RIP Don Imus – The End Of An Era

by James Watkins

Long before the iPhone, there was the iMan. Don Imus wasn’t a shock jock. I hate that term. Truth and honesty isn’t shocking, it’s just that honest talking is abnormal in the radio industry. We are taught to be “announcers,” or at least it has become that way. Imus broke the mold because he was, in many ways, beholden to no one and it freed him to entertain and be thought-provoking at the same time. These are the two sides of Don Imus. He could be childish, and childlike inquisitive, and he loved to find peoples’ soft spot, because that is where people become real, like Don Imus.

Imus and Stern represent a form of talk radio that took root in the 80’s. It was talk radio that was hilariously funny and also deeply personal. CBS tried to replicate a Free FM, but it ended up being T&A Talk, which flopped miserably (accept for giving Adam Corolla a spectacular future). It is only 9/11 that made Talk Radio into a political party.

I lost my morning gig to Imus in 1995. But I was instantly hooked on his show, even as I had gone from being the morning co-host to the board op and news guy for the syndicated show on my station. Imus got me into talk radio and I have stayed there for 25 years.

Imus also taught me that to be good, you have to get work your craft. I was on his show one time (early in my career) and he ripped me, like he used to do with so many people. His sense of timing was incredible and he knew how to work his team. The laughter was real – both in studio and in my car.

Don didn’t like bullshit, he was an early force against political correctness, and what happened to him with MSNBC was a tragedy. He really was one of the first to fall to the PC crowd. The ‘nappy-headed ho’ comment wasn’t even his, it was Bernie’s, and it wasn’t even Bernie (McGuirk), it was a character of Bernie’s. Much worse and more offensive things had been said on Imus in the Morning, but this was supposedly racist when SJW needed to bring someone down. Imus never really recovered. The times were-a-changin.

After losing his gig on MSNBC (which opened the door for him to go to the much better network Fox Business Channel, now home to Maria Bartiromo, and one-time side kick Dagen McDowell), Imus became less offensive and more guarded, and it showed. His crew, while talented, was modified to become inclusive, and the political correctness killed the tenor and tone of the show. When Charles McCord left, Imus lost his right arm. Chuck and Imus had that rare kind of chemistry that comes with life experience, and it showed.

I watched Imus for five years on MSNBC and on Fox. I listened to his show on the radio and he never bored me. I give him credit for shaping my political opinion. There are few people who can interview a politician today with the same finesse and objectivity.

We were left with Morning Joe on MSNBC and Syd and Bernie, both one-time primary players on the Imus in the Morning program, taking over WABC.

It’s also worth mentioning that, like Johnny Carson, many people got their careers kicked up a notch by becoming regulars on Don’s show, which says something about the impact of show and its host. Among them, Laura Ingraham, Mike Barnicle, Dagen McDowell, Bill Giest, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Amy Robach, David Gregory, Contessa Brewer, Tucker Carlson, Bo Dietl, Maureen Dowd, Delbert McClinton, and so many, many others.

There is much more that can be said, and much of already has been said, but from a guy who was just starting his career, my two biggest influences were Imus and Rush, possible Stern if I had to pick three career influences.  I would have liked to have his take on Trump. Now that would be interesting.

Simply put, funny is what you are born with, and these days, radio could sure use alot more funny. 


The Political Prophet Speaks: Looking Ahead to 2020

The Roaring 20’s. America was a great place to live. Money was flowing, cars were being built for the first time en masse, creating antecedent industries like hotels and motels, restaurants along highways, highways that sprawled from coast to coast, all of it creating America’s first real middle class. World War 1 had ended, America was the victor and we had so much money we loaned it to Europeans to help them build up their countries after the war. Jazz and movies exploded on the streets and in major cities across the great land. Silent movies had replaced Vaudeville, and talkies were on the horizon. It was also the golden age of radio, television had not just been invented. Then there was flight. More airplanes, more distance records and another industry was booming. 

In retrospect, the 1920’s were probably the most prosperous of any American decade, possibly outperformed by the 1950’s, again, right after another great war had given America another victory. The times weren’t perfect, but people felt confident and confidence is always a precursor to success.

And this is why we should enjoy these last few months before the 2020 elections. Since Donald Trump was elected, confidence has returned, jobs have come back, less regulation has spurred new business investment, small business investment has never been higher, taxes are lower for most, and there is real optimism, despite the congressional distraction of democrats who hate Trump for showing us a non-politician can actually be president.

It doesn’t matter of Trump gets re-elected. In fact, I would argue that there will be no peace in America if Trump gets re-elected. There will probably be blood on the streets. The machinations of the world media will ensure that outcome because 1) if it bleeds it leads, and 2) 95% of the media hates Trump so all hatred will be amplified to a fever pitch. The natives will get restless.

Confidence is the key, and when confidence wains, look for a run on the stocks and what lttle cash there actually is in the banks. 90% of all transactions are conducted with credit, the notion that you have credit to use, but if you try to cash out, there simply isn’t enough cash and this will, as it did in 1929, cause panic. Insecurity in the community almost always drives panic, and since the media will be complicit in fanning the flames of that panic (especially if it makes Trump look bad), we can expect the “good times” to end, and there will be a lack of confidence spreading like a flu epidemic..

I won’t say what, but with so much vitriol against President Trump, if he loses, there will be anger. If he wins there will also be anger. 

Franklin Roosevelt, despite many of his socialist policies was well-liked. He calmed fears and it help stem the depression’s effects until American could find its equilibrium (and World War 2 helped because it revived industry and put people back to work, including women). 

But Trump can’t play that card. He isn’t likable. Even his supporters admit they love many of his policies, but find it hard to like the person.

I believe history will be kind to Trump. Historians of the future will marvel at his ability to do so much in such a little bit of time. All of this is a matter of record, not opinion. 

If Trump loses, there will be a reversal to the policies that have made our government weak. Biden, Sanders or Warren will undue prosperity, because these people believe in the socialist version of ‘no child left behind.’ Their philosophy: We all need to suffer a little more to feel better about having so many poor people. That’s the message of the Democratic Left. Taxes will go up, regulations will increase and you can bet we will go back to where Obama believed we should have stayed. After all, they say, America was never great – and never will be again if the Left gets its way.

If Trump wins, there will be riots and fires and martial law and destruction. It doesn’t bode well for confidence. and without confidence, the economy will crash. So my advice: enjoy the good times while they last, because they never do, and the reckoning is coming, as it always does.

Maybe that’s why people are holding on to their cash. They can sense in their gut there is an approaching storm, just like the one that ended the Roaring 20’s.


James Watkins is a social commentator, author and host of the weekly podcast Speaking Out

The Hallmark Controversy – Can We Have a Real Discussion?

OPINION

In its simplest terms, being attracted to someone of the same sex is a physical urge produced by an emotional response. Trust is where all of this lies, who we trust, how we attain intimacy with those we trust. Trust and Intimacy lie at the root of LGBTQ.

Are people born gay?

The genetics don’t support it. Being gay, or having a preference for a loving relationship with a member of the same sex is an emotional response.

When a person is unable (or unwilling) to engage in a relationship with a member of the opposite sex, is it because of an underlying emotional issue, or simply a preference? 

Most gay individuals will tell you they “knew”  they were gay from a young age. 

But studies suggests most likely a triggered event shut down the emotional response to a person towards the opposite sex, OR a person of the same sex caused experienced trauma that resulted in the inability to feel intimacy towards someone of the opposite sex. What is intimacy? It is the ability to trust.

Here are some common clinical examples of traumatic experiences that trigger a negative emotional response common among gay people:

  • A young child is sexually or physically victimized by a male family member or close associate
  • A young child is made to feel shame for being aroused (and thinking it was normal until they were told otherwise)
  • A young child is exposed to pornography and is unable to process his/her thoughts, other than being aroused (which, by the way, is normal since we are mammals).
  • A young child witnesses a parent, usually the mother who is abused
  • A young child witnesses a sibling being abused
  • Due to a limitations or circumstances, young children are deprived of developing a strong loving relationship with one or more of their parents at a young age

These are common examples of trauma that can trigger a negative emotional response, which in turn, prevents the child being able to form trusting relationships during the formative years of their life (usually in the first 14 years of life, but especially between the age of 1 and 7 years).

If this is all academic, let me explain my point.

People choose based on personal likings. How they developed those likings depends on a thousand different episodes which make up a person’s life that brings them to that point. But the inability to engage in a trusting relationship with a member of the opposite sex is the symptom of a social ‘trauma’ that most likely occurred during those years when they were developing relationship skills with others. Our failure to deal with the emotional damage as a result of a specific trauma has been replaced by the ideological push to accept the results of the emotional trauma. It is also true that mental health trauma is usually treated medicinally, instead of using therapy to discover the underlying root of the mental trauma.

For men it is about the sexual drive, for women it has always been about trust.

