Category: blaze media

JB Pritzker, the Democratic governor of Illinois, had an ugly meltdown on Saturday about a meme shared by President Donald Trump. When a member of the liberal press took a page out of Pritzker’s book and treated the meme as a threat, Trump leaned in with a reality check.

How it started

Days after Pritzker claimed that Trump is “neither wanted here nor needed here,” Chicago suffered another bloody Labor Day weekend with at least eight killed and 58 wounded. According to police, America’s rattiest city suffered 278 homicides as of Aug. 31.

Trump condemned the violence, warning Pritzker: “Better straighten it out, FAST, or we’re coming.”

Pritzker and other Democratic officials instead channeled their energies last week into condemning a possible federal intervention rather than meaningfully tackling the underlying issues.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, for instance, kicked things off by signing an executive order “denouncing any attempts to deploy the United States Armed Forces and/or the National Guard and/or militarized civil immigration enforcement in Chicago.”

RELATED: This is what Brandon Johnson is blaming for Chicago’s violent Labor Day weekend

Vincent Alban/Getty Images (left); Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images (right)

Pritzker then concern-mongered on MSNBC, telling former Biden White House press secretary Jen Psaki that Trump’s plan is “one that’s been repeated over and over again by … tyrannical dictatorships across history where you try to incite local population into some mayhem by sending in police or other disruptors, and then claim that there’s too much mayhem on the ground, and therefore there must be troops that are sent in.”

The Democratic governor, who held on tightly to emergency powers through the pandemic and well into 2023, suggested further that the aim of the plan, which has already neutralized most street crime in Washington, D.C., was to “convert a democracy into something other than that.”

The meme

At the outset of another weekend marked by numerous fatal shootings in Chicago, Trump shared a meme titled “Chipocalypse Now” that features an AI image of himself as Colonel Bill Kilgore, the fictional commander of the 1st Cavalry Division in “Apocalypse Now,” with the Chicago skyline as his backdrop.

Whereas Kilgore, played by Robert Duvall, states in film following an airstrike on potential enemy combatants along a nearby tree line, “I love the smell of napalm in the morning,” Trump’s meme is captioned, “I love the smell of deportations in the morning.”

Trump added, “Chicago about to find out why it’s called the Department of WAR.”

Pritzker characterized Trump’s post as a legitimate threat, writing, “The President of the United States is threatening to go to war with an American city. This is not a joke. This is not normal.”

“Donald Trump isn’t a strongman, he’s a scared man,” continued Pritzker. “Illinois won’t be intimidated by a wannabe dictator.”

— (@)

Pritzker subsequently disseminated guidance on how to handle encounters with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents for the apparent benefit of illegal aliens in his state, recommended that residents film federal operatives, and advanced the suggestion that the Trump administration’s efforts to restore law and order constituted “atrocities.”

Mayor Johnson also decided to interpret Trump’s humorous post as a threat, noting, “The President’s threats are beneath the honor of our nation, but the reality is that he wants to occupy our city and break our Constitution. We must defend our democracy from this authoritarianism by protecting each other and protecting Chicago from Donald Trump.”

NBC News’ Yamiche Alcindor joined Pritzker and Johnson in spinning the president’s meme as a declaration of intent, asking Trump whether he was indeed “going to war with Chicago.”

“Darling, that’s fake news,” said Trump.

When Alcindor began to argue the point, the president responded, “Be quiet. Listen. You don’t listen. You never listen. That’s why you’re second rate.”

“We’re not going to war. We’re going to clean up our cities,” said Trump. We’re going to clean them up so they don’t kill five people every weekend. That’s not war. That’s common sense.”

Trump further underscored on Sunday that he is simply keen on making American cities safe and beautiful.

“Chicago is a very dangerous place, and we have a governor who doesn’t care about crime,” Trump told reporters on Sunday. “We could solve Chicago very quickly.”

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told Blaze News in a statement, “Eight people were killed and over 50 people were wounded over Labor Day weekend in Chicago, but local Democrat leaders are more upset about a post from the president — that tells you everything you need to know about the Democrats’ twisted priorities.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Chicago, Illinois, Donald trump, War, Trump, Crime, Jb pritzker, Brandon johnson, Yaminche, Politics 

Surveillance video caught the moment when a mob of hammer-wielding, hooded thugs pulled off a smash-and-grab jewelry store robbery in broad daylight.

A vehicle is seen backing into the San Jose store’s entrance, which created an opening for at least a dozen crooks to pour in late last week.

‘This is appalling. Watching this senior get assaulted made my blood boil.’

San Jose police confirmed it’s investigating an “armed robbery” that occurred at the Kim Hung Jewelry store on the 1900 block of Aborn Road just after 2 p.m. Friday, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

No arrests have been made, and the robbers are “unidentified and remain at large,” the department confirmed Sunday morning to the Chronicle.

Video appears to show 16 individuals entering the store holding hammers and breaking display cases and grabbing merchandise as a few store employees look on. Police told the paper that at least one of the suspects carried a gun but didn’t comment on the value of the items stolen.

The robbers fled the scene in multiple vehicles, police said in their statement, according to the paper.

Video shows one of the robbers violently shoving one of the employees to the floor, and an X poster noted that his friend’s 88-year-old uncle was the victim in question.

“He was injured by broken glass and then had a stroke,” the poster wrote before adding a message to San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, saying the Democrat has “done a lot for SJ but still more criminals to be locked up.”

The Chronicle said it couldn’t independently verify the information in the X post.

Mahan posted on X the following response: “This is appalling. Watching this senior get assaulted made my blood boil. I’m sorry this happened to your friend’s uncle, @Chris_Moore4Sup. These people need to face the harshest possible consequences for their actions. I’ve been in touch with our Police Chief @SJPD_AC_Joseph and will be following the investigation closely. Wishing our @SanJosePD officers godspeed as they pursue leads.”

The paper said police didn’t respond to an inquiry regarding if anyone was injured during the incident and added that the department did not have “any details to provide at this time.”

Police also told the Chronicle that anyone with information on the incident is asked to contact the agency’s robbery unit at sjpdrobbery@sanjoseca.gov.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​San jose, California, Smash-and-grab, Robbery, Hammers, Guns, Armed, At large, Jewelry store, Mayor, Matt mahan, Broad daylight, Crime 

In the aftermath of the tragic Minneapolis shooting — where two young lives were lost to a violent gunman — Trump’s Department of Justice is considering taking action to stop guns from getting in the hands of transgenders.

The move is being celebrated by conservatives, as the shooter, Robin Westman, was a 23-year-old man who identified as a woman.

One potential avenue could see Trump formally declare that those who identify as transgender are mentally ill and no longer legally allowed to possess firearms.

“Under Attorney General Bondi’s leadership, this Department of Justice is actively considering a range of options to prevent mentally unstable individuals from committing acts of violence, especially at schools,” a spokesman for the DOJ said.

However, while many conservatives believe that transgenderism is a mental illness — they’re not sure that broadly banning guns for any group of people is the right move.

“I read that headline and my knee-jerk reaction is like, good, they shouldn’t have guns. And then I’m like, ah, I don’t know how you do that with the Second Amendment,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales says on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”

“I think everyone would agree you don’t want violent, mentally ill people to have firearms,” BlazeTV contributor Grant Stinchfield chimes in. “So we can all agree on that. The problem becomes ‘Who is the decider?’”

“So who decides who’s violently and mentally ill? Because I promise you, Nancy Pelosi is going to say, ‘Well, Stinchfield’s mentally ill because he loves freedom and God and all those things.’ So it’s all in the decider,” he continues.

“Now, transgender certainly … it’s a violent, violent section, mentally ill people, and it is a mental illness. If you think you’re a boy and you don’t have nuts hanging down below you, you’re mentally ill,” he adds.

Gonzales notes that while not all shooters are transgender, transgenders make up such a small percentage of the population and have committed several of the devastating mass shootings in recent years.

“It’s pretty skewed when you look at that,” she says, adding, “And so it’s just hard because you want to prevent this from happening.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Video phone, Upload, Free, Camera phone, Sharing, Video, Youtube.com, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Transgenderism, Mental illness, Transgenderism is a mental illness, Gun violence, Robin westman, Robert westman, Minneapolis shooting 

I matched with Jane on OkCupid. Not Tinder (which is for hookups). Not Hinge (which is for hookups with intellectuals). But OkCupid, which is — in the online dating world — a kind of normie land.

That’s where the more ordinary, more boring singles go to meet people they can do boring things with (meet for coffee, etc.).

‘You don’t have to live like this. You can just have coffee with a person.’

Jane was above average in looks. She had a job. She liked stuff I liked. She didn’t have pictures of herself doing sexy poses on a yacht. Or sneering and holding up her middle finger to the camera.

She seemed nice. Like genuinely nice. And normal. Possibly sane. That’s a serious win in the online dating realm.

The fine art of small talk

We texted back and forth on the OkCupid app, chatting, getting to know each other.

When our conversation reached a natural lull, I proposed a coffee date for later that week. I suggested a quiet café in the city. She said yes.

For the next couple of days, I daydreamed about our meeting. I felt like even if we didn’t fall in love, it would still be nice to have coffee with a relaxed, easygoing person.

This is often the best part of dating: those moments of happy anticipation, of feeling pleasantly excited about a date.

A surprise message!

But then, on the night before our date, I got a new message from Jane. I thought she was going to cancel. That happens a lot. People get cold feet.

Before I even opened her message, I considered how I might convince her to go through with our meeting. I often got cold feet myself before internet dates. Everybody did.

I would remind her it was just coffee, just a half-hour of her time. And the café was nice. You could look out the window. Why not? You only live once …

I opened her message. It wasn’t cold feet. She was writing because we hadn’t discussed our “values” in our previous messaging. Shared values were important to her in a relationship, she said. She wanted to confirm that we were “on the same page” in that regard.

RELATED: Breaking up with the division industrial complex: A romantic comedy’s case for connection

Bridge Entertainment Labs

How to respond?

