Selling one’s soul to the devil for fame, money, or power is an age-old trope. Elites have long dismissed it as nothing more than a conspiracy theory perpetuated by “satanic panic” Bible beaters, but is there any truth to this legendary exchange?

In her March 10 podcast episode, actress Candace Cameron Bure, best known for her role as D.J. Tanner in the iconic sitcom “Full House,” suggested that it’s more than just a theory. The outspoken Christian revealed that she’s personally stared Hollywood’s dark underbelly in the face.

On a recent episode of “Strange Encounters,” BlazeTV host Rick Burgess reacted to Bure’s anecdote and exposed the truth about Hollywood’s depravity.

On the “Candace Cameron Bure Podcast,” Bure told her co-host Madison Prewett Troutt about a time when she and her husband, former NHL hockey player Valeri Bure, accidentally attended an S&M themed party.

“I went to a party once with Val because we were married, and it ended up being this underground party that was an S&M like sex thing that was so dark and demonic,” she recounted, adding that her “eyeballs were popping out of [her] head.”

The scene was so shocking that the couple immediately left. “We made a hard U-turn and walked right out of there,” she recalled.

“It was just so slimy and weird. … We just had no idea what we were walking into. And it was so disgusting and gross.”

The “Full House” star has long been open about rejecting Hollywood’s moral compromises. On the “Stay True Podcast” last year, she explained: “I was just honestly never the kid that wanted to do the risky thing, that wanted to use my body or my sexuality to get ahead or my morality meant more to me, and my character has always meant more to me than the success of things.”

Rick reads between the lines of Bure’s comments.

“What she’s saying is there were moments she got scripts and there were things in the script she didn’t want to do,” he says, implying that Bure’s dedication to her Christian values might have cost her opportunities because she refused to participate in the “underground demonic world of Hollywood.”

He rejects the notion that Hollywood infuses depravity into film and music “because that’s what the people want.”

“That’s not true because we know that really family-oriented movies and shows have far bigger numbers than any of this garbage. No, it’s an agenda. It’s coming from a dark place,” he warns.

To hear more of Rick’s commentary, watch the full 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, Strange encounters with rick burgess, Rick burgess, Candace cameron bure, Hollywood, Hollywood corruption, Blazetv, Blaze media 

A male was caught on video punching a Philadelphia-area crossing guard in the face and knocking her out in front of elementary students Monday afternoon.

The incident took place outside Walnut Street Elementary School in Darby Borough shortly after 3:30 p.m., WPVI-TV reported.

‘Her children go to this school, so can you imagine? They shouldn’t have to witness anything like that.’

Authorities told the station the guard was helping students cross the street when a male exited his car, chased her down the sidewalk, and punched her in the face.

“It’s disgusting,” Darby Borough Police Chief Joe Gabe told WPVI. “She stated an unknown male exited a Nissan Altima and came at her in an aggressive manner, chased her down the street, about a quarter of the way down the block, grabbed her, and struck her in the face with his left fist.”

RELATED: 3 females dragged Philly crossing guard off bus when she tried to escape brutal beating, detective says; suspects arrested

Surveillance video captured the attack; it shows the male chasing the guard down a sidewalk until she stops next to a school bus. The male gets in her face, brutally punches her, she falls backward to the ground, and he runs off.

She told police she was knocked unconscious as the male ran back to his car and drove away, the station said.

The chief told WPVI it’s believed the suspect may have been angry about waiting in traffic: “He may have been upset with having to wait for her to cross children off of the school bus there.”

Gabe added to the station that the suspect was yelling profanities as he drove through the intersection prior to the attack: “When he was approaching her, he was yelling more obscenities at her before he grabbed her and struck her in the face.”

The crossing guard suffered swelling to her face, WPVI said, adding that police said she regained consciousness, walked home, and then called authorities.

The station said the crossing guard didn’t report to work Tuesday, and a male crossing guard took her place.

“We just spoke to her, she’s feeling OK, but she’s very shaken up over what happened yesterday and is worried to go back to her position as a crossing guard,” Gabe added to WPVI.

Dionne Galloway, a school district employee, added to the station that “I see her every day. She’s a part of this family, this school district. She crosses these children every day. She’s always on time. She’s always helpful. I just hope she recovers and is safe. Her children go to this school, so can you imagine? They shouldn’t have to witness anything like that.”

Police told WPVI they’re asking for the public’s help in identifying the suspect, who was seen driving a gold Nissan Altima. However, police added to the station that the car didn’t have a license plate and had a paper tag in the window.

“It’s terrible that a person would come up, just out of nowhere, just maybe frustrated with traffic or having to wait, and goes over and assaults this woman,” the chief told WPVI. “A male goes over and assaults this woman in front of children and has no problem doing it.”

Gabe also has a message for the suspect, the station noted: “We are tracking you down, and we’re hoping that we will be able to find you and have you prosecuted. So the best thing to do is to turn yourself in.”