You see, emotions play a big role in our sexual identity. Emotions are almost always a reflection of prior cumulative results of a negative or positive experience.  If we deem men to be a threat, or unworthy, something inside women tells them to run. BY the same token, women can be very intimidating to men, especially in youth. I joke with my friends about the fact that for the first two years of life, most boys are introduced to the world while they are sucking on a breast, is it any wonder most men are obsessed with them?

But what happens when there is a dysfunctional or non existent relationship with a child and the parent. How does one learn to develop trust? This is so key to human development, and yet we refuse to have that conversation because we don’t want to imply there is anything wrong with being gay.

I have two neighbors who are lesbian. They are very kind and I sense that they love each other and feel quite satisfied to be in a trusting relationship. My brother is gay and I know he enjoys a sublime trusting relationship with his partner. It is also probably true that both women, and perhaps even my brother, could never achieve the same trusting love for a person of the opposite sex, or else they probably would have. But for reasons we may never know, they feel more comfortable being with someone of the same sex This is why I have no issue with same-sex marriage. Two adults are entitled to have a loving relationship as long as it is a healthy and emotionally satisfying.

My issue is that when the sexual identity of a person is a result of abuse or trauma we as a society don’t want to address that prickly issue. Most likely because it would be an admittance that the fact that many who identify as “gay” may just be experiencing sexual dysphoria due to an actual experience which prevents them from bonding in a normal heterosexual relationship. Instead, LGBTQ advocacy becomes an umbrella for all those who might be suffering from ongoing emotional trauma, and mask it by playing sexual identity games, that skirt the underlying trust issue. For example, when a young girl thinks she identifies as a boy, the first approach is to determine IF something triggered this emotional response. To simply assume they were born in the wrong body is to ignore science. There are thousands of trigger events, the most common being emotional immaturity, that might confuse a child or young adult, but immediately adopting a new sexual identity should be the last resort – if at all.

But for the LGBTQ community to protest Hallmark Television’s decision to refrain from showing a commercial featuring two women at the altar kissing each other (under pressure, Hallmark reversed its decision, no doubt due to advocacy driven by the army of LGBTQ activism) is to miss the point. 

People protested Hallmark for airing the commercial because they don’t want to have a channel dedicated to family-friendly programming feature a scene of two women kissing. It forces a discussion that people have a right not to have to address. Period. It doesn’t matter that you might feel they have no right to feel that way, but they do. 

LGBTQ advocacy doesn’t belong on family-friendly channels for the same reason that they don’t (or shouldn’t) show racy sex scenes on the Disney channel. Just because progressives have adopted the normalcy of liberal sexuality doesn’t mean it’s established moral authority to do so. Just because Hollywood thinks it’s time to “woke” people about gayness, doesn’t mean it is. Respect must be afforded that allows people to choose their own time when to discuss controversial issues in their home – at their own choosing.

ACCEPTING SOCIAL NORMS AS RELEVANT

Children need fathers and mothers.  When society’s mores become entangled in emotionally destructive behavior SUCH AS PROMISCUITY, the family units fall apart (because there are no longer norms as touchstones we can build upon); society loses its bearing and family units no longer provide the soil of stability for good character growth and strong moral decision making. To deny this fact is to deny the entirety of the human experience. Families are far more important to society than sexual liberation.

Young men, now being told its okay to kiss other men, experiment, and then live with guilt for the rest of their lives. Young women, abused by older women, or by older men, develop long-term emotional duress because they can no longer trust adults. It is a sad fact that a majority of women who identify as lesbian or bisexual have been sexually assaulted at least once in their childhood. The same is also true for boys. Young boys who have been sexually assaulted by older men often go on to victimize other boys when they get older because they feel tainted by pedophilia. 

Gay men are far more promiscuous than gay women. The rules of social conduct didn’t change simply because people became open to have different sexual partners. Men are just naturally more sexually active than women. Two gay men are naturally going to exploit their sexual activity much more than two gay women. 

But instead of society dealing with these kinds of underlying emotional issues that probably play a major role in what is called sexual identity dysphoria, we normalize it without attempting to understand the cause of a person not being able to connect emotionally or normally with a member of the opposite sex. so they confuse this with sexuality. They can’t connect emotionally, perhaps due to fear or trust issues, so they externalize this into changing the rules of their sexual partners, thinking this will resolve the issue. They stop trying to overcome the emotional handicap, and instead, accept homosexuality as an alternative.

I love Ellen Degeneres. I have been a fan since her TV show, and even before when she was doing standup comedy. I fully respect her relation with her partner. She being gay has no bearing on my opinion of her. But if she (or anyone, really) chooses to be gay, my first question will be, “what was it that made it impossible for her to have intimacy with a man?” 

Let’s start there.

If a person told me he likes to wear high heel shoes and walk around naked, pretty good bet that person was exposed to something that triggered that emotional behavior. But is it not better to resolve the underlying issue so that the person doesn’t fetishize his/her behavior?

In the 1970’s American society obligingly understood it was no longer appropriate to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation. It has been codified and there are clear protections afforded to people who identify with being gay. This is a good thing.

But then being gay became a trend, it became license to be promiscuous for men. In the 90’s it became deadly. Being gay was to be a protected class in the midst of a scourge that spread (AIDS), and because of this protection, tens of thousands of men died because infected partner we free to spread HIV/AIDS. I personally knew six people, 4 of them gay, two straight, that died from AIDS and none of them used needles. My point is that sexual orientation should never have been turned into a commodity. But it has and it continues to be sold as a “lifestyle choice.”

The next evolution has occurred and this is what adults were afraid of. Excess.

Now that we welcome gay people with open arms, sexuality has become “fluid‘ and now children as young as three are allowed to have body-modifying surgery based on a parents decision to turn their child into the opposite sex. Sexual identity is now a choice, and encouraged. Can you imagine how confusing this is for pre-teens? Sexual fluidity is promoted by young children’s mentors, the media and now higher education. It is as if being sexually fluid is somehow virtuous, that “coming out” is an act of extreme bravery, when it may be the result of social pressure to conform in order to gain acceptance.

It was never about two adult women deciding to consummate a life together with a kiss, it was always about the promotion of sexuality as a commodity like clothing. It was also about undermining the moral and ethical teachings of our culture to make room for the new paradigm where there are no real rules, except embrace “your truth,” which is relative to the truth

Sending a message to our youth that it is okay to be gay, bi, gender fluid, non-binary, trans, or whatever other of the 123 sexual flavors there are, is leading these immature minds on a destructive and confusing path to sexual dysphoria, and it will no doubt effect their ability to have healthy, normal relationships later, not just with members of the opposite sex, but with all people who may (or may not) conform to their self-appointed identity.


JR Watkins is a social commentator and behavioral analyst.

Why Climate Change Policies Are Racist

Why Climate Change policy is bad for races of color.

Using the trickle-down theory as the basis of my conjecture, let me explain to you why the push to “do something” to save the climate will ultimately do more harm to people of color than any other race.

It’s time to wake up.

If indeed the action taken to lower the earth’s temperature requires charging more for fossil fuels then let me explain why this policy is inherently racist.
First, inner city people, comprises mostly of people of color, will have to pay more for their food, for their electricity, for charging their smartphones and playing their x-boxes, since all of these things are currently powered by fossil fuels. Cheap gas means cheaper food, cheaper utility bills, longer rides in older cars, cheaper bus fares. 

All of the things that are cheaper now so that people who live near or below the poverty line in major cities, which is disproportionately Black or Hispanic, will pay more, making it harder to make ends meet, all while they are helping to ‘save the planet.’

It will harder to climb out of poverty when energy costs are higher

Poor people in general will get less social service treatment as well because of increased fuel process brought on by climate change proponents. The U.S. economy will weaken, less people working means less people paying the taxes that support social services like drug treatment programs, personel, etc.

In a good economy, everyone wins because money is flowing, people are working and when you have cheap abundant energy, everyone wins, including people of color who live near or below the poverty line.


In Africa, Southeast Asia, Southern India, these places are finally being raised up out of poverty because of cheap energy. With strict regulation, a carbon tax, a fine, or worse, a rule of law that forbids the use of fossil fuels in these developing areas of the world, people of color would be hurt the hardest. They would be hit by several forces at once, including:
1) Less access to medical healthcare due to the roll back of donations from countries who are being forced to comply with expensive energy regulation.

2) NGO who live on international support, would be hard hit, and these are the front line agencies who fight poverty and try to lift these global communities up. Bad global economies mean less money for the poorest of the poor.


3) More corruption. Leaders who run these poor countries would naturally get IMF funding for agreeing not to develop fossil fuels, but instead, would be “paid” to take on renewable projects like windmills or solar panels as a way of generating less reliable energy. But in small countries, when there is money, there is always corruption. Again, corruption always hurts the poorest of the poor, and in this case, the poorest are people of color in Africa and in South Asia who must now wonder why they can’t get electricity because it “harms the planet.”


