Biden Admin Plans To Roll Back Trump-Era Free Speech Protections In Education

/in , , , , , , , /by

‘A guilty until proven innocent standard.’

  • President Joe Biden’s administration is planning to roll back current Title IX regulations, which experts argue will revoke protections for both the accuser and the accused in sexual assault cases and threaten freedom of speech at federally funded schools. 
  • “It ultimately returns Title IX back to a guilty until proven innocent standard,” Sarah Perry, a senior legal fellow for the Heritage Foundation said.
  • “Any changes could put students’ free speech rights at risk and will only exacerbate the problem of self-censorship that has been plaguing our campuses,” Speech First executive director Cherise Trump said. 

President Joe Biden’s Department of Education (DOE) is planning to roll back Title IX due process regulations implemented by former President Donald Trump’s administration, which experts argue will revoke protections for both the accuser and the accused in sexual assault cases and threaten freedom of speech.

The Office of Civil Rights (OCR) is planning to rewrite the rules outlined in Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments that set sexual harassment standards at federally funded schools. The Biden administration’s changes would reverse 2020 due process protections that require federal K-12 and higher education schools to investigate Title IX violations in a fair and unbiased manner, which includes the right to be represented by counsel, the presumption of innocence, the ability to cross examine and to introduce witnesses, experts told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Proponents of the current standards argue they fixed problems created by former President Barack Obama’s Education Department; before the 2020 changes, instances of sexual assault and harassment were only recognized as instances of unlawful sex discrimination through regulations that were not legally binding. However, under the current standards, school districts, colleges and universities have a legal obligation to respond to such cases in a fair and unbiased manner.

Under the Trump administration’s standards, instances of sexual assault at federal schools are handled more like “quasi-judicial proceedings,” Sarah Perry, a senior legal fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told TheDCNF.

“It ultimately returns Title IX back to a guilty until proven innocent standard … as opposed to leaving it to one Title IX investigator to determine who was right and who was wrong, in a ‘he said, she said’ proceeding,” Perry said.

Speech First executive director Cherise Trump told TheDCNF that the rules changes will likely be weaponized against constitutionally protected speech, which could make students subject to “harassment” for their personal or political stances.

The current Title IX regulations that were implemented in 2020 are consistent with a Supreme Court precedent known as the Davis Standard, which concluded that “student-on-student harassment must be so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive its victims of access to a school’s educational programs or activities,” Trump explained.

“This is a pretty high threshold that protects students from being accused of harassment for simply voicing their opinions and possibly offending someone with their ideas,” Trump said. In response, universities frequently manipulate Title IX language to fit a more “broad-sweeping definition” such as “severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive…” to “severe, pervasive, or objectively offensive,” she explained.

The small change in wording allows school administrators to restrict and punish speech they believe is “offensive,” “unwanted” or “problematic,” but would not be considered harassment under current Title IX rules, she said.

“Previously, the process for adjudicating serious harassment allegations on campus had been plagued by bias, vagueness, and overreach,” Trump added. “Any changes could put students’ free speech rights at risk and will only exacerbate the problem of self-censorship that has been plaguing our campuses.”

A Republican coalition of 15 state attorneys general have expressed legal concern about the DOE’s plans to roll back the “historic” move that codified sexual harassment regulations under Title IX into law, arguing the previous standards were unworkable and unfair.

“Hundreds of successful lawsuits against schools for denying basic due process and widespread criticism from across the ideological spectrum arose from the Obama-era rules“ the statement said. “The rules also resulted in a disproportionate number of expulsions and scholarship losses for Black male students.”

The Department of Education did not respond to The DCNF’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

KENDALL TIETZ

Education reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: Republicans Say They Have Proof FBI Targeted Concerned Parents, Despite Garland Denials

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.

Did a History Teacher’s ‘Third Wave’ Nazi Social Experiment Go to Far?

/in , , , , , , , /by

Foreword by Fred Brownbill. I read this article which had in truth been sent to me by a extremely good and close Jewish friend of mine, a former Israeli Army Special Force operator. I read it and found it answered a few questions many may ask. I hope you enjoy it. I will post the link at the bottom of the blog as there are pictures etc. you may want to see.

Did a History Teacher’s ‘Third Wave’ Nazi Social Experiment Go to Far?

By Lauren Coontz | May 14, 2022

“Strength through discipline! Strength through community! Strength through action! Strength through pride! Strength through insight!” students at Cubberley High School chanted at a rally led by history teacher Ron Jones in April 1967. It was the last day of a classroom social experiment in which Jones, who taught contemporary world history at the California high school, attempted to teach his students about the perils of fascist totalitarianism.

Before initiating the experiment, Jones lectured his class on the shameful history of the Holocaust. The horrified students asked questions typical of children first learning of the atrocities: How could the German people stand by and watch as the genocide unfolded? Did no one oppose what was happening?

Jones — popular among students for his unusual teaching methods — had an idea for an experiment. He would replicate 1930s Germany by fostering a sense of entitlement among some of his students, while ostracizing others. The 2010 documentary Lesson Plan interviewed Jones and his former students, who gave first-person accounts of their experience.

On the first day of the experiment, Jones entered the classroom and wrote “strength through discipline” on the chalkboard. Jones lectured the students on the merits of disciplined adherence to a routine and asked the students to sit up straight. When answering questions, Jones directed students to stand and be as concise as possible with their answers. On the second day, Jones added “strength through community” to the chalkboard, lecturing on the benefits of working together as a team and building community spirit.

Jones labeled his new movement the “Third Wave,” relating it to how surfers ride only the third waves, known to be the strongest. He taught the students a salute — a cupped hand raised next to the head, the elbow bent at a right angle.

Jones then passed out index cards to act as proof of membership in the Third Wave, noting that anyone who received a card with a red X on the back was now an informant. These randomly selected students, whom Jones sometimes referred to as Gestapo, reported anyone who acted contrary to the Third Wave’s community values.

