In the wake of the first two nationally-televised Democratic presidential debates of 2019, it’s become absurdly obvious just how far from reality the progressive Left has drifted. This is great news for Trump who — despite what he might think about himself — remains one of the most historically unpopular presidents of all time thanks to the public’s previously cemented image of a narcissistic, corrupt, womanizing, immoral, immature, Twitter-obsessed, shady businessman. Correspondingly, over 55 percent of Americans now say they won’t vote to reelect him in 2020, including those who are in key swing states. This explains why Trump has largely abandoned voters in those areas and appears to be concentrating more on stirring up support among his adoring fans. To be fair, this is what he does best. The only problem with this approach is that some of those folks are leftover reluctant Trump voters and may indeed bail on him at the last minute in favor of a Democrat.
Nevertheless, the president could still win reelection so long as one thing remains in place: the ignorant detachedness of the Democratic candidates. If Wednesday evening’s debate was an indication of at least one thing, it’s just how incredibly out of touch this group is with America — how disconnected they are from reality and how divorced they are from any semblance of sanity. Here are just a few examples:
There may be no issue more polarizing and divisive, while simultaneously being the most critical and paramount of our time. And yet, for whatever reason, Democrats seem hellbent on taking ideological and political positions that are completely at odds with the vast majority of Americans’ wishes. Recent Gallup polls indicate that a stunning 77 percent of adults in the United States are opposed to third-trimester abortions, with 53 percent opposing first-trimester abortions in times when the mother “does not want the child.” For those of you who may be accustomed to Bernie Sanders-style math, that is indeed the majority in both instances.
But what did these bloodthirsty presidential enthusiasts do? They stood centerstage — literally — in front of the nation, and proudly announced their willingness to defend abortion-on-demand for every woman, at every stage of pregnancy, for any reason whatsoever, at absolutely no charge. “Kill your baby for free anytime you want, no questions asked. Huzzah! We’ll even saddle the taxpayers with the financial burden!” Moreover, they even seemed to be opposed to laws which would require doctors to care for babies who manage to miraculously survive abortion procedures. It was a grotesque display of emotionless barbarism and an utter disregard for the value of human life. The psychotic insanity of it all was capped by off by former Obama Secretary of Urban Housing and Development Julian Castro, who decided that these abortion rights should also extend to biological men.
For a group that is obviously fine with the murder of unborn children, it was ironic to hear them use the term “health care” or to attempt to show any feigned compassion toward Americans suffering from various ailments and physical diseases. They claim that private insurance is a disaster, which, in some ways, is true. Premiums have skyrocketed and co-pays are laughable. But, the answer certainly isn’t a government-run system. One look back at the train wreck of Obamacare should prove how catastrophic that would be.
I speak from personal experience. As a single adult male with a neurological condition, my monthly premium went from $155/month to $344/month for the exact same plan that I had all along. Same benefits. Same coverage. Same everything. Furthermore, the co-pay costs for my medication refills doubled. The latest polls indicate almost 55 percent of Americans are in favor of sticking with private insurance and not allowing the government to tamper with the blasted system anymore than it already has been. And, to be frank, it’s not hard to see why.
I caught myself laughing out loud when Governor Jay Inslee (Washington State) stood among his cohorts and spewed some nonsense about how he would spend $3 trillion in an effort to create “clean energy jobs.” I thought it was a good joke until I realized he was actually being serious. I guess the joke is on Inslee for failing to realize that most Americans won’t be onboard with this level of extreme government spending, particularly when countless federal programs are already drowning in debt. Sure, they might support the notion of cleaner air and water and a better environment, but radical proposals like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal are viewed as silly and impractical. Create jobs? Yes. Leave more national debt to our children and grandchildren? No.
There’s almost no need to address the Party’s views on immigration (most favor loose laws or open borders) or free speech (most want it restricted, particularly online) or religious freedom (most would force a Christian baker to make a cake for a gay couple against his wishes.) This is the Democratic Party of 2019 and beyond. This is a Party overrun by tyrannical curmudgeons and progressive maniacs who lean so far Left that they are nearly indistinguishable from the socialists of old. Is it really any wonder, then, that they have no idea what Americans want? How could they? They’ve abandoned our nation’s founding principles, values, and morals. And there is indeed nothing American about that in the least.
