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):

Sunday, September 27, 2020

We Are Being Lied To About the Wuhan Virus—Repeatedly

Because they’ve made a god of government, there’s seemingly always another low to which liberals will stoop in order to help slow, sleepy Joe defeat Donald Trump in November. Many of these lows involve the numerous nefarious reactions to the Wuhan virus. Make no mistake about it, we have suffered an unprecedented loss of jobs and businesses, the shutdown of schools, entertainment, and hospitals, the mandating of masks and “social distancing,” and the like, not because of a global pandemic, but because of our foolish and unprecedented reaction to a global pandemic. 

In other words, much of what was “unprecedented” in the fight against the Wuhan virus was simply unnecessary. As Tim Black at Spiked recently put it, because of what leftism has wrought worldwide, we have turned a pandemic into an apocalypse. Mr. Black writes, 

To varying degrees, political elites, screamed on by the media, have responded to the threat posed by this virus as if it is world-ending. As if it demands the complete reorganisation of social and economic life around the supreme principle of safety. As if there is no way back. They treat it not as a nasty virus that poses a significant but manageable health risk to certain sections of the populace. No, they treat it as a god-like judgement on the old structures of social life, now deemed, in the jargon of the day, unsafe and unsustainable. 

This is what is unprecedented. Not the novel virus itself. But the panicked, fear-laden and, in some quarters, gleefully apocalyptic response.

Because viruses are simply going to virus—not at all unprecedent—in order to keep the fear and the panic high, American leftists in politics, academia, and the media must regularly lie. This is especially the case as the lockdowns drag on and as the actual evidence contradicts what those who have a vested interest in keeping the Wuhan virus fear level high and the lockdowns in place are telling us. 


Probably the most repeated lie in this evil episode is the near-endless reporting on Wuhan virus “case counts.” As has been noted multiple times, these reports are filled with numerous deceptions. The drive-by media in my home state of Georgia again provides a clear example. 

About a week ago, an Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) headline declared, “Georgia tops 300,000 cases; decline in new cases flattens.” The first two sentences of the article report that “Georgia has surpassed 300,000 confirmed coronavirus infections amid hints that a decline in new cases may be leveling out. With totals reported Thursday, Georgia is close to 301,000 COVID-19 cases.” 


The piece downplays the more important facts that hospitalizations and deaths in Georgia have long been on the decline with the supposed scary revelation that “the seven-day rolling average of new cases has drifted up for several days, and Georgia remains the state with the 12th most new cases per capita in the past 14 days, according to data kept by The Associated Press.” 


Again, without proper context, “300,000 confirmed coronavirus infections”--or any number of confirmed coronavirus infections--is a near-meaningless number. It’s akin to saying that 300,000 confirmed dollars has infected my bank account. Anyone wanting the correct context of my personal finances would ask, “Okay, over what period of time?” And, “How much is currently in your bank account?” 


The vast majority of those 300,000 cases in Georgia saw the person infected require no hospitalization and completely recover, or, more often than not, have no symptoms whatsoever. The latter is especially true if the infected was a child. What’s more, if it was a young person who tested positive, they were likely not to be contagious. In other words, as multiple studies have shown, children are in little to no danger from the Wuhan virus, and, if they get the Wuhan virus, they present little to no danger to those with whom they come in contact. The drive-by media almost always ignores these facts. 


In the meantime, all across America, those hoping to help sleepy, slow Joe over the November finish line—and others who are simply foolishly misguided—are constantly using case counts to keep some version of a lockdown in place. As some U.S k-12 schools, along with some colleges and universities, have now reopened, the drive-bys are enthusiastically reporting student case counts. 


The University of Alabama provides a great example here. Beginning in late August, the AJC began to target what they reported as a “spike in new coronavirus cases” that were supposedly “threatening to derail on-campus classes at the University of Alabama.” The AJC article continued:

The state’s flagship school reported 531 confirmed cases among students, faculty and staff since classes resumed in Tuscaloosa last week, according to an online COVID-19 dashboard that was unveiled Monday.

Another 35 cases were reported throughout the greater UA System, which includes six cases at UAB Birmingham, eight cases at UAB Huntsville and 21 cases at UAB Clinical Enterprise — for a total of 566 positive tests since Aug. 19, according to data.

So a few hundred casesagain, with no context givenout of tens of thousands of people was supposed to send us into a panic that would result in demands that colleges and universities across Alabama shut down. And if not shut down, then these schools were supposed to enact foolish, unnecessary, uncomfortable, and expensive Wuhan virus measures (masks, social distancing, bans on gatherings, and the like) that would make life difficult to miserable for most of those impacted. 


The AJC continued to perpetuate Wuhan virus fear porn with multiple reports on cases in Alabama’s universities. This culminated in a September 10 article that reported “new coronavirus cases soar past 2,000” at the University of Alabama. These scare tactics were not limited to Alabama universities. The AJC also produced multiple articles detailing Wuhan virus case countsagain absent context and full of fear-porn — at the University of Georgia. There was also an article gleefully reporting on the University of South Carolina suspending students because of a “pandemic pool party.” 


Of course, the drive-by media across the U.S. has played a similar game when it comes to schools and Wuhan virus cases. Nowhere in the AJC — and I would wager in any other drive-by media outlets — was this information presented (courtesy of Dr. Andrew Bostom on Twitter): 

So, as of just days ago, with over 48,000 reported Wuhan virus cases at 37 different U.S. universities, there have been only two hospitalizations and zero deaths! Based on what we already know about young healthy people, such data is totally unsurprising. Yet, based on this myriad of misinformation and deceit, schools across America continue to force foolish mask mandates and shut down in-person classes, sports, parties, meetings, and the like. Thus, for students and their parents, the bigger problem is not the Wuhan virus pandemic, but rather the Wuhan virus “CASEdemic” constantly trumpeted by the drive-by media. 

Whenever there is a tragic case of a child who has died and tested positive for the Wuhan virus, it is almost always the case that the child died with the virus and not from the virus. Nevertheless, as has been documented multiple times already, when a child has died and tested positive for the Wuhan virus, the media has often grossly, selfishly, and deceptively used these terrible tragedies to push their lockdown agenda. 


In Michigan recently, no less than the Chief Medical Executive  — Joneigh Khaldun — fraudulently announced that she was “so saddened to hear this week of a 2-month-old baby in Michigan who died because of COVID-19 (emphasis mine).” However, the 2-month-old actually died of a birth defect called gastroschisis, “a condition in which a baby is born with intestines located outside the body.” 


Such ugly fraud has been perpetuated numerous times across the U.S. by the media, politicians, school administrators, business executives, and medical personnel alike. Enough is enough! These Wuhan virus lies are disrupting and destroying lives and livelihoods. It’s long past time to end the lies and open the country! 

(See this column at American Thinker.) 

Copyright 2020, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith and Reason.
Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Sunday, September 20, 2020

Ignore the Polling on Who Should Replace Ginsburg

Not even 24 hours after Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, multiple media outlets were telling us that on the question of who they prefer to replace Ginsburg on the U.S. Supreme Court, voters prefer Joe Biden to President Trump.

The Fox News headline Saturday afternoon declared that “52% trust Biden over Trump on Supreme Court picks.” The Fox News question on the Supreme Court was included in its regular Trump-Pence vs. Biden-Harris poll and was conducted days prior to Ginsburg’s death. The Fox poll gave Biden a 52%-45% edge on who people trust “to do a better job on…SCOTUS nominations.”

On early Saturday afternoon, a New York Times headline read, “Polls Have Shown Voters Prefer Biden to Pick Next Justice.” The Times article reported on the Fox poll and also reported on its own New York Times/Siena College three-state poll. The Times article states, “In Times/Siena polls of Maine, North Carolina and Arizona released Friday, voters preferred Mr. Biden to select the next Supreme Court justice by 12 percentage points, 53 percent to 41 percent.”

A Saturday headline at The Hill read, “Majority of voters say Trump should not nominate a Supreme Court justice.” This article reports on “a snap poll released Saturday by YouGov.” According to The Hill,

The poll found that 51 percent of voters believe Trump should not nominate another justice this year, while 42 percent said he should move forward with a nominee. A slight majority, 48 percent, believe the Senate should not confirm a nominee this year. Forty-five percent said the upper chamber should.

Of course, all of this is meant to discourage President Trump, Senate Republicans, and their supporters from moving forward with a nomination to replace Ginsburg prior to the November elections. In other words, these polls are like most every other election-related poll in this modern drive-by media era. They are meant to shape opinions instead of merely reporting on them. Events in 2016 again provide an informative lesson here.

After the death of Antonin Scalia in February of 2016, the media put tremendous pressure on the Republican-led U.S. Senate to give Obama nominee Merrick Garland a Senate hearing and a vote. Part of this pressure included numerous polls that supposedly showed Americans were overwhelmingly in favor of Garland receiving a Senate hearing and a vote. Polling Report reveals this to be the case.

Just days after Scalia’s death, Pew Research Center asked, “In thinking about how the Senate should deal with the Supreme Court vacancy, which of the following statements comes closer to your view? Do you think the Senate should hold hearings and vote on whomever President Obama nominates, or not hold hearings until the next president selects a nominee?” Pew reported that “Hold hearings on Obama’s nominee” got 56% support while “Wait for the next president” got only 38% support.

In late February of 2016, a CNN/ORC poll asked, “President Obama has said that he will nominate someone to fill the vacancy. Do you think the Republican leadership in the Senate should or should not hold hearings on the nominee?” According to this poll, “should” hold hearings was at 66% while “should not” was at 32%.

Likewise, in early March of 2016, an ABC News/Washington Post poll asked, “The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has opened a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. After Obama nominates someone to replace Scalia, do you think the Senate should hold hearings and vote on whether to accept the nomination, or should the Senate NOT hold hearings, which would block the nomination and leave it to the next president?” Again, support for holding hearings was supposedly at 63% while those against holding hearings came in at only 32%.

Similarly, in the middle of March in 2016, Gallup asked, “Now turning to the U.S. Supreme Court, as you may know, Merrick Garland is a federal judge who has been nominated to serve on the Supreme Court. Would you like to see the Senate vote in favor of Garland serving on the Supreme Court, or not?” According to Gallup, those wanting the Senate to vote “in favor” was 52%, while those wanting the Senate to “not vote in favor” was at 29%.

And so on it went for the weeks and months leading up to the 2016 elections. What’s more, liberal pundits across the U.S. ran hundreds of editorials calling for Mitch McConnell to allow hearings and a vote on Garland. Even individual GOP Senators—including Susan Collins—called for the Senate to grant Garland Judiciary Committee hearings.

Of course, refusing to acquiesce on Garland hearings was supposed to cost republicans in the 2016 elections. No less than a former executive editor of The New York Times thought so. Writing in The Guardian, Jill Abramson called Garland’s nomination a “political gift” for Hillary Clinton and added that “Garland’s temperate record and demeanor also magnify the extremism of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, the leaders for the GOP presidential nomination who could make their own court nominees if Garland is not confirmed by the election. That could further scare off moderate Republicans.”

Of course, after holding up Garland’s nomination in 2016, Donald Trump became the U.S. President, the republicans held on to the U.S. Senate, and even gained two seats in the 2018 midterms. There’s nothing in politics—or, more importantly, in the U.S. Constitution—that says republicans can’t or shouldn’t replace Ginsburg prior to this November. Don’t let the drive-by media lead you into thinking otherwise.

Additionally, any threats of violence, mayhem, and destruction, or any acts of violence, mayhem, and destruction that result from Trump and Senate Republicans acting to replace Ginsburg will not be the fault of the President and the GOP. Like the rest of the violence and mayhem currently plaguing the U.S., the blame will lie squarely on Democrats and their voters. And remember, it was Democrats who turned the courts into “super legislatures” in order to achieve what they otherwise could not get through actually winning elections and passing legislation. If the courts were what our Founders intended, these battles to replace Supreme Court Justices would not be so contentious.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2020, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith and Reason.
Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Wednesday, September 16, 2020

Christian Artists Should Not be Partnering with Dolly Parton (and the like)

Recently, Dolly Parton made big news in the contemporary Christian music industry. Ms. Parton is certainly no stranger to big news when it comes to her music. Parton has had a stellar, decades-long career as a country music artist. She has produced 25 number-one songs—a record she shares with Reba McEntire—seven chart-topping albums, and 44 top-10 albums—which leads all artists. In addition, she has been nominated for 49 Grammys and won 10. 

Her most recent Grammy win was this year and was the result of her collaboration with the contemporary Christian duo, For King & Country, on the song “God Only Knows.” However, this effort was not what got Parton recent headlines in the Christian media. According to The Christian Post, Ms. Parton’s duet “There Was Jesus” with Christian artist Zach Williams “marks Parton’s first No. 1 on Billboard's Christian charts.” 

Nevertheless, the biggest story here is not Parton’s Christian music Grammy or her number-one song. The biggest story here is that Christian artists would pair themselves, and produce work—Christian songs—with an individual who has been wrong on some of the most important moral issues of our time: marriage and homosexuality

Ms. Parton has not only been wrong, she’s been very outspokenly wrong. What’s more, this is not a recent development. On the gravely important issues of marriage and homosexuality, Parton has been on the wrong side of the truth for quite some time and has frequently made her anti-biblical positions known. 

According to Baptist Press, over 15 years ago, in early 2005, Ms. Parton joined dozens of other deceived music artists—including Christina Aguilera, Pink, the Dixie Chicks, and Emmylou Harris—in contributing to a CD entitled “Love Rocks.” All of the proceeds for “Love Rocks” went to the Human Rights Campaign. The Human Rights Campaign is the largest organization in the U.S. devoted to spreading LGBT propaganda and was co-founded by the infamous (and under arrest) Terry Bean. (Bean is a prominent democrat donor and fund raiser who was arrested and indicted in 2014 on two felony counts of third-degree sodomy and one count of third-degree sexual abuse after allegedly having sex with a 15-year-old boy he met online. Bean was again arrested last year for the same crimes, and after allegedly paying $200,000 to make the original charges go away.) 

The largest advocate in the U.S. for the perverse LGBT agenda, the Human Rights Campaign was a leading voice in pushing for nationwide same-sex “marriage” in the U.S. Ms. Parton and those like-minded aided and abetted them. 

In 2018, The Advocate—the “oldest and largest LGBT publication in the United States—called Ms. Parton “an enduring queer icon” and chronicled eight times that she “Cemented Her Status as an LGBTQ Icon.” Among other sad disclosures, The Advocate revealed that “Dolly loves drag.” They also noted how that, in 2005 Parton contributed the song “Travelin' Thru” to the film Transamerica

The Advocate describes the film as “a trans woman's journey to self-love, and a reunion with the son she didn't know she had.” They also describe “Travelin' Thru” as a “lovely ditty” that “became an anthem of transformation and bravery, and it endeared us even more to Dolly.” The song was nominated for an Academy Award. 

The Advocate piece also noted how Ms. Parton rejects the idea of “bathroom bans.” They wrote, 

Of the bans, Dolly said to CNN Money in 2016: “I think everybody should be treated with respect. I don’t judge people and I try not to get too caught up in the controversy of things. I hope that everybody gets a chance to be who and what they are. I just know, if I have to pee, I’m gon’ pee, wherever it’s got to be.”

Such words from Ms. Parton remind me of the ignorant claptrap spouted by godless post-modernists who reject virtually every tenet of the Christian faith. Yet Parton considers herself a Christian. Her current number-one song frequently declares, “There Was Jesus.” She seems to have forgotten “why was Jesus” and why He died. There’s nothing in Scripture that indicates Jesus died so that “everybody gets a chance to be who and what they are.” 

If a Christian can’t stand for the basic truth of who is a male and who is a female, what aspect of the faith can they be trusted to defend? Additionally, if Christians can’t be trusted to tell the truth on something as foundational as marriage, on what will they tell the truth? 

In a foolish desire to be “relevant” or “tolerant,” Christians across the world—especially mainline Protestant churches and the Catholic Church—have abandoned long-heeded truths for heresy. This is especially the case when it comes to matters in the sexual realm. Nevertheless, the Bible is very clear on what is marriage and on what is moral when it comes to sex and sexual behavior.

In fact, there are few things that the Bible is clearer on than marriage. Marriage is “the Crown of Creation.” It is the priority relationship within the family, with all other relationships being subordinate, and functioning subject, to it. After our relationship with our Creator, the most important relationship in the universe is the relationship between husband and wife. The union is so profound that throughout the New Testament, God uses the analogy of the bride and bridegroom to describe the relationship between Jesus and the Church.

What’s more, marriage is the oldest institution in the history of humanity—older than God's covenant with the nation of Israel, older than The Law, older than the church. Marriage is one of the earliest truths revealed by God. If ANYTHING is true, marriage as the union of one man and one woman is true. On this, there can NEVER be compromise. 

And neither can there be silence. This is especially the case for Christians with a wide audience and significant influence—like Christian musicians with voluminous radio airplay. Such Christians who know the truth but choose to remain silent would do well to recall the words of Mordecai to his cousin Esther (paraphrased):

Do not think that if you remain silent in this matter you will escape. For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise from someone else. And who knows but that you have come to your influential position for such a time as this?

On the matter of marriage, the stakes are too high, and the deceit too widespread to compromise. 

Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith and Reason.


Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America