At its core, the idea of making energy expensive (when it is cheap) is racist. It targets the people who need it the most, people who barely have electricity to begin with. Making it more expensive means people will die, but they will be told they are ‘saving the planet. ‘

I have interviewed over a dozen of experts in astrophysics, climatology, energy production and meteorology, including people from NASA, JPL and NOAA. I have study climate change the 1980’s when I first started to doing Talk Radio and researched environmental causes that at the time, focused on waste rather than fossil fuels and carbon output. .I have attended conferences where climate change was discussed long before it was a thing, back when emphasis wasn’t on punishing rich countries who use cheap energy.

When the globalists start punishing us for using cheap, efficient energy, people of color, not just in our country but elsewhere, will feel the pain more than the liberal elite who feel better because they have done something to ‘save the planet,’ while killing those who just want to have hot meal and a warm place to sleep.


The Very Real Danger of Climate Change Isn’t The Climate

(Note: This is all caps because of the urgency of the message)

THE BATTLE LINES HAVE BEEN DRAWN

RIGHT NOW DELEGATES, INDUSTRIALISTS, WORLD LEADERS AND SCIENTISTS DRIVEN BY PROFITS ARE CONVERGING IN LONDON FOR A CLIMATE ACCORD.

I WANT TO TELL YOU WHY THESE PEOPLE ARE DANGEROUS.

EXTREMELY DANGEROUS.

THEY WANT TO CAP THE USE OF CHEAP ENERGY, THEY WANT TO FORCE THE ADOPTION OF EXPENSIVE AND LESS EFFICIENT RENEWABLE ENERGY THROUGH GLOBAL REGULATION. THE BELIEF OR ACCEPTANCE OF THIS GLOBAL POLICY IS PREMISED ON THE THEORY THAT THE USE OF FOSSIL FUELS WILL CAUSE A CLIMATE CRISIS AND IS RESULTING IN CATACLYSMIC CLIMATE ACTIVITY, FLOODS, ICE CAP MELTING, MASS MIGRATORY CHANGES FOR PEOPLE AND ANIMALS, ETC. IN ESSENCE, THIS CABAL OF PEOPLE HAVE CONVINCED THEMSELVES THAT BY NOT USING CHEAP ENERGY, WE WILL LOWER THE TEMPERATURE OF THE GLOBe BY 2 OR 3 DEGREES, WHICH THEY BELIEVE WILL OFFSET GLOBAL WARMING ENOUGH TO PREVENT CLIMATIC DISASTERS.

NONE OF THIS HAS BEEN PROVEN. MOST OF IT IS DRIVEN BY MAN-MADE CLIMATE MODELS FED INTO A COMPUTER, WHICH SPITS OUT PROBABILITIES BASED ON THE DATA SET AND ALGORITHMS THE RESEARCHERS THEMSELVES CREATE (THAT ARE CONSTANTLY BEING READJUSTED). THIS IS HOW IT WORKS: A RESEARCHER INPUTS DATA THAT STIPULATES CARBON (CO2) LEVELS EQUATES TO A CERTAIN RISE IN TEMPERATURES. IF CARBON LEVELS GO FROM 250 TO 400 PPM, WHAT EFFECT DOES THIS HAVE ON THE TEMPERATURE?

DO YOU SEE THE ERROR? THE ERROR IS THE QUESTION. YOU HAVE ALREADY STATED THAT TEMPERATURES ARE RELATED TO CO2. THE COMPUTER ASSUMES THAT X – 1 AND Y = 3, THEREFORE IF YOU MULTIPLY X, THEN Y ALSO INCREASES. THE FALLACY IS IN THE PRESUMPTION THAT CARBON AFFECTS TEMPERATURE. IT MAY OR MAY NOT, BUT IF THIS IS YOUR DATA SET, THEN OBVIOUSLY THE COMPUTER MODELS WILL ADOPT THESE SETS INTO A PREDICTABLE OUTCOME BASED ON DATA SETS THAT ARE NOT PROVEN.

IT MIGHT SOUND PREPOSTEROUS, BUT THIS IS WHY AL GORE, LEONARDO DICAPRIO AND MILLIONS OF LAY PEOPLE BELIEVE IN ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE, PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF CLIMATOLOGY ASSUME SCIENCE HAS THIS NAILED BECAUSE OF A SIMPLE ASSUMPTION (THAT CARBON CREATES A WARMING EFFECT ON THE EARTH’S SURFACE).

THE GOAL IS TO CONTROL WEALTH, NOT ENERGY

WHILE THERE IS CERTAINLY CONSENSUS ON CLIMATE CHANGE BEING DRIVEN BY EXCESS CARBON, THERE IS NO VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE AS TO JUST HOW MUCH THE USE OF FOSSIL FUELS CONTRIBUTES TO CLIMATE WARMING. IT’S HARD TO KNOW THIS BECAUSE MOST MAJOR NEWS ORGANIZATIONS HAVE PROMOTED THIS CONSENSUS AS EVIDENCE. ASK ANY SCIENTIST IF CONSENSUS IS EVIDENCE AND THEY WILL TELL YOU ABSOLUTELY NOT. CONSENSUS IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF SCIENTIFIC THEORY, WHICH IS TO DEMONSTRATE YOUR HYPOTHESIS WORKS REPEATEDLY. IF THIS DOESN’T HAPPEN, IT IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC FACT. AND YET CONSENSUS IS DRIVING THIS GLOBAL EFFORT TO CONTROL CHEAP ENERGY, AND FORCE ENTIRE NATIONS TO ADOPT ENERGY POLICY THAT WILL CRIPPLE PEOPLE’S ABILITY TO GET OUT OF POVERTY.

WE ARE LEARNING NEW THINGS ABOUT THE SOLAR EFFECT AND CYCLICAL DATA THAT STRETCHES BACK MILLIONS OF YEARS. WE KNOW NOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT CLOUD COVER IS NON-PREDICTABLE, AND YET PLAYS A MAJOR ROLE IN SURFACE TEMPERATURE NOT AFFECTED BY “GREENHOUSE GASES.” WE KNOW FOR EXAMPLE, THAT OCEANS PLAY A MUCH LARGER ROLE IN ENERGY DISBURSEMENT, AND WATER MAKES UP 75% OF THE PLANETS’ SURFACE. WE KNOW FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THE SUN GOES THROUGH NOT ONLY 11-YEAR CYCLES OF SUNSPOT ACTIVITY, BUT ALSO A 300 YEAR CYCLE THAT CAUSE THINGS LIKE MINI ICE AGES TO OCCUR AS WELL AS EXTREMELY WARM PERIODS LASTING HUNDREDS OF YEARS.

WE ALSO KNOW THAT MOST OF THE PREDICTIONS ABOUT CLIMATE GOING BACK 100 YEARS HAVE TURNED OUT TO BE WRONG, AND YET DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE KNOW THIS, “EXPERTS” ARE NOW TELLING US THAT WE NEED TO STOP USING OIL, GAS, HYDROGEN AND NATURAL GAS, WHICH ARE IN ABUNDANCE, AND GO BACK TO THE WINDMILL.

WE ARE BEING TOLD THAT WE NEED TO STOP USING ELEMENTS THE EARTH PRODUCES IN ABUNDANCE, ENERGY THAT HAS PROVIDED A WAY OUT OF POVERTY FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, IN FAVOR OF LESS RELIABLE ENERGY THE EARTH PRODUCES WHICH WILL KEEP MOST OF US IN POVERTY. IN FACT, UP UNTIL WE MOVED AWAY FROM “RENEWABLES,” (OR WHAT I CALL UNCOMPRESSED ENERGY – AS OPPOSED TO STORED ENERGY, I.E., COAL, OIL, ETC)” THE EARTH WAS ONE GIGANTIC POVERTY-STRICKEN PLACE. IT WAS CALLED THE PRE-INDUSTRIAL AGE. IT WAS WHEN IT WAS NORMAL FOR MILLIONS TO DIED FROM STARVATION AND FROM LACK OF HEAT.

TODAY, IN AREAS OF THE WORLD WHERE THEY STILL DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO CHEAP FUEL, THEY STILL STARVE AND THEY STILL LIVE IN POVERTY. NOW, THE EU AND THE IPOCC WANT TO KEEP THESE PEOPLE IN POVERTY TO “SAVE THE PLANET.”

BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT WILL BE DISCUSSED AT THE CLIMATE ACCORD.

WHAT WILL BE DISCUSSED IS HOW TO CONTROL ENERGY IN THE WORLD.

THIS IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF THESE POWERFUL WORLD LEADERS GET THEIR WAY AND TRY TO FORCE COUNTRIES INTO ACCEPTING THEIR STRICT REGULATORY CONTROLS OVER THE SPECIFIC USE OF CHEAP ENERGY, NAMELY GAS, OIL, COAL AND OTHER RAW MATERIALS THAT PROVIDE INEXPENSIVE ENERGY FOR BILLIONS OF PEOPLE.