I was surprised by this message. This didn’t sound like the person I had been texting with before. She hadn’t mentioned her values in our previous conversation. She didn’t put them in her profile. That’s why I liked her!

I hadn’t put my values in my profile either. Like what kind of values was she even talking about? Did she mean things like being an honest and upstanding guy? I try to do that.

Or did “values” just mean political positions? Like on immigration reform, or abortion, or mail-in ballots?

This was a tricky situation. I would have to think about it.

Boys vs. girls

The problem was, I’m a guy. When I think of “values,” I think of things like being “good on your word.” Like if you say you’re going to help your buddy move, you help him move. Even if it’s raining.

Or like when you’re a kid and you get in a fight. You don’t try to really hurt the other guy. Once somebody wins, you let up. You act in an honorable way.

Which is different from the qualities women value: compassion. Empathy. Helping people who can’t help themselves. These are also excellent characteristics for a person to have. But they are a little more female-coded.

But what if Jane was thinking of specific things, like she hates Trump and insists that I hate him too? That doesn’t seem fair.

The truth is that men and women approach politics differently. In the past, that was considered a good thing. That was the yin and yang of heterosexual relationships.

I thought back to past girlfriends. Had we always agreed about politics? Of course not. Had it caused problems in the relationships? Not really. In some ways, it made them stronger.

Beware the friend group

I still had to respond to Jane. What should I say? I went back through our original text conversation. There she was: nice, agreeable Jane. Just like I remembered.

So why the sudden need to clarify our values?

I concluded this was probably her friends. Or maybe her co-workers. Or maybe her therapist. Jane had told somebody about our date and they were advising her not to meet me until she had questioned me about my political orientation.

The response

I didn’t know what to write back. I started texting different things but then deleted them. And then I felt sad. Sad for her. Sad for myself. An invisible wall of toxic politics was being forced between us, blocking us from the simple pleasure of meeting up.

I finally texted: “I try not to discuss politics on the first date.” And then I said something like: “You don’t have to live like this. You can just have coffee with a person.”

She didn’t respond right away. Maybe she was thinking about it. I hoped she was.

But then the next morning we were unmatched. She had disappeared. Maybe she had blocked me? Then I felt even more sad. And I felt bad for her.

What could have been

But I still think about Jane. What if she had been the one? In another time, a less political era, we might have met for coffee, gone for a walk, made a connection.

She would put up with my male perspective. I would put up with her female perspective. Like men and women have been doing throughout human history.

Who knows what might have happened?

​Dating, Hinge, Dating apps, Political divide, Shared values, Men and women, Culture, Lifestyle 

President and general counsel at Child and Parental Rights Campaign Vernadette Broyles is a leader in the fight against school policies that help “trans” children without their parents’ consent — and one case she tells BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey about is particularly chilling.

“What we’ve seen, and we have many parents we work with and we have lawsuits over, are children that are secretly transitioned,” Broyles tells Stuckey.

“One of them, I’m thinking of the Paris family. So their little girl, she was 12. This is a Catholic Christian family, had never had any gender dysphoria and really didn’t have any mental health problems to speak of. Just a normal kid,” she continues.

“But she was bullied a bit at school, and she thought, ‘You know, boys are stronger, so I just want to be a boy.’ That alone then catalyzed this process where privately, the school counselor started to meet with her. Parents had no idea,” she adds, noting it happened in Florida.

At the urging of her school counselor, the little girl essentially began living a double life.

“The double life became so untenable for her, unbearable, that she just decides it’d just be better if I ended my life. And she attempted suicide at school,” Broyles explains.

“So the parents, they’re called, they have no idea, they’re called to the principal’s office to learn for the first time as their child is being taken to the hospital in the back of a police vehicle … they learn she’s been trans-identifying,” she continues.

While the girl now is a “warrior” and has stopped trans-identifying, she’s not the only one who’s been failed by the school system.

“Our most tragic is Sage,” Broyles says.

“She had had trauma as a child … so when she hits puberty … begins to trans-identify. That causes her to become sexually harassed at school because they’re telling her, and she’s tiny, she’s 5’ tall, to use the boy’s bathroom,” she explains.

“None of this is told to the parents. So Sage, she runs away because she doesn’t feel safe. And when she runs away, she runs into the arms of an adult pedophile who raped her and trafficked her to other men and took her across state lines,” she continues.

“And when she’s found in Maryland, the woke judge doesn’t want to give her back … because they discover that her parents might not be affirming of her male identity. This is a traumatized child. Her mom wasn’t able to be there when they did a rape kit on her. And so they put her into a facility for troubled boys because she’s identifying as a male.”

In the facility, Sage was then sexually assaulted and ran away again.

She then was trafficked again, and they find her in Texas — a state that had the common sense to return her to her parents.

And this horrifying process commonly begins with the schools.

“These school officials are endorsing this lie to susceptible children,” Broyles says, “who are in the process of development, who believe trusted adults when the trusted adult says, ‘Maybe your problem is that you were born in the wrong body,’ and, ‘You know what, we don’t have to tell your parents because you and I know better.’”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Video phone, Video, Upload, Camera phone, Free, Sharing, Youtube.com, Relatable, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Allie beth stuckey, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcast, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze originals, Blaze online, Gender transition schools, Gender transition, School transitions, Secret school transgender policies, Trans kids, Transgenderism 

A woman was arrested for injuring her 10-year-old son with a machete while they were in the shower, according to California police.

The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office said officers were called to the home in Carmichael on Angelina Avenue at about 8:30 p.m on Aug. 18.

‘She’s going to jail. She’s gonna have to sort out whatever demons she has in there and hopefully be held accountable.’

They found an injured man subduing the woman and her child, who had lacerations, said the sheriff’s spokesperson, Sgt. Amar Gandhi.

He described the long knife as something like a machete.

The woman was identified as 41-year-old Anna Veres, and she was arrested. The boy was hospitalized and treated for his wounds.

“There were several wounds, so hard to say if they were full-on stabs. There were several slashes and, again, both suffered multiple wounds. But fortunately, some of them may have been on the hands and arms and torso,” Gandhi said.

Both the son and the father are expected to survive their injuries.

Gandhi went on to say it was unclear why the woman attacked her son, and he added that she could be suffering from mental illness.

“Was she under the influence of something? Is it mental health? Is it just pure evil? I honestly don’t know right now,” he said.

RELATED: Georgia mom stabbed 6-year-old son to death and then lit their home on fire, police say

“She’s going to jail. She’s gonna have to sort out whatever demons she has in there and hopefully be held accountable,” Gandhi added.

The woman is being held at the Sacramento County Main Jail on suspicion of felony assault with a deadly weapon and felony charges of corporal injury to a child, as well as felony charges of corporal injury to a spouse. She was held without bail.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Anna veres, Woman stabs her child, Carmichael mom stabs child, California crime, Crime 

As Ukrainian cities suffer under the escalating Russian missile and drone attacks, an unsettling truth has emerged: The weapons killing innocent Ukrainians are powered by components sold by European and even U.S. companies. Confirmed across multiple investigations, these Western-made electronics are frequently found in wreckage from Russian attacks.

The Ukrainian National Police document war crimes, and in the wreckage of Russian jets and drones, they’re finding Western-made sensors, microchips, and navigation systems.

Companies whose products powered Russian weapons may find that in the court of global opinion, they’re the next Switzerland.

This is a modern echo of an old disgrace: Switzerland’s wartime profiteering during World War II. While claiming neutrality, Switzerland sold munitions to Nazi Germany. Today, many Western firms appear similar on paper — even as their products power violence in practice.

Ukrainians pay the price

The consequences, then and now, are devastating. Ukrainians bury their loved ones while billions of dollars move through “innocent” supply chains — supply chains that ultimately help lead to the very funerals and heartbreak we see today.

A 2023 study by a Radio Free Europe-Radio Liberty investigative unit found more than 2,000 different electronic components — many made by U.S., Japanese, and Taiwanese firms — inside five types of Russian Sukhoi warplanes.

Friends of mine in the Ukrainian National Police confirmed that Western-made parts routinely show up in missiles and surveillance gear recovered after attacks. These items often pass through intermediary nations, such as China, Turkey, and even some EU member states, shielding the original suppliers.

‘Out of our hands’

How do the companies respond when questioned? Most point to legal compliance, third-party distributors, and plausible deniability. “We didn’t know,” they say. “It’s out of our hands.”

But when a buyer in a Russia-aligned country suddenly orders 2,000 units of a component normally purchased in batches of 100, it shouldn’t just raise a red flag — it should sound a blaring siren, a warning no one can miss.

Imagine you’re the CEO of an imaginary company, East Elbonian MicroSystems, a U.S.-based manufacturer of high-frequency guidance chips used in both civilian drones and industrial automation. For five years, you’ve sold 100 units annually to a Turkish buyer.

Suddenly, your Turkish buyer places an order for 2,000 chips. The order comes with an up-front payment and a request for expedited delivery. You have recently read reports that chips identical to yours have been recovered from the wreckage of Russian missiles that struck Ukrainian hospitals and apartment buildings.

You don’t wait. You send a senior compliance officer to Istanbul, unannounced. “We need to see where these chips are going,” the officer says upon arrival at your Turkish buyer’s office. “We’ll need full documentation within 24 hours — sales logs, shipping manifests, end-user agreements.”

If your Turkish buyer can’t provide a legitimate explanation for the spike in orders, you terminate the relationship immediately. No more shipments. No more plausible deniability.

Legacies of shame

This is not radical. It’s standard practice in sectors like pharmaceuticals and banking. Robust end-use documentation, site visits, and statistical audits are basic components of ethical commerce. So why not in defense-adjacent tech?

The answer is as old as Switzerland’s wartime banks: profit. Tragically, the cost of not taking action is measured in shattered lives. It means more orphans growing up without parents, more widows mourning at fresh graves, more families torn apart by midnight missile strikes.

