Daily Archives: September 4, 2019

September 4 A God We Can Trust

Scripture Reading: Psalm 85:1–13

Key Verse: Psalm 85:7

Show us Your mercy, Lord,

And grant us Your salvation.

Trust is something we earn with one another. However, from the moment God saves us, He trusts us and believes in us. Does He think we will never make another mistake? God knows we will still make mistakes, but His Spirit lives in us—and this is a point of uncompromising trust.

Many people read God’s Word and then allow the enemy to twist God’s truth in such a way that they doubt God’s goodness. When there are people in our lives who promise us things but fail to deliver, an attitude of cynicism can seep into our thinking. Trusting anyone can be a major challenge for us when we have been disappointed time and time again.

However, God has a reputation of trust for several millenniums. Throughout the Bible, we do not read of God promising to do something and then not following up on His promise. For some people steeped in cynicism, this might take longer to believe than others. But in the end, the truth is revealed: God is faithful—always.

God’s faithfulness is great. His promises do not always unfold the way we imagined, but He always keeps them. As God proves His faithfulness to us, we learn that He is ultimately trustworthy with everything, including our lives. We can rest confidently in that assurance.

Dear Lord, cleanse me of any cynicism that has seeped into my thinking. I embrace Your faithfulness and trustworthiness with renewed assurance.[1]


[1] Stanley, C. F. (2006). Pathways to his presence (p. 259). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

September 4 Living a Consistent Life

Scripture Reading: Ephesians 4:17–24

Key Verse: Ephesians 4:24

You put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.

A Christian college professor urged her students to make sure their lives were consistent with the message of God’s Word: “Never let an air of inconsistency blow through your lives. If this happens, the world will notice it, and your testimony for Jesus will be damaged.”

Consistency is difficult. The Lord knows this and is ever present to keep us pointed in the right direction. However, the matter of consistency also is a matter of self-will. We must want to be like Jesus in order for there to be a sweetness to our lives that others notice and see as being essential to the Christian lifestyle.

In Ephesians 4, Paul explained how the believer is to approach life. He admonished the young church in Ephesus to leave their old ways and thought patterns, especially the ones that reminded them of their lives before they were saved.

A radical change takes place on the inside when our souls are transferred from eternal death to eternal life. The evidence of this transformation is that now that we have given our lives to Jesus, we no longer desire to live in sin’s habitat.

Washed in the saving blood of Jesus Christ, we are new creatures. The old is gone. Once we lived as those who do not know Jesus as Savior and Lord; praise be to God, though, as believers, we have a new consistency to our lives that brings eternal peace and hope.

Father, I want to be like You. Let my life exude a sweet aroma that others will notice. Help me be consistent in my Christian walk.[1]


[1] Stanley, C. F. (1999). On holy ground (p. 259). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

September 4 Focus on God

Scripture reading: Luke 10:38–42

Key verse: Luke 10:42

But one thing is needed, and Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her.

Martha had chosen to prepare the evening meal. No one forced her to do it. In fact, if we examined the situation, we would find that Martha really didn’t mind the work. She loved receiving praise for her cooking.

Yet here’s the scenario: Jesus is in the front room of the house talking to those gathered near Him. Martha is rushing around the cooking area in the back of the house. All is fine until she discovers her sister is missing. A quick check of the courtyard provides no clue of Mary’s whereabouts. With her jaw set to reprove her sister, Martha storms by the doorway to the front room. Then she spots Mary sitting near the feet of Jesus. Envy and jealousy take control of Martha’s heart: “Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore tell her to help me” (Luke 10:40).

All of us have fought feelings like these. Although God understands our weaknesses, jealousy is intolerable to Him. Why? For one, it proves that we are more interested in taking care of ourselves than in taking care of our love relationship with Him. Jesus told Martha, “Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her.”

Make every effort to rid your life of envy, strife, and jealousy. Let God bless you in the way He has chosen. Set the focus of your heart on Him, and rejoice that He greatly loves you.

