For the past thirty years or so the left has invented a narrative that there are two Americas. A group of very super-rich people (the one percenters) who have prospered over the past several decades, and everyone else who has gotten poorer. It’s a fairy tale narrative because almost all Americans have seen financial progress. The median household income adjusted for inflation rose by more than 40% since 1984.
Prosperity isn’t an “us versus them” zero-sum game. A rising tide really does lift all boats.
But there really are Two Americas today. First, there are the cultural and over-educated snobs – the kind of people who religiously read the New York Times, drive EVs, wear Harvard or Yale sweaters, and have never even heard of NASCAR or eaten at Popeyes or ridden a John Deere tractor.
And then there is normal main street America. The snobs thumb their collective noses at the unrefined working-class Americans. The elites believe they are intellectually, culturally, and morally superior to the working class and rural America. You won’t see too many elites at a Trump rally with 30,000 people.
A group I helped found, the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, just published a study entitled “Them Vs. U.S.” examining how America’s cultural elites (defined as at least one postgraduate degree, $150,000+ annual income, high-density urban residence, and attended an Ivy League school) are hopelessly out of touch with ordinary Americans. Pollster Scott Rasmussen did the research.
Here are some of the key jaw-dropping revelations from the survey:
Financial Well-being: Nearly three-quarters of the elites surveyed, believe they are better off now financially than they were when Joe Biden entered the White House. Less than 20% of ordinary Americans feel the same way.
Individual Freedom: Elites are three times more likely than all Americans to say there is too much individual freedom in the country. Astonishingly, almost half of the elites and almost six-of-ten ivy leaguers say there is too much freedom.
Climate Change: An astonishing 72% of the Elites – including 81% of the Elites who graduated from the top universities – favor banning gas cars. And majorities of elites would ban gas stoves, non-essential air travel, SUVs, and private air conditioning. That means no air travel with the kids to Disney World.
Education: Most elites think that teachers unions and school administrators should control the agenda of schools. Most mainstream Americans think that parents should make these decisions.
Oh, and about three-quarters of these cultural elites are Biden supporters. Surprised?
The Grand Canyon-sized divide between the elites in America and ordinary Americans is so profound that it is as if they live in two different countries. Silicon Valley, Manhattan, and Washington, D.C. have become bubbles that have lost contact with everyday Americans. This explains why the political class – which is a big part of the elite group – is confused by poll numbers showing that voters are feeling financially stressed out. The elites are doing fine, so they believe that everyone is prospering. I suspect that most don’t want radical change in the public schools because their kids attend blue-chip private schools. They are fine with abolishing SUVs because in big cities Americans generally don’t drive those cars – if they drive cars at all.
Crime, illegal immigration, inflation, fentanyl, and factory closings aren’t keeping the elite up at night because in their cocoons they don’t encounter these problems on a daily basis the way so many Americans do today. Not too many main street Americans are losing sleep about climate change or LGBTQ issues.
The elites in America tend to work in the “talking professions” – university professors, journalists, lawyers, actors, and lobbyists. They keep talking and normal Americans are more than ever not listening to them.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, co-founder of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, and chief economist with FreedomWorks.
The Iranian mullahs must be thrilled at the progress they are making on obtaining nuclear capability. It represents the realization of their millennia-old ambition to turn the world into an Islamic caliphate. The world should be thoroughly alarmed.
The West seemingly insists on not paying much attention, but observant Muslims, which is most of them, make no bones about it. It is a tenet of the faith that eventually all non-Muslims will convert, die, or live in subjugation to Muslims. It is the duty of all faithful Muslims to devote their life to jihad, i.e. striving to bring about that day when sharia law rules the world.
Islam’s lack of success so far is mostly because they lack the infrastructure necessary to support such a sustained, massive effort. Like the Soviet communists, their ideology creates the economic conditions which make it difficult to advance their cause. The mullahs blame us, chanting “Death to America” and meaning it.
Until now, nations that have attained nuclear capability, starting with the United States, have at least to some degree recognized the awesome responsibility of having weapons so massively destructive that their deployment could set off a conflagration ending civilization as we know it. The greatest threat ever may be that fanatical Muslims, who have no respect for human life or even their own people, and who despise the values of Western civilization, will obtain nuclear capability.
So, faced with such obvious mortal danger, America’s leaders are doing everything they can to prevent Iran from getting the bomb, right? Almost unbelievably, President Biden is still working to relax enforcement of sanctions and to provide enabling funds to Iran.
This glaring error goes back to 2015 and Barack Obama’s belief that a policy of appeasement, rather than confrontation, was the best way to make an ally of the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. For Obama and his advisors, negotiating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the “nuclear deal”) was also the way to right our past injustices to Iran.
“I do think you have to have the capacity to put yourself occasionally in their shoes,” Obama said, always willing to stick up for Muslims while deeming America just another nation with nothing especially remarkable about it.
Obama’s plan to produce an equilibrium of forces and thus stability in the Middle East by increasing Iran’s access to resources and its standing in the Middle East was an unqualified failure. Lifting sanctions, terminating Justice Department operations against Iran, and requiring the Defense Department to work cooperatively with a sworn enemy craving nuclear capability predictably produced the opposite – more terrorism, more nuclear development, and more hostility to the U.S.
Still, the American Left offered yet more support for Iran despite the fact that under the nuclear deal we moved ever closer to facing a belligerent, nuclear armed, and irrational enemy. Reversing Trump was all that mattered.
In 2022, Iran faced severe internal disruption due to its brutal treatment of women under sharia law. But instead of supporting the uprising or even letting it play out, the White House offered sanctions relief to prop up Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and slipped a note to Iran’s government to assure them we still supported the nuclear deal.
In 2023, the Obama/Biden team stubbornly continued to do about everything possible to subsidize Iran’s nuclear ambitions including:
releasing $20 billion from the International Monetary Fund.
using a sanctions waiver to allow Iran to move $10 billion out of Iraq.
ending sanctions on oil sales which produce $30 million of annual revenue for Iran.
releasing $6 billion in oil revenue from South Korea.
Even the October 7 massacre and over 100 continued attacks on American military installations didn’t stop Biden from allowing the UN missile embargo on Iran to expire. Plus, just to show there were no hard feelings apparently about attacking our ships in the Red Sea, we granted a waiver to allow Iran to access $10 billion more from Iraq.
Why do our leaders insist on enabling Iran’s nuclear dreams and subsidizing terror? Do they honestly believe we can achieve peace through weakness?
This isn’t partisan bickering. Our bumbler-in-chief has put America in a very dangerous position.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
With the New Year upon us, the freedom to freelance will surely be under attack in 2024 just as it has been throughout the Biden reign on a variety of fronts—be it the impending regulatory restrictions soon to be imposed by the U.S. Department of Labor, or prospective bills seeking to limit independent contracting in states like Minnesota and Michigan.
Meanwhile, the ongoing destruction of the independent workforce in California is still unfolding in real-time, thanks to the disastrous AB5 law enacted in 2020, a law so restrictive that it has put hundreds of thousands of Californians out of business across a vast swath of professions.
Proponents of these onerous labor laws have seized on a new tactic to hijack the “flexibility” argument from those of us who advocate for self-employment. They assume that flexibility is our sole reason for desiring freelance careers—whether it’s a single mom needing to stay at home with the kids, or a person with a chronic illness unable to participate in the traditional workplace, to name a few.
While flexibility is just one factor that makes independent contracting appealing, it’s not the “be-all-end-all” for why millions of Americans choose to be in business for themselves. The anti-freelancer forces cite current work trends that began during the pandemic when employees discovered the convenience of at-home work arrangements, equating this to flexibility. But these remote-work arrangements are not the same as being your own boss. Not by a long shot.
For freelance journalist JoBeth McDaniel, the ability to pick and choose clients is imperative, along with being able to charge top rates per project. Also important: not having to be beholden to a single employer or difficult boss.
“I choose self-employment in part due to harassment I endured as a low-level employee in my 20s,” said Daniel. “When you’re a small business, it’s a simple matter to replace one bad client with nine or more others wanting to work with you.”
Another benefit of being your own boss is the opportunity to avoid workplace discrimination, particularly for seniors like audio-visual tech Roger Zeilinski, who lost his career in California due to AB5. “No one wants to hire a senior like me as a full- or part-timer because of the added costs for healthcare, liability, and workers’ comp,” he said.
With ageism rampant in corporate America, professionals in their 50s, 60s, and 70s like Roger find themselves completely shut out of the job market in favor of younger workers. With self-employment, however, age is often not a factor. Certified Medical Transcriptionist Debbie Gosselin lets her work speak for itself: “In most instances,” she said, “my clients don’t even know my age because is irrelevant.”
For writers, journalists, cartoonists, and graphic designers, independent contracting allows an individual to retain intellectual property rights. Freelance writer/photographer Kristina Anderson posed this scenario: “Imagine a newspaper columnist wanting to compile her columns into a published book, or a still photographer who desires to sell their images to another outlet. If I were an employee, those options are off the table, as the copyright belongs to the publisher and not the original creator.”
For those who file Schedule C on their federal tax returns, deducting expenses is crucial, especially if expensive equipment is required in a particular field such as independent filmmaking. Prior to AB5, film producer Dan Cheatham could write off his office costs, vehicle usage, fuel, software, hardware, equipment, healthcare, and self-advertising. “AB5 is poison for the self-employed in California unless we are willing to just volunteer our services and turn this into art for art’s sake,” he said.
Finally, the opportunity to hone one’s craft is inherent in the freedom to freelance. Whether it’s a videographer working with different clients in different settings, a writer growing their skill sets to include photography and web design, or a wedding vendor expanding her offerings, the chance to try on different hats is one of many essential attributes of being self-employed.
According to Gail Gordon, executive director of Numi Opera in Los Angeles, an aspiring opera singer can perform as a freelancer in a mid-tier opera company in hopes of someday joining a major opera house. “Freelancing opens up new horizons and new career opportunities for up-and-coming artists,” she said. “Laws like AB5 take that all away.”
This New Year, the opportunity to freelance will be more essential than ever, be it a full-time career or a side hustle to supplement one’s income. Here’s to hoping the Biden administration will cease and desist its continued assault on legitimate, thriving independent contractors just to appease the selfish wish list of organized labor.
Karen Anderson is a contributor to the Daily Caller News Foundation, a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Forum (iwf.org), and the founder of Freelancers Against AB5.
As Christmas approaches, Americans are making a list and checking it twice — not to determine who’s been naughty or nice, but to determine what they can afford this Christmas. For all too many of them, the answer is, not much, and certainly not as much as before Joe Biden became president.
That creates a political problem for the president, because even as he’s spent the better part of the past six months touting the benefits of “Bidenomics” (suggesting the word connotes a rising standard of living for the majority), the American people have come to a different far different conclusion. For them, “Bidenomics” means, “I can’t afford it.”
A recent Bloomberg News analysis shows why: A basket of goods for the average family that cost $100 before the COVID-19 emergency costs $119.27 today. “Since early 2020,” says the piece, “prices have risen about as much as they had in the full 10 years preceding the health emergency.”
Electricity is up 25% since January 2020, and groceries the same. A pound of ground beef is up from $3.29 to $5.23; two pounds of chicken breast have risen from $6.12 to $8.44; and coffee has gone from $4.17 to $6.18.
You won’t save any money going out to eat — restaurant food is up 24%.
And getting there isn’t any less expensive, either. After peaking around $5 per gallon last year, gasoline has dropped somewhat, but gasoline prices today are still 60% higher than they were on the day Joe Biden took office.
Because of Biden’s bad energy policies (read: shutting down pipelines; stricter EV regulations; no leases for drilling; and new taxes on coal, oil, and natural gas, among others), energy prices have gone up overall by 30% in less than three years — electricity is up 25%, propane gas is up 23%, natural gas is up 25%, and diesel fuel is up 47%.
Housing, too, is far more expensive, and nearing unaffordable. In January 2021, the monthly mortgage payment on a median-priced home was $989. Today, that number has more than doubled, to $2,041. Mortgage rates have more than doubled since Biden took office, pricing many families out of the market – and forcing sellers to pull back and sit on properties they’d prefer to sell, but cannot.
Not surprisingly, American families have turned to their credit cards just to make ends meet. The result: Americans now hold more than $1 trillion in credit card debt. That’s a record high.
It’s no wonder Biden’s approval ratings, and, specifically, his approval rating on his handling of the economy, are down. In this recent survey, he’s at 40% approve, 49% disapprove on his overall job rating, and 36% approve, 61% disapprove on his handling of the economy. A full 76 percent said the economy was either “not so good” or “poor” when asked to rate economic conditions right now. Just 26% of the survey respondents said Biden’s economic policies had helped the economy “a lot” or “somewhat,” while 48 percent said his policies had hurt the economy “somewhat” or “a lot.”
And in this poll’s version of the killer question Ronald Reagan posed in his one debate with Jimmy Carter in October of 1980 – “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” – just 4% say they are “much better off” and 10 percent say they are “somewhat better off” when asked how they have fared since Joe Biden became president.
Policies have consequences, and Americans are suffering under the real-world consequences of Joe Biden’s policies.
It’s bad enough that Americans have to suffer under the consequences of Biden’s bad policies. What makes it worse is that Biden and his administration are doubling down on their bad policies. They refuse to learn from the real-world experience of seeing the results of their policies; instead, they continue to act as if those consequences are not visible to anyone, let alone everyone.
Biden and his Democrat allies know they want more government spending, more government programs, more government regulation, more government power and control over our lives.
Meanwhile, Rudolph goes hungry, because Santa can’t afford to feed his reindeer.
This week, national Republican and Democrat candidates for President of the United States met the filing deadline to appear on a March 19th election ballot in the Grand Canyon State. Nine Republicans and seven Democrats will be on the ballot for voters of their respective parties to choose from.
The 45th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, headlines the Republican side, which also includes fellow challengers Ron DeSantis (Governor of Florida), Nikki Haley (former Ambassador to the United Nations), Chris Christie (former Governor of New Jersey), and Vivek Ramaswamy (Entrepreneur).
President Joe Biden, the 46th American Commander in Chief, overshadows the field for his Democrat Party.
A fair number of candidates with significant name ID remain on the Republican side in addition to the former president, but the choices for Republicans will likely be whittled down to two candidates by the time March 19th rolls around – thanks to several primaries in states around the country before Arizona’s contest. In 2016, the last time the state hosted a competitive Republican preference election, Trump and U.S. Senator Ted Cruz were essentially the last two candidates standing in Arizona, even though more names were on the ballot.
Though there are more than three months remaining until the Arizona Presidential Preference Election, former President Trump appears to have a commanding lead over any of his Republican competitors. According to a November poll of the primary field by Noble Predictive Insights, Trump’s numbers in the November survey grew to 53% of the Republican electorate (up from 50% in July), while Governor Ron DeSantis lost three points (19% from 16%). Ambassador Nikki Haley doubled her standing from the July report, acquiring eight percent of the Arizona GOP field (from four percent in July). Vivek Ramaswamy remained at nine percent.
A recent AZ Free News voter poll conducted by Data Orbital also revelead that nearly 4.5 percent more of Arizona voters prefer former President Donald Trump over current President Joe Biden
The primaries and causes will soon start when the calendar turns to 2024, and candidates look to shore up the requisite number of delegates to win their party’s nomination. On Monday, January 15, Iowans will caucus to kick off the election schedule. New Hampshire will then follow on Tuesday, January 23. There will be 14 states holding primary elections on ‘Super Tuesday,’ March 5.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
