Minimum wage Politics Progressives Truth

Stop It, America. Politicians Can Not Make Our Lives Better

Rod Thomson

Here’s the deal, if you are looking to this president, or you were looking to the past president, or you are looking to a future president to make your life better you’re on a fool’s errand. It was the furthest thing from the minds of the Founders and Framers that any individual should have such power and sway.

If you are looking to Congress — this Congress or a past Congress or a future Congress — to make your life better you’re on a fool’s errand. It was maybe the second furthest thing from the minds of the Founders and Framers that any part of the federal government could so greatly impact your life.

There is very little government can do to make your life better. There are quite a few things government can do to make your life worse. (See: All of history.) Most of your problems in life are going to be up to you to solve, to improve or at least to deal with. 

For instance, if you want to make more money you’re going to either have to work harder and/or longer, or get training or education to get a better paying job. And if you keep making the same decisions you’ve made all along, and you’re 35 and stuck working at Walmart at minimum wage, there’s nothing the government can or should do for you. You need to change your choices to change your future. If the government steps in to improve your future for you, it inevitably begins a cascade of events that makes many lives worse, including yours eventually.

When governments try to solve poverty by giving poor people a little more money each month, they actually end up keeping them subsistent on government largesse and locked in a hopeless cycle. This has been demonstrated for 50 years now. And the government forcibly takes other people’s money to do it; lose-lose.

The best overall situation is when we can all act freely; free people exchanging goods and services for money freely in markets that are both free and competitive. That simple, relational structure has lifted, literally, billions out of poverty in the past 40 years. Government’s primary role was to stay out of the way, with a small role in making sure there were no monopolies and there were courts to settle contractual disputes.

This is well-documented through our history, but it is not well-known among our population. Schools, universities and the media are the primary culprits in purveying this ignorance. There may be a role for a temporary safety net, but because politicians are politicians it always grows, such as what we have now with enormous entitlements and transfer payments.

But promising more giveaways often garners votes. Some would say buys votes.

So naturally, we have a lot of politicians saying that they can, and will, make things more fair for you, make things better for you and give you this, that and everything you want. Just vote for them. Well not to burst your bubble but there’s nothing they can give you except that they take it from someone else, through taxes now or taxes later to pay off deficit spending now. And eventually they’ll be taking it from you, too, unless you stay at the bottom in poverty, in which case the government will in due time run out of other peoples’ money and then you are lost, too. More lose-lose.

As Margaret Thatcher said: “The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

The better way, the only proven way, is the collective intelligence of hundreds of millions of Americans, and even billions of people around the world. This is almost infinitely greater than any group of central-planning politicians. (See Russia’s five-year plans, East Germany’s junk new cars, Maoist China’s everything, Venezuela’s oil.) 

So when you hear all these politicians promising a plan for this and a plan for that, trillions here and trillions there, remember that the Great Society government plan to end poverty starting in the late 1960s under President Lyndon Johnson resulted in the transfer of $22 trillion from working Americans to poor Americans. It was not charity. It was government force, benefitting politicians along the way, but no one else. The result was that as of today, there is virtually no change in the poverty rate. More welfare programs will have the same net effect until all of the money is gone.

No politician is going to improve your life. That is going to be up to you and your choices. The American dream does not come from government; it relies on a constrained government. It then comes via each American exercising their individual God-given natural rights in liberty.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Progressives Socialism Truth

EXPLAINED: Why Democrats Are Generationally Blind To The Spectacular Failure of Socialism

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” – Margaret Thatcher

In full deference to the Iron Lady, that’s not the only problem. That is a functional reality of socialism’s practical doom. But at its core, socialism is a violation of elemental human nature that desires to build, innovate, expand and improve life — the same nature that drives parents to be always working towards a better future for their children.

Socialism denies that elemental nature and so not only dooms itself to eventual self-destruction, but creates enormous misery en route. This has been demonstrated in every country where it has been substantially put in place, from the Soviet Union to Cuba to Vietnam to Cambodia to Angola to Venezuela.

Yet for many — from college campuses to Reddit fever swamps to now much of the Democratic Party’s leadership — socialism still holds a dreamy-eyed allure. They passionately to angrily believe the world would be dramatically better if socialism supplanted capitalism. This defies not only human nature, but also all historical experience. And yet it persists at amazing and growing levels.

The reason: Democrats don’t work on an operational assumption of immutable human nature, or even increasingly in the reality of science. They operate in an arena that combines emotional utopianism (socialism) with just flat emotional make-believe (there are 112 genders.)

Communism, the maturity of socialism, officially rejects God, because the supreme deity is the State. It is hard to against the idea that the leadership of the Democratic Party gives some lip-service to God and church, but philosophically has jettisoned anything remotely tethered to the Christianity of the Bible. Kill God and then create a new “reality” based in what feels good.

This is a continual trend on the philosophical left.

So let’s start with defining socialism, no small task really because part of the current Democratic/media task is to redefine socialism as having nothing to do with every social failure that has existed in history — which is every attempt at socialism in history.

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” — Winston Churchill

Socialist ideology defined

Wikipedia has a fair if somewhat dry definition of socialism, summarized as being a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and control of every aspect of production. Social ownership includes public, collective, or cooperative ownership.

Means of production is the key. The means of production is essentially anything that is not human that is part of an economy. In socialism, the means of producing everything are in the hands of the “everyone.” There are no individual property rights, there is no individual ownership. Everything is owned by the collective, the hive, an economic Star Trek Borg 100 percent antithetical to the founders and the Constitution.

Socialism grew out of pre-Marxist ideologies that saw the inherent problems with feudalism. But it’s popularity exploded with Karl Marx and others as the industrial revolution took hold in the 1800s and abuses of the low-end labor pool grew exponentially at the same time wealth did. Socialism was a response to that by upending the entire system.

People power. But not person power.

Merriam-Webster defines socialism as “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.” Google defines socialism as “a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.”

“Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” Alexis de Tocqueville

What it looks like in reality

The Russian Revolution of 1917 led to the largest experiment in socialism. The doey-eyed utopianism of Trotsky led to the authoritarianism of Lenin which led to the brutal tyranny of Stalin and the soul-crushing Communist Soviet Union.

That story is pretty well known but also a well-worn path for every socialist experiment, albeit it was on maybe the largest scale.

Cuba was the people’s revolution heralding in a communistic state that was ruled with an iron fist by Fidel Castro, just as Stalin, Khrushchev and the rest did in the Soviet Union. That was a thriving little island economically, but it was not hugely free and it was not a democracy. The income disparities and relative poverty in large swaths fueled Castro’s form of socialism and people followed him.

Venezuela is the most recent example. Due to its oil wealth, Venezuela had the highest per capita GDP in South America in 2005. It had not been well run and was fairly corrupt and incompetent at the government level. But it was still the best and richest in South America — a continent known for corruption and incompetence in government.

