‘Violent crime’ at Güstrow railway station: this was the headline used by the police in their press releases. In recent months, there has been a sharp increase in such incidents, including fights, verbal abuse, threats, thefts and even stabbings – mostly involving Syrians, Russians and Afghans, but Germans were also involved. Weapons and alcohol were often involved. Federal and state police, the municipal public order office and railway security services had to deploy barriers, which even led to train delays.
Marina Lange no longer feels safe. The saleswoman at the newspaper shop in the station admits to being afraid. Even though the police and security guards from the German railway company patrol the area every day and ask the employees if everything is okay, as she says. “For a year now, since I’ve been working here, I’ve had to watch people fighting on the station forecourt, sitting outside and drinking. Especially at the end of the month, when people receive their welfare payments, many buy spirits and drink them straight away. Or they steal them from the shop,‘ says the saleswoman. ’Sometimes it’s unbearable.‘ She also has to listen to crude remarks such as, ’I’ll smash your face in!”
She observes that ‘everyone’ meets here at the station. Often, she says, it is ‘the foreigners’. ‘When they are banned from the shop, they come back anyway, disguised with sunglasses.’ One of them threw the ham croissant she had just sold back in her face because it contained pork, which Muslims do not eat. Fortunately, some young people intervened. ‘Otherwise, we have to rely on the police, especially when there are fights outside. But the twenty minutes it takes for them to get here feel like an eternity.’
The travellers themselves often confirm that they do not feel comfortable here at Güstrow station, says the blonde saleswoman. Magdalene Klerowitz, a passenger from North Rhine-Westphalia, admits that she does not feel comfortable here, especially as a woman, and that she has already been harassed.
The German government has given the green light in the cabinet to a draft bill that would allow searches of newsrooms and the premises of digital platforms without a prior court order under certain circumstances.
According to press reports, the initiative is presented as a technical transposition of European rules on transparency in political advertising. However, it has sparked intense legal and political controversy due to the breadth of the powers it would grant to the administration.
The proposed Political Advertising Transparency Act aims to incorporate into national law the EU regulation governing the dissemination of political advertising online. Its stated purpose is to strengthen transparency, traceability of funding, and data protection in political messaging. In practice, however, the draft goes well beyond mere disclosure obligations and directly affects the operations of media organisations and technology platforms.
The most controversial aspect of the proposal is the strengthened role of the Bundesnetzagentur, which already acts as the digital supervisory authority under the Digital Services Act. Under the draft law, the agency would be able to order inspections of companies and entities that disseminate or facilitate political advertising if it deems that they have failed to provide the required documentation.
In cases of “imminent danger,” such inspections could be carried out during business hours even without prior judicial authorisation. The draft itself acknowledges that this power restricts the fundamental right to the inviolability of the home enshrined in Germany’s Basic Law—an admission that has intensified criticism from constitutional lawyers and press associations.
Experts in constitutional law warn that the proposal represents a disproportionate expansion of administrative powers. They stress that searches and seizures are instruments typically reserved for criminal investigations and that their use by a regulatory authority—without prior judicial oversight—is particularly problematic when it may affect newsrooms protected by enhanced guarantees of press freedom and professional confidentiality.
The European context further fuels the controversy. The EU regulation provides for fines of up to 6% of global annual turnover for violations of political advertising rules. Faced with complex requirements and the ambiguity surrounding the definition of “political advertising,” major platforms such as Google and Meta have chosen to restrict this type of content in several markets.
The Ministry for Digital Affairs defends the draft bill by arguing that similar mechanisms exist in other areas of economic regulation and data protection, where administrative inspections without a court order are permitted in exceptional cases. The government insists that the aim is not to interfere with journalistic work but to comply with European obligations and safeguard the integrity of democratic processes.
Opposition reaction has been fierce. The leader of Alternative für Deutschland, Alice Weidel, has accused the government of using the Digital Services Act framework to introduce what she describes as a “censorship hammer.” According to Weidel, merely suspecting a media outlet of spreading “disinformation” could be enough to justify a search of its newsroom—something she considers incompatible with the standards of a liberal democracy.
Auf Grundlage des "Digital Service Acts" (DSA) der EU will die Merz-Regierung ein Gesetz erlassen, das unkompliziert Durchsuchungen in Medien-Redaktionen erlaubt. Sobald ein Medium im Verdacht stünde, "Desinformation" zu verbreiten, könnte dessen Redaktion durchsucht werden.… pic.twitter.com/SBsGMozWPZ
Weidel argues that the real aim of the legislation is not only to regulate political advertising but to exert pressure on critical media and content creators. In her view, even the opening of investigations would have an intimidating effect, given the highly politicised environment and the significant public exposure such proceedings would entail.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán used a wide-ranging international press conference in Budapest to frame the run-up to Hungary’s 2026 parliamentary election as a choice between what he called a Brussels-driven path toward war and centralization and a sovereign national course focused on peace, energy independence, and family-friendly policies.
