Connect with us


Leftist tolerance and intolerance: A brief list of what’s allowed



A brief explanation of the tolerance of leftism

I’ll be the first to admit I hate social media. I don’t hate the concept or the potential, but I do hate the idiocy, trolls, and false activism. Did I mention trolls?

Sometimes, one can draw conclusions by sifting through the white noise. I’ve come to a conclusion.

What I’ve found most perplexing is the tendency by leftists to denounce intolerance with… intolerance. Here is a list of things leftists demand we all tolerate:

  1. Accusations by women against men regardless of corroboration – I’m not even going to elaborate on this one.
  2. Radical Islam in all its forms – While leftists are quick to denounce most violence of any kind (except for violence perpetrated by their activists) and gun violence in particular, they are hesitant to even mention violence if the alleged perpetrator is Muslim. This is why stories about violence driven by radical Islamic beliefs, whether they’re hate crimes, domestic violence, or outright terrorism, are buried or ignored by mainstream media.
  3. Open borders – It’s unfair to a leftist that some people aren’t Americans and won’t go through the legal immigration process. While many on the left hate America, they have no problem with accepting the freedoms allowed in America and wanting to share them with everyone who wants to infiltrate our borders. After all, they want us to build bridges, not walls.
  4. Censorship of conservative voices – It’s hate speech. It’s all hate speech. Whether it’s Ben Shapiro or Kathleen Parker or Gavin McInnes or any other right-leaning speakers, all they want is to divide us. They only have hate speech… at least to radical leftists who probably haven’t even heard them speak before.
  5. Police doing their jobs – If a police officer shoots and kills anyone, particularly a minority, it’s instantly bad and never justified in the eyes of the left. It doesn’t matter what they did to prompt action against them, how aggressive they were acting, what threats they posed, what drugs they were on at the time, or any criminal history they might have on record. No police officer should shoot and kill any unless the “victim” fires first… and even then we’ll often see protests.
  6. Socialism – “It’s never been tried,” the leftist will say. Examples of it failing were not really socialism. Examples of capitalist Scandinavian countries applying certain degrees of socialism are the model they want us to follow. Oh, and don’t read any of the reports suggesting their economies are not sustainable long term.
  7. Rich leftists – Bernie Sanders. Alyssa Milano. Colin Kaepernick. Glenn Close. Elizabeth Warren. Jeff Bezos. Taylor Swift. These people aren’t really rich. They just have money they’re saving up to redistribute to the poor when the Republicans finally allow them to do so.
  8. A woman’s reproductive rights – It’s her body, therefore she must decide what to do with the non-human-potential-for-life-if-she-chooses-to-allow-it that’s growing inside of her.

Now, here’s a list of some of the things we must never tolerate, according to leftists. See if you notice any parallels:

  1. Accusations against women for lying about men – I’m not even going to elaborate on this one.
  2. Judeo-Christian values – Our nation was founded on values that were derived from a Judeo-Christian worldview. These values have permeated into nearly every aspect of American life from our justice system to the charitable nature that gives more to other nations than all other nations combined. But hey, don’t preach to a leftist or you’re just an intolerant bigot.
  3. Border security – We are a sovereign nation, but don’t tell that to hardcore leftists. They believe America is a blight to the world and we’re lucky to have all the nice people from Central America, the Middle East, and Asia willing to come over and educate us about how we’re really supposed to be living. Oh, and 100% of those crossing the border are good people with no intention of committing a crime or hurting anyone, you bigot!
  4. Selective name-calling – Again, this only applies to certain people. President Trump, for example, is pure evil and a complete misogynist for calling a woman who sued him a “horseface,” but there’s not a peep from leftists when Kanye West is called Trump’s “token negro” on national television.
  5. Criminals doing their thing – There are no real criminals in this world, according to leftists. There are only people reacting to a condition forced upon them by the old, white male patriarchy. Murders in Chicago, Baltimore, or St. Louis are never the story if it’s an African-American killing another African-American. To the left, even talking about such violent acts means we must be bigots.
  6. Capitalism – This is pure evil to the left. Pure. Evil.
  7. Rich conservatives – Oh, how privileged it must be for the Koch brothers, Tim Allen, and James Woods to sit in their mansions and crap all over the poor people.
  8. A pre-born baby’s right to live – To a leftist, it isn’t a human life worthy of personhood until after it’s exited the host. Even then, there may be a grace period.