In Lesson Plan, former student Sherry Tousley remembers asking Mr. Jones, “Why can’t we just say what we think?” Jones banished Tousley to the library. He continued to send other students who questioned the movement to the library. When Tousley told the librarian, who’d grown up in Nazi Germany, her reason for not being in class, the librarian expressed alarm. She told young Tousley, “You can’t take this sitting down; you have to do something.”

Tousley and her father secretly began to place anti-Third Wave posters in the school’s halls. Within an hour of school’s starting the next day, the posters were already removed. Tousley named her library-banished revolutionaries “The Breakers.”

By the third day, Jones wrote “strength through action” on the chalkboard. He lectured about the merits of activism and asked students to begin recruiting others outside the classroom. “Strength through discipline and strength through community mean nothing without action to go with it,” former student Philip Neel recalled in Lesson Plan.

As the days passed, Jones noted his own growing enjoyment of the power, the control, and the students’ adoration during the experiment. He liked having 100 students salute him in the hallways.

“That’s pretty addictive,” he says in Lesson Plan.

The experiment began to take on a life of its own, and by day three, Jones was holding mock trials in the classroom from informant testimonies. Because of the student Gestapo, members of the Third Wave couldn’t trust their best friends; some of them had known each other for more than 10 years. Fights broke out in the hallways over membership status and differing opinions on Jones’ unorthodox teaching methods.

On the fourth day, Jones added “strength through pride” to the chalkboard and told the class the Third Wave was real. He explained it was a national movement to save the country from the Democrats and Republicans who could not agree on policy or how to get the country out of Vietnam. The impressionable students believed their young, charismatic, and trusted leader.

Jones then informed the class of a rally the next day for Third Wave members only, during which the new national leader behind the movement would reveal himself through a television broadcast to more than 1,000 participating high schools.

On the day of the event, photographers swarmed the auditorium — mostly friends of Jones whom he’d asked to pretend to be press. Jones stood at the front with around 200 students eagerly waiting for him to speak.

“Let us show everybody the extent of our training,” Neel remembered Jones saying.

“We all stood up at attention and belted ‘Strength through discipline; strength through community, strength through action,’” Neel said. “It started soft, and it grew louder and louder and louder.”

Jones turned the little 19-inch television on and left the room with only the snow crackling on the screen. The photographers and Jones, along with his self-appointed student bodyguards, then left the room.

“It was like a pressure cooker. We all felt like something was really wrong,” former student and producer of Lesson Plan Mark Hancock remembered.

Some students ran from the auditorium.

“I half expected those doors to be locked,” former student Steve Coniglio said. “I tore out of there,” Hancock added.

The lights came on and Jones approached the front of the room, looking disturbed. One student yelled, “There is no national leader!”

Jones, in response, snapped to a “Sieg Heil” Nazi salute and played clips of the 1933-1935 Nazi Party rally films from Nuremberg.

“What I have witnessed has really sickened me,” Neel said, remembering Jones’ speech as the realization dawned on the students.

Jones recalled telling the students, “We are no better or worse than the Germans. We are just like them.”

The repercussions of Jones’ experiment served as the inspiration behind a feature film, a theatrical production, a Netflix miniseries, an Emmy Award-winning 1981 after-school special, and two documentaries — in both English and German. The case study is often used as an example in schools to showcase the pitfalls of totalitarianism and the ease with which a civilized society can turn on itself. The experiment’s official website includes study guides and lesson plans to help teachers caution their students about the dangers of totalitarianism.

Jones has since acknowledged the danger he created in conducting the experiment. Though he advocates learning about it, he warns teachers against its implementation.

©Lauren Coontz. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES: Biden Admin Plans To Roll Back Trump-Era Free Speech Protections In Education

Trust in ‘The Science’ is polarizing along party lines

/in , , , , , , , , /by

After the last two years, how can any reasonable onlooker not have developed a healthy skepticism of the ‘experts?’

Are Americans losing faith in scientific experts? Well, according to one bombshell new poll, many are—but there’s a catch.

A new survey from the left-leaning pollster FiveThirtyEight measured Americans’ trust in the scientific community. It finds that in recent years, trust in “the scientific community” has cratered among Republicans and soared among Democrats. In the past, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents alike had similar levels of confidence in the scientific community, but these data show an intense polarization around party lines over the last few years.

In 2015, about 42 percent of Democrats said they had a “great deal” of confidence in the scientific community, and about 35 percent of Republicans agreed. After 2020, however, that number surged to more than 65 percent among Democrats and plummeted to barely 30 percent among Republicans.

The elite class’s response to this data was essentially a collective sneer at Republicans for their supposedly rube-like distrust of experts. The FiveThirtyEight article reporting the results even branded Republicans as “anti-intellectualism” and Democrats as “pro-intellectualism” due to these findings.

But this backlash misses the point. There is, of course, value in expertise and a very real need for expert input in many walks of modern life. When I go to the doctor, I do so because she has expertise in medicine that I do not. Yet a healthy skepticism of supposedly all-knowing, benevolent “experts” and would-be planners is more than warranted—the pandemic era has proven this time and time again.

Just consider how many times the “experts” got things wrong or misled the public since the COVID-19 outbreak first began.

At the very beginning, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) blocked the use of emerging COVID-19 testing technology. They literally required everyone to use their government-approved test, which later proved to be wildly inaccurate. Only belatedly and begrudgingly did the government allow private innovators to step in and produce the accurate COVID tests now in widespread use.

But that’s just the cherry on top. The “scientific community” promised Americans that if they just complied with expert advice, the pandemic could quickly be contained and life could return to normal. Remember “15 days to slow the spread?”

The “experts” went on to promote harsh government lockdowns that, as later comprehensive research has shown, had minimal public health benefits—but did destroy the economy and cause a wide range of life-threatening unintended consequences. So, too, they pushed unscientific mask mandates and security theater that has aged about as well as BlockBuster.

No single individual embodies the scientific community’s credibility crisis better than Dr. Anthony Fauci. The well-credentialed government COVID “expert” flip-flopped on countless key public health questions, from masking to closing schools to herd immunity and more. Fauci also blatantly misled the public on issues like gain-of-function research. He went from originally enjoying widespread approval and trust to largely being perceived as a hero or villain along party lines.