Opening Monday’s event, Orbán said the “rules of the old liberal world order are no longer valid,” arguing that a new global phase had begun. “The new era will be the era of nations,” he said, adding that Hungary was already adapted to this reality.
He identified four defining issues of the period ahead: “War and peace, energy, migration, and development.”
On the war in Ukraine, Orbán reiterated Hungary’s refusal to take part in any form of military or financial involvement. “Hungary’s task is clear: we must stay out of war,” he said. He rejected EU proposals for joint financing and support, stating bluntly: “We will not give our money to Ukraine. We won’t give a war loan either — the word loan is a scam. Everyone knows it will not be paid back.” He added: “We do not send soldiers and weapons, and we do not accept the transition to the Brussels war economy.”
🕊️ PM Orbán: Hungary has decided to stay out of the war economy, we are building a peace economy
🎙️ @PM_ViktorOrban launched Hungary’s 2026 political season with a wide-ranging international press conference in Budapest, laying out the government’s position on key… pic.twitter.com/zTarm02w5j
Instead, Orbán said Hungary had chosen a different economic direction. “Hungary has decided to stay out of the war economy. We are building a peace economy,” he said, describing this approach as “the Hungarian way,” which he said offered “an opportunity for development.”
The Hungarian prime minister warned that the country’s opposition Tisza party, led by Péter Magyar, would adhere to Brussels’ demands in several areas, handing over taxpayers’ cash to fund the war, and accept the EU’s controversial migration pact and gender ideology, infringing on sovereignty.
Energy policy was also presented as a core element of national sovereignty. Orbán said energy would be “the most important issue of technological development, in addition to sovereignty,” arguing that countries able to secure cheap and reliable energy would emerge as winners in the new era. He sharply criticized EU sanctions on Russian oil and gas, saying that current regulations “would cut off supplies from Russia to Hungary” and that Brussels was abusing its legal powers. “Energy policy falls under national competence,” he said, confirming that Hungary was initiating legal proceedings against the European Commission. He also claimed that existing EU measures had “increased prices in the European Union by 20 percent.”
Migration was described as a fundamental and unresolved conflict with Brussels. Referring to the EU’s migration pact, Orbán said Hungary would be required to process 23,000 asylum applications a year, establish migrant facilities, and accept relocated migrants from other member states. He rejected this outright. “We will not take in any migrants. We will not change border security, and we will not become an immigration country,” he said. “Brussels cannot decide who Hungarians must live with.”
Orbán linked these positions to the broader political stakes of the 2026 election. “The government’s view is that the options facing the country are simple,” he said. “Either we follow the Brussels path, which leads to austerity, or we follow the Hungarian path, the path of peace, which creates a better life for Hungary.”
Funding war < Supporting families
While Western Europe shifts toward a war economy, Hungary strengthens a peace economy: higher wages, tax cuts for parents and small businesses, lifelong tax exemption for mothers, and a 14th-month pension. This is what choosing peace looks like. pic.twitter.com/uKX774Gj0H
Turning to domestic policy, Orbán argued that Hungary could continue developing even as much of Europe faced fiscal tightening. “You will have money for development if you do not give it to others,” he said, again referring to the government’s refusal to finance war-related spending. He stressed that resources would be used “for Hungarian families, not for foreign governments.”
He highlighted a package of measures that took effect on Jan. 1, calling them “decisions that are unthinkable in Western Europe today.” These include the completion of the doubling of family tax benefits, with a further 50 percent increase, personal income tax exemptions for mothers under 30 with one child and under 40 with two children, and an 11 percent rise in the minimum wage. Orbán also pointed to the launch of a corporate tax reduction program, the introduction of a 14th-month pension, continued 3 percent fixed-rate mortgages for first-time buyers, and additional pay increases across the public sector.
“The rate of growth is at the mercy of war,” Orbán said, “and we are still able to make the lives of Hungarians easier under such circumstances.” He argued that this demonstrated the resilience of the Hungarian economy, adding that “not many countries would withstand such measures while maintaining the budget deficit and public debt.”
In his closing remarks, Orbán said that Hungary’s position was not accidental but the result of consistent choices. “We must not give up the Hungarian way,” he said, presenting the election year ahead as a referendum on whether the country continues on what he called the path of peace and national independence or yields to external pressure from Brussels.