It’s been a while since Bernie Sanders — the ‘ole socialist curmudgeon from Vermont — was trending in the news. I admit that I was kind of hoping he had decided to retreat back to his home world where he could never again pester the people of Earth with his psychotic speeches and communistic proposals. Unfortunately, it appears he’s gone and done precisely the opposite. Sanders delivered a speech on Wednesday in which he openly and proudly declared himself to be what he describes as a “democratic socialist.” We should pause here to note that this is really just code for “socialist-socialist.” In an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper on the same day, he also went so far as to defend the notion that “Americans will be delighted to pay more in taxes” when they realize they will [allegedly] receive free healthcare and education. I can almost hear Joseph Stalin, Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky, Benito Mussolini, and Vladimir Lenin applauding wildly from beyond their graves as I type this very sentence.
Now, to understand Bernie, you have to understand his perspectives on reality and society. In the past, he's tended to dodge questions about his adherence to socialistic beliefs. This time, he didn’t hold back. Sanders made it clear in his speech that — as far as he sees things — there are essentially two abhorrent evils at work within American society: 1) income inequality and 2) a tyrannical “oligarchy” of power-hungry, wealthy, old, white men who want to control, dominate and oppress everything and everyone in American culture. Apparently the irony has been lost on Bernie that he happens to be a tyrannical, power-hungry, wealthy, old, white man himself and — were he elected president — he would surely control, dominate, and oppress everything in sight. Socialism tends to do that, you know. If you need proof, just take a look at the histories of the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, Nicaragua, or East Germany.
Sanders can claim his form of socialism is “different” than the strains of socialism that have devoured and destroyed countless other nations throughout history like a carnivorous flesh-eating bacteria, but the dear senator isn’t fooling anyone, perhaps other than himself. And that’s ultimately the point: He’s so terribly self-deceived and so utterly blinded by his own distorted ideological views that he’s completely lost touch with reality — including the reality that the vast majority of Americans, and many in his own party, would never vote for him in a Democratic presidential nomination.
He also isn’t hoodwinking anyone when he claims that President Trump’s policies have led us into a new Great Depression, particularly considering that women and minorities are currently experiencing record-low unemployment. Even Americans without a college degree are doing exceptionally well in the job market. You might not like Donald Trump as a person — and that’s perfectly fine — but numbers don’t lie. So this means Sanders is either an oblivious dotard, or he’s intentionally attempting to mislead the American people in order to achieve a depraved ideological and political outcome. If I was a betting man, my money would be on the latter.
This is reflective of how the political game is played, especially by a professing socialist. Emperor Sanders even argued that “economic rights are human rights,” conveniently failing to mention that granting government-approved economic rights would mean stripping Americans of their inherent liberties and natural individual rights. After all, if the government starts doling out free healthcare, housing, and jobs, then citizens will no longer have personal rights in their doctors’ offices, property ownership rights at their homes, or freedoms in their workplace. If everything is owned and run by the government, no citizen has any rights or freedoms unless otherwise granted him by the government. And therein lies one of the many problems with socialism, er, excuse me — “democratic socialism.”
Sadly, Bernie couldn’t care less about the fact that this ideology has failed in every country in which it has been implemented throughout world history for over a century. He couldn’t care less that socialism is nothing more than a hideous, monstrous, and mutated form of Big Government that wrecks the lives of ordinary citizens. And why should he care? He’s not an ordinary citizen. He’s an elite Washington-based Congressional millionaire with a comfy book deal and three houses. He’s got nothing better to do than sit around and dream up radical extremist policy ideas that would turn the United States into his idea of a utopia.
Tragically, he would only wind up creating a Marxist hellhole. And after the dust settles, and we're all standing in breadlines waiting for our daily portion of food, he'll be left wondering what went wrong all over again.
NOTE: If you're reading this post in your e-mail inbox and would like to comment, please feel free to reply via e-mail or click on the post title above and leave a comment on my site. Also, be sure to follow me on Facebook and on Twitter.