In 2005, President Hugo Chavez took the country in a deep socialist direction. He began nationalizing industries such as oil companies and the media — natural steps for socialism — and started transferring large sums to the poor. The results are truly epic. Venezuela now has a totally collapsed economy with starvation and the lack of basic infrastructure becoming more common. A failure on an amazing level.

In an explanation of Venezuela’s collapse, Bloomberg noted: “The last years of Chavez — he died of cancer in 2013 — and the first under his handpicked successor Nicolas Maduro have been a time of unparalleled fiscal profligacy.”

But that is always the case in socialism. Massive government debt driven by a declining economy — a common side effect of socialism — and huge welfare spending generated hyper-inflation has made the country the poorest in South America. In eight years it went from the richest to the poorest by pivoting sharply to socialism.

“Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don’t need it and hell where they already have it.” Ronald Reagan

Capitalism’s inequality “problem”

Capitalism is duty-bound to create inequality in wealth. Some people are just great at making money. Some are great at making things. Some are clever and some are lucky (think Mark Zuckerberg.) Those generally do very well in capitalism. Many others are simply hard workers and they often do well, though in more of a middle class sort of way — which in America is beyond kingly from just 150 years ago.

Other people are bad at making money and worse at money management. Others are not clever and some are unlucky. Some are just lazy. These all do relatively poorly in capitalism.


The question is whether inequalities are bad if all or most boats are being lifted, just some lifted higher than others. In the United States, the poorest 10 percent of people are better off than the richest 10 percent in any third world or developing nation. But Forbes points out an Economist chart that shows that America’s poor are better off than most of Europe’s poor, including better off than in far more socialist countries such as the Netherlands, Germany, France, Great Britain and Italy.

This is worth noting because those are considered social democratic nations by the likes of Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. But they are actually capitalistic countries with free markets, but a heavy overlay of social welfare programs.

While they are often heralded as examples for America to follow, it seems like the trade-off of inequality is worth it for the rising quality of life of the poor — unless envy trumps quality of life, which is what socialist-espousing politicians play on. It’s why class warfare must precede socialism, as it did with Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Mao Zedong and Fidel Castro, so it does with many in the Democratic Party.

China is the largest socialist/communist country and struggled with universal poverty for decades after its revolution. But as it instituted capitalism’s free market reforms beginning in the 1980s — while retaining its authoritarianism, and socialist structure in name anyway — China’s economy began booming and is now second only to the United States. Capitalism did that. But it also created the inevitable inequalities.

Vietnam became socialist/communist after the Vietnam War. The country was already a disaster from the long war, but socialism provided no means for pulling it out. In recent years, the leadership has instituted more capitalist-based market reforms, a la China. That has begun creating more wealth for the country, but it is mostly flowing into a few hands — starting with those most connected to government leadership.

So capitalism works everywhere to generate more wealth. But it will always be unequal. Socialism equalizes, but does so by making everyone but those in charge poorer.

“Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.” Thomas Sowell

What it might look like in America

What happened in Venezuela is instructive, because it is similar to Cuba and even the Soviet Union, although every situation will have its unique dynamics.

In a vision of what the first steps toward socialism would look like in the United States, Democrats are running variously on platforms of free government-run single-payer healthcare, free college, expanded Social Security and more. Of course, the beginning, as a bad as that would be for the American middle class, is never the ending with socialism.

To pay for it — and this is where Thatcher is just so right — Democrats would dramatically increase taxes by trillions of dollars. In fact, they frequently speak of tax increases alone to pay for all of the nationalized healthcare. That’s just taking other people’s money on a more massive scale, and would due to the math require a giant middle class tax increase.

These proposals were only a small step toward full-blown utopian socialism. A totally predictable outcome would be that the high taxes would start slowing the economy, necessitating more tax increases, which would further slow the economy. You see the spiral.

The tax increases would never keep up with the expenses being run up in national healthcare, free college, expanded Social Security and the host of further steps that would ultimately be taken. The United States would not be immune to the immutable laws of economics and human nature. Eventually, we would succumb — as has every other nation.

Socialism is a siren song to the idealistic, the frustrated and the naive. But it is a fool’s errand. It requires ignoring known reality and supplanting it with a make-believe utopianism — which is the precise groundwork being laid by the 2019 Democratic Party in line with leftists for the past 150 years. Presumably, if right-thinking Americans prevail again in this battle, it will erupt again in 30 years or so.

Socialism’s end is the proverbial pack of wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner. There is a new sheep member each dinner until there are no more sheep, and the remaining wolves starve.

And you have Venezuela. Or Cuba. Or Vietnam. Or the Soviet Union.

(This is a vastly updated version of an article was first published at The Revolutionary Act on May 15, 2017)

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and Founder of The Revolutionary Act.

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Democrats Leftists Progressives Race Truth

Sammy Davis, Jr. — Like Kanye — Was Viciously Attacked For Hugging A GOP President

By Julio Gonzalez, M.D., J.D.

If you ever wondered what would happen when you put Kanye West and Donald Trump in the Oval Office together, last week undoubtedly gave you an indication. Their meeting was one of the most colorful displays of contrasting styles, differing perspectives, and looseness of association in recent memory — ending with a flamboyant hug behind the Resolute Desk, sealed with Kanye’s proclamation of, “I love this guy!”

Predictably, Kanye’s hug was the talk of the nation, and it wasn’t all positive.

CNN’s Don Lemon saw it as a moment when Kanye West was exploited and used by a white president. And the African American rapper, T.I., lashed out at West, exclaiming via social media, “This is the most repulsive, disgraceful, embarrassing act of desperation & auctioning off of one’s soul to gain power I’ve ever seen. . . I feel compelled to slap the f***k outta you bro for the people!”

This abusive relationship between independent black men and the Democratic Party left has a long history.

Things were not good between Richard Nixon and the African-American community back in 1971. First, he was a Republican, and the Democrats had just passed the Civil Rights Act that had been originally pushed by Republicans. The view of the Republican Party as the Grand Ol’ Civil Rights Party was abandoned as African-Americans flocked to Lyndon B. Johnson and his War on Poverty.

What’s worse, Nixon was an awkward, white man. He had no spunk and had this awful tendency to accumulate sweat above his upper lip. His performance in front of the camera was so bad that a decade earlier, during his debate with John F. Kennedy, those who heard the event on radio called him the clear winner while those who saw it on television almost universally sided with Kennedy.  

Also, African-Americans were not impressed with Nixon’s first term as President. For starters, he had nominated two Southern judges to the Supreme Court, neither of whom was confirmed by the Senate. Second, unlike Lyndon B. Johnson with his Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Robert C. Weaver, Nixon did not appoint any African-Americans to his cabinet.

More Original Content On Patreon

And then there was the issue of the growing welfare state and Nixon’s intent of cutting programs initiated by Johnson. In fact, in 1971, the animus towards Nixon was so intense that the Congressional Black Caucus boycotted his State of the Union address.

Nixon recognized he needed an ally from the black community. He had been seen a few times with James Brown, but Brown was not a politically active individual.