Switzerland moved to freeze any assets held by deposed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and close associates “with immediate effect”.
“The Federal Council wants to ensure that any illicitly acquired assets cannot be transferred out of Switzerland in the current situation,” the government said in a press release.
This is the first fresh asset-freeze announcement since Saturday’s capture of Maduro, though Bern has not said whether any assets actually exist or in what amount.
Switzerland has had sanctions in force against Venezuela since 2018, and the US, Canada and EU imposed sanctions and an embargo on dealing with Caracas in 2017.
Under the Federal Act on the Freezing and the Restitution of Illicit Assets Held by Foreign Politically Exposed Persons (FIAA) the Swiss government “decided, as a precautionary measure, to freeze any assets held in Switzerland by Mr. Maduro and other persons associated with him,” the statement continued.
The asset freeze does not affect any members of the current Venezuelan government.
The Swiss government also said that “should future legal proceedings reveal that the funds were illicitly acquired, Switzerland will endeavour to ensure that they benefit the Venezuelan people.”
On 3 January, Maduro was arrested by US forces in Caracas and flown to the United States due to charges of narco-trafficking and his alleged collaboration with drug traffickers and criminal groups in both Venezuela and Colombia.
Switzerland’s private banking industry has repeatedly surfaced in major leaks and watchdog reports as a place where politically exposed people and other high-risk clients have parked their wealth, ostensibly drawn by the country’s political stability, a large wealth-management sector and historically strong bank and corporate secrecy that can make ownership harder to trace.
Bishop Antonio Suetta Diocese of Ventimiglia-San Remo
The Diocese of Ventimiglia–San Remo has installed a bell dedicated to unborn children at its episcopal headquarters, prompting criticism from leftist political figures.
On December 28, 2025, the Diocese of Ventimiglia–San Remo inaugurated the “Bell for Unborn Children” at the tower of the diocesan curia building in Ventimiglia, north-western Italy, as an initiative promoted by Bishop Antonio Suetta to raise awareness about unborn life, encourage reflection on abortion laws, and convey a message of hope and prayer. This action has since attracted strong objections from representatives of the centre-left in the region of Liguria.
“Contrary to prejudices expressed in various quarters regarding this initiative, the sound of this bell is in support of life and is not intended as an invective against women who have had an abortion,” Suetta said in an interview with La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana.
The bell, which bears the inscription “To all unborn children,” is designed to ring once a day at 8 p.m. According to the diocese, the daily toll is meant to serve as a reminder of children who were never born and as a call to prayer for the protection of human life. The inauguration took place on the liturgical feast of the Holy Innocents, a date traditionally associated in the Catholic calendar with the commemoration of children killed at the time of King Herod, as narrated in the Gospel of St. Matthew.
The initiative immediately sparked controversy in Italy’s political arena. Edoardo Verda, a Democratic Party councillor in the city of Imperia, described the bell as “moral propaganda” and as “an unbearable intrusion into a sphere that does not concern religion, but women’s self-determination.” Similar criticism came from Enrico Ioculano, a regional councillor for Liguria, who publicly stated that “the diocese should question its priorities.”
Suetta, responding to accusations that the bell represented a judgement against women, stressed that the Catholic Church’s position distinguishes between the moral condemnation of abortion and pastoral care for women involved. Citing the Second Vatican Council’s document Gaudium et Spes, he reiterated that the Church defines abortion as an “abominable crime,” while also considering women who have undergone abortions as victims of a broader moral and social harm. “In the fact of abortion,” Suetta said, “a child dies and, at the same time, a mother also suffers. Abortion leaves a heavy burden of pain, and the bell invites prayer and closeness for all women who suffer for this reason.”
The bishop also framed the initiative as addressing what he called a widespread “assuefaction” (or habituation) to abortion in countries where it is legal. In his interview, he argued that legal abortion, now permitted in most countries worldwide, has led many people to underestimate its biological and medical reality and to cease considering it either a crime or a sin.
He added that, in his view, abortion is often presented by progressive and feminist movements as an absolute right, subordinating scientific evidence, natural law, and moral judgement to individual choice. For this reason, he described the bell as an attempt to “sensitize consciences” on an issue that he defined as “not confessional, but anthropological and scientific.”
The controversy expanded further after Laura Amoretti, the Equal Opportunities Councillor of the Liguria Region, wrote a formal letter to Pope Leo XIV asking the Pontiff to take a position against the initiative.
In her letter, Amoretti stated that the decision to install the bell, because of its strong symbolic value, had caused “concern and pain in many women and families” and had generated “a climate of judgement and stigmatization” regarding personal decisions often made in complex and distressing circumstances.
