May 9, 2023, UNITED STATES
This is a short podcast preview in which I discuss the systematic removal of womankind as part of the dominant co-species in our society, the world, and life as we know it. The Transgender Movement has severe implications for women in society, in the sports arena, and private spaces. Transgender women have a radical agenda of replacing women and the current administration, along with the LBGTQ is erasing the biological truth of the differences between men and women. Now, a protected class in our society while womankind is dismissed - losing the rights they've fought for; for decades.

#EndangeredSpecies #WomankindUnderAttack #DylanMulvaney #LiaThomas #BiologicalWomen #BiologicalMen #TransgenderMovement #GenocideOfWomankind #PrivateSpaces


Chiraq: Welcome to the Jungle [The Chaos in Chicago]


Apr 24, 2023, UNITED STATES
Chicago has had a long history of violence and crime; however, the residents have been trying to come from underneath that stigma as the “The Capital City of Crime,” or “The Third World Country of the United States”. Last weekend, a teen take-over shattered any reason to change the city’s status when they rampaged the South Loop, the Art Institute, and Millennium Park. The curfew didn’t stop them and the underfunded Chicago Police Department was no match. Tonight’s podcast should send a clear message that the chaos facing Chicago and many cities like Los Angeles, and Seattle are under attack from within by a Marxist ideology and corrupt District Attorneys. Politicians are of no consequence as they boldly protected the teen take-over as children being children and the frustration about no opportunities. But one has to ask, “Where were the parents.” Why has the Chicago leadership attempted to normalize this behavior? Once, normalized, we run the risk of a breakdown in society and possibly a race war – and whom do you think the saviors will be? The same ones who systematically create the environment which we are witnessing in Chicago.

#TeenTakeOver #MayorLightfoot #MayorBrandonJohnson #Chiraq #thirdworldcountry #DAKimFoxx #MurderCapital #MillenniumPark #AssaultedTourists #TeensGoneWild


Abortion – ProLife vs. Murder on Demand

“Life begins at conception.” “Abortion is murder.”Abortion is a moral dilemma that continues to circulate in society by two groups that have been arguing for and against abortion policies in the United States – Pro-life and Pro-choice. Democrats argue that Women’s Reproductive Rights are in jeopardy, but a large number of the so-called women are young teenagers and women with economic challenges. Pro-life advocates argue that life for the unborn fetus begins at conception. While opposition Pro-choice denies this argument as a fact – their argument is life begins when a pregnancy goes to term. However, the Pro-choice argument isn’t about when life begins; rather it centers on a woman’s right to choose. This a choice at odds with the many Pro-life groups that contend abortions are a wholesale market for murder without consideration of life.

Now, to be fair. Abortions have existed for centuries without question. A written abstract by G Hovey called Abortion: a history reveals that in the early Roman Catholic church, abortion was permitted for male fetuses in the first 40 days of pregnancy and female fetuses in the first 80-90 days. Not until 1588 did Pope Sixtus V declare all abortion murder, with ex-communication as the punishment. Only 3 years later a new pope found the absolute sanction unworkable and again allowed early abortions. 300 years would pass before the Catholic Church under Pius IX again declared all abortion murder. This standard declared in 1869, remains the official position of the church, reaffirmed by the current pope. An article called Church Has Always Condemned Abortion by Fr. William Saunders contends the Roman Catholic Church has consistently condemned abortion — the direct and purposeful taking of the life of the unborn child. In principle, Catholic Christians believe that all life is sacred from conception until natural death, and the taking of innocent human life, whether born or unborn, is morally wrong. The Church teaches, "Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains forever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being" ("Donum vitae," 5).

In 1920 the Soviet Union became the 1st modern state formally to legalize abortion. In the early period after the 1917 revolution, abortion was readily available in state-operated facilities. These facilities were closed and abortion was made illegal when it became clear that the Soviet Union would have to defend itself against Nazi Germany. In the United States as early as 1856 Dr. Horatio Storer establishes a national drive through the American Medical Association to make all abortions illegal. Before this, first-trimester abortions were legal or a misdemeanor in most states. However, I think the moral dilemma was that of the sanctity of life and not one of profit.