It means children losing limbs to drone shrapnel, hospitals overwhelmed with burn victims, and schools reduced to rubble. Each shipment of unchecked components contributes to a growing ledger of human suffering — paid for in blood, grief, and futures stolen before they begin.

RELATED: Survival over pride: The true test for Ukraine and Russia

Photo by Vitalii Nosach/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images

In the U.S., politicians from both sides of the aisle ideally would write laws mandating that all firms producing dual-use components publish regular audits and require reporting on statistically unusual purchases.

Companies would have incentives to comply. History offers a powerful cautionary tale. After World War II, Switzerland faced global outrage for war profiteering. In 1998, the complicit banks agreed to a $1.25 billion settlement. The reputational damage led to public boycotts and a tainted legacy that persists to this day.

Come clean now, or face justice

Legal consequences loom for any U.S. company complicit in war profiteering. Ukrainian investigators, particularly in the National Police, are meticulously cataloging dual-use components from other countries.

When the war ends, expect publicity and accountability to follow. Companies whose products powered Russian weapons may find that in the court of global opinion, they’re the next Switzerland.

Companies that pretend not to know where their components end up still have time to redeem themselves. But that time is running out. Remember — journalists like me may be eager to tell the world exactly what you knew and when you knew it.

​Opinion & analysis, Ukraine, Ukrainian war, War in ukraine, Russian invasion, Russian invasion of ukraine, Russia ukraine war, Russia ukraine, Switzerland, War, World war ii, Profiteering, Technology 

The mainstream media made their bias known after refusing to cover the fatal stabbing of a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee.

Iryna Zarutska was brutally victimized on a train in North Carolina on August 22, suffering stab wounds in the throat before eventually being declared dead at the scene. Zarutska’s alleged stabber was later identified as 34-year-old Decarlos Brown, who was charged with first-degree murder in relation to the case.

‘This is a greater outrage than the death of every BLM martyr combined times a thousand.’

Records from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department show that Brown has repeatedly been arrested and convicted of serious offenses, including armed robbery and felony larceny.

News of Zarutska’s death rapidly spread online and sparked outrage, yet mainstream media outlets outside of local news have continued to ignore the story entirely.

RELATED: Horrific video sparks outrage after young Ukrainian woman is fatally stabbed, allegedly by repeat offender

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Critics have pointed to the media’s double standard when it comes to covering politically convenient tragedies. Mainstream outlets amplified the death of George Floyd in 2020, writing tens of thousands of articles related to the incident. The same publications that gave wall-to-wall coverage of Floyd’s death are now turning a blind eye to Zarutska’s.

“Despite the release of an explosive video that has received massive public outcry, as of 4:45 pm eastern today, NONE of our major news outlets except @FoxNews have covered the murder of Iryna Zarutska,” the Daily Wire’s Megan Basham said in a post on X on Sunday. “Not one.”

“This is a greater outrage than the death of every BLM martyr combined times a thousand,” the Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh said in a post on X.

RELATED: Jasmine Crockett’s jaw-dropping defense of criminals: ‘They literally are trying to survive’

Photo by Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images

Other commentators like Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk have pointed to race as a predominant factor in the media’s selective coverage. Kirk argues that the difference in coverage between Zarutska’s murder and Floyd’s death ultimately comes down to whether the narrative is politically convenient.

“Dear CNN, WaPo, NYT, ABC, NBC etc etc,” Kirk said in a post on X Sunday. “If you want to know why your ratings are in the tank and no one likes you, look no further than the brutal murder of Iryna Zarutska who moved to US to escape war in Ukraine, a story you refuse to tell.

“Sadly she couldn’t survive the Democrats’ criminal justice system,” Kirk added. “Yet you wouldn’t shut up or stop villainizing Daniel Penny, a hero, who probably stopped a murder just like [hers]. Why? Because he was a straight white American male and the perp was black. Shame on you. Genuinely.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Mainstream media, Cnn, Iryna zarutska, George floyd, Megan basham, Matt walsh, Decarlos brown, Charlotte-mecklenberg police department, North carolina, Media bias, Legacy media, Ukraine, Russua, Russia-ukraine war, Charlie kirk, Washington post, New york times, Abc, Nbc, Democrats, Daniel penny, Hate crime, Politics 

In 1939, George Orwell coined the phrase “Judeo-Christian ethic” to include the values that formed the moral foundation of Western civilization.

This ethic influenced the American founders and helped shape their views on liberty, rights, and law. Post-Enlightenment philosophers have criticized the irrational aspects of religion and its role in the politics of state, but most have acknowledged the role that the Judeo-Christian ethic has served in preserving the fabric of society.

The idea that secular humanism is salvific for the individual or for society at large has been repeatedly discredited when Marxist ideology has been put into practice.

“Progressivism,” on the other hand, is a political philosophy focused on social progress through systemic reforms. It demands a strong central government dedicated to countering societal inequality and injustice. The progressive movement historically shares roots in Christianity and secular humanism, although in recent decades it has emphasized a reliance on science and technology and antipathy toward any expression of religion in the public square.

Left-leaning since its inception in the 19th century, progressivism has, since the 1960s, adopted misotheistic Marxist ideology. Its proponents have focused primarily on discrediting Christian religious practice.

In the Biden administration, for example, both public and private expressions of Christianity came under attack by federal agencies despite First Amendment guarantees that Americans can practice their religion without government interference. These government transgressions are currently being reversed by the new faith-friendly Trump administration.

The big question

So why does progressivism target Christianity specifically?

The obvious answer is that Christianity has been the dominant religion in America since its founding, and at least until recently, most Americans continued to engage with its practice. But religious affiliation constitutes a challenge to the progressive secular state, as this state insists that there can be no greater authority than itself.

The emphasis on freedom of individual within Christianity also tends to resist the enforced conformity that is central to neo-Marxist ideology and identity politics. Progressivism is best viewed as a secular humanist civic religion that is engaged in a religious war with monotheistic faith.

RELATED: Christianity’s real crisis isn’t atheism — but a far more sinister deception

D-Keine/iStock/Getty Images Plus

As Bertrand Russell opined, Marxism is in many respects an atheistic restatement of Christianity, but unlike the Christian “kingdom of God,” its utopian goals can only be realized through the authority of the state.

For this reason, all Marxist states are openly antagonistic to theistic religion.

Cultural infiltration

Since the 1960s, Marxist ideologues, many having fled Nazi fascism in Europe, recognized that a revolution to install socialist and communist values was unlikely to succeed in America. Instead, they envisioned a less radical evolutionary strategy aimed at infiltrating the institutions that define American culture — including its educational systems, news media, entertainment industry, and corporations — with Marxist ideas.

But for this strategy to succeed, it would first have to transform the values of the Judeo-Christian ethic in the direction of Marxism.

A document in the 1963 “Congressional Record” outlines the plan of Marxists to undermine America by targeting the family unit, promoting deviant sexualities, and fostering criminal behavior. This strategy was aligned with neo-Marxist postmodern philosophies being taught in universities that questioned the possibility of objective truth and viewed virtually all societal transactions through the post-colonial polarized lens of “oppressors” and “oppressed.”

But in order to succeed, this strategy could not break radically with the past. Rather, it was necessary to retain those aspects of the Judeo-Christian ethic that had been established as part of the American “social imaginary.”

To this end, neo-Marxism adopts Judeo-Christian concerns with “social justice” but ignores its focus on law. This has allowed progressivism, in its current neo-Marxist “woke” avatar, to “stand for social justice” while simultaneously attacking white privilege, normative sexuality, law and order, and religion.

Although Christianity has been the primary focus of progressive vitriol, it stands to reason that the other source of the Judeo-Christian ethic would also be a target for hostility.

Following the October 7 terrorist attacks in Israel, anti-Israel protests led by progressives erupted on America’s college campuses and streets. Jews represent a small minority of Americans and, as such, do not represent a numerical challenge to progressive goals.

However, loyalty to religion and the state of Israel, as well as Judaism’s focus on law, elicited the age-old criticisms of Jewish particularism by Marxists.

Why not Islam?

Why, then, has Islam, a monotheistic religion, been spared the wrath of progressives? There are several likely reasons.

First, Islam is a newcomer to the American scene and, until recently, had little political influence and did not constitute a noticeable resistance to progressive goals.

Second, “woke” progressives imagine all Muslims as oppressed peoples of color who have suffered at the hands of imperial governments. Moreover, radical Islam, like Marxism, seeks to undermine the Judeo-Christian traditions of the West.

Radical Islam, like Marxism, seeks to undermine the Judeo-Christian traditions of the West.

Jihad against the West with the goal of restoring a theocratic caliphate has been a goal of fundamentalist Islam since its inception. Indeed, nowhere in Islamic countries have Christians or Jews ever enjoyed equitable freedom with Muslims, nor are women or the LGBTQ+ afforded equal freedoms with Muslim men, a fact that progressives assiduously avoid admitting.

Although Marxists and Islamists have banded together to undermine Judeo-Christian values in the West, theirs is an uncomfortable alliance, as the atheistic Marxist state is ultimately incompatible with an Islamic caliphate. Only in Muslim countries governed by secular strongmen has an alliance with Marxism achieved even a modicum of success.

Finally, one must always “follow the money.” And in recent years, Islamic governments have provided substantial financial resources to progressive causes because they share in common the goal of “transforming” America.

Faithful resistance

If the right to practice the Judeo-Christian traditions is to be preserved, it is incumbent upon America’s religious leaders to recognize that the goals of progressivism are antithetical to faith, and they must resist being co-opted by misotheistic ideology out of fear or ignorance.

The idea that secular humanism is salvific for the individual or for society at large has been repeatedly discredited when Marxist ideology has been put into practice.

Marxist ideology, therefore, should be seen in its true light, which is as the product of a destructive impulse within the human psyche that will only be fully extinguished in the messianic future.

​Christianity, Christians, Islam, Liberals, Liberal, Progressivism, Progressives, Marxism, Marxist, Faith 

Car buying has never been more complicated — or more expensive. The average new car price has climbed to nearly $49,000, compared to just under $34,000 a decade ago, according to Kelley Blue Book. That kind of sticker shock leaves many buyers asking: “How can I possibly afford this?”