Father, help me set the focus of my heart on You and rejoice in Your love today.[1]


[1] Stanley, C. F. (2000). Into His presence (p. 259). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

The Two Ticking Time Bombs of the Coming Election — Christian Research Network

The country voted, the Electoral College met, and Comey knew that when he sought a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) warrant to “spy” (Attorney General Bill Barr’s mot juste) against the  Trump campaign and transition team, on the basis of the Clinton campaign’s false and malicious dossier. Comey’s actions went “beyond” courage and were a grievous corruption of the FBI and a threat to American democracy. 

(Conrad Black – American Greatness)  It is now clearer than ever that the whole Trump-Russia collusion argument, as many of us have been loudly proclaiming since it began, is a monstrous hoax, “a conspiracy so immense”—to use Senator Joseph R. McCarthy’s infamous words in his attack upon General George C. Marshall in 1951—that it has been hard for the public to take it on board.

Of course, the assimilation of what has happened has been made more complicated by the extremely agitated political ambiance of the Trump era, which was to a large extent inevitable given the mandate this president received to make profound public policy changes and to assault the whole bipartisan political class in its entrenched positions.

As soon as the rock was pried off the fact that the much-touted Steele dossier was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, the alarm bells rang on the smell-test monitor. Clinton’s memoir of the election, blaming everything on being “shivved three times by Jim Comey,” and on her opponent’s “treason” with the Russians, cited the Steele dossier several times as independent corroborative evidence of President Trump’s treachery and betrayal of the nation.

But the stark contrast in policy and personality terms between the president and the Democrats, and the bellicosity of the president himself, which can be embarrassing but may have been essential for him to get through the unprecedented effort to undermine him illegally, do not in themselves explain the very long fuse that is burning with excruciating slowness toward the powder keg of explicit revelation of Democratic law-breaking.   View article →

via The Two Ticking Time Bombs of the Coming Election — Christian Research Network

Alan Greenspan says it’s ‘only a matter of time’ before negative rates spread to the US | CNBC

There is currently more than $16 trillion in negative-yielding debt around the world as central banks try to ease monetary conditions.

It will not be long before the spread of negative interest rates reaches the U.S., former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said.

“You’re seeing it pretty much throughout the world. It’s only a matter of time before it’s more in the United States,” Greenspan told CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street ” on Wednesday, adding investors should watch the 30-year Treasury yield.

The 30-year U.S. rate traded at 1.95% midday Wednesday. It reached an all-time low last week.

There are currently more than $16 trillion in negative-yielding debt instruments around the world as central banks try to ease monetary conditions to sustain the global economy. The 10-year sovereign bonds in Belgium, Germany, France and Japan — among others — are trading with a negative rate.

U.S. Treasury yields are still well within positive territory, but the Fed has already cut rates once this year and is expected to ease later this month. Market expectations for a rate cut in September are at 92.7%, according to the CME Group’s FedWatch tool.

An aging population is driving demand for bonds, pushing their yields lower, Greenspan said.

“We’re so used to the idea that we don’t have negative interest rates, but if you get a significant change in the attitude of the population, they look for coupon,” Greenspan said. “As a result of that, there’s a tendency to disregard the fact that that has an effect in the net interest rate that they receive.”

He added that gold prices have been surging recently because people are looking for “hard” assets they know are going to have value down the road as the population ages. Gold futures are up more than 21% in 2019 and are trading around levels not seen since 2013.

Greenspan’s comments come after New York Fed President John Williams called low inflation the “problem of this era” in a speech earlier in the day.

Source: Alan Greenspan says it’s ‘only a matter of time’ before negative rates spread to the US

Actor Robert Davi: 95% of Hollywood’s Technical Crews ‘Are for Trump,’ But ‘They’re Frightened’ to Admit It | CNSNews

Actor Robert Davi (Getty Images/Valery Hache)

While the vast majority of Hollywood’s behind-the-camera workers support President Donald Trump, they’re too frightened to say so because of liberal intolerance in the industry, veteran actor Robert Davi says.