Let’s begin by asking this important question: What is an abortion? And what impact has it had on society? According to the Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica; an abortion is the expulsion of a fetus from the uterus before it has reached the stage of viability (in human beings, usually about the 20th week of the gestation period). The Pro-choice movement states “the fetus is just a part of the pregnant woman’s body, like her tonsils or appendix. You can’t seriously believe a frozen embryo is an actual person.” This callous comparison of the fetus to the tonsils or the appendix is insidious in its argument. But, the debate for a women’s right to have an abortion was argued back in 1959 when the American Law Institute (ALI) proposed a model penal code for state abortion laws. The code advocates legalizing abortion for reasons including the mental or physical health of the mother, pregnancy due to rape and incest, and fetal deformity. The stage was being set for the abortion debate, to normalize this healthcare procedure similar in scope to remove a wisdom tooth without the implications it would present legally, morally, and spiritually to not only the women but society as well.

And this leads to a challenging question debated fiercely by Pro-life and Pro-Choice advocates – when does life begin during a pregnancy? According to an article on LiveAction; Science is clear: Each new human life begins at fertilization By Sarah Terzo on January 13, 2013 – she wrote that “Science teaches without reservation that life begins at fertilization (conception). It is a scientific fact that an organism exists after fertilization that did not exist before. This new organism has its own DNA distinct from the mother and father, meaning that it is a unique person. As the embryo grows, it develops a heartbeat (22 days after fertilization), its own circulatory system, and its own organs. From fertilization, it is a new organism that is alive and will continue to grow and develop as long as nutrition is provided and its life is not ended through violence or illness.”

However, Pro-choice argues “It is uncertain when human life begins; that’s a religious question that cannot be answered by science.” According to the book: ProLife Answers to ProChoice Arguments by Randy Alcorn written February 18, 2010, he states the following; Medical textbooks and scientific reference work consistently agree that human life begins at conception. Some of the world’s most prominent scientists and physicians testified to a U.S. Senate committee that human life begins at conception. Many other prominent scientists and physicians have likewise affirmed with certainty that human life begins at conception.

Next, it should be noted that abortions have become a billion-dollar-a-year industry if not more. The abortion industry with companies like Planned Parenthood, Whole Woman’s Health, All Women’s Health, and Family Planning Associates Medical Group provide comprehensive healthcare, but largely provide abortions on demand. Planned Parenthood alone grosses billions, but I can’t provide the actual numbers because it's not disclosed in the report. I downloaded the 2019 annual report and provided percentages in pie charts rather than real numbers. Additionally, Planned Parenthood gets financial funding from the federal government and millions in donations. This amount of monetary gain is achieved by the wholesale slaughter of the unborn and the sale of aborted body parts like fresh-cut choice meats at a butcher shop for profit. And I apologize for the description, but this is a fact.
If you recall the Federalist journalist Edie Heipel on April 5, 2021, wrote an article about legal accountability group Judicial Watch dropping a bombshell: a nearly 600-page report proving the U.S. government has been buying and trafficking “fresh” aborted baby body parts. These body parts, purchased by the (FDA) or U.S. Food and Drug Administration to “humanize” mice and test biological drugs in scientific experiments, came from babies up to 24 weeks old gestation, just weeks from being born. So what changed? Well, aborted baby parts were no longer thrown into dumpsters, no; now the wholesale of baby parts is an additional revenue stream by the abortion industry and funded by the Federal government.
While Americans may be used to hearing pro-lifers beat the warning drum on abortion groups harvesting baby bodies and selling them for research, (who hasn’t heard of the lawsuit against David Daleiden, who exposed Planned Parenthood haggling over baby lungs and livers at dinner parties?) this time, the U.S. government was the one trafficking baby parts.