Dealers are quick to provide an answer: the 84-month car loan.

For years, the buyer will owe more than the vehicle is worth. If they try to sell or trade in the car, they’ll need to pay the bank just to get out of the loan.

It sounds simple at first, but it’s a trap. Spread across seven years, the monthly payments shrink to a number that feels manageable to most people. A $50,000 vehicle suddenly seems affordable when the cost is sliced into smaller installments, but is this really a smart solution, or does it carry consequences that can trap buyers in years of financial frustration?

No accident

The rise of 84-month loans is no accident. Dealerships benefit enormously from pushing buyers into longer financing terms. Smaller monthly payments make it easier for salespeople to convince customers to move up to pricier trims, tack on optional packages, or select luxury features that would otherwise be out of reach.

For the financing office, stretching out the term makes it easier to close deals with so-called payment shoppers — those who focus only on whether they can afford the monthly bill, not the total cost of the vehicle. In addition, a lower monthly car payment improves the buyer’s debt-to-income ratio, which helps more customers qualify for loans they might not have secured under traditional 36-month terms.

On the surface, this seems like a win-win arrangement. The buyer gets the car they want at a payment they can afford, while the dealer locks in a bigger sale. But what feels like an opportunity on day one quickly becomes a burden as the true cost of the loan takes shape. And in the end, you will pay a bigger price.

Costly trade-off

Why? The most obvious issue is interest you pay. When a car loan stretches across seven years, there are far more months for interest charges to accumulate. Only the finance company wins.

Consider a buyer who finances $40,000 at 7% interest with a traditional 60-month loan — they’ll pay roughly $7,500 in interest. With an 84-month loan, that interest expense number climbs to more than $10,700.

In other words, the buyer pays over $3,000 more for the privilege of lowering their monthly bill. For most households, that’s a costly trade-off.

And higher interest rates themselves don’t remain equal. Lenders know that a seven-year loan carries more risk than a five-year loan, so the rate is higher. Over that longer period, economic conditions could change, inflation could rise, or the borrower’s financial situation could deteriorate. To protect themselves, banks and credit unions often attach higher rates to longer loans. That means buyers aren’t just paying interest for more years — they’re paying higher interest rates, and the only one that makes out is the financial institution.

RELATED: Introducing ‘Quick Fix’: Practical answers to all your car questions

Blaze Media

Much depreciated

The financial pitfalls don’t stop there. Vehicles are depreciating assets. The moment a new car leaves the dealership, it loses about 20% of its value. Within the first year, that loss can climb to 30%.

With long-term loans, the first several years of payments go mostly toward interest, with very little progress made on the loan principal. The result is what’s known as negative equity, or being “upside down.” For years, the buyer will owe more than the vehicle is worth. If they try to sell or trade in the car, they’ll need to pay the bank just to get out of the loan. This forces you to keep the vehicle for a longer period of time or take the big financial penalty.

Warranty warning

This problem is compounded by warranties. Most new vehicles come with a bumper-to-bumper warranty that lasts three years or 36,000 miles, and a powertrain warranty that typically extends to five years or 60,000 miles.

Those timelines don’t come close to covering a seven-year loan. That means a buyer still making monthly payments could face a transmission or engine failure with no warranty protection. They would be paying for expensive repairs on top of paying down the car itself, a double hit that can wreck household budgets. And these extended warranty companies are not worth the money either, which would increase your monthly payment on top of the car payment.

With prices rising for both new and used vehicles, long loan terms are more than just a temptation — they are, for many families, the only way to fit a car payment into the monthly budget.

But while the appeal is easy to see, the long-term risks are just as clear. Stretching a loan to seven years often leaves buyers paying thousands more in interest, trapped in negative equity, and financially vulnerable if their circumstances change. In the event of job loss, medical bills, or an unexpected expense, they may be stuck with a car they can’t afford to keep but also can’t afford to sell.

Making it make sense

This doesn’t mean long-term loans are never justified. There are a few situations where they can make sense. Some automakers offer 0% financing for qualified buyers, which eliminates the concern over accruing interest. Others may find themselves on a fixed budget where the choice is either a longer loan or no car at all. And in cases where a buyer plans to keep a reliable, higher-quality vehicle for a decade or more, the extra interest paid over time may balance out in the long run. You have to be honest and consider the true costs.

Still, for the majority of consumers, financial experts consistently recommend avoiding 84-month loans. The smarter move is to aim for 48- or 60-month loan terms, which not only save on interest but also keep buyers closer to a car’s actual value throughout the life of the loan. Car shoppers should also consider more affordable vehicles, make larger down payments, or explore certified pre-owned options to keep their finances in check.

Cars may be getting more expensive, but debt traps don’t have to be part of the deal. Buyers who look beyond the monthly payment and focus instead on the total cost of ownership will be far better positioned to protect both their wallets and their peace of mind.

The finance manager at any dealer is going to try and close the sale. That’s their job. Yours is to understand just what you’re getting into when you sign a long-term loan.

​84-month loans, Lifestyle, Auto industry, Cars, Align cars 

I think coincidences are exceedingly rare. Most of the peculiar things that happen to us are begging to be unpacked for the symbolism, messages, and questions they hide.

Let me give you my latest example. I’ve been reading Bessel van der Kolk’s famous book on trauma studies, “The Body Keeps the Score.” You’ve probably heard of it, maybe even read it yourself. It’s arguably the most widely read and cited mental health book in existence.

In a single moment, years of trauma and heartache just lifted like fog that evaporates under a warm sun.

If you haven’t read it, here’s a summary: Trauma (i.e., exposure to violence, abuse, horror, tragedy, etc.) deeply impacts us at the neurological and physical levels. This is even more true in childhood when the brain and body are still in their fragile developmental states. Once a trauma occurs, it fractures us psychologically. We interact with the world differently because our brains process stimuli differently. This causes a sprawling range of difficulties — behavioral disorders, physical ailments, relational issues, and beyond. If we want to function in society, we have to undergo specific types of treatment that target the trauma we’ve suffered. Medication is rarely a long-term solution because it treats symptoms, not the underlying trauma.

As I was picking my way through the book, I found myself nodding along vigorously.

I hate what Big Pharma greed has done to traumatized people — pushing them through the health care system like numbered cattle, pumping them full of ineffective medications that have six side effects for every symptom they treat, all while growing fat on the billions of dollars the mental health care industry rakes in annually. No healing; just numbing.

Every chapter in my copy has tear-stained pages marking the stories of men brutalized by combat, children despised by their own parents, young girls repeatedly raped by male relatives, and little boys abused in secret by priests.

However, the majority of the people covered in the book were able to process and move beyond their traumas with the assistance of trained doctors who led them through eye movement desensitization and reprocessing, somatic therapies, neuro-feedback, and play-based and creative therapies, among other types of treatment.

It takes years, commitment, and incredible patience for a traumatized individual to regain a sense of normalcy, albeit a scarred one.

I found myself celebrating these therapies that target the root causes of people’s suffering, applauding van der Kolk and his colleagues for their devotion to researching and developing treatments that have seen suicidal individuals come to enjoy life again, children learn how to trust again, and people drowning in shame accept that the abuse they suffered wasn’t their fault.

“Why can’t all facets of medicine have this approach?” I thought.

The night

About midway through my reading of this book, however, my parents hosted an event at their house for a family of missionaries they’ve become friends with.

Once a year, Nic, his wife Rachael, and their four children return to the United States from Brazil, where they run an incredible ministry for abused women and girls, many of whom are entrenched in prostitution. For a few days, they host small gatherings at friends’ homes. People are invited to come, worship, and hear the beautiful stories of their ministry.

This year, since my parents were hosting, I attended the event. I know for next year to avoid wearing mascara. I was a sniffling, smudgy mess by the time I got in my car to drive home.

The stories I heard broke my heart, but I expected them, too. I was familiar with the ministry before I attended the event, so precious little girls sold into prostitution rings by their own families and young women who have no hope other than what profits their bodies might yield in a night were exactly the stories I expected to hear.

RELATED: When God’s light hits hard, don’t flinch — stand firm

wynnter/Getty Images Plus

What I did not expect to hear, however, were the stories of miraculous and often instantaneous healings. Nic and his wife shared stories of traumatized girls, many of them still children, who heard the gospel message, hit their knees, and rose completely different people.

One girl who came to their ministry was physically deformed from horrors they thankfully spared us. She was hunched over, refused to make eye contact, voluntarily mute, and utterly terrified of physical touch. One day during a worship session, in which she stood silently in the back of the room, she suddenly fell to the floor and began violently trembling. A few moments passed, and she stood back up. But this time she stood upright. Her hips, which had turned inward, were suddenly straight and aligned. Her spine was no longer hunched. She looked Rachael in the eyes and said, “He is so beautiful.”

She was healed — in body and in spirit. Her life from that point forward was marked by joy.

Many other similar stories were shared, of girls who came to the ministry hardened from abuse and suffering transformed into radiant, confident people after hearing the good news of what Jesus did for them on the cross. Adopted into His family as beloved daughters, suddenly the horrors of their past lost their grip, the fear that once consumed them dried up, the shame that suffocated them dissipated, and they walked into new life, eager to share His saving grace with others.

In a single moment, years of trauma and heartache just lifted like fog that evaporates under a warm sun.

My favorite story was of one young girl (I think she was around 10 years old) who was rescued out of prostitution among other horrors and introduced to Jesus. Like the others I described, His gift of redemption radically transformed her.

One day, a missionary from a different ministry visited the girls’ home. She asked this young one to share her testimony. Smiling, the girl started listing her hobbies and favorite things.

The missionary stared at her, perplexed and disappointed. She wanted to know the girl’s past — what slum she’d come from, what heinous things she’d suffered before she was introduced to Jesus. “No, I mean what happened to you?” she urged.