In an interview Monday with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, Davi discussed how Hollywood liberals blacklist and discriminate against conservatives who are simply trying to earn a living in the entertainment field. Davi said he’s been both offered work – if he would denounce Trump – and denied work because of his conservative views.

Davi, who has appeared in more than one hundred films, including the iconic action movie “Die Hard” and the James Bond thriller “License to Kill,” said he wishes Hollywood executives would hold a meeting and agree to stop denying work to people who don’t share their political views.

“It’s never going to happen,” Ingraham replied, calling Hollywood liberals “the most intolerant people when it comes to ideology”:

“It is never going to happen. Never going to happen. They are the most intolerant people when it comes to ideology. They are not for diversity – they’re for their type of diversity. Other people are horrible, awful, rotten people. And, they just don’t want to work with you. I’m sorry, but I have heard this time and again. People have to go and lie about what they believe in order to feed their family. They are lying and hiding themselves.”

Davi agreed, saying that – when it comes to Hollywood’s technical professionals – “95 percent are for Trump,” but can’t say so, for fear of losing their jobs:

“The below-the-line people – the key grips, the sound guys, the lighting guys, the gaffers, the makeup artists – a lot of them, 95 percent are for Trump.

“So, when they go in front of the cameras, they’re frightened. They come to me and say, ‘Man, thank you for speaking up for us. Thank you for being one of the few that speak up.’”

In addition to his film work, Davi’s acting credits include appearances in hit television programs, such as “Profiler” (82 episodes), “CSI: Crime Scene Investigation,” and “Criminal Minds.”

Source: Actor Robert Davi: 95% of Hollywood’s Technical Crews ‘Are for Trump,’ But ‘They’re Frightened’ to Admit It

New Gun Debate Flash Cards Get You Through Arguments With Speed And Efficiency — The Babylon Bee

EAST LONGMEADOW, MA—A new deck of flashcards is hitting stores this week that promises to get you through your next gun debate “thoroughly, speedily, and efficiently.” Card manufacturer Filton Brigley is releasing the cards in the form of a fun game where two people on different sides of the debate can quickly raise cards to cancel out the other person’s argument until every known gun ownership cliche has been exhausted.

The pack comes with two decks: one for gun advocates, and one for those who want stricter gun laws. Each player may choose the level of extremism that suits them based on what cards they select. For instance, a pro-gun player may use any card from, “It’s in the constitution,” to “Nukes should be legal too.” Gun control advocates will find arguments that range from “common-sense gun control” to “Tyrannical authoritarian government takeover.”

The cards are thorough and include all your favorite gun arguments from both sides of the aisle, including:

  • “The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”
  • “You don’t need guns, you can call the police”
  • “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”
  • “What about Switzerland?!”
  • “We should arm teachers”
  • “Cars kill a lot of people, should we ban those too?!”
  • “You have blood on your hands!”

There are even bonus sarcasm cards such as…

  • Maybe we should make killing against the law too
  • You look sooo cooool with your big gun
  • And many more
  • You really want to start a civil war with gun owners?

Players will find that the deck runs out quickly, but you can cycle through all of the arguments as many times as you want until exhausted, just like in a real gun debate.

When you’ve worn out all the arguments in both decks, Brigley has also announced that they will be releasing personal insult flashcards. “At some point, these debates always get personal, so we have a deck for that too,” Seth Hemet, CEO of Filton Brigley told the press. “Cards mocking body types, genders, sexual orientations, religion, skin color, privilege… it’s all in there and will provide anyone with hours and hours of personal attacks when the gun debate deck needs to take a rest.”

via New Gun Debate Flash Cards Get You Through Arguments With Speed And Efficiency — The Babylon Bee

Five Things They Don’t Tell You about Slavery — National Review

It’s important to know what happened before 1619 and what happened elsewhere besides America.

