats

RELATED ARTICLES:

AOC Shows Her CONTEMPT for Her Constituents, DANCING As They Chant ‘AOC Has Got to Go’

DEMOCRAT DESPOTISM : Steve Bannon Sentenced to Prison

Confused Biden Tells Fetterman’s Wife She’ll Be A ‘Great Lady In the Senate,’ But She’s Not the Candidate

‘Count, kid, count’: Hot-tempered Biden snaps at reporter who questioned the number of candidates campaigning with him

Wisconsin Democrat Senate Candidate Praises Iran’s Murderous Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Screw Parental Interference’: Inside The Online Community Encouraging Kids To Transition thumbnail

‘Screw Parental Interference’: Inside The Online Community Encouraging Kids To Transition

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

In sequestered parts of the internet — blacklisted from Google searches — parents are discussing the spread of Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD), attributing their child’s newfound gender identity to online influence.

Reddit, a popular anonymous internet forum, harbors one such online community that promotes “affirming” a child’s gender confusion with or without adequate medical or psychological examination. The community, “r/trans,” allows self-identified minors to discuss cross-dressing, surgeries, and hormone replacement treatment with transgender individuals, most of whom identify online as adults.

Chloe Cole, an 18-year-old who detransitioned after undergoing cross-sex hormones and a double mastectomy, told the Daily Caller that she likely would not have transitioned if it weren’t for social media.

“My first exposure to transgender content was [online],” Cole said. “I saw female adolescents ages 12 to 19 talking about their transition. I feel like I wouldn’t have transitioned if I wasn’t exposed to that.”

At the age of 12, Cole began socially transitioning to a boy identity and told the Daily Caller that she began browsing Reddit communities.

“I was fed a lot of medical misinformation on [Reddit],” Cole said. “I was sort of pigeonholing myself into this ideology or community.”

Users of r/trans opt for a vocabulary outside of the day-to-day vernacular of most Americans. Fourteen-year-olds use slang such as “T,” which stands for testosterone hormones, or “MtF,” which stands for male to female.

A common post on the r/trans thread is titled “Do I Pass?” which features self-described trans-identifying individuals posting photos of themselves asking for affirmation from community members on whether they pass for the opposite sex.

Other popular threads seek advice from other r/trans members. In one post, a user who identifies as a 14-year-old biological male solicited advice on how to come out as transgender now that the user is “forced to reintegrate back into society for high school.”

Another purported minor, who claims to be a middle schooler and biological female, sought advice on chest binding.

“This year I am going into a whole new school (I’m in middle school) and I’m trans [female to male], my mom won’t let me cut my hair and she won’t buy me a binder. I’ve tried the sports bra tricks, didn’t bind well, and I don’t own a beanie to do the beanie trick. I need some advice.”

Cole told the Daily Caller that she was caught in a similar online community that praised her for each step in her physical transition.

“Initially, I wasn’t really interacting with other transgender people online directly,” Cole said. “When I reached more milestones in my transition … with each milestone, as they got more and more extreme, I got more praise. Both from people who call themselves ‘allies’ and other transgender people.”

A self-described “minor,” who claims to be a 16-year-old, discussed starting testosterone soon. The biological female sought advice on how to easily procure the hormone treatment.

Click here to view Reddit r/trans screen shot

Several of the threads allegedly posted by minors included comments from older users encouraging kids to cut parents out of their lives. A self-described high school freshman, who appears to be a biological female, solicited advice on whether to get a male-styled haircut despite the student’s mother’s wishes.

“I would be surprised if the grounding lasted more than a couple weeks. 4 years of grounding for cutting your hair once is ‘I’m cutting you out of my life as soon as I turn 18’ territory,” one user responded.

Users on the board overwhelmingly supported the student, encouraging the teen to get a haircut.

“Cut it, and style it however you want in spite of that ridiculous ultimatum. Then just preemptively learn to pick a lock … and sneak out with friends,” another user suggested.

“Off with her head,” a self-described trans woman said. “In this instance, her head is your hair. Cut that stuff off and feel good about yourself. Screw parental interference. They only know so much about you.”

Other advice included cutting a portion of hair to “hide it” at home and “put it up in a bun at school.” Another user suggested “falling asleep” with a wad of chewed bubble gum to get a haircut.

The r/trans thread also applauds minors taking medical steps to transition physically. A self-described 14-year-old posted in all capitalized letters, “GUYS I DID MY FIRST [TESTOSTERONE] SHOT TODAY!” The biological female received cheers and congratulatory messages from fellow users.

One user asked what country the 14-year-old lives in. “America in California,” the user responded.

Click here to view Reddit r/trans conversation with 14-year old girl

Other purported minors posted about their discomfort dealing with gender dysphoria. A 14-year-old biological male questioned whether 6’1″ was too tall to pass as a female, and a young biological female questioned whether or not to use the men’s bathroom at school.

One thread, allegedly written by a minor, solicited advice on how to purchase female clothing when the biological male’s parents have access to their bank account.

Dr. Erica Anderson, a clinical psychologist with 30 years of experience and a transgender woman, told the Daily Caller that it’s undeniable that troubled adolescents are being influenced by social media communities.

“Many adolescents are spending a lot of time on these sites and they are influenced by them,” Anderson said. “It is influential in particular to kids who may be susceptible to others … or who are troubled and sincerely looking for answers.”

Cole described being “bombarded” with LGBT content at the age of 11, when she first obtained an Instagram account. She said she consistently saw content that downplayed femininity and motherhood in favor of content that was “super sexualized.” She credits Reddit and Instagram with promoting gender ideology.