Amoretti argued that, in a pluralistic society and a secular state, such initiatives risk becoming a form of public judgement on women’s bodies and choices, potentially increasing gender inequalities rather than reducing them. While acknowledging the Catholic Church’s religious freedom and social role, she maintained that “both religious and civil institutions should aim to accompany and support individuals rather than divide communities or expose legally recognized personal decisions to public scrutiny.”
The origins of the bell predate its installation on February 5, 2022, during the diocesan initiative “40 Days for Life,” when the bell was cast as a permanent and visible sign of prayer, remembrance, and entrustment. “40 Days for Life” is a period of 40 days dedicated to prayer, public witness, and educational meetings focused on pro-life issues, an initiative in which the Diocese of Ventimiglia–San Remo has previously taken part.
According to diocesan sources, its purpose has remained consistent since its casting: to give symbolic “voice” to unborn children and to keep the issue of abortion present in public consciousness through a daily, audible sign. Since its inauguration, however, the bell has become a focal point of a broader public debate in Liguria, highlighting ongoing tensions in Italy between religious expression, political authority, and differing views on abortion and women’s rights.
Screen shots of Tik-Tok posts propagating Poland leaving the EU. The Polish government has reacted against the posts demanding Tik-Tok should be sanctioned by the European Commission.
Poland’s government has asked the European Union to take measures against the social media platform TikTok after allegedly AI-generated clips appeared on the platform calling for Poland to leave the EU.
The centre-left government’s spokesman Adam Szłapka claimed “there is no doubt that these videos on TikTok are Russian disinformation” and alleged the spoken text in the videos contained Russian syntax.
The videos in question, which targeted a younger audience, contained images of young women brandishing Polish national colours and emblems supporting “Polexit”, the popular term for Poland leaving the EU, while criticising the Tusk government for its pro-EU orientation.
In one post, viewed by over 100,000 TikTok users, a young woman says, “Yes, I want Polexit. I’ve had enough of Poland governed from Brussels. Tired of being threatened that without foreign interference we can’t cope. It’s our rights, our money and our decision to make.”
Dariusz Standerski, the deputy digital affairs minister in Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s coalition government, said December 31 that “in recent days, TikTok has seen a surge in videos generated with the use of AI, spreading disinformation regarding Poland’s membership in the European Union. The scale of this practice may suggest that we are dealing with an organised campaign”.
Standerski then revealed the text of a letter sent to Henna Virkkunen, the European Commissioner for tech sovereignty, security and democracy. The letter demanded the European Commission initiate proceedings against TikTok under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA).
The DSA is the EU legislation, which came into force in 2022, aiming to regulate the accountability, moderation, and transparency of digital services. It has been heavily criticised by President Donald Trump’s US administration and campaigners for free speech across Europe.
The US government recently took exception to an EC decision to fine social media platform X €120 million for not complying with the DSA.
According to the letter sent by the Polish government, the recent TikTok content on Polexit “poses a threat to public order, information security, and the integrity of democratic processes in Poland and across the European Union”.
The minister did not offer evidence as to how the Tik Tok videos threaten “public disorder” or any “democratic processes” in Poland.
Standerski claimed TikTok has not been sufficiently robust in stopping the videos.
“Available information suggests that TikTok has not implemented adequate mechanisms for moderating AI-generated content, nor has it ensured effective transparency regarding the origin of such materials”, he said.
The letter added that in the government’s opinion, this “undermines the objectives of the Digital Services Act concerning the prevention of disinformation and the protection of users”.
In its response to the government, the EC’s spokesman Eva Hrncirova said January 2 the Commission will “be in touch with the Polish authorities to examine the compatibility of the TikTok content with the DSA”.
She added that, according to the provisions of the DSA, internet platforms such as TikTok have the “duty to identify and assess all risks involved with the functioning of their services, including the risks involved with the use of Artificial Intelligence.”
Hrncirova confirmed the EC is monitoring TikTok’s compliance with the DSA and revealed in March 2024, the EC had contacted social media platforms to seek information on the measures they were taking to counter the threats involved with the use of AI.
The Polish government’s action on TikTok has been criticised by prominent conservative journalist Cezary Gnyz, a contributor to the weekly DoRzeczy.
“Since when has content advocating the leaving of the EU become forbidden and on what legal basis?” asked Gnyz, who added his magazine has just published an article calling on Poland to “escape from the EU”.
According to portal Interia, the channel sharing the AI generated videos has been removed from the TikTok service after a multitude of complaints from users and reports of its activities on news websites in Poland.