Sammy Davis Junior, on the other hand, was a “Cool Cat.” He was an African-American Jew and flaunted it. He had one fake eye and was proud of it. And he was the sole black member of the famously infamous Rat Pack!

Besides, Sammy Davis, Jr. was The Candy Man! Who could ever dislike the man that could take the sunrise and sprinkle it with dew; and cover it with chocolate and a miracle or two?

Astutely, Nixon asked Davis to be on his National Advisory Council on Economic Opportunity. Davis, of course, was thrilled at the prospect. From his standpoint, he was being tasked to serve on a Committee by the President of the United States! What greater honor could there be for any American, particularly an African-American Jew! Davis gladly met with the President at the White House to accept his position, a photo op for both men.  

Then Nixon asked Davis to appear in Vietnam before the troops, which he did, and then came to the White House to report to the President. Another photo op.

Next thing he knew Sammy Davis, Jr. was appearing at Republican fundraisers, and singing!

Get More Truth On Our Facebook Page

So, in the 1972, it was natural for Davis to be asked to participate in the Republican National Convention in Miami Beach. Davis enthusiastically accepted and that’s how he found himself on stage before the Republican Youth Rally at the Playboy Hotel in Miami as the President of the United States arrived in the middle of his performance!  

Seeing Nixon walk on stage, Davis was naturally overwhelmed. He stopped, warmly introduced Nixon, and then, in the joy of the moment, gave the President a welcoming, warm, sideways hug!

Immediately, the cameras blazed, inscribing in black and white one of the 20th century’s most impactful, interracial photographic moments. The picture, angled from the men’s front-right, captured a stooped over Sammy Davis, Jr. with his left arm around the President and his right hand gripping Nixon’s right forearm. The smiles on the two men’s faces were genuine and beaming even though their poses — Davis’s ever cool and Nixon’s ever stiff — bespoke their differences.

Although the moment was genuine, the reaction from the left was vicious. The hatred towards Sammy Davis, Jr. was palpable as African-Americans from all over the nation condemned him for so praising the President. He was accused of being used and manipulated by white people.

In short, the left, despicably, turned Sammy Davis, Jr. into a traitor to his race. Sounds pretty familiar.

Recognizing the vitriol, Davis’s PR team went on offense. Sy Marsh, Davis’s PR director, immediately reached out to one of the stalwarts of the Civil Rights movement and one of the most respected African-American leaders in the country at the time: Jesse Jackson.  Remember, Jackson was at the balcony of the Lorraine Motel when Martin Luther King was brutally shot. The cameras would capture him as one of the men standing next to a dying King desperately pointing in the direction of the gunshots.

Of course Jackson could salvage Davis’s image! Or at least Marsh thought. 

At the time, Jackson was involved in an organization he developed, People United to Save Humanity (PUSH), and if Davis could bring $15,000.00 to the upcoming PUSH fundraiser in Chicago, Jackson would be happy to have Davis join him on stage.

Try Our Youtube Channel

Marsh quickly scrounged up the money from the people who recurrently bailed Sammy Davis, Jr. from financial peril stemming from his drinking and drug use; the casino owners. The payment arranged, Davis showed up as planned, and here is how Wil Haygood, author of a 2003 Washington Post article named the “The Hug” describes it:

And there [Davis] stood, preparing to join Jackson on that Chicago stage and navigate the swinging bridge of black-white relations that defined the ’60s. “Sammy walks out,” recalls Marsh, “and they booed him. Sammy is in a state of shock.” Davis swung his head from side to side of the building, looking for the anger, the source of the boos. “It struck me as with physical force, knocking the wind out of me,” Davis would recall. “It grew louder.” Jackson seemed momentarily startled. He quickly flung his muscular arm around Davis. Jackson’s ferocious embrace was so full of on-the-spot love it seemed to weaken Davis. He seemed to be shrinking inside his denim jacket. The boos and catcalls rained on.

“Brothers,” Jackson said, waving his arm for quiet, “if it wasn’t for people like Sammy Davis, you wouldn’t be here, we wouldn’t have PUSH today. Now, I expected some foolish people were going to react like this because the man hugged the president of the United States. So what? Look at what this gigantic little man has committed himself to over all these years.”

As the boos erupted anew, Jackson realized he had underestimated the anger. Davis’s body began twisting. He wanted to bolt. Jackson could feel his angst, and only held Davis tighter. Then he asked Davis to sing something, and suggested “I’ve Gotta Be Me.” Given the circumstances, it was a request both funny and meaningful — and perhaps Freudian. Davis had no time to ponder the meaning; he simply began singing. Words caught in his throat; there was snickering. Marsh felt terrible. “Sammy sang a song, came off, said, ‘. . . They don’t want me. I don’t want them.’ He got blind drunk that night, and cried.

What happened to Sammy Davis, Jr. is emblematic of the bullying tactics so characteristically employed by the left against anyone who dares to disagree with its position or who strolls outside of the confines of its stable. Sammy Davis, Jr. dared to venture outside of his predefined confines, and he paid for it dearly. Forever after, he was called a whitey, and he was never acknowledged as the incredible credit he was to his race and to his country despite his many personality flaws.

Now, 46 years later, Kanye West stands at the threshold of the same precipice. Hopefully, his treatment will be a lot gentler, but as we’re witnessing from the conduct of the new left bullies like Don Lemon and T.I., probably not.

(The author acknowledges Wil Haygood, “The Hug” The Washington Post, Sept. 14, 2003, from which much of the factual content is obtained.)

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is an orthopaedic surgeon and lawyer living in Venice, Florida. He is the author of The Federalist Pages and cohost of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod. Dr. Gonzalez is presently serving in the Florida House of Representatives. He can be reached through to arrange a lecture or book signing.

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


Elections Progressives Socialism Trump Truth

Socialism vs. Trump after Massive Turnout in Florida’s Tuesday Primary

Rod Thomson

Florida is the largest swing state in the union and possibly the most demographically representative with transplants from the Northeast and Midwest, along with natives of the South. Plus it’s the third largest state after California and Texas, which are not as representative.

That makes the results of Tuesday’s primaries so intriguing to the tea-leaf reading set. In this case we can see some real actual trends, because it is not just one special election that both sides were trying to make into a national referendum — it’s a mini three-quarters of America.

One big takeaway: The establishment, “centrist” portions of both parties lost big time. The Democrats went all in on the surging socialism elements of the Party while Trump remains a monstrous force in the Republican Party. That looks like the war shaping up in November, as the Democratic base moves toward the surging Bernie Sanders-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wing of the Party and Republicans continue to move toward the strong America First Trump wing.

Second big takeaway: Everyone is jazzed up. The off-year Florida primary broke records across the state for any primary this century — with higher turnout even than in presidential election years. Importantly, the increase is in both parties. The Democratic turnout is up more than the Republican turnout, but in the red areas of Florida, there was a record number of people voting Tuesday.

