Tag Archives: free state patriot

Mark Caserta: America is Starving for Leadership

28 Sep

America is starving for something that should never have become unusual: leaders willing to pray, think clearly, exercise common sense and remember exactly whom they were elected to represent.

We don’t elect leaders to represent a political party or an ideology!

They are elected to represent “We the People”.

Yet increasingly, Americans are watching elected officials approach some of the most serious issues facing our country as though the first question is not, “What is right for my constituents?” but rather, “Which side is the other party on?” or “Is this a Donald Trump policy?”

That is not leadership. It’s gut-wrenching politics and sadly, the reason many people refuse to vote.

 I’ve come to believe that some political figures have become selfishly satisfied that more Americans don’t exercise their right to vote for fear if they did, they would be fired!

 Americans deserve better.  The problem, however, seems to be the same ineffective politicians keep getting elected and feel absolutely no indebtedness or responsibility to their constituency!

Since Donald Trump returned to the White House, virtually every major issue—from immigration and crime to drug trafficking, parental rights and enforcement of federal immigration law—has once again become part of an intense partisan struggle, with the American people suffering the consequences.

Consider what is happening at sea.

The Trump administration has used military force against vessels it says are connected to drug-trafficking organizations that it has designated as terrorist groups. Some Democratic lawmakers, human-rights organizations and a couple Republicans have challenged the legality of those strikes and questioned whether the administration has sufficiently demonstrated that every targeted vessel warranted lethal military force. The administration argues that drug cartels represent a grave national-security threat.

That is a legitimate debate for Congress to have. But Americans also have every right to ask their representatives a fundamental question of “what’s in their best interest?”  Each of us has, no doubt, lost a family member or friend to drugs and it’s gotten increasingly worse due to feckless politicians lacking leadership in addressing the issue.  All the while our people are dying.

This administration, while not without fault, has actually worked to prevent deadly narcotics and violent criminal organizations from harming American families?  Yet, every step President Trump takes to protect Americans is automatically deemed dangerous by the left, regardless of its effectiveness. 

Are these representatives representing their constituents or their party?  It seems, at times, that a vote is worth more than a human life.

We certainly see this in the illegal immigration debate.  While the Trump administration has done what no other president has been willing to do in securing our borders, liberal Democrats seem to choose a vote over a life.

The names Laken Riley, Rachel Morin and Jocelyn Nungaray have been reduced to political talking points. They were beautiful human beings wonderfully created in God’s Image and deserve better.

Laken Riley was murdered in Georgia by Jose Ibarra, a Venezuelan national who had entered the United States illegally; he was convicted and sentenced to life without parole. Rachel Morin, a Maryland mother of five, was raped and murdered by Victor Martinez-Hernandez, who had unlawfully entered the United States multiple times; he was convicted in 2025. Two Venezuelan nationals who had entered the country illegally were charged in the killing of 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray in Houston.

Those cases do not establish that immigrants generally are criminals, and that accusation from the left is frankly, insulting.  We are a nation of immigrants who were welcome to come to America legally and assimilate into our culture of freedom.

Yet, Democrats choose every avenue possible to allow illegals to stay in our country simply for election leverage at the polls by establishing a consistent, dependent voter base. 

Based on recent polling 81% favor requiring voter ID — backed by 79% of independents and 70% of Democrats.

Yet virtually every Democrat in Congress voted against the Save America Act!  How can one justify this vote if a representative’s role is to vote on behalf of their constituents?  It is a stain on our republic.

The debate over commercial driver’s licenses has also moved beyond representation. In February 2026, the U.S. Department of Transportation finalized tighter rules governing certain non-domiciled commercial drivers, arguing that deficiencies in screening and access to foreign driving records created safety concerns.

Again, Americans should be entitled to representation that places public safety first!  They don’t need representation that protects a politician’s voter base.  Dozens of lives in several states have been lost due to illegal immigrants truck drivers.  Where’s the common sense?  Where’s the representation?

Then there is the continuing national argument over children, parents and gender policy.

On December 17, 2025, the House passed H.R. 3492, the Protect Children’s Innocence Act, by a vote of 216–211. The legislation concerned medical gender-transition procedures involving minors.

More recently, on May 20, 2026, the House passed H.R. 2616, the PROTECT Kids Act, 217–198. The measure requires certain federally funded elementary and middle schools to obtain parental consent before changing a minor student’s gender markers, pronouns, preferred name or sex-based accommodations. The vote included 208 Republicans and eight Democrats in favor, while 198 Democrats voted against it.

Common sense voters simply see these as protections for children and parental authority.

Yet, the Democrats leverage this as a political talking point directed at garnering favor among the LGTBQ voter, regardless of the proven detriment to our children, our families and our communities.

These a only a handful of issues weighing against the American people.

I’ve often stated that most politicians have forgotten their sole job is to represent their constituents.  They stick their finger in the wind and spew whatever rhetoric will purchase them the most votes – and then they go to work representing their own ideology or political party.

It’s become quite sickening, actually.  Equally concerning is the fact they KEEP GETTING ELECTED! 

We must stop allowing politicians to tell you what they believe. Look at what they do.

  • Read the bill.
  • Read the roll call.
  • Examine the policy.
  • Ask who benefits.
  • Ask who bears the consequences.

And then hold every elected official—Republican, Democrat or Independent—to precisely the same standard.

Our republic cannot function properly when allegiance to a political party becomes more important than allegiance to truth. Nor can it survive indefinitely when every issue is reduced to personalities.

Donald Trump will not be president forever.

Members of Congress will come and go.

Political parties will rise and fall.

But the principles upon which this nation depends—equal justice, individual liberty, responsibility, the rule of law, protection of innocent life and government accountable to the people—must endure beyond every election cycle.

For people of faith, there is another dimension. Our founders understood that liberty cannot survive without virtue and that self-government requires people capable of governing themselves. It requires wisdom, discernment, courage and prayer.

But even all of that is useless unless Christians exercise their right and I submit, responsibility, to vote!

America does not need politicians who automatically oppose something because Donald Trump supports it—or even automatically support something merely because he proposes it.

America needs leaders. Leaders who remember that the words written at the beginning of our Constitution are not We the Republicans or We the Democrats.

They are, “We the People.”

Perhaps the question Americans should be asking their representatives today should be a little different. 

Rather than ask questions about the politicians; perhaps we should begin asking questions about ourselves.  Don’t complain about what you permit. 

We hire our representatives with our vote. Just as in business, we should monitor their work ethic and effectiveness.  And we decide if they should stay in office. Our representation is literally controlled by our votes.

Currently, it’s a political game many politicians are winning. They rely on our lack of engagement, and sadly, we are not disappointing them.

If we are ever to get back to winning for “We the People,” it must begin with our commitment to vote.

Not just when we are angry. Not just when our candidate excites us. Not just when the election feels convenient.

Every election. Every time.

Because when good people stay home, someone else makes the decision for them.

We can pray for better leaders. We can demand better government. We can complain about corruption, incompetence, and misplaced priorities. But if we refuse to vote, we surrender the very power the Constitution placed in our hands.

“We the People” only works when “We the People” show up.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Mark Caserta: The 353,440 West Virginia Voters Republicans Shouldn’t Ignore. (Democrats certainly won’t)

18 Sep

For months, supporters of a closed Republican primary in West Virginia have raised a familiar concern: voters who are not Republicans could enter the Republican primary and attempt to influence which candidates the party nominates.

But if we are going to make policy based on that concern, we should examine the evidence without being distracted by emotion. It is easy to say — and perhaps even easy to believe — that Democrats, in large numbers, are using their primary vote to influence the eventual GOP nominee. The emotion resulting from even the thought of such voter malpractice is understandable and easily propagated.

But so far, I have found no documented evidence showing that large numbers of registered Democrats were crossing over into West Virginia Republican primaries for the purpose of manipulating Republican election outcomes.

Even before the GOP closed its primary, registered Democrats were not allowed simply to request a Republican ballot while remaining registered Democrats. They had to officially change their party affiliation to do so.

West Virginia’s Secretary of State says that voters registered with a recognized political party could vote only that party’s primary ballot. The voters who could request another participating party’s ballot were voters registered with no recognized party or unaffiliated status.

West Virginia law also allows each party to decide whether unaffiliated voters or voters of other non-recognized parties may participate in that party’s primary. That is different from allowing someone registered as a Democrat to vote a Republican ballot.

That distinction matters.

West Virginia election law permits voters to change their political-party registration. A voter may change parties by completing a new voter-registration application, and if that change is made at least 21 days before the election, the new affiliation applies to that primary.

What can be shown factually is that from January 2024 through April 2026, 16,910 registered Democrats switched their registration to Republican, while another 20,003 unaffiliated voters became Republicans. During that same period, only 2,399 Republicans switched to Democrat, according to the West Virginia Secretary of State’s Office.

So closing the Republican primary does not prevent someone who was previously registered as a Democrat from becoming a registered Republican and voting in the Republican primary.

What it does prevent is a constitutional conservative or independent-minded voter who remains unaffiliated from participating in that primary. And that affects a very large bloc of West Virginia voters.

According to West Virginia Secretary of State registration data dated July 31, 2026, the state had 304,775 voters registered with no party affiliation and another 48,665 voters registered with other political parties, for a total of 353,440 West Virginia voters outside the two major parties.

That is 29.35 percent of the state’s electorate — nearly three out of every ten voters.

And there is another number that cannot simply be ignored.

When the 2026 Republican legislative primary is compared with the last non-presidential midterm primary in 2022, Republican vote totals across comparable House and Senate contests were a combined 46,795 votes lower.

That included 28,812 fewer votes in House races and 17,983 fewer votes in Senate races.

No one can say with certainty that all — or even most — of those missing votes came from unaffiliated voters who were no longer permitted to participate in the Republican primary. The election data do not allow us to make that claim.

But a decline of 46,795 votes is still a significant data point, and it deserves to be considered when evaluating the effects of closing the Republican primary.

That fact should be part of any serious discussion about the future of the Republican primary. Many of these voters have simply chosen principle over party.

Those numbers alone do not prove that closing the Republican primary caused lower turnout, but the fact remains that May primary turnout was just over 21 percent, which is concerning to say the least. What one may reasonably derive from such low turnout is that a significant number of West Virginians may not be enthusiastic about what they are getting from state government or from the political process generally.

Republicans must reach out to unaffiliated voters — not exclude them.

Closing the primary does not create an ideological test. It simply creates a registration test.

So, if the purpose of closing a primary is to prevent strategic voting, how effectively can it accomplish that when any eligible voter may change party registration before the deadline?

That includes registered Democrats.

The job of any political party is to establish a platform that voters can get behind, not limit participation only to those willing to walk 100 percent in lockstep with an ideology. Excluding hundreds of thousands of West Virginians who have chosen to remain outside the two major political parties may also reduce the incentive for Republican candidates to engage those voters during the primary process as potential constituents.

We must look at this issue pragmatically, set emotion aside, and consider the facts and evidence.

Unaffiliated voters must be considered part of West Virginia’s future and part of the future of constitutional conservatism.

Locking them out of the GOP primary is not a good way to start.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Artificial Intelligence: Are We Building the Future or Our Replacement?

15 Sep

Last week, I heard a news report that stopped me in my tracks.  It is particularly relevant with the current artificial intelligence debate.

The story involved a researcher from one of the major artificial intelligence companies who had reportedly walked away from his work because of growing concerns about where AI may be headed.

The event caught my attention because an increasing number of people charged with developing highly advanced artificial intelligence systems believe there is a real possibility that, within the next decade, AI could become powerful enough to pose an existential threat to humanity.

This artificial intelligence researcher, Jacob Coxon, reportedly resigned from Anthropic, the company behind Claude AI, an AI assistant much like ChatGPT, Grok or Meta AI. Coxon’s decision to leave was striking in that he did not simply walk away from a job. According to Axios, he resigned roughly two months before his Anthropic equity was scheduled to vest, meaning he potentially sacrificed a significant financial interest in one of the world’s most valuable AI companies. Coxon had also previously worked for OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT.

His reason for walking away should give us all pause.

Since Coxon’s resignation, the concerns have only grown louder. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has now publicly called on artificial intelligence companies to slow the pace at which they increase the capabilities of their most advanced models, arguing that additional time is needed to better understand and manage the risks. Other leaders in the AI industry have also expressed support for stronger safety testing, independent evaluation and greater cooperation among competing companies.

In other words, Coxon’s warning is no longer simply the concern of one researcher who walked away. The debate has now reached the highest levels of the companies actually building this technology.

Coxon warned that the companies building the world’s most powerful artificial intelligence systems are becoming increasingly advanced and potentially self-improving. His concern is that working toward these AI advances without first knowing with certainty that humanity will be able to control what it creates could become catastrophic. He argued that the race among the major AI companies has become dangerously competitive and that the consequences could ultimately threaten human life.

It sounds more like the plot of a science-fiction movie than a serious discussion taking place among some of the brightest minds in technology.

For those of us who remember Arnold Schwarzenegger in The Terminator, it is almost impossible to hear a warning like that without thinking about Skynet, the fictional artificial intelligence system that became self-aware, decided humanity was the threat and launched a war against its creators.

But then I started looking into what these researchers actually mean when they talk about “stress testing” artificial intelligence—and the issue becomes considerably more serious.

Stress testing AI means deliberately pushing these systems to their limits, like a physician may do with a patient, by deliberately putting the system into difficult situations.

Researchers attempt to discover whether an advanced AI can deceive its operators, work around restrictions, exploit computer systems, manipulate people, conceal its intentions, or pursue a goal in ways its human creators never anticipated. Can it gain access to tools, information or potential power it was never supposed to have?

Now, this is a long way from “Skynet” launching missiles, but it is also considerably more serious than ChatGPT giving you incorrect information! The concern is that increasingly capable and autonomous systems may eventually begin doing things their designers cannot fully anticipate.

The concern is not necessarily that an artificial intelligence suddenly becomes “evil” in the Hollywood sense. Machines do not have to have “emotion” to become dangerous. In a “Star Trek” sense, perhaps logic over emotion is enough for a system to become a threat.

But at this point, we must begin asking ourselves the question that is obviously on the minds of highly intelligent AI scientists. What if we created a system far more capable than ourselves, gave it an objective, and then discovered that we no longer completely understand, or control, the methods it uses to achieve that objective?

For those engaged in furthering AI technology, they are constantly asking themselves, “What can we make it do?” But what happens when we make something that can do more than we intended?

I’ve found myself using AI more in the past year than I could ever have imagined! It increasingly astounds me in terms of its ability to “create” a perceived personality based on individual data it accumulates from an individual’s questions, research and personal data—even to the point of relationship building!

That is why this debate deserves more than sensational headlines and science-fiction comparisons. Artificial intelligence is advancing at an extraordinary pace, and the people building it are now openly debating whether humanity can guarantee that the most powerful systems of the future will remain under human control.

It’s an issue that will no doubt rise in significance in each of our lives.  Caution should be exercised so we are not blindsided by its impact.

The real question may not be how intelligent artificial intelligence becomes. It may be whether humanity remains intelligent enough to stay in control of it.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Unwarranted government surveillance under the guise of protection is only the beginning.

20 Jul

History records the progressive movement will use this foothold to advance their agenda!

My entire adult life, I have observed, studied, and written about the progressive movement. What began as a movement that many viewed as advancing society has, over time, evolved into an effort to transform society itself.

In 1973, the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade recognized a constitutional right to abortion while also acknowledging limits intended to protect the health of the pregnant woman and what the Court described as “potential life.” Under the Court’s original framework, abortions after viability could generally be prohibited, except when necessary to protect the life or health of the mother.

Over the years, however, the national debate expanded dramatically. Controversial procedures, including what became known as “partial-birth abortion,” and even “live-birth abortions were performed, heinously murdering an innocent life.  The original decision was the catalyst for disaster.

The cultural shift did not stop there.

In the 1970s, network television was vastly different from what we see today. Sexual content was limited. Profanity was heavily restricted. Violence, while present, was generally restrained. Families could sit down together during prime time with a reasonable expectation that the programming would be suitable for everyone.

Today, I don’t need to describe how different things have become. What is now considered mainstream entertainment would have been unthinkable on network television in that era.

Likewise, legal and social debates surrounding LGBTQ issues have continued to evolve over the decades. Questions involving marriage, employment protections, military service, and gender identity have all developed on different timelines.

Today, we have biological males competing in women’s sports and having access to women’s locker rooms—issues that would have seemed unimaginable to many Americans just a generation ago.

The same pattern is emerging in another area that should concern every citizen: government surveillance.

The Fourth Amendment has protected Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures since 1791. Yet today, many progressives casually support warrantless camera systems, such as Flock cameras, that record and track the movements of law-abiding citizens without individualized suspicion.

Some argue that this type of surveillance is not specifically prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. But the Framers anticipated that future generations might attempt to narrow the people’s liberties by exploiting technicalities. That is precisely why they included the Ninth Amendment.

The Ninth Amendment makes clear that just because a right is not specifically listed in the Constitution does not mean the people do not possess that right. It was intended to prevent the federal government from claiming authority over every aspect of our lives simply because a particular liberty was not expressly enumerated.

This is how progressivism often advances. Change rarely comes all at once. It begins with policies that appear modest, reasonable, or even beneficial. Then the boundaries continue to move. What was once described as an exception becomes the norm. What was once considered unacceptable gradually becomes expected.

It’s the desensitization of Americans.

The objective is not merely to reform society but to redefine it.

There comes a point when every generation must decide whether it will preserve the principles it inherited or surrender them one compromise at a time.

For me, that decision is clear.

It is time to exercise common sense. It is time to stand for the enduring principles found in the Holy Bible and the Constitution of the United States. If we fail to defend them today, we should not be surprised to find that future generations no longer enjoy the freedoms we inherited.

How to Fight Deployment of Flock and Other Mass Surveillance License Plate Readers in Your Community | American Civil Liberties Union

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Mark Caserta: The Price of Freedom

18 Jul

“Today, the threats to liberty do not come in the form of muskets and cannon fire, but they are very real.

They arrive quietly—through complacency, the steady erosion of constitutional freedoms, or the willingness to trade liberty for convenience, security, or political expediency.

Who are we to casually relinquish our freedoms brave men and women have died to protect?“

Young George Washington was suddenly awakened by the deafening roar of muskets and cannon fire. He had been unconscious, suffering from a severe case of dysentery, but the thunder of battle gave him the strength to rise and discover what was happening around him.

Having failed in his first military command against the French and their Native American allies, Washington had resigned his commission. Yet when the call came again, he volunteered to serve in any capacity he could, determined to do his part in defending the future of the New World.

Amid the thick powder smoke and chaos of battle, Washington mounted his horse to assess the situation.

“The battle is lost,” he was warned. “Turn back, Washington. Save yourself. It isn’t worth the risk.”

But George Washington knew his fellow soldiers were trapped on the front lines. He refused to abandon them. Instead, he spurred his horse toward the fiercest fighting, determined to lead from the front rather than seek safety in the rear.

History records that George Washington was remarkably protected that day. As bullets ripped through the air around him, he rode fearlessly across the battlefield, rallying frightened soldiers and helping as many as possible escape certain death. Though General Braddock’s army had been overwhelmed and the battle was ultimately lost, Washington’s courage prevented an even greater catastrophe.

With General Braddock mortally wounded and panic spreading through the ranks, Washington organized the retreat, encouraged his exhausted troops, and directed them to use the cover of the trees rather than continue fighting in the open. His calm leadership amid chaos saved countless lives and transformed what could have been a complete annihilation into an orderly withdrawal.

By the end of the battle, hundreds of brave men had sacrificed their lives at the Battle of the Monongahela, also known as Braddock’s Defeat. Yet George Washington emerged from the battlefield untouched, despite having two horses shot from beneath him and multiple bullet holes through his coat.

Many who witnessed the battle believed Divine Providence had preserved his life for a greater purpose—a purpose that would eventually lead him to command the Continental Army, guide a fledgling nation to independence, and become the first President of the United States.

Freedom has never been free. It never has been, and it never will be.

Our nation’s liberty was purchased with the courage, sacrifice, and blood of men and women who believed there were principles worth dying for. They understood that freedom is never guaranteed. It survives only when ordinary people are willing to stand against extraordinary odds.

George Washington could have turned his horse and ridden to safety. Instead, he rode into the battle.

That decision did more than save lives. It revealed the character of a man who would later lead a revolution and help establish the greatest experiment in self-government the world has ever known.

Every generation is called to defend freedom. Ours is no different. Who are we to casually relinquish our freedoms brave men and women have died to protect?

The question is not whether freedom will require sacrifice.

The question is whether we will have the courage to pay its price.

But given the right moves, even a pawn can take the King.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Federal Law Enforcement working only to resolve Democrat open border policy.

27 Jan

I’ve written commentary for 25 years, long enough to realize I can’t change many minds over any emotional issue.

But let’s be clear in analyzing the situation.

The only reason ice agents and border patrol agents’ presence in our cities is heightened at this time is because liberal Democrat politicians have opened our borders to millions of illegal, unvetted individuals – period.

These illegals take refuge, largely, in sanctuary cities where their needs are provided at the expense of the taxpayer.

Some of these individuals entered the United States because they are criminals and have, sadly, continued their criminal activity in the cities.

Notably, many of these individuals did not come into this country to commit crimes, but committed a crime by coming into our country illegally.

When sanctuary city leadership does not comply with federal law-enforcement, it is very difficult to identify the hardened criminals from the ones who simply did not follow our immigration laws.

This situation forces ice agents to have to scour communities looking for and vetting criminals, which can be unsettling.

Our law-enforcement agents are not here to foment violence, quite the opposite. They are here to protect our citizens and enforce our laws.

Sadly, sanctuary city leaders are emboldening, and often paying protesters to insight violence and obstruct this process.

Even sadder, is the fact that some of these individuals want to incite a shooting so it can be captured on a cell phone and used to build an illegitimate argument against law-enforcement.

We are a nation of laws made by our elected officials. These officers cannot pick and choose which laws to enforce. They are here to serve and protect.

And they deserve protection in the process.

Let’s bring the heat and the rhetoric down. Let’s dispense with the conspiracy theories and allow our law enforcement agents to do their jobs.

These very law-enforcement people whom some would denigrate, are the first people they would call in case of an emergency.

Finally, this is not a move by the federal government to create a police state and move toward a monarchy.

This is simply an effort to remove people who are here illegally, with the primary focus on the criminal component.

Working with law enforcement will bring down the emotion and enable the process to be looked at through a much clearer lense.

Working against law enforcement who are simply enforcing the law, set in place by the people we elected, will only prolong the current state.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Divided, we lose. It’s that simple.

17 Jan
Mark Caserta is a candidate for West Virginia House of Delegates 28th District- Wayne County

Fact: 76 million people, 312 Electoral college votes, 7 swing states and 90 percent of all counties voted, in part, for Donald Trump to end open borders and protect our nation’s sovereignty.

We were dying as a nation. Illegal immigration was slowly overtaking our country with an estimated 20 million unvetted illegals pouring into our country during the Biden administration.

Every single state, every single race and ethnicity moved toward the right and voted for common sense in stopping this insanity. They were tired of woke, failing policies that were causing America to fail on many levels to include healthcare, education, jobs and the rule of law.

Also understand, we are a nation of immigrants – LEGAL immigrants. If anyone comes to our country illegally, they have committed a crime – period. The argument that conservatives are against immigration is inaccurate and often leveraged with intellectual dishonesty.

One must understand congress makes the laws that protect our nation. These laws include immigration laws. Law enforcement agents do not get to pick and choose which laws to uphold. Their job is simply to enforce them.

If you truly love America, stop fighting and work together to make a positive difference rather than create more division. If we plan to have a viable future for our children, we must be united.

Leaders who compare law enforcement agents to Nazis or challenge their authority are emboldening protesters to risk their lives.

Where was this anger and dissension when innocent victims like Laken Riley, Rachael Morin and Jocelyn Nungaray were brutally raped and murdered by illegal immigrants? Have you researched the brutality of these murders?

Why do we make the choice to fight more for the criminals than we do for the victims? Is that really who we are? Is that the rule of law we want for our children?

There are evil forces at work here attempting to divide our people. We MUST choose NOT to allow that to happen.

Good choices are never made out of emotion. Good choices are made with wisdom, temperence and prayer.

Let’s do the exact opposite of what the enemy would have us do.

It’s a great time to remember the civil discourse Charlie Kirk modeled for us.

Let’s be Charlie Kirk

Tags: , , , ,

Pastor Mike Lewis: Opioids: Weapons of mass destruction – Battle begins at the border.

15 Jan
Mike Lewis is a pastor and businessman who travels the world serving others

Opioid addiction destroyed an entire generation of sons, daughters, parents & families. We didn’t see it coming – it was a fraud perpetrated on Americans by big pharma

Now, since 2021 fentanyl has killed an average of 300k Americans a year, mainly driven by open borders allowing the flow from China but sold by cartel members

6.5k children in WV sit in foster care because their family is dead or detained

Another 4k sit with kinship family members because their parents are dead or detained

300 kids a night sleep in hotels & offices because there is no room in the inn

575 kids from WV live out of state because we have no special needs centers to house them

WV is last in workforce participation 

48/50 in national education rankings 

47/50 in early mortality 

I have spent 30+ years serving those who had no hope until we introduced them to Jesus – food, clothing, counseling, housing, training, relocation, abortion decision change and more

I have buried +100 sons, daughters, parents & my own brother as a result of illegal drugs and hopelessness drive by addiction driven by open borders pouring fentanyl in

When you have a solvable problem like open borders and removing illegal criminals from our great country- you do it. You do the hard work. The unpopular work. The work that will save another generation from death & detention 

I have traveled to 86 countries in my career – know what they all have?  A secure border

I have been detained by machine gun weilding border agents in India, China and El Salvador all in their attempt to ensure their border laws were followed.  Me, an American executive working for an $11b corporation providing thousands of jobs in their countries 

We are called to protect the widows & orphans. WV leads the nation in both. 

I’ll die defending them. My last breath will be in defense of babies & families and in favor of the removal of those who are here to kill, steal and destroy them

If your spiritual resume is similar then we can sharpen each other. If the only thing you have done is type keyboard quotes then lay down the phone and pick up a servants sword and make a change not a charge

A warrior for WV!

Tags: , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Leftist policies lack common sense

10 Oct
Mark Caserta is a political columnist and editor for Free State Patriot

Look around you.

Look at the liberal, leftist agenda and what it means to your children and your children’s children.

Are you comfortable voting for someone with these beliefs on their resume?

  • Naked men in women’s locker rooms, fully exposed and glaring at your daughter? Some of these men even with facial hair?
  • Supporting Illegals who rape, murder and commit other crimes in the U.S. with your tax dollars?
  • Your tax dollars spent on ludicrous liberal agenda programs such as male circumcision in Mozambique?
  • Biological men allowed to compete in women’s sports simply because they identify as a woman? Science is irrelevant.
  • Eliminating all words that historically apply to a male amd female, and requiring employees to take diversity training so you know which pronoun to use when addressing others?
  • Running political campaigns on socialist ideology and contrary to the our Founding Fathers?
  • Encouraging violence against anyone who disagrees with the leftist viewpoint – even to the point of celebrating death if it helps their cause? Pure evil here.
  • Sacrificing American safety and prosperity simply because Democrats hate our president more than they love our country?
  • Supporting the murder of millions of innocent babies in the womb simply based on an inconvenience and the denouncement of life upon conception.? These same lunatics would claim life on other planets if a telescope found a microbe? Huh?
  • Shutting down all fossil fuel production and raising prices on Americans based on the myth of man-made climate change?
  • Removing any semblance of God and His Holy Word from all public areas of our lives?

Do you really want someone who supports these idiotic ideas representing you?

Well, every single liberal Democrat politician is in this camp!

Frankly, if these lunatics have their way, we won’t recognize our country. In fact, I’ll go as far to say that’s the very goal – fundamentally change America!

It’s time for some common sense representation.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Government shutdown threats are result of years of fiscal insanity by our elected officials

30 Sep

“We are from the government and we’re here to help”

NOT!!!

Historically, politicians have attempted to hide their desires to raise your taxes.

Historically, politicians have attempted to hide their socialist tendencies.

Historically, politicians have at least “attempted” to “appear” they are representing their constituents.

Historically, politicians at least attempted to “discuss” what’s best for the country.

But the political theater has changed. Fiscal responsibility isn’t important. It’s given way to financing liberal agendas.

Capitalism is being attacked as the problem, not the roadmap to the American dream.

Politicians act as if they don’t even know how a Republic works, much less give it credence.

“What’s best for the country” has succumb to what’s best for party.

Frankly, I’m beginning to feel better when the government is shut down and only essential services are covered.

So much seems to be hidden from the American people, it’s difficult to determine the best approach to governance!

But when liberal Democrats want to use my money for transgender studies and DEI training in other countries, for example, it isn’t difficult to understand that they DO NOT have my best interest at heart.

It’s time for a common sense approach. President Trump is, by far, the most common sense driven leader we’ve had in Washington in my lifetime.

If the choice is between shutting the government down or continuing to frivolously spend my hard-earned tax dollars for outlandish, ridiculous pursuits???

I say, shut it down and learn how to live as most Americans do –

Within our means!

Remember, when you vote, you are essentially planning for your financial future. It requires education and planning.

Failing to plan is, well, you know, planning to fail.

Tags: , , , , ,

← Older Entries