It’s a necessity for the loudest on the left to have big mouths. Otherwise they’d have a hard time speaking out of both sides of it.



Culture and Religion

Stand against Marxism



Stand against Marxism

As you may have seen, there’s a conference coming up called Stand Against Marxism Conference. Fellow GKer Sam Jones and I will both be speaking at this conference, alongside a long list of speakers, including Trevor Loudon, Janet Mefferd, Judd Saul, Steve Deace, Jon Harris and JD Hall. This two day event will be jam-packed with information from these voices who have chosen to take a stand against the Cultural Marxist infiltration into the church.

There are at least two people that I know of that will be speaking at this conference that are not biblical Christians. One is flat out not a Christian, while the other is Catholic. So how can I be consistent in publicly confronting pastors like John MacArthur for speaking with those promoting a false Gospel when I choose to speak at this conference alongside a Catholic & a non-Christian?

For example, I wrote an article criticizing Pastor MacArthur being scheduled to speak at the NRB Convention. My criticism of him agreeing to speak there was that the premise of the convention was that everyone was unifying around furthering the Gospel. Thus, it’s a blanket endorsement of everyone’s Gospel who was speaking or exhibiting. Well, there were people like Rick Warren, Roma Downy & Mark Burnet, as well as TBN. Why would you agree to speak at an event that was stating for all to see that those people are furthering the Gospel? You see, there might be another context in which it would be ok to speak at the same event as those people. However, it couldn’t be when the premise was furthering the Gospel or some other unifying factor around serious doctrine that we disagree with.

So when it comes to the Stand Against Marxism Conference, am I being a hypocrite by speaking with a non-Christian and a Catholic? I do not believe so. Here’s why:

When Judd Saul asked me to be a part of this conference, I discussed this concern with him. We had a very good talk about it, and the thing that I came away with was that the unifying factor for this conference is combatting Cultural Marxism and Social Justice, which is intentionally infiltrating Christianity. However, this is not a strictly theological issue, although it is compromising the Gospel and the most dangerous threat to the Gospel in our lifetime.

This is a political ideology that is using religion to further its goals, and our own evangelical elite are falling for it hook, line and sinker. You see, the ultimate strategy behind the social justice movement is to usher in the one world religion, one world government and one world currency that we see talked about in Revelation. So what these non-Christian Globalists are doing is trying to use God’s own people for their evil plans. They’ve already infiltrated our government. They’ve already infiltrated the entertainment world. They’ve already infiltrated the education system. Now, the final stand is infiltrating religion. And the most influential religion in the most influential nation in the world is Christianity here in America.

Both non-Christians and Christians can be concerned with this strategy. Non-Christians see this as a communist/socialist attempt to overthrow our American way of life, taking away our freedoms and liberty given to us in the Constitution. Christians see this not only as a political overthrow, but as a flat out compromising of the Gospel, changing biblical theology just enough to motivate acceptance of Social Justice within our churches.

Think about it: Many of these Social Justice Warriors have eschatology that teaches them that they need to establish God’s Kingdom here on earth before Christ can return. So they are so concerned with overtaking politics, education, entertainment and business that they are accepting of these false beliefs of Social Justice, because they are trying to alleviate all of systemic oppression to clear the way for Christ’s return. However, really what’s happening is they have a belief system that is so sinister, that they think they are establishing Christ’s Kingdom, when in reality they are laying the groundwork for the anti-christ’s rule during the tribulation. This is the definition of the term: Useful Idiots.

So when it comes to the Stand Against Marxism Conference, the unifying principle is opposition to Marxism. Both Christians and non-Christians see that the church is the last stand against this sinister movement. If we lose this battle, that’s it. Our way of life is done.

When it comes to the majority of us who are Christians who will be speaking at this conference, we understand theologically and prophetically what is happening here. We understand that we have to take a stand for biblical truth. But we also have to remember that many of those who are on our side in this battle against Marxism are not saved and heading towards eternal punishment in hell. So it’s important that, while we are going to battle against Marxism alongside some that aren’t saved, we must preach the Gospel and not in any way compromise our beliefs. Many of those that are leading the way in this fight need to hear the Gospel themselves.

This is the perfect opportunity for many of us to be clear in our beliefs, but also point back to the necessity of the Gospel. We could win this war against Marxism, but many of those who helped us win are still going to hell. So what’s the point? For us as believers, we cannot get distracted with political battles. We can participate in them, yes. In fact, it’s a good thing to participate in them. But we have to remember our primary goal: Preach the Gospel and point everyone back to Christ.