This is relatively unheard of in off election years and what it portends for November is not so easy to determine. One would have to give an edge to Democrats for historic reasons and greater increase in turnout reasons. However, what we know for sure is that everything could change tomorrow. Mueller could issue his report and who knows what all else. What’s clear is that Trump is turning out Democrats, but anti-Trump hysteria and socialism is turning out Republicans.

Here are the themes from the demographically representative Florida primaries Tuesday:


Trump remains a very powerful force in the GOP

In the race between long-time presumed Republican gubernatorial candidate Adam Putnam, a favorite of the GOP establishment, and one-time longshot Congressman Ron DeSantis, a favorite of President Trump and the Trump wing of the GOP, DeSantis pulled off not just an upset but a landslide upset.

DeSantis was an early Trump supporter and spent a lot of time on Fox News defending the President and attacking his critics. This is something Trump likes and rewards. Going into the election process, DeSantis was not well-known outside of his Congressional district while Putnam had strong name recognition and a ground game that had been built over many years through the GOP. He’s conservative, but definitely seen as establishment.

Join Our Fight Pro-American Values

Eight weeks ago, Putnam was polling with solid and consistent leads of 15 to 18 percent over DeSantis. After Trump endorsed DeSantis on Twitter and then went to Tampa for a DeSantis rally, the polling flipped by an astonishing 30 percentage points and DeSantis won the primary 56 percent to 36 percent. Not even close.

That’s the power of Trump in the GOP. We’ll find out in a few months the power of Trump in a general election.


Socialism ascends in Democratic Party with nomination of Andrew Gillum

Former Congresswoman Gwen Graham, daughter of popular former Governor and Senator Bob Graham, was ahead in the polls going into the primary Tuesday. Wealthy candidates out of Miami spent about $70 million combined trying to pass her. But Gillum worked the grass roots, the black turnout, and the socialist/progressive wing and pulled off an upset that left the pollsters, pundits and media embarrassed. No one saw it — other than a little known but growing outfit of anti-Trumpsters called Change Research. They nailed it.

Graham was seen more as an establishment Democrat in the same way that Putnam was as a Republican. In fact, until Trump’s entry, it was widely believed this would be a race between those two. But the establishment in both parties is being rapidly neutered and that was obvious by Tuesday night.

Gillum spent the least of the five major candidates in his primary race and was barely seen on TV — important elements in a state with 21 million people with at least four major metro areas. He relied on a grassroots campaign, the support of the furthest left in the party and the socialism appeal of Sanders and Ocassio-Cortez to beat four other candidates, including Graham.

Follow us on Facebook

Gillum is young at 39, and was endorsed by socialist former Sen. Bernie Sanders and Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. He was the heavy favorite among Democrats who called themselves progressives. He was supported by California billionaire environmental extremist Tom Steyer. And President Trump wasted no time in going after him this morning as a “failed socialist,” tweeting out: 

“Not only did Congressman Ron DeSantis easily win the Republican Primary, but his opponent in November is his biggest dream….a failed Socialist Mayor named Andrew Gillum who has allowed crime & many other problems to flourish in his city. This is not what Florida wants or needs!”

In addition to the socialism label, there are some threats moving forward with Gillum. The FBI is conducting an ongoing investigation of corruption among Tallahassee city officials (it is a long-time Democrat-run city) and no one — including Gillum — has been cleared of anything yet. Will the FBI pull a James Comey and act politically? Who can say in this environment. But that looms out there. Expect the DeSantis camp and allies to use it.

Final point. Gillum was not seen as a threat to win among any of the major candidates, and as such, he received virtually no attack ads and minimal scrutiny by the media and other candidates. That will not be the case in the next few months. (Except for the media part, of course.) A lot will come to light that has hitherto been hidden.


Flipping the Florida U.S. Senate seat just got harder

Everyone nationally is watching the races for Congress, and in this too, Tuesday’s results give the lay of the land.

The race between Gov. Rick Scott and long-time incumbent seat-warmer Sen. Bill Nelson was seen as a strong opportunity for Republicans to pick up a Senate seat and give them a cushion by flipping it to red. However, that goal just got tougher. Having Andrew Gillum, the first black gubernatorial candidate to win his party’s primary, at the top of the Florida ballot will likely ensure high black turnout from the Democratic Party as they can feel something historic to be excited about. It could be a similar dynamic for Florida as was in play in 2008 with Barack Obama.

Bill Nelson excited no black voter ever — well, no voter ever. He is a reliable Democratic vote whose 40 years in Washington have netted virtually no legacy beyond a warm D seat. Scott currently has a small lead in the contest. But Gillum’s presence will almost assuredly deliver votes to Nelson, next on the ballot, that he would not have otherwise received. Flipping the seat is now more difficult to pull off.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


California Immigration Progressives Socialism Truth

California’s Slow Decline Into The Abyss of Venezuela

Rod Thomson

The slow, steady erasure of California’s middle class holds the very real potential to descend that state into a version of the chaos and anarchy in Venezuela.

Yes, yes, that sounds like the crazy hyperbole we hear from the Left. But it’s not. If not for the fact that we still have a functioning democratic republic with both an undergirding constitution and long heritage tethering that careening state to the more stable Union, it actually would be almost assured. The burgeoning lower end of the state and the walled off high end of the state are squeezing the middle, resulting in an eye-popping number of productive Californians fleeing the state.

We think that because California is so large and prosperous that it always will be. It has Silicon Valley and Hollywood and a pretty solid creative class, along with outstanding weather and a beautiful natural geography from oceans to mountains. The problem is, that is only part of the picture. Venezuela also had a top tier of wealth and entrepreneurship, plus a bustling, growing middle class and massive natural resources, such as oil — along with the ocean and mountains.

But through overbearing government control of private businesses, ever increasing taxes, transfers from the working classes to the not-working class, and ultimately nationalization of industry, the socialist leaders of that South American country managed to crush and eliminate its thriving middle class. And that was the final straw that began the chaotic and rapid spiral into the horrific desperation the country is experiencing now. Want to know what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s vision for America would look like? There it is.

A middle class is required to sustain an economy and ultimately a stable society. A middle class provides stability in the culture, political stability, entrepreneurs and plentiful responsible workers that hope for a good life. It is fuel for a thriving capitalist country. Any society that does not have a middle class — just a thin upper and vast lower class, a la feudal societies — is doomed to strife, a crashing economy, anger, resentment and ultimately revolution.

This has been Venezuela’s path. Starting with the Socialist/Communist President Hugo Chavez — whom Obama praised and literally embraced — and continued by his fellow socialist, Nicolás Maduro, policies squeezed out the middle class and bled them until none were left — leaving the country with only some rich people and a whole lot of poor people.

California is in the early stages of the exact same dynamic.

Join Our Fight Pro-American Values

That state is experiencing overbearing government control of private lives, religious freedoms, private businesses, draconian environmental regulations, very strict land-use laws and eroded property rights. What the state does not regulate and control, major cities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, San Diego and Sacramento do.