With all that has happened over the last two years, how can any reasonable onlooker not have developed a healthy skepticism of the “experts?”

Far from being evidence of “anti-intellectualism,” the decline in trust for the scientific community among Republicans is actually a good sign. Blind trust in the “experts” is often exploited by those who seek centralized power and control, sometimes to tragic results.

“Many of the great disasters of our time have been committed by experts,” economist Thomas Sowell observed in a 2020 interview. “You may remember [former President Franklin Delano Roosevelt]’s ‘brain trust,’ which according to later studies, prolonged the Great Depression by several years. The ‘whiz kids’ in the Pentagon who managed to mess up the Vietnam War… you can run through an impressive list of disasters brought about by men with very high IQs.” (Emphasis mine).

Of course, skepticism of the experts and the scientific community can go too far. Scientists are people, and they’re not always right—but they’re certainly not always wrong, either. In the same way that blind faith in experts leads one astray, so too can a blind rejection of everything they say.

The solution is simple. We should consider what experts have to say, but consider it critically, not accept it as gospel. Contra FiveThirtyEight’s narrative, that approach is not “anti-intellectualism.” In fact, true intellectualism requires thinking for ourselves.

AUTHOR

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and the Eugene S. Thorpe Writing Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education. He was previously a Media and Journalism Fellow at… More by Brad Polumbo

RELATED ARTICLE: Scientism is a soothing but mind-numbing narcotic

RELATED VIDEO: Ex-Merck rep Brandy Vaughan exposes the dark side of pHARMa

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

What are the Federal and Florida Laws and Criminal Penalties for Election Fraud?

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

As we approach the 2022 mid-term elections on November 8th, 2022 it is important for citizens to understand the specific federal and recently revised Florida laws, and accompanying criminal penalties, for voter and election fraud.

Why? Because voter fraud has now become a “multi-dimensional interference” in elections.

Every illegal ballot or ballot cast by an illegal voter is a clear and present danger and a threat to our national security.

This information is provided for those who many witness voter fraud and what are your responsibilities to report it to either or to both the Florida Office of Election Crimes and Security and federal authorities, i.e. the FBI.

First here is the Federal law under 52 U.S. Code § 20511 – Criminal penalties:

A person, including an election official, who in any election for Federal office—

(1)knowingly and willfully intimidates, threatens, or coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any person for—

(A) registering to vote, or voting, or attempting to register or vote;
(B) urging or aiding any person to register to vote, to vote, or to attempt to register or vote; or
(C) exercising any right under this chapter; or

(2) knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by—

(A) the procurement or submission of voter registration applications that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held; or
(B) the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held, shall be fined in accordance with title 18 (which fines shall be paid into the general fund of the Treasury, miscellaneous receipts (pursuant to section 3302 of title 31), notwithstanding any other law), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (Pub. L. 103–31, § 12, May 20, 1993, 107 Stat. 88.)

On April 25th, 2022 Florida governor Ron DeSantis signed Senate Bill (SB) 524 which created a police force dedicated to pursuing voter fraud and other election crimes.

Senate Bill (SB) 524, Election Administration, was passed and signed into law in order to ensure that the State of Florida continues to have secure and accurate elections. This legislation strengthens election security measures by requiring voter rolls to be annually reviewed and updated, strengthens ID requirements, establishes the Office of Election Crimes and Security to investigate election law violations, and increases penalties for violations of election laws.

To read more about the bill, click here.

Florida Secretary of State, Laurel M. Lee at the signing ceremony said,

“Governor DeSantis has made elections integrity a top priority from the very beginning of his administration, taking steps to ensure we invested in our elections systems, strengthened our cyber defenses, modernized equipment, updated voter rolls, and improved transparency, and we’ve seen results. As Florida’s Chief Elections Official, I share Governor DeSantis’ strong commitment to elections integrity. We want to ensure that every Floridian can have confidence that in Florida, we do elections right.”

It is incumbent on all citizens to be on the look out for election fraud.

The film 2000 Mules shows how election fraud has now become a threat to our national security and our free and fail election process. wrote,

Both The Epoch Times and D’Souza have investigated and followed the many aspects, conflicting arguments, waves of evidence, people directly involved, and more…associated with the very sophisticated, multi-dimensional interference of the last national election in November of 2020. Without a doubt the compilation of evidence substantiates the reason for the initial Joint Public Arizona Legislative Hearing in Phoenix on November 30, 2020. Arizona State Rep. Mark Finchem and Arizona State Senator Sonny Borrelli co-chaired the day-long hearing, and testimony along with cyber-evidence presented by Mayor Rudy Giuliani and a team of professionals. Epoch Times, One America News, and seven other fair and balanced news organizations provided national coverage for the ten hour hearing. I was privileged to coordinate all aspects leading up to the legislative hearing, and then thereafter. This hearing launched investigations and hearings in 16 other states.

Stealing the vote is now the greatest threat to our Constitutional Republican form of government.

Remember, every illegal vote cancels out one legal vote. Cast enough illegal votes and you can win a presidential election.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

To read more articles about voter fraud click here.

RELATED ARTICLE: Historic Judicial Watch Gerrymander Win Could Set National Precedent

RELATED TWEET:

Karine Jean-Pierre Stumped On Her First Day When Peter Doocy Asks How Raising Corporate Taxes Lowers Inflation

/in , , , , , , /by

The new White House press sec. Karine Jean-Pierre appeared to dodge a question from Fox News’ Peter Doocy about a tweet from President Joe Biden regarding inflation.

“Karine, congratulations, it’s nice to see you up there,” Doocy began. “The president’s Twitter account posted the other day if you wanna bring down inflation, let’s make sure the wealthiest corporations pay their fair share. How does raising taxes on corporations reduce inflation?”

“Um, so, are you talking about a specific tweet?” Jean-Pierre, who appeared stumped, asked.

Doocy then referenced a May 13 tweet from Biden that said “you want to bring down inflation? Let’s make sure the wealthiest corporations pay their fair share.”