In one of the most beautifully childlike responses I’ve ever heard, the girl sweetly replied, “Oh, that doesn’t matter any more. I’ve been made new.”

The lesson

I couldn’t sleep when I got home that night. The stories I had just heard were strikingly similar to the case studies I was reading about in my book.

But unlike van der Kolk’s patients, it didn’t take years of therapy, hospital stays, and repeated dark nights of the soul for these Brazilian girls to recover from their traumas. The Spirit fell on their hearts and did in a moment what intense psychological intervention takes ages to accomplish.

And they didn’t just recover enough to function in society. They transformed from the inside out into joyful, loving girls who worship with their hands lifted high, pray bold prayers for the healing of their sisters, and smile with the confidence of those who know they are loved fiercely and unconditionally.

This is the power of Jesus. Do we believe it?

I knew when I went home that night that I had repenting to do. Yes, I believed that God could heal any brokenness, but I didn’t necessarily believe that he would. I had placed too much hope in modern therapy, believing it was the best lifeline for traumatized people.

I had forgotten that my God was, is, and will always be a healer — the one who created the danger-sensing amygdala, the rational prefrontal cortex, the hormone-regulating hypothalamus, and the delicate neuro-pathways that can make or break a distressed individual. He crafted and commands what science has labored ages to grasp. He can restore a traumatized brain to homeostasis in a single, sacred moment.

And He does. Regularly. In Brazil, in Nigeria, in India, and yes, even here in the United States.

But how many more of these miraculous healings would happen if we believed that the gospel is more powerful than our best therapy programs?

Nic and Rachael aren’t doctors; they have no formal training in psychoanalysis, neuroscience, or psychology. And yet they’ve seen more traumatized people heal in the 15 years their ministry has been operating than most therapists see in their careers.

This is the power of Jesus. Do we believe it?

I don’t mean to suggest that therapy is worthless — quite the opposite. I remain grateful for the various branches of science that have led to the development of treatment regimens for traumatized people. For the hurting, secular individual, I’m thankful there are resources. Perhaps a gentle, patient therapist will be their first taste of true kindness and serve as a precursor to the Jesus they’ll meet at a future date. Perhaps it will just make life livable again. In either case, I’m grateful.

I’m also thankful therapy exists for traumatized Christians. I have benefited from therapy, as have many of my friends and family members. Sometimes God heals the terminal cancer patient when his loved ones hit their knees in prayer; sometimes He does it through months of chemotherapy. Except unlike bodily ailments, which He may choose not to heal on this side of heaven, we are guaranteed healing for our broken hearts, which often present as traumatized brains.

In Psalm 34:18, we are told that “The Lord is near to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit.”

He may choose to mend our crushed spirits through therapy, but I’m betting we’d see more of the miraculous healings Nic and Rachael witness in Brazil if we truly believed He’s as powerful and good as He says He is — far surpassing even our best therapy programs.

The ‘coincidence’

When I picked up “The Body Keeps the Score,” it was dusty. I’d bought it a while ago after hearing the hype, shoved it in my ever-expanding bookcase, and forgotten about it. But one day when I was writing an article about America’s mental health epidemic, I plucked it from the shelf and started reading it.

You can’t convince me that it’s mere coincidence that I was nose-deep in this sciencey book at the same time I was wrecked by the stories of these Brazilian girls.

No, this was the hand of God, beautifully knitting the tapestry of my personal choices with His plan, reminding me that our best efforts to remedy what’s broken may be valiant, intelligent, and even effective, but only His touch can heal a shattered heart in a single, glorious moment.

If all believers carried this truth in their hearts, can you imagine the miracles we’d see?

My heart burns at the mere thought.

​The body keeps the score, God, Healing, Jesus christ, Christianity, Therapy, Trauma, Therapy culture 

You’ve heard of young women getting engaged to their AI boyfriends, but have you heard of artificial intelligence replacing the bond between a mother and daughter?

Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck recently read one of these stories — which was about a mother who admitted to liking her AI companion more than her daughter — and it set off some serious alarm bells.

“She says, ‘I spend five hours a day with my new companion, and we play games, we do trivia, we just talk, and I like her more than my daughter,’” Glenn recalls. “Wow. So my first thought was, ‘This has got to stop. We can’t do this.’”

“We’re going to lose our humanity,” he says.

However, Glenn then realized that “maybe we have already lost our humanity in a different way.”

“I want to say we have to stop this, but then what do you replace it with? Then we just have this old woman at home by herself rotting away, not talking to anybody. Have we lost our humanity? Because my thought was, ‘What have I done to exercise my humanity?’” he says.

This is where the question “What would Jesus do?” comes into play.

“He’d stop. He’d notice the old lady. He’d sit down. He’d eat with her. He would chat with her. He’d spend time. He touched the untouchable. He didn’t outsource compassion,” Glenn explains.

“Why are we embracing fake AI friends and talking to them and everything else? Why are our kids on social media? Because real face-to-face stuff, real kindness, is really risky. It’s really risky. If I step into your loneliness, it means I have to feel my own loneliness,” he says.

“We stop being human and we just play this little game because ‘I don’t want to have to rearrange my afternoon; I’m really busy,’” he continues. “So we keep that risk at arm’s length. And now we’re eliminating it because AI is always ‘fine.’ Machines never cry. They never ask for a ride to the doctor or to the airport.”

“We bury this human part of us because of convenience,” he adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Free, Video, Video phone, Camera phone, Upload, Sharing, Youtube.com, The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Artificial intelligence, Ai boyfriend, Ai relationships, Religion, Dangers of artificial intelligence, Dangers of ai 

Another school shooting. This time in Minnesota. Families torn apart in seconds. A normal day turned into horror.

In the aftermath, many recalled another atrocity — the shooting at the Covenant School in Nashville two years ago. That one struck close to home for me. While my wife and I lived in Nashville, Covenant was our church for many years. I watched video of SWAT officers rushing past the very room where I once sat in Sunday school. The grief became more personal when I flew back to Tennessee from Montana to play the piano at the funeral of one of the victims.

When our own curtain is pulled back, and the way forward is shadowed with suffering, we remember: The road to glory may well run through a street called Straight.

These moments make the world feel unrecognizable. And when the dust settles, the mockery often begins. Politicians dismiss prayer. Late-night hosts sneer at faith. Social media shrugs off God with cheap jokes. Unbearable suffering, then mocked with derision.

Watching this unfold, I was reminded of the story in Acts 9 about a street called Straight. Saul had just experienced a dramatic encounter with the risen Christ on the road to Damascus — an encounter that left him blind for three days. During that time, the Lord appeared in a vision to a disciple named Ananias. He told him that Saul was staying at the home of a man in Damascus, on a street called Straight, and that Ananias was to go and pray for him.

Ananias recoiled — Saul’s reputation as a persecutor was well-known — but the Lord gave him a startling explanation: “I will show him how much he must suffer for my name” (Acts 9:16).

Not long after, Saul became known as Paul — the same apostle whose letters fill much of the New Testament. And from the very beginning of his ministry, suffering was not hidden from him but placed squarely before him. In Greek, the phrase means literally, the full measure. Not a glimpse. Not a teaser. The whole road of suffering laid out before him. And Paul walked it anyway.

His apostleship was never presented with illusions of ease. Five times he endured 39 lashes, until his back was scarred beyond recognition. Three times he was beaten with rods. In Lystra, a mob stoned him and left him for dead. Paul did not write as a theorist or philosopher; every sentence came from a man whose body testified as loudly as his words.

So when Paul wrote words of encouragement like, “We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed” (2 Corinthians 4:8-9), we can bank on it — because those words were not written in safety but with scars still healing.

These weren’t armchair reflections but battlefield confessions. And scripture pulls the lens back even further with Job, who faced his own crucible of loss. His wife derisively urged, “Curse God and die.” But Job replied, “Though He slay me, yet will I trust Him.”

Why? Because Job knew the One who allowed suffering was also the only One who could redeem it.

This truth was driven home to me after one particularly brutal surgery. My wife, Gracie, was clock-watching in her hospital room. In this recovery (she’s had 98 surgeries), the pain spiked to staggering levels. She had to wait before the next dose of medication, and the minute hand on the wall became her tormentor. Her jaw clenched, her body trembled, and she looked at me with eyes filled with anxiety and agony.

Leaning close, my own eyes moist, I thought about the apostle’s testimony and said softly, “Gracie, it is often said that if you took off the apostle Paul’s tunic, you would see 195 scars from the beatings he endured. And he had no anesthesia.”

Through clenched teeth she shot back, “I’m not the apostle Paul.”

I placed my other hand on hers. “No, you’re not. But the same Spirit who sustained him will sustain you. He will never abandon you.”

The pain didn’t vanish. But together we endured — not by strength we could muster, but by the same power that carried Paul through lashings, Peter to his cross, and Jesus all the way to calvary.

RELATED: When God’s light hits hard, don’t flinch — stand firm

Photo by sykkel via Getty Images

God does not answer every question. He did not explain Job’s suffering, and He rarely explains ours. What possible explanation could we process about what happened in Minnesota?

But He did reveal to some. He showed Paul the full measure of what he would suffer. He told Peter the manner of his death. He warned the disciples plainly about persecution. And still they went.

They left scars, letters, hymns, and sermons that still speak. And because they staked their lives on what they had seen, we can bank on their testimony when our own way grows murky.

The path is often hard to see. Scripture says God’s word is a lamp to our feet, not a searchlight illuminating miles ahead. In the dark, we do not get the full blueprint. But we do get enough light for the next step.

Yet, sometimes God pulls back the curtain — just a little — and the road ahead looks unbearably bleak. For the families in Minnesota, for Job in his ash heap, for Paul staring down lashes and stones, the cost was laid bare. And in those moments, the scars of Paul, the conviction of Job, and — above all — Christ setting His face like flint toward calvary, echo down the centuries to steady us.

Because when our own curtain is pulled back, and the way forward is shadowed with suffering, we remember: The road to glory may well run straight through a street called Straight.