For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?

-Mark 8:36

To register for the Stand Against Marxism Conference, please visit We’ll see you there!

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading


Debunking the religion of ‘settled science’



Once upon a time there was a government that actually listened to the scientific community…

Nope. Never happened.

What actually happens is a lot more mysterious than the twists and turns of scientific inquiry. You see, those bits of information come from squinty-eyed lab coats that ask uncomfortable questions and get answers even they don’t like. But I digress.

In the 1950s some researchers had found that a diet rich in animal fats seemed to raise serum cholesterol. Ancel Keys firmly believed that this led to more heart attacks, so he studied diet and health in seven countries from 1958-1964. He chose not to include France and Switzerland, two countries likely to contradict his theory. Instead he used Greece, Italy, and Yugoslavia, countries that were undergoing massive dietary changes due in part to post World War II economic changes. In Finland 992 men per 10,000 died of heart attacks. In Crete only 9 of 10,000 did. It had to be the olive oil on Crete instead of the animal fats in Finland that made the difference.

True scientists would note that Keys didn’t prove anything about animal fats and heart attacks. First, his “selection bias” led to an experiment designed to support his beliefs. Second, East Finland had three times as many heart attacks as West Finland, in spite of all other factors being equal. But let’s leave the terrible design of the Seven Countries Study for the moment.

In The Big Fat Surprise, Nina Teicholz tells about Vilhjalmur Stefansson, a Harvard trained anthropologist who lived with the Inuit in the Canadian arctic in 1906. He lived their life style, with 70-80% of all calories from animal fat. Red meat was dog food. Vegetables were added only when they were unsuccessful at hunting. (“Vegetarian” is an Inuit word for “bad hunter.”) During the polar night, light was so poor that they could not do much outside safely, so they didn’t even exercise much. Yet, in Stefansson’s 1946 book Not by Bread Alone, he noted that the Inuit were the “healthiest people I had ever lived with.” They had no obesity and almost no disease.

In 1928, Stefansson and a colleague, under rigorous supervision, ate nothing but meat and water for a full year. After the year, the two men were carefully examined, and found to be fully healthy. They didn’t even get scurvy, since they ate the whole animal, including bones, liver, and brain, which have Vitamin C. So thirty years before Ancel Keys, we already knew that he was wrong.

The problem is simple. There’s no such thing as “settled science.” But anyone who wrote contradicting Keys got such a tongue-lashing in the journals that they tucked their tails between their legs and slunk away.

“Science” is not an answer, it’s a method. First, a researcher sets up a test designed to prove his theory wrong. You read that correctly. Every good piece of science is set up to show that the researcher’s idea is bad. Only good ideas can survive that sort of inquiry. Then, when the first researcher says, “My study showed that the ‘null hypothesis’ is wrong,” another researcher sets up a different way to prove the idea wrong. Only when the experimental hypothesis is confirmed by repeated experimentation can we have real confidence in our answer. By the way, most studies can’t be confirmed.

As a physician, I have lived this process for decades. There are many ideas in medicine that have been promoted as “gospel truth,” just to be disproved later. But this kind of uncertainty is simply not good enough for the political class.

The Political Prime Directive is “Do Something!” It doesn’t have to work. In fact, you don’t really have to do anything. You just have to look busy. That will tell gullible voters that you are “fighting for them.” Reality is unimportant.

In the case of diet, we find that the McGovern Committee of the Senate created in response to an overhyped 1967 CBS “documentary” titled “Hunger in America” was the prime mover. The Committee pushed for federal guidelines on nutrition best exemplified by the “food pyramid.”

Food Pyramid

The “bread, cereal, rice, and pasta group” makes up half of the dietary recommendation. If we add fruits, which have lots of sugar, that portion increases. Add in “use fats and oils sparingly,” and we have the High Carb/Low Fat modern dietary recommendations. And as Dr. Jason Fung shows in The Diabetes Code, high carbohydrate intake causes Type II Diabetes. The only cure is a High Fat/Low Carb diet with intermittent fasting. When I titled my YouTube video on the subject Your Government is Out to Kill You, I meant it. Let’s consider the facts.

Scientific inquiry is never finished, and even such simple ideas as Newton’s three Laws of Motion are never fully explained. Quantum theory continues with more and more detailed understanding, at times contradicting what was proposed before. We thought that general relativity required time dilation at high speeds, but now we believe that space itself may be able to move through space. And if that’s confusing, then imagine how legislators must feel when they consider scientific questions.