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

​Physical attack, Crossing guard, Male punches female, Elementary school, Darby, Pennsylvania, Knocked out, Suspect at large, Caught on video, Assault, Crime 

Republicans didn’t win the Senate so their leaders could manage expectations. They won it to deliver results. Will Republican leaders actually deliver? We are about to find out with the SAVE America Act.

The legislation requires proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections. That is not a fringe idea. It’s the law of the land in nearly every nation in the world — and is one of the most widely supported election reforms in the United States.

Republicans campaigned on restoring integrity to elections. Passing the SAVE America Act should be treated as a blood oath, not a messaging exercise.

A February Harvard CAPS/Harris poll found that 85% of voters say only U.S. citizens should vote in American elections. The same survey found that 71% support the SAVE America Act itself, 81% support voter ID, and 75% support proof-of-citizenship requirements. Perhaps most striking: Roughly 70% of Democrat voters support voter ID.

That’s a consensus. When an issue has that level of support, failure usually isn’t about policy. It’s about will.

Yet Senate Republicans still appear poised to treat the SAVE America Act like a messaging exercise: Debate it for a bit, eventually set up the opportunity for Democrats to kill it rather than having to vote on the bill, shrug, and move on.

That may satisfy the Senate’s procedural instincts, but it won’t satisfy voters. It certainly isn’t how Donald Trump gets a deal done. In “The Art of the Deal,” Trump laid out a strategy he has followed again and again with demonstrable success: seeking leverage, wearing down your opponent, fighting back hard and never folding, exerting time to your advantage, and applying psychological pressure.

Past Senate leaders have understood this method and have used it themselves. In December 2009, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) wanted the Affordable Care Act passed before Christmas. Several Democrat senators were balking.

RELATED: ‘Allows ICE to kick tens of billions’ off voter rolls? Schumer’s SAVE Act claims keep getting worse.

Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Reid’s solution was blunt: No one goes home until the votes are there. The Senate stayed in session nearly a month and passed Obamacare on Christmas Eve. Senators whose votes hadn’t been there suddenly discovered ways to support it. Amazing what happens when missing Christmas becomes the alternative.

Senate leaders routinely use endurance and inconvenience as leverage — especially in budget fights. They keep the floor open overnight, run endless amendment votes, and threaten to blow through recess until the holdouts crack.

That kind of determination to change the dynamic when “the votes aren’t there” should not be reserved just for spending bills. The SAVE America Act is exactly the kind of legislation where pressure works and why Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) wants to restore the standing filibuster for this bill to maximize pressure.

The recess threat isn’t just about challenging Democrats’ ideological commitment to unverified voting processes. It’s about the human cost of being physically trapped in Washington while your family, your staff, your donors, your fundraisers, and your district events — as well as your junkets and vacations — are elsewhere. That applies to every senator regardless of how committed they are to blocking the bill.

And over 80% public support for common-sense voter ID creates an entirely different kind of psychological pressure: the daily political exposure of defending an unpopular position.

This would be the application of Trump’s doctrine, which isn’t just about wearing down a monolithic opponent — it’s about identifying and applying pressure to the weakest link.

Remember, Democrats are politically exposed. Democrats must defend two Senate seats this year — including Georgia, where Jon Ossoff faces re-election in a state Trump carried, and Michigan, where Gary Peters’ retirement has created a competitive open seat.

Other Democrat incumbents — from Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire to Mark Warner in Virginia — represent states where elections are often decided at the margins. Picture what a real floor fight would look like if Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) were serious about getting the SAVE America Act passed.

RELATED: The SAVE Act is the hill voters will die on

Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call Inc. via Getty Images

The SAVE America Act stays on the Senate floor. No artificial deadline. No prearranged surrender through cloture vote. Republican leadership simply says: We are staying here until this bill passes — even if that means canceling spring recess.

Senators like Jon Ossoff — or any Democrat in a competitive state — would be faced with a brutal choice: Keep blocking a bill their own voters support overwhelmingly, while missing weeks of campaigning, or break ranks.

That’s exactly the kind of leverage Trump talks about. Find the pressure points. Apply force where the incentives are weakest. Keep the fight going until the opposition starts looking for the exit. Republicans don’t need to break the entire Democratic caucus. They need seven votes — really six if you think John Fetterman (D-Pa.) is smart and sensible.

Now add one more piece of leverage: Restore the standing filibuster so that obstruction actually carries a cost. The Senate survived that rule for most of its history, and its absence has helped turn the Senate from the world’s greatest deliberative body into the place where legislation dies in darkness.

If Democrats want to block the SAVE America Act, let them talk all night if necessary. Let them explain repeatedly why they oppose proof of citizenship to vote. Go on record with their condescending view that married females are too dim-witted to get new IDs (thank you, Mazie Hirono) and their racist smears that minorities will struggle to get ID (thank you, Chuck Schumer).

The modern “silent filibuster” protects obstruction from accountability. A talking filibuster does the opposite — it puts obstruction on display.

Republicans campaigned on restoring integrity to elections. Passing the SAVE America Act should be treated as a blood oath, not a messaging exercise. Trump would understand that instinctively. The question is whether Senate leadership does, because right now the country isn’t looking for performative politics. It’s looking for resolve and results.