A sign commemorating the arrival of the first Africans is displayed at Chesapeake Bay, in Hampton, Va., August 24, 2019. (Michael A. McCoy/Reuters)

It didn’t begin or end in the United States.

The same people most obsessed with slavery seem to have little interest in the full scope of its history.

There has been an effort for decades now — although with new momentum lately, as exemplified by the New York Times’ 1619 project — to identify the United States and its founding with slavery.

To the extent that this campaign excavates uncomfortable truths about our history and underlines the central role of African Americans in our nation, it is welcome. But it is often intended to undermine the legitimacy of America itself by effacing what makes it distinctive and good.

Yes, slavery and racial prejudice were our great original sins. It would have been better if we had, like the British, been leaders against the slave trade and for abolition (the representation of slaveholders in Congress and the rise of King Cotton forestalled this). But we didn’t invent slavery, even in its race-based form.

Slavery didn’t make us unique, which is obvious if we consider its history in a little broader context. Critics of the American Founding don’t like to do this because it weakens their case and quickly brings them up against politically inconvenient facts that they’d prefer to pass over in silence.

Let’s dwell, then, on a few things they don’t tell us about slavery. None of these are secrets or are hard to find, but they are usually left out or minimized, since they don’t involve self-criticism and, worse, they entail a critical look at societies or cultures that the Left tends to favor vis-à-vis the West.

None of what follows is meant to excuse the practice of slavery in the United States, or its longevity. Nor is it to deny that the Atlantic slave trade was one of history’s great enormities, subjecting millions to mistreatment so horrifying that it is hard to fathom. But if we are to understand the history of slavery, it’s important to know what happened before 1619 and what happened elsewhere besides America.

1. Through much of human history, slavery was ubiquitous and unquestioned

Slavery wasn’t the exception in human history; it was the norm. The “perennial institution,” as historian Seymour Drescher calls it, was an accepted feature of the ancient world, from ancient Egypt to Greece to Rome, and of traditional societies.

The Greeks, according to the compelling David Brion Davis book Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World, “came to see slave labor as absolutely central to their entire economy and way of life” and deployed it in a wide range of occupations. Roman slavery wasn’t race-based but was brutal all the same (see the fate of slave gladiators, among many other atrocities).

In the post-Roman world, the Byzantines, the Vikings, and Central Asian societies all embraced slavery in various forms.

Again, this wasn’t remarkable. Consider, for instance, Ethiopia. Stewart Gordon writes in his book Shackles of Iron: Slavery Beyond the Atlantic that its first legal code, dating from the mid 13th century, “recognized slaves as central to the economy and defined the acquisition and holding of slaves as the natural order of things.” In the 16th century, Ethiopia “was a full slave society,” even taking tribute from some provinces in the form of slaves.

Slavery knew no bounds of color or creed. During one period, from 1500 to 1700, there were more white European slaves held captive on the Barbary Coast than slaves sent from West Africa to the Atlantic world, according to Gordon.

All this history wasn’t incidental to what eventually arose in the Atlantic world. Davis notes, “There was a genuine continuity of slave-trading and slave-holding from Ancient Greece to Rome and from the late Roman Empire to the Byzantine and Arab worlds, from the medieval shipment of slaves from the Balkans, the Black Sea and Caucasia to Muslim and Christian Mediterranean markets, and from there to the beginnings in the fifteenth century of an African slave trade to Portugal and Spain, and then to the Atlantic Islands and New World.”

And slavery was widespread throughout the New World. “An imaginary ‘hemispheric traveler,’” Davis writes, “would have seen black slaves in every colony from Canada and New England all the way south to Spanish Peru and Chile.”