It should not surprise you, your tax dollars are hard at work purchasing dismembered body parts of aborted fetuses for the FDA, and the California-based Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) conduct Frankenstein-level experiments; I mean it’s a billion-dollar industry profiting on the murder of the unborn or future of the human race. That’s why you have lobbyists petitioning the government to repeal abortion laws so companies like Planned Parenthood can continue to profit along with their investors. And think about this; abortions aren’t meant to comfort women but provide a resource of human parts to many industries because of the inconvenience of an unwanted pregnancy.

So who is culpable and complicit in helping sustain the abortion industry? The FDA, the Health and Human Services agencies, Planned Parenthood, and our government. And the public is unwittingly misled to believe what these agencies are providing to the economically challenged provides Women’s Reproductive Rights. It is a sham. This is why “sex education” doesn’t work, nor are parental values encouraged by the industry, politicians, and even religious groups because the laws are designed to keep the abortion industry running – the fact is, the laws encourage promiscuity in our youth because these are the manufacturers of fetuses to an industry without oversight. In addition, teen abortions can occur without parental consent, which violates the rights of the parents.

Edie Hiepel's article goes on to say, “Americans should be outraged their government participates in the wide-scale human trafficking operation that created a market for harvesting the organs of murdered infants. In no humane society could such a violation of the human body and dignity occur, in which babies’ eyes are “harvested immediately upon death,” organs marketed based on sex, and personhood attributed to mice but not children. Until demanded otherwise, our society is complicit in the unchecked abuse and commodification of preborn children. Moral urgency is incumbent on us to condemn these atrocities sanctioned by the federal government’s lead medical researchers and fight to stop them. We may lose more battles before we win, but we cannot say we never knew.” Sounds to me like we are repeating a tragic period in history and following China’s massive pro-abortion ideologies.

Whatever happened to the consciousness of the American people? Why can’t we teach teenagers and adults alike to use contraception to prevent unwanted pregnancies? The simple answer is there are profits to be made in the wholesale murder of the unborn. May God have mercy on our souls for permitting these atrocities.


Good evening, all. Back on September 27, 1994, Newt Gingrich publicly announced a Republican Party Contract with America. What did that mean back then? The Contract with America was a legislative agenda advocated for by the Republican Party during the 1994 congressional election campaign. Written by Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey, and in part using text from former President Ronald Reagan's 1985 State of the Union Address, the Contract detailed the actions the Republicans promised to take if they became the majority party in the United States House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years. Many of the Contract's policy ideas originated at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

The Contract with America was introduced six weeks before the 1994 Congressional election, the first midterm election of President Bill Clinton's administration, and was signed by all but two of the Republican members of the House and all of the Party's non-incumbent Republican congressional candidates. The contract described the plan of the Congressional Representatives, seeking to nationalize the Congressional election. Its provisions represented the view of many conservative Republicans on the issues of reducing the size of government, cutting taxes, and both tort reform and welfare reform.

The 1994 elections resulted in Republicans gaining 54 House and 9 U.S. Senate seats, flipping both chambers. The Contract was seen as a triumph by party leaders such as Minority Whip Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, and the American conservative movement in general.

Contract with America 1994:
The Contract would address Government and Operational reforms
On the first day of their majority in the House, the Republicans promised to bring up for a vote, eight major reforms:
1. Require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress;
2. Select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud, or abuse;
3. Cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
4. Limit the terms of all committee chairs;
5. Ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
6. Require committee meetings to be open to the public;
7. Require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
8. Guarantee an honest accounting of the Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.

The Contract implementations: The Fiscal Responsibility Act

An amendment to the Constitution that would require a balanced budget unless sanctioned by a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress {this passed by the US House Roll Call: 300-132, January 26, 1995, but rejected by the US Senate: Roll Call 65–35 (the amendment was defeated by a single vote, with one Republican opposed, Oregon Republican Senator Mark Hatfield; Dole cast a procedural vote against the amendment to bring it up again in the future. In short, it did not pass.