A “hybrid talking filibuster” is a good step, but ultimately what counts is delivering results, and Donald Trump, the dealmaster, shows how to get it done.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.

​Save america act, Election security, Voter fraud, John thune, Senate republicans, Save act, Gop, Trump, Democrats, Opinion & analysis, Filibuster, Voting rights, Voter id, Voter registration 

I was in the delivery room for my eighth child when I found out Paul Ehrlich died.

Ehrlich’s 1968 book “The Population Bomb” did not come from concern for the environment. It grew out of a basic contempt for his fellow man. He viewed people not as the foundation of society but as a destructive force consuming resources. His warnings about overpopulation and climate issues were not about protecting nature. They were about controlling and reducing the number of people.

Ehrlich prided himself on the hundreds of millions of babies who were never born because of his ideas. That is his legacy.

This line of thinking was not original. Ehrlich drew directly from Thomas Malthus, the 18th-century writer who argued that population increases faster than food production, leading inevitably to catastrophe. Malthus provided the intellectual justification for elites of his era to look down on the poor and the growing families among them.

Ehrlich updated the same argument with modern statistics, computer models, and environmental language. He took it farther. Ehrlich functioned as a modern version of the Albigensians, the medieval sect condemned by the Catholic Church for teaching that physical matter and the body were inherently corrupt. Those believers discouraged marriage and childbirth, seeing procreation as trapping more souls in an evil material world. The ultimate good preached by the Albigensians was for followers to starve themselves to death to show their commitment to not consuming resources.

Ehrlich repackaged these ideas in pseudoscientific terms: Stop having children, or you will destroy the planet. The message stayed the same — human life and babies are the problem.

His specific forecasts failed, one after another. He predicted that hundreds of millions of people would die of starvation in the 1970s and ’80s. That did not happen.

He wrote that India faced unavoidable mass famine and societal breakdown. Instead, new agricultural techniques dramatically increased food production there and across Asia.

In a famous 1980 wager with economist Julian Simon, Ehrlich claimed prices of key raw materials would surge due to scarcity over the next 10 years. The prices fell, and he lost the bet.

Ehrlich had an easy time settling his $10,000 bet with Simon. He mailed the check shortly after receiving both the MacArthur “Genius” Grant and the “ecologist’s version of the Nobel” for his ingeniously wrong ecology — twin prizes that netted him $485,000 (about $1.15 million today).

Despite this best-selling record of error, Ehrlich’s outlook and recommended policies gained influence among those who consider themselves the educated, evidence-based class. University departments, international organizations, and media outlets adopted his assumptions.

RELATED: NYT is getting crushed online for downplaying infamous ‘population bomb’ false alarm

Gene Arias/NBC/NBCU Photo Bank

When he wasn’t barnstorming lecture halls demanding that parents be taxed at higher rates than selfish adults, he was making multiple appearances on “The Tonight Show,” where he warned that “there’s a finite pie. The more mice you have nibbling at it, the smaller every mouse’s share.” Johnny Carson nodded along, no doubt contemplating the alimony he had paid out over the course of four marriages.

Our elites were not simply mistaken about the facts. They embraced Ehrlich’s ideas because they already held contempt for the people they aimed to direct. Large families in middle America, working parents, and growing populations in developing nations represent something they want to limit — too many independent voices, too many demands on resources, too much resistance to top-down planning.

This shared attitude explains why policies inspired by Ehrlich persisted, from China’s one-child policy to aggressive carbon pricing that burdens ordinary households and education that frames having children as environmentally irresponsible.

The goal was never just saving the planet. It was managing populations that elites view as excessive and unruly.

It may no longer be in vogue in communist China, which is now scrambling to recover from the disaster of crushing birth rates through forced abortion and sterilization, but progressives throughout the Democratic Party and Europe are still wildly enthusiastic about suppressing new life in the name of “freedom.”

Maybe the closest Ehrlich ever came to being correct is when he predicted that Britain would no longer exist as a viable nation by the year 2000. That will not happen for another year or two under Keir Starmer’s leadership. The U.K., it turns out, won’t be undone by climate catastrophe or mass starvation, but by its embrace of Paul Ehrlich’s worldview. In 2023, England and Wales aborted nearly 300,000 babies. Live births dipped below 600,000.

Ehrlich is gone, but the impulse he represented continues in policy circles and institutions that treat the human population itself as the central threat. Families across the country continue to reject that message. They are choosing to raise children and invest in the future without apology.

Ehrlich prided himself on the hundreds of millions of babies who were never born because of his ideas. That is his legacy. It had to be, because, as he boasted throughout his lifetime, he got a vasectomy in 1963 after the birth of his first child.

Paul Ehrlich lived 93 years. His family tree spanning four generations is less crowded than the recovery room I’m in right now.

​Paul ehrlich, Population bomb, Thomas malthus, Natural resources, Population bomb book, Birthrates, Opinion & analysis, Obituary, Environmentalism, Population decline