Most Popular



It was widely publicized that President Biden had declined to participate in the usual Super Bowl interview for the second consecutive year. The common thought was that the 81yo president, who has given very few tv interviews during his tenure in the WH and has come under severe scrutiny in recent days for age-related cognitive issues, could not risk an interview in his condition. “It is the biggest tv audience and you get an opportunity to do a tv interview on that day, and you do not do it?” legendary Democratic James Carville asked. “That’s a sign that either the staff or you lack confidence in yourself. “There is no other way to interpret this.”

Given this, most political observers predicted that Biden would not appear on Super Bowl Sunday. But Biden had different plans. If he refused or was unable to conduct a Super Bowl interview, he would still contribute to the narrative by crafting an attention-grabbing, Super Bowl-themed clip that was released right before kickoff. No difficult questions, no awkward pauses, just complete White House dominance.

Biden’s video turned out to be about “shrinkflation.” It refers to companies, specifically snack food companies, that include fewer chips, cookies, or whatever in containers that still cost the same. In other words, it is a different type of inflation that has affected both businesses and consumers. The price remains constant, but the product delivered to the buyer decreases.

“It’s Super Bowl Sunday,” Joe Biden announced in the video. “And if you are anything like me, you enjoy watching the big game with a snack or two. You may have observed anything while buying food for the game. Sports beverage bottles are smaller. Although the bag of chips contains less chips, the price remains the same. And, as an ice cream fan, what irritates me the most is that ice cream containers have reduced in size but not in price.”

Sitting in the WH theater next to a table piled high with plainly identifiable food containers — Tostitos, Doritos, Oreos, Gatorade, Breyers Ice Cream — Biden said: “I’ve had enough of shrinkflation.” It is a rip-off. Some corporations are trying to pull a quick one by gradually reducing their products in the hopes that you would not notice. Give me a break. The American populace is tired of being taken advantage of. I’m calling on businesses to put an end to this. Let us ensure that firms act responsibly right now.”

What???!!! Shrinkflation, as Biden refers to it, is obviously real. Everyone who has visited a grocery shop within the last several years is aware of this. But shrinkflation is simply a type of inflation—the inflation that Biden and his Democratic Party colleagues on Capitol Hill fueled with trillions of dollars in wasteful government spending. Biden’s policies are responsible for at least some of the shrinkflation he criticizes.

What’s really happening here is that Biden, who behind former President Trump in swing-state surveys, is attempting to shift the blame for his two most serious political liabilities as the 2024 race heats up. The president blames Congress for the border crisis and “companies attempting to pull a fast one” for rising inflation.

The difficulty, of course, is that Biden is solely responsible for the border situation, and Biden is also partially responsible for inflation. So, of course, he’s pointing fingers in an attempt to avoid election-year blame.

Some Democrats have been championing the concept of shrinkflation for quite some time. Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) released a report in December titled “Shrinkflation: How Companies  Are Shrinking Products to Increase Profits.” Casey defined shrinkflation as a type of “greedflation,” which is “when companies use inflation as a cover to increase prices and profits.” Last week, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) warned of shrinkflation on X. “Giant companies are shrinking their products but charging the same or more,” she stated in an email. “We aren’t fooled. Corporations use these tactics to improve their earnings. “It’s time to clamp down on this shrinkflation and on corporate greed.”

Biden participated in the shrinkflation game during a campaign stop in South Carolina, on January 27. He told people that while inflation is low and things are fine, terrible firms continue to make going to the grocery shop difficult. “Inflation is coming down,” Biden stated. “It is now lower in America than in any other major economy throughout the world. Eggs, milk, poultry, gasoline, and a variety of other necessities have become more affordable. Despite our efforts to lower prices, there are still far too many firms in America that take advantage of individuals through price gouging, trash fees, greedflation, and shrinkflation. Did you notice the article about Snickers bars?” Biden was apparently referring to a Jan. 18 NY Times article titled “Why Are Voters So Upset? Think about the Snickers Bar,” which admitted that food prices are still high and rising, contributing to customer dissatisfaction.

Biden slammed food businesses and pledged government action to reduce candy bar pricing. “Well, it’s going to stop,” he explained in Columbia. “Americans, we’re sick of being played for suckers. And that is why we’re going to hold these individuals accountable – to keep pressure on them and drive down rates.”