2. The East African slave trade lasted into the 20th century

The United States ended slavery too late (again, Britain is a better model). But let’s not forget how long the slave trade, ended in 1808 in the United States, lasted elsewhere.

Gordon discusses the East African slave trade, also called the Arab slave trade: “Throughout the vast Indian Ocean region,” he writes, “slave trade and ownership were considered completely moral and legal, regardless of the religion of the slaver or the buyer.”

More than a million slaves were taken from East Africa in the 1800s. Despite British attempts at suppressing it, this trade continued into the 20th century. According to Gordon, “Perhaps the last large-scale movement of East African slaves to the Middle East was in the 1920s.”

Relatedly, the Muslim world was a vast empire of slavery and enslaved countless black Africans.

3. Islam was a great conveyor belt of slavery

“Long before the establishment of African slavery in the Americas,” James Walvin writes in his A Short History of Slavery, “Islamic societies were characterized by the widespread and generally unchallenged use of slavery. Indeed slavery was commonplace throughout Arabia well before the rise of Islam. But as Islam spread between the eighth and 15th centuries, and especially to black Africa, it extended and confirmed the commonplace use of slavery and slave trading.”

According to Walvin, Muslim slavers transported enslaved Africans across vast distances — via overland routes — “long before the European pioneers in the Americas began to consider the use of African slaves as laborers in the American settlements.“ The routes across the Sahara, he adds, “survived from the seventh to the twentieth century, and millions of Africans were force-marched along them from their homelands to the slave markets to the north.”

This story is relevant to the nature of slavery in the Atlantic world. At first, slavery in the Muslim world wasn’t race-based, but that changed. Davis writes: “The Arabs and other Muslim converts were the first people to make use of literally millions of blacks from sub-Saharan Africa and to begin associating black Africans with the lowliest forms of bondage.”

It may well be, he continues, that “racial stereotypes were transmitted, along with black slavery itself — to say nothing of the algebra and knowledge of the ancient Greek classics — as Christians treated and fought with Muslims for the first Islamic challenges to the Byzantine Empire, in the seventh and eighth centuries, through the era of the crusades.”

Certainly, while slavery was in eclipse in the rest of Europe, it had a new vitality on the Muslim-occupied Iberian peninsula, with Muslims and Christians both engaged in the practice.

“By the fifteenth century,” historian James Sweet notes, “many Iberian Christians had internalized the racist attitudes of the Muslims and were applying them to the increasing flow of African slaves to their part of the world.“ He adds, “Iberian racism was a necessary precondition for the system of human bondage that would develop in the Americas during the sixteenth century and beyond.”

One would think that there would be more attention paid to the Muslim world’s contribution to race-based slavery, but since it doesn’t offer any opportunity for Western self-reproach, it’s mostly ignored.

4. The Atlantic slave trade would have been impossible without African cooperation 

Slavery wasn’t a European imposition on West Africa. It was already a common practice before the European slavers showed up to subject African captives to the hideous Atlantic passage and bondage in the New World.

According to John Thornton, “slavery was widespread in Atlantic Africa because slaves were the only form of private, revenue-producing property recognized in African law.”

Europeans didn’t capture millions of slaves on their own. The slavers were confined to the coasts. They weren’t capable of enslaving masses of Africans, and even when they attempted it, they risked disrupting the entire system (and retribution from the Africans).

In the interior, slaves were captured in battles and raids and marched to the coast in unspeakable conditions. They were then sold to the Europeans for liquor, textiles, tobacco, and other goods.

Davis notes “the rise of predatory states, such as Futa Jallon, Dahomey, Asante, Kasanje, and the Lunda Empire, which found it financially profitable to wage war on neighbors and sell prisoners to the Portuguese, Dutch, English, French, Danes, or Americans.”

The system of West African enslavement kept running even when the Europeans stopped coming, “flooding various regions with nonexportable slaves,” as Davis puts it. The slave population in West Africa would come to exceed that of the New World.

