Our Books

If you enjoy this site, please consider purchasing one of our books (as low as $2.99). Click here to visit our Amazon page.

Our Books

Our Books
Books by Trevor Grant Thomas and Michelle Fitzpatrick Thomas

E-Mail Me:

NOTE: MY EMAIL ADDRESS HAS CHANGED! Trevor's new email address: trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com

Latest News/Commentary

Latest News/Commentary:

News/Commentary Archives:

News/Commentary Archives (for the current year; links to previous years archives at the bottom of each page)---PLUS: Trevor's Columns Archived (page linked at the bottom of the table below):

Wednesday, June 27, 2018

I Told You the GOP Would Save Money on Midterm Ads

As I noted barely two weeks ago, as long as the unhinged left continues to be-clown themselves, "the RNC will have to spend next to nothing when it comes to creating ads for the midterm elections." In other words, radical liberals will themselves write the ads for the GOP. The recently released ad below illustrates this perfectly:

And there you have it. Thank you Bernie Sanders, Kathy Griffin, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Samantha Bee, Bill Maher, Johnny Depp, "Nasty" Madonna, et al! Of course these fools should repent and turn from their wickedness, but almost certainly they will not. The modern left seems too devoted to the myriad of perverse causes that defines modern liberalism. Thus, the electoral choice for Americans could not be more clear. Again, by whose morality will you be governed America?

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Tuesday, June 26, 2018

Whose Truth? Whose Morality?

On my website, I have a “Quotable Quotes” page. The quotes are loosely grouped by topic, and at the top is this one by Winston Churchill:
Truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it; ignorance may deride it; malice may distort it; but there it is.
This has long been a favorite of mine, and several years ago I had a poster-size version of it printed so I could display it in my classroom. It cost me less than $10 to do this—a real bargain when one considers that The New York Times wants you to spend $300 to sport a t-shirt ($450 gets you the hoodie) that bears their new slogan (purportedly written by Churston Winchill, a transgender Times intern who majored in angry protesting and vulgar tweeting)—Truth. It’s more important now than ever.

This replaces the old slogan, which of course was, Shut Up, You Racist, Homophobic Bigot! T-shirts bearing this can now be found at a discount price of only $50 in the LGBT section of Target stores. At least I think so. We stopped shopping at Target years ago when they couldn’t seem to grasp the truth about males and females.

Only really smart people—such as those who read “all the ‘truth’ that’s fit to print”—would ever spend $300 for a t-shirt. And as one astute observer noted, if you’re a liar, you’ll want to wear it every day. This means we should be seeing them daily all across bastions of liberalism—college campuses, Hollywood, Planned Parenthood lobbies, same-sex “weddings,” the offices of the SPLC, Red Hen restaurants, and the like.

Instead of its pasta, Red Hen restaurants are now famous for partisanship—and, like most every liberal these days, “panic, ignorance, and malice.” Instead of angry politics, the Virginia location that turned away Sarah Sanders claimed they were doing so based on “moral convictions.” How absurd.

Of course, as most now well know, the “moral convictions” of modern liberalism allow for the killing of the most innocent and helpless among us, the legal redefinition of the oldest institution in the history of humanity, the attempted redefinition of gender, the embracing of virtually every sexual perversion imaginable, and so on. In other words, a modern liberal clamoring about “moral convictions” is like Larry Flynt complaining about adultery.

This so-called “moral conviction,” this so-called “truth” has nothing to do with morality or truth at all, but rather is something nearly as old as humanity itself: the desire to rule one’s own world. As Francis A. Schaeffer put it in chapter one—The Abolition of Truth and Morality—of his seminal book A Christian Manifesto, such a worldview has placed mankind “at the center of all things, and making him the measure of all things.” And those who live according to this worldview “have no sufficient base for either society or law,” and thus, they certainly have no business in any positions of power.

This humanistic view of reality led even a former Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (1946-1953), Frederick M. Vinson, to conclude, “Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes.” Vinson said this prior to 1950, and his ignorant proverb has indeed proven to be, as Al Mohler put it, a “dark prophecy” of things to come. For decades, liberals across the U.S. have embraced Vinson’s vision of a relativistic society.

Therefore, truth and morality are not eternal and from the One who made all things, but rather are merely a matter of taste. As the Humanist Manifesto II put it, “moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational needing no theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human need and interest.”

Thus, if one “needs” to kill her unborn child, or one is “interested” in “marrying” his homosexual partner, or if a man wants to “experience” what it’s like to live as a woman, so be it. If one “needs” to conduct an illegal investigation in order to win an election, or one has a vested “interest” in taking guns away from law abiding Americans, or one wants to “experience” college without having to pay for it, nothing or no one should stand in the way.

Whether in their personal lives, their politics, and even their theology, today’s liberals are blind to the notion that some things are settled for all time, and they have written their own moral code. While hypocritically touting “tolerance,” they insist that the rest of us either submit to their rule or “get the hell out!” Only God, or those operating under His authority, has the right to such an ultimatum, and—in spite of the insistence by fools like Maxine Waters that “God’s on our side,”—most liberals long ago decided that they didn’t want to play by His rules.

“Truth makes the Devil blush” wrote English historian Thomas Fuller. As liberalism has created a culture that is nearly bereft of shame, and in spite of their increasingly unhinged and immoral behavior, and because they are mostly ignorant of the “incontrovertible” truth, today’s liberals rarely blush. This usually happens only when someone becomes a political liability and not because some proper moral standard has been violated.

Again, what we are really dealing with here is competing views of truth. As noted apologist William Lane Craig put it when writing about the Christian perspective on homosexuality, “Today so many people think of right and wrong, not as matters of fact, but as matters of taste.” And if taste determines truth, then we’re all at the mercy of whoever’s in charge, because, ultimately we’re all intolerant. It’s simply a matter of two things: who’s right, and who are Americans going to put in charge.

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Wednesday, June 20, 2018

The Left Should Avoid Any and All Debates Concerning “The Children”

In their latest attempt to swing this fall’s election toward the democrats, the left now wants us to focus on “the children.” They haven’t really thought this through. Liberals the world over should work hard to avoid any debate that significantly involves the lives and wellbeing of children. Most anyone armed with even the slightest bit of the truth when it comes to liberalism and “the children” can easily quiet the left in virtually any debate that involves children or the family.

The first bit of truth that any liberal should have to answer for when it comes to children is, if liberalism is so concerned for the welfare of young people, why has the left spent decades fighting for the “right” to kill the most innocent and helpless among us? Ever since the American left decided to ignore sound science and morality and the dehumanization of the unborn became standard dogma for those who support the Democrat Party, children in their mothers’ wombs have been little more than a political headache for the modern left.

Since the 1960s, countless liberals across the U.S. have won elections by promising to keep legal their wicked “final solution” for those who want to be able to do whatever they wish in the sexual realm. Thus, for the left, children are only a concern when the timing is right—when kids are “wanted”—and when the political benefits are favorable for democrats.

Even longer than they have ignored the right to life, American liberals have worked to build a massive welfare state that has played a terrible role in the destruction of the family—especially the black family. Stealing a bit of my thunder here, about an hour after beginning this piece, Rush Limbaugh again reminded Americans which political party enabled generations of children—again, especially black children—to be separated from their parents.
The Democrat Party exists on dependency, and people that escape it pose a problem. So don’t buy that the Democrats care about separated families. Because, after all — and let me remind you — the Democrat Party literally subsidized single motherhood in the black community for decades. It was called AFDC.

The Democrat Party promoted a welfare policy that gave single women additional money for every child they had. The father need not ever be around. In many cases, the father was not even known, the father was not even identified because the Democrat Party assumed the role.

Actually, the Democrats made the government assume the role of father. If you want to talk about honestly separating families, the Democrat Party wrote the book on it and promoted it and campaigned on it and won elections on the basis of separated families where the government took over the economic responsibilities of the father.
As I noted in 2015, Barack Obama continued the democrats’ long practice of promising and giving away “free” stuff from Uncle Sam’s “stash.” Of course, then candidate Hillary Clinton pledged to do more of the same. This is just one of the reasons why she was rejected and Donald Trump was elected President of the United States. The welfare state created by democrats and their enablers has been as effective as abortion at “ripping” apart families in the U.S.

What’s more, the countries from which thousands of parents are sending their unaccompanied children to make the long and dangerous trek to the U.S. have long been dominated by leftist politics and policies. Thus, these nations have devolved into the world’s “crapholes” from which many of their citizens are eager to flee.

Working in concert with the welfare state is the wicked sexual agenda of the left. Whether pornography, promiscuity, or the LGBT agenda, since at least the middle of the twentieth century, the many sexual perversions of liberalism have wrought decades of death and destruction upon children, adults, and families alike in America.

Among other tragic consequences, this has led to rampant divorce, disease, and out-of-wedlock births—which, among other terrible outcomes, has given us violence, crime, filthy and deadly neighborhoods, dangerous and ineffective schools, and the like. What’s more, fatherlessness—a tragic outcome liberals have long championed—is the leading cause of poverty in the U.S. In their efforts to buy votes and remain in power, democrats have doomed generations of American children to growing up poor.

Not being content with destroying marriage and family as God gave it to us, liberals have taken the previously unthinkable and duped tens of millions of Americans—including those occupying the highest court in our land—into accepting it, or even embracing it, as normal. We were deceptively told that, since no harm comes to others, “consenting adults” ought to be able to do as they wish in their bedrooms.

Ignoring the eternal truths of their Creator, when “consenting adults” do as they wish, it’s often children who suffer the most. Millions of American children today are suffering under the myriad of lies pushed by the perverse LGBT agenda. Some are in homes without a mother or a father simply because liberals decided that it was within their “right” to redefine the oldest institution in the history of humanity.

Tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of U.S. children who are stuck in government schools are not only being taught that homosexuality and same-sex “marriage” are normal, but that biology doesn’t determine a person’s sex. Because of liberalism, children are being read to by drag queens, “entertained” by drag queens, and even turned into drag queens! Because of liberalism, children in government schools are being provided with a study guide on transgenderism that instructs kids that a gender-deluded lifestyle is just another choice for a young person to make.

Because of liberalism, children in government schools are being provided with a George Soros-funded “sexual health toolkit” that, among other immoralities, and in spite of the significant health disparities suffered by homosexual teens, instructs them on homosexual behavior, including sodomy. Because of liberalism, those who wish to flee the immoral and unhealthy homosexual lifestyle are being hindered from doing so, and in this backwards process, liberals have banned the Bible. Because of liberalism, in addition to invading girls’ locker rooms and bathrooms, and as I warned would be the case, boys are taking trophies from girls.

If we can’t trust liberals to instruct children properly on who is a male and who is a female; if we can’t trust liberals to tell the truth on something as old and foundational as marriage and the family; if we can’t trust liberals to work to ensure that children are raised by a mother and a father; if we can’t trust liberals to protect children from sexual perversion; if we can’t trust liberals to guard the very lives of the most helpless and innocent among us, we should trust them on nothing when it comes to “the children.”

(See this column at American Thinker and The Black Sphere.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Thursday, June 14, 2018

The Ignorant, Godless Left Can’t Help Themselves

It seems the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) cash advantage over the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is even more pronounced than the numbers—$43.8 million to $3.4 million—indicate. As long as democrats like Nancy Pelosi vainly continue to attempt to ignore, downplay, or even bad-mouth good to excellent to record breaking (in more ways than one) economic numbers—and in the process be-clown themselves—the RNC will have to spend next to nothing when it comes to creating ads for the midterm elections.

Pelosi, in particular, is the gift that keeps on giving to the GOP. Cementing herself as one of our nation’s most morally and economically ignorant citizens, just prior to the GOP passing—and President Trump signing—sweeping tax reform legislation in December of last year, Mrs. Pelosi went on a historically foolish rant.

Awash in hyperbole and hypocrisy—remember, she leads the party that stands for, among other immoral outrageousness, the “right” to kill the most helpless and innocent among us, the “right” for boys to take trophies from girls, and the legal redefinition of the oldest institution in the history of humanity—she accused republicans of embracing “moral obscenity and unrepentant greed.”

Blind to her extreme “plutocracy hypocrisy,” the 78-year-old grandmother, who’s been in Congress for over 31 years and has a reported net worth of over $100 million, claimed that a vote for the GOP tax bill was “a vote to install a permanent plutocracy in our nation.” Forgetting that she represents those who hate our Founders and our military and those who think children are a “punishment,” Mrs. Pelosi also claimed that the GOP tax bill “does violence to the vision of our Founders” and “disrespects the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform. And it betrays the future and betrays the aspirations of our children.”

After the GOP tax bill went into effect and businesses and corporations started shelling out large bonuses and raises, Mrs. Pelosi then had the difficult duty of pretending that these were not really good things. Her “crumbs” comments have already come back to haunt her, and they should continue to do so.

Of course Nancy Pelosi is far from alone in her efforts to try to keep the American electorate from believing what they are seeing when it comes to the U.S. economy. Chuck Schumer echoed her “crumbs” comment; Debbie Wasserman Schultz joined in the “Liberals Against a Magnificent Economy” (otherwise known as LAME—I hear they’ll be opening for Madonna soon) chorus; and naturally, the establishment media aided and abetted these absurd attempts at deceit.

Along with trying to put increased wages in a bad light, Pelosi and her ilk also had the unenviable task of trying to convince Americans that more jobs is a bad thing. While trying to distract from record employment numbers, Pelosi attempted to disown the healthcare debacle that continues to plague millions of Americans. In other words, along with trying to convince American voters than increased wage and jobs numbers are somehow “fake news,” democrats are also hoping to dupe us into forgetting that it is they who wrecked our healthcare system.

The awesome May jobs report gave the left-wing media another opportunity to remind us how smart they are and how stupid President Trump is. They did about as well as they usually do. CNN’s Don Lemon said, “There’s no question today’s job report is good news, including the news that we’re as close as we’ve ever been to full employment in the black community. But what’s full employment without full respect.”

As Andrew Klavan aptly put it, “Don apparently thinks Americans don’t respect all black people. Who’s going to break the news that it’s just him we don’t respect?” Instead of the great news on jobs, NBC wanted to focus on—and pretend that they weren’t the only ones focused on—Trump’s “premarket tweet.” CNN’s chief national correspondent John King dared everyone to find a President of the United States prior to Trump “talking about, Tweeting about, communicating about the unemployment report before it came out.” Of course, someone took his dare and proved him laughably wrong.

Things have gotten so good economically—or bad, depending on your election hopes—and so deep is the left’s hatred for Trump and his administration that liberals have stooped to “A pox on you and your economy!” On a recent episode of his Real Time show, Bill Maher declared,
Can I ask about the economy because this economy is going pretty well? I feel like the bottom has to fall out at some point. And by the way, I'm hoping for it. Because I think one way you get rid of Trump is a crashing economy. So, please, bring on the recession. Sorry if that hurts people, but it's either root for a recession or you lose your democracy.
Actually it’s a republic—if we can keep it. And as is sometimes attributed to Ben Franklin himself, when the people find they can vote themselves money—as often happens when there is a ballot cast for a democrat—that will herald the end of the republic. In other words, Maher and his minions face a political Catch-22: to elect more democrats, liberals need a “crashing economy,” but the quickest way to a “crashing economy” is to elect more democrats. Good luck with that, Bill.

Maher’s selfish drivel was only upstaged by that of Robert De Nero—I mean “Niro.” Sorry, I sometimes confuse vulgar, debauched Romans. With his epic “F-Trump” rant, De Niro and his enthusiastically approving audience at the Tony Awards again reminded us—as if we needed reminding—of where hedonistic Hollywood stands on the political and moral spectrum.

Whether De Niro or Samantha Bee, Joy Behar, Susan Sarandon, Chelsea Handler, Lena Dunham, J.K. Rowling, Jennifer Lawrence, Jimmy Kimmel, George Clooney, Matt Damon, Danny Glover, Michael Moore, Seth Meyers, Stephen Colbert—the more they open their foul, godless mouths, the more they also remind us why Trump was elected and why liberals and liberalism have been so widely rejected.

(See this column at American Thinker and The Black Sphere.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Monday, June 11, 2018

A Near-100% Guarantee on Preventing STDs

Despite being sexually active for over two decades,—I know, “TMI,” but you can hardly discuss sex and not have a little “TMI”—my wife and I have never spent even five seconds worrying about, or one dime preventing or treating an STD. This is chiefly due to the fact that our sexual activity exactly corresponds to our marriage years. We’re teaching our four children—ages 9, 12, 14, and 16—that if they conduct themselves similarly, they too will never have to ponder preventing or treating an STD.

For us, “conducting themselves similarly” means adhering to what God has said about sexual behavior. Namely, that the only rightful place for sex is within marriage. And marriage (How tragic that this even has to be said!) is ONLY the lifetime union of one man and one woman. That either of these statements is shocking or controversial—or even revealing—only goes to show how corrupt our culture has become when it comes to sexual morality.

Among other tragic outcomes, this corruption has led to an STD epidemic in the U.S. As I noted recently (more than once), according to The New York Times, a shocking 110 million Americans—more than one-third of our population—has an STD. A recent Drudge headline declared “STDs run rampant in USA.” The headline linked to a piece that reported on the “incredibly alarming numbers” of STDs in California.

Those were not the words of a reporter, but of Heidi Bauer, chief of the STD control branch of the California Department of Public Health. She added that the STD numbers in California amounted to “an epidemic.” Of course, Bauer’s solutions to their STD problem are the typical liberal California claptrap—i.e. condoms and cash.

According to Dr. Bauer—as is virtually always the case in these sad situations with those corrupted by liberalism—the solution to what ails us involves more money and bigger government. Along with blaming a lack of funding for public health programs for California’s rise in STDs, Dr. Bauer also blamed “the funneling of patients away from public health services toward primary care physicians.”

Of course, teaching kids the proper use of a condom is standard operating procedure for liberals when it involves anything dangerous in the sexual realm. According to The Daily Californian,
The STD Control Branch is approaching intervention through three different avenues: mandating sexual education in public schools, working with medical providers to ensure comprehensive STI testing and encouraging local health departments to ensure treatment for patients who test positive, according to Bauer.
The type of sex education The People’s Republic of Kalifornia would like to “mandate”—among other perverse things—provides a “sexual health toolkit” that is funded in part by the George Soros-connected Tides Center. According to Life Site News, this “toolkit”—among many other perverse things—“offers kids tips on using sex toys and anal lubricant. It defines ‘anal intercourse, ‘phone sex,’ and more as ‘common sexual behaviors’” and even has a section entitled “Wetter Makes It Better.”

In line with those who believe we have the right to rule our own world, the toolkit—or more aptly, “foolkit”—also tell kids that they may “[Have] Sex on Your Own Terms.” To clarify what this means, youngsters are provided with a “Relationship Bill of Rights.” This tells kids—kids!—that they have the “right” to:
  • Trust my feelings. 
  • Be with who I want, when I want, and how I want. 
  • Have sex when my partner AND I both want to. 
Is there any doubt that California’s—as well as the rest of America’s—STD epidemic is the result of such immoral information? Dr. Bauer also ignorantly concluded that California’s STD epidemic is “not confined to any particular group,” and she emphasized that the increases are across the board.

I can almost guarantee you that this is not true. As is the case across the rest of the world, there’s one group of Californians that are virtually STD free: monogamous, married (again: one man and one woman), early-committed Christians. In other words, those who decided—almost certainly because this was taught to them and modeled for them by their loving parents (a mother and a father)—prior to, or early in their teenage years, to follow Jesus and adhere to His teachings on sex.

This means celibacy unless married, and once married, complete sexual faithfulness to one’s spouse. If you live your life in such a way, it is nearly impossible to get an STD. This is not an easy path—especially in our sex-saturated culture—but as you’ve often heard, few things worthwhile are easy.

An STD-free life is just another peaceful and healthy benefit of the Christian lifestyle. And yes, Christians are generally healthier. This is a guiding principle behind the increasingly popular and growing number of Christian-based health insurance alternatives. These “health-care sharing groups” (my wife’s sister and her husband recently joined one) are marketed to “committed Christians” who must commit to, among other wise things, refraining from homosexual activity and extramarital sex.

As the left continues to force its immorality on the rest of us, don’t be surprised to see these types of healthcare alternatives grow even more popular. Thus, as almost always is the case in these situations, don’t be a bit surprised to see the left target these organizations. After all, remember, part of the goal of the left is complete acceptance of their perverse sexual agenda and vengeance upon all of those who resist.

Of course, one can be celibate, faithfully monogamous, STD-free, and otherwise healthy without being a Christian. However, outside of a faithful walk with our Creator, the immoral and dangerous sexual lifestyle of those corrupted by liberalism looms as a nearly irresistible temptation. In addition, no moral code has proved better than Christianity at producing a healthy, productive, responsible, and moral individual and society.

(See this column at American Thinker and The Black Sphere.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Tuesday, June 5, 2018

Barr and Bee: What Do They Really Represent?

So we’re supposed to believe that a Chick-fil-A hating, socialist loving, foul-mouthed former Hillary and Bill Clinton supporter, and 9/11 Truther who once sang the worst rendition of our National Anthem in the history of our nation—afterwards grabbing her crotch and spitting (even Keith Olbermann was critical)—is someone who accurately represents Trump voters. Of course The New York Times, CNN, and MSNBC would have us believe that this is the case.

If only the real Roseanne were more like the TV version. But alas, we are left with the real thing. (I wonder: Who do liberals hate more right now?) As even the most elementary efforts to examine her personal and political past reveal, Roseanne Barr is certainly no conservative. Neither is she widely representative of a typical Trump voter.

She does, however, represent a great problem—for democrats. If someone with the liberal leanings of Roseanne Barr can be persuaded to vote for Trump—and if this can be replicated and repeated—democrats will remain the minority party for the foreseeable future. Just after Trump’s victory over Hillary, it was revealed—by a variety of sources—that Trump was able to peel off more than three times the percentage of Obama voters (13% to 4%) as Hillary was able to lure Romney voters.

If Roseanne embodies anything, she stands for those whose worldview is decidedly liberal, but nevertheless, voted for Trump. If similar numbers of today’s left are able to set aside their (literal) lust for sexual perversion and longing for a government sugar daddy, the democrats are in real electoral trouble. I suspect that more than anything else, this is why liberals were so quick to attack Barr and her show.

Samantha Bee, on the other hand, is anything but a contradiction. Like so many liberal “entertainers,” her foul and vulgar persona exemplify her politics. In other words, she could be the poster child for the always angry, endlessly anti-Trump “nasty” woman so common on the left today.

For all the left’s hyperbolic posturing about so-called “privilege” on the right, as David French recently alluded to, few today are more privileged than those who occupy the left-wing media. Whether news or entertainment, as long as the right—especially the Christian right—is the target, leftist mediacrats are nearly untouchable. Along with Bee, there are a myriad of examples.

After Roseanne’s gross insult of Valarie Jarrett, MSNBC invited Jarrett on their network to discuss the incident. On her left sat MSNBC host Al Sharpton. As Miss Jarrett herself might put it, and as Jeffrey Lord did put it, the event was a “teachable moment.” As Lord notes, whether blacks, whites, Jews, Chinese, Korean, Greeks, and so on, Sharpton has a loooong—often obscene and unapologetic—history of racial insults.

All of this was known when MSNBC hired him seven years ago. It was also known when Sharpton became an advisor to then President Obama; he was even described as Obama’s “go-to man on race.” Having Al Sharpton as your “go-to man on race” is like having Harvey Weinstein as your “go-to man on sexual harassment” or Keith Olbermann as your “go-to man on responsible social commentary.”

Olbermann is the perfect conservative-hating metrosexual male counterpart to the raging vagina hat-wearing feminazis exemplified by Ms. Bee. In spite of his lengthy history of using whatever media platform that will allow him to revoltingly weaponize the English language, ABC/Disney—who fired Roseanne quicker than you can say “Worst Person in the World”—continues to provide him with the opportunity to spew his hate.

Whether Joy Behar, Susan Sarandon, Chelsea Handler, Lena Dunham, J.K. Rowling, Jennifer Lawrence, Jimmy Kimmel, Robert De Niro, George Clooney, Matt Damon, Danny Glover, Michael Moore, Seth Meyers, Stephen Colbert, and on, and on, and on, the left is littered with these hate-filled fools. Samantha Bee’s comments just happened to fall closest to Roseanne’s in their seemingly never-ending cycle of attacking anything or anyone that might put Donald Trump in a positive light.

And remember, these people hate Trump because of where they have placed their hope. Because they have foolishly placed most of their hope in the forces of this world—in other words, because they have made a god of government, and because Donald Trump currently represents the greatest threat to this false god—the Hollywood left is, and almost certainly will remain, unhinged in their efforts to stop him.

As long as President Trump acts on conservative—especially Christian conservative—principles, he is undermining the left’s attempts at remaking America into a nation our Founders would not recognize and reminds them that, at least to some extent, they are losing their grip on the American culture. Thus, he—and his allies—must be politically, or even personally, destroyed.

Samantha Bee is simply another agent in this attempted destruction and another voice preaching the perverse worldview that dominates modern liberalism. As long as she remains reliably faithful to the mission of promoting what is sacred to the modern left—unlike Roseanne Barr—she will be allowed to keep her job and continue her propaganda.

(See this column at American Thinker and The Black Sphere.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America