Author: Steven Sinclaire

John Boyd, Jr., president of the National Black Farmers Association and a rancher with over four decades of experience, expressed serious concerns about the current state of the U.S. cattle industry on “Fox & Friends First.” He highlighted a significant reduction in beef production, stating that the country is producing 1 billion pounds less beef compared to last year. Boyd emphasized the urgent need to invest in America’s cattle farmers to address this issue, expressing disappointment with the current administration’s handling of the situation.

The decline in beef production has led to empty stalls at cattle markets, such as one near Boyd’s home in Blackstone, Virginia. This situation is expected to lead to increased beef prices, impacting consumers nationwide. Boyd criticized the Biden administration for not giving adequate attention to what he says is a national crisis for American cattlemen.

The USDA’s biannual Cattle Inventory Report reveals a stark picture: the U.S. cattle herd as of January 1, 2024, totaled 87.2 million head, a decrease of about 2% from the previous year and the smallest herd size in 73 years. Agricultural economists attribute this decline to a combination of factors, including persistent drought over the past three years, high input costs, and inflation.

These factors are affecting both consumers and farmers. Bernt Nelson, an economist at the American Farm Bureau Federation, explained that higher input prices and drought conditions have led farmers and ranchers to market more cattle, including female cattle crucial for replenishing the herd. The current calf crop is the smallest since 1948, signaling potential challenges in beef supply in the coming years.

Despite the current strong pipeline for beef supplies, Nelson warned that as this supply diminishes, beef could become increasingly scarce, potentially leading to record prices in 2024 and 2025. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that beef sold for an average of $5 per pound last year, but prices are expected to rise due to these supply issues.

Author: Steven Sinclaire

The staggering surge in credit card debt to a record-shattering $1.13 trillion is a dire warning sign of the economic mismanagement plaguing our nation under the current administration. This alarming figure, unveiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, highlights not just a financial crisis but a failure of leadership. The $50 billion leap in credit card debt in the last quarter alone, a shocking 4.6% increase, is a clear indicator that American families are struggling to keep their heads above water.

The root causes, inflation and soaring interest rates, are direct outcomes of policies that have prioritized reckless spending over fiscal responsibility. It’s no surprise that Americans are drowning in debt; they are bearing the brunt of an economy that penalizes savers and rewards debt. The ripple effects of this debt crisis are widespread, with household debt ballooning to an unprecedented $17.5 trillion.

The situation is grim, with nearly half of credit cardholders trapped in a cycle of debt, a significant jump from just two years ago. This isn’t just about numbers on a page; it’s about real people forced into financial corners with no way out. The increase in auto loan balances to $1.61 trillion and the slight uptick in student loan debt to $1.6 trillion are further proof that the American dream is slipping further out of reach for many.

This debt crisis is a ticking time bomb, set off by policies that have ignored the economic well-being of the American people. It’s a stark reminder of the need for leadership that understands the value of hard work, the importance of living within one’s means, and the critical importance of economic policies that foster growth, not indebtedness.

We need policies that encourage saving, not spending; that reward fiscal responsibility, not penalize it. It’s time to reverse course and adopt policies that put the American people first, not last. The current trajectory is unsustainable, and if left unchecked, the consequences will be felt for generations to come. The credit card debt crisis is a wake-up call, one that demands immediate action and a return to common-sense economic policies.

Author: Blake Ambrose

The admission from McDonald’s executives that their sky-high prices are alienating lower-income customers is a stark reflection of the broader economic challenges Americans face today.

An $18 Big Mac meal is not just a fast-food anomaly. It’s a symptom of the rampant inflation that has taken hold under current leadership, far removed from the affordability seen during former President Donald Trump’s tenure.

This price hike to a once affordable meal option is a direct hit to the everyday American, especially those in the lower-income bracket making $45,000 or less. These individuals are not just “weary of pricing.” They are burdened by an economy that increasingly pushes them towards financial precarity. The fact that McDonald’s, a global fast-food giant, recognizes the need to shift focus back to more affordable menu options underscores the severity of the situation.

The CEO’s observation that the low-income demographic is decreasing in their customer base, opting to eat at home as a more affordable option, is telling of the dire state of our economy. It’s about the viability of making ends meet on a daily basis. While middle and upper-class customers may not yet show “any real change in behavior,” the distress among lower-income Americans should be a wake-up call.