Yesterday, Walt Disney Co. CEO Bob Iger threatened to yank filming and production from Georgia over the state’s new “heartbeat” legislation, which, if passed, would effectively ban abortion after the unborn baby’s heartbeat is detected (six-week gestation.) Speaking with Reuters about whether or not his company will shoot there in the future, he said, “I rather doubt we will.”
Marvel Studios, which happens to be owned and operated by Disney, recently brought millions of dollars to Georgia’s economy when it shot scenes for both “Avengers: Endgame” and “Black Panther” throughout The Peach State.
Iger also added, “I think many people who work for us will not want to work there, and we will have to heed their wishes in that regard. Right now we are watching it very carefully…I don’t see how it’s practical for us to shoot there [if the law goes into effect.]”
I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out the blatantly hypocritical and laughable irony in these statements, which is three-fold:
First, that a private company as large, powerful, and as wealthy as Disney actually “has” to do anything or “has to heed” anyone’s wishes is just plain ridiculous (yes, including, and especially, the wishes of their own employees.) This is Disney for God’s sake. They answer to no one but themselves.
Second, that a company which prides itself on cranking out so-called “family friendly” content — from Winnie the Pooh to The Avengers — and being “family friendly” in its very nature as a business, would actually stand against pro-family legislation, is itself overwhelmingly paradoxical and self-contradictory.
Third, that a company which creates entertainment specifically for children won’t do any businesses with states that are defending the lives of its own audience.
Let’s address the first point. Disney has a net worth more bloated than Thor’s beer belly from “Avengers: End Game.” Based on statistical analysis of profit and revenue from the last three years, the company currently boasts a total equity of about $130 billion. We’re talking Tony Stark-level money. As one of the most recognized and prosperous brands in the world, they wield tremendous influence and authority, both on a cultural level and in the business world. People know who they are. People respect what they do. People listen to what they say. Everyone from their fans to their employees has a loyalty that would not be easily broken.
And speaking of authority and employees, when did it suddenly become wrong for a CEO to say, “This is the decision I’m making because I believe it is morally or otherwise right. If you don’t like it or agree with it, you’re free to put in your two-week’s notice or walk now”?
The argument that such a decision would destroy their business or obliterate their ability to maintain a workforce is simply ludicrous and unprovable. Chick-fil-A took a moral stand when they decided to close on Sundays and they don’t seem to be hurting financially or lacking in employees. In fact, they continue to demolish the competition by a wide margin, with one day tied behind their back — even as their own CEO has been outspoken about his beliefs in traditional marriage and conservative Christian values.
So, assuming that Iger is correct, and that hundreds of Disney employees would supposedly jump ship if he chose to keep film production elements in Georgia, I doubt that it would damage this multi-billion dollar company beyond repair. Moreover, I doubt that he would even lose as many workers as he thinks. The pro-choice abortion enthusiast demographic in America is actually much smaller than we’ve all been led to believe. They just happen to have the loudest voices and most of the mainstream media venues at their disposal. The vast majority of Americans, however, are pro-life and even those who aren't still favor restrictions on abortion. Besides, folks tend to appreciate it when a company is willing to stand up for what’s right or at least not get muddied down in political spats. (Not that I’m holding my breath on Disney.)
On that note, let’s address the second point. Disney has long prided itself on churning out “family friendly” content and being a company that reflects and embodies so-called “family values.” If there were ever a time when this was true, it was when Walt was still alive. Sadly, I believe the poor man is now rolling in his grave, wondering why in the blazes his company is producing pro-LGBT kids TV shows, hosting Gay Pride days at their national theme parks, and refusing to denounce the slaughter of the unborn. The question that I would pose here is: How are any of these actions, particularly the latter, considered to be “family friendly?”
If indeed it requires a set of heterosexual parents to create a baby — in order to procreate the human species for further existence — and if you claim to be a pro-family and family friendly company, wouldn’t it then follow that you would naturally stand against anything that would harm or destroy this process or contradict this viewpoint? At the very least, wouldn’t you be as accepting of the pro-life perspective as the pro-choice? Or would you be so blinded by and immersed in political agendas and a childish fear of offending a relatively small minority of people that you would make a decision which contradicts the values ingrained in your company’s own public image, thereby causing yourself to appear utterly ridiculous and hypocritical? Apparently, Disney has chosen the latter.