The Taking Back Our Streets Act:

An anti-crime package included stronger truth in sentencing, and "good faith" exclusionary rule exemptions (H.R.666 Exclusionary Rule Reform Act, passed US House Roll Call 289–142 February 8, 1995).

The Personal Responsibility Act:

An act to discourage illegitimacy and teen pregnancy by reforming and cutting cash welfare and related programs. This would be achieved by prohibiting welfare to mothers under 18 years of age, denying increased Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) for additional children while on welfare, and enacting a two-years-and-out provision with work requirements to promote individual responsibility. H.R.4, passed by the US House 234–199, March 23, 1995, and passed by the US Senate 87–12, September 19, 1995. The Act was vetoed by President Clinton, but the alternative Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act which offered many of the same policies were enacted on August 22, 1996.

The American Dream Restoration Act:

An act to create a $500-per-child tax credit, add a tax credit for couples who pay more taxes in aggregate if they are married than if they were single (but keep in place the fiction of Earned Income Splitting), and the creation of American Dream Savings Accounts to provide middle-class tax relief. H.R.1215, passed 246–188, April 5, 1995.

The National Security Restoration Act:

An act to prevent U.S. troops from serving under United Nations command unless the president determines it is necessary for national security, to cut U.S. payments for UN peacekeeping operations, and to help establish guidelines for the voluntary integration of former Warsaw Pact nations into NATO. H.R.7, passed 241–181, February 16, 1995.

The Common-Sense Legal Reform Act:

An act to institute "loser pays" laws (H.R.988, passed 232–193, March 7, 1995), limits on punitive damages, and weakening of product-liability laws to prevent what the bill considered frivolous litigation (H.R.956, passed 265–161, March 10, 1995; passed Senate 61–37, May 11, 1995, vetoed by President Clinton. "H.R.956 - Product Liability Fairness Act of 1995". Another tort reform bill, the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, was enacted in 1995 when Congress overrode Clinton's veto.

The Job Creation and Wage Enhancement Act:

A package of measures to act as small-business incentives: capital-gains cuts and indexation, neutral cost recovery, risk assessment/cost-benefit analysis, strengthening of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and unfunded mandate reform to create jobs and raise worker wages. Although this was listed as a single bill in the Contract, its provisions ultimately made it to the House Floor as four bills:
• H.R.5, requiring federal funding for state spending mandated by Congressional action and estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to cost more than $50m per year (for the years 1996–2002), was passed 360–74, February 1, 1995. This bill was conferenced with S. 1 and enacted, on March 22, 1995 "S.1 - Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995".
• H.R.450 required a moratorium on the implementation of federal regulations until June 30, 1995, and was passed 276–146, on February 24, 1995. Companion Senate bill S. 219 passed by voice vote, on May 17, 1995, but the two bills never emerged from the conference "S.219 - Regulatory Transition Act of 1995".
• H.R.925 required federal compensation to be paid to property owners when federal government actions reduced the value of the property by 20% or more and were passed 277–148, March 3, 1995.
• H.R.926, passed 415–14 on March 1, 1995, required federal agencies to provide a cost-benefit analysis on any regulation costing $50m or more annually, to be signed off on by the Office of Management and Budget, and permitted small businesses to sue that agency if they believed the aforementioned analysis was performed inadequately or incorrectly.

The Citizen Legislature Act:

An amendment to the Constitution that would have imposed 12-year term limits on members of the US Congress (i.e., six terms for Representatives, two terms for Senators). H.J.Res. 73 was rejected by the U.S. House 227–204 (a constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds majority, not a simple majority), on March 29, 1995.

Other sections:

Other sections of the contract include a proposed Family Reinforcement Act (tax incentives for adoption, strengthening the powers of parents in their children's education, stronger child pornography laws, and elderly dependent care tax credit) and the Senior Citizens Fairness Act (raise the Social Security earnings limit, repeal the 1993 tax hikes on Social Security benefits and provide tax incentives for private long-term care insurance).


Some observers cite the Contract with America as having helped secure a decisive victory for the Republicans in the 1994 elections; others dispute this role, noting its late introduction into the campaign. Whatever the role of the Contract, Republicans were elected to a majority of both houses of Congress for the first time since 1953, and some parts of the Contract were enacted. Most elements did not pass in Congress, while others were vetoed by, or substantially altered in negotiations with President Bill Clinton, who would sarcastically refer to it as the "Contract on America" implying that the Republicans' legislative package was akin to an organized crime "hit" on the American public. As a blueprint for the policy of the new Congressional majority, Micklethwait and Wooldridge argue in The Right Nation that the Contract placed Congress firmly back in the driver's seat of domestic government policy for most of the 104th Congress, and placed the Clinton White House firmly on the defensive.
Not all of the contract’s objectives were achieved, including congressional term limits and a constitutional amendment to force balanced budgets, but those that did were astoundingly successful.

While Democrats screamed like scalded dogs and promoted doomsday scenarios, President Bill Clinton correctly gauged the mood of the country, declaring that “the era of big government is over.” If only.
The Clinton-Gingrich welfare reform bill was a major achievement of the contract. The left claimed poor people would starve. They didn’t. Most of the able-bodied among them found jobs, which benefited them and the country.
Taxes were cut and in 1998 the federal budget was balanced and stayed balanced through 2001. Hard as it is to believe with today’s $30 trillion-dollar debt, the country experienced a surplus of $236 billion in 2000.

Economic growth was 4% or higher from 1997 through 2000 and unemployment rates, which had been above 7% at the beginning of the decade, fell to less than 5% in 1997. By the end of 2000, unemployment was under 4%.
For three straight years - from 1997 through 1999 - the economy produced more than 3 million jobs, a record.
It is undeniable that the contract worked.

Commitment to America 2022:

Recently Kevin McCarthy Minority Republican Leader of the house reinvented the same Contract with America again.
The new list of Republican goals will work, too, if they are implemented, because they are rooted in the history of what has worked before - lower taxes, less spending, personal responsibility, and accountability, empowering parents, not teachers' unions.

President Joe Biden is no Bill Clinton. The Democratic Party has been taken over by the hard left and they are not about to compromise on anything, from social issues to “climate change.”
Only if Republicans win the Congress and the White House does the GOP “Commitment to America” have a chance to fully succeed. As in 1994, the party has the issues on its side — from previously mentioned inflation and a declining stock market that is hurting the savings of retirees to an uncontrolled border, violent crime, and a cultural fabric that seems to many conservatives to be coming apart.

If Republicans can’t win on these issues, they can expect and deserve to be committed by voters to years of irrelevancy.

Final Thoughts:

Here is my problem with all of this. Both Republican Parties during 1994 and 2022 are required by the Constitution to protect and serve the people of the United States. So, when I think about the Republicans committing to a contract, I think of this critically because currently during the Biden Administration, we’ve seen Republicans like Liz Chaney R-WY, Peter Meijer R-MI, Jaime Herrera Beutler R-DC, Adam Kizinger R-IL, Anthony Gonzalez R-OH, Dan Newhouse R-DC, David Valadao R-CA, John Katko R-NY, Fred Upton R-MI, and Tom Rice R-SC all voting to impeach former President Donald J. Trump.
So, it leaves a bitter taste in my mouth when Republicans rally behind a contract that has no meaning unless they're committing themselves to support the Constitution, which they have sworn to uphold. To me, the Commitment to America is more for a show, even if the last contract had some success, but it may just be a distraction to vote for the Republicans. This is why we need to look at which Republicans have demonstrated support for We the People and The Constitution – this is my litmus test. What will be yours?


The Southern Border Crisis: In the Dark of Night

The Southern Border Crisis has been one of my top-viewed podcasts and I didn’t understand why, until I realized the News Media hadn’t been reporting on it as much these days. However, it became clear that you the audience are very aware of the plight of our Southern Borders. Then I recalled a video I saw in which an Arizona mayor declared a state of emergency as a result of the surge of illegal immigrants at the United States-Mexico border. In addition, the mayor along with other states is placing blame at the feet of President Joe Biden and the Democratic Party.

Biden gave his administration 60 days to find and review all current contracts and determine which can be canceled, which must be renegotiated, and whether any of the remaining money can be used on other projects. Trump, as of Jan. 15, had spent $6.1 billion of the $10.8 billion in wall construction it had contracted out, a Senate Democratic aide told AP. Overall, the Trump administration had secured $16.45 billion for the wall, including $5.8 billion appropriated by Congress and the rest seized from the Treasury and Defense departments. Biden is targeting that latter pot of money.

Gila Bend Mayor Chris Riggs made the declaration after he was told that busloads of migrants would be dropped by the federal government in his town despite him saying that the town is not capable of testing them all for the coronavirus.
According to Social Media writer Michael Lee, an Arizona sheriff warned that the United States is “in serious trouble” due to the Biden administration’s immigration policies that will cause a “huge crisis.”

"Where it's going is a huge crisis,” said Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels. “It’s already knocking on that door. There’s no doubt about it. Talking to my federal partners, talking to local law enforcement, talking to our health department — I mean, when it comes to public safety, national security when it comes to the health pandemic, we’re in trouble. We’re seriously in trouble, and this all started under the word 'politics.'”
Sheriff Mark Dannels said President Biden failed to consult with Arizona lawmakers before making immigration enforcement decisions, leaving the state to “pick up the pieces” at a border that is “wide open” for cartels.
Isn’t it just like a tyrant to act alone and not in harmony with State Governors by releasing Illegal Immigrants into their states? One thing is clear all state borders are under invasion by the Biden Administration moving Illegal Immigrants into their states in the dark of night.

Unfortunately, unlike Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Arizona has not fought back against the unauthorized release of Illegal Immigrants into their state’s town. For the most part, Governor Greg Abbott has been fighting back against the Biden Administration’s disregard for the citizens of Texas. Abbott outlined his order in a letter to Major General Tracy R. Norris, Adjutant General of the Texas National Guard, directing the guard to assist the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) in arresting illegal immigrants.

“Beginning on May 31, 2021, I have issued multiple proclamations certifying under Section 418.014 of the Texas Government Code that the surge of individuals unlawfully crossing the Texas-Mexico border poses an ongoing and imminent threat of disaster for certain counties and agencies in the State of Texas,” Abbott wrote. “To respond to this disaster and secure the rule of law at our Southern border, more manpower is needed — in addition to the troopers from the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and soldiers from the Texas National Guard I have already deployed there — and DPS needs help in arresting those who are violating state law.”

Since the Biden Administration through Executive Order canceled all contracts which halted the building of the rest of the border wall on his first day on the job in 2021, declaring the Southern Border a non-emergency, the Texas and Arizona uncompleted border wall might as well have signaled the welcome to the United States. And the accomplishments of hardline former President Trump concerning Illegal immigration would under the Biden Presidency become a full-scale invasion by Illegal immigrants because of President Joe Biden’s Open Borders Policies. Great job, dick!

Next, the Biden Administration wants to pay migrants – Illegal migrants up to $450 almost as a form of reparations. Reparartions for what? Reparations are taxpayer funds the government uses indiscriminately as though they were using Monopoly money. And yet, the homeless in our country receive nothing and Americans are facing higher and higher inflation – empty shelves at our local groceries and higher taxes, and yet again the Biden

The administration wants to give away our hard-earned money as though he were a modern-day version of Robinhood. Except the middle-class of America is not as rich as the Biden Administration and the Democratic Party think we are.