“Look, we have talked about, um, we have talked about this past year, about making sure that the wealthiest among us are paying their fair share, and that is important to do. That is something the president has been working on everyday when we talk about inflation and lowering costs, so it’s very important that as we’re seeing costs rise, as we’re talking about how to, you know, build an America that’s equal for everyone and doesn’t leave anyone behind, that is an important part of that as well,” Jean-Pierre said.

“But how does raising taxes on corporations lower the cost of gas, the cost of a used car, the cost of food for everyday Americans?” Doocy pressed.

“So I think we encourage those who have done very well, especially those who care about climate change, to support a fairer tax code that doesn’t charge manufacturers workers, cops, builders a higher percentage of their earnings, that the most fortunate people in our nation, and not let that stand in the way of reducing energy costs and fighting an existential problem if you think about it, that is an example. To support basic collective bargaining rights as well.”

“But look, by not, without, having a fairer tax code, which is what I’m talking about, then all, like, manufacture workers, cops, you know, it’s not fair for them to have to pay higher taxes than the folks who are not paying taxes at all,” she continued.

“But what does that have to do with inflation?” Doocy asked. “The President said if you wanna bring down inflation let’s make sure the wealthiest corporations pay their fair share. Jeff Bezos came out and tweeted about that, he said ‘the newly created disinformation board should review this tweet.’ Would you be okay with that?”

“Look, it’s not a huge mystery why one of the wealthiest individuals on earth, right, opposes an economic agenda that is for the middle class, that cuts some of the biggest costs families face, fights inflation for the long haul, right, and that’s what we’re talking about, that’s why we’re talking about lowering inflation here, and adds to the historic deficit reduction the president is achieving by asking the richest taxpayers and corporations to pay their fair share. That’s what we’re talking about,” Jean-Pierre said.

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos criticized the aforementioned tweet, arguing that “misdirection doesn’t help the country.”

“The administration tried hard to inject even more stimulus into an already over-heated, inflationary economy and only Manchin saved them from themselves. Inflation is a regressive tax that most hurts the least affluent.”

Inflation reached its quickest uptick since December 1981 after soaring 8.5% in March.

AUTHOR

BRIANNA LYMAN

Reporter. Follow Brianna on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘That’s Not How You’re Going To Solve Inflation’: CNBC Host Calls Out Pete Buttigieg To His Face

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

Twitter Senior Engineer Says Company is ‘Commie as F*ck’ and ‘Does Not Believe in Free Speech’

/in , , , , , , , /by

*CLICK HERE TO TWEET OUT THE VIDEO*

Project Veritas published explosive undercover footage tonight featuring one of Twitter’s senior engineers discussing the dynamics behind internal reactions to the acquisition of the tech company by business magnate, Elon Musk.

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

  • Siru Murugesan, Twitter Senior Engineer: “Twitter does not believe in free speech… Elon believes in free speech.”
  • Murugesan: “Our jobs are at stake, he [Elon Musk] is a capitalist and we weren’t really operating as capitalists, more like very socialist. Like we’re all like commie as f*ck.”
  • Murugesan on Twitter offering equal access to both parties: “I don’t know if two parties can truly coexist on one platform.”
  • Murugesan on how Twitter employees are dealing with the changes at Twitter: “They’re like, ‘this would be my last day if it happens…’ a lot has changed. Like, we’re stress eating a lot. Like, we’re all worried for our jobs.”

You can watch the full video HERE.

Murugesan also explained how Twitter employees did all they could to “revolt against” Musk’s takeover of the company.

“We did all we could to like, revolt against it. A lot of employees were revolting against it, but at the end of the day, the Board of Directors have the say.”

He added that he thought the board “… acted on their best interests ‘cause they didn’t want to get sued…they’re always looking out for themselves at the end of the day.”

At the time of this writing, Twitter has yet to respond to a request for comment.

*CLICK HERE TO TWEET OUT THE VIDEO*

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

Poll: 75 Percent of Americans Say Country Is on ‘Wrong Track’

/in , , , , , , /by

Now we know that 25% of the country is certifiably nuts.

From the story: NBC noted that the poll is the fourth consecutive survey where the “wrong track” figure was above 70 percent and only the fifth time in 34 years that the “wrong track” number reached 75%. The last time it was that high was during the Great Recession in 2008, followed by the 2013 government shutdown (Daily Wire).

Meet The Press: NBC NEWS POLL: Just 16% say the country is headed in the right direction, while 75% say we’re on the wrong track. It’s a truism that voters’ views about the economy begin to harden in May. If that theory holds, the Democrats are in serious trouble right now (Twitter).

Three Out Of Four Americans Say Country Is ‘On The Wrong Track’: Poll

By  John Rigolizzo •    DailyWire.com

Three-fourths of Americans say the country is on the wrong track, according to a new poll.

The NBC News poll of 1,000 U.S. adults, conducted between May 5-7, found that 75% of Americans said the country was “off on the wrong track,” while just 16% said the United States was “headed in the right direction.”

NBC noted that the poll is the fourth consecutive survey where the “wrong track” figure was above 70 percent and only the fifth time in 34 years that the “wrong track” number reached 75%. The last time it was that high was during the Great Recession in 2008, followed by the 2013 government shutdown.

Read more.

RELATED VIDEO: TRUMP: ‘Call Me Conservative. Call Me Liberal. I Want a Border.’

REALTED ARTICLES:

Rasmussen: Majority of Americans Want Abortion Decided by Voters, Not Courts

Netflix Memo to Employees: Quit if Offended by Our Content

Sexual harassment investigation launched into 3 middle schoolers’ WRONG USE OF PRONOUNS

New York Times Falsely Claims Israel Responded ‘Aggressively’ to ‘Palestinian’ Rioters

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

‘All Of It Is Poison’: Tucker Carlson Warns Political Leaders Will Use ‘Race Politics’ To ‘Make Us Hate Each Other’

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Fox News host and Daily Caller co-founder Tucker Carlson warned Monday of the potential “destruction” political leaders will cause by pushing “race politics.”