On the third note, a company whose primary audience is little kids has chosen to openly support the bloody and gruesome extermination of the very babies who would grow up to become said children; some of the very children who would be in their theme parks, who would be enjoying their toys, who would be watching their movies. If you can find anything “family friendly” — or even remotely coherent, rational, moral, logical, or psychologically sane — about this sort of business decision, please let me know.
I certainly can’t.
In the wake of all the hubbub surrounding Alabama’s “extreme” (and wonderful) abortion law, there was another controversy that made its way to the surface in the state without garnering nearly as much attention, although it truly should have. I’m referring, of course, to the fact that Alabama Public Television refused to air a recent episode of the popular children’s program “Arthur.” In the episode titled “Mr. Ratburn and the Special Someone,” Arthur’s elementary school teacher, Mr. Ratburn, — a familiar and longtime recurring character on the show — gets married to another “male” character named Patrick. (I place “male” in quotation marks because, after all, we are talking about animated rodents here.) I took to Facebook a few days ago and briefly mentioned the episode.
Alabama Public Television ultimately declined to air it. And to be clear, that’s exactly what it was: A decline to air a specific episode of a specific program. It’s not a ban of the entire program, despite what the progressives and LGBTQ trolls across social media are spewing.
Anyway, APT Programming Director Mike McKenzie released an official statement to local news site AL.com, explaining his decision by arguing that “parents trust that their children can watch APT without their supervision.” In other words, most parents prefer to be able to step out of the room to wash the dishes or fold the laundry without having to wonder whether or not little Billy and Susie will be learning about gay marriage or sexual topics from a random government-funded cartoon. I’m sure this comes as quite a shock to leftwing extremists and LGBTQ advocates.
Sadly though, this isn’t the first time the “Arthur” franchise has pushed the limits. In the 2005 spinoff series “Postcards From Buster,” viewers were treated to an episode in which a traveling character visited some families from Vermont, two of which included lesbians. Although PBS didn’t send it out for national airtime, the episode did make its way to WGBH in Boston, where it was then aired independently. Alabama Public Television also yanked that episode and once again cited parental trust as their reason for doing so.
While I certainly respect and agree with APT’s reasoning, I tend to believe that “parental trust” is only a small issue within the larger context of what is actually taking place. It doesn’t require a doctorate in Child Psychology to see that the “Arthur” scriptwriters and producers have taken it upon themselves to intentionally indoctrinate impressionable children into believing homosexual marriage is not only culturally acceptable, but completely normal. That is the bigger picture here — the more pressing perspective — and I fear that it is being overlooked even by many conservatives and Christians in the name of “education.”
You see, those on the Left and within the LGBTQ community have spent the last several days claiming that “Arthur” is just “educating kids on an alternative form of marriage that they will encounter in the real world one day.” As far as they see it, there’s no harm in this, particularly since the cartoon isn’t visually graphic or explicit. Many alleged conservatives even echoed this sentiment on social media, firing off comments like, “It’s just a freaking cartoon, people.” and “Kids will eventually learn what gay marriage is anyway.”
But that’s not the point.
The whole problem with this line of thinking is that it completely ignores the reality that a government-funded television program is not supposed to be utilizing subliminal messaging to convince your child to think a certain way about topics reserved for adult conversation and parent-child discussions. For example: To think that two men marrying each other is normal or that it’s even an acceptable form of marriage. It isn’t normal and it doesn’t meet the definition of marriage. So to attempt to sway naive and innocent children into believing that it is, in fact, normal and acceptable, is a blatant transition from harmless education to harmful indoctrination.
And anyone with a shred of honesty knows it.