​Opinion & analysis, Opinion, Annunciation, Annunciation catholic school, Annunciation church and catholic school, Annunciation catholic shooting, Annunciation shooting, Apostle paul, New testament, Pain, Endurance, Fortitude, Patience, Faith 

Last December we tackled the ModRetro Chromatic, a handheld gaming system that plays Game Boy and Game Boy Color games.

The brainchild of tech billionaire and founder of Anduril Industries Palmer Luckey, the Chromatic offered enhanced display and functionality, with the ability to pop in Pokemon games of the past. It came only with Tetris as a bundled launch title, with other games available for separate purchase.

Now, a full rerelease of the ModRetro is finally here, and it is beautiful.

‘We have a generation growing up having never had any need to touch physical media.’

Apart from the original sapphire screen cover, purposefully clicky buttons, and enhanced lighting one typically gets from a modified Game Boy, the Chromatic now comes with even more games and a slew of accessories, which are very exciting.

Let’s say the leaf-green Chromatic is your go-to ($199.99). You’re going to want to pick up the matching Koss Porta Pro headphones ($49) because they absolutely stole the show.

Yes, stole. Originally released in 1984, these retro-style headphones will shock you with their quality. They feel natively louder, especially when compared to different types of headphones. Tested with the new game Self Simulated ($39.99) — a platformer starring a R.O.B.-esque robot — the Porta Pros outshined a 2020 pair of JBL Live 400BT on-ear wireless headphones, Sony WF-C700N wireless ear buds from 2023, and Sony’s 2025 MDREX15AP/B, which are newer but old-school wired headphones.

Be warned: Sliding these retro headphones on will certainly induce flashbacks to the back of your family’s station wagon.

RELATED: Back to the future? Palmer Luckey’s Chromatic does nostalgia right

Photo by Blaze News

Gamers will be surprised by the rerelease of Sabrina: Zapped! ($39.99), which originally came out for the Game Boy Color in 2000. Why? Because it shows ModRetro is indeed interested in reviving old feelings for different demographics.

The Mod Kit ($14.99) is also available for budding engineers (a nice nod from Luckey that I couldn’t get my hands on). It offers replacement parts and buttons to style to a user’s liking but does not require any complex maneuvering — just a pointy device and desire for change.

Replace the directional pad, A, B, or start and select buttons, among others.

What the Chromatic offers that no other old handheld can do is streaming. The device can now stream gameplay natively to Discord, Mac, and PC, with no extra hardware required.

Return asked Torin Herndon, CEO at ModRetro, why this was such an important feature to include this time around.

“So many devices require an intermediate dock for streaming video, which drastically reduces the possible convenient use cases,” Herndon explained. “We felt that it was essential to open up streaming Game Boy games, simply while using a handheld console with proper button layout.”

What Herndon and ModRetro did not know, though, is that Return had a secret weapon up its sleeve: a Game Boy Camera.

Not only does the Game Boy Camera work on the Chromatic for taking offensively bad pictures that range in color from light green to black, but by simply connecting the Chromatic to a PC via USB-C, gamers worldwide can livestream in sparkling low-res quality through the device.

Not many will take up this offer, but this crossover of retro tech was an incredibly satisfying discovery.

RELATED: Palmer Luckey-led crypto bank promises startups a capital hoard safe from scheming feds

Photo taken by Blaze News via Game Boy Camera on the Chromatic

Gamers can also marry a Chromatic to an old Game Boy Color through the Link Cable ($14.99). This can revive decades-old Pokemon trades and rivalries or provide head-to-head match-ups on Mario Golf, for example. (The link will not work with the original Game Boy, alas.)

The rechargeable battery pack ($29.99) that 90s babies wished they had as a kid provides about 16 hours of gameplay after charging by USB-C for a few hours. This means you can save those official ModRetro-branded batteries if you are insane about your collecting, which is totally normal.

Photo by Blaze News

According to Herndon, Return was far from being the only group of gamers excited about the product. The success of the Chromatic is what sparked a second release, with the new games, kit, and even a firmware updater tool.

“Last year, we had no idea if we would strike a chord with a wider audience or if this device would only appeal to a handful of weirdos like us at ModRetro,” Herndon joked. “Since it ended up having broader interest, we wanted to make the experience available to as many people as possible.”

Why is retro gaming coming back, and how did the company come to realize that not everything has to be frontier-level tech to be desired and important?

Herndon replied reflectively. “A lot of frontier tech never stops to ask itself ‘why?’ At the most basic level, people oscillate between being productive and being entertained. Increased technology can sometimes be correlated with increased entertainment, but generally it is not,” he went on. “This is why there are probably games with tens of millions of dollars of development that have fewer play hours than Chromatic Tetris in 160×144 pixels. At ModRetro, we like to think about distilling entertainment into simple forms.”

The CEO added that if physical media is going to make a comeback, it is going to be through a new generation yearning for it.

“We have a generation growing up having never had any need to touch physical media. I think it was inevitable that they would become curious about the romance of the physical form of various media formats from their parents’ generation.”

After plugging in that Game Boy Camera, we totally agree.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Retro tech, Return, Game boy, Game boy color, Palmer luckey, Gaming, Video games, Chromatic, Mod retro, Tech 

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky once again bucked his party, this time taking aim at Vice President JD Vance.

The Trump administration claimed to have successfully struck a Venezuelan drug boat on Tuesday, killing 11 traffickers identified as members of the Tren de Aragua gang. Vance and other high-profile Republicans championed the strike, calling it the “highest and best use of our military.”

‘Did he ever read To Kill a Mockingbird?’

Vance experienced pushback from the usual suspects like Brian Krassenstein, who called the strike a “war crime.” Vance promptly responded by saying, “I don’t give a s**t what you call it.”

While the left raged on about Vance’s comments, Paul joined the chorus.

RELATED: Horrific video sparks outrage after young Ukrainian woman is fatally stabbed, allegedly by repeat offender

Photo by Alex Wroblewski-Pool/Getty Images

Paul criticized the military action for not providing the Venezuelan alleged drug traffickers due process before being killed.

“JD ‘I don’t give a s**t’ Vance says killing people he accuses of a crime is the ‘highest and best use of the military,'” Paul said in a post on X. “Did he ever read To Kill a Mockingbird? Did he ever wonder what might happen if the accused were immediately executed without trial or representation??

“What a despicable and thoughtless sentiment it is to glorify killing someone without a trial.”

Paul’s criticism was met with backlash from some of his Republican colleagues who accused Paul of “defending foreign terrorist drug traffickers.”

RELATED: Jasmine Crockett’s jaw-dropping defense of criminals: ‘They literally are trying to survive’

Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

“What’s really despicable is defending foreign terrorist drug traffickers who are *directly* responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans in Kentucky and Ohio,” Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio said in a post on X. “JD understands that our first responsibility is to protect the life and liberty of American citizens.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Jd vance, Donald trump, Trump administration, Rand paul, Senate republicans, Bernie moreno, Venezuela, Tren de aragua, Drug trafficking, Due process, To kill a mockingbird, Politics 

Andrew Beck has written a useful and provocative essay about a subject that has been simmering in American politics for decades. The dual accelerants of events and ideology brought that simmer to a boil in 2020.

The disputed question remains open: What is an American? It’s impossible to answer that question without its predicate: What is America? If we answer those questions, we are led to the primordial question of politics, which concerns justice: Are America and her institutions good?

If America is to endure, we must rehabilitate the creed after a century of distortion and neglect.

These are the fundamental queries at the heart of the assimilation debate. What are we assimilating new Americans to — and why? The right remains divided on these issues, as it has in different and shifting ways in the postwar era.

Until the left moderates on the topics of citizenship, assimilation, and civilizational stability, it will be up to the American right (and its fellow travelers across the Atlantic) to have a rational argument about the preservation of American and Western civilization.

Creedal mutations

Beck writes about assimilation in terms of America’s “historic way of life,” “American culture,” “language,” “mores,” “Christianity,” and “civic ideals.” America’s “principled assertiveness” of a “unifying identity,” which is made up of these components, “transformed a continent of European colonists and later immigrants into a single people.” He is correct that “Christianity shaped our institutions, our conception of law and liberty, our ethos of charity, and our traditions of self-rule.”

But we must remember that after decades of self-government and increasing conflict, the American people decided to break with a mother country that shared these common cultural touchstones. Any consideration of a “unifying identity” that has driven assimilation for most of American history after that break must reckon with a new American political culture, forged in the principles and experiences of the American Revolution.

It is fashionable, especially on the young right, to disparage the place of America’s creed in the American way of life. Abstractions about all men being created equal and natural rights are waved away or denied. Even worse, the American creed — that is, the political thought of the Declaration of Independence — is thought to be a source of the ills of modernity.

However, sober interlocutors in this debate should acknowledge that many on the right have come by this passion honestly as an overcorrection for intellectual laziness and moral confusion about America being only an idea. Add to that the decades of irresponsible and utopian foreign adventurism in pursuit of “spreading democracy.”

Finally, throw in 65 years of heedless immigration policy lacking any due consideration of the cultural distance between the American people and those the ruling class would admit as new Americans. The natural reaction to such a misguided and perverted elevation of the modern so-called “creed” to the exclusion of all else inevitably led to a snap back to a culture-first, or even culture-only, reflex.

But to understand America properly and fully requires an appreciation of the crucial importance of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, in addition to the dominant Anglo-Protestantism present at America’s founding. Both creed and culture matter in America, and after 250 years, they have fused our habits and self-understanding.

Picking creed over culture, or vice versa, is utopian because it neglects public opinion and political reality.

In addition to understanding the original blend of American creed and culture at the founding, it is also vital to understand the ways in which America’s creed and constitutional culture have been warped and appropriated over the last century by the left, whether under the evolving banners of progressivism, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s liberalism, post-1960s leftism, or wokeism.

If America is to endure, we must rehabilitate the creed after a century of distortion and neglect, while also ensuring our immigration policy doesn’t further erode America’s constitutional culture and way of life.