Carlson said Democrats created a “coordinated campaign” to blame the Saturday shooting in Buffalo, New York, on their political opponents, and are using it to justify the restriction of “hate speech” to silence anyone who disagrees with them politically.

“Professional Democrats had begun a coordinated campaign to blame those murders on their political opponents. ‘They did it,’ they said immediately. Payton Gendron was the heir to Donald Trump, they told us. Trumpism committed mass murder in Buffalo. And for that reason, it followed logically, we must suspend the First Amendment. … So what is hate speech? Well, it’s speech that our leaders hate. So, because a mentally ill teenager murdered strangers, you cannot be allowed to express your political views out loud.”

The Daily Caller co-founder then pointed to President Joe Biden’s planned visit to the shooting location Tuesday, alleging the president will likely “attack” the Republican Party when addressing the incident that killed 10 people. Carlson read a report by Politico alleging Biden told his aides he views the Republican Party as “an existential threat to the nation’s democracy.”

“People who disagree with Joe Biden, according to Joe Biden, are now [an] ‘existential threat to the nation’ like al Qaeda or climate change. A threat that by definition is so profound we must declare war upon it if we’re to survive. Now, keep in mind, this threat that Biden is referring to is you. He’s talking about his fellow Americans. No president has ever spoken like this, ever.”

Carlson then warned that Biden will use race politics to his political advantage while addressing the shooting that “dehumanizes” people and erases the primary focus on “initiative and decency.”

“But the most painful and destructive of all, Biden is likely use racial wounds in order to make his point,” he continued. “There is no behavior worse than this. All race politics is bad, no matter what flavor those politics happen to be. No race politics is better than any other. All of it is poison. Race politics subsumes the individual into the group. It erases people, it dehumanizes them.”

“Race politics always makes us hate each other and always in a very predictable way,” Carlson added.

Carlson further noted it is race politics that leads to the emergence of “white identity politics,” for which political leaders only have themselves to blame.

“Race politics always leads to violence and death,” Carlson said. He cited identity politics as the leading cause of genocide that killed approximately 800,000 people in Rwanda. He said the U.S. should emulate Rwanda’s response by eliminating the focus on racial identifications and instead form a “colorblind meritocracy.”

“There is only one answer to rising racial tension, and that’s to de-escalate,” he said. “We have a moral duty to do this because all people have equal, moral value no matter what they look like. All lives matter, period. That’s not the determination of the U.S. government, that’s the determination of God and it’s true.”

The host concluded saying the nation’s political leaders are leading Americans down the path of “destruction” by blocking the ability to move toward a meritocracy.

AUTHOR

NICOLE SILVERIO

Media reporter. Follow Nicole Silverio on Twitter @NicoleMSilverio

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘It Infuriates Me!’: Megyn Kelly Eviscerates Media Blaming Tucker Carlson For Buffalo Shooting

‘Would’ve Shot Me’: Black Man Who Bought The Alleged Buffalo Shooter A Drink Speaks Out

Biden To Visit Buffalo Following Mass Shooting, Avoided Waukesha

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

Clarence Thomas: ‘I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them’

/in , , , , , , , /by

“You would never visit Supreme Court Justice’s houses when things didn’t go our way. We didn’t throw temper tantrums. It is incumbent on us to always act appropriately and not to repay tit for tat.” – Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas

Clarence Thomas: ‘Tremendously bad’ Supreme Court leak shatters public trust

by Jacob Knutson, Axios, May 14, 2022:

Justice Clarence Thomas said Friday at an event in Dallas that the Supreme Court has been changed by the leak of a draft decision that would overturn Roe v. Wade earlier this month, calling it “tremendously bad,” according to audio obtained by Reason Magazine….

“You can’t have a civil society, a free society, without a stable legal system. You can’t have one without stability and things like property or interpretation and impartial judiciary,” he added.

“And the institution that I’m a part of, if someone said that one line of one opinion would be leaked by anyone in you would say that, ‘Oh, that’s impossible. No one would ever do that.’”

“There was such a belief in the rule of law, belief in the court, a belief in what we were doing, that that was verboten. It was beyond anyone’s understanding, or at least anyone’s imagination, that someone would do that. And look where we are, where now that trust or that belief is gone forever.”

“When you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I’m in, it changes the institution fundamentally. You begin to look over your shoulder. It’s like kind of an infidelity that you can explain it, but you can’t undo it.”

“I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them. And then I wonder when they’re gone, or they are destabilized, what we will have as a country. And I don’t think that the prospects are good if we continue to lose them.”

Thomas also criticized recent peaceful pro-abortion protests outside of justices’ homes, saying he believes conservatives would have never done the same.

“You would never visit Supreme Court Justice’s houses when things didn’t go our way. We didn’t throw temper tantrums. It is incumbent on us to always act appropriately and not to repay tit for tat.”

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED ARTICLES:

Justice Clarence Thomas Calls Out The Media In Rare Public Appearance

Washington Post: ‘Roe’s impending reversal is a 9/11 attack on America’s social fabric’

Bezos Just Roasted Biden For The Third Time In Four Days

‘Not Just Women That Are Getting Pregnant’: Abortion Activists Sound Off At ‘Bans Off Our Bodies’ March

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

Biden reverses Trump withdrawal, sends U.S. troops back to Somalia

/in , , , , , , /by

Is it really America’s job to solve all the world’s problems? What difference can fewer than 500 troops make, anyway? With America suffering from so very many problems at home, is this really the best use of the nation’s resources? Or is it all just to make sure that the military-industrial complex continues to show a profit for all concerned?

Biden approves plan to redeploy US troops to Somalia

by Natasha Bertrand CNN, May 16, 2022:

(CNN)President Joe Biden has approved a request by the Pentagon to redeploy US troops to Somalia in an effort to counter the terrorist group al-Shabaab, a senior administration official said on Monday.

The move reverses a decision by President Donald Trump to withdraw all US troops from the country in 2020.