5. Brazil took the lion’s share of slaves from the Atlantic slave trade

Any historical accounting of the Atlantic slave trade has to judge Brazil harshly.

Ninety-five percent of the slaves transported across the Atlantic went to places south of the present-day United States, with Brazil alone taking about 40 percent.

Black slaves were already about 10 percent of Lisbon’s population in 1550, and Brazil had about 1 million slaves by 1790.

Even though a relatively small 5 percent of African slaves went to colonial America, the population in the colonies and the United States grew until there were four million slaves by the time of the Civil War. Brazil never had this natural increase because the life expectancy of the slaves there was so low. Life on Brazil’s sugar plantations was brutal and regimented.

“Beginning in the 1960s,” Davis writes, “historians have demolished the myths that Brazilian slavery was benign or humane and that Brazil was relatively free from racism.” The record shows, he writes, “extreme forms of racial prejudice coupled with the view that slaves were mere instruments of production.”

Even when the Atlantic slave trade was mostly illegal and on the way out, the beat went on. Brazil and Cuba received most of the more than 2 million slaves transported between 1820 and 1880, according to Davis.

***

To repeat, none of this justifies American cruelty and hypocrisy across the centuries. It does suggest, however, that an appropriate perspective should take full account of all that sets us apart, which emphatically wasn’t chattel slavery.

None of the other societies tainted by slavery produced the Declaration of Independence, a Washington, Jefferson, and Hamilton, the U.S. Constitution, or a tradition of liberty that inspired people around the world for centuries. If we don’t keep that in mind, as well as the broader context of slavery, we aren’t giving this country — or history — its due.

via Five Things They Don’t Tell You about Slavery — National Review

Leading SJWs Now Claim ‘There is No Evangelical Social Justice Movement’ — Christian Research Network

“For mercy sakes, people. Just google Thabiti Anyabwile’s own name cross-referenced with “Social Justice” and you’ll see he’s been promoting that movement BY NAME for the last two years. And now, he has the audacity to claim it doesn’t exist and we’re making it up.”

(JD Hall – Pulpit & Pen)  Thabiti Anyabwile and Kyle J. Howard – two outspoken proponents of Social Justice – are now claiming that there is no Evangelical Social Justice Movement. They are now insinuating that those who allege the existence of such a movement are conspiratorial or paranoid. These same men who have explicitly used the term thousands of times in recent years and promoted the concept as a new revolution now claim it doesn’t exist.

And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed – if all records told the same tale – then the lie passed into history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present controls the past…’Reality control,’ they called it: in Newspeak, ‘doublethink.’

George Orwell, 1984

Marxists are like rats who have infested a home. When the light is shined upon them, they scurry back into the black shadows. Rats do not leave, they simply retreat, only to come out again in whatever corner happens to have remained darkened.

These men use terms of Critical Race Theory, until we explain their vocabulary, its origins, and its ideology. These men espouse doctrine from the Frankfurt School until we explain what Cultural Marxism is, at which point they change their approach. These men teach explicit Liberation Theology, until we explain the devilish doctrines of James Cone. In each case the rats do not evacuate; they only evade. Subversive doctrines require plausible deniability, shows of aloofness, coyness, and the willingness to lie.  View article →

Research

Thabiti Anyabwile

The Gospel Coalition

Progressive (Social Justice) “Christianity”

via Leading SJWs Now Claim ‘There is No Evangelical Social Justice Movement’ — Christian Research Network

CURL: ‘Facts’ Are Dead In Today’s Political World, Replaced By Personal ‘Truth’ — The Gateway Pundit

Do “facts” exist anymore? Or are we all living in alternative realities, where we everyone has their own set of facts?

It sounds silly, but it’s all too real.

Just days after President Trump moved into the White House in 2017, top aide Kellyanne Conway kicked off the whole game. During a “Meet the Press” appearance, she was asked about the size of the crowd at the inauguration — yes, that was an actual news story — and she said then-press secretary Sean Spicer “gave alternative facts” to dispute claims that there was a paltry crowd.