Most legislators are trained in law, not science. So when a “scientist” comes to them with an apparent answer to a supposed problem, they are, like most gullible people, ready to buy into the proposed solution. After all, they’ve been hired to “do something,” and when someone with the right letters after their name comes to the Emerald City, the Great and Powerful Oz must follow their recommendations.

There are many others with proper academic credentials who present information that contradicts the High Priests of Carbohydrates. But those researchers don’t represent farmers who “need” protection from crop failures and can contribute to political campaigns. So our benevolent CongressCritters vote for wheat and sugar subsidies that kill us with obesity and Type II Diabetes in exchange for a never-ending stream of money for them. All this is justified under the General Welfare clause of the Preamble to the US Constitution.

Not surprisingly, wheat and sugar subsidies result in more wheat and sugar being grown. To prevent a glut in these commodities, Congress passed various bills to limit the acreage devoted to them. So now farmers could get paid for not growing crops. A series of “fixes” has followed, but no one seems willing to challenge the wisdom of promoting crops that kill us. Or for that matter, promoting anything from DC.

And that brings us to another imagined pending apocalypse. We’ve been serenaded by a chorus claiming that 97% of scientists agree that we are facing a man-made crisis in our climate. The carbon dioxide we make as a by-product of fossil fuels is somehow turning the earth into an oven. Alexandria Airhead-Cortez has declared that we have only twelve years left, and every Democrat Presidential Candidate has taken up the refrain.

Rather than debunk of the 97% myth again, let us simply realize that it is “a lie of epic proportions.” So is almost everything else about “global warming.” Remember the nature of science. It makes predictions. If the UN IPCC predictions fail, then the ideas that support those predictions are scientifically wrong.

Certain facts are abundantly clear. Our current global temperature is cooler than it was during the Roman Climate Optimum or the Medieval Warm Period, yet the prophets of climate doom deny this fact to create a “hockey stick” graphic supposedly showing a catastrophic warming trend. They use this “garbage in, garbage out” starting point to create a set of computer models that predict massive warming if we did not reduce our CO2 output.

Temperature Anomoly

But the recent path of temperatures hasn’t been so supportive of their predictions. Since 1998, there has been no net warming. The UAH (light green) graphic is the gold standard of the data, and its average (dotted line) is flattening. Ditto for the HadCrut data.

IPCC Predictions

In short, the IPCC has been crying “Wolf!” And when we plot actual global temperatures, we find that they have nothing to do with CO2.

Geological Timescale

In particular, the medieval warm period ended in the Little Ice Age about 1250AD. And it was only one of several warm periods unrelated to industrial activity or burning of fossil fuels. In short, something bigger is going on.

Average Near-Surface Temperatures

Is that big thing solar cycles? El Nino/La Nina? Cloud dynamics? Ozone holes? Volcanic activity? Cow farts? There are so many factors and so many possibilities that no one has anything close to a complete understanding. About the only thing we can be sure about is that CO2 isn’t a problem. The Gospel of Man-Caused Global Warming is a religion, it’s not a scientific truth.

The current level of atmospheric CO2 is far below the level easily identified in ancient times. And life was flourishing then, just as it is now. If CO2 levels were to rise, as greenhouse operators do artificially, plants would grow better. And they would use less water, making sub-Saharan Africa into a garden. If CO2 falls by a third, most plants would die. Then what would all those carbon-free vegans eat?

CO2 isn’t even a potent greenhouse gas. It’s easily outstripped by methane, which is utterly dwarfed by water vapor. In short, the tiff over CO2 is about as important as worrying about what Congress will do when it isn’t in session. If you want to control the earth’s temperature, control its clouds.

But we have a spectacle every few weeks where uninformed and overexposed Democrats blather on about a non-existent catastrophe that has been perpetually just around the next corner. New York and Miami are about to be flooded by a rising sea level. Reality simply can’t enter their bubble for the same reason that crop subsidies don’t die. “Climate Change” creates massive donations to political campaigns. Once elected those ignorant legislators create subsidies to their favored researchers and businesses who return the favor with more money and alarmist projections.

The Law of Subsidy is again proven. When you subsidize climate hysteria, you get more of it. It becomes more expensive because its rent-seekers promote rules that cost you and me money through CAFE standards, eagle-killing windmills, and loan guarantees to Solyndra. There are lots of Tesla cars on the road because the Feds gave Tesla over $700 million in subsidies, just in the third quarter of 2018. (Who said Elon Musk wasn’t smart?) The possibilities are endless. As Ronald Reagan said, “The closest thing to immortality is a federal program.” The reason is simple. The Law of Subsidy creates harmful and perverse incentives.