The US will reposition US forces in east Africa and move to restore a US military presence in Somalia in consultation with the Somali government, the official told reporters on Monday. The official said “under 500” troops will be sent back into the country but declined to provide a precise number. He emphasized, however, that the Pentagon “will not be restoring the full contingent of operators present in Somalia before” the previous administration’s withdrawal, which was about 750 military personnel.

The official described the Trump administration’s withdrawal as “abrupt and sudden,” and said that al-Shabaab “has unfortunately only grown stronger” since then.

“We have seen, regrettably, clear evidence that al Shabaab has the intent and capability to target Americans,” the official said, noting that the group had killed over a dozen Americans in east Africa in recent years, including three at a US military base in Kenya in early 2020….

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED ARTICLES:

Video: Robert Spencer discusses what is said about him, and The Critical Qur’an

US intelligence community launches review following catastrophic failures in Ukraine and Afghanistan

Sweden: Shia imams conduct temporary marriages as cover for prostitution

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

Man Who Uncovered Hunter Biden Laptop to Rally with Oklahoma U.S. Senate Candidate

/in , , , , , , /by

The Delaware computer repair shop owner who blew the whistle on Hunter Biden’s “Laptop From Hell,” is coming to Oklahoma for two rallies with U.S. Senate candidate Jackson Lahmeyer on May 21st in Tulsa and Oklahoma City. 

TULSA, Oklahoma/PRNewswire/ — Jackson Lahmeyer, the Businessman and Pastor who is seeking to unseat establishment GOP Senator James Lankford in Oklahoma will be feature alongside John Paul Mac Isaac, the whistleblower who gained national prominence in the lead up to the 2020 election when he sounded the alarm about the content he discovered on a laptop left at his computer repair shop by Hunter Biden. Lahmeyer has previously appeared at rallies and secured the endorsements of Trump advisors Roger Stone and General Michael Flynn.

John Paul Mac Isaac first went to the FBI with the hard drive from Hunter’s “laptop from hell,” but was dismayed when he realized that the Bureau did not want anything to do with the laptop President Biden’s son abandoned at Mac Isaac’s computer repair shop. When the contents were eventually leaked, the mainstream media, Democrats, and their allies in Big Tech, claimed it was all a hoax and “Russian disinformation or propaganda.” Just a few weeks ago, the New York Times confirmed that the laptop was indeed real and the contents were not a hoax.

“To have someone as courageous and brave as Mr. Mac Isaac in Oklahoma to support our campaign is a great honor. When he came forward with the laptop from hell, he was doxxed and harassed by powerful billion-dollar media conglomerates. This led to threats against his livelihood and his personal safety. I think it’s very important for Oklahomans to hear his story. When I am elected to the United States Senate, I will fight for more expansive and responsive protections for whistleblowers like John Paul Mac Isaac, who is an American hero. Whether you are exposing corporate greed or government corruption, you should be afforded respect and protection from the United States, even when you are exposing the wayward son of a former Vice President who was at the time campaigning for President,” explained Lahmeyer.

There will be two rallies with Mac Issac and Lahmeyer on May 21st, the first occurring at 2pm in Oklahoma City and then another at 6pm at Sheridan Church in Tulsa (4121 S. Sheridan Road). You can get tickets here.

Does Biden’s $5B Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Plan Put Government Totally in Control of Charging Your Car?

/in , , , , , /by

Recently we received a link to a study on all electric vehicle (EV) charging stations (EVSEs) in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The study was titled “Reliability of Open Public Electric Vehicle Direct Current Fast Chargers” done by David Rempel, Carleen Cullen, Mary Matteson Bryan and Gustavo Vianna Cezar from the Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley. The study found,

“the cable was too short to reach the EV inlet for 4.9% of the EVSEs and 22.7% of EVSEs that were non-functioning were unresponsive or unavailable screens, payment system failures, charge initiation failures, network failures, or broken connectors…This level of functionality appears to conflict with the 95 to 98% uptime reported by the EV service providers (EVSPs) who operate the EV charging stations.”

So, 27% of the EVSEs had serious enough issues that you could not charge your EV.

The Biden administration wants to create the ‘backbone of [a] national charging network’ for electric vehicles. The Biden administration has said it will make a $5 billion investment to build electric vehicle charging stations across the country by 2030 in a bid to ease U.S. dependence on gas-powered cars.

Biden has set a goal of a national network of 500,000 public charging stations in place by 2030, and administration officials say over 100,000 exist already.

However, this 100,000 EVSEs is not true. It is misinformation.

According to Satista.com as of January 13th, 2022 there are 46,290 fast charging stations (EVSEs) and 113,558 home charging outlets in the U.S.

California has a combined 41,300 public and private power outlets or 38% of those in the U.S.

PodPoint.com reports:

The time it takes to charge an electric car can be as little as 30 minutes or more than 12 hours. This depends on the size of the battery and the speed of the charging point.

  • A typical electric car (60kWh battery) takes just under 8 hours to charge from empty-to-full with a 7kW charging point.
  • Most drivers top up charge rather than waiting for their battery to recharge from empty-to-full.
  • For many electric cars, you can add up to 100 miles of range in ~35 minutes with a 50kW rapid charger.
  • The bigger your car’s battery and the slower the charging point, the longer it takes to charge from empty to full.

QUESTION: How long will it take to charge an 18 wheeler and does it make sense to have these drivers sitting around drinking coffee waiting for their trucks to get charged? How much will this increase our costs for food and other manufactured products?

Will Biden’s Building EVSEs Kill Small Business?

Currently more than 95% of the 145,000 gas stations in the U.S. are privately owned and operated by members of the National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS).

According to Statista.com:

United States’ gasoline station sector recorded a gross output of approximately 101.4 billion U.S. dollars in 2020.

[ … ]

The U.S. automotive industry represented some 14.5 million light vehicle sales in 2020, with the majority having gasoline ICEs. Motor vehicle gasoline consumption had steadily increased through 2019, reaching over 146 billion gallons in that year. Motor gasoline is by far the energy source in highest demand in the U.S. transportation sector, dwarfing distillate fuel oil by over seven quadrillion British thermal units in 2020. Carbon dioxide emission levels of light-duty vehicles, the mode of transport projected to use the most energy in 2020, have lowered in the past few years. Pickup trucks, the vehicles with the steepest emission levels, went from emitting some 470 grams of CO2 per mile in 2017 to 460 grams per mile in 2020. Other vehicle types recorded similar drops.