In a fantastic twist you couldn’t have made up, “journalist” Dan Rather blasted Conway (yes, the guy who used “alternative facts” when he claimed former President George W. Bush never served in the Texas Air National Guard and got booted from his CBS News anchor chair).

It’s all gone downhill since then.

Now, “facts” have become fungible. Every day, both side cite “facts” — often diametrically opposed “facts” — to support their arguments. Fact-checkers swing into action, with liberal sites backing Democrats’ “facts” and conservative sites validating Republicans’ “facts.”

And both sides are embracing the fact that maybe there aren’t any “facts” anymore.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in a testy hearing in January with Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen about the U.S.-Mexico border, interrupted to declare: “I reject your facts.”

Well, that pretty much ends that debate.

Nielsen, a no-nonsense sort, was having none of it. “These aren’t my facts,” she fired back. “These are the facts.” But were they, in fact, her own “facts”?

That’s where we are today — everyone is armed with their own “facts.”

Especially Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She takes to social media daily to decry this or denounce that, often citing “facts.” Last week, she said that “there is a potential that a lot of diseases could, um, escape these melted glaciers, things that were frozen for thousands of years, and that they’re going to get into our water.” She must’ve read an article, so now, clearly, she’s an expert. Fact.

The 29-year-old former bartender also said mosquitoes are “starting to fly further north that carry diseases like malaria, and, um, a whole slew of other things,” so, boom, another “fact.”

AOC embodies the new flexible definition of “fact,” lamenting to The Washington Post that “I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.”

Then, as always, there’s former Vice President Joe Biden, for whom “facts” are whatever he says they are.

At the Iowa State Fair last month, the 2020 Democratic front-runner declared to a crowd of supporters: “We choose unity over division. We choose science over fiction. We choose truth over facts.”

Biden actually bailed out of his first run for the White House in 1988 after it was revealed that he had plagiarized parts of his own life story from a British politician.

“My intent was not to deceive anyone,” Biden wrote at the time. “For if it were, I would not have been so blatant.”

The 76-year-old is at it again, this time after telling a story last month about how a four-star general asked him to travel to Afghanistan to award a Silver Star to a Navy captain who saved a fellow soldier. It was a great tale, “except almost every detail in the story appears to be incorrect,” The Post wrote.

Biden has been defending himself for a week for conflating the stories of three different soldiers into one anecdote, and on Monday said he wasn’t trying to “mislead anybody.”

“Details matter in terms of whether you’re trying to mislead people. And I wasn’t trying to mislead anybody,” Biden told reporters in Iowa at a Labor Day picnic. “My point is, I was there.”

Then he went further on Tuesday, saying “the details are irrelevant in terms of decision-making.”

Snopes, a liberal fact-checking site, backed Biden, saying his “story is not ‘false,’ as was widely reported, because his underlying recollection of pinning a medal on a grieving soldier who did not want the medal is based on a real occurrence.” Huh?

Then, of course, there’s Trump. “As of Aug. 5, his 928th day in office, he had made 12,019 false or misleading claims,” according to The Post. Even if the liberal paper is only half right, that’s a lot of falsities.

So, forget facts. Politicians from both sides are telling you they don’t exist anymore.

But luckily, you know better. “Facts” are real, and they still exist. They’re hard to find and harder to validate, but that’ll be every American’s job this election season as they sift through the claims from Democrats and Republicans.

And always remember, you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own “facts.”

*Joseph Curl ran the Drudge Report from 2010 to 2014 and covered the White House for a dozen years. He can be reached at josephcurl@gmail.com and on Twitter at @JosephCurl. A version of this article ran previously in The Washington Times.

via CURL: ‘Facts’ Are Dead In Today’s Political World, Replaced By Personal ‘Truth’ — The Gateway Pundit