Humanity is Saving Life on Earth, Not Destroying It

by | Oct 23, 2019 |

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

October 2019 was yet another month in which the climate change debate was not merely expensive and misguided, but completely ridiculous. And in no jurisdiction was this more apparent than in Canada, which, to the dismay of many in oil-rich Alberta, hosted Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg. On Oct 2, Toronto, the country’s largest city, voted unanimously to declare a climate emergency “for the purpose of ‘naming, framing, and deepening’ Toronto’s commitment to protecting the city’s economy, ecosystem and residents from climate change,” according to CTV News.
Arguable more than in any other general election in Canadian history, climate change was a major issue in the vote that saw the ruling Liberals returned to power on Oct 21 despite coming in second place to the Conservatives in the popular vote. And, with the exception of the tiny People’s Party of Canada, all parties promoted the nonsensical idea that we are in the midst of a climate emergency. 
Consider for example, the Oct 7 leaders’ debate statement of Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party of Canada: 
“Greta Thunberg is right. The house is on fire. Grownups then stand up and say kids, get to safety, we’ve got this. We’ll take care of this for you.” 
And then later in the debate, May proclaimed: 
“We are in a climate emergency. We need grownups in the room to take responsibility!”
Happily, there were at least some Canadians acting like grownups during an otherwise bizarre October: climate and energy realists meeting at seminars held in Montreal (Oct 16) and Toronto (Oct 17).

Hosted by the Canadian Climate Realism Interest Group (CCRIG) an informal group of Canadians from various professions, including teaching, investing, engineering, government and business, the meetings were held at the prestigious Mount Royal Club in Montreal and the Shangri-La Hotel in Toronto. The presentation schedule may be seen here. In the leadup to the seminars, CCRIG gave their rationale for the seminars:  
“We are distressed that activists are using the global warming panic as justification for extraordinary levels of taxation that are burdening transportation, manufacturing and households with high prices, crippling our industries and pushing jobs offshore.”
CCRIG originator John Zacharias, a retired Toronto-based engineer, gave a more personal perspective:
“I experienced first-hand the devastating impact of misguided climate policies when unnecessary greenhouse gas regulations made our company’s operations untenable. One of my goals in organizing CCRIG was to publicize the actual state of the science underlying the climate scare and encourage a more balanced dialogue.”
The first presenter in Montreal, Alain Bonnier, Ph.D. Physics, INRS-Centre de Recherche en Énergie (1973), said, 
“Along with about 500 other scientists & professionals, I endorsed the European Climate Declaration, an open letter to the UN stating that ‘there is no climate emergency.’ We explained that the world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate. Since 30 years, climate models forecasts have systematically been wrong in overestimating global temperature and for this reason are not remotely plausible as policy tools. There is no cause for panic and alarm.”
Montreal seminar chairman Reynald Du Berger, ing. FIC, professeur titulaire de géophysique, retraité de l’Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, a European Climate Declaration ECO Ambassador for French-speaking Canada, explained, 
“I am most concerned by media propaganda and biased teaching of climate science in Canadian schools. If Greta Thunberg leads a #climatestrike in Alberta, I would like to ask her a basic question:

‘How do you explain the fact that the global average annual temperature has been stagnating over the last 20 years, despite the fact that more than 40% of all our CO2 emissions have been emitted during the same 20 years?’”

Professor Du Berger concluded, 
“How can people go out into the streets to demonstrate on a complex scientific subject of which they know almost nothing – scaring themselves and others with media headlines, not peer-reviewed materials? We must have open debate about this controversial field.”
The first speaker in Toronto, the junior author of the piece (Dr. Jay Lehr), demonstrated how the Medieval Warm Period, a time thought to be warmer than today, and the Little Ice Age were both featured prominently in a graph in the First Assessment Report of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 1990). “But this did not fit the global warming narrative,” explained Lehr. “So, it was replaced by the hopelessly flawed ‘hockey stick’ which showed relative stable temperatures for the first 900 years of the second millennium and then suddenly rising temperatures starting about 1900.” 
The hockey stick was invalidated in 2003 by two Canadian statisticians, Stephen McIntyre and Professor Ross McKitrick. Yet it, or other graphs like it, are often cited in support of the climate scare.
Lehr next illustrated the absurdity of climate alarmist claims about dangerously rising sea level, saying,
“NOAA’s tide gauge analyses show there has been no acceleration of the sea level’s normal rise of 7 inches per century for the past 800 years.”
Lehr concluded with a discussion of “Twelve climate variables which we do not properly understand.” He said,
“The climate scare is based solely on the forecasts of computer models that do not work. Indeed, they cannot work since we do not have a comprehensive theory of climate for the simple reason that we do not understand many of the basic natural factors driving climate change. Until we do, no one should take the output of these models seriously.”
After explaining that even, if we eliminated all cars, SUVs and pickup trucks in Canada, we would only get slightly over one third of the way to the existing 2030 emissions reduction target, economist and policy expert Robert Lyman, the second presenter at the Toronto event, summed up:
“Current Canadian climate policies are very damaging to the country and the efforts to attain either the 30% or 45% emission reduction targets will make matters much worse.
“We need a far more positive and democratic approach to energy and environmental policy. It should be premised on the view that energy services should be plentiful, reliable and inexpensive. Consumers and businesses should be able to choose, based on competitive markets and available technology, which energy sources to produce and use. The over-reaching policy paradigm should emphasize democratic decision-making within a multi-goal, pluralist framework, an emphasis on balancing costs and benefits, and a preference for the use of cost-effective policy instruments.”
James Taylor, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center at the Arlington, Illinois-based Heartland Institute next gave a rousing presentation in which he showed that the most accurate land-based temperature record in the United States (the Climate Reference Network stations) showed no warming since at least 2005 (see below figure used by Taylor). 

Taylor next demonstrated how wrong the temperature and food security forecasts of the UN IPCC have been. Citing the UN IPCC Climate Change and Land, report (Aug 2019) that stated that food security has been adversely impacted by climate change, Taylor explained the huge increase across the world in crop production, showing a slide with the following quote:
UN FAO Food Outlook, May 2019 – “world cereal output is forecast to reach a new record level of 2,722 million tonnes (including rice in milled equivalent), that is 71 million tonnes higher than in 2018.”
“We need to base policy on real-world observations of the climate system,” said Taylor. “And those observations tell us that, whether we are examining temperature, extreme weather (droughts, tornadoes and hurricanes, etc.), Great Lakes water levels or any of the parameters often cited by alarmists as a harbingers of climate disaster, there is nothing extraordinary going on.”
Tom Harris, the senior author of this article, demonstrated why wind and solar power have not lived up to the promises of advocates. He said:
“Wind and solar power have applications in remote locations off the grid and for consumers who are prepared to pay a very high price for their power. But for the rest of us, these are hopelessly impractical energy sources.”
Harris showed the below bar chart and explained:
“Anyone who thinks new wind and solar resources are competitive with existing coal, natural gas, and nuclear does not know what they are talking about. The average Levelized Costs of Electricity (LCOEs) from these existing conventional energy sources are less than half the cost of new solar and wind resources when you do not include subsidies to renewables but do include the costs of back-up power that intermittent wind and solar necessitate.”

Source: “The Levelized Cost of Electricity from Existing Generation Resources,” June 2019, Institute for Energy Research and Amercaspower.org (not included are the huge costs for transmission for wind and solar)
Both Montreal and Toronto seminars wrapped up with a stunning presentation from Dr. Patrick Moore, a founding member of Greenpeace, who showed that there are now 400% more polar bears than in 1973. With the slide below on the screen, he concluded,
“While there is no proof that carbon dioxide (CO2) is causing recent warming, it is certain that increased CO2 is greening the Earth. If humans had not begun to unlock some of the carbon stored as fossil fuels, all of which had been in the atmosphere as CO2 before sequestration by plants and animals, life on Earth would have soon been starved of this essential nutrient and would begin to die. No other species could have accomplished the task of putting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere that was taken out and locked in the Earth’s crust by plants and animals over the millennia. We should celebrate our CO2 emissions, not demonize them!”

 

Moore said, “I can tell you one thing about the people who are presenting to you today. We are honest. We are not liars. But there are a lot of liars on the other side. They are the real deniers, the ones who deny this history and this truth.”
Videos of all presentations will be uploaded to the website of the International Climate Science Coalition shortly. 
Image Credit: NASA/Nick Hague

Avatar

Dr. Jay Lehr is a Senior Policy Analyst with the International Climate Science Coalition and former Science Director of The Heartland Institute. He is an internationally renowned scientist, author, and speaker who has testified before Congress on dozens of occasions on environmental issues and consulted with nearly every agency of the national government and many foreign countries. After graduating from Princeton University at the age of 20 with a degree in Geological Engineering, he received the nation’s first Ph.D. in Groundwater Hydrology from the University of Arizona. He later became executive director of the National Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers.

Tom Harris is Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition, and a policy advisor to The Heartland Institute. He has 40 years experience as a mechanical engineer/project manager, science and technology communications professional, technical trainer, and S&T advisor to a former Opposition Senior Environment Critic in Canada’s Parliament.

Use the code ‘OUTLOUD’ and save 15%
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dave James
Dave James
2 years ago

Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris assert that human-caused climate change is “..not merely expensive and misguided, but completely ridiculous…” Their assertion is not supported by the scientific evidence. https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/energy/Climate-change/pdf/CCCR-Chapter2-UnderstandingObservedGlobalClimateChange.pdf
Strangely, Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr complain about the Liberals winning the election despite recieving fewer votes than the Conservatives while they acknowledge in their next sentance that the Conservative, Liberals, and all the political parties who won seats in Parliment accept the scientific evidence of human-cause climate change.
None of the speakers at Mr. Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s seminar have ever studied climate science or related fields, conducted research in climate science or related fields, or published a paper on climate science or related fields including Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris.
Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris are associates of the conservative American group the Heartland Institute. Heartland’s history of pushing psdeo-scientific mumbo-jumbo goes back a long way. In the 1990s, the Heartland Institute worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question the science linking second-hand smoke to health risks, and lobbied against government public health reforms.
Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr reject the scientific evidence of human-cause climate change and embrace false and unsupported conspiracy theories. For example: https://americaoutloud.com/the-obvious-chinese-collusion-in-the-climate-change-delusion/ They assert “The primary motive behind the global warming movement is political ideology” and to the socialist leaders of the global warming movement “…capitalism and free markets are evil. Personal freedom and democracy are evil. As the United States represents the primary embodiment of these attributes, America is in their eyes an evil empire that needs to be destroyed.” https://americaoutloud.com/global-warming-aka-climate-change-has-nothing-to-do-with-saving-the-planet/#comment-755

Tom Harris
2 years ago

As he does often, Dave James makes a straw man argument when he says we “complain about the Liberals winning the election.” We did no such thing. ICSC is non-partisan.
This Disqus profile – https://disqus.com/by/disqus_JzQ88MTX2I/following/ – shows that since March 31, 2016, Mr. James has made 3,740 comments. Here is a sample of some of his many, many posts apparently trying to discredit my writings in online article comment sections: https://www.google.ca/search?site=&source=hp&q=%22Tom+Harris%22+%22Dave+James%22&gws_rd=cr&ei=nyGDWefuDavcjwSb-oK4DA . I already explained to Mr. James that many of his points are either wrong or misleading . I will not waste any more time explaining this to him, unless other people bring up the same or similar questions.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Tom Harris
2 years ago

Tom Harris writes that he and Dr. Jay Lehr did not complain about the Liberals winning the election despite receiving fewer votes than the Conservatives, however, in this opinion piece they wrote, “Arguable more than in any other general election in Canadian history, climate change was a major issue in the vote that saw the ruling Liberals returned to power on Oct 21 despite coming in second place to the Conservatives in the popular vote.”
Mr. Harris blames me for his credibility. Mr. Harris is mistaken. It is not my words which impact Mr. Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s credibility but the words they write. Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris have a long history of writing false and misleading opinion pieces on climate science, for example: https://www.westernjournal.com/media-hysteria-climate-change-heat-records-huge-data-manipulation/ Mr. Harris decision not defend his opinion piece with anything more than vague assertions is telling. Mr. Harris knows that open and honest debate can only damage his and Dr. Lehr’s agenda.
Mr. Harris’ claims to be non-partisan. His past opinion pieces don’t supported his claim. Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris recently claimed that GOP leaders should decide their position on climate change based on “political strategy” rather than scientific evidence. They castigated Republicans like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Trump appointee Neil Chatterjee, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for accepting the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change. Dr. Lehr & Mr. Harris asserts these Republicans are “…abandoning their base and supporting the climate scare is terrible political strategy for Republicans…” https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/conservatives-must-stand-up-to-climate-change-bullying/

Tom Harris
Reply to  Dave James
2 years ago

I sopped reading after para 1 of Dave James’s posting since he proves my point with his recitation of our quote.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Tom Harris
2 years ago

Quoting Mr. Tom Harris and Dr. Jay Lehr directly and providing the sources so they can be read in context is the sign of a polite, cogent, and well-supported argument. Refusing to discuss your opinion piece is the sign of a weak argument.
Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris are not the greatest advocates of open and honest debate. Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr praised Agriculture Secretary, Sonny Perdue for the government refusing publicize dozens of government-funded studies that carry warnings about the effects of climate change. According to Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris, “Happily, President Trump remembers his high school science well enough to recognize that this is nonsense and, accordingly, he has stopped the publishing of the agriculture department’s press releases of fraudulent science.” (Source “Agriculture Secretary Perdue Right to Put the Lid on Alarmist Announcements” By Dr. Jay Lehr & Tom Harris, July 30th, 2019, America Out Loud)

Dave James
Dave James
2 years ago

In the comment section, Mr. Harris claims to be “non-partisan” however, during the 2016 election Mr. Harris wrote op-eds demanding GOP leaders follow Donald Trump. According to Mr. Harris, “GOP candidates must follow Trump’s lead (on climate change)…” because of “Trump’s assertive approach to climate change…” (Source “GOP Must Follow Trump’s Lead on Climate Change” by Tom Harris, Sep 5, 2016, Epoch Times)
Mr. Harris also has argued that America should abrogated international treaties on climate change because: “Trump needs to Democrat-proof his agenda…” and “Actions that significantly reduce CO2 emissions would entail dramatically cutting back on the use of coal…”(Source “Killing the Paris Agreement is Not Enough” by Tom Harris, May 5, 2017, The Daily Caller)

Tom Harris
Reply to  Dave James
2 years ago

Encouraging Republicans to follow Trump on climate change is no more partisan than if I encouraged Dems or Martians to follow Trump on CC. It is the issue that counts, not who promotes it.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Tom Harris
2 years ago

Demanding the GOP follow Donald Trump during the 2016 American Presidential election is clearly partisanship. There is no context in which arguing, “Trump needs to Democrat-proof his agenda…” is not a partisan plea. Your opinion piece show who you are and its not non-partisan.

Tom Harris
Reply to  Dave James
2 years ago

You had to look pretty hard for the evidence for that comment when your other arguments fell apart.
Well, at least you must consider our writing significant enough to spend so much time researching and attacking. Good.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Tom Harris
2 years ago

Mr. Tom Harris is again mistaken. In the marketplace of ideas false, weak, and unsupported arguments can only succeed if they go unchallenged. I am not alone in finding fault with Mr. Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s opinion pieces. For Example: Western Journal op-ed deceives readers with completely unsupported claims: Analysis of “Media Hysteria: Climate Change ‘Heat Records’ Are a Huge Data Manipulation” Published in The Western Journal, by Jay Lehr & Tom Harris, 26 Feb 2019 | Editor: Scott Johnson, Climate Feedback.
Quoting Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris and providing the sources so their words can be read in context is not an attack but polite, cogent and well-supported argument. Not only have my arguments not fallen apart, Mr. Harris initially refused to discuss my criticisms and then claimed to have only part of my posts. Avoiding open and honest discussion is not the sign a strong opinion piece.
It is not difficult to rebut Mr. Harris assertion that he is non-partisan. Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris don’t even attempt to hide their political partisan agenda. For example: In an opinion piece printed by America Outloud, on October 15th, 2019, titled “Global Warming, aka Climate Change, has Nothing to do with ‘Saving the Planet’,” Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris claim that GOP leaders should decide their position on climate change based on “political strategy” rather than scientific evidence.
They castigated Republicans like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Trump appointee Neil Chatterjee, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for accepting the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change. Dr. Lehr & Mr. Harris asserts these Republicans are “…abandoning their base and supporting the climate scare is terrible political strategy for Republicans…”
Anyone can read all of Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris opinion pieces published on America Outloud by clicking on the names under the title of this opinion piece.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Dave James
2 years ago

I made a mistake. Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris partisan statements that GOP leaders should decide their position on climate change based on “political strategy” rather than scientific evidence was not in American Outloud but in an opinion piece titled “Conservatives Must Stand Up to Climate Change Bullying” BY TOM HARRIS AND DR. JAY LEHR, MAY 9, 2019. PJ Media.

Tom Harris
2 years ago

Great to see the amount of time Dave James is putting into trying to rebut us. We only get flak when we are over the target.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Tom Harris
2 years ago

Mr. Tom Harris is mistaken. It does not take much time to recognize the flaws in Mr. Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s opinion piece. Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr are not above criticism.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is for educational, general information, and entertainment purposes only and is never intended to constitute medical or legal advice or to replace the personalized care of a primary care practitioner or legal expert.

While we endeavor to keep this information up to date and correct, the information provided by America Out Loud, its website(s), and any properties (including its radio shows and podcasts) makes no representations, or warranties of any kind, expressed, or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability with respect to its website(s) or the information, products, services or related graphics and images contained on the website(s) for any purpose.

The opinions expressed on the website(s), and the opinions expressed on the radio shows and podcasts, are the opinions of the show hosts and do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or policies of anyone or any entity we may endorse. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

At no time, nor in any event, will we be liable for any loss, or damage, including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss of data or profits arising out of, in an association of, or connection with the use of this website.

Through this website, users can link to other websites that may be listed. Those websites are not under the control of America Out Loud or its brands. We have no control over the nature, content, or availability of those sites. America Out Loud has no control over what the sites do with the information they collect. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation, nor does it endorse the views expressed with or by them.

Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, America Out Loud takes no responsibility for, nor are we, and will not be liable for being temporarily unavailable due to technical difficulties beyond our control. America Out Loud does not sell, trade, nor market email addresses or other personal data.

Take a Look at the Positive Side of Anarchy

Take a Look at the Positive Side of Anarchy

The only way to achieve liberty and peace is to restore law and order. And the only way to restore law and order is to literally crush the forces of evil. When that begins to happen, we do actually see the positive side of tyranny and anarchy. Conflict is a bedfellow of oppression. Therefore we must end the conflict and, in doing so, end the tyranny. Here’s the positive side of this war…

It’s a LONG-HAUL with COVID-19

It’s a LONG-HAUL with COVID-19

The context is that about 50% of those hospitalized with COVID-19 develop post-COVID symptoms. Severe outpatients also are affected. Characteristic symptoms include headache, hearing loss, tinnitus, loss of olfactory function, sleep disturbance, muscle aches, weakness, fatigue, and chest or abdominal pain…

Be the One.

Be the One.

Be the one — no longer willing to huddle together in the helpless band — the one who dares to join the fight. Another will follow you and then another, and in a flash of time, that bleeding hulk of our nation — once the great light of liberty to the world, now barely flickering — will rise again to throw off the wolves like it has done before, sending them scurrying for safety…

Major Medical Mystery: Why Some People Despite Exposure Don’t Get COVID

Major Medical Mystery: Why Some People Despite Exposure Don’t Get COVID

A small fraction of Americans have escaped COVID infection. CDC uses a figure of 60% for those infected, while the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington says that 76% have been infected. The remainder may have escaped exposure or been exposed but escaped infection. The latter people are the subject of the medical mystery…

Correcting America’s Course Back to the Constitutional Rule of Law

Correcting America’s Course Back to the Constitutional Rule of Law

The US Constitution must scrupulously be followed, especially by the judiciary. It is not for judges to make laws; it is for them to observe and rule on the constitutionality of issues before them. Their oaths, taken upon their confirmations, should include the understanding that their failures to follow judicial protocols would end in their termination…

Does Joe Biden Aspire to be America’s Last President?

Does Joe Biden Aspire to be America’s Last President?

Most ominously, no American administration has ever seemed so entirely unconcerned about hemorrhaging political capital. And that lack of concern about voters’ approval can only mean that this administration no longer believes it relies on political capital (the consent of the governed) for power. We can only assume that this Marxist-aligned administration intends to authorize itself with whatever power it requires to achieve its ends…

Criminal Intimidation Led By Schumer and Pelosi are America’s Domestic Terrorists

Criminal Intimidation Led By Schumer and Pelosi are America’s Domestic Terrorists

The SCOTUS leak was explicitly designed to tip the balance back to Progressivisms demands and rally the Democrat base to intimidate conservatives, political and business leaders by threats of violence because the country is in a Biden mess, one he created in January 2021 to reflect his party’s image as one that clings to the failed philosophy of Marx and Engles…

Pennsylvania Races Plunge to Swampy Politics 

Pennsylvania Races Plunge to Swampy Politics 

The establishment has money and counts itself as power brokers. They love the status quo, the “don’t rock the boat” mentality. They pronounce, “This is our guy!” and expect the masses to get in line. However, many are standing up and deciding to vote conscience over party or affiliation – regardless. But aren’t those the same “stand up” attitude and actions that formed this great nation?

The Ignorance of Politicians Wishing for a Non-Carbon Future is Insane

The Ignorance of Politicians Wishing for a Non-Carbon Future is Insane

Congressman Don Beyer (D-VA) seems unaware that in a “non-carbon future,” everything would be dead since carbon is the primary building block of life. Undeterred, the AP release from Beyer’s office claimed: “Warmer temperatures are lowering workers’ incomes, and the increased severity and frequency of natural disasters is lowering overall economic growth…The cost of inaction will be catastrophic.”

America Out Loud 6 years

Celebrating 6 incredible years fighting to restore liberty and justice to our beloved America.

Your Source for Free Speech, Talk Radio, Podcasts, and News.

 

Here we take on the challenges of our generation so that we can preserve future generations. Please consider making a contribution in the fight for liberty!

iHeartRadio

The APPS are free; the mission is priceless!

Free APP
Healthycell

Podcast Networks

Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Tunein
iHeart
Stitcher

Subscribe and Listen on Your Favorite APP

Our Columnists and Show Hosts

Truth For Health

Apple Podcasts

COVID Solution Summit

Apple Podcasts

Evacuating Americans & fully-vetted Afghan's at Risk - Help Us!

Apple Podcasts

Empowering and mentoring conservative trailblazers from Generation Z to win!

Apple Podcasts

Turning Point Action is Recruiting Precinct Chairs - Become a Grassroots Warrior Today!

Apple Podcasts

URGENT - KEEP NINE
Please join us to protect the Supreme Court:
Sign the Petition!

Apple Podcasts

The LATINO USA EXIT from the Democrat Party, click for details...

Apple Podcasts

Fighting corporate censorship and ensuring voter integrity...

Apple Podcasts

Support wounded and fallen police officers. The Wounded Blue.

Wounded Blue
Share via
Copy link