Cole desisted from her transgender identity and said the same online communities that once love bombed her, now spew vile attacks at her character.

Cole’s experience appears common in anecdotal stories of parents with transgender teens worldwide. Dr. Lisa Litman, the scientist who coined the phrase “Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria”, found that parents began reporting a correlation between children participating in online discussion groups and young adults who experience ROGD, despite having “no histories of childhood gender identity issues.”

A quick search of the words “Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria,” shows only articles that discuss the controversy of ROGD and videos from activists on why the theory is false. Dr. Litman’s study on ROGD is not one of the primary results.

R/trans is only one of many online forums where children go to discuss their ever-changing gender identities.

Reddit did not respond to the Daily Caller’s multiple requests for comment.

AUTHOR

CHRISSY CLARK

Education reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats Attempt To Memory-Hole Legislation That Would Have Made Parents Felons

‘Medical Safeguarding’ Of Kids ‘Should Not Be A Political Issue,’ Detransitioners Argue In Letter To Attorney General

EXCLUSIVE: Philadelphia Gender Clinic Trained Employees At School That Hides Students’ Gender Identities From Parents

College Won’t Place Student Teachers At School That Prohibits The Teaching Of Critical Race Theory

‘Discredited’: Hundreds Of Health Workers, Parents Sign Declaration Condemning Leading Trans Medical Group

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

NYC City Hall Official Declares ‘No Sympathy’ For Public Sector Employees Forced Out of Jobs Due to COVID Vaccine Mandate thumbnail

NYC City Hall Official Declares ‘No Sympathy’ For Public Sector Employees Forced Out of Jobs Due to COVID Vaccine Mandate

/in , , , , , /by

By Project Veritas

*CLICK HERE TO TWEET THE VIDEO*

Project Veritas Action released a second video today exposing the staff and inner workings of New York City mayor Eric Adams.

Here are some of the highlights from today’s video:

  • Chris Baugh, Advance Team Aide, NYC Mayor Eric Adams: “I have no sympathy for them. They made a choice [not to get vaccinated]. They chose not to do a very harmless thing that protects the rest of society. F**k ‘em. 1,400 people voluntarily quit their jobs rather than get vaccinated. They don’t deserve their jobs back. We have thousands and thousands of vacancies in city government right now. I’m worried about filling all of those jobs more than I’m worried about giving people who volunteered to leave their job back.”
  • Baugh: “I don’t give a sh*t. They are like, ‘This is unfair.’ F**king deal with it. We’re allowed to set the terms of employment. Period.”
  • Baugh: “I have no sympathy for those people. That was the rule. You had a very cushy government job…Again, no one was required to get vaccinated. You just had to get vaccinated if you had a job. So, you could have moved to Florida.”
  • NYC Mayor’s Press Secretary Fabien Levy RESPONDS: “Despite how many ‘parts’ Project Veritas releases, the fact remains that this is an enterprise run by a convicted criminal and one that admitted to lying in an effort to simply have a conversation.”

You can watch the video HERE.

The city official went on to dismiss concerns expressed by NYPD officers.

“The cops are mad at us though because we rolled back the private sector mandate, but we’re not rolling back the public sector mandate…COVID is over is the short answer. Why are we still doing it [vaccine mandate] for the public sector? I don’t know. We will probably stop that in a few months,” Baugh said.

“Being a cop is like the cushiest gig in the city. Like, you might get shot, but otherwise it’s very good,” he said.

“I’ve just always joked — New York is sort of like Hogwarts. Like, it’s a lot of fun, great opportunities, and people die.”

*CLICK HERE TO TWEET THE VIDEO*

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas exposé is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Joe O’Biden, Oil Production, Energy Prices & Politics thumbnail

PODCAST: Joe O’Biden, Oil Production, Energy Prices & Politics

/in , , , , , /by

By Conservative Commandos Radio Show

GUESTS AND TOPICS

DR. JOHN R. LOTT, JR.

Dr. John R. Lott, Jr., is the founder of The Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), an economist and a world-recognized expert on guns and crime. During the Trump administration, he served as the Senior Advisor for Research and Statistics in the Office of Justice Programs and then the Office of Legal Policy in the U.S. Department of Justice. Lott has held research or teaching positions at various academic institutions including the University of Chicago, Yale University, the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Stanford University, UCLA, and Rice University, and was the chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission during 1988-1989. His latest book is: Gun Control Myths: How politicians, the media, and botched “studies” have twisted the facts on gun control.

TOPIC: Media Spin on Gun Control Doesn’t Match Voters!

GEORGE LANDRITH

George Landrith, President and CEO of Frontiers of Freedom – a public policy think tank devoted to promoting a strong national defense, free markets, individual liberty, and constitutionally limited government. In 1994 and 1996, Landrith was the Republican candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia’s Fifth Congressional District. His work has been printed across the nation, including: Washington Times, Chicago Tribune, LA Daily News, National Review, Sacramento Bee, Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, Providence Journal, Daily Caller, Washington Examiner, Townhall, and Human Events. George Landrith is also a co-host here on the Conservative Commandos Radio Show.

TOPIC: Joe Biden, Oil Production, Energy Prices & Politics!

TODAYS GUEST HOST: Rick Manning is a Conservative Commandos and AUN-TV alumnus and the President, Americans for Limited Government. Rick also served on President Trump’s transition team. And he is also the author of the new book with Starr Parker — “Necessary Noise: How Donald Trump Inflames the Culture War and Why this is good for America!”

©Conservative Commandos Radio and AUN-TV. All rights reserved.

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.