The OG creed and its culture

America’s leading thinker on the relationship between creed and culture in the American founding is my colleague, Claremont Review of Books editor Charles Kesler. He has been writing about the problem for at least 20 years, sometimes using the great Samuel Huntington as a foil.

Huntington was no enemy of America’s creed, but in his book “Who Are We?,” he put primary emphasis on the Anglo-Protestant culture of America’s founding. In 2019, Kesler gave an underappreciated speech at the first National Conservatism conference, pointing out the difficulties with Huntington’s culture-first approach:

Huntington is left awkwardly to face the fact that his beloved country began, almost with its first breath, by renouncing and abominating certain salient features of English politics and English Protestantism — namely, king, lords, commons, parliamentary supremacy, primogeniture and entail … and the established national church. There were, of course, many cultural continuities — Americans continued to speak English, to drink tea, to hold jury trials before rogue judges, and to read the King James Bible. But there has to be something wrong with an analysis of our national culture that literally leaves out the word “American.” “Anglo-Protestantism” — what’s American about that, exactly? The term would seem to embrace many things that our country tried and gave up and that have never been American at all, much less distinctively so. Huntington tries to get around this difficulty by admitting that the creed has modified Anglo-Protestantism, but if that is so, how can the creed be derived from [the culture] of Anglo-Protestantism? When, where, how, and why does that crucial term “American” creep onto the stage and into our souls?

Thomas Jefferson called the Declaration an “expression of the American mind.” I need not rehearse in full America’s creed here. Most readers of Blaze News and the American Mind know it well.

In a speech at the Claremont Institute’s 2025 Statesmanship Award dinner in July, Vice President JD Vance gave voice to a view on the right that is gaining momentum:

Identifying America just with agreeing with the principles … of the Declaration of Independence — that’s a definition that is way over-inclusive and under-inclusive at the same time. What do I mean by that? Well, first of all, it would include hundreds of millions, maybe billions, of foreign citizens who agree with the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Must we admit all of them tomorrow? If you follow that logic of America as a purely creedal nation, American purely as an idea, that is where it would lead you.

Within the principles of the American creed itself, however, this is a problem that is easily handled. If all men are created equal — that is, they have equal claims to the natural right to liberty — then they cannot justly be ruled without their consent.

The American people also announced their right and duty in the Declaration “to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

The question of admitting new members of the political community was incorporated into the U.S. Constitution, ratified 12 years after the Declaration. Acting through their representatives in Congress, the American people would control the rules for naturalization. They were thus amply empowered to be the guardians of the velocity and nature of expanding the political community as new immigrants arrived in America.

The question of what kinds of arriving peoples and cultures would be most likely to assimilate to this new American culture, shaped by this new creed, can be found throughout public and private discussions and writings in the early republic. American officials acting on behalf of public opinion would have to guard the understanding of Americanness as America inevitably grew.

Kesler calls this “the statesman’s point of view,” encompassing “both the proper role of creed and culture” in the formation of “a national identity and a common good”:

In the 1760s and early 1770s, American citizens and statesmen tried out different arguments in criticism of the mother country’s policies. Essentially, they appealed to one part of their political tradition to criticize another, invoking a version of the ancient constitution to criticize the new constitution of parliamentary supremacy — in effect, appealing not only to Lord Coke against John Locke but to John Locke against John Locke. In the Declaration of Independence, Americans appealed both to natural law and rights on the one hand, and to British constitutionalism on the other, but to the latter only insofar as it didn’t contradict the former. Thus, the American creed emerged from within, but also against, the predominant culture. The revolution justified itself ultimately by an appeal to human nature, not to culture, and in the name of human nature … the American people, and God — as supreme creator, lawgiver, judge, and executive — the revolutionaries set out to form an American union with its own culture. Everyone recognized in the founding that certain qualities of mind and heart would be required of American citizens. If so, politics … had to help shape a favoring culture. Most of the direct character formation, of course, would take place at the level of families, churches, state and local governments — and eventually public and private schools.

This question of the “certain qualities of mind and heart” necessary for a durable and responsible republican citizenry applies with equal force to the presence, or lack thereof, of those qualities in the future citizens we admit as immigrants. As Pavlos Papadopoulos reminded us recently at American Reformer, George Washington worried even about how a group of moderate European academics, imported all at once into one place, would assimilate to American life in 1794.

This throws into stark relief Beck’s worries about the message being conveyed by the statue of the Hindu deity Hanuman that was erected in Sugar Land, Texas. His worries are Washington’s, updated for our current circumstances and recent immigrant flows in America. By importing enclaves of immigrants while neglecting crucial questions of hearts, minds, and assimilation, Beck fears we are exacerbating the conditions that have been diluting our common national identity for decades.

Immigration and assimilation — right and left

To embellish Beck’s argument in Kesler’s terms, we have neglected the crucial questions of “character formation” that are the rightful and primary province of “families, churches, state and local governments,” and public and private education. If all these institutions were more robust and assertively American, Beck would have had much less reason to raise the questions he did.

The average reader, I suspect, will object that I’m being much too coy. America’s dominant public ruling philosophy has done far worse than just “neglect” the character formation necessary for the perpetuation of our republican institutions.

At least 60 years of liberal public policy, NGO legal activism, and cultural warfare have done much to dismantle, disrupt, and corrupt the family; infiltrate American churches, undermining their core tenets; homogenize and defang state and local governments’ superintendence of health, safety, and morals; and transform public and private education into enemies of any confident American identity.

The old creed and culture have their champions, and might still live in the hearts and minds of perhaps even a majority of the American people, however latent. But the prospect of revived momentum and increasing success on various fronts in the right’s project to revive the older American way of life has radicalized the left, revealing the depths of its hostility to America as it once was. Our divisions are increasingly over the very ends themselves, not simply just the means.

The two rival creeds mean we have two immigration and assimilation paths in front of us.

The critics of Vance’s Claremont speech indignantly invoke the principles of the Declaration and Abraham Lincoln’s praise of them to vilify his caution about a creed-only approach to immigration and assimilation. But a careful reading of the leading documents and public arguments of modern liberalism over the last century shows something concerning: an intellectual and political movement dedicated to the fundamental transformation of America’s founding creed and constitutional culture rather than the application of the old creed’s principles to changing times.

The modern left not only rejects, in Lincoln’s words, “the standard maxims of a free society” laid out in the Declaration of Independence, but also the entire anthropology and cosmology of America’s founding creed.

As Kesler put it in the conclusion of his 2019 NatCon speech, Samuel Huntington’s uncritical acceptance of this modern story liberals tell about themselves and their project led him to misdiagnose our current ills and their civilizational remedy:

He persisted in thinking of liberals … as devotees of the old American creed who pushed its universal principles too far. Who rely on reason to the exclusion of a strong national culture. But when liberals, or progressives, renounced individualism and natural right decades ago, they broke with the American creed and did so proudly. When they abandoned nature as the ground of right, progressives broke as well with reason, understood as a natural capacity for seeking truth, in favor of reason as a servant of will, or of culture, or history, fate, and finally nothingness. In short, Huntington failed to grasp that our liberals attack American culture because they reject the American creed around which that culture has formed and developed from the very beginning. The American creed is the capstone of American national identity, but it requires a culture to sustain it. And our task … is to recognize the indispensability of the creed but also the absolute necessity of a hospitable culture, which, combined with political wisdom, can help to shape a people who can live up to its own principles.

Those principles and their sustaining culture are at issue in our current debates about immigration and assimilation.

We have two rival creeds and accompanying constitutional cultures vying for public acceptance and legitimization. The founders’ creed and its limited-government republicanism — however beleaguered and weakened — continue to endure, stubbornly. The left’s rival creed of lifestyle identity politics and unlimited bureaucratic government has been slowed by reality, internal contradictions, and a revived sense of purpose and political momentum on the right.

RELATED: National conservatism is the revolt forgotten Americans need

Photo by FilippoBacci via Getty Images

The two rival creeds mean we have two immigration and assimilation paths in front of us. The continued revival, reinvigoration, and assertion of America’s founding creed, constitutionalism, and civilizational confidence can make possible a coherent approach to immigration and assimilation that will preserve American republicanism through our 250th birthday and beyond.

However, if we continue down the path of modern liberalism and its insistence that any cultural or creedal assertion by Americans is xenophobic, colonialist, or racist, then assimilation will transform into bureaucratic and despotic balkanization — and we will lose the cultural and creedal touchstones that could continue to shape and preserve one American people.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at the American Mind.

​Opinion & analysis, Opinion, Assimilation, Immigration, Immigration crisis, Citizenship, American mind, American founding 

On August 28, 23-year-old Robin (formerly Robert) Westman, a transgender-identifying biological male, fired through the windows of Annunciation Catholic Church in Minneapolis, killing two children and injuring numerous others. Westman, who died by suicide, left behind a disturbing manifesto in video and written format, revealing his fixation on mass violence and his severe mental health disturbances.

Everyone is talking about his morbid obsession with mass shooters, his racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-Christian statements, and his self-loathing reflected in his manifesto. But are they missing the bigger picture?

What’s clear to Rick Burgess, BlazeTV host of “Strange Encounters,” is that Westman was plagued by demons – not the secular, metaphorical kind synonymous with mental illness and personal struggles. Real demons.

“It’s just so obvious that this is demonic possession,” he says.

For starters, Westman killed himself, as many mass shooters do. Rick draws a comparison between this desire to inflict self harm and biblical stories of demons terrorizing and torturing their hosts.

He then plays a short clip from one of Westman’s videos capturing him stabbing a hand-drawn diagram of the church he targeted, whispering “kill myself” repeatedly. Add to that his use of strange symbols, violent sayings, and sinister diagrams and drawings — like the one of him staring at his horned demon reflection in the mirror or a shooting target with a graphic of Jesus’ face on it — and it’s easy to see Westman was not merely afflicted by demons but full-on possessed.

