Citizen Writers Fighting Censorship by Helping Americans Understand Issues Affecting the Republic.
Diane explains how the Democrats controlling Washington State have destroyed parental rights vis a vis the public schools, sending the kids out into the streets to scream at nonexistence ICE operations. George discusses his experience with George Soros.
The modern moral argument surrounding immigration often leans heavily on Christian language while quietly discarding Christian wisdom. Appeals to compassion are constant; appeals to discernment are conspicuously absent. The result is a moral bait-and-switch: Christians are told that disagreement with expansive, consequence-free policies is equivalent to cruelty, fear, or hatred—despite Scripture never making such a claim.
What is it about Biden’s “newcomers” when they get behind the wheel of a big rigs? Since they were allowed to break the law when entering America, do they think that they have a RIGHT to ignore traffic laws, not to mention common sense safety procedures?
That was 1967. Vietnam was raging. Cadets were not being groomed for cable news panels or Senate confirmation hearings. They were being prepared for jungles, rice paddies, ambushes, and body counts. Humor, especially gallows humor, wasn’t a problem to be solved—it was a survival mechanism. The name “Fighting Cocks” wasn’t vulgar to them; it was irreverent, aggressive, and just juvenile enough to signal that these were young men who understood they were not being trained for polite society. They were being trained for war.
Moral anger is where the process begins. Unlike ordinary anger, which arises from frustration or injury, moral anger feels virtuous. It carries the intoxicating belief that one’s emotional response is proof of righteousness. When politics is framed as a moral emergency, anger stops being something to manage and becomes something to display. Neurologically, this matters. Moral anger activates threat responses and suppresses reflective thought, which is why it feels urgent, clarifying, and necessary—even when it is wildly oversimplified. Once people believe that being angry is the same as being good, reason no longer stands a chance.
One wonders where does this ridiculosity stop-and will not be shocked-when the NFL wokes further up and lectures us on social issues when they recognize other nationalities in America with their own distinctive national anthems, and start calling the “Star Bangled Banner” the “White National Anthem”
This latest round of revived nonsense over Jim Crow 2.0 is resurrected donkey dung, hysteria laden dogma from half a decade ago. You would think that even a smidgen-a modicum of respect-for their constituents would motivate new thoughts, ideas or tactics from democrat leaders
The most dangerous futures rarely arrive with explosions. They arrive with paperwork, emergency meetings, and soothing language about “stability.” The worst-case scenario facing the United States is not sudden collapse or foreign invasion. It is something far more corrosive: a loss of sovereignty by process, at the exact moment the world becomes less forgiving, more competitive, and openly hostile to American advantage.
Uniforms are not decoration. They are language. Long before an officer speaks a word or a citizen weighs compliance, the uniform announces intent, authority, and the rules that govern the encounter. In a free society—especially one built on constitutional limits—this signaling is not cosmetic. It is foundational.
Oil was a critical resource we were running out of, until we were not running out. Same with Lithium.
If Part I was about how we got here, Part II is about the uncomfortable truth most Americans are living with now: the system hasn’t collapsed—but it no longer works the way it used to. We are in the uncanny valley between order and chaos, where institutions still function, shelves are stocked, paychecks clear, and elections are held—but trust is gone, legitimacy is fractured, and nothing feels durable.
Epstein sits before the camera not as a man crushed by exposure, but as one still convinced the rules apply differently to him. He speaks in abstractions. He talks about systems, reputation, philanthropy, misunderstanding. The victims are nowhere to be found—not as people, not as faces, not as lives interrupted. They exist only as legal problems, public-relations complications, inconvenient footnotes to an otherwise impressive résumé. This is not the language of remorse. It is the language of a man who believes morality is negotiable if one is clever enough.
Americans didn’t wake up one morning and decide they wanted to live under surveillance, financial precarity, endless war, and algorithmic babysitting. This wasn’t a vote. It wasn’t even a debate. It was a process—slow, technical, wrapped in flags and fear, and sold as “temporary” at every stage.
Modern political Christianity has a dangerous habit of confusing compassion with chaos. Somewhere between yard signs and virtue-signaling sermons, the Church was told that borders are immoral, laws are unloving, and governments exist primarily to replace God as the ultimate provider. None of that is biblical. In fact, Scripture teaches almost the opposite.
What is the main opposition to requiring or teaching Western Civilization survey courses? Why is teaching the considerable and important political and social contributions Western civilization has made to the world a bad thing?
For decades, political science was the academic punchline—the major you picked when calculus broke you, engineering filtered you out, and chemistry made you cry. Everyone knew the line: If you can’t do anything else, go poli-sci. Parents nodded approvingly because “college is good for you,” administrators cashed tuition checks, and students emerged four years later fluent in theory, jargon, and grievance—but functionally incapable of building, fixing, or running anything in the real world. What no one admitted at the time was that political science didn’t just produce underemployed graduates; it quietly trained a generation in how to dismantle systems they never understood and could never rebuild.
In 2019, Bernie Sanders said, “Billionaires should not exist.” Last year, he said, “We have a government of billionaires, by billionaires, and for billionaires.”
President Obama’s “leadership” and actions that fateful day of 9 December 2016 was the stuff of legends, near unprecedented in the annals of American political history. From the standpoint of precedent, it likely ranks in the top five or so of the scummiest, most criminal (conspiracy theory) dirty trick political actions in albeit somewhat short American history.
Obamagate: The Criminal Conspiracy Of Barrack Hussein Obama Previous articles have plainly laid out the nefarious plot and plans-the lengths-that President Obama was willing to go to in his quest to undermine Trump. Obamagate pretty much took up where the infamous Spygate somewhat left off as Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC) wandered off in bafflement, muttering …
The facts were never complicated: an armed civilian inserted himself into a volatile confrontation with federal agents during an active operation. That’s not a courtroom debate. That’s a high-adrenaline environment where every decision carries lethal stakes. Rights don’t suspend physics. They don’t freeze human reaction time. They don’t override use-of-force laws that have existed for decades. You can be legally armed and still behave recklessly enough to trigger a fatal chain of events.