The “battleground with that low-income consumer” mentioned by McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski highlights a larger war against inflation and economic downturn that demands immediate and effective action. The focus on “affordability” is essential, not just for McDonald’s but for the nation as a whole.

The nearly four percent tumble in McDonald’s shares following the executives’ revelations is a clear market reaction to the underlying economic issues at play. As prices soar and wages stagnate, the American dream slips further out of reach for many. The situation at McDonald’s is a microcosm of a larger economic malaise that requires leadership capable of steering the country back to prosperity and stability, reminiscent of the growth and affordability witnessed under Trump’s administration.

Author: Blake Ambrose

Yuval Noah Harari, a high-ranking figure within the World Economic Forum, has recently sounded the alarm over President Donald Trump’s potential return to the White House, suggesting it could spell disaster for what he calls the “global order.”

This commentary, dripping with disdain for the populist wave Trump champions, exposes the deep-seated fear among the global elite that their grip on power could be weakened by a leader who prioritizes national sovereignty over globalist agendas.

Harari’s remarks betray a fundamental misunderstanding or perhaps a deliberate misrepresentation of the patriotic sentiment driving Trump’s base. The false dichotomy Harari presents between patriotism and globalism is a tired narrative aimed at discrediting the legitimate concerns many Americans have about the erosion of national identity and sovereignty. There’s nothing mutually exclusive about loving one’s country and engaging constructively on the world stage, unless, of course, the end goal is a “global government” that undermines the very concept of nation-states.

The oath to the U.S. Constitution taken by elected officials is a pledge to defend the nation from threats, both foreign and domestic, not a commitment to uphold a nebulous and unaccountable global governance structure. Harari’s comments not only reveal a blatant disregard for national loyalty but also underscore a broader agenda to consolidate power within a global technocratic elite, an agenda that Trump and his supporters have vocally opposed.

The irony of Harari’s fear-mongering is that it only serves to bolster Trump’s appeal among those who are wary of the globalist project. The notion that Trump’s presidency could be a “death blow” to the global order is music to the ears of many who feel disenfranchised by the current trajectory toward centralized global control. Harari, in his hubris, fails to recognize that his warnings may actually rally more support for Trump, who is seen as a bulwark against the encroaching globalist agenda.

If only Trump were as dedicated to dismantling the globalist framework as Harari believes, perhaps there would be a real chance to challenge the likes of Harari and his cohorts, who sit comfortably in their “filthy seat of power,” dictating policies and directions that benefit the few at the expense of the many. The battle lines are drawn, and Harari’s comments have only sharpened the resolve of those who cherish national sovereignty and democratic principles over the visions of a detached and unelected global elite.

Author: Steven Sinclaire

Bernie Sanders, in his twilight years, seems to be getting tangled in his own words, offering a glaring example of the confusion and contradictions that plague the Democratic Party today. On “Late Night With Seth Meyers,” Sanders attempted to drum up support for Joe Biden’s reelection, yet he inadvertently highlighted the dismal reality many Americans face under Biden’s leadership. Despite acknowledging that a staggering 60% of workers live paycheck to paycheck—a clear indictment of the current economic policies—Sanders paradoxically praised Biden’s economy as thriving.

This bewildering contradiction lays bare the cognitive dissonance within the Democratic ranks. Sanders lambasts Trump for policies favoring the wealthy, yet in the next breath, he lauds an administration under which Americans continue to struggle financially. It’s almost comical how Sanders tries to position Biden as a champion for the working class, citing minimal progress on prescription drug costs and job creation, while glossing over the widespread economic hardship.

Sanders’s fear-mongering about the end of American democracy under Trump is nothing short of alarmist rhetoric aimed at distracting from the Democrats’ failure to address the core issues affecting everyday Americans. His call for Biden to adopt a more progressive agenda to win the election reveals a deep-seated acknowledgment that the Democratic Party is out of touch with the working class.

The irony of Sanders, a self-styled socialist, championing Biden—a president under whose administration the wealth gap has only widened—is lost on no one. His plea for radical healthcare, housing, and tax reforms as the key to victory is a testament to the desperation within the Democratic Party to cling to power by any means necessary.

