California court decision ups the odds for passing school parcel taxes

Want to go broke?  Continue approving parcel taxes for government schools—you will be financing sexual grooming, bigotry, hate of America, racism and bigotry—as well as ending free speech and the right to think without punishment.  Add to this that district after district are turning from education to being housing speculators—providing housing for teachers.  At that point the unions will no longer help themselves, they will totally control government education.

“Last month, 52.7% of the 438 school district voters in the unincorporated low-income Central Valley farm communities of Cutler and Orosi voted in favor of a parcel tax. But as also happened four years earlier, that wasn’t enough. Supporters fell several dozen votes shy of the two-thirds majority they needed to pass a $48 per property tax to fund staff for summer youth sports.”

Now you know why the Central Valley is the poorest area of the State—they continue to tax themselves into poverty, giving the money to failed government schools for non education efforts.

California court decision ups the odds for passing school parcel taxes

Citizen-initiated measures would require only a simple majority vote, not two-thirds

JOHN FENSTERWALD, EdSource,  12/6/22   

Last month, 52.7% of the 438 school district voters in the unincorporated low-income Central Valley farm communities of Cutler and Orosi voted in favor of a parcel tax. But as also happened four years earlier, that wasn’t enough. Supporters fell several dozen votes shy of the two-thirds majority they needed to pass a $48 per property tax to fund staff for summer youth sports.

2022 PARCEL TAX RESULTS

In the November 2022 election, seven school districts placed parcel taxes on the ballot. Six passed and one failed to get the two-thirds majority.

  • Bayshore Elementary School District, San Mateo County, $96 a year: 69.6%.
  • Campbell Union High School District, Santa Clara County, $85 a year: 75.9%.
  • Hope Elementary School District, Santa Barbara County, $79 a year: 76.1%.
  • Loma Prieta Joint Union School District, Santa Clara County, $348 a year: 69.15%.
  • Oakland Unified, Alameda County, $120 a year: 81.6%.
  • Ross Elementary School District, Marin County, $1,550 a year: $78.7%.
  • Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified, Fresno County, $48 a year: 52.7%, failed.

In the June primary election, seven school districts placed parcel taxes on the ballot. All surpassed the two-thirds majority required.

  • Alum Rock School District, Santa Clara County, $214 a year: 69.4%.
  • Belmont-Redwood Shores School District, San Mateo County: $292 a year: 75.1%.
  • Brisbane School District, San Mateo County, $131 a year: 73.2%.
  • Kenwood School District, Sonoma County, $52 a year: 81.1%.
  • Larkspur-Corte Madera School District, Marin County: $910 a year: 77.3%.
  • Milpitas Unified, Santa Clara County, $84 a year: 74.5%.
  • Mount Pleasant School District, Santa Clara County, $84 a year, 68.5%.

“We are building a new auditorium and aquatic center; we were looking for a funding source to hire lifeguards and a director of recreation,” said Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified Superintendent Yolanda Valdez, who grew up in Orosi, a dozen miles north of Visalia. “We want to give our kids what other middle-class communities offer. Our kids do not know how to swim.”

Next election, they may have better odds.

In July 2021, three judges on the Court of Appeal in San Francisco did what Democratic legislators have talked about doing for years: lowering the requirement for passing a school district parcel tax from two-thirds approval to a simple majority. Over four decades, about 2 in 5 tax measures failed for lack of a two-thirds majority. Many districts looked at the barrier and decided the odds of failure were too big to try, said Megan Baier, a legislative advocate for the Association of California School Administrators.

“The threshold is really high. The amount of people power and funds to put a parcel tax on the ballot is an incredible lift. If there is not a good chance, districts will not move forward,” she said.  

The court’s monumental but barely noticed decision should make it much easier for voters in more districts to raise extra funding to support their schools, perhaps through parent groups, teachers and civic organizations — with or without the tacit consent of the school board.

“I am amazed how silent it has been (about the decision). Schools continue to have financial needs, and this is an important way of meeting that. This is quite a huge story, and no one has picked up on it,” said Carol Kocivar, a former president of the California State PTA and attorney from San Francisco who has written about the decision for the education website Ed100.

But there’s a catch, which may partly explain why the idea has yet to catch on. The unanimous decision by three judges on the San Francisco-based 1st District Court of Appeal applies only to citizen-initiated parcel tax measures.

 Product of Proposition 13

Until now, most parcel taxes have been placed before voters by school boards. And district-initiated parcel taxes fall under Proposition 13, the 1978 anti-tax initiative that cut the property tax rate to 1% of assessed value and required all “special taxes” — those not used for general purposes — to be approved by two-thirds of voters. A 1996 state ballot proposition subsequently amended the state constitution to define a school parcel tax as a special tax.

Because Proposition 13 also bans new property taxes based on the value of a property, parcel taxes must be uniform. Therefore, owners of a vacant lot and a 10-bedroom mansion both pay the same amount. (A few parcel taxes have used a rate based on square footage.)

Many parcel taxes are in the $100 per year range and specify how the money will be used, such as on music and arts programs. But a few wealthy communities have passed parcel taxes for hundreds of dollars, widening a revenue gap with poor districts. On the same day that a parcel tax foundered in Cutler-Orosi, where 96% of families are low-income, 3 out of 4 voters in Ross passed a $1,500 parcel tax for the Ross Elementary School District. It will be used to attract and retain highly qualified teachers; maintain low student-to-teacher ratios and support the visual and performing arts and technology integration. The median-priced house in Ross, in Marin County, sold for $4.7 million in 2021.

In its decision, the Court of Appeal ruled that San Francisco Unified’s Proposition G in 2018, which citizens placed on the ballot, didn’t require a supermajority since Proposition 13 specifically applied restrictions only to governments’ authority to tax. It didn’t displace “the people’s power to enact initiatives by majority vote,” the ruling said.

Proposition G was approved by 60% of voters; it established a $298 per parcel tax, with the bulk of the $50 million in revenue dedicated to salary increases for district staff. The money was set aside, accumulating to $150 million, while the issue of the majority threshold was litigated. As the case dragged on, voters passed a replacement parcel tax by more than a two-thirds majority.

Plaintiffs who appealed the case argued that citizens who filed Measure G were a front for the teachers union, which colluded with the district to put it on the ballot. Proponents of Measure G were trying to evade the intent of voters who passed Proposition 13, they said.  

But the appellate court found that the three individuals who filed the proposed initiative with the required number of signatures met the law’s simple requirements. The law doesn’t require that they fund the effort or collect signatures.

“We find nothing inherently sinister about the fact that the District and the Union supported this proposition,” the judges wrote. “No law precludes a governmental entity “from publicly expressing an opinion with regard to the merits of a proposed ballot measure.”

Untapped source of funding

The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the California Supreme Court, but in August 2021, it declined to hear the case. For now, parents, interest groups and others will point to the 1st Appellate Court ruling when deciding whether to pursue a parcel tax on the ballot by majority vote.

“The Supreme Court may not have loved the reasoning, and there may be a future decision, but the assumption was the court decided not to take the case because it was OK with the result,” said Abe Hajela, founding partner of Capitol Advisors Group, a school consulting firm. 

Only an estimated 10% of the state’s nearly 1,000 school districts have passed a parcel tax; some of those have done so multiple times. High-cost and high-wealth districts in the Bay Area and Los Angeles predominate. According to Ed-Data, from 1983 through 2021, voters approved 61% of proposed parcel taxes. An additional 30% failed but got more than 55% support; those are the districts that could capitalize on the court decision. 

In the past decade, Democratic legislators have proposed constitutional amendments that would lower the parcel tax threshold to 55%, the same requirement as needed to pass school construction bonds. But they never found a supermajority needed to put a constitutional amendment on the state ballot, and the bills never advanced.

Little awareness or interest so far

The Court of Appeal ruling has yet to churn up interest in the year since it was issued. Neither the California School Boards Association nor the administrators’ association has expressed much interest. Baier said she hadn’t heard of it. 

There were only seven parcel taxes on the ballot in November, an unusually low number; two years ago, there were 28, with half passing. Cutler-Orosi’s parcel tax was the only one of the seven TK-12 district parcel taxes to fail in November. A citizens-initiated parcel tax to raise more money for San Francisco City College, which has been criticized for years for financial mismanagement, failed to get 50%. San Francisco Mayor London Breed opposed it.

Valdez said she’d be interested in knowing more about the court decision allowing a majority vote and trying a third time in Cutler-Orosi. School districts are prohibited from using district money to run a parcel tax campaign, so parents were involved anyway. The challenge was that the largest property owner in the district, who owned many parcels, organized against it.

“I am going to seek more about the decision and see what we can do with that,” she said. “We got donations. People gave up their time for this. It was very citizens-like.”

Angels Baseball to Get Another $9 Million from Taxpayers to Promote Mental Health–SCAM on Taxpayers

By giving away tickets to a ball game, the Angels baseball team is going to get $9 million in tax dollars by calling it a mental health solution.  This is just a scam to transfer tax dollars to the billionaire owners of the Angels.  Wonder if anybody will protest this waste of tax dollars?

“The Los Angeles Angels Major League Baseball team is getting another, controversial multi-million-dollar taxpayer contract to promote mental health in Orange County.

Under the $9 million, three-year contract, the Angels will promote the county’s mental health website OC Navigator, provide 500 tickets to each Angels home game that’s sponsored under the contract, and make Rally Monkeys and bobbleheads with the website logo, among other services.”

The only supervisor to oppose this scam is a Democrat!  The mental health issue is the sanity of the three Supervisors that agreed to transfer tax dollars for nothing.

Angels Baseball to Get Another $9 Million from Taxpayers to Promote Mental Health

BY NICK GERDA, Voice of Orange County,   12/7/22    

The Los Angeles Angels Major League Baseball team is getting another, controversial multi-million-dollar taxpayer contract to promote mental health in Orange County.

Under the $9 million, three-year contract, the Angels will promote the county’s mental health website OC Navigator, provide 500 tickets to each Angels home game that’s sponsored under the contract, and make Rally Monkeys and bobbleheads with the website logo, among other services.

The contract was approved 3-1 on Tuesday, with Supervisor Katrina Foley objecting.

Foley cited the lack of measurements of whether the marketing efforts – which started in 2019 – have been effective.

“There’s no, really, way to know whether or not that is resulting in any access to resources and services,” she said.

Foley has been asking for that data for months.

She said “it’s really difficult to understand whether or not this significant investment from our Mental Health Services Act dollars is having on impacting that demographic that we’re trying to reach.”

“I really believe that the lack of any kind of a direct mail program, or a direct kind of contact with the demographic of individuals that we are trying to reach, is probably a weakness in this campaign,” she added.

No other supervisor, nor county staff, addressed Foley’s concerns, aside from Supervisor Lisa Bartlett saying they’re “very good points” that should be sorted out before the Angels’ contract comes up for renewal in three years.

County records about selecting the Angels do not indicate any other alternatives were explored for promoting the mental health website.

The effectiveness of the Angels campaign – as opposed to alternatives – has been called into question in the past by the chair of the county’s mental health board.

The Angels ads have often lacked a consistent message or theme, said Matt Holzmann, the chair of the county Behavioral Health Advisory Board, in an interview earlier this year.

“If you’re going to put together a program that doesn’t have that zing to it…it’s not going to work nearly as well,” Holzmann said.

The Angels, which are owned by billionaire Arte Moreno, have said they’re proud of their work, which they charge taxpayers millions for.

“We are proud of our partnership with OC Health Care Agency and the awareness it brings to support mental health in the county,” said Angels spokeswoman Marie Garvey in a statement earlier this year.

She declined to answer whether the team’s management or Moreno considered gifting the ads as a public service, in light of the Angels using a taxpayer-funded stadium.

Multi-million-dollar contracts with the Angels and the Ducks hockey team take up a large portion of the county’s mental health outreach budget.

Of the $2.2 million the county spent on suicide prevention outreach during from spring 2020 until late 2021, 83 percent went to the Angels.

“This [Angels] campaign was the only continuously active mental health awareness campaign that was running from April 2020 through October 2021,” a county presentation stated earlier this year.

It’s not the only taxpayer support the Angels are getting.

The team, owned by billionaire Arte Moreno, gets to use the taxpayer-funded Angel Stadium while paying an amount that averages to about $180,000 annually over a recent 12-year period.

Angel Stadium was built by the city of Anaheim in the 1960s for the equivalent of about $200 million in today’s dollars.

That’s roughly $15,000 per month – equivalent to what five apartments rent for locally on average.

The Angels made $100 million in ticket sales at the stadium, as of 2019.

This has left some wondering whether a corporate entity that gets to use a taxpayer facility at bargain basement price should be running public service ads for free.

“I suppose you could argue this is a public service ad and should be provided free,” said Susan Shelley, vice president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, in an interview earlier this year.

Democrat Voter Fraud: A Brief History

Even though CRP chair Jessica Patterson claims California elections are fair and honest, we know she is promoting the Democrat Party line.  We already know that hundreds of thousands of dead people are on the voting rolls.  Jessica knows that California ballots are going to people who live out of State.  Her words have encouraged the Democrats to continue fraudulent voters, dead and alive to get live ballots.

This article gives you example of Democrat voter fraud—how many do you recognize?

Democrat Voter Fraud: A Brief History

By J.R. Dunn, American Thinker,  12/6/22 

This is a “brief history” because the complete history of Democrat electoral malfeasance reaching back to Tammany Hall and Tweed would require four volumes or more. (I’m running into the same problem with a new book I’m outlining analyzing the Democrats as a criminal organization, much like the Mafia or the Camorra.)

So a brief history it is, limited to the past thirty years or so. Believe you me, there’s no lack of cases even in that short span.

The Dinkins Magic Voting Machines

Just days before voting in the 1993 David Dinkins/Rudolf Giuliani election, the New York Times reported that a number of voting machines had been found in a closed Manhattan school. All the machines were loaded with votes for Democrat incumbent David Dinkins.

Voting proceeded without the help of those machines, and of course Rudy was elected. But that was the end of it. As far as I’ve been able to learn, there was no investigation, no inquiries, or, for that matter, any further reportage on it. A Democrat attempt to steal the NYC mayoral election was flushed down the memory hole.

An Inconvenient Decision

We all know the absurdist story of the 2000 presidential election. But it’s often overlooked that Al Gore was attempting an outright steal of a presidential election, a bold move not to be repeated until 2020 – and he attempted it with the open assistance of the judiciary.

The leftist version is well known, since it’s all we ever hear – George W. Bush was only ahead by 900 votes in Florida when Gore, in the pure interest of fairness, requested a simple recount, at which point the right-wing extremist Supreme Court leapt in and handed the victory to Bush by fiat. (This, by the way, has served as an excuse for all electoral cheating since that point – “the GOP started it in 2000… We have to cheat, to protect democracy.” As to what excuses the myriad cases of cheating that occurred beforehand… well, don’t ask me. I dunno.)

What actually happened is that Gore’s crowd created a strategy in which every possible vote-counting method would be utilized, with recounts repeated as many times as necessary until one was finally discovered that would overturn the results. These included attempts to carry out recounts only in Democrat strongholds such as Dade County while shutting down any such efforts on the Panhandle, home to many military retirees.

The Bush campaign took Gore to court to prevent such schemes, until finally, given the opportunity at last, the Florida State Supreme Court – almost exclusively Democrat-appointed — found in favor of Gore’s demand that ‘undervotes” – ballots showing no presidential vote at all – be counted, while at the same time “awarding” him nearly 500 votes, a novel concept unheard of in American jurisprudence up to that date.

It was here, facing the prospect of a presidential election thrown by a corrupt Democrat court in full public view and in defiance of established precedent, that the U.S. Supreme Court finally stepped in, overturning the Florida court’s decision and ending the recount circus. Bush won with 537 votes. (A later media recount showed that Bush’s lead would have held in any reasonable recount process.)

Votes from the 8th Dimension

The 2004 Washington state gubernatorial contest between Republican Dino Rossi and Democrat Christine Gregoire ended with Rossi up by 261 votes. A machine recount left him still ahead by 42 votes. The state Democrats paid over $700,000 for a hand recount, and whaddaya know… Votes started appearing from any and all conceivable sources. A bag containing votes here…  an electoral official’s car there… it’s surprising they didn’t start falling out of the sky like the frogs in Magnolia.

By the end of the year Gregoire was ahead by 130 votes and was inaugurated on January 12. Rossi, God love him, continued fighting, taking Gregoire to court over the blatantly illegitimate votes. A Pierce County judge tossed the votes out, only to be overruled by the Washington State Supreme Court. A final decision didn’t come for six months, when Judge John Bridges, a Democrat appointee, tossed aside the concept of “chain of custody” to find in favor of Gregoire. Rossi should have continued on to the U.S. Supreme Court – after all, a critical legal concept was being overthrown – but he does get an E for Effort, since he did more than any other Republican in recent memory.

The Washington case enshrined the concept that all Democrat votes, whether they emerged from a portal into hyperspace or were discovered in a 2000 B.C. Sumerian temple, had to be counted no matter what the circumstances. GOP votes… not so much.

Goshdarnit, People Liked Him

A similar chain of events occurred in the election of Al Franken in Minnesota in 2008. Incumbent Norm Coleman originally prevailed with over 700 votes, which were mysteriously whittled down to 200 in short order. Franken called for a recount, and begorrah, the votes suddenly started appearing. Some, anyway — an envelope of votes from one county simply disappeared, but were counted regardless, the totals evidently being read out from tea leaves. By the time it all ended, Franken was ahead by 312 votes. Coleman, a Republican gentleman of the old school, made perfunctory efforts at protest, but was undercut by the GOP itself, led by former governor Arne Carlson, a RINO to rule them all, who had refused to endorse Coleman during the campaign.

Shortly after the election, it was discovered that at least 1,099 illegal votes had been cast by felons, and this had been known during the vote count, but had been ignored. Franken exchanged his diapers for a suit and spent the better part of two terms voting the way he was told and embarrassing his party before being forced out during the “MeToo” craze.

Trump Agonistes

At this point anyone who needs convincing about cheating during the 2020 election needs their own personal TED Talk covering it. While media keeps telling us it has been “debunked,” they never quite get around to details such as when, where, by whom, and on what grounds.

What’s often overlooked is that 2020 was layered operation, with efforts taking place from the most exalted corridors of power down to the lowest one-legged precinct worker. Consider the Hunter scandal(s). Following the NY Post’s blockbuster report, 52 members of the “Intelligence Community” published a letter in Politico asserting that it was a Russiandezinformatsiya exercise. Intelligence operatives also approached social media outlets such as Twitter and Facebook with the same yarn, with Dorsey and Zuckerberg eagerly censoring the story. The entire saga, featuring hookers, crack, stifled investigations, payoffs from China and Ukraine, and 10% for the “Big Guy,” was buried until well after the election. This, playmates, goes by the term “election interference.”

Following the vote, polls revealed that up to 17% of voters would not have voted for Biden if they’d known about Hunter’s escapades. That’s the election right there. So how has this been debunked? It hasn’t — there’s no way it could be; it’s right out there in the open, stinking like a dead skunk. It has simply been ignored.

As for cheating at the voting level, everything that needs to be said was said in 2000 Mules, which summarized True the Vote’s investigation into the “irregularities” surrounding the election. The mechanism was simple: left-wing operatives dumping armfuls of votes into isolated drop-boxes at three in the morning. Literally thousands of hours of footage of this activity exists, and is featured in the film. (My favorite bit of evidence here involves the single bust of voter fraud that occurred – in Louisiana, of all places — A critical piece of evidence involved fingerprints on the fake ballots. Within hours, vote dumpers across the nation appeared suddenly accoutered with vinyl gloves.)

It seems to me that it would be easy enough to “debunk” this if you really wanted to – simply track down those lefty operatives (we know who they are) and find out what they were actually doing in the middle of the night dropping boxloads of ballots while wearing gloves. If they’ve got a reasonable answer, fine. But they don’t… that’s why such “debunking” has never and will never occur.

True the Vote’s Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips were arrested on trumped-up contempt charges just a week before the 2022 election. What a coincidence!

2022

Which brings us to the latest reports, in which the Democrat Party astonished the world by abandoning 170 years of duplicity to allow the first completely clean national election in nearly two centuries.

Actually, no… having gotten away with 2020 — so far — the Dems saw no reason to hold back. While something on the order of 400 laws reforming electoral procedures have hit the books since 2020, it wasn’t enough. None of these were in blue states, and few if any in purple ones.

So Fetterman was not elected in Pennsylvania, and Kelly and Hobbs were not elected in Arizona, and Cortez Masto was not elected in Nevada. These are the results of cheating, blatant cheating in Arizona and Pennsylvania (250,000 bogus votes were intercepted in PA before the election, and sequestered by order of both the state and federal Supreme Courts, decisions which acting Secretary of State Leigh M. Chapman ordered election officials to ignore. Does anyone want to bet those were the only ones?)

Arizona is a unique situation, with the contest overseen by… Katie Hobbs, acting as secretary of state. This is unbelievable, the equivalent of putting Hunter Biden in charge of the DEA. Kari Lake is admirable in many ways, but how she allowed this one to get by her I cannot surmise. This should have been a major issue from day one and fought relentlessly all the way through. It’s a simple fact of nature: give a Democrat an opportunity to cheat, and cheating will happen, as the sparks fly upward. There is no excuse for overlooking this by anyone, anywhere, anytime.

Once again, we need to call on Goldfinger’s dictum: once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action. We are way past “three times” at this point.

Three points follow. First, Democrat electoral cheating is not a Trump fantasy. The Dems have been cheating since they first emerged from the roiling chaos of Andrew Jackson’s id. Tammany, the Locofocos, the Jim Crow South, Frank Hague, Tom Pendergast, Harry Hopkins, the Cook County machine, Joe Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson… It’s one long saga of corruption from beginning to end.  The suggestion that the Dems are totally corrupt in their approach to elections is not a novelty, nor is it a slander. It is a simple statement of fact. Claims to the contrary are nonsense, as are the media assist-me-to-my-fainting-couch fits every time the topic comes up.

The Dems have taken a system of fraud developed over a century’s time and steadily weaponized it over the past three decades. It is a science at this point. Its most glaring weakness is that, like any con, it requires near-open cooperation from its victims to work.

Which the GOPe has been happy to supply. Republicans have made next to no effort at any point to put a stop to it. Not even Rudy, the GOP’s attack dog, made an effort to shine a spotlight on Dinkins and his little games. And if the man who took down the New York mob wouldn’t touch it, what can we expect from the flock of capons currently running the Republican Party?   

Years ago, when I was in real estate in New Jersey, there was an immigrant from a Slavic country living in downtown Passaic. He had been mugged over sixty times. Local thugs would wait until he left to shop for groceries, then follow him to the store and simply relieve him of the bag when he emerged. The city cops offered him a radio (this was well before the cellphone era) so that he could summon them when it happened again. “No, no,” he wailed. “It would only be taken from me.”

The emotions aroused by this story include pity, sympathy, and heavy admixture of glee and contempt. This may seem mean, but it’s also healthy.

The Republican response to Dem electoral cheating arises from the same source, a gutlessness indistinguishable from sheer cowardice.

Things may at last be changing. Trump blew the whistle on the whole scam – one of the major reasons they hate him. Now Kari Lake is redeeming herself by promising to hammer Kathy Hobbs and the Arizona Dems for as long as it takes.  This is a good start — but it’s only a start.

There are dozens – perhaps as many as a hundred – populist conservatives joining Congress at the beginning of next year. Investigating voter fraud (particularly involving Hobbs, and her snipers on the rooftop) represents their opportunity to make their mark.

This is the second election in a row marked by impossible results. Not “extraordinary,” not “unusual,” but impossible. Joe Biden did not get 81 million votes. Fetterman could not have been elected by a sane electorate. Catherine Cortez Masto was not saved by magic votes arising from spontaneous generation. All these outcomes are outside the realm of the possible. All were produced by a sophisticated, highly developed system of cheating. Eventually, we’ll have to put a stop to it, one way or another.

Biden Energy Department Touts $200M Grant to Battery Company Primarily Operating in China

Do you need more proof that the Biden Crime Family is wholly owned by the Chinese Communist Party?

“Additionally, in the grant’s announcement, the Department of Energy touted that Microvast is a “majority U.S.-owned company, traded on NASDAQ” that is “headquartered in Stafford, Texas,” with additional locations in Tennessee, Florida, and Colorado. However, the Free Beacon explained that financial records reveal the company primarily works out of China:

[F]inancial records show the company operates primarily out of China. Microvast itself says the Chinese government “exerts substantial influence over the manner in which we must conduct our business activities and may intervene, at any time and with no notice.” The company was also recently added to a Securities and Exchange Commission watchlist of Chinese companies that are on track to be delisted from NASDAQ for failing to comply with U.S. auditing requirements.

The report also noted that the so-called “Bipartisan” Infrastructure Law states that the Department of Energy should avoid using the grants money to fund any project that “use battery material supplied by or originating from a foreign entity of concern,” including companies “subject to the jurisdiction or direction” of China.

In other words, once again Biden violated U.S. law to help the people that gave millions to him and his sons—the Communist Chinese.  We do not need a Congressional hearing on this—we need a Grand Jury.

Report: Biden Energy Department Touts $200M Grant to Battery Company Primarily Operating in China

JACOB BLISS, Breitbart,  12/7/22   

The Department of Energy under President Joe Biden is touting a $200 million grant it gave to a lithium battery company that would help the United States  grow its domestic sources of green energy, even though it “primarily” operates in China, according to a report.

Microvast, a Texas-based company that “primarily” operates in China, according to the Washington Free Beacon, received $200 million in grant money provided by the U.S. government from the so-called “Bipartisan” Infrastructure Law to help shift the county to green energy.

When the grants were announced in October, Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm touted the investment in “American-made” products:

This is truly a remarkable time for manufacturing in America, as President Biden’s Agenda and historic investments supercharge the private sector to ensure our clean energy future is American-made. Producing advanced batteries and components here at home will accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels to meet the strong demand for electric vehicles, creating more good-paying jobs across the country. [Emphasis added.]

Additionally, in the grant’s announcement, the Department of Energy touted that Microvast is a “majority U.S.-owned company, traded on NASDAQ” that is “headquartered in Stafford, Texas,” with additional locations in Tennessee, Florida, and Colorado. However, the Free Beacon explained that financial records reveal the company primarily works out of China:

[F]inancial records show the company operates primarily out of China. Microvast itself says the Chinese government “exerts substantial influence over the manner in which we must conduct our business activities and may intervene, at any time and with no notice.” The company was also recently added to a Securities and Exchange Commission watchlist of Chinese companies that are on track to be delisted from NASDAQ for failing to comply with U.S. auditing requirements.

The report also noted that the so-called “Bipartisan” Infrastructure Law states that the Department of Energy should avoid using the grants money to fund any project that “use battery material supplied by or originating from a foreign entity of concern,” including companies “subject to the jurisdiction or direction” of China.

Moreover, the Free Beacon wrote that Microvast describes itself in its 2021 annual SEC report as a “holding company” that conducts its business “principally through our subsidiary in China.”

“A substantial portion of our operations and manufacturing and most of our current customers are in the [People’s Republic of China],” Microvast added in its SEC report, according to the Free Beacon, which also explained that it previously received subsidies from the Chinese government in addition to noting that most of its customers are associated with “state-owned companies in the PRC.”

Furthermore, the SEC, in May, added the lithium battery company to a list of companies that do not satisfy U.S. auditing requirements under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, as the Free Beacon noted:

In May, the SEC added Microvast to a list of Chinese companies that aren’t in compliance with U.S. auditing requirements under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. The law, which went into effect last spring, is designed to prevent Chinese companies listed on the U.S. stock exchanges from using non-approved China-based auditors to obscure their finances.

Companies that remain on the list for three consecutive years will be delisted from NASDAQ. They are also required to disclose whether they have any directors who are members of the Chinese Communist Party, or CCP ownership.

The Free Beacon explained that, according to Microvast spokeswoman Sarah Alexander, Microvast CEO Yang Wu is a U.S. citizen. Still, Arthur Wong, another director at the company, is a Hong Kong citizen based in Beijing and is the chairman of the audit committee at Daqo New Energy Corporation — where a subsidiary of that company, according to the report, was previously sanctioned by the Biden administration for having connections to slave labor.

Alexander noted that one of Microvast’s directors is a member of the Chinese Communist Party and that the company primarily operates out of Huzhou, China, where their website says it has a “Manufacturing Facility and R&D Center.”

Regarding the SEC’s compliance list, the spokeswoman said that it could change due to  “recent developments on the [Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act], including an agreement between the U.S. and Chinese governments to allow for” complete inspections. Recently, “U.S. and Chinese regulatory officials are in talks to settle a long-running dispute over the auditing compliance of U.S.-listed Chinese firms,” Reuters reported.

However, as Breitbart News extensively reported last year, Biden’s energy secretary is no stranger to controversy regarding taxpayer-funded government grants in the green energy sector. During Granholm’s two terms as Michigan’s governor, pushing for electric vehicles was “a major focus” of hers, “which she pursued by selecting particular businesses and industries to back with state taxpayer support,” Michigan Capitol Confidential notes.

When she was governor, Granholm approved billions of dollars in state-approved tax credits for her chosen companies. Still, Michigan Capitol Confidential noted that “every single one fell far short of the job projections hailed by the Granholm administration in press releases. And a good number of the companies went bankrupt.”

Breitbart News added:

The most notorious of Granholm’s state-backed grant failures was the Michigan-based electric battery company A123 Systems, to which Granholm’s administration granted $141 million in state credits and subsidies in conjunction with a $249 million federal stimulus grant from the Obama administration to develop lithium ion battery technology for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Despite this massive government investment, A123 Systems filed for bankruptcy in October 2012. And then in 2013, the Obama-Biden administration approved the sale of A123 Systems to a Chinese company, thereby allowing China to acquire all of the U.S. taxpayer-funded electric battery research developed by the Michigan company.

Given the Biden administration’s soft stance on China and lack of clear safeguards in the so-called “Bipartisan” Infrastructure Law to prevent China from buying up U.S. assets and government subsidized companies, it is possible any company receiving grant money from the U.S. could be the next A123 Systems.

Disney Fights Second Amendment Rights—with NEW CEO

Disney is still going after American rights and traditions.

“Despite his previous comments vowing political neutrality, no one should be surprised by Iger linking arms with arguably the worst president in history to declare war on America’s gun owners. Iger, after all, is a longtime Democrat who helped fundraise for Crooked Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.”

If you hate freedom and America—support Disney products.

Woke Disney Is Back! New CEO Says Those in Power “Have an Extra Responsibility” to Promote Gun Control

By Cullen Linebarger, The Gateway,  12/7/22  

Disney’s war on American culture seemingly took a hiatus after new CEO Bob Iger vowed to avoid political controversy. After his comments at a gun control event, though, one can safely assume the war is back on.

Iger joined former President Barack Obama and liberal Hollywood actor Matthew McConaughey at the Sandy Hook Promise event in New York on Tuesday. The occasion marked the 10th anniversary of the Sandy Hook Massacre in Newtown, Connecticut where 20 innocent children and six adults were murdered.

Iger began his speech stressing his role as a family man and CEO. “As a grandfather, as a father, as CEO of The Walt Disney Company, I believe there is no greater or more important task than ensuring the safety and well-being of our children,” Iger said.

He continued:

Those of us who are in positions to affect change, whether it’s by influencing laws of shaping culture or supporting organizations on the frontlines, I think we have an extra responsibility.”

Obama also spoke at the event and spewed his usual demagoguery. He lamented his “biggest disappointment” in office was Congress failing to pass gun control legislation. Obama went on to whine about Congress bowing to the “gun lobby.”

From the former “firearm salesman of the year”:

“Perhaps the most bitter disappointment of my time in office, the closest I came to being cynical, was the utter failure of Congress to respond in the immediate aftermath of the Sandy Hook shootings. To see almost the entire GOP, but also a decent number of Democrats equivocate and hem and haw and filibuster and ultimately bend yet again to pressure from the gun lobby.”

Despite his previous comments vowing political neutrality, no one should be surprised by Iger linking arms with arguably the worst president in history to declare war on America’s gun owners. Iger, after all, is a longtime Democrat who helped fundraise for Crooked Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

He also tried to defend liberal bias at Disney in 2013 after ABC “News” and ESPN bashed various conservatives. Instead, Iger claimed:

 “We have at times either presented the news in slightly inaccurate ways through mistakes or in ways that we weren’t necessarily proud of. But I firmly stand behind the integrity of our news organizations.”

Interesting how such “mistakes” disproportionately affect one side of the political aisle, no?

The fiduciary duty Iger has as CEO to make money for Disney, not weigh in on politics. One way to accomplish this is actually producing films audiences love rather than woke, box office bombs.

Do not count on him following this course of action, though. Iger has already proven he is too weak to counter the radical left.

Investigation Shows Millions in Taxpayer Funds Diverted to Left-Wing Groups

Government is transferring your tax dollars to radical, anti-freedom Leftist organization—to end your Constitutional rights.

“The investigation details numerous taxpayer-funded contracts and grants directed to the Left-wing groups by politicians that investigators concluded were “padded” or even directly subsidized political activities. The investigation even uncovered coordination between government staff and a Left-wing group in advancing proposed redistricting maps that would benefit these same politicians.

The inappropriate funding allocations to the Left-wing groups came in the wake of Democrats taking control of the several local government agencies – including the gas tax-funded San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.”

They are using our tax dollars against us.  This is a good analysis of how the Left is killing off democracy with our money.


Investigation Shows Millions in Taxpayer Funds Diverted to Left-Wing Groups

  •  

San Diego News Desk, By Dylan Martin, 12/6/22 

The Transparency Foundation exposes how Left-wing groups in San Diego County got over $6.6 million in inappropriate taxpayer funding while engaging in lobbying, issue advocacy, and political activities – and has now referred the matter to oversight agencies.

A bombshell investigation conducted by the Transparency Foundation has identified at least $6.6 million in inappropriate taxpayer funding was diverted to Left-wing groups in San Diego county in 2020-2021 – all while those same groups engaged in significant lobbying, issue advocacy, and political activities.

The investigation details numerous taxpayer-funded contracts and grants directed to the Left-wing groups by politicians that investigators concluded were “padded” or even directly subsidized political activities. The investigation even uncovered coordination between government staff and a Left-wing group in advancing proposed redistricting maps that would benefit these same politicians.

The inappropriate funding allocations to the Left-wing groups came in the wake of Democrats taking control of the several local government agencies – including the gas tax-funded San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.

The Transparency Foundation has forwarded the findings of its investigation to several government oversight agencies and is now calling on local government officials to immediately suspend any funds going to what it deems ten “High Risk” political groups in San Diego county currently receiving government funding.

“The diversion of taxpayer funds to these overtly political groups is outrageous and highly inappropriate – and likely is illegal,” says Carl DeMaio, Chairman of the Transparency Foundation.

“We are so concerned about the pattern of abuse of taxpayer funds outlined in our report that we’re asking oversight agencies to look into the evidence we collected and the findings we have made,” DeMaio adds.

The Transparency Foundation says it launched the investigation after receiving a complaint from a whistleblower inside one of the government agencies that was directed by politicians to disburse funds to a local political group under a grant without proper definition of deliverables.

Among the evidence-based findings of the investigation:

  • Extensive Targeted Voter Contact: While being awarded millions in taxpayer funds, the Left-wing groups simultaneously expended funds on running political campaigns and conducting significant outreach to voters – including “direct express advocacy” for ballot measures. In one email obtained during the investigation, a SANDAG government grant manager revealed interest in partnering with a Left-wing group based on their work on a ballot “initiative” regarding an increase in the minimum wage.
  • Extensive Lobbying and Filing Violations: The Left-wing groups that received taxpayer funds all engaged in lobbying for and against passage of legislation before the boards that funded them – raising concerns the politicians on those boards used taxpayer funds to help finance public outreach and lobbying efforts to support legislation they championed.
  • Padding of Expenses or Inappropriate Use of Funds: Politicians will claim they awarded the Left-wing groups contracts and grants for bona-fide services. To the contrary, the Transparency Foundation investigation identified multiple examples of intentional “padding” of expenses and the awarding of contracts and grants with dubious statements of work and/or non-existent deliverables. In addition, specific grants and contracts inappropriately covered shared facilities, equipment, software/information technology, and other overhead expenses for groups that engage in political activities and lobbying. A political canvassing group received $175,000 in a no-bid contract and charged the taxpayers at rates 5-10 times the prevailing market rates (taxpayers were charged $8.46-10 per door knock!)
  • Inappropriate Collaboration on Fundraising: Emails obtained during the investigation reveal that government staff actively directed grants to Left-wing groups – acting almost like business development partners for the groups. Even worse, one agency even covered the cost of purchasing fundraising software for a political group.
  • Manipulation of Redistricting Efforts: On top of providing taxpayer funding to Left-wing groups at the same time that they lobbied the state and local redistricting commissions, the investigation found evidence that SANDAG government staff produced maps-on-demand and related redistricting marketing materials for a Left-wing group lobbying redistricting commissions and worked to boost Census participation in Democrat-leaning communities.
  • Campaign Finance Violations: One organization that received taxpayer funding openly admitted to supporting the collection of signatures on a local tax hike ballot measure – and then failed to properly report this contribution.

“Given significant amount of taxpayer funds being diverted and the numerous alarming examples of politicized emails we obtained between government officials and these groups, there is little doubt that this misuse of taxpayer funds is part of a larger and deliberate plan,” DeMaio says.

While the investigation focuses on San Diego county funding streams, the Transparency Foundation believes the pattern of diverting taxpayer funds to political groups is likely happening in other California counties as well. For example, in May 2021 nearly $100 million in federal Covid-19 funding was distributed to over 480 “community-based organizations” across California, but there has been no way to track that funding or any deliverables associated with it because funding was funneled through third parties such as foundations and private vendors.

The Transparency Foundation is calling on state and local leaders to take immediate action to prevent any additional misuse of taxpayer funds in San Diego county. Among the recommendations made:

  • Immediate Suspension on Taxpayer Funding to Political Groups: To remove any suspicion or doubt going forward, San Diego elected officials and government agencies should adopt a policy to prohibit taxpayer funding for any non-profit organization that engages in lobbying, issue advocacy, or political activity.
  • San Diego County Grand Jury Investigation: The San Diego County Grand Jury should initiate an investigation into the use of taxpayer funds by groups that engage in lobbying, issue advocacy and political activity to determine if the funding was appropriately accounted for and used.
  • Congressional and Inspector General Inquiries: A Congressional committee of appropriate jurisdiction should conduct an aggressive oversight hearing on the misappropriation of Covid-19 funds using San Diego County as a case study — and make a formal request to appropriate Inspectors General of federal agencies for investigatory support in this matter.

“There is absolutely no defense for the diversion of taxpayer funds to any political groups – whether on the Left or the Right – at the same time that they are lobbying government officials, engaging in issue advocacy or voter contact, or outright funding campaigns on political issues,” DeMaio concludes.

San Fran School District Teaches Gender Identity Curriculum Without Parental Consent

If you are a parent, do you want a teacher to tell your son he is really your daughter?  And, NOT tell the parents that a government school is changing the gender of your child.

“San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) told teachers they didn’t need to notify parents before teaching children pro-transgender, gender identity lessons.

Parents don’t need to be notified before teachers discuss “LGBTQ family and gender diversity,” documents obtained by Parents Defending Education through public records requests found. 

A document called “LGBTQ Family + Gender Diversity,” a “Teaching Guide for Elementary Grades,” explained that there are several instances in which teachers don’t need to inform parents that they will teach gender identity curriculum in the classroom. 

This is why we need school choice—San Fran schools are going to insure that your child is mentally confused for life—bad relationship, dangerous relationship and the inability to know the difference between men and women.  This is a mental ill school district—sex is more important than education.

San Francisco School District Teaches Gender Identity Curriculum Without Parental Consent

Mark Kerrison/In Pictures via Getty Images

SPENCER LINDQUIST, Breitbart,   12/7/22  

San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) told teachers they didn’t need to notify parents before teaching children pro-transgender, gender identity lessons.

Parents don’t need to be notified before teachers discuss “LGBTQ family and gender diversity,” documents obtained by Parents Defending Education through public records requests found. 

A document called “LGBTQ Family + Gender Diversity,” a “Teaching Guide for Elementary Grades,” explained that there are several instances in which teachers don’t need to inform parents that they will teach gender identity curriculum in the classroom. 

“A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education,” the document explains, saying that such instruction “does NOT require parent notification or permission according to the California Education Code.” 

It goes on to explain that parent notification is not required “When celebrating diversity or April’s LGBTQ Pride month,” “When providing definitions to students,” “Reading a book with LGBTQ character(s)/plots/subplots,” or when “Speaking about LGBTQ persons in the curriculum outside of sexual health education.” 

One section, titled “Essential Questions by Grade Level,” lists learning goals by grade. The questions are intended to help implement a “learning process that introduces, builds and deepens students’ understanding of LGBTQ family and gender diversity.”   

A question for kids in transitional kindergarten reads “What do we notice about gender?” while a question for first graders is listed as “What do I notice about rules about gender?” 

Meanwhile, those in second grade are asked, “How can we be supportive of LGBTQ people in our community?” and, “How have heroes and allies made a difference for LGBTQ communities?”

Questions for fourth graders include, “How is gender organized across California society and history? How is that different from Native American traditions?” as well as, “What is the relationship between oppression and LGBTQ health?” Another reads, “How have LGBTQ people organized social movements now and in the past in California?”

Fifth grade students are asked questions like “How was gender controlled in the formation of the United States?” and “What is gender self-determination? How is it different from the gender binary?”

“Key Ideas” that children are taught at SFUSD are taught include “It is normal to explore gender and be curious about gender” and “limiting ideas about gender are learned from families, friends, TV/Movies, school and society.”

Children in the district are also taught that “Westward expansion and colonialism impacted Native American gender diversity.”

A document called “Gender Inclusive Language,” labeled as “Guidance for SFUSD Educators,” included a vocabulary list. It featured terms like “transgender,” “cisgender,” “non-binary,” and “gender-nonconforming.”

The document also instructed teachers to “avoid using he as a universal pronoun; likewise, avoid using binary alternatives such as he/she, he or she, or (s)he.”

The district also has a “Queer Trans Advisory Council” which is made up of high school students and is tasked with planning Youth Pride Day and engaging in other forms of outreach and activism.

Is Newsom’s gas profits penalty really a tax?

Newsom wants a tax on oil companies—no, not to penalize them, but to make up for the lost revenue from EV’s that do not pay gas taxes.  He found out even in a 75% Democrat Assembly and State Senate he is having a hard time to get the 2/3 vote he needs to raise the tax.  Gavin is slick.  Now he no longer wants a tax—he wants a penalty—which will only take a 50% plus 1 vote to pass.  The difference between a tax and penalty?  Just the spelling, either way the consumer pays the full amount.

“However, when Newsom finally outlined his proposal this week, the tax approach had been abandoned and instead, he said he wants petroleum companies to be docked civil penalties by the state Energy Commission if they exceed designated profit margins.

“California’s price gouging penalty is simple — either Big Oil reins in the profits and prices, or they’ll pay a penalty,” Newsom said in a statement. “Big Oil has been lying and gouging Californians to line their own pockets long enough. I look forward to the work ahead with our partners in the Legislature to get this done.”

In other words, government is going to set the profits a company can make.  If the Democrats can do it to oil, they can do it to lawyers, doctors and butchers.  This is how socialism works.  It is government control of the corporations.


Is Newsom’s gas profits penalty really a tax?

BY DAN WALTERS, CalMatters,   12/7/22     

IN SUMMARY

Originally, California Gov. Gavin Newsom called for a tax on excess profits on gasoline sales, but now terms it a penalty, which would make it easier to win legislative approval.

When Gov. Gavin Newsom launched his crusade against what he called blatant price-gouging on gasoline by oil refiners, he called for taxes on excess profits.

At the time, gas prices had soared to more than $6 a gallon in some locales, a couple of dollars higher than those in other states, and Californians’ pain at the pump symbolized the soaring inflation that was ravaging household budgets.

However, when Newsom finally outlined his proposal this week, the tax approach had been abandoned and instead, he said he wants petroleum companies to be docked civil penalties by the state Energy Commission if they exceed designated profit margins.

“California’s price gouging penalty is simple — either Big Oil reins in the profits and prices, or they’ll pay a penalty,” Newsom said in a statement. “Big Oil has been lying and gouging Californians to line their own pockets long enough. I look forward to the work ahead with our partners in the Legislature to get this done.”

Later, he told reporters, “I believe in free enterprise, I just don’t believe in greed. These guys have been gaming the system for decades. They’ve been taking advantage of you for decades. And it’s got to end.”

Why the change from taxes to civil penalties?

It has to do with the state constitution, which requires any tax to be passed by two-thirds majorities in both houses of the Legislature. Newsom is betting that the civil penalties that he proposes would be exempt from that requirement and thus need only simple legislative vote majorities to become law.

In other words, he’s not certain that despite overwhelming Democratic legislative majorities he could muster a two-thirds vote for a profits tax, due to a general reluctance among politicians to impose new taxes and the oil industry’s vigorous courting of support, aided by its influential unions.

The industry had already signaled that it would vigorously oppose a profits tax by characterizing it as something that would raise pump prices even higher. But what about civil penalties?

The industry immediately characterized them as taxes in sheep’s clothing.

“A fee imposed on the industry as a commodity going to the government, that is going to look and act like a tax,” Kevin Slagle, spokesperson for the Western States Petroleum Association, said. “We know windfall taxes have been tried nationally and don’t work. What we need to do is focus on better public policy.”

So we know how the political battleground is being staked out, but what’s the underlying legal situation?

When Newsom’s proposal was formally introduced as Senate Bill 2X on Monday, the Legislature’s legal counsel marked it as a non-tax measure requiring only simple majority votes. Ultimately, however, whether the proposed civil penalties qualify for that designation depends on the interpretation of an exemption allowed in the constitution’s Article XIII A, Section 3.

It says, “A fine, penalty, or other monetary charge imposed by the judicial branch of government or the state, as a result of a violation of law” is not a tax. In other words, Newsom would put gasoline profit penalties in the same exempt category as traffic tickets for speeding.

We don’t know as yet what Newsom’s legislation would set as a profit speed limit or what the penalties would be for exceeding it. SB 2X leaves those numbers blank, to be filled in later as the measure makes its way through the legislative process next year.

Were it to become law, however, we would most likely see a prolonged legal battle over whether, indeed, excess profit penalties are not taxes.

Companies ditch four-year degree requirement

It is beginning to look like American corporations have caught on to the college/university scam.  High tuition and low education.  If a corporation wants a worker in the tech field, those folks need a degree from a computer school, not a degree from Cal or CSLAS where they learn to be bigots, hate American and how to bully people—plus unsure if they are male, female or a human.

“Colleges have not given students the tools they need to succeed, he argued. “What’s the point of a college degree when you can give students technical skills to do certain jobs?”  

Companies used to have apprenticeships, where people started at low-level positions and worked their way up, Andrew Wilkow, host of the program, mentioned. “Something is happening in colleges that are making the graduates no longer desirable.” 

Diplomas are now issued on lowered standards and no standards, just given out (if you don’t you could be accused of racism or worse).  They are as useful as toilet paper and prove your intelligence just as much in many cases.

WATCH: Companies ditch four-year degree requirement

Courtesy kladcat, Flickr

Campus Reform 12/7/22 

Campus Reform Higher Education Fellow Nicholas Giordano appeared on Wilkow! to discuss how major U.S. companies are dropping their requirement to have four-year degrees. 

Degrees used to be a ‘golden ticket’ into corporate America, “but then the businesses and the companies realized that the students are not coming in prepared for our workforce,” Giordano said.

Colleges have not given students the tools they need to succeed, he argued. “What’s the point of a college degree when you can give students technical skills to do certain jobs?”  

Companies used to have apprenticeships, where people started at low-level positions and worked their way up, Andrew Wilkow, host of the program, mentioned. “Something is happening in colleges that are making the graduates no longer desirable.” 

Giordano responded, “It’s because education has lowered standards for the last 30 years. Students have simply been cycled through the system where they haven’t learned how to write effectively, they don’t learn how to communicate with other people.” 

He further explained that companies are taking it upon themselves to train workers, because the universities are unreliable, as they incentivize laziness.

“Companies are saying, ‘We need workers that are actually going to work.’” Gordano concluded. “How are these students going to be able to manage in the real life if they can’t sit there and take a class that’s hard?”

Watch the full video above.

8 Ways The American Church Has It Worse Than The Church In China

Christians in China—and Colorado are being harassed by government.  In China it could be a death sentence.  Canada and England are both calling the Bible hate speech and ministers have to be careful NOT to quote certain passages or they can be fined and jailed.  Freedom of religion is under attack, even with the First Amendment.

Our pastor never gets arrested for preaching and frankly, he’s starting to get a bit stale: He doesn’t even make Marvel movie references.

We have to drive all the way to church in the morning instead of conveniently meeting in our homes in the basement with the lights off: Chinese Christians don’t know the pain of getting everyone in the minivan on Sunday.

8 Ways The American Church Has It Worse Than The Church In China

SPONSORED by Christian Freedom IntERNATIONAL, · BabylonBee.com, 12.6.22 

In China, Christians can’t openly worship the Lord because it’s illegal. They have to meet in homes like the early Christians living under the reign of Nero. But in America, we have it so much worse!

Look, we are totally persecuted too —

  1. Sometimes we forget where we left our Bible and that’s really hard: Why does God let this happen?
  2. Our pastor never gets arrested for preaching and frankly, he’s starting to get a bit stale: He doesn’t even make Marvel movie references.
  3. We have to drive all the way to church in the morning instead of conveniently meeting in our homes in the basement with the lights off: Chinese Christians don’t know the pain of getting everyone in the minivan on Sunday.
  4. None of us know kung-fu: How can we be expected to refuse to fight and love our enemies when we can’t fight anyway?
  5. Sometimes there are typos on the lyrics slide: Embarrassing.
  6. The A/C is a little loud: And cold. What is this? Corinth?
  7. Sometimes people sit in our pews: You can’t be expected to sit over there with those “left pew” people.
  8. Hillsong: Worse than anything the Chinese have to endure.

NOT SATIRE: Right now Christians are fleeing tyranny in China, violent attacks in Myanmar, unconscionable cruelty in North Korea. Christians elsewhere are beaten, their property destroyed, and killed.

How can we help? The first step is to pray.