Author: jh staff

Funny Guy David Zucker’s Serious Warning

Humor is David Zucker’s specialty.

Not the lazy blue variety that passes for comedy these days, but the laugh out loud kind that makes your sides hurt, your eyes water and the world disappear.

The mega-successful film director, producer and screenwriter is best known for the legendary spoof flick “Airplane!” and the side-splitting “Naked Gun” and “Scary Movie” franchises.

He happens to be one of our culture’s current reigning experts on all things funny, and he’s sounding an alarm bell for all to hear.

Lucky for us he has joined the ranks of other comedy greats who have issued similar warnings: Dennis Miller, Jerry Seinfeld, Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock, Gilbert Gottfried, Mel Brooks, Adam Carolla, Steve Harvey and John Cleese.

The giants of humor are all saying pretty much the same thing; that Tinseltown’s head honchos and their like-minded fellow residents of the New Woke Hollywood are virtually strangling comedians, comedy writers and comedy itself.

Zucker was recently featured in a video posted by PragerU, where he shared some reflections on his trademark comedy.

He doesn’t think the jokes that propelled his films to the top could be delivered today. Too many folks now fail to understand the nature of comedy.

Unlike most audiences of the past, many of today’s joke consumers are so easily offended that it has risen to the level of ridiculous.

If everything is offensive, then nothing is funny.

New Woke Hollywood is decimating the comedic arts, along with the writers and performers that bring laughter to our lives.

As Zucker stated, “They’re destroying comedy because of nine percent of the people who don’t have a sense of humor.”

He used a real-life Hollywood example to illustrate the point. In a pitching session that he and his writing partner did for a James Bond/Mission: Impossible-style parody, he was stunned by the reaction of an executive just to some of the project’s dialogue.

“One female executive said, ‘This joke is getting pretty risqué here.’ It was a mild joke about the lead female character. Because she had come up through the police department and through the FBI…she needed a breast reduction to fit into the kevlar vest,” Zucker said.

“It was pure oatmeal, so mild,” he said. “Not one of our funniest things, but this was too much. I thought, ‘If this was the criteria for it, we’re in big trouble.’”

In speaking of the past, he said, “We went where the laughs were…We never worried about any of this stuff with the Naked Gun or Scary Movie films.”

Zucker honed his comedic skills in the 1980s and 90s with movies like “The Kentucky Fried Movie” (1977), “Airplane!” (1980), “Top Secret” (1984), “Ruthless People” (1986), “The Naked Gun” (1988), “The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear” (1991) and BASEketball” (1998).

He added his 21st Century contributions “Scary Movie 3” in 2003 and its sequel “Scary Movie 4” in 2006.

Many of the films that he was involved with are now classics and continue to attract appreciative audiences and younger movie fans.

He is often asked whether his most iconic film could be made today.

“When we do screenings of ‘Airplane!’ we get the question if we could do ‘Airplane!’ today,” he said. “The first thing I could think of was, ‘Sure, just without the jokes.’”

According to Zucker, although in the current comedy climate freedom may be taking a hit, the future actually looks bright.

“Comedy is in trouble, of course, but I think it’s going to come back,” he said. “There’s a pendulum, and the pendulum will swing back. I’d like to see comedy filmmakers do comedies without fear.”

Zucker has gone against the grain in liberal Hollywood. He has even worked on political ads for the GOP and directed a political parody film at the expense of Michael Moore, titled “An American Carol” (2008).

Charmingly, he is a huge fan of Davy Crockett. He once made a cameo appearance dressed as Crockett in “The Naked Gun 2½.” As a matter of fact, one of his dream projects is a Crockett biopic. He also hosted a “Davy Crockett Rifle Frolic” at his ranch back in the 1990s. And he decided to write some additional verses to the celebrated song “The Ballad of Davy Crockett.”

Regarding his faith, he was asked by the BBC some years ago whether he believes in God.

His answer was exquisite.

“Oh yeah, I believe in God,” he replied. “I think there’s much more evidence that there is a God than that there isn’t. I don’t believe that Mother Teresa and Hitler go to the same place. I believe in justice, maybe not in this life, but there has to be justice.”

In addition to justice, no doubt there’s laughter too.

As C.S. Lewis put it, “Joy is the serious business of Heaven.”

How Jimmy Kimmel Became a Democrat Hack

A lot of folks have been wondering what’s up with Jimmy Kimmel. The late-night comic has become more and more vicious in his politics and extreme in his one-sided humor.

As a result, the ratings for his TV show have really taken a hit.

Here’s a theory about how Jimmy’s comedy got wrecked and how his once-popular program fell into a rating’s ditch.

James Christian Kimmel was raised a Catholic. In his youth, he was fervent enough in his faith to step forward and serve at Mass as an altar boy.

Now, both in his politics and joke delivery, he appears to back every left-wing narrative that the dominant media and reigning powers-that-be are pitching, including a load of Dem-devised policies antithetical to his own faith heritage.

As host and executive producer of “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” he has consistently been serving as sort of a polar opposite altar boy for the Democratic Party.

He recently admitted that using so much of his show to aim insults at former President Donald Trump had resulted in his audience being cut in half over the last several years.

He also revealed that ABC is less than pleased with the loss in ratings.

In an interview with the Naked Lunch podcast, he spoke about the shrinking number of viewers, telling hosts Phil Rosenthal and David Wild, “I [Kimmel] have lost half of my fan[base], maybe more than that.”

“Ten years ago, among Republicans, I was the most popular talk show host, at least according to the research that they did,” he said.

He also shared that the network had discussed the idea of easing up on the constant barrage of Trump barbs. But according to Jimmy, he responded to the ABC heads by offering to leave the show rather than moderate his attacks.

“If you want somebody else to host the show, that’s fine, that’s okay with me. I’m just not going to do it like that,” he apparently said. He also claimed that the network reluctantly conceded.

The truth is he has been a Republican basher for as long as he has been a late-night host. Most recently, he was featured in a nasty partisan campaign ad, where he attacked the Republican who is running for the U.S. Senate in the state of Nevada, Adam Laxalt.

A glance at Jimmy’s past provides insight into the possible rationale for his unwavering allegiance to radical left-wing political and cultural ideology.

Prior to becoming the woke host of “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” he was the unwoke co-host of Comedy Central’s “The Man Show.”

When “The Man Show” first debuted in 1999, he accurately referred to the program as “a joyous celebration of chauvinism.”

The show began with a MeToo-violating theme song that included accompanying footage of a male using a leaf blower to remove a woman’s dress.

The program also had a regular segment in which The Man on the Street, namely Jimmy, recruited female volunteers to participate in a supposed game called “Guess What’s in My Pants.”

“I’ve stuffed something in my pants,” Kimmel said, explaining that “you’re allowed to feel around on the outside…You’ll have 10 seconds to then guess what is in my pants.”

Other skits on the show degraded women through use of vulgar props, partial nudity, and highly suggestive language.

In a sketch that degraded African-American individuals, prior to taking to the stage Jimmy applied a dark shade of makeup to his face for a supposed comedy effect.

By committing the above cultural violations over the years, he has broken a whole host of woke rulebook provisions, many of which were memorialized on video.

Maybe he has been trying to do penance as it relates to his newfound woke religion. Or maybe his kowtowing to the left has been the means in which he has avoided the cancellation of his prized television show and reputation.

In any event, although things seemed to have worked for him up until now, the past has a funny way of catching up with a person.

Or in Jimmy’s case, maybe a not-so-funny way.

Elon Musk’s Plan to Set the Bird Free

Tesla founder Elon Musk currently owns the singular status of being the wealthiest person in world.

Back in April of 2022, amid a modest amount of fanfare, he purchased a 9.2 percent stake in Twitter. This caused the keepers of the predominant media narrative to come unglued.

Amusingly, he was able to explain his motives on the very platform that he was in the early stages of acquiring.

“Free speech is essential to a functioning democracy,” Elon tweeted, and then asked his followers, “Do you believe Twitter rigorously adheres to this principle?”

Over 70 percent of the 2 million participants in his poll responded “No.”

He had already secured a significant degree of celebrity status, having previously grabbed headlines numerous times over and had even taken to the iconic “Saturday Night Live” stage to perform host duties.

Now it looks as though he has become a historical figure of sorts, due in large part to his $44 billion purchase of the company he has characterized as “the de facto public town square.”

Along with the entire world he had watched as a small group of corporations worked hand in hand with the government, under the guise of eliminating “misinformation.”

It was a warped process at a minimum, one in which people were stripped of the ability to engage in the free exchange of ideas, something that Americans had previously enjoyed and had even taken for granted.

The stifling of speech in this manner had an additional treacherous impact; that being, the authentic pursuit of truth became a virtual impossibility.

Ironically, many of those who considered themselves to be champions of free speech seemed to have suffered a degeneration in their ability to reason.

CNN ran a piece that carried the headline “Analysis: Elon Musk owning Twitter should give everyone pause.”

“The Guardian” did a one-up op-ed with the title “Elon Musk’s Twitter Is Going To Be a Disaster.”

And a “Wired” piece offered the prediction “Elon Musk’s Twitter Will Be Chaos.”

For his part, Elon shared a series of text images explaining why he had acquired Twitter.

“There has been much speculation about why I bought Twitter and what I think about advertising,” he posted. “Most of it has been wrong.”

The tech mogul apparently perceived the societal risk that was inherent in the direction social media had been trending.

“There is currently great danger that social media will splinter into far right-wing and far left-wing echo chambers that generate more hate and divide our society,” Elon wrote. “In the relentless pursuit of clicks, much of traditional media has fueled and catered to those polarized extremes, as they believe that is what brings in the money, but, in doing so, the opportunity for dialogue is lost.”

“It is important to the future of civilization to have a common digital town square, where a wide range of beliefs can be debated in a healthy manner without resorting to violence,” he added. “…that is why I bought Twitter. I didn’t do it because it would be easy. I didn’t do it to make more money. I did it to try to help humanity, whom I love.”

Leftists on Twitter reacted to Elon’s sentiments in a spiteful adolescent manner.

Writer for “The Intercept” Jon Schwarz stated, “This would be the traditional kind of town square that’s owned by one guy and funded by huge corporate advertisers.”

Deadline Hollywood associate editor Valerie Complex tweeted, “Im glad I already started distancing myself from Twitter so when this is finalized I can be at peace being on here even less.”

Condé-Nast legal affairs editor Luke Zaleski posted, “What’s the point of being the richest man in the world if you can’t own free speech?”

The Prospect managing editor Ryan Cooper tweeted, “Sounds like curtains for this place.”

Entertainment outlets and Hollywood figures also displayed their collective displeasure.

In its opening, “Saturday Night Live” telegraphed the producers’ loyalties to the Democratic Party via an attack on three mid-term election GOP candidates: Dr. Oz, Herschel Walker, and Kari Lake. It then took aim at its former host through its “Weekend Update” segment, targeting Elon’s purchase.

Writer-producer Shonda Rhimes tendered her judgmental farewell, tweeting, “Not hanging around for whatever Elon has planned. Bye.”

Marina Sirtis, the actress who plays Deanna Troi on “Star Trek: The Next Generation,” announced the following: “I’m sorry but I cannot be a part of anything owned by #ELONMUSK and his cabal of deplorable‘s. I’ll stay on for a couple of days so that we can say goodbye but after that I’m gone.”

“I’m out of here,” Ken Olin, executive producer of “This Is Us,” tweeted.

Elon, who has comically dubbed himself “Chief Twit,” indicated that no decisions on content or reinstating of accounts will be made until a “content moderation council” is put in place.

Still, one potential reinstatement has leftists in an absolute frenzy; that would be the reinstatement of the man of their nightmares and the years-long target of their obsession, former President Donald J. Trump.

Anxieties were heightened when reports came out in May of 2022 that Elon had stated the following: “I do think it was not correct to ban Donald Trump; I think that was a mistake.”

Although what Twitter will ultimately become still remains to be seen, the new chief has been using his account to celebrate the personal ownership of the platform.

A recent message posted by the entrepreneur perhaps best captures feelings on the part of a vast majority of Twitter users.

Elon tweeted the liberating song lyrics of the late great B.B. King, “Let the good times roll.”

May he keep the bird free.

A Win for J.D. Vance Would Be a Boon for the U.S. Senate

J.D. Vance has had great success as an attorney, venture capitalist and author.

The modern-day Renaissance man may soon be adding another notch to his career belt, that of U.S. Senator.

The son of Donald Bowman and Bev Vance was born in Middletown, Ohio, after the family moved there from Jackson, Kentucky.

His parents divorced early on, so he and his sister went to live with their grandparents James and Bonnie Vance. As a tribute to them, J.D. later chose to take on the surname of Vance.

He attended Middletown High School, and after graduating he enlisted in the Marine Corps, where he served in the Iraq War. He went on to attend Ohio State University and later earned his Yale law degree.

He took on the corporate law firm world, and then moved to San Francisco to work in the technology industry as a partner with Peter Thiel’s venture capital firm, Mithril Capital.

He experienced an additional game changer in 2016, when Harper published his book “Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis.” The book enjoyed phenomenal success and remained on The New York Times Best Seller list for months.

“Hillbilly Elegy” tells the story of the strengths and struggles of one of America’s truly forgotten segments, a group that is largely invisible to our nation’s leaders, media outlets and business communities. It is the subculture of impoverished whites living in rural America.

As the title indicates, the book sheds light on the culture of Appalachia, those with whom J.D.’s family shares its rural Kentucky roots before additional ones were established in the Ohio Rust Belt.

The book would take flight in a different manner in 2017. Iconic director-actor Ron Howard signed on to direct a film version of “Hillbilly Elegy,” which was released by Netflix in 2020. This would also be the year that J.D. would become a CNN contributor.

His upbringing and life experiences informed his positions on national policies in a dynamic way, which helped to prepare him for his campaign run as well as his likely senate post. He is expected to win the Ohio seat.

As would be expected, MSNBC hosts have gone on the attack against the Republican candidate.

A recent MSNBC panel used the final debate between J.D. and Dem candidate Tim Ryan to target J.D. while simultaneously slamming “white Republican men.”

Abortion was the overriding theme of the panel discussion, though, which is consistent with the hierarchy of issues being pushed by Democrats and their allies in the lead-up to the midterms.

Host Joy Reid, along with Democratic strategist and frequent guest Kurt Bardella, went on the attack against J.D. Then Bardella flatly stated that J.D. and other Republicans do not understand how “a baby is actually made.”

“I mean the one thing we’ve seen during the abortion debate that’s unfolding is that most of these White Republican men have no idea how a baby is actually made,” Bardella stated.

Reid agreed, saying, “Do they even know how to make a baby? I don’t think they do, and he [J.D.] has kids!”

Just for the record, J.D. has been married to former law school classmate Usha Chilukuri Vance for eight years and the couple has three children.

The negative focus on abortion and white GOP males by the Democrats and liberal media appears to be the result of an increase in J.D.’s voter support, as indicated in a recent USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll.

The poll shows a 47% to 45% lead for J.D. This suggests that there has been a significant swing in recent weeks from Ryan’s one-point advantage over J.D. to J.D.’s current 3 point advantage.

Although Ryan has attempted to portray himself as a pragmatic moderate, many voters have taken note of Ryan’s voting record in Congress, where he has consistently voted in lockstep with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Voters may also recall that during his unsuccessful 2020 presidential campaign he sounded unmistakably woke.

In contrast, J.D.’s relatability appeals to average everyday folks because he really has lived their same pain. In the Ohio steel town home of his youth, he felt the aftereffects of an ever shrinking economy.

Additionally, like so many families affected by addictions of various sorts, his mother tragically became addicted to heroin. Grandmother “Mamaw” came to his rescue, bringing stability to his life and teaching him to accept responsibility for his actions.

Mamaw told him that he lived in the “best and greatest country on earth,” which in J.D.’s words “gave meaning to my childhood.”

J.D.’s writings and life example stand as a testament to the axiom that the virtues of humility and fortitude are forged in the triumph over adversity.

“One of the things Hillbilly Elegy is about is a struggle to find stability in your own life, but also to become a good person when you didn’t have an easy upbringing,” J.D. shared. “That means being a good husband and a good father, and being capable enough to provide for your family.”

A search for the source of goodness has led him on a faith journey. He was raised as an evangelical Protestant but ended up unattached to any particular religious denomination. Then in 2016, he began thinking more deeply about his faith and became a Catholic Christian in 2019.

“When I looked at the people who meant the most to me, they were Catholic. My uncle by marriage is a Catholic,” he explained.

As a Confirmation patron name, he chose a figure that is beloved by Christians, philosophers and academics alike, St. Augustine, who authored a book that J.D., like so many others, finds inspirational, “Confessions.”

Sure would be nice if the pursuit of virtue that J.D. exhibits could rub off on his future colleagues in D.C.

The Road to Success for Kari Lake

Kari Lake has been garnering quite a bit of national attention of late.

As Arizona’s GOP gubernatorial nominee in the upcoming 2022 election, she has made a name for herself as a dynamic candidate, expert communicator and truly affable individual.

Illinois was her birthplace and Iowa was the state where she grew up in a family with eight other siblings. Fortuitous by-products of her early life experiences were her solid mid-western roots and down-home values.

Prior to venturing into the political arena, Kari’s professional career included serving in the capacities of news anchor and reporter. This is where she had the rare opportunity of interviewing both former President Barack Obama and former President Donald Trump.

She became a household name in Arizona when she served as a prime time television broadcaster, the position she held for 22 years. Over the two decades-plus she received several prestigious awards, including an Emmy.

It was in March of 2021 that she would walk away from her successful media career. She had grown uncomfortable with the lack of objectivity being exhibited by many within the journalistic field.

Her primary election turned out to be a power struggle between Republicans that were aligned with former President Trump and those affiliated with the establishment wing of the GOP.

Kari received the endorsement of former President Trump. Her establishment-backed challenger had the support of former Vice President Mike Pence, incumbent Arizona Governor Doug Ducey and former New Jersey governor Chris Christie.

Boris Epshteyn, a former Trump White House aide, noted that Kari won the primary despite being “outspent 10-to-1.” She was victorious in every single county in the state.

Mainstream news outlets recently reported that Democrats are becoming increasingly concerned about Kari. They evidently have good reason to be.

Axios featured a story titled “Democrats fear Arizona Republican Kari Lake will be a big star.” The sub-headline of the piece was “Democratic Party strategists are watching Arizona’s Kari Lake with growing alarm.”

“Some of Katie Hobbs’ supporters are concerned MAGA firebrand Kari Lake is outshining her low-key campaign,” one NBC News headline read.

A New York Times article bore the label “Democrats Worry They’re Being Overshadowed in Arizona’s Governor Race.”

For its part, The Washington Post published the upbeat title “How Kari Lake turned her campaign for Arizona governor into a phenomenon.”

The above reports and similar ones generally describe the degree that Democrats are engaging in hand-wringing over the performance and prospects of Kari’s opponent Katie Hobbs, who is their party’s nominee for governor.

Kari’s ability to relate to people and clear delivery of her policy positions are strengths that her opponent seems to lack.

Democratic Party operatives appeared to panic when Kari’s opponent, who is Arizona’s former secretary of state, declined to debate Kari.

Instead her opponent arranged a one-on-one interview with a local PBS affiliate. Among those who were upset with the decision was Sandra Kennedy, a co-chair of the 2020 Democratic campaign for president in Arizona.

“If I were the candidate for governor, I would debate, and I would want the people of Arizona to know what my platform is,” Kennedy told NBC News.

Columnist for The Arizona Republic Laurie Roberts went even further, writing that the Democratic nominee’s refusal to debate Kari “represents a new level of political malpractice.”

David Axelrod, former senior adviser to President Obama, expressed criticism on his podcast for what he said was a “mistake” in avoiding debates.

“I think it’s a recognition that Kari Lake is a formidable media personality,” he added.

The New York Times reported that some Democrats were unhappy with Kari’s opponent’s recent appearance on “Face the Nation,” stating that the Democrat nominee spent too much of her eight-minute segment being on the defensive. From the Democrats’ perspective, the television moment was a missed opportunity to go on the attack against Kari.

Arizona’s GOP gubernatorial nominee actually has more going for her than the Democrats realize.

She has re-discovered the faith that makes for strength.

In an interview with The Arizona Sun Times in June 2021, Kari recounted the manner in which her faith was re-ignited, which led to a renewed connection with God.

It was in the summer of 2019 that she was confronted with the sheer anger of the woke mob.

“Two years ago, I got canceled – as they say – now I laugh at it. It was painful at the time and really frightening. At the time, it was horrible,” she said. “Something had been recorded at work, and somehow [was] put out in the world and became a really big story and I immediately was attacked for it and was canceled for it.”

As is often the case, suffering brought blessing.

“It really brought me to my knees. I was praying to God to just get me through this,” Kari revealed.

During the pandemic lockdowns, while working from home she had the opportunity to embrace the Scriptures once again.

“I don’t know how people didn’t return to their faith during COVID,” she remarked. “I started reading the Bible. I hadn’t been reading the Bible for decades – since I was a kid!”

After immersing herself in The Word, Kari yearned for regular church attendance. Some friends invited her to come and worship with them. She went and it changed her life.

“I had the most beautiful church epiphany, and found a church that just stirred my soul. I’ve never missed a week, except when I’m out of town,” she said. “It just brought me so much closer to where I have an intimate, good relationship with Jesus. I feel as if I have a connection with Jesus.”

This is the kind of connection that makes for success in any direction the road may lead.

Even a political one.

Lessons Learned from the PayPal Debacle

PayPal is currently in an existential crisis.

The company recently issued an updated “Acceptable Use Policy” (AUP), which was set to go into effect on November 3 of this year.

Among other things, the AUP included a $2,500 fine, which was to be imposed on users of PayPal if said users transmitted speech that the digital financial service company deemed unacceptable.

The type of speech that would have triggered the policy included “the sending, posting, or publication of any messages, content, or materials” that “promote misinformation.”

Debits taken directly from users’ PayPal accounts would have been the means used to collect the hefty fines.

Having already suffered the loss of free expression at the hands of the reigning misinformation police currently patrolling our society’s virtual and real worlds, a whole lot of people reacted swiftly and forcefully.

A tsunami-sized backlash against the AUP ensued in the conventional media, social media and elsewhere. This forced PayPal to backtrack big time.

Up until now the multinational technology company had been the world’s preeminent online payment system, ranking 143rd in revenue on the 2022 Fortune 500 list.

Originally founded in 1998 by Max Levchin, Peter Thiel and Luke Nosek as a company called Confinity, it went through a merger in 2000 with X.com, an online financial services company co-founded in 1999 by Elon Musk.

Musk directed X.com to focus its resources on the online payment business. Musk was subsequently replaced by Thiel as CEO of X.com, which was renamed PayPal, and ultimately went public in 2002. The former wholly owned subsidiary of eBay became an independent company again in 2015.

Like way too many other large tech enterprises, PayPal’s management ultimately swerved into speech regulating territory, banning in 2018 radio host Alex Jones, along with Jones’s website.

Three years later PayPal announced a plan to collaborate with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), as well as other nonprofits, to scrutinize users’ transactions for purported investigative purposes relating to extremism groups. The results were intended to be shared with law enforcement and other entities.

ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt indicated that a better understanding of how extremist groups use PayPal could potentially “help disrupt those activities.”

In September of 2022, PayPal closed the accounts of a British social commentator and two related groups, the Free Speech Union and The Daily Sceptic website.

The accounts were apparently terminated because of alleged misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine. A few days later, however, PayPal reversed its decision.

During the same month, the company threatened to withdraw its sponsorship of the Phoenix Suns, if the basketball team’s owner Robert Sarver failed to be removed from the franchise.

Sarver is presently under a one-year suspension from the Suns, following an internal investigation that found he allegedly used “hostile” words and slurs against women and minorities.

The company also recently banned Gays Against Groomers, a group composed of LGBT-identifying individuals. Simultaneously, PayPal’s subsidiary Venmo also blocked the organization.

Ian Miles Cheong, an independent journalist who reports on the promotion of transgenderism to minors, has also been banned.

After facing media scrutiny and a viral wave of criticism, including some chiding from its former president David Marcus and one of the company’s founders Musk, lo and behold, the company stretched credibility by claiming the change in policy had gone out to the public by mistake.

A PayPal spokesperson reportedly told the following to National Review:

“An AUP notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information. PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy. Our teams are working to correct our policy pages. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused.”

— Marcus had used his Twitter account to slam the original AUP policy change.

“It’s hard for me to openly criticize a company I used to love and gave so much to. But PayPal’s new AUP goes against everything I believe in,” PayPal’s former CEO tweeted. “A private company now gets to decide to take your money if you say something they disagree with. Insanity.”

— Musk tweeted a single word reply, “Agreed.”

— Another Twitter user, Andrea Stroppa, had shared an article on the policy change and added, “Worrying. That’s why we need the X platform more than ever.”

Musk responded with an emoji, “💯,” meaning total agreement. Stroppa appeared to be referring to a new platform that Musk recently said he wanted to create.

Professionals in tech and media know quite well, when dealing with Terms of Service, these kinds of changes are reviewed and signed off on by skilled executives and attorneys before they are implemented.

— Intrepid reporter and social media influencer Jack Posobiec didn’t mince words when he posted, “#BankruptPaypal no one is buying their walkback. We know what their plan is. They’re just mad they got caught.”

— “Well, well… looks like PayPal spread misinformation about itself,” Christina Pushaw, campaign spokeswoman for Gov. Ron DeSantis, tweeted. “Maybe they should pay a $2,500 fine to all of us?”

Other furious users had simply closed their accounts and taken to Twitter to share their thoughts.

— Commentator and impactful influencer Candace Owens had tweeted, “Just moved all money I had in my PayPal account out of it. And I very must suggest you do the same. This is serious… #PayPal is dead.”

— Sen. Tim Scott, R – S.C., had posted his desire to investigate the matter.

“Allowing private companies to become thought police would be egregious and illegal overreach,” Sen. Scott tweeted. “My office will be looking into the validity of PayPal’s new policy and taking any necessary action to stop this type of corporate activism.”

It remains to be seen the extent to which PayPal has damaged itself with the attempted curb on freedom of expression and the unconvincing withdrawal.

In any event, the PayPal saga serves as an object lesson for corporations still wishing to dabble in viewpoint discrimination.

A big warning sign now hangs at the entrance to the internet, which reads,

CAUTION: Censor at your own risk.

A California Nightmare: Late-term Abortions with No Limits

California is potentially poised to sink into an unimaginable bad dream.

It is one in which politicians and lawmakers are presently taking delight at the thought of voters signing on to a ballot proposition this November, which would amend the California Constitution so abortions would have absolutely no limitations.

Feelings on the part of a lot of average everyday Californians who are aware of what is being proposed are those of shock and revulsion. But there is also a high degree of fear that too many of their fellow residents aren’t sharing their same feelings.

California’s Proposition 1 seeks to permit the lives of babies in the womb to be terminated right up to the moment of birth.

Abortion procedures would be allowed to be conducted during any stage of pregnancy, regardless of whether or not a mother’s life was in danger. Furthermore, abortions would be able to be carried out on infants who, in other more welcoming circumstances, would be duly capable of surviving outside of the womb.

California Governor Gavin Newsom recently announced plans for a billboard campaign that is to be conducted in states where abortion is more restrictive.

Well, the billboard campaign appears to be moving ahead.

He reportedly plans to use a portion of his re-election campaign funds to buy billboard space in the states of Indiana, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas.

Some life-denying billboards display a pro-abortion invitation of sorts, accompanied by a Bible verse from Mark 12:31, which reads: “Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no greater commandment than these.”

The governor also took to Twitter to spread the unholy message, with several Republican governors being tagged, including Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine and Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves. His tweet read in part, “To any woman seeking an abortion in these anti-freedom states: CA will defend your right to make decisions about your health.”

Christians across the country who have been affected by the billboard messaging are understandably offended.

Thankfully, two prominent religious leaders have courageously entered the public square to help enlighten folks on issues relating to the matter.

John MacArthur, author, televangelist and pastor of a non-denominational Southern California mega-church, expressed concern over the governor’s soul and took him to task for “shamelessly” misquoting the Bible for political purposes.

The pastor pulled no punches in his open letter to the governor.

Utilizing passages from Scripture in his response, Pastor MacArthur noted that the governor had “…compounded the wickedness of that murderous campaign with a reprehensible act of gross blasphemy, quoting the very words of Jesus from Mark 12:31 as if you could somehow twist His meaning and arrogate His name in favor of butchering unborn infants.”

Pastor MacArthur’s letter additionally shed light on what he characterized as the “diabolical effect” of the governor’s policies that have tarnished the once-Golden State and contributed to “California’s epidemics of crime, homelessness, sexual perversions, and other malignant expressions of human misery that stem directly from corrupt public policy.”

The pastor concluded with assurances that prayers were forthcoming from “countless Christians nationwide.”

Another prominent California religious leader has also spoken out in defense of human life and against the life-destroying policies and politics that state leaders are pursuing.

San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone has been a consistent voice for the rights of the unborn. His Excellency recently spoke to the media and also penned a letter to the archdiocese, asking parishioners to vote “No” on Proposition 1.

In an interview, Archbishop Cordileone noted that the proposition, as written, “would seem to allow abortion in all nine months of pregnancy up to birth. But it ignores that once conception has taken place, reproduction has already happened.”

Under existing California law, there are no limitations on abortions performed during the first six months of pregnancy.

However, should Proposition 1 pass, the life-ending practice, currently permitted during the third trimester of pregnancy only if there is a threat to the life or health of the mother, would be expanded, thereby eliminating even the nominal safety provisions that are presently in place for pre-born babies who are in the womb for the full term.

With regard to the governor’s claim that he wants the state to be an “abortion sanctuary,” Archbishop Cordileone pointed out, “The irony is that a sanctuary is designed to protect life, whereas these measures harm it.”

His Excellency indicated that the anti-life policy being pushed by California “furthers the mentality that pregnancy is an inconvenience and that abortion is the only option a woman has.”

The archbishop further noted that the state appears to have an ample supply of taxpayer money to pay for abortions “but no money for crisis pregnancy centers, which can help a woman to have her child.”

Archbishop Cordileone asked those who are pushing abortion the following questions: “Why are you limiting a woman’s rights? If it is okay to have an abortion a day before a baby is born, why not the day after? Why not a month later, or six months or a year? Why can’t a young mother, after having a baby and raising that child for six months say, ‘I can’t do this. It is too hard,’ and be allowed to kill that child?”

“Laws need to be grounded in sound reasoning, that human life begins at conception and must be protected,” the archbishop explained.

Science has long settled the principle that at the moment of fertilization a new life is created, which has unique genetic attributes. Therefore, as the archbishop stated, “It can never be right to procure an abortion, just as it would never be right to kill a newborn baby.”

On a scriptural note, both Pastor MacArthur and Archbishop Cordileone reminded those who have ears to hear about a pagan entity from the Old Testament. Some of the ancient Israelites fell into the worship of false gods, which included sacrificing children to a pagan deity of a neighboring nation, Molech.

Pastor MacArthur invoked the Old Testament, writing that the governor had “used the name and the words of Christ to promote the credo of Molech (Leviticus 20:1–5).”

“It would be hard to imagine a greater sacrilege,” the pastor commented.

Archbishop Cordileone quoted Psalm 106: “They worshipped those nation’s false gods, till they found themselves entrapped, and sacrificed their own sons and their daughters to demons.”

His Excellency cited a passage from the Old Testament (Leviticus 18:21), “You shall not give any of your children to devote them by fire to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the LORD.”

Best to heed our religious leaders’ words. If we don’t, California’s bad dream will become America’s nightmare.