THERE WILL BE REVOLTS IN THE STREETS

FIRST, IF THEY GET THEIR WAY, SAUDI ARABIA, QATAR, RUSSIA, THE U.S., MEXICO, VENEZUELA AND IRAN WILL HAVE MASSIVE UNEMPLOYMENT, ENERGY COSTS WILL SKYROCKET, FRAGILE ECONOMIES WILL COLLAPSE. COUNTRIES THAT GET ENERGY FROM THESE SUPPLIERS WILL HAVE RIOTS IN THE STREETS. IT’S ALREADY HAPPENING IN PLACES LIKE BOLIVIA AND IRAN BECAUSE OF STRICT ENERGY CONTROLS IMPOSED THROUGH SANCTIONS AND POOR LEADERSHIP.

MANY OF THESE COUNTRIES’ GDP SOLELY DEPENDS ON THE FACT THAT HAVE LARGE OIL RESERVES. TAKE THAT AWAY AND WHAT DO YOU THINK 500 MILLION ANGRY UNEMPLOYED MUSLIMS, AMERICANS, RUSSIANS AND HISPANIC PEOPLE WILL DO WHEN THEY ARE BROKE, UNEMPLOYED AND STARVING BECAUSE A FEW EUROPEANS, LED BY A 16 YEAR OLD EMOTIONALLY DRIVEN TEENAGER, DECIDED TO MAKE FOSSIL FUELS TOO EXPENSIVE TO USE?

CLIMATE POLICIES WILL ENSLAVE AFRICA – AGAIN

MOST OF AFRICA WILL BE DRIVEN TO ACCEPT INEFFICIENT ENERGY ADOPTION, ESSENTIALLY ENSLAVING THEM TO OTHER COUNTRIES’ RULES AS DESPOTS GET RICH ACCEPTING IMF FUNDING (THAT NEVER GETS USES FOR ITS INTENDED PURPOSE), WHICH IS TO PROVIDE ENERGY TO PEOPLE THROUGHOUT AFRICA. WHAT KIND OF CORRUPTION WILL WE SEE?

PLENTY.

THE AFRICAN PEOPLE WILL ONCE AGAIN BE SUBJUGATED BY FOREIGN ENTITIES.

RUSSIA AND CHINA WILL CONTINUE TO USE COAL AND WILL BECOME DE FACTO OIL CARTELS WHO WILL CONTROL THE MARKET WHILE EUROPEAN AND WESTERN COUNTRIES PAY HEAVY FINES TO CLIMATE ORGANIZATIONS WHO RUN BY NON-ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO ACT ON BEHALF OF A PUBLIC THAT HAS BEEN INCULCATED INTO BELIEVING THE WORLD IS GOING TO END UNLESS WE “DO SOMETHING.”

INSTEAD OF LIFTING PEOPLE UP WITH NEW ENERGY POLICIES, COUNTRIES WILL BE UNDER THE THUMB OF CENTRALIZED PLANNING.
CONVERSELY, WITH CHEAP ENERGY RIGHT NOW FLOODING THE WORLD MARKETS, THIS HAS BEEN IS A BOOM FOR COUNTRIES LIKE AFRICA, WHO CAN NOW FINALLY DRAGTHEMELVES OUT OF THE STONE AGE, THEY CAN ANND ARE BECOMING PROPSEROUS BECAUSE OF ACCESS TO ENERGY, WHICH TRANSLATES TO INFRATRUCTURE IMPORVEMENTS, INCREASED ACCESS TO JOBS, BETTER FAMILY PLANNING, EDUCATION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN IN SMALL VILLAGES, BETTER SANITARY CONDITIONS, FOOD PRODUCTION, ETC. ALL OF THIS GOES AWAY IF WE FORCE THESE UNDERDEVELOPED COUNTRIES TO STICK A GIANT WINDMILL IN THEIR VILLAGE AND ARE BEING TOLD TO WAIT FOR ELECTRICITY (AND TO BE GRATEFUL BECAUSE THEY ARE “SAVING THE PLANET”)

COMMUNICATIONS, CHEAP TRAVEL, ACCESS TO INFORMATION, CELL SITES, SMART PHONES, CHEAP ENERGY IS HAVING A PROFOUND EFFECT ON HELPING POVERTY-STRICKEN PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD—THIS IS A GOOD THING. A GLOBAL INITIATIVE TO FORCE PEOPLE TO ABANDON CHEAP ENERGY IS REGRESSIVE, AND IN MY OPINION, CRIMINAL.

STRADDLE THESE SAME GLOBAL VILLAGES WITH MASSIVE REGULATION THAT DOES NOTHING BUT PENALIZE PEOPLE FOR USING NATURAL RESOURCES, UNDER THE GUISE THAT THESE RESOURCES ARE SOMEHOW KILLING THE ENVIRONMENT OR CAUSING THE TIDES TO RISE, IS A RIDICULOUS ATTEMPT TO SEIZE POWER AND AUTHORITY THROUGH MISINFORMATION, THROUGH FEAR, AND ON A GLOBAL SCALE BY AN ELITE FEW WHO ARE EITHER KNOWINGLY LYING TO US, OR FOOLISHLY BUYING INTO THE NOTION THAT MAN CAN ACTUALLY MANIPULATE AND CONTROL THE ENVIRONMENT.

IT’S TIME TO PUSH BACK AGAINST THESE DARK FORCES

THESE WORLD LEADERS SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES, ESPECIALLY FOR USING LITTLE GRETA THUNBURG AS A TOOL TO SWAY YOUNG PEOPLE INTO BELIEVING THIS RUBBISH, SCARING CHILDREN INTO COMPLICITY, AND TAKING AWAY THE HOPE OF THE VERY PROSPERITY NOW BEING AFFORD TO SO MANY PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD BECAUSE OF CHEAP, EFFECTIVE ENERGY, JUST SO THAT, THE ELITE, THEY CAN FEEL A LITTLE LESS GUILT FOR HAVING SO MUCH ABUNDANCE THEMSELVES AS A RESULT OF THE VERY ENERGY THEY WISH TO CONTROL AND REGULATE.

WE CANNOT BE MISLED INTO THINKING NATURAL RESOURCES ARE KILLING THE PLANET.

AT THIS STAGE WHEN SO MANY ARE BEING LIFTED OUT OF POVERTY, AND SO MANY ARE ENJOYING THE FRUITS OF EFFICIENT ENERGY DISTRIBUTION, HOW CAN THESE SUPPOSED WORLD LEADERS KNOWINGLY BETRAY THE HUMAN RACE BY LYING TO US ABOUT RENEWABLES, LYING TO US ABOUT CARBON, LYING TO US ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING, ALL SO THEY CAN PAD THEIR POCKETS WITH OTHERS PEOPLES’ POTENTIAL.

PEOPLE IN GERMANY, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND ARE BEING TAXED TO DEATH BECAUSE OF STRICT ENERGY POLICY, A MICROCOSM OF THINGS TO COME. CALIFORNIA, RICH IN NATURAL RESOURCES, IS PAYING TWO DOLLARS MORE PER GALLON FOR GAS BECAUSE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS MEANT TO CURB POLLUTION, EXCEPT THAT BETTER CARS HAVE DONE MORE TO REDUCE POLLUTION. ALL THE TAXES HAVE DONE IS ALLOW FOR MORE BUREAUCRACY TO DEVELOP. BUILDING A NEW HOME, WITH ALL OF THE NEW REGULATIONS LIKE MANDATORY SOLAR PANELS (FILLED WITH TOXIC CHEMICALS) WILL COST A MINIMUM OF $400,000 DOLLARS, PASSED ON TO THE CONSUMER, OR COURSE, DRIVING UP REAL ESTATE VALUES, THUS MAKING THEM UNAFFORDABLE TO THE AVERAGE MIDDLE AMERICA, IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW GOVERNMENT REGULATION – IN THE NAME OF THE ENVIRONMENT – KILLS PROSPERITY WHILE MAKING THE STATE RICH.

I’LL CLOSE WITH THIS. IN ALDOUS HUXLEY’S 1932 NOVEL BRAVE NEW WORLD, YOU MIGHT RECALL HOW YOUNG CHILDREN, TODDLERS REALLY, ARE REGULARLY PUTTON PATCHES OF GRASS, AND THEN THE CHILDREN ARE SHOCKED WITH ELECTRICITY TO TEACH THEM TO BE FEARFUL OF GRASS.

WHY?

SO THAT THEY WILL NEVER VENTURE OUTSIDE THE CONFINES OF THE CITY, TO STAY AWAY FROM THE OUTSIDE WORLD, WHERE THEY HAVE BEEN TOLD IS A BAD PLACE FULL OF DISEASE AND PAIN. IT TEACHES THEM TO PUT THEIR FAITH IN THE STATE. WHAT IT ALSO TEACHES THEM IS SUBMISSION.

IT’S THE SAME KIND OF FEAR YOU SEE WHEN YOU OFFER SOMEONE A PLASTIC STRAW IN CALIFORNIA, OR WHEN YOU ARE LABELED A “DENIER,” A THREAT TO THE PLANET. IT’S A REFLECT BORN OF SOCIAL CONDITIONING., OF BEING TAUGHT SOMETHING WITH THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF CONTROLLING BEHAVIOR.