My state is currently in the news for passing a piece of legislation that declares something every person in the nation already knows whether they’re willing to admit it or not: Unborn babies are human beings and are therefore entitled to equal protection under the law. On Wednesday night, Governor Kay Ivey (who happens to be a woman) signed the Alabama Human Life Protection Act, making nearly all abortions throughout the state illegal and making the mere act of performing an abortion a felony punishable by up to 99 years in prison unless the mother’s life is in jeopardy. There are no exception clauses in the bill for cases of rape or incest, something which predictably sent the Left into unhinged pandemonium (although, to be fair, any limitations on abortion cause the Left to erupt into unhinged pandemonium.) If you don’t believe me, here are a few tweets from prominent liberal celebrities:
Of course, the Left was already in a tizzy as similar anti-abortion bills recently passed in states like Georgia, Mississippi, Kentucky, and Ohio. Missouri is also on a similar path. This was just the last straw needed to send them over the edge.
Indeed the pro-life movement has been gaining ground, making incredible strides, and winning victories across the country like never before. Alabama’s law, however, is undoubtedly the strictest one to date or, to use the Left’s own terminology, the most “extreme.” In fact, it is “too extreme” we are told. It is “so extreme” that it is “harmful to women’s health” and “a threat to women’s rights” and — as feminist actress, novelist, and scriptwriter Amber Tamblyn noted above —it’s enough to start a “war.”
To that, I have only one thing to say: So be it. If you want to start a war, we’re right here. We’ve been here all along. We’re the pro-life movement and we’ve had enough. We’ve had enough of the senseless slaughter and bloodshed. We’ve had enough of the 60 million dead bodies since Roe v. Wade. We’ve had enough of the soulless acceptance of infanticide. This war you’re talking about started 46 years ago. It started in 1973 when the Supreme Court found some magic pixie dust in the Constitution granting women the right to murder their unborn children in the name of “women’s rights” or “reproductive healthcare,” both of which are nonsensical and unconstitutional. The only casualties in this so-called “war” have been the 630,000 defenseless children butchered every year in our culture’s endless cycle of death. That is the real war, and we have been fighting it all along.
Now, as for the Alabama law being “extreme,” I personally, I couldn’t be more thrilled — both as a pro-life conservative and as a Christian — to see the Left using this word. For once we have finally made enough of a difference in this arena to cause abortion enthusiasts to label us radical fanatics (which is somewhat ironic coming from folks who openly endorse and support the genocidal massacre of babies.) Nevertheless, we’ve not only gotten their attention and ruffled some feathers, but we’ve simultaneously maintained the fundamental integrity of the pro-life belief: That unborn babies are people, that life is precious at every stage of pregnancy, and that every child has a right to life no matter the circumstances of said pregnancy (rape, incest, etc.) There is nothing outrageous or revolutionary about this viewpoint. The law here in Alabama was only “extreme” in as much that it shaped the pro-life position into a piece of tangible legislation.
If that position is “extreme,” then I am more than happy to wear that label and to wear it proudly. If it is “extreme” to want to end the decades-long bloodbath of children, then yes, I will be an extremist. The mere fact that the Left is this enraged over Alabama’s law and similar anti-abortion rulings tells you everything that you need to know about their platform and their ideology. It also tells you who the true extremists are in our society — the true supporters and arbitrators of child murder. And personally, I want to be at the other end of that extremist spectrum. I want to be at the end of the spectrum where science, morality, and Absolute Truth are on our side. After all, those are the things that not only make us right, but make us unstoppable.
In the coming days, pro-aborts and the leftwing media will undoubtedly use every play in the book to fight against the progress being made on the pro-life front. In many ways, this has already begun. A quick glance at Twitter will serve as proof. Mark my words: We will see everything from childish scare tactics to harassment to false statistics to leftist legislative pushback at the state level or even in Washington.
Mrs. Tamblyn is right about one thing: This is a war. And, as pro-lifers, we’re finally fighting it like soldiers who believe in our cause. Now is not the time for halfheartedness, dispassion, or indifference. We are finally effecting real change and making a lasting impact. If you’re unsure about where you stand on this issue, if you’re worried about losing a few Facebook friends, if you’re terrified of offending someone, or afraid of being labeled “extreme,” perhaps it would be best for you to get out of the way and remove yourself from the discussion altogether. Those of us who remain will continue to stand our ground as anti-abortion “extremists.” And we will do it for as long as it takes.