Hardest to miss is that the California Assembly in Sacramento adds ever more taxes, as do most of the major cities in the state. California has one of the highest income tax rates in the country, with 10 rates up to 13.3 percent as of 2018. (Of course, it is all on top of federal taxes.) Property tax rates aren’t bad, but they are on the most inflated property values in the nation, and they are levied on full market value, which means in real dollars they are sky high. Sales tax is high at 7.25 percent. Gas tax is 54 cents per gallon, second highest, on gas prices that are among the highest because of regulations — making gas 25-30 percent higher per gallon than the rest of the nation. But California also kills with a thousand cuts by taxing an incredible number of oddball items for political purposes, i.e. fruit out of a vending machine has a 33 percent tax.

Regulation is always harder to assess specifically, but the results are not hard to see. California has earned the reputation for having the most onerous regulations for companies and land-use in the country, which makes everything more expensive — on which the high tax rates are then levied, added to the smothering cost-of-living burden.

Socialist-minded Democrats then take the enormous tax largesse they have extracted from struggling middle class Californians — and the wealthy elites in secluded conclaves that can afford it — and transfers it to the burgeoning non-working classes.

The state spends $106 billion annually on welfare at the state level, nearly twice as much as the next largest state, New York, and three times as much as the third highest state, Texas. California’s $103 billion is the lion’s share of it’s entire budget of $183 billion, dwarfing the next largest item of education — on which it spends more than the national average.

Follow Us On Facebook

The largest welfare cost is Medi-Cal, the healthcare program for low-income Californians, which now has 14.2 million people enrolled — meaning more than one in three state residents are on government healthcare. California also provides cash payments to people who work but do not earn enough to pay taxes, another transfer payment from the middle and upper income to the low income. Relatively paltry amounts for such a large state and budget are spent on infrastructure — things the middle class relies on — such as $2.8 billion on roads, about 1 percent of the budget.

Remember, while more than one million people exited California for other states — that’s a net number, one million more left than arrived — the state’s population still soared. There is obviously only one place all of these new residents are coming from; immigration. Some of those are legal immigrants, a portion of whom bring talents to the state. But millions are illegal immigrants. California is estimated to have close to three million illegal aliens inside its borders, and about one in ten workers are illegal aliens, although these numbers are really unknown. Virtually all of these people are receiving some form of transfer payment from California’s middle and upper income residents.

The exorbitant costs cannot be sustained by increasing portions of the middle class. This is maybe most clearly demonstrated in the exodus from California. San Francisco represents the problem precisely.

Perhaps the most liberal major city in America, San Francisco residents pay some of the highest taxes and deal with the most overburdening regulations — particularly on private property use — in the country. This has resulted in a median home price of $1.6 million dollars. The average rent for a one-bedroom, unfurnished apartment in the city is about $3,258 per month. These astronomical prices stun most of the country, but this is a clear result of the first stages of Socialistic tendencies in government control, regulation and taxation for redistribution.

This dynamic is in operation throughout the Bay Area, and in Los Angeles, San Diego and Sacramento. California families on average paid three times their income for a home in 1970. Now that figure has jumped to nearly 10 times their income. The nation as a whole has seen nothing comparable, which of course becomes almost impossible for the lower part of the working middle class.

And it comes with a staggering price tag. According to the San Francisco Business Times:

“Nearly half of San Francisco Bay Area voters plan to leave the region in the next few years, fed up with exorbitant housing costs and the long commutes caused by the lack of available homes near their workplaces…Most troubling for the future of the regional economy, is that millennials plan to flee; 52 percent said they will depart vs. 46 percent last year, the Council poll says.”

The major metro areas technically have very low unemployment. But in reality, they have a massive homeless population, a street defecation epidemic, a diminishing working class and a mushrooming illegal alien population.

Subscribe To Us On Youtube

And its emblematic of the red warning flag waving over the state. According to the Orange County Register:

Between 2007 and 2016, California lost 1 million more domestic residents than have come into the state, according to the IRS. Many are moving to Texas, Arizona, Nevada and Oregon.

This is ongoing. Major, well-paying companies such as Toyota, Occidental Petroleum, Nissan and others who paid between $80,000 and $120,000 — solid middle class pay — have shuttered factories and left the state due to the overly burdensome regulations, taxes and cost of living for workers. Those people have fled to Texas, first, and then other states where they found it affordable to live and raise families.

Joel Kotkin, a presidential fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University, told the Register:

“Today, we have a society which over time is becoming more and more feudal with the very rich, very successful — some of the richest people in the history of the world — at the very top, and then a diminishing middle class…And what’s more frightening is you have young people, some of them with college educations working at Uber, working at Starbucks, essentially barely making it.”

The picture painted here is one of the middle class being squeezed out in a way that even the naturally beautiful weather and geography cannot overcome.

The reality is that California is slowly driving a stake through the heart of its once thriving middle class. And that is where the parallel with Venezuela is so strong — and dangerous.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


College Progressives Truth

Colleges Are Turning Red Students Radically Blue

Rod Thomson

A good friend of mine recently attended his daughter’s high school graduation and was amazed at the high number of students attending prestigious universities around the nation. That includes his daughter, who is traveling across the continent to attend Stanford University.

The high school is located in a very conservative part of Southwest Florida just littered with churches, Republican Clubs and Trump supporters. Most of the transplants are from Midwest states. In other words, this is very red America, and presumably a high number of those graduating students reflect their parents’ values. Certainly my friend’s daughter does.

At this moment. And that’s the rub.

Our university systems are increasingly focused on turning red students radically blue. This is not a stated goal, of course. It’s simply the reality on the ground — taking generally conservative, pro-America Christian students and indoctrinating them over four years into progressive, anti-America non-Christian students. While there are certainly exceptions, the numbers depressingly bear out the effectiveness of this indoctrination.

According to Campus Renewal, more than 70 percent of teens who confess Christianity when they enter college reject Christianity by the time they leave four years later. Previous studies have placed it between 65 and 80 percent. So roughly three out of every four.

Of course some percentage of young people will leave the faith when they leave home anyway. That has always been the case, as William Wilberforce explained more than 200 years ago. But the percentages are significantly lower in that group. So if you have a youth group with 20 kids that go to college, the odds are only five or six will still be Christians four years later. Those are just the facts, and that should be deeply sobering for parents, pastors and priests.

There are virtually no studies on the shift in political views of people before and after college, perhaps because so many are still so young they have not formed firm enough worldviews yet to create a data set. But considering the dominance of liberal professors and the monolithically progressive environment that young, impressionable students are thrown into for four years, it is only reasonably to expect a similar level of influence and “flipping” among them.

Join Our Fight Against Poisonous Anti-American Values

This picture is partially painted just from faculty political affiliations. In an article published by the National Association of Scholars, entitled “Homogeneous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty,” Brooklyn College professor Mitchell Langbert shows this in pure, dominating numbers. Langbert examined the political affiliations of doctorate-holding faculty members at 51 of the top 66 liberal arts colleges listed by U.S. News & World Report.