“I don’t think anybody could convince me that this is just mental illness,” says Rick. “It’s of the spiritual realm so clearly.”

While secular society, especially on the left, is going to tell us our prayers are fruitless and push for legislative action for gun control, Rick says prayer is what we need more than ever.

“The prayer that we should pray is not just for protection; we need to pray a prayer of repentance,” he says.

“We are embracing things that blaspheme God. We are opening invitations to darkness throughout our society, throughout our government. We are telling God that we don’t want Him … and when that vacuum is created, it will be replaced with demonic activity,” he warns.

Even the strictest gun laws won’t do a thing to mitigate the forces of evil, he says. When we create a culture that confuses good and evil, promoting things God hates and spitting on His commands, we are inviting evil through the front door.

To hear more of Rick’s analysis and more about the reality of spiritual warfare, watch the episode above.

Want more from Rick Burgess?

To enjoy more bold talk and big laughs, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Strange encounters, Rick burgess, Demonic possession, Demonic oppression, Spiritual warfare, Blazetv, Blaze media, Robert westman, Robin westman, Minneapolis shooting, Mass shooting 

After a transgender shooter murdered children at Annunciation Catholic School last month, liberals demanded no more “thoughts and prayers.”

For once, they’re right — but not for the reasons they think.

Ritual scorn

Before the facts were fully known, liberals seized on the moment to lecture Americans about why prayer is an insufficient response to the tragedy.

Former White House press secretary Jen Psaki declared that “prayer is not freaking enough.” Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) went a step further. He used a press conference to browbeat Christians. “Don’t just say that this is about thoughts and prayers right now,” he declared.

The reaction was as predictable as it was tone-deaf.

Evil had just entered the sanctuary of God, and two innocent children were murdered. Yet progressives like Psaki and Frey believe that was the time to denounce believers who offer their sympathy to the victims and call out to God in a time of dire need?

It’s a familiar ritual: Politicians and pundits use tragedy to score easy points against Christians.

Are they right?

Yes — partially. While Scripture recounts miraculous answers to prayer, most Christians don’t experience immediate “results” from prayer (as if results are the goal; they’re not). Prayers don’t restore broken stained-glass windows and (typically) don’t resurrect life.

But in a way, these ghoulish critics are right: America needs something more than words.

America lacks the courage to name evil for what it is and to confront the anti-God and demonic ideologies that deform human souls.

It’s not that prayer is weak, ineffective, or insufficient. Calling on God is not a wholesale abdication of duty. Quite the opposite. Prayer is a powerful act precisely because it’s meant to lead us to repentance, action, and moral renewal. Christian tradition does not sever prayer from action. They are inherently intertwined.

So, I agree: Our country needs more action. But what kind?

Rotten roots

As liberals sneer at prayer — the one practice that consistently births moral courage in the face of evil — they offer to sacrifice the Second Amendment on the altar of progressivism. Endless laws, strict regulations, all in the name of “safety,” are pushed as the “real action” America needs. Ironically, they can’t name a single law that would have prevented the tragedy, short of repealing the Second Amendment entirely.

But gun control is not the cure. The real solution is moral action.

Right now, America lacks the courage to name evil for what it is and to confront the anti-God and demonic ideologies that deform human souls. At the core, the Annunciation Catholic School tragedy is the fruit of moral disorder, the result of a culture that catechizes people into anti-God, anti-truth ideologies.

When a society teaches young people to reject God, meaning, and moral reality — everything that is true and good — we should not be surprised when their brokenness turns monstrous.

RELATED: The idols and lies behind the Minneapolis Catholic school shooting

The cure begins with addressing the spiritual rot at the root of these tragedies: racial individualism, nihilism, the denial of objective truth, and the rejection of God. In the simplest terms, it means rejecting the worldview of progressive liberalism. And prayer, rightly understood, fuels this moral reckoning. It reminds us that righteous action is not merely a policy outcome but a divine imperative.

We have a duty to love God and to love our neighbor as ourselves. That means it’s time for courageous Americans to stand up and recover a moral vision that forms strong men and women who fear the Lord and walk in His ways.

No law will save us. Only righteous action from God-fearing men and women will prevent the next Annunciation tragedy.

Prayer’s demand

When Jesus hung on the cross and bore the weight of humanity’s sin, mockers looked upon the living God and declared, “He saved others, but he cannot save himself” (Matthew 27:42).

That is exactly what the prayer-mockers do. They think prayer doesn’t work or it has failed. Worse yet, they believe that God has failed.

But the eyes of man are easily led astray. The mockers on that day failed to discern that what they saw as a failure was anything but a failure. Jesus, after all, left the tomb alive.

So, yes: “Thoughts and prayers” aren’t enough. Not because prayer is insufficient but because prayer calls us to more than words; it demands moral seriousness and righteous action.

If “thoughts and prayers” are to mean anything, they must be joined to action — the hard, uncompromising, and courageous work of confronting evil, calling out false ideologies, and shaping a culture that values truth, virtue, human life, and the God that created us. And what is beautiful about prayer is that it prompts righteous but flawed people to step up and do what is right. It fuels our courage to act.

We must pray — because it’s vital — but we must also act. Prayer sets the compass, and moral action steers the ship. It’s high time we took the wheel.

​Thoughts and prayers, Prayer, Christianity, God, Jesus christ, Jesus, Annunciation catholic school, Anti-god ideologies, Faith 

Movies and television programs reportedly have significantly more sexual content, nudity, and immodesty now than those shown just a few decades ago. The so-called “adult entertainment” industry has, meanwhile, exploded, with one projection suggesting that it will grow from an estimated global market size of $58.8 billion in 2023 to $74.7 billion by 2030.

While depictions of sex are ubiquitous in the media, a new study suggests that the real thing is disappearing from the lives of everyday Americans.

The delay and avoidance of marriage appear to be another major factor.

Citing General Social Survey data, the Institute for Family Studies recently indicated that “Americans are having a record-low amount of sex.”

Whereas in 1990, 55% of adults ages 18 to 64 reportedly were having sex at least once a week, that number reportedly dropped to less than 50% by the turn of the century. As of last year, the percentage of adults ages 18-64 having sex weekly had fallen all the way down to 37%.

RELATED: Heritage Foundation’s Kevin Roberts: Conservatives must get ‘uncomfortably honest about our present crisis’

Photo by Toronto Star Archives/Toronto Star via Getty Images

When it comes to individuals ages 18-29 who reported not having sex in the last year, the number held steady at around 15% of respondents until 2010. However, between 2010 and 2024, that number skyrocketed to 24% in the General Social Survey.

There appear to be numerous factors at play, including shifting social norms; libido-killing prescription drugs; the pandemic; decreasing alcohol consumption; the interpersonal impact of social media, gaming, and the smartphone; and pornography. The delay and avoidance of marriage appear to be another major factor.

Dr. Brad Wilcox, professor of sociology at the University of Virginia and director of the National Marriage Project, and Lyman Stone, director of the Pronatalism Initiative at the IFS, noted in a 2019 article in the Atlantic that married people have sex more often but that the share of adults who are married was falling to record lows.

Whereas 46% of married men and women ages 18-64 reported having weekly sex, only 34% of their unmarried peers reported the same, said the new IFS study. However, married couples are also facing a so-called “sex recession,” as 59% of married adults ages 18-64 reportedly had sex once a week in the period between 1996 and 2008.

RELATED: American fertility rate hits all-time low as Dems clamor for foreign replacements

Photo by Heritage Art/Heritage Images via Getty Images

The new IFS study noted that younger generations are having less sex than their predecessors did in part because of a “decline in steady partnering, especially in marriage, and a decline in sexual frequency within couples.”

This “sex recession” has some obvious implications besides youngsters’ joylessness.

Data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in July revealed that U.S. fertility rates dropped to an all-time low in last year, with 1.599 children being born per woman. For comparison, the latest reported fertility rates in Australia, England and Wales, Canada, and China are 1.5, 1.44, 1.26, and 1.01, respectively.

The fertility rate necessary for a population to maintain stability and replenish itself without requiring replacement by foreign nationals is 2.1.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Science, Health, Sex, Sexuality, Marriage, Fertility, Social media, Pornography, Psychology, Satisfaction, Replacement, Politics 

California has been facing a homeless crisis for a long time, and Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is of the mind that in order to solve it, the homeless need less rules and regulations and more freedom to appease their addictions.

“Clean and sober is one of the biggest damn mistakes this country’s ever made,” Newsom said once in a statement about the homeless crisis, noting that he has been known to “self medicate” with a glass of wine as well.

Founder of the Dream Center in Los Angeles, Matthew Barnett, calls it “one of the most discouraging statements ever made by our governor.”

“When I heard that comment I’m like, we’ve given up. We have no belief that people can change. We have no belief that people can escape darkness. And when I heard that, my jaw dropped. It was almost like something that was said that came from the spirit of darkness,” Barnett tells BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey on “Relatable.”

“It really was. Kind of like a really creepy, defeatist mentality,” he continues.

“The great accuser,” Stuckey agrees. “You’ll never get better. You’ll never defeat drunkenness or whatever.”

Barnett’s foundation helps those struggling with homelessness and addiction, and Barnett tells Stuckey that he has seen people with fentanyl addictions successfully get clean.

“They’re getting free and getting clean, and they’re excited. They’re praising and worshiping the Lord,” he explains.

Barnett believes Newsom’s attitude is a “total slap in the face” to those who are actively trying to change.

“That comment was simply kind of like the cultural feeling over the last five years. We can’t overcome stuff. We can’t win. We can’t fight poverty. We can’t achieve on our own,” he says, adding, “And so we just kind of have to rebuke that message every day by the way that we live.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Video, Camera phone, Sharing, Upload, Video phone, Free, Youtube.com, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Relatable, The blaze, Allie beth stuckey, Blaze media, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Gavin newsom, Blaze online, Blaze originals, California homelessness crisis, Homelessness crisis, Los angeles, The dream center, Matthew barnett