Sanders’s mixed messages and the Democratic Party’s internal discord highlight a fundamental truth: they are floundering, disconnected from the realities of the American people. As Sanders and his ilk continue to push for a progressive agenda that has yet to yield tangible benefits for the majority, it becomes increasingly clear that their vision for America is out of sync with the values and needs of its citizens. The choice in the upcoming election couldn’t be clearer for those who prioritize economic stability, national sovereignty, and the preservation of democratic principles.

Author: Scott Dowdy

Several House Democrats have broke ranks to join Republicans in voicing alarm over the Biden administration’s halt on green-lighting new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals. This decision, criticized by energy experts and now lawmakers from both sides, is seen as a move that inadvertently boosts foreign energy producers and does nothing to curb global emissions. The administration’s pause, intended to evaluate the climate impacts of LNG projects, is anticipated to extend over a year, triggering concerns about the implications for national security, economic stability, and the United States’ ability to meet clean energy objectives.

The bipartisan letter to President Biden, signed by seven Democratic members of the Energy Export Caucus, underscores the critical role of U.S. LNG exports in supporting American jobs, supplying energy to allies, and contributing to environmental benefits on a global scale. The signatories argued that halting the approval process for LNG export projects undermines not only U.S. national security but also the administration’s own clean energy and climate goals.

This development follows closely on the heels of reports that the Biden team had moved towards scrapping a natural gas project after engaging with a young TikTok influencer, highlighting the administration’s susceptibility to pressure from environmental activists. The response from Senate Republicans has been swift, with proposed legislation aimed at reversing the administration’s policy on LNG terminal approvals, although Senate Democrats from gas-producing states have yet to clarify their stance on the matter.

The upcoming hearings by the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on the LNG export terminal approval pause promise to further scrutinize the decision. While lawmakers express bipartisan concern, environmental activists have hailed the pause as a triumph for their cause, pointing to a broader clash between energy policy and environmental advocacy.

The pushback from members of President Biden’s own party over the halt on approving new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals reveals a growing fissure within the Democratic ranks, signaling a potential loss of faith in the administration’s handling of energy policy. This rare bipartisan objection underscores the complexity of balancing environmental stewardship with pragmatic energy and economic policies. The involvement of Democrats in the criticism of the administration’s decision not only highlights the strategic importance of LNG in the global energy market but also suggests a broader concern over the direction of Biden’s energy agenda.

Author: Scott Dowdy

In April 2023, I exposed a radical shift in California’s approach to utility billing, mandated by state law to enforce a fixed-rate system based on household income rather than electricity usage. This move, ostensibly to foster equity in billing, veers into dangerous territory, aligning more with socialist principles than with the American values of fairness and individual responsibility. By prioritizing income over consumption for utility costs, California sets a precedent that undermines the very fabric of merit-based economics.

Governor Newsom, amid growing opposition, persists in championing this scheme, presenting it as a dual victory for environmental progress and economic justice. However, this policy is a stark departure from common sense, burdening the majority with higher costs under the guise of aiding the economically disadvantaged. The concept, eerily reminiscent of Marxist ideologies, suggests a redistribution of wealth that does not belong in the energy sector or any part of American life.

Democratic Assemblyman Marc Berman’s outcry over rising utility rates reflects a broader dissatisfaction, not just with the policy’s impact but with its fundamental premise. The idea that Californians, already grappling with exorbitant energy costs, should now face an income-based billing system adds insult to injury, especially for those committed to energy conservation.

The internal dissent among Democrats, once supporters of the policy, now reversing their stance in light of public dissatisfaction, underscores the policy’s inherent flaws. This is not a mere policy adjustment but a significant misstep that threatens to increase living costs, penalize energy-saving behaviors, and impose invasive income checks on all.

California’s electricity rates, having surged nearly 70% since the move away from fossil fuels began in 2010, stand as a testament to the state’s misguided energy policies. Californians now pay nearly 83% more for electricity than the national average, a burden that will only worsen under the proposed income-based billing system.

Critics like Edward Ring from the California Policy Center accuse Newsom of hiding behind environmentalist values to justify policies that, in reality, punish those not eligible for subsidies. Newsom’s broader environmental agenda, including ambitious electric vehicle targets, risks further straining the state’s infrastructure without addressing the underlying issues of affordability and sustainability.

The backlash against the proposed billing system, from tenant advocates to environmental groups, highlights a consensus that the policy is fundamentally flawed. It discourages energy conservation, increases costs for all, and risks exacerbating the state’s energy crisis.