The Association For Convenience & Fuel Retailing was founded August 14, 1961, as the National Association of Convenience Stores. Today it is an international trade association representing more than 2,100 retail and 1,600 supplier company members.

The American Petroleum Institute (API) reports:

The NACS, the association for convenience and fuel retailing, reports that there are more than 145,000 fueling stations across the United States. 127,588 of these stations are convenience stores selling fuel. The rest are gas-only stations, grocery stores selling fuel, marinas, etc.

According to the latest information, the refiners own less than 5% of the 145,000 retail stations. When a station bears a particular refiner’s brand, it does not mean that the refiner owns or operates the station. The vast majority of branded stations are owned and operated by independent retailers licensed to represent that brand. According to the National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS), more than 60% of the retail stations in the US are owned by an individual or family that owns a single store. Through various branding agreements, approximately 36% of the retail stations in the US sell fuel under API members’ brands. See U.S. Service Station Outlets Summary.

QUESTION: Why do we need 500,000 EVSEs when we only need 145,000 gas stations to refuel the millions of cars, trucks, SUVs and 18 wheelers on the road today?

Why aren’t we using retail gas stations to create EVSEs? Given that it can take hours to charge your EV it would be convenient to have these charging stations co-located with convenience stores. Don’t you think?

API also noted “Many countries assess higher tax rates and use the revenue for their general fund budget. For example, ten countries in Europe, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom assess more than $3 in taxes on every gallon of gasoline, according to the Tax Foundation.”

At some point the government, now fully dependent on gasoline taxes to build and maintain our road and highway structure, will have to tax the heck out of EVSEs and home charging units. Don’t you think?

So, let’s look at California’s San Francisco Bay area charging stations. If according to the Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley 27% of the EVSEs don’t work properly, what does that say if the government was the sole owner and operated 500,000 EVSEs? That might mean:

  1. Approximately 135,000 of these EVSEs would not be fully functional.
  2. Electric companies or EV manufacturers like Tesla, like refiners of gasoline and diesel, would no longer be able to partner with locally owned convenience stores or build independently owned EVSEs.
  3. The National Association of Convenience Stores would not own and operate the EVSEs.
  4. Many of the current gas stations would go out of business meaning you can’t refuel your car, truck, tractor, lawnmower, SUV, or 18 wheelers.
  5. The government would be in total control of the vast majority of charging stations nationwide, shutting out small business owners.

The Bottom Line

Whenever government gets into any business be it healthcare, public education or building and operating EVSEs they will find a way to screw things up.

For example there is a group called Pecan Street that gets grants for its “Centre for Race, Energy & Climate Justice.” Get it? Government and the private sector studying the links between race, energy and climate justice. Who would have thought? Hmmmmm.

Do we really want organizations like Pecan Street and the federal government using our tax dollars to create a national network of EVSEs to insure climate justice?

I think not. The private sector and open market can best deal with how we fuel or recharge our cars, trucks, SUVs and commercial vehicles.

Get government out of the charging business or, like California, we will see it fail 27% of the time.

Put your trust in the private sector, not big government.

I can see a future that if you don’t get vaxxed-up you can’t get charged-up. Prove me wrong.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

How Fast Can You Charge Your Electric Car at Home?

Colossal Failure: EV Charging Stations Face Mechanical Problems – Over Half Inoperable in 1 Area

Tesla May Buy Mining Company That Ruins the Natural Environment in Order to Build ‘Green’ Electric Cars

RELATED TWEET:

Give It a Rest, Bernie

/in , , , /by

Bernie Sanders reintroduced Medicare for All legislation in the Senate, recently.  He should give it a rest.  His single payer proposal hasn’t gotten any better with time.  Witnesses and Republican senators tore it to shreds in a hearing last week.

Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin pointed to the government’s “miserable failures” on testing, restrictions on treatment, and its other sorry responses to the COVID pandemic. “Why in the world would anybody put government more in charge of health care?,” he asked. He said there will be more bureaucracy, not less, if the government takes over all healthcare, producing less innovation and higher costs.

Sen. Rick Scott of Florida said Bernie’s plan would abolish Medicare and private insurance.  Worse, it would “have the federal government deciding which procedures you get and when you get them. Think about that…Do you want the government to make these choices for you?”

A healthcare policy expert testified Bernie’s plan to pay doctors and hospitals 30 to 40 percent less would force many physician practices and hospitals to close or significantly cut back on services (p.11).  If you think we have a doctor shortage now, just wait. She further testified Bernie’s plan would also cut access to new medications and pull the rug out from under new drug development, including new cancer treatments (p.13). She noted single payer supporters keep saying nationalized healthcare would cut administrative costs, but claims would still need to be processed which means the administrative cost differential would largely be a wash (p. 13).

A budget expert testified the additional cost of Bernie’s 2017 plan, over and above current federal healthcare spending, would be around $38 trillion in the first 10 years (p.2).  If you add in current spending, the total cost is more like $60 trillion (p.3). You could double all personal and corporate income taxes, and it still wouldn’t be enough to pay for single payer (p.2).   As I’ve commented before, there’s never enough money to pay for single payer.  The National Health Service in Britain is always running out of money and asking for more.

The arguments for and against single payer haven’t changed much in years.  Arguments against single payer coming back around recently include it would raise taxes thereby reducing GDP and the incentives to work and invest; produce massive fraud; and lead inescapably to rationing and long wait times as other countries have found out.  Most insidious of all, though, is how single payer will completely politicize all of medicine.  The kind of care you get will depend on who you know in high places.  Care will be doled out to privileged classes, perhaps even by race and ethnicity. The federal government is already moving in that direction, now requiring private insurers selling Medicare Advantage plans or Obamacare plans through government exchanges to report race and ethnicity data beginning in 2023 (p. 1).