THIS IS WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING NOW FOR TWO GENERATIONS. OUR CHILDREN HAVE BEEN TAUGHT THAT PROSPERITY IS EVIL, THAT WEALTH IS EVIL, THAT PEOPLE OF WEALTH (EXCEPT POP STARS AND ENTERTAINMENT FOLK) ARE BAD BECAUSE THEY MAKE PEOPLE POOR (INCOME INEQUALITY), AND FINALLY, THAT USING CHEAP OIL THAT COMES OUT OF THE GROUND IS BAD BECAUSE IT KILLS THE PLANET.

WE’VE COME ALONG WAY. AND IF THEY CLIMATE CHANGE PROPONENTS WIN, WE ALL LOSE.

DECEPTION IS THE WORST FORM OF TYRANNY. IT LULLS THE BELIEVER INTO THINKING THEIR OWN DEMISE SERVES A GREATER PURPOSE.


James R. Watkins is a climate researcher, national public speaking author and host of Speaking Out, the Podcast. follow Jim on Twitter @jimthetalker

What Trumps reveals about all of us

by James R. Watkins

I can’t say I like President Trump or not. I have never met him. I think if I was sitting down having dinner with him, he would do most of the talking and I would probably enjoy the conversation. People brag. Trump is a bragger.

When Trump first ran for president I held (I was doing a morning talk show at the time in Tampa, Florida), that based on resume and experience alone – and especially that he was NOT a politician, this gave Trump the edge over most of the other candidates. Trump supporters felt empowered.

I also said that this presidency for Trump is no different from his TV show The Apprentice. If you go back and watch the way Trump structured the people, the goal or objective, and the outcomes – exactly the way he runs the White House. Every challenge he faces is like he did on that show: How do we solve objective What are the choices? who is the best person for the job? It’s how he strategizes.

Someone once told me there is a fine line between confidence and arrrogance. Confidents attracts, arrogance repels. That is Trumps greatest issue. You either like and/or understand his style, or you don’t.

So now we come to outcomes.

The nice thing about Trump is that, despite the anger people have for him, America is doing extremely well right now economically and the world is benefitting from it.

Minus the noise from the media. Trump is achieving objectives. I watch the stocks every day, I stay close to business trends and also what is happening in other global economies. People should know what China is up to, and why Brexit matters. They would see that Trumps’ actions are working positively in ways that actually are improving lives and restoring confidence.

In 2008 the opposite was true.

Florida was ground zero and what started there was the real estate bubble pop that was heard around the world.

We all know what happened and it wasn’t pretty. People lost their homes, there were record bankruptcy rates, small businesses were barely scraping by or were closing altogether. Unemployment was hovering around 10%. Also erupting just under the surface was the Opioid epidemic about to explode.

Today, we have an enormous homelessness issue in every major city, drug and alcohol abuse is taking its toll as a $55-billion dollar a year medical expense for Medicare, and our leaders, instead of really focusing on helping people, are instead, busy trying to tear down a presidency, or prevent the second term of one, simply because they hate Donald Trump.

We all know the media and the internet magnifies this hatred ten-fold. I see people I know and love who are so full of rage they don’t even talk to me anymore. I know I have certainly curtailed my own words, not because I am ashamed of them, but because it is not worth the arguing.

The media, and the democrats have done a tremendously good job at fomenting the already obnoxious behavior of Trump. It’s all they obsess about, totally ignoring so much of what else is interesting and important going on in society. There is no real news, it’s all advocacy and polling.

Watching the media support the democrats non-stop attack on the president (some of it well deserved) is like the Jodie Foster movie The Accused where you have the guy in the back urging everyone to “get in on the action,” as the victim lays there getting assaulted while everyone cheers on the assailants. The hatred has become unbearable to watch.

One worry is what happens once Trump is gone.

What happens next is the democrats (including the new Leftist party) will never give up power again.

The new Democratic party will rule with an iron fist so that people like Trump never run again. It will be the first PTSD Congress and White House, and for all of those who supported Trump, you will pay. Dearly.

New laws will pass restricting our freedoms of speech, the right to defend ourselves and the right to practice our faith openly.

Our thoughts and our social media will be scrutinized. We will be marginilized. Resistance is futile!

Our money will be taken from us because the new Leftist globalist party will double, even triple our financial commitment in our renewed efforts to fight climate change, and we will pay for our sin in allowing Trump to take the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accord, to the tune of hundres of millions of dollars a year- forever!

Then, the new leaders will ruin our economy to pay for increased social services, universal health care, immigration costs, etc. taxes will rise, small business will once again retreat, and we will be told this is the new normal, that America was never that great to begin with, and that white patriarchy is a racist stigma that must be eradicated, to the cheers of the New Progressives!

So the rest will be revealed as you will see, because what is happening now in California is waiting for the rest of us if we allowed Trump to be defeated.

And the darkest side of human nature is yet to be revealed.

The hatred of Trump has revealed the real moral character of the progressive Left, the corrupted media, and compromised leadership not only in Congress and in our intelligence agencies, but also in the judicary as well with activist judges. They will do and say anything to seize power.

I believe the devil loves Trump, he brings out the worst in people, and they don’t even know it.

But I do, and so do you.

The only question is: which side are you on?

What’s Driving Adam Schiff?

by James R. Watkins

When trying to understand the perseverance of Adam Schiff going after Trump, we must take into account who he serves.

Part of Schiff’s district is West Hollywood and Hollywood. He serves at the pleasure of the mega-elite movie industry producers, directors, stars, all of whom have globs of money and hate Trump with religious fervor, which comes in especially handy when you are running for re-election every two years and want to continue running un-opposed. 

Schiff represents the far-Left, the Rob Reiners, the Michael Moores, the Hollywood moguls who hate Trump with drool dripping from their teeth and yet, have also profited enormously from him.

But there is also a darker side to Schiff I am afraid I must reveal. 

Many years ago I chanced to meet a young gay man who was a very close friend of my brother, who is also gay. During the 80’s and 90’s gay in Hollywood was all of the rage. The rules on gay lifestyle were only being barely written and so there was an openness to it. It’s why young gay men flocked to Hollywood, to be used and abused by the Hollywood elite who host young men parties for people like, well, you know, Adam Schiff. People who wield great power and can make or break careers; the Bryan Singers’ of the world, the Ed Bucks (who was recently charged with two felony counts of murder for drugging two young black men in his home and refusing to call emergency when one of his victims overdosed on illicit drugs).

My brothers friend, and his name was Brad (Brad committed suicide in Seattle in 2009), mentioned that Schiff was a regular at these discreet young men’s parties hosted by the many producers who are behind some of the biggest movies in history.  It was common to see certain people and Schiff, according to Brad, liked to have a driver take him to cruise along Sunset late at night for young gay men to hire for sex.

So not only does the money that backs Schiff belong to these Hollywood moguls, but their secrets are also in the possession of these self-serving zillionaires who delight at having their own personal congressmen to manipulate like a marionette doll. 

You can see the fear in his eyes, it’s not anger. It’s desperation. Many Hollywood insiders tell me that Schiff knows if he doesn’t deliver the goods on bringing Trump down, he can kiss his district goodbye in 2022, and if Trump does manage to survive the constant onslaught of democratic fury, it will be Schiff’s credibility on the line both in Washington and at home, depending on Trumps’ re-election outcome.

Forget not that Schiff was LA’s chief prosecutor long before we knew him as Congressmen, and it was during the 80’s and 90’s that LA became the hub for cocaine, pornography and a booming movie industry where hookers and #metoo chicanery was an accepted part of the culture, not to be despised or judged. And Schiff was right there in the middle of all of it.

Schiff may not know where all of the bodies are buried, but he knows who buried most of them. And they have his number as well. No one is innocent in LA, including Schiff.

If there is someone who deserves to be investigated, it should be him.

Prayer Is Now Considered Hate Speech

COMMENTARY

by James R. Watkins, editor

If you tell someone, “I’ll pray for you,” or “I will send a prayer your way,” this is now considered by many, not just some, but many, to be a form of hate-speech, a micro aggression, an infliction meant to cause someone emotional harm.

CNN reported recently that Linda Thunström, an economist at the University of Wyoming who co-authored the study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that sending someone prayers is considered “controversial,” adding that in some instances, atheists and agnostics would even be willing to pay you not to pray, believing that such acts can actually do more harm than good.

I’m quoting her from the Breitbart report: The study, based on interaction with some 400 residents in North Carolina following Hurricane Florence’s destruction in 2018, said that atheists and agnostics are “prayer averse” — willing to pay to avoid receiving prayers — and are especially against receiving thoughts and prayers “from Christians.” end quote.

The report goes on to say, and from CNN, “Along with the emotional aversion that atheists and agnostics may experience to prayers said for the, critics also argue “that these gestures are meaningless and can reduce material help or structural reforms aimed at mitigating natural and social disasters,” the study said.

Some have included the phrase “I’ll pray for you” in lists of micro-aggressions, suggesting that this expression can “communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative slights and insults toward people.”