His findings are astonishing. Fully 39 percent of the colleges in his sample have no Republican doctorate faculty on staff. Not one.

Langbert also looked at the total Democrat-to-Republican faculty ratios at the most elite colleges. At Williams College, the Democrat-to-Republican ratio is 132-to-1; Amherst College, 34-to-1; Wellesley College, 136-to-1; Davidson College, 10-to-1; Swarthmore College, 120-to-1. Only two colleges of the top 66 are even close to having an even faculty: the U.S. Military Academy (West Point) with a Democrat-to-Republican ratio of 1.3-to-1, and the U.S. Naval Academy, with a ratio 2.3-to-1.

Many on the left and in the media have dismissed such studies by claiming that the GOP has moved far right and so actually it left academia. That doesn’t really pass the smell test, but Sam Abrams, writing at Heterodox Academy, plotted graphs comparing where university faculty stand on the political spectrum and where the American people stand. What he demonstrates is that as liberal as universities were as recently as the 1990s, they are dramatically more so now.

“Professors were more liberal than the country in 1990, but only by about 11 percentage points. By 2013, the gap had tripled; it is now more than 30 points. It seems reasonable to conclude that it is academics who shifted, as there is no equivalent movement among the masses whatsoever.”

This dominance, and the obsequiousness of college administrators, reveals itself in the shift in curriculum.

In 64 of the top 76 universities in the country, students can get a history degree without any American history. Wisconsin is entirely dropping history as a major. So is California. Less than 3 percent of colleges require history or civics to get a degree. This all explains why 75 percent of students support socialism, but can neither define it or give one successful example of it. Ignorance of history is foundational to indoctrination. It’s a form of Orwell’s Memory Hole in “1984.”

Like Our Facebook Page

This is about as objective as is available right now: Comparing the polling on Christian students, the smothering monolithically Democratic faculty, the leftward lurch compared to the rest of the country and the dramatic shift in curriculum, and the outcome becomes not only obvious, but predictable.

In “What’s So Great About Christianity,” Dinesh D’Souza, makes the broader point about public schools through universities:

“Children spend the majority of their waking hours in school. Parents invest a good portion of their life savings in college education and entrust their offspring to people who are supposed to educate them. Isn’t it wonderful that educators have figured out a way to make parents the instruments of their own undoing? Isn’t it brilliant that they have persuaded Christian moms and dads to finance the destruction of their own beliefs and values? Who said atheists aren’t clever?”

The same holds true about Democrats and political radicalization.

An indicator of the veracity of this truth is that the most liberal of media outlets, such as The New York Times and Vox have been working hard to show that while all these facts may be true, college is not making students more liberal, or professors aren’t doing so, or maybe colleges are just opening students’ eyes — depending on the publication.

In other words, they’re providing cover for the indoctrinators.

The students with the best ability to weather the storm of the politically progressive, theologically anti-Christian college years are those whose parents and churches equip them with strong defenses for their beliefs. Without that they walk into a four-year, sustained assault on everything they believe and the statistics are clear what happens.

There is one silver lining. The small percentage that survive the fires of liberal programming over four years, are some of the most stalwart young conservatives out there and are far more adept at defending their views than their peers on the left who were seldom, if ever, challenged in their worldviews. (See: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.)

Even this small percentage worries the progressive gatekeepers such as the New York Times. And that, at least, is a good thing.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


Identity Politics Media Progressives Truth

The Media’s Full-Throated Defense Of NYT’s Hiring An Anti-White Bigot

Rod Thomson

As the story surrounding Sarah Jeong’s anti-white shamefulness unfolds it only gets worse, and it goes directly to the bifurcation of our country that comes from the stew of leftist hierarchy identity politics, anti-Americanism and a now openly dishonest and partisan media.

The progressive defense of the Times’ hiring a bigot, particularly by the media, is an awesome display of the power and terror unleashed through the hierarchy of identity politics, because a different writer hired by the Times in February found to be using gay slurs was fired within hours. But not only is Jeong not being fired, the wagons have tightly circled across the media landscape.

Yes, because in the poisonous identity hierarchy, lesbians are far more aggrieved and therefore have greater rights and power than whites, which are at the bottom of the hierarchy — seriously, this has been taught on college campuses around the country for years — there is a built-in, intended and defended double-standard. Want to know the reason for the rise of the Alt Right and white nationalism? Read on.

As is now well-known, the New York Times this week announced the hiring of Sarah Jeong to sit on their editorial board and write editorials. This board forms the newspaper’s daily opinions. About 30 seconds after the announcement, Twitter exploded with some of Jeong’s breathtakingly hateful and bigoted tweets against whites and white males. She is Korean-born and the Times must have known of these.

We have to have a quick and ugly sampling, from roughly 2014-2015, so hardly ancient writings:

“Dumba** f***ing white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants”

“Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins”

“oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men”

“White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon. This was my plan all along.”

“White people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants”


Join Our Fight Against Poisonous Anti-American Values

There’s more from the Times’ new bigot. For normal Americans, these tweets are a gasp, and surely spelled her doom. When the Times announced the hiring of Quinn Norton in February, it was discovered that she had used the gay slur “fag” and “faggot” repeatedly. She herself is a lesbian and gay rights activist, and was using the term toward other gays on Twitter in the same way that blacks use the N word with other blacks. It’s all quite despicable. The Times high moral code forced it to fire Norton within hours of announcing the hiring.

But a funny thing happened with Jeong’s anti-white bigotry tweets. The Times’ high moral code is not kicking in to fire her, and much of the media, all of the left-wing media, is defending the Times’ keeping Jeong onboard. In fact, publication after publication is attacking the “organized conservative Twitter trolls” and urging the Times to stand firm.

The Washington Post blames conservative media — not Jeong:

“Without evidence that they had any bearing on Jeong’s extensive body of work, which includes a book she wrote about online harassment, these statements could have perhaps been unceremoniously dismissed as insignificant. But after conservative media seized on the story Thursday, they ignited a firestorm of debate…Jeong’s episode has also raised complicated questions about the stubborn nature of harassment that women of color face online.”

I’m waiting for the Post to write about what Michelle Malkin endures daily. She’s Filipino. Or maybe Candace Owens. She’s black. But they’re conservative, so again…meh.

The Huffington Post called on the Times to just ignore the critics:

“The proper way to respond to a bad-faith troll campaign like the one the right-wing internet is waging on Sarah Jeong, the newest member of The New York Times editorial board, is to not respond at all, to not even listen in the first place…But ignore the trolls you must. This includes the gleeful, snickering chuds who strip old tweets of their context and send them back out into the world. And this also includes the establishment figures like Ari Fleischer and publications like the National Review, the folks wailing about an Asian woman’s “anti-white racism,” as if there were such a thing.”

There’s more of the identity politics. Racism isn’t racism. Only whites can be racist. Minorities by this new definition, cannot be. Because whites are at the bottom of the aggrievement scale. This is how the new bigot thinks.

The huge tech site The Verge, encouraged newsrooms everywhere to stand against the hate — not Jeong’s, mind you, but the hate of those who are calling out her tweets and the Times’ hiring of her.

“…as the editors of The Verge, we want to be clear: this abusive backlash is dishonest and outrageous…journalists have been increasingly targeted by people acting in bad faith who do not care about the work they do, the challenges they face, or the actual context of their statements…it’s time other newsrooms learn to spot these hateful campaigns for what they are: attempts to discredit and undo the vital work of journalists who report on the most toxic communities on the internet.”

Like Us On Facebook

Jezebel magazine was ticked the Times responded at all, thinking they should have ignored the outcry as other media outlets encouraged:

The trolls have largely concerned themselves with Jeong’s fairly innocuous tweets about white people.”

Their meaning of “innocuous” is different from mine.

The Cut considered her tweets harmless:

Many of Jeong’s tweets that the right dug up dated back five years, and were harmless jokes about conservative white people.”

But “fag” used by a gay person toward other gay people was so harmful as to be a firing offense? Yes. Identity politics. She was the wrong kind of bigot — if one at all. Jeong is the right kind of bigot.

The list of defenders goes on and on. Jeong will not only keep her job and take her place in the pantheon of modern progressive regressives on the Times’ editorial board, she will become a hero on the Left. Worse, though, is that more people will be emboldened to think and talk hatefully like her — as long as their bigotry is correctly targeted. That is the lesson between Norton and Jeong.

And I’m sorry to say that “correctly targeted” means at white people.

Hence the rise of the alt right and white nationalism — two small but dangerous movements — is actually just more identity politics driven by the left. Bigotry begets bigotry. A few short decades ago, we were trending away from the day of the bigot.

Again, all of this ends really, really badly if there is not a sea change in the culture.

Rod Thomson is an author, former journalist and current TV talking head, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


Christianity College Culture Feminism Islam Progressives Truth

St. Ambrose College’s Segregated Muslim Prayer Room Is A Chilling Reality

by Rod Thomson

That St. Ambrose College in Davenport, Iowa has opened a sex-segregated prayer room for Muslim students requires an explanation. On the surface, it seems totally bizarre. Why exactly do Muslims want to go to an explicitly Catholic college and why is that now-progressive Catholic college proudly violating normative standards of equal treatment for men and women?

The answer is found in why feminists have turned into crickets on select overt sexism when they howl outrages over only perceived slights against women. Muslims, feminists and most American progressives have a common enemy: America’s Judeo-Christian heritage, which they have been working to dismantle for generations.

This is the only way to make sense of the otherwise head-scratching alliance of religiously antagonistic progressives, feminists and devout Muslims. Their stated beliefs and goals should make them natural foes — and they are in Muslim run countries. But they are not in America. However, if you identify a common enemy, the reason for their alliance comes into focus. It also explains why these groups are so disdainful of American exceptionalism, of America’s heritage and specifically of the founding fathers and the Constitution they produced.

The hrumphing at this proposition will be loud. But it is undeniably a part of today’s Islam around the world. It is pretty easily a part of modern feminism that focuses on the demon of the patriarchy, denies differences in the genders and celebrates whatever the Bible decries. And it is patently manifest in pretty much all of the actions of modern progressives.

Judeo-Christian America is what modern feminism and progressives find to be an archaic, backward, gun-toting, Bible-clinging threat to the march of civilization — as they perceive it. And the Muslim march of civilization is basically all Muslim.

And what this decision by St. Ambrose College shows is that the college makes policy based on being progressive before being Catholic. That, it would seem, is unarguable.

Join Our Fight For American Values!

Just listen to the very-pleased-with-himself college senior who designed the prayer room, in conjunction with the Saudi Student Association — because every Catholic college needs to have an association of the women-crushing, hand-cleaving, civil-rights-denying ruling House of Saud.

“It’s uniquely Ambrosian, and it just sort of shows our commitment to all different faiths,” Matt Mahoney said of the sex-segregated worship room he designed. “It is really outstanding.”

What might the early church father St. Ambrose think of this “commitment to all different faiths” — which rather sounds like a commitment to no faiths? Let’s look at who Ambrose was.

“A zealous preacher and valiant defender of the Christian Faith, Saint Ambrose received particular renown as a Church writer. In dogmatic compositions he set forth the Orthodox teaching about the Holy Trinity, the Sacraments, and Repentance,” according to Orthodox Church in America. “Saint Ambrose, defending the unity of the Church, energetically opposed the spread of heresy.” [Emphasis added.]

Like Us On Facebook

Ambrose converted many pagans to Christianity, from Germany to Persia (he lived before Mohammed founded Islam) and most famously, he showed a wayward young man named Augustine the way to God through Christ. Ambrose would most certainly have considered Muslims as pagans in need of conversion — not celebration.

It’s safe to say that Ambrose would be aghast at what was being done at a college named after him. And it’s further safe to say that when the young man said the sex-segregated Muslim prayer room is “uniquely Ambrosian” he was not referring to Ambrose the man, but the culture of the progressive college that appears to have turned its back on the legacy of St. Ambrose — and made alliance with those who actively seek to destroy the actual legacy of Ambrose.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy.  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


Journalism Media Progressives Truth

Two USA Today Reporters Hit DefCon One Level Political Correctness

Rod Thomson

Political correctness is a disease on the body public in America, stifling open debate, conversation and the free exchange of differing viewpoints. It dominates on college campuses like a mid-20th century tyrant, but as more graduates who have deeply imbibed the dangerous nonsense move into positions of influence, political correctness expands to more of our culture, our being.

PC is one of the driving reasons behind the launch of The Revolutionary Act. As George Orwell said in 1984, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” Politically correct speech resulting in written and de facto speech codes is setting the table for a universality of deceitfulness.

So in today’s installment, we come to a pair of young USA Today reporters who went through hit songs from past years to explain how terribly offensive their lyrics are now — and of course always were but we just weren’t woke enough. Conceptually, their retroactive judgy-ness is bad enough. But, like all of PC, it is applied selectively.  

In the headline to their Orwellian RightThink story, they don’t even hide it: “20 politically incorrect songs that’d be wildly controversial today.”

The indictments range from hyper-sexualized Rolling Stones songs (which, ironically, makes them strange bedfellows with conservative Christians who criticized the songs then and now) to Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder to still popular singers such as Katy Perry and Taylor Swift. Because in the end, nothing will pass PC muster unless it is so vanilla it says nothing the speech police deem unsayable. Conspicuously missing from this list are any rap songs — some of the most vile filth being spewed into music today — which points to the selectivity of PC.

Support Our Fight For Traditional American Values

Perhaps the most astonishing song on our reporters’ list is Ebony And Ivory, by McCartney and Wonder. What could possibly be so offensive in a song promoting the idea of people of different races living together in harmony? Let’s ask the PC police. Here’s their problematic lyric and explanation:

Choice lyric: “Ebony and ivory / Live together in perfect harmony / Side by side on my piano keyboard / Oh lord, why don’t we?”

Why it wouldn’t fly today: McCartney and Wonder meant well with their hyper-literal interpretation of race relations. But their message of “people are the same, there’s good and bad in everyone, so let’s just get along” would be interpreted as hilariously naïve by the more woke factions of today’s cultural discourse.

Your first response is to dismiss this as the vapid nonsense coming from the hell-hole of intersectional RightThink. Resist that temptation. Because what these propagandized reporters are saying is that people are not all the same and we can’t get along. Racial harmony is naive nonsense now to the PC crowd. This is really alarming stuff. And from First Amendment-protected reporters no less!

Here’s another offender.

Song:Turning Japanese by The Vapors, 1980

Choice lyric: “I’m turning Japanese, I think I’m turning Japanese”

Why it wouldn’t fly today: No, Turning Japanese isn’t literally about turning Japanese. Still, it wouldn’t be acceptable today to hear a group of white guys assuming the identity of Asian people.

This song was about the angst of young coming of age in a changing culture. Just basic life. It wasn’t anti-Japanese or racist in any way, as our thought monitoring journalists admit. Their problem stems from the sheer nonsense that a member of one culture cannot assimilate into or even appreciate another culture. Their philosophy rests on tribalism at its worst, which is very much revived in modern, progressive intersectionality.

Like Us On Facebook

Cultural appropriation is the conceptual opposite of the melting pot that has formed America for two centuries. People immigrated (legally) to our shores from all over the world. They retained elements of their heritage and were proud, but they melted into the larger American ideal based on freedoms and rights and hope for a better life.

Identity politics and cultural appropriation force every immigrant, ethnicity, race, gender and fictional gender into separate categories. Intersectionality than ranks them by degree of grievance. All logic, rational thought and history are pitched out the window in favor of those with the most grievance. More grievance, more truth, no matter how ridiculous a statement.

Here’s one more.

Song: Illegal Alien by Genesis, 1983

Choice lyric: “It’s no fun being an illegal alien”

Why it wouldn’t fly today: Its message and story are seemingly well-intentioned, detailing a Mexican immigrant’s struggle to cross the border in search of a better life. But the racist video puts the song in a whole different light, with stereotypical imagery of mariachi horns, ponchos, sombreros and oversize mustaches.

Here we have a very early example of defending and uplifting the plight of illegal aliens. Oh, but in the video, they represented a Mexican as a guy with a big sombrero and a thick mustache. Das is verboten! You see, that’s both ethnically insensitive and cultural appropriation — despite the lyrics being positive about people sneaking into our country illegally.

Here are some songs that did not make the list from the rap genre.

Nope. Can’t do it. After just minimal research, not going to print any of it. From gang rape, to graphic sex, to violence and everywhere dehumanizing women, rap is a smorgasbord of filth and degradation. Yet our USA Today reporters include none of it.

So who are these two intrepid reporters writing for the largest national newspaper in America?

Maeve McDermott is, according to how she describes herself on Twitter: entertainment writer/editor @USATODAY • very baller, very anarchist •  So she comes out of a journalism school, presumably, which would be part of the problem, but certainly out of college, another problem, and proudly proclaims herself an anarchist. And USA Today thinks, We need to hire her!

Join Our Revolutionary Channel

Patrick Ryan is an entertainment reporter for @USATODAY, @Cronkite_ASU ’14 grad. His Twitter banner pic says. “Manchesta by the feckin sea”

These two youngsters represent a sort of vanguard of the wave of hyper-offended, PC speech totalitarians who are pouring into journalism, the arts, the social sciences, government positions and the teaching profession.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy.  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


ACLU Liberalism Progressives Truth

ACLU May Sue Florida Schools Over Bra-Less Girl Controversy

Rod Thomson

The big “Bracott” bra boycott was a big dud — at least as far as student participation in the supposed civil rights violation of the Florida high school girl who had her nipples X’d out with bandages because her bra-less attire was…distracting other students in class.

But the district and all Florida schools may have a bigger problem as the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida is looking at suing the district, which is already struggling to find money to put deputies in every school after the Parkland shootings.

The bra boycott was organized by the girl, her gender-centric victimhood mom and a few other activist-oriented students protesting school administrators holding boys and girls to different standards in the school’s dress code. The “protest” urged all the girls to go bra-free in solidarity against…the patriarchy or something.

“They should feel ashamed for slut-shaming that girl for not wearing a bra,” said Isabella Ayer, a student who participated in the protest. Another female student, who wanted to remain anonymous, wore a shirt that stated, “Do my nipples offend you?”

But the school stood firm and said any violations of the school dress code would be met with disciplinary actions. And it turns out when the adults act like adults and do not indulge kids in uninformed grandstanding, things don’t go all haywire. Apparently the level of “civil rights violations” did not strike most of the other high school girls as warranting the risk of discipline. Nothing of subtance happened. There were no dress code disciplinary actions.

“It was a completely uneventful day,” said District spokesman Mike Barber.

Well, not quite. It may have been uneventful as far as the protest goes. But something eventful is bubbling.

Support Our Fight For Traditional American Values

The ACLU of Florida is investigating suing the school and the district, said Nancy Abudu, the legal director. “The ACLU is carefully investigating what happened in terms of the policy the school has enforced, and we have been in touch with the family,” Abudu told the Tampa Bay Times’ Gradebook Podcast.

That’s just a terrific way for the school district to have to spend money, defending itself from spurious lawsuits by progressive activists within the ACLU. The district, like others in Florida, is already seeking ways to harden schools and provide law enforcement officers in each school at the cost of millions of dollars that had not been budgeted.

Liberal Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, a former board member for the national ACLU who did not vote for Trump, has had an epiphany about the organization. He wrote in The Hill: “…over the last several years it has turned from being a neutral civil liberties organization to a left-wing, agenda-driven lobby group…Now, since the election of President Trump, it has sunk to a new low, becoming a cheerleader for the violation of the civil liberties of those on the other side of the political spectrum.”

This has been true of the ACLU for longer than the last several years. But it is gratifying to see someone of Dershowitz’s stature acknowledge it.

Like Us On Facebook

The original incident came about two weeks ago when the 17-year-old female Braden River High School student went to school in a loose top without a bra. Her teacher notified school administrators that the revealing outfit was being a distraction in class and administrators determined it to be a violation of the school’s dress code and told her to put a T-shirt on under her loose shirt. But the female administrator thought the girl’s nipples remained too prominent and sent the girl to the nurse’s office to put four band-aids on to “X out her nipples.”

The girl’s story went viral internationally — and The Revolutionary Act was one of the first to report on the girl turning her embarrassment into a civil rights crusade.

We’ll continue to watch what the ACLU does here and what it costs the district.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy.  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


Learn How to
Decode the Media.
Download your free copy now!

3 Keys to Decoding the Media by Rod Thomson

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.