The channel which had put up the posts had existed since May 2023 under a different name and used English as its lead language.
It began to operate in Polish under a different name last month, and began posting content relating to Poland.
However, there is no evidence it has had any impact on public opinion. While surveys show support for ‘Polexit’ has risen to 25 per cent from under 10 per cent in just two years, these were taken before the channel began to operate in Polish.
These surveys showed voters who support the political Right are increasingly supportive of Poland leaving the European Union. However, the only political grouping in Poland openly committed to Polexit is the “Confederation of the Polish Crown”, led by the unaffiliated MEP Grzegorz Braun.
The other two Right-wing parties, the Conservatives (PiS) who ruled Poland between 2015 and 2023, and the Libertarian Nationalist Confederation party, have criticised the EU but stopped short of calling for Poland to leave it.
Braun left Confederation at the beginning of 2025 in disagreement of what he called the party’s drift to the centre.
The Polish government has introduced legislation in parliament to implement the DSA. Provisions there give government officials the right to take down internet material without a court order.
The legislation has been attacked by the opposition as a threat to free speech. Opposition-aligned President Karol Nawrocki has said he will veto the measure if it clears parliament in its present form.
Donald Trump’s operation against Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro on the night of 2 to 3 January provides a convenient insight into the links and sympathies maintained by the deposed dictator with left-wing parties around the world. On this occasion, information that came to light a few years ago has resurfaced: one of Emmanuel Macron’s closest advisers was involved in Maduro’s campaign in 2013.
In 2016, L’Express magazine investigated Ismaël Emelien, Macron’s right-hand man. The investigation, which went relatively unnoticed at the time, was republished in 2019, when Emelien resigned from his position with the president of the republic. It revealed that Macron’s adviser and close collaborator had been involved in Maduro’s election in 2013, alongside Gilles Finchelstein, director of studies at the communications consultancy Havas, one of the oldest and most prestigious communications agencies in France.
The investigative newspaper Mediapart also looked into Emelien’s case in 2017, at a time when Macron was criticising the links between his left-wing opponent, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, and the Venezuelan regime. Emelien confirmed that he had travelled to Venezuela and devoted himself to this mission “about one day a week for three months.” His colleague, Finchelstein, explained that he had worked alongside him “thinking about the strategic positioning of Maduro’s campaign.”
The mission entrusted to Havas began when Hugo Chávez’s death was looming and his succession was being prepared. In addition to Emelien, the mission employed no fewer than 30 people to provide “a comprehensive service including the production of advertising spots, a documentary, the organisation and design of meetings, social media and consulting.”
Emelien later explained to L’Express that he had been mistaken about Maduro. “We thought Maduro was a true reformist. During the campaign, we realised that this was not the case.” The fact remains that considerable human resources were allocated to help one dictator succeed another.
These revelations, which have resurfaced today, testify to the troubled relations maintained by part of the French Left—including Macron himself through his personal adviser, despite his ‘centrist’ position—with the Venezuelan dictatorship. Emelien was one of Macron’s closest collaborators, awarded the title of ‘special adviser’ at the Élysée Palace after being one of the architects of the ‘En Marche!’ movement that supported Macron’s election in 2017.
On Sunday, January 4th, a protest against Maduro’s arrest was held at Place de la République in Paris, bringing together around a thousand people at the behest of left-wing parties. Several leftist figures expressed their outrage at Macron’s official statement, accusing him of giving Trump ill-advised support with his words: “The Venezuelan people are now free of Nicolas Maduro’s dictatorship and can just rejoice.” Mélenchon, president of La France Insoumise (LFI), described Maduro’s arrest as “an odious kidnapping.”
Mélenchon was also an unconditional admirer of Hugo Chávez, whom he praised upon his death with these words: “What Chávez is never dies; it is the inexhaustible ideal of the humanist hope of revolution.” In 2019, he supported Maduro, who had been re-elected under suspicious circumstances a year earlier.
Among the participants in the demonstration, there is a preference for remaining cautious in describing the fallen regime and focusing attacks on Trump, described by a Colombian refugee activist interviewed by France Info as a “true dictator.”
They wanted to take advantage of the plight of people in south-west Berlin affected by the power outage. But an alert passer-by and officers from the 23rd riot police unit thwarted a gang of thieves on Saturday night.
According to police reports, the officers were approached by a witness at around 2 a.m. who had observed a group of men on Nieritzweg who appeared to be scouting out detached houses.
Berlin power outage after left-wing extremist terrorist attack: Former minister fears thousands of deaths; residents of the neighbourhoods are afraid of the Arab migrants in their unlