Category Archives: News

Twitter censored news stories at the request of Biden’s Democrat regime

A very interesting story broke on the weekend. Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk decided to release documents that reveal how the Democrat party was able to contact Twitter in order to have critics of the regime banned. The Democrat party could also contact Twitter to have stories critical of the regime censored. It turns out that our secular left fascists are the same as any others in history.

Here’s the story from Daily Wire:

Twitter CEO Elon Musk released information through journalist Matt Taibbi Friday afternoon showing that Twitter was working in conjunction with then-Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden’s team, removing tweets that team Biden wanted deleted.

Musk said that he decided to release the information because it was “necessary to restore public trust” in the platform after it censored the New York Post’s bombshell report about Hunter Biden’s laptop just weeks before the 2020 presidential election.

Musk quote retweeted Taibbi’s multi-tweet thread on Twitter, writing: “Here we go!!”

Taibbi began by explaining that the company was “slowly forced to add … tools for controlling speech [that] were designed to combat the likes of spam and financial fraudsters.”

“Slowly, over time, Twitter staff and executives began to find more and more uses for these tools. Outsiders began petitioning the company to manipulate speech as well: first a little, then more often, then constantly,” Taibbi said. “By 2020, requests from connected actors to delete tweets were routine. One executive would write to another: ‘More to review from the Biden team.’ The reply would come back: ‘Handled.’”

Remember the New York Post’s story about Hunter Biden’s laptop?

“Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be ‘unsafe,’” Taibbi continued. “They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, e.g. child pornography.”

The Federalist recalls how Facebook also censored stories that were critical of the Biden regime, at the request of the Biden regime:

Just this week, FBI Supervisory Special Agent Elvis Chan confirmed the government’s information suppression campaign to Attorneys General Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Jeff Landry of Louisiana. In his testimony, Chan disclosed that agents from the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency met weekly with Big Tech companies to encourage censorship ahead of the 2020 election.

The FBI’s instructions inspired Facebook to reduce distribution on posts reporting about the laptop, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg admitted earlier this year.

“If the FBI… if they come to us and tell us we need to be on guard about something, then I want to take that seriously,” Zuckerberg said on an episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience.”

When the corporate media and dozens of former intelligence heads quickly brushed off Biden family corruption under the guise of “Russian disinformation,” Facebook saw its opportunity to throttle the story that would give its preferred president a bad rap.

It’s very interesting. I’ve read something about secular left regimes in history. The Nazis in Germany. The communists in Russia and China. And so on. The methods of the Democrat party and their allies in Big Tech are analogous to the methods of these other secular left regimes. It’s surprising to me that so many voters would support fascist political parties. But I guess if they don’t learn much about history in the unionized government-run public schools, then we shouldn’t be surprised.

Woman asks female friends: why are you 38 years old, but acting like 23-year-olds?

I watched a very interesting video on Friday, featuring a 35-year-old woman who spoke to 4 of her 38-year-old friends. In the video, she admits to having been in a relationship that has been going on for 6 months, with no talk about purpose or commitment. The 38-year-olds are the same. What’s interesting is that all of these women say that they want to get married “some day” and have children.

Here’s the video, it’s just under 9 minutes:

So what I wanted to say about this is simple. Young, unmarried women today are not connecting their day-to-day choices with their stated long-term goals. Their long-term goals are marriage and children. But their decision making in the moment has the purpose of maximizing “fun”. The primary purpose of men they are choosing is providing these women with FUN. And fun doesn’t just mean travel, gifts, experiences, etc., but also premarital sex. These women are not looking for leadership, nor commitment, nor chastity, nor sobriety, nor frugality, nor fidelity. In fact, they see moral character and commitment as BORING, and seek to avoid it. They do not want a good man leading them towards commitment behaviors and marriage responsibilities.

According to the video, this fun-seeking starts in the mid-teen-years, and continues right through to age 40. In my experience, the reasons why women change their minds about which men they want in their mid-30s and early 40s is not because they believe in traditional marriage. It’s because they want 1) social respectability, 2) financial security, 3) needing a handyman, 4) wanting a father figure for the babies they made with no-commitment men.

Many of these women are just concerned about “falling behind” their peers who are getting married or having children. They don’t really like husbands, marriages or raising children. They just need to keep up with their friends. They don’t see marriage as having goals like building civil society or raising productive, moral children. They are not interested in marriage as self-sacrifice. They are not interested in marriage as a set of obligations or responsibilities.

Are feminists good at marriage?

Previously, I blogged about how 68% of unmarried women voted Democrat in the 2022 mid-term elections. That means that 68% of unmarried women favor unrestricted abortion, no-fault divorce, same-sex marriage, transgender radicalism, and every other secular left social policy you can imagine. They also favor fiscal policies that drain money from husbands to pay for things like taxpayer-funded sex changes, persecuting Christians who dissent from abortion or LGBT, single-mother welfare (fatherlessness by choice), etc. These policy preferences support fun-seeking, but they they are not the policies that marriage-minded men support.

Right now, the culture is so hostile to marriage-minded men, that they are rightly focusing on their own educations, careers and finances. They do not display their wealth to unmarried women, or spend their wealth on unmarried women. They want to be left alone. They want to retire early. They do not think that marriage to a feminist in her mid-30s – a feminist who is not even attracted to them as leaders of the home – is a good idea.

The things men are looking for in a wife / mother cannot be developed overnight after 20 years of “fun”. Although women might think that they are building up their value with travel, student loans, public sector “work”, cheating, break-ups, and a high body count, they are NOT. Marriage-minded men don’t want those things. Showing up in church after 20 years of “fun” might get you rconciled with God, but it isn’t going to be useful to a marriage-minded man looking for demonstrated ability at wife and mother roles. Think of marriage as a job. An empty wife / mother resume isn’t going to be fixed by a couple of weeks of church attendance.

If women are interested in marriage, the first step is to become a strong opponent of feminism. And that means choosing men who are good at moral leading and spiritual leading early on. Letting go of the pursuit of “fun” early, and focusing on marriage and children right from the start. It seems to me that there needs to be serious thinking about what marriage-minded men want from women as wives and mothers.

Cosmologist Luke Barnes answers 11 objections to the fine-tuning argument

This is from the blog Common Sense Atheism.

Atheist Luke Muehlhauser interviews well-respect cosmologist Luke Barnes about the fine-tuning argument, and the naturalistic response to it.

Luke M. did a good job explaining the outline of the podcast.


In one of my funniest and most useful episodes yet, I interview astronomer Luke Barnes about the plausibility of 11 responses to the fine-tuning of the universe. Frankly, once you listen to this episode you will be better equipped to discuss fine-tuning than 90% of the people who discuss it on the internet. This episode will help clarify the thinking of anyone – including and perhaps especially professional philosophers – about the fine-tuning of the universe.

The 11 responses to fine-tuning we discuss are:

  1. “It’s just a coincidence.”
  2. “We’ve only observed one universe, and it’s got life. So as far as we know, the probability that a universe will support life is one out of one!”
  3. “However the universe was configured, evolution would have eventually found a way.”
  4. “There could be other forms of life.”
  5. “It’s impossible for life to observe a universe not fine-tuned for life.”
  6. “Maybe there are deeper laws; the universe must be this way, even though it looks like it could be other ways.”
  7. “Maybe there are bajillions of universes, and we happen to be in one of the few that supports life.”
  8. “Maybe a physics student in another universe created our universe in an attempt to design a universe that would evolve intelligent life.”
  9. “This universe with intelligent life is just as unlikely as any other universe, so what’s the big deal?”
  10. “The universe doesn’t look like it was designed for life, but rather for empty space or maybe black holes.”
  11. “Fine-tuning shows there must be an intelligent designer beyond physical reality that tuned the universe so it would produce intelligent life.”

Download CPBD episode 040 with Luke Barnes. Total time is 1:16:31.

There is a very good explanation of some of the cases of fine-tuning that I talk about most on this blog – the force of gravity, the strong force, etc. as well as many other examples. Dr. Barnes is an expert, but he is also very very easy to listen to even when talking about difficult issues. Luke M. is very likeable as the interviewer.