In conclusion, California’s venture into income-based utility billing is a misguided attempt to apply socialist principles to utility management, ignoring the broader consequences for conservation efforts and economic stability. As Governor Newsom and his administration push forward with this policy, they do so at the expense of Californian households, who will bear the brunt of these ideologically driven decisions. This policy is a clear example of governance detached from the realities of everyday Californians, prioritizing political ideology over practical, fair, and effective energy management.

Author: Steven Sinclaire

Bissell has initiated a recall for over 150,000 vacuum cleaners due to a fire hazard, prompting concern among consumers. The recall encompasses the Multi Hand Reach and Floor vacuum cleaners, following reports that the device’s battery pack can overheat, potentially leading to smoking or even catching fire. This issue was highlighted in a statement from the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (USPSC), which underscored the risks associated with the malfunctioning appliances.

According to Bissell, there have been 17 instances where the recalled vacuum cleaners were reported to smoke or emit a burning odor. More alarmingly, in six of these incidents, the battery pack ignited, leading to fires. While most cases resulted in minor property damage, there were two instances of minor burn injuries reported, raising concerns over consumer safety.

The recalled vacuum cleaners, numbering around 142,000 units in the United States and an additional 14,600 in Canada, were available for purchase between August 2016 and December 2022. With prices ranging from $110 to $270, these appliances were accessible to a wide range of consumers, making the recall particularly significant. In response to the hazard, Bissell is advising owners of the affected models to immediately cease using the vacuum cleaners. The company is providing instructions on how to safely deplete the battery and is offering a free replacement appliance to those impacted. Bissell emphasizes the importance of disposing of the lithium-ion batteries according to local and state regulations, rather than simply throwing them in the trash.

The recalled vacuum cleaners were sold through various retailers including Lowe’s, Macy’s, Kohl’s, Target, and Best Buy. Additionally, they were available for purchase online via Bissell’s own website, Amazon, and HSN. This wide distribution further underscores the need for awareness among consumers regarding the recall and the steps to take if they own one of the affected models. Bissell’s proactive approach in addressing the fire hazard and ensuring the safety of its customers through the recall and replacement offer highlights the company’s commitment to quality and consumer safety.

Author: Steven Sinclaire

John Harwood, who fancies himself a journalist on X, recently spewed a bunch of elitist nonsense, trying to whitewash the grim reality Americans face daily. He’s out there, claiming that the weaponized Justice Department targeting conservatives is “bulls**t,” and even has the audacity to dismiss the legitimate concerns over the Biden-Mayorkas impeachment drive as mere “bulls**t.” Harwood doesn’t stop there; he boldly declares the crushing economic hardship faced by countless Americans as “bulls**t,” and tops it off by mocking the justified grievances of President Trump as “victimhood whining.” Oh, and let’s not forget, according to Harwood, any skepticism towards the Swift-Kelce-Pfizer-psy-op Super Bowl narrative is just more “crazy bulls**t.”

The echo chamber on X might lap up Harwood’s delusions, but the reality on Main Street tells a starkly different story. Americans are struggling under the weight of soaring inflation, skyrocketing gas prices, and a border crisis that’s been blatantly ignored by the Biden administration. Yet, Harwood, sitting in his ivory tower, has the nerve to label these pressing issues as figments of our imagination.

Harwood’s attempt last November to paint a rosy picture of the economy and Biden’s effectiveness at 80 as “handling the job effectively right now” is laughable at best and dangerously misleading at worst. His claim that “there’s never a time when many, many Americans/businesses don’t struggle” is a slap in the face to those genuinely suffering due to the current administration’s failures.

The arrogance displayed by Harwood in mixing trivial social media stories with critical news issues, as one commenter pointed out, underscores the lack of seriousness and disconnect from the everyday American. It’s clear Harwood is more interested in serving as a mouthpiece for the Biden administration rather than addressing the real “crazy bulls**t” plaguing our nation.

I’m tired of these media hacks dismissing the legitimate concerns of millions of Americans. Harwood’s posts are a stark reminder of why trust in the mainstream media is at an all-time low. It’s high time journalists like Harwood start acknowledging the truth instead of peddling their partisan “bulls**t.”

Author: Steven Sinclaire

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!