Rose told me about this article from Daily Wire on Monday night, and I thought it was important enough for me to share here. Many Big Tech companies are allied with the Democrat party. The question is, how much does that affect their goods and services? I think if you read this story, you might feel the need to do more of your online sharing on Twitter, rather than on Facebook.

Here’s the article from Daily Wire:

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a letter on Monday that the Biden-Harris administration repeatedly pressured his company — which includes Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, WhatsApp, and more — to censor content that is protected free speech.

Zuckerberg made the admission in a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) this week…

“In 2021, senior officials from the Biden Administration, including the White House, repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, and expressed a lot of frustration with our teams when we didn’t agree,” he said in the letter.

Here’s an example of Facebook censoring content in order to help the Democrat party:

He said that the company made a mistake by temporarily demoting a New York Post story during the 2020 election about Hunter Biden’s laptop after officials falsely suggested that it was part of a “Russian disinformation operation.”

“It’s since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn’t have demoted the story,” he said. “We’ve changed our policies and processes to make sure this doesn’t happen again – for instance, we no longer temporarily demote things in the U.S while waiting for fact-checkers.”

How much did censoring that story interfere with our elections? In my opinion, Facebook handed the election to Biden by censoring this story. But there were never any consequences. They’re just too powerful, so long as millions of people keep going onto their site. I prefer to spend my time on Twitter, and rarely go on Facebook. I can’t take the chance of having my account shut down for posting true news – just because some loser with an arts degree decided that she didn’t want to see anything that made her feel bad.

It’s important for people to understand that you only have as much free speech on these Big Tech platforms as they allow you to have. When it’s election time, many Big Tech companies use “fact checkers” to censor true news stories that make the Democrat party look bad. They want the Democrat party to win.

I’ve collected some of my previous posts about Facebook helping the Democrat party and interfering in our elections.

• Facebook censored posts at the request of the Democrat party / Biden administration
• Twitter and Facebook suspend LibsOfTikTok after she reported on sex-change surgery on kids
• Facebook and Twitter spread disinformation about Hunter Biden’s laptop to help Biden win in 2020
• Facebook / Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s election meddling violated bribery laws
• Peer-reviewed medical journal blasts Facebook “fact checkers” for censorship
• Facebook has a long record of censoring speech critical of Democrats
• Facebook fact-checker caught plagiarizing 54 articles
• Facebook bans Christian professor for disagreeing with Biden’s executive actions
• Facebook “non-partisan” fact-checker revealed to be a far-left Trump-hating Democrat
• Facebook “fact-checker” Politifact forced to retract “false” rating against Candace Owens
• When Facebook fact-checkers conflict with peer-reviewed studies, who is right?
• Potential violation of election law: Facebook and Twitter censor Biden scandal
• Facebook and Google removing content that harms Democrat party
• Facebook censors admit that they suppress Republican content to help Democrat Party
• Facebook censors interview with abortion survivor to help Democrats win 2020 election
• Facebook uses pro-abortion “fact checkers” to label pro-life pages “fake news”
• Facebook bans Christian apologist David Wood for posting the death threats he received
• Facebook censors criticism of Democrat Party, especially before “important elections”

On Twitter, many people who support Kamala Harris are raving about her smile, her happy words, and how she makes them feel. They don’t seem to really understand that a candidate’s appearance and talk doesn’t mean that they can get results or solve problems. One problem is expensive housing. In this post, I’ll explain how the Biden-Harris policies have caused housing prices to rise.

First, let’s see how the housing industry is going in America, with a Daily Signal article by a Heritage Foundation economist:

Home affordability just hit a 17-year low, which means the dream of homeownership remains unattainable for the average person. Amid a cost-of-living crisis, saving enough for a downpayment and then affording a monthly mortgage payment has become a Sisyphean task—and radical leftist policies are to blame.

Adding up the monthly cost of principal and interest on a mortgage, property taxes, and insurance amounts to half the average wage earner’s monthly take-home pay. That would be a stretch even in good economic times, but it is downright impossible when the prices of necessities such as food and energy have exploded over 20% and 50%, respectively, in less than four years.

When people are already borrowing on credit cards just to pay for groceries, spending half your income on housing just is not doable.

Government spending is to blame for the inflation that is crowding out people’s budgets:

Forty-year-high inflation was created by a profligate Congress and White House spending trillions of dollars that the nation did not have. In 2020, the year before the radical Left took control of the federal government, prices rose just 1.4%. Just 18 months later, prices were rising almost that fast in a single month.

And when inflation rises, interest rates have to rise, too. This isn’t going to affect people like me – I bought my new construction home for cash years ago. But young people who are buying today will have to borrow for their homes, and they’ll pay more in interest:

Just as the predictable result of government overspending was inflation, so, too, was the rise in interest rates that followed. The sheer size of the multitrillion-dollar deficits of the last several years caused prices and interest rates to jump significantly.

But there’s more. The open borders policies of the Democrat party are an independent cause of higher home prices.

Here is an article from the Washington Times, written by that same Heritage Foundation economist:

Many Americans rightly blame the current housing affordability crisis on government for overspending and manipulating interest rates, which drove up prices and made borrowing prohibitively expensive.

But few understand the role the radical left’s open-border policies have played in raising home prices.

As millions of aliens entered the United States illegally over the last 3½ years, they significantly increased housing demand. That was especially true in places where state and local governments gave handouts — in addition to federal funds — to illegal aliens for monthly housing payments.

This dynamic in the housing market has even been recognized by Neel Kashkari, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. But you don’t need to be a Fed bank president to know that increasing the demand for housing will raise prices; it’s basic economics.

The same thing happened in Canada, after 9 years of Justin Trudeau. He let in MILLIONS of illegal immigrants and refugees – people who pay less in taxes than they collect in benefits. And you can bet they need somewhere to live. Unfortunately, Trudeau’s anti-business policies have killed the home construction industry. Demand went up, supply went down. Now the average price of a single-family home in Canada is up to $801,600 CAD. ($593,406.75 USD) And if that were not bad enough, the massive influx of unskilled immigrants has caused health care costs to skyrocket – up to $17, 713 CAD for a two-parent family with two children. Demand is going up, but supply is going down, as many Canadian doctors leave to work in countries that pay more, and tax less.

I can’t believe that in America, there are people out there who do not know how prices are set in a free market economy. In a free market economy, when demand goes up, and supply goes down, then there is a shortage, and prices rise. You would think that the public school teachers would understand basic economics, and teach it to children. That’s what they are paid to do. But not only do the young people not understand basic economics, the teachers in the public schools don’t understand it either. It’s the blind leading the blind.

If I had to pick the strongest defender of Christianity operating today, I would pick Dr. Stephen C. Meyer. His recent book “Return of the God Hypothesis” defends three arguments for a Creator / Designer of the universe. But there have been some criticisms of those arguments. In this conversation, Justin Brierley asks Dr. Meyer to respond to those criticisms.

Here is the video:

Here is the description:

Justin Brierley interviews controversial philosopher of science Dr Stephen Meyer, about his recent book “Return of the God Hypothesis”. Stephen shares the latest advances in the field of “Intelligent Design”, ranging from design inferences that can be drawn from the origin of the universe, the fine-tuning of the universe, the information content of the living cell, and even from attempts of atheist materialists to try to avoid the God Hypothesis!

And here are the topics, with timestamps:

00:00:00 Coming up…
00:00:40 Introduction
00:01:08 Darwinism is in trouble
00:05:42 Isn’t I.D. God of the gaps?
00:09:03 What about the Dover School trial?
00:13:21 Has the I.D. stigma changed?
00:15:57 Big Bang points to design?
00:23:44 Objections to beginning & cause of the universe
00:30:04 Is there a bias against God?
00:32:31 Fine-tuning points to design?
00:37:14 Puddle objection to design
00:42:38 “C.R.A.P.” objection to design
00:45:40 Multiverse defeats design?
00:52:42 About The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God podcast
00:54:29 Own-goals from trying to avoid design
00:56:29 Origin of life points to design?
01:03:56 Dawkins is wrong about life arising by chance
01:09:15 What about naturalistic models of life?
01:12:23 Aesthetic objections to I.D.
01:15:47 Paul Davies’ views on I.D.
01:19:53 Conclusion
01:23:46 Next!

If you watch this, leave a comment and let me know what you thought of it.