The report concludes with this anecdote. “One atheist said that being told “I’ll pray for you” with the claim it was a compliment “invokes the same feeling as equating sexually lewd comments with compliments.”You are saying what I said. This is fake news right?

I mean, do you think it is possible that people, even hard atheists, would actually be offended by someone tell you they will pray?

Is CNN just trying to push an agenda to promote secularism? or maybe the people who are offended are the younger Nones, who have practically no religious upbringing, but even then, is the offense that you feel your non-belief is being trampled upon? or is it because the very notion of prayer, that there actually might be a God who can crush you like the little spoiled brat that you are, that there might be a divine being who could end your existence with a mere thought, but, for the sake of the love that he possesses, would rather let you toil in your pain over something as nice as a prayer.

I mean, if you live in that world where words like God, and Jesus actually cause anxiety, what does that say about you?

What kind of human being would be anxious about the notion of faith, or the idea that there is something larger than you  that exists? and that your puny non-life, as important as it is to you, is really meaningless, and the truth is God reminds you of that very truth.

So if instead of facing that fact, you hide yourself from having superior thoughts and ideas, and instead settle for being a snowflake, stuck in your own make-believe world where life is an accident – and so are you.

I am so sick of people attacking or marginalizing faith.

CNN is doing this by reporting this fake, fraudulent non-story and passing it off as some kind of cultural trend that we all need to embrace just because there are weak minded individuals who are making a stink, lost souls really, who can’t take the idea that they have to take responsibility for the fact that thoughts and actions do have consequences, and it is they must take accountability for what they are and what they do in this life – and the next, and that this life isn’t just a free ride for all, free to act like little children and  play by whatever rules want to play by because, well, thats what you think!!!

Listen, the faithful and the reasonable among us must push back on this kind of nonsense.

Mainstream media and secularist in general have no desire to help people of faith or to ensure faith-principles remain a part of our society. Let that be known.  If allowed to metastasize, these anti-religious, anti-Christ loving vice-masters will spread their nihilistic doctrine to the world. They have already infected our schools and our media.

I would argue there is a good cause to be found promoting spiritual virtue and moral insights that in the end, make us all a better people and better citizens.

If we don’t who will? When faith become hate-speech we are all one step away from being locked up because of our faith, and it wouldn’t be the first time in history this has happened.


James Watkins is an author and the host of the podcast Speaking Out.

Dead Christians and a Silent Media

It should alarm you that over 245 million Christians were targeted for persecution last year around the world. 80 percent of all religious persecutions were against Christians, according to a recent study commissioned by the British Government and conducted by the Catholic Church.

The Foreign Commonwealth Affairs (FCO) report was established by the Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, HM Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, and chaired by the Bishop of Truro, Rt. Rev. Philip Mounstephen, and it focuses on several regions of the world where persecutions of Christians are most intense, including Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, China, Indonesia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

But Mountstephen says the scope of the report doesn’t include dozens of other countries where Christian persecutions occur in increasing numbers. The Bishop also affirms that the report is meant to emphasize the Human Rights abuses which face all people who are entitled to Freedom of Religion and Belief, as has been agreed to as a core human right by all nations under numerous charters agreed to by global Parliaments, Members of the U.S. Congress and members of the UN General Assembly.

And yet, these abuses continue.

ISIS and Boko Haram are probably the most vicious, but China is also a major oppressor of religious rights, as is Pakistan, and most of North African countries like Libya and Egypt. 

This report is a call to all people who believe in God. There is not A greater sin, in my opinion, than to oppress or to bring harm upon any human being simply because they want to exercise their rights to worship, or to gather in fellowship to worship.

What is happening to Christians now is happening to all faiths. As Mounstephen writes, “religious rights are fundamental to all other rights, the rights of conscience, the right to free speech, etc.”

The report says it is not a condemnation of Islam, but rather, those radical factions of Islam (like ISIS or Boko Haram, and increasingly so, the Taliban in Afghanistan), who have most certainly participated in the extermination and “racial cleansing” in many Middle East and Central African regions. The scope of persecutions extends to non-Muslim countries like China, North Korea and Cuba, where atheistic governments seek to remove thr Christian religion because of its perceived threat to State power.

To put things into perspective, right now, one third of the planets‘ population of Christian believers are being persecuted or oppressed.

If you really don’t care, you should, because oppression always starts with the others until it becomes your problem. 

The fact that Western Media doesn’t cover it is predictable.

We suffer from what Mountstephens calls “Post Colonial Guilt.”

I would also add that, thanks to constant badgering of Christians by the left in order to protect LGBTQ advocacy, many in Western Culture have no problem defending gender rights, but they seem to exhibit a real disdain against the religious rights of Christians – whom they despise.

But remember. Though Christians bear the brunt of persecution, as Mountstephen says, this is about the human right of religion and belief.

Article 18 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance. (The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 

As a Christian I find it shameful that this Genocide is occurring at a time when so many millions of us celebrate the very freedoms and liberty that derive from Christian principles, which led to the recognition of human dignity in modern times.

I find it shameful that the people who have most benefited from the charters of liberty are deaf to the sufferings of people simply because they don’t think Christian suffering matters.

Food for thought for people of faith: instead of trying so hard to find and save new souls, maybe we should, instead, focus our efforts to help rescue our brothers and sisters who fear for their lives while we lavish under the banner of liberty living in a free society.


James R. Watkins is a media consultant, author and host of the weekly Podcast Speaking Out

The Danger of Judging Yesterday with Today’s Moral Yardstick.

Slavery is a good example of how people today judge what happened a century ago by today’s moral standards, and why it is wrong to do so.

First off all, none of us were alive so we don’t know exactly how people felt, how they were treated and with the exception of writings we can look at from that period, we simply can’t comprehend with any degree of clarity, how it was that people allowed slavery to exist. We look back with the experience of not having slavery, just like we look back with the experience of not allowing heads to be removed from conquered people, which used to be a common practice. We look back today and wonder how did people drain blood to cure the flu, why did they believe the world was flat? Why did our ancestors believe evil spirits could possess horses, or why people used to be thrown into volcanoes or over cliffs as a sacrifice to the gods? 

But they did.

A hundred years from now people may wonder the following things about us:
Why did they believe there are 112 genders?

Why did they believe they were the only planet to inhabit the universe?

Why on earth did they put themselves in vehicles that move through space over 75 miles an hour?

Why did they use radiation to kill cancer when it also kills the patient?

Why did they spend all of that time sitting in front of a screen watching shows that were so violent?

Why did women get raped?

Why was there child abuse?

Why did people take drugs and get high?

Why did people wear make up and eat sugar when they knew it was bad for them?

Why were people so obese?

Why was porn so popular?

Why did they believe in Jesus?

Why did they not believe in Jesus?

Why did they execute people, or not execute them?

You see, in each of these questions and in so many more, societies and cultures develop over time, we evolve and are subject to the conditions at hand. We are the end result of trial an error – but we are not the END, and this is why we can never properly judge the previous generations based on our own enlightenment, or lack thereof.

What we do today will be judged by our children and grandchildren, just as we judge our forefathers, and sometimes in disgust and amazement. But morality, ethics, the mores, are adjustments in time and modified by new information as we evolve and progress. So it does no good to pass judgement, or worse, to seek retribution for past sins, especially if we weren’t the ones who were on the receiving end of them.

Or else we are all guilty and can never hope to find absolution.


James R. Watkins is an author and host of the podcast Speaking Out

What Our Next President Should Look Like

Commentary:

by James R. Watkins

What I would like to see in our next president, whoever wins, is a president who will continue the Trump policies that are working, like de-regulation, robust energy policies that produce low prices as well as innovations in R&D towards environmentally beneficial energy, low taxes for business and personal, and a reduction of duplicitous government programs and/or departments that are wasteful of tax dollars. Trump has shown us that these three strategies work in producing jobs and improving the lives of millions of Americans.

If Trump is re-elected I have no doubt he will continue with these winning policies as he continues to “drain the swamp” of big-government excess that has been hurting the American people for 20 years. 

But there is more work to do on our infrastructure improvements, trade imbalance policies and immigration control, as these three areas, if invested in properly and brought under a sense of intelligent direction, can go a long way at further reducing the tax burden on the U.S. citizen, while also tapping into the resourcefulness of the American people who can help solve these problems private and public enterprise innovations.

Lastly, our educational system is in need of great reform. From kindergarten to High School we need to get rid of the progressive curriculum so that our schools produce citizens who are capable of competing on the world market, not snowflakes who are unprepared to deal with the rigors of adulthood and the responsibility that comes with it. 

The emphasis in our education should not be on “group think” feel-good learning skills, but on individual, character growth skills – as well as basic reading, writing and math skills, with an emphasis on American History as well as Classic History, Economics and fact-based Earth Sciences (not climate change propaganda).

The fact that many major employers say American students are not capable of filling much needed positions in tech as well as the medical field is proof our schools are need of improvement. Schools are, frankly speaking, spitting out stupid citizens who are more concerned about global warming and gender studies than getting a real job with lifelong benefits so they can support themselves.

But lastly, I hope our next President is less about being brash and more about being calm, and not giving the media an opportunity to lambast him/her at every point. Politics has become a joke and everyone gets a finger on this one.

I am not sure who is responsible for the constant bullshit that is called news today, but the mainstream news media is doing no one any favors by turning everything into a scandal.

American media’s obsession of Trump must stop. Let him do his job, and if re-elected, let him continue to do his job. If another person is elected, let us hope that person is wise (and honest) enough to maintain those Trump policies that are working and improve upon on those points outlined above.

Despite the noise, Trump has done much swamp cleaning. More people are working, wages have risen, crime is down, less people are in poverty today, and while other countries are struggling economically, American business is robust and confident.

America deserves a president who can maintain this momentum, not “transform it” into something for purely political or ideological reasons.

We don’t need another Obama-like leader with feckless progressive policies that we know do not work, we another Trump – minus the three-ring-circus who understands that when left alone, Americans thrive.

In the movie “As Good As It Gets,” Helen Hunt’s character Carol exclaims at the end of the movie “why can’t I have just have normal?!”

I want normal, maybe even boring, but with a steady hand and a leader who truly represents mainstream America, not extreme.

We deserve that, don’t we?


James Watkins is a media consultant, author and host of the podcast Speaking Out.

Goodnight America

I have asked myself how is it China is ruled by one political party? How is it that China also controls the media? How is that 1 billion people seem to live under this illusion that the Party, or the State, has their best intentions in mind when they govern?

You have to seriously ask yourself this question because all of this that I have just described about China didn’t just happen overnight. It happened because a very small, but determined, group pf Marxist believed that a very small, but powerful force could control a country. All you had to do was control the education, marginalize religion, own the media (print, television, newspapers and now the Internet), and use fear or shame to control the masses.

And all of this is happening before our very eyes in the U.S. We are slowly morphing into a one-party nation. We are slowly morphing into a nation where the media has chosen which side it wants to be on, and will support and propagate whatever that party wants in order for them to remain in power and those who serve it also stay in power.

What surprises me the most is Trump. He wasn’t supposed to happen. He wasn’t supposed to win. But he did and the Left’s attempt to take full control of America was foiled. Even after he won the “swamp” tried to take him out. When the economy, under his guidance of policy and de-regulation began to have a positive affect on people’s lives, the media was right there to perpetuate bigotry, racism and the rest, pinning it not only to one man, but to those who support him.

Today, we have at least four front-running Democrats, all of them marxists, who truly believe that they will fundamentally change America so that the State becomes so powerful that no one will ever defeat them.

Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are anti capitalists and they will “fight for the poor” by making sure we are all equally poor (what they call true “income equality”) and they will also make sure White America never gets control of the White House, and Congress again.

They do this because they believe America is a racists country and always has been.

They believe we must pay for our racial sins and the only way to do it is to socialize every aspect of American life. They believe the only way to get environmental justice is to control energy distribution, under the guise of climate change control (the fallacy that humans can lower the earth’s temperature by stopping the use of oil and coal); they believe that the minority is the victim and the oppressors must pay. Who are the oppressors? Those who believe in free-market capitalism, and those who believe in God. You see, the faithful are the oppressors. They are the ones who prevent women from having abortion rights, they are the ones who discriminate against Islam and/or gender liberation, they are the ones who make us feel guilty because we can’t have our rights to be whatever and whoever we want to be.

It’s over and I know it will be because the Marxists have already one. 

Even if Trump gets re-elected, which he will not because Google and the Democratic Alliance of America (a progressive socialist group funded by billionaires) have already prepared for the next 15 months. If Trump does survive the media, he won’t survive the radicalized left who will most assuredly take him out.

And those who support Trump, they will be demonized, and when enraged, will be showcased as “the problem” in America.

History will recall that Trump ended up being the last true capitalist president. And i really pray that I am wrong. But I know human nature and the problem is far too many people look to government to solve their problems. But like our current medical system, it’s not about prevention, it’s about maintenance. There is no money in curing people. If you cure them they don’t need you, and one thing government needs to survive is people giving it power to control their lives “for their own good.”

It was good while it lasted

Frank Adair is a media consultant who resides in St. Augustine, Florida


How To End Predatory Behavior

Commentary by Jeff Richards, columnist-at-large

August 14, 2019

Is there a biological reason older men like younger women?

Yes.

And you are not going to like the answer.

It has to do with species survival and being hard-wired to seek out those who stand the greatest chance of success in propagating the species.

As a male is able to produce sperm until his death, and in that younger women tend to be much more fertile, it stands to reason there would be internal mechanism built with the sexual urge that makes it more likely older men would be more naturally attracted to younger women.  Pause to consider that, for most of our existence, the typical lifespan of a human was 40 years. It was important to reproduce, to have children who could take over the farm or the field. People died quickly from disease, cold, hunger and natural disasters. Our sexual hunger insured our survival.

However, what started out as a natural urge that eventually led to the establishment of the homelife, which of course led to communities and still later, nations, has turned into a fetish; sexuality has become more about personal satisfaction than public duty. We lavish in sexuality, especially during the age of liberation of vices, and it will most likely continue for the foreseeable future.

There is however, some level of hypocrisy in the way we view sexuality.

This latest period of scarlet-lettering of every middle aged or older male with the charge of being a sexual predator drives the behavior underground, where all human fetishes go, hidden, taboo, and even more dangerous. But at the same time, our liberal culture also celebrates pride in certain kinds of sexuality, but condemns others. For example, Miley Cyrus is proud of her ability to be open with her sexuality, but if you were an older male parading about having an open relationship with a younger guy, you would be most assuredly condemned by social media. It’s okay to be a teen bi-sexual, but it is not okay to be a millionaire who is attracted to younger women.

Whether it’s seeking out pleasure in dark corners with fellow seekers (like kiddie-porn sites), or using power and influence (i.e., Charlie Rose, Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein) to subdue younger women and teens with the approval of fellow predators, it’s the same. We have a sexual fetish problem in our culture that in some circles is celebrated but in other circles it is not. The lines of discretion and decency are sometimes vague.

One thing that could help, and it’s a shame that we have to remind ourselves, but women must be treated with respect.

Women, by the same token, should be sensitive to the fact that using one’s sexuality to gain leverage, a practice that is as old as sex itself, is also equally manipulative and wrong in today’s society. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t be offended at a male’s forward gesture, and at the same time use use your good looks to get one’s attention or favor, and then act as if that is not what you are doing.

I have always said that if women didn’t care about their sexual leverage, why the makeup, why the perfume, the short skirt or the tight dress? Sure, it’s cultural now to be somewhat risque in our dress, but in the interest of honesty, it is a fact that women and men play the game of cat and mouse all of the time, to a greater or lesser degree. Whether its getting an edge at work or getting a bus driver to stop and wait, women use their beauty as they have always done, to gain leverage. In ancient times it was about survival, today it is a social game we play to our advantage. To be shocked that men are takers is to display one’s naiveté.

It is hypocritical on the one hand, to condemn older men’s attraction to younger women, while at the same time celebrate a teenage males decision to announcing his bisexuality, or for Katy Perry to promote promiscuity while attending a #MeToo protest.

But the two great rules we can all agree on that might help us resolve the predator epidemic is:


1. Teach young boys to always respect women. Period. I was taught this from an early age. I fully realize my life has been much easier because I adhered to this rule.

2. Teach all children that acting on impulses is not a good character trait. Most men will agree they can’t help but notice when there is an attractive woman nearby (as most women would probably admit the same thing with regard to an attractive male catching their attention). As my wife says, we’re human, its normal to notice, but acting on the impulse is what separates us from mere animal. If we make the distinction early with young children to refrain from acting on one’s impulses, we will all be the better for it. As a parent, it is your societal duty to reinforce this message for the betterment of all of us.

Nature pushes us into many directions, but we can all learn to develop the right disciplines along the way to keep us out of trouble. But we have to admit first that men have natural attractions to women, and vice versa, and that we all must be tamed for our own good.

It’s nature vs. nurture folks, let’s admit it and move on from where we find ourselves today.



Why Hong Kong Should Matter to Americans

Commentary by JR Watkins, Contributor

August 9, 2019


Our Western media really knows how to kill a story, or in the least, make the story uninteresting because the media itself doesn’t really understand it. And by media I mean Western Journalists who are more preoccupied with Trump than they are with the ruthless mega-monster known as China.


Hong Kong is scared, and they should be. Breathing down their necks is a regime that is in lockdown-mode when it comes to surveillance and strict population control. It stopped being about extradition rights 9 months ago. It is now about freedom itself, and the fact that the American flag is the Hong Kongers flag of choice is telling.

You see, for all of those taught in U.S. public school systems, Hong Kong used to be under British rule until 1997, that is when Hong Kong became part of China, with the stipulation that the small Island State could retain its free-market policies, meaning it could remain relatively independent from Communist China. One Country, Two-Systems was the mandate, but recently things have changed.

For one thing China’s economy is a fraud and they know it. It’s like Jinga, only this tower is so high up and wobbly no one can even see the top.

The escalating U.S. China trade war is also not helping. Chinese needs America to buy its stuff, and Trump knows it. Meanwhile, two things have been taking place in China for the past few years, more surveillance (thanks to new and much-improved technology), and China’s crackdown on dissidents. Usually when you have a “crackdown” it means people at the top are nervous. The CCP needs Hong Kings’ money, I think, because they have run out of their own. But more importantly, China needs obedience. If the mainlanders start hearing about resistance, the fire could spread. Right now China can control its people because it has the tech and the fear to do it. But not so in Hong Kong (this is why you see a lot of protestors wearing masks, which prevents their image from being captured by face-recognition technology).

What happens next is anyone’s guess, but Americans who think it doesn’t matter should remember that if China wins this, it means they gain strength. If they lose, we have the upper hand and Trump will have scored a major victory going into 2020. A broken China is defined as giving in to the resistance of Hong Kong protestors and backing off. Not likely in the long term, but in the short term, it might be prudent for China to fight this battle another day, which they are wont to do.

Remember, China has its own domestic issues at home: high unemployment, urban sprawl, a weak Yuan and of course, a trade deal that keeps them afloat unless Trump dangles the carrot too long.

A fallen regime in China is like the wall coming down in East Berlin in 1989. That was a gift to Reagan, but it also ushered in greater democracy and free markets for Europe, not to mention millions of former Soviets who lives would vastly improve in a free-market system (too bad leadership hasn’t improved in Russia, but some things take time).

China is the Stalinist empire of the 21st Century. They have concentration camps, they kill people because of their faith, they sell organs taken from prisoners, they export their wicked surveillance and social monitoring software to world despots (like Venezuela and Iran), and they are the largest country by population in the world, so yes, they need to go down, and go down hard.

Hong Kong is waving our flag, hello?


JR Watkins is a media expert and consultant

Truth Is Killing The Left

Commentary | James R. Watkins, Editor at Large


Most Americans are not racist. Most Americans know this fact and they also recognize the following truths:


1) Slavery was and is bad

2) Blacks paid a heavy price

3) There are still racists but thankfully, most people are NOT racists because they know racism is wrong. It goes against God and against human decency.

What the press and the Democratic party have done is to consolidate all of their hatred towards Donald Trump, to a degree never seen before in this country, and are now attempting to project that concentrated hatred of Trump outward to include all who support him. In other words, the Trump-haters think they can convince people that if you vote for Trump you, too, are a racist, coupled with another goal, which is to convince Democrats that if they know someone who supports Trump, it is their moral duty to label such supporters as ‘white nationalists,’ which is now equated with ‘white supremacy.’

But none of this will work because most people can see through the charade.  Human beings have a great ability to discern truth as well as deception. Which is why once the Democrats and the endless parade of Trump-haters in establishment media realize they have become the very intolerant person they despise, once movies like The Hunt expose their dark intentions, there will be a huge awakening as more of us come to recognize Leftisms’ ugly face, exposed for all the world to see.

Everyone with a brain and a sense of truth understands that Trump didn’t cause the recent mass shootings. Most are well aware Trump has done more for minorities in two years than the Democrats have done for them in twenty. Everyone knows that when Trump called out Elijah Cummings he did so because no one else had the courage to ask Elijah why Baltimore is in such ruins when the President’s administration has given $18-billion to the city of Baltimore in 2018.

Where did the money go? And you know what happened when Trump started asking??

People became woke to what the president was saying, Elijah’s media buddies and fellow Democrats had to deflect with charges of racism towards the President. Cummings was being held accountable, but because he is an African-American, he assumed he could hide behind charges of racism rather than be called upon to explain his poor leadership for his constituents.

But then the script was changed. A new drama emerged. People could see what the media was trying to do, what the Left does. Deflect. By the third day, the cameras shifted away from the Trump-Cummings skirmish (‘thank God,’ said the Dems) to mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton. And not skipping a beat, the blame for these shootings were laid upon Trump’s feat, yet again. It was his fault for stoking flames of racial hatred, a charge he has carried since they day he came down that escalator in Trump Towers tellings us Mexico sends us their worst.

Watching the presidential candidates exploit the shootings for political gain was quite embarrassing. It was as plain as rice is white, and I am sure I am not alone in my assessment.

People died, and yet…

Beto, Kamala, Pete, all of them, prostrating themselves before the altar of political exploitation, to charge such heinous events as being the result of Trumps’ racist rhetoric, the same rhetoric now coming out of their mouths? Exposing their empty souls and their hypocrisy, as if we were so stupid to believe these people could ever lead the world’s greatest nation with such vacuous character traits on display, using dead bodies to destroy their political opponent in the name of feigned compassion.

Shame on all of them.

People continue to die every week in cities like Chicago and Baltimore, and yet this weekend, “America grieved.”

Why aren’t we grieving every weekend when innocents are shot? Because the media can’t blame Trump for those deaths, that’s why. The lack of lawlessness in the streets is brought on by gangs (Trump is trying to fight) and poor democratic leadership in many of these inner cities.

Meanwhile, the media picks and choose which murders to cover, based on the ties it might have to the Orange Bad Man.

And we all see it.

2020 is going to be a landslide if Trump can maintain the economy (which I believe he will), but it won’t be because we all love Trumps’ not-so-wonderful demeanor, brash as it is. It will be because Trump has done what he promised. The country is doing better because he was spot on with limiting regulation, cleaning up the “swamp” by reducing waste, and having the tenacity to stop wasting taxpayer dollars on feel-good programs that benefit only lobbyists and elites.

Trump will win because Americans are cognizant of the fact that for the first time in a long time, we have someone who holds government accountable.Trump will also have won because the country has grown sick and tired of the flagrant establishment media that has sold their souls – and their minds – to a failed ideology that seeks to make everyone a victim.

Trump’s reelection will be a vindication, a referendum against Leftism, even a condemnation of the Left’s attempt to take over this great country and turn it into a surveillance-state of political correctness.

For every lie they spew about the America they hate, Americans remember.

You can already see the pushback. Cable news is down (by as much as 60%); the Mueller investigation was a sham, and there was no accountability by the Press or by leadership in Congress when President Trump was not charged for conspiracy to collude with Russia. Instead, they kept the impeachment movement going because, well, they don’t like the guy.

Americans are a forgiving people, but you have to ask for redemption, or lose your reputation and credibility. The media has lost its reputation, it has squandered its credibility as an important part of the American system of politics, it has become a joke, trivial, untrustworthy and jaded by ideology an of hate. Ironic since the Left complains most loudly about hate even while they foist all of it upon one man who was duly elected as president.

Meanwhile, the economy roars on. Consumer confidence reigns, people’s wages are rising. Americans are proud.

Most of us anyway.

Even the sham of climate change is starting to be exposed.

The Left is losing its grip on trying to globalize our country through fear-based, socialist climate-change policies that undermine a free and open society. Some people are starting to realize that Climate Change is normal, natural and having nothing to do with human beings (except for our trash, of course).

Now referred to in media as a Climate Crisis, the fraudsters are embarrassed by new data revealing startling new information which proves carbon dioxide is not causing global warming. Just this week, as if to rebut the new findings by NOAA scientist Max Fleming and others, members of the IPCC tried again to claim that “excessive carbon dioxide will create deserts,” if we don’t curb our usage of fossil fuels.

Carbon dioxide, we all know from 5th grade biology, feeds plants, not starves them. We also now know, according to NOAA, that man only produces 3% of all carbon dioxide found in the atmosphere. This suggests that even if we stopped producing carbon dioxide altogether, the earth would only have 3% less carbon dioxide in its atmosphere, a literal drop in the bucket, showing that this has been about fear all along.

We can all now see what is going on with the now incestuous relationship between the extreme political Left and the Establishment Media. We see the emperor has no clothes. We see that traditional family values are under attack by the Left, who now trying to convince us that there is no such thing as gender, that income inequality is because of patriarchal capitalism, that caucasians are inherently racist and oppressive as well as the source of all of the worlds social ills. But we aren’t buying it.

We see the Left’s agenda and its attempt to undermine the principles of this country by attempt to marginalize people of faith, by using media to portray people who are proud of the United States as bigots; that things like liberty, freedom, the right to self-determination are merely patriarchal ideas that oppress people of color, when nothing could be further than the truth!

Only now Black Americans, Asian and even Mexican Americans are realizing that the Left wants to take every dream they ever had away, replacing it instead with an ideology that declares the State can pick and choose losers and winners, that the rich need to pay up; that we are all equally victims, and we need to be protected by authoritarian policies based on output and social worth to the State – not to the individual who simply wants to be left alone.
 

I could go on because I am moved, not by my hatred of the Left, but by my belief in the human spirit and its ability to see through the lies of the Left, whose days are numbered because truth reigns supreme.

We can thank our creator for giving us the ability to see truth.

It will be fun to watch the Left drown in their hatred come November of 2020.


James R Watkins is a former national talk show host, and producer for Michael Savage, Laura Ingraham and others, is currently a national media consultant.