Bernie and his supporters know all about these problems, but never talk about them.   All you get from them is happy talk.  That should make you deeply suspicious of their motives. Do they really want better healthcare for all, or are they just looking for a way to control the people, as a congressman let slip during the Obamacare fight?

When Bernie and other single payer supporters stop the happy talk and start addressing the very real problems their proposals will cause, then I might start to listen.  Until then, my message to them is ‘in the future, you will control no one and be happy.’

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

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Biden blames crippling inflation rate on ‘MAGA King’ Donald Trump

Light at the end of the American tunnel will shine in November

/in , , , , , /by

Originally published by Arab News 

Nov. 8, 2022, is the magic date for the US, which suffers from broad divisions politically, economically and socially due to the rise of the radical left movement and its theories that are very different from the nature of American society.

With the 2022 Congressional midterm elections six months away, key decisive issues have not changed much.

The latest NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist national poll showed that Republican candidates have a 47 percent advantage over the Democrat’s 44 percent nationally.

“On the economy, controlling inflation, crime, national security, and gun policy, pluralities of Americans perceive the Republican Party to be the party which would be better able to handle these issues. Americans express these views as President Joe Biden’s job approval rating remains upside down. His ratings on the economy and the crisis in Ukraine take on water,” the poll read.

The poll found that three times as many independents believe that Republicans would better control inflation than Democrats. These numbers should concern the Democrats since 34 Senate seats, and all 435 House seats, are up for grabs.

Commenting on the poll, director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, Lee M. Miringoff, said that the road to the midterms has the Republican Party in the driver’s seat.

Traditionally, the president’s party loses seats in the midterms, and it seems that President Joe Biden will not be the exception in November. Back in 2018, Republicans lost 41 seats to the Democrats under former President Donald Trump, while in 2014, Democrats led by former President Barack Obama lost 63 seats in the House of Representatives.

Just as many predicted that the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan would not be a factor in the elections, the war in Ukraine will not help Biden and his party either.

The American memory is short, and their preoccupation with essential issues that affect their daily lives directly removes Ukraine from the voters’ list of critical problems.

The last four monthly Gallup polls showed that the country’s most critical problems are inflation at 17 percent, the economy in general at 11 percent, and fuel/oil prices at 4 percent. Even though the left blames the Russian invasion for inflation and high prices, the economic troubles had begun a long time before, and the Biden administration’s stimulus package has further worsened the financial situation.

Neither Democrats nor Biden’s leadership in the economy can be trusted. A bad economy leads to insufficient security.

According to a report published by the Council on Criminal Justice, homicides in 2020 were up 44 percent from 2019, and that number rose by 5 percent in 2020. The drastic increase in violent crimes in 2021 is an important issue that worries liberals since most of the high crime rate cities are governed by Democrats. However, the same topic will be used by the left to push for gun control laws in the country.

Read more.

AUTHOR

Dalia Al-Aqidi

Senior Fellow.

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Just Single-Handedly Made the Gas Crisis Worse

/in , , , , , , , /by

Americans are already struggling under the weight of crippling inflation, from skyrocketing gas prices to exorbitant grocery bills. And even if few Americans thought the Biden Administration had a plan to combat these things—especially considering the fact that their spending and regulatory problems directly created them—I’m betting most Americans didn’t think the President would take obvious actions to immediately make things worse either.

Yet, that is what he did this week, canceling one of the most important oil and gas leases at the country’s disposal in the middle of the night. This action will halt the potential to drill for oil in over 1 million acres on the Cook Inlet in Alaska, marking a devastating loss for those trying to increase the oil supply in the country.

A top official with the American Petroleum Institute, the country’s largest oil and gas trade association, called the cancellation of the Cook Inlet lease “another example of the administration’s lack of commitment to oil and gas development in the US.”

According to The Hill, “canceling the sale would be in keeping with political promises President Joe Biden made in the name of halting global warming.”

Not only did the Biden Administration cut this lease, they also stopped two other pending leases in the Gulf of Mexico claiming there were “conflicting court rulings that impacted work on these proposed lease sales.”

This is a problem of basic Econ 101. High prices clearly demonstrate the country needs more oil and gas. But instead of opening up the supply chain, the Biden Administration continues to restrict it in numerous ways—proxy wars in Russia, trade wars, and now canceling leases that would allow us to develop our own resources.

Why are they doing this? No one can say for certain, but Public Choice Theory would suggest that Biden and co. care more about their political objectives and keeping their special interest groups happy (in this case, climate lobbyists) than about the lives their policies govern.

And make no mistake, high gas prices are no small issue as some elitists on the left will try to claim.

Behind skyrocketing gas prices are mothers who can’t get to their second job, parents who have to pick between transportation and food for their kids, women stuck in unsafe situations with abusive partners…the list could go on.

The point is, in public policy there are always trade-offs, something many progressives seem to refuse to acknowledge.

Do we want to take care of the earth and preserve our resources? Of course. Any good capitalist should be concerned with scarcity and preserving such things. But we have to balance that goal with the real lives that can be harmed if we go too far in one direction or the other. As the economist Thomas Sowell said, “there are no solutions, there are only trade-offs.”

So rather than blindly attacking fossil fuel development, we need to look for policies that help balance both goals—the desire to preserve the earth and its resources and the desire to make goods and services cheap and readily available so more people can be lifted out of poverty and enjoy a higher standard of living.

When it comes to the environment, there are free-market policies that can be pursued while also ensuring we still have the supplies to meet the basic needs of the humans already in existence. For instance, scientists are already finding ways to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere and turn it into valuable commodities like carbon nanotubes or even back into coal. And the market is rapidly providing more fuel-efficient cars and planes. Everywhere we look we can find ways the market is already providing better solutions to climate change.

Meanwhile, governments continue to be the biggest polluters.

The Biden Administration is willing to throw our citizens under the bus so they can reach a false, net-zero emissions utopia. But the reality is, we don’t have to have $5/gallon gas in order to save the planet.

AUTHOR

Hannah Cox

Hannah Cox is the Content Manager and Brand Ambassador for the Foundation for Economic Education.

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