Subsidies create financial gains for donors and power for those inside the Beltway. If Congress were to eliminate subsidies to climate hysteria or agriculture, CongressCritters would lose mutually beneficial relationships with those donors. What’s not to like?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Lecrae’s Jordan River baptism is unbiblical



Lecraes Jordan River baptism is unbiblical

The rapper known as Lecrae posted a baptism video on Instagram and Twitter touting his upcoming album. The social media post sparked conversation on baptism and the merits of getting baptized more than once. Many comments had assumed that Lecrae, who has for years marketed himself as a Christian had already been baptized. Others tout Jordan River baptisms as something Christians do when they visit the Holy Land. There are a number of important biblical questions here that should be discussed. But first, here’s the post:

Believer’s Baptism?

The Bible has examples of baptism all throughout the Book of Acts. We see that in Peter’s Sermon, Peter instructs the convicted audience to repent and be baptized. We can go all throughout the Book of Acts, but my favorite example is is Acts 16, the passage read when I was baptized.

27When the jailer awoke and saw the prison doors opened, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. 28But Paul cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here!” 29And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, 30and after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

31They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house. 33And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household. 34And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household. Acts 16:27-34 NASB

People first believe, then they are baptized, promptly. That is the model throughout scripture with every Christian except the thief on the cross next to Jesus.

Number of Baptisms?

I challenge people to find a scriptural example of someone being baptized more than once. There may be a passage fitting for this question with the baptism of Jesus.

11“I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.” 

3Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. 14John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” 15But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. 16And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; 17and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” Matthew 3:11-17 ESV

John the Baptist was presumably already baptized, seeing as he was baptizing many others. While one cannot blame him for wanting Jesus to baptize him, Jesus corrects the situation by saying it must be done to “fulfill all righteousness.” As we can see in verse 17, Jesus knew what he was talking about. John the Baptist is not then baptized by Jesus afterwards despite experiencing the awe of the Holy Spirit.

If John the Baptist was not baptized a second time, what scriptural support is there for any believer to be baptized a second time.

Legitimate Second Baptisms

Samuel Sey of Slow to Write wrote a piece on why he’s a baptist. It provocatively begins by stating:

I’ve been baptized twice. I was baptized for the first time two years before I became a Christian. And I was baptized for the second time six years after I became a Christian. But what happened in between that time is why I am a Baptist.

He goes on to explain how he had a meaningless baptism in his youth. Then when he actually became a Christian, his church wrongly disallowed him to be baptized. There are Christians who were baptized either as infants or when they never really believed. For them to be baptized when they are saved is perfectly in line with the scriptural model. Otherwise it is not rooted in the Bible for Christians to be baptized a second time whether they have just gone through something or as a “renewal.” For if it were, what is to stop baptism from being performed a third or fourth time for a believer. And if a believer can be baptized that many times, why then is baptism not practiced to the regularity that Communion is?

Lecrae Responds

So in one tweet, it went from being a baptism to a Mikvah. So after being questioned, he backtracked. His Instagram post delves deeper into explaining how baptism and Mikvah are the same, which further undermines the legitimacy of his defense.

But then after backtracking, he doubled down. He then compared his baptism after already being baptized to Jesus being baptized despite being God, as if the reasons for either are remotely comparable.

Thirdly, Lecrae insists that we “celebrate the heart” as opposed to criticizing him. But plainly put, there is nothing here to celebrate. He is a rich man of privilege vacationing overseas. There is nothing godly about what he is doing: calling a baptism a Mikvah under criticism and telling us to “celebrate the heart” instead of discerning the obvious theological discrepancy that sets a terrible example for believers. No, we should reject his his postmodernist statement of celebrating the heart which the bible says is deceitful. We should instead use our heads, for Christianity is a faith that promotes and enables us to critically think.

Final Thoughts

Can’t be baptized in the Jordan river and make the same old music. This new album is gonna be special.

This stunt is clearly self promotion and that elevates this from being a misunderstanding of scripture to an open mockery of the sacrament of baptism.

This is likely a sign of further decline as he increasingly distances himself from the “Christian” label in favor of going woke. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism (believer’s baptism), and believers ought to take that seriously.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading