Opinion – Today is no ordinary election day; it’s a watershed moment, a last-ditch effort to reclaim the foundations of liberty in a country slipping rapidly toward authoritarianism. The vote you cast today may be the most consequential act of civic duty in your lifetime—a choice that could spell the difference between restoring our constitutional republic or watching its final decay. A vote for Donald Trump represents more than a candidate; it is a vote to preserve the freedoms and self-governance that generations have fought to safeguard. Without a decisive, overwhelming turnout that leaves no room for doubt or manipulation, we may be watching the end of the great American experiment.

For years now, a deep-seated erosion has taken hold in our institutions, our values, and even our communities. Government, once an instrument of the people, has been infiltrated by forces at odds with liberty and self-determination. This infiltration stretches from local school boards to federal agencies, with unelected bureaucrats and activist judges deciding what is best for the people, often ignoring the people’s will entirely. The outcome of this election will determine whether we, the American citizens, can assert ourselves against this encroaching authoritarianism, or whether we’re content to passively accept our descent into one-party rule.

The Stakes Could Not Be Higher

Let’s be clear about the stakes. If Kamala Harris were to ascend to the presidency, either through election or through a manufactured disqualification of Trump, it would signal the formal end of the two-party system. With 20 million illegal aliens on a path to citizenship—and therefore to voting—our electoral balance would be irreversibly skewed. In every state, their votes would drown out those of lawful citizens, effectively dismantling the prospect of a Republican president for generations. A one-party system, historically, is the path to poverty and oppression. The policies pursued by today’s Democratic leadership already show signs of those authoritarian leanings: centralization of power, stifling of dissent, and an alliance with a compliant media eager to silence the opposition.

Imagine a nation where the people’s choice no longer holds sway, where elections resemble those of one-party regimes, a mere show to legitimate those already chosen by the elite. A Harris administration would solidify a monopoly on power that would cripple our middle class, reduce our freedoms, and enforce an ever-growing dependency on government. We have seen such examples in every authoritarian regime throughout history: a downward spiral that relegates the majority to mere subsistence, while the elites grow ever more powerful. This is not hyperbole; this is the blueprint Democrats themselves have revealed through their policies, which elevate government authority over personal liberty.

And if they win, they won’t pretend to listen to the people any longer. Our Republic will become, in effect, an oligarchy, veiled in the trappings of democracy but devoid of its essence. This is what we face.

An Urgent Plea to American Patriots

This election must be too big to rig. Every American with even a passing sense of patriotism must turn out and vote—not just for Trump but for the very survival of our democratic processes. Our votes must overwhelm any margin of error, fraud, or manipulation. The Left has proven itself adept at working every lever within its reach to secure its desired outcomes, from ballot harvesting and mail-in voting to courtroom battles waged by teams of highly-paid lawyers who ensure that laws tilt their way. This is no time for complacency or hesitation; if we don’t assert ourselves now, the window will close, perhaps forever.

The Left’s Agenda is Already in Motion

If Trump wins, we should expect the Democrat machine to mobilize its forces against him once again. Their commitment to opposing him goes far beyond ideological difference; it is visceral, almost pathological. “Trump Derangement Syndrome” isn’t merely a phrase; it is the lens through which the Left has viewed him from day one. They don’t see him as merely a president or a politician—they see him as a threat to their power, and as such, they will deploy every available means to dismantle his administration and nullify the people’s choice.

Plans are already being made to ensure that Trump either cannot take office or, if he does, that his power will be so restricted he will be unable to enact any meaningful change. Impeachment efforts, relentless media attacks, judicial blockades—these tools have been utilized in the past and will be refined and unleashed again, with greater ferocity and purpose. The question is not whether the Left will resist Trump; it’s how far they’re willing to go, and if history is any indicator, they are willing to go all the way—even if it means tearing down the very institutions they claim to protect.

What We Stand to Lose

Our Constitution was crafted not just as a governing document, but as a safeguard against tyranny. But the Constitution is only as strong as the people’s will to uphold it. For too long, we’ve watched as unelected officials interpret, redefine, and often disregard it to fit the narratives of those in power. This election offers us a chance to reaffirm our commitment to self-governance. But if we fail to turn out in force, if we allow fraud and manipulation to taint the outcome, we will have lost the last true mechanism for resistance.

The cost of failure is unfathomable. A future without a middle class, a future where government dictates every aspect of life, a future in which dissent is crushed and replaced with Orwellian newspeak—the loss of American freedom would resonate globally. We cannot afford to assume that someone else will secure this future for us; the responsibility rests on each of us.

The Republic’s Last Stand

There will be no do-overs, no second chances, no reset button. This election is our moment to choose: to either reclaim our nation from the grips of radical ideologues or to watch its transformation into a state we no longer recognize. Freedom, once lost, is rarely regained without extraordinary sacrifice. But here and now, with a vote, we have the power to resist—to assert the founding principles of our Republic, to demand accountability, and to preserve the precious liberties that countless Americans have died defending.

So let this be your rallying cry, your mission, your civic duty: vote for Donald Trump, for freedom, for the Constitution, and for the America we know and love. Because if we lose today, we may never get another chance.

Dallas, TX — The political temperature in North Texas has reached a boiling point as Rep. Jasmine Crockett [D-TX-30], known as one of the most radical progressives in Texas, faces fierce criticism over her controversial stance on former President Donald Trump’s Secret Service protection. Crockett, second only to Rep. Gene Wu in terms of radicalism, has drawn significant backlash for her co-sponsorship of H.R.8081, a bill that sought to strip Trump of his Secret Service protection following his conviction on felony charges in New York.

The uproar comes on the heels of a second assassination attempt on Trump, which occurred on September 14, 2024. The attempt took place at Trump’s New Jersey golf course, where a suspect, Ryan Wesley Routh, breached security and fired multiple shots. The Secret Service neutralized Routh before he could inflict harm, but the attempt underscored the life-threatening risks Trump continues to face, even after leaving office.

Crockett’s push to remove Secret Service protection from Trump has been described as not only extreme but dangerous, given the former president’s ongoing security risks. This most recent assassination attempt follows an earlier attack on Trump during a rally in Pennsylvania, where he narrowly avoided a fatal injury when a bullet grazed his right ear.

Despite these violent threats, Crockett has doubled down on her position, drawing the ire of many Texans. Leading the call for her resignation are 16 prominent Texas Republicans, including State Rep. Brian Harrison and State Sen. Bob Hall, who released a letter on Monday condemning her legislative actions. “Presidents of the United States, both current and former, must be protected—this should not be a partisan issue,” their statement read.

Crockett’s Radical Agenda in the Spotlight

Jasmine Crockett’s radical legislative agenda has long been a topic of concern for Texas conservatives. Known for her unapologetically progressive stances, Crockett has earned a reputation as one of the most left-wing members of the Texas delegation. Following in the footsteps of Rep. Gene Wu, the most radical progressive in the state, Crockett has been a vocal supporter of extreme measures on issues ranging from criminal justice reform to economic redistribution.

Her co-sponsorship of the “Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable Former Protectees Act” (DISGRACED) is just the latest in a string of controversial moves. Had it passed, the bill would have left Trump without Secret Service protection—a move critics argue would have made the former president even more vulnerable to assassination attempts like the ones he has faced in the past year.

Even more inflammatory were Crockett’s recent remarks about the MAGA movement. In an interview, she referred to MAGA supporters as “threats to us,” a comment that further inflamed tensions between her and conservative Texans. State Rep. Harrison blasted her remarks as “divisive and dangerous,” while State Sen. Hall called them “a chilling insight into her extreme worldview.”

Political Violence and Crockett’s Hypocrisy

Crockett’s response to the assassination attempt on Trump has done little to quiet her critics. In a carefully crafted statement posted to her official X account, she stated, “My thoughts are with Mr. Trump as he recovers. My deepest appreciation is extended to law enforcement for their selfless & decisive action. Political violence in all forms must be condemned.”

However, Republicans were quick to highlight the hypocrisy of Crockett’s statement. Many pointed out that by supporting legislation that would have removed Trump’s Secret Service protection, she was effectively putting his life at greater risk. “Her words are hollow,” said one Republican strategist. “You can’t claim to condemn political violence while simultaneously voting to leave a former president defenseless against it.”

Ken Ashby, the Independent candidate challenging Crockett in the upcoming election, seized on this apparent contradiction. “Rep. Crockett’s actions speak louder than her words. The fact that she supports leaving a former president vulnerable to assassination attempts is not only reckless, but it shows just how extreme her views have become,” Ashby said in a recent interview.

Ashby, who is gaining traction among conservative voters in Texas’ 30th District, has positioned himself as a voice of reason in a race where no Republican candidate is running. With Election Day approaching, Crockett’s controversial positions could be a major liability as voters weigh the risks of re-electing a radical progressive against the more measured approach Ashby offers.

Crockett’s Radicalism and the Future of North Texas Politics

Jasmine Crockett’s political career has been defined by her radical views, which have earned her praise from the far-left and scorn from conservatives. Her tenure in Congress has been marked by her support for progressive policies that many in Texas see as far out of step with the state’s values. From her early days as a public defender to her time in the Texas House of Representatives, Crockett has pushed for policies that critics say go too far in dismantling traditional structures of law and order.

In addition to her support for the DISGRACED Act, Crockett has been a vocal advocate for police reform, economic redistribution, and expanded government healthcare—positions that have alienated many moderate voters in her district. Her stance on Trump’s security, combined with her inflammatory rhetoric about MAGA supporters, has only deepened the divide between her and Texas Republicans.

Ken Ashby has been quick to capitalize on Crockett’s vulnerabilities, framing himself as a defender of American values and a protector of the dignity of the presidency. “It’s not just about Trump,” Ashby said in a recent statement. “It’s about protecting the office of the presidency and ensuring that all our leaders, past and present, are safe from harm. That’s something every American, regardless of party, should support.”

As Election Day draws near, the future of North Texas politics hangs in the balance. The race between Crockett and Ashby has become a referendum on extremism, with voters in District 30 forced to decide whether they want to continue down the path of radical progressivism or chart a more moderate course.

A District Divided

The controversy surrounding Rep. Jasmine Crockett’s radical views and her dangerous legislative efforts has highlighted the deep political divide in North Texas. As the second most radical progressive in Texas, Crockett’s extreme positions have made her a polarizing figure, and her co-sponsorship of a bill that could have stripped Trump of vital security protection has only amplified the concerns of her critics.

With two assassination attempts on Trump in the past year, including the most recent on September 14, 2024, many voters are questioning the wisdom of Crockett’s judgment and the safety implications of her legislative priorities. Her opponent, Ken Ashby, has positioned himself as the alternative to radicalism, offering a more secure and balanced approach to governance.

Ultimately, the voters of District 30 will decide whether to endorse Crockett’s radical agenda or embrace Ashby’s more conservative vision for North Texas. The outcome of this election could have far-reaching implications for the political landscape of Texas, shaping the direction of the state for years to come.

In the intricate web of modern economies, one thread stands out for its sheer indispensability: oil. Not just the lifeblood of transportation, oil’s influence permeates every facet of consumer life, from the mundane to the sophisticated. Yet, under the Harris-Biden administration, what appears as a war on oil could well be the unseen hand inflating prices across the board, touching every product we use or consume.

Consider your morning routine. That cup of coffee from Starbucks? Oil isn’t just in the fuel that transports the beans; it’s in the cup itself, lined with petroleum-based plastics. The makeup you applied before going to work… those are petrochemicals. Petrochemicals are integral to cosmetics. And let’s not forget your smartphone or laptop, where oil derivatives are crucial in manufacturing components like plastics, synthetic rubbers, and even the tiny amounts in circuits.

The agricultural sector, the backbone of food production, is deeply oil-dependent. From the fuel for tractors to the fertilizers made from natural gas, a byproduct of oil extraction, to the plastic packaging of your groceries, oil’s footprint is undeniable. Water purification? It relies on energy-intensive processes, often powered by fossil fuels. But water additives, filters, piping … every component is a product of oil; synthesized from petroleum derivatives.

Your clothes, your shoes, your eye glasses or contacts. Your hair products (or hair dryer), shampoo bottles (and even the shampoo) are all petroleum based. And let’s not forget that everything you purchase was shipped to that store … or your door. Shipping is a huge oil based industry. It’s not just the fuel, it’s the cardboard box, the tape, the sticky print labels and even the ink on those labels. It’s even the road… the additives in the asphalt. The paint of the lines on the road. The traffic lights or reflective road signage.

Even the most eco-conscious choices, like electric vehicles, aren’t free from oil’s influence. The manufacturing of EVs, from batteries to tires, involves oil at every step and in every part. The plastic dash, the leather seats, the electronics. The last thing in the line is the electricity to charge them. While renewable sources are growing, a significant portion still comes from oil or natural gas. Even if the source of the energy comes from a renewable source, the wires that bring it to your house are copper & rubber, which is made from petroleum. Oil.

Every single thing in your home is made with, by or shipped using petroleum … oil. Everything.

This pervasive reliance on oil sets the stage for understanding the economic repercussions of the Harris-Biden administration’s energy policies. By imposing restrictions on new oil and gas leasing on federal lands, as seen in early 2021, and signaling a shift away from fossil fuels, these policies have inadvertently tightened the oil supply, pushing prices up. This isn’t just about filling up your car; it’s about the cost of everything.

Inflation, therefore, isn’t merely a monetary policy issue but a direct consequence of energy policy. When oil prices surge, not due to market demand but policy-induced scarcity, every sector feels the pinch. Manufacturers face higher production costs, which inevitably get passed on to consumers. The ripple effect is clear: higher oil prices lead to higher costs in transportation, manufacturing, agriculture, and beyond, culminating in the inflation we’re witnessing.

The administration’s approach, while aimed at combating climate change, overlooks the immediate economic realities. By not fully supporting domestic oil production or infrastructure like the Keystone XL Pipeline, they’ve contributed to a scenario where oil prices could have been moderated, thus potentially alleviating some inflationary pressures.

In essence, oil isn’t just a component of our economy; it’s the lifeblood. The policies that inadvertently restrict its flow are akin to tightening the economic arteries, leading to a systemic increase in costs across all goods and services. As we navigate this complex landscape, understanding oil’s role beyond just fuel for our vehicles might just be the key to untangling the inflation conundrum we face today. The Harris-Biden administration’s energy strategy, while well-intentioned for the environment, might be the unseen force inflating our everyday expenses, reminding us that in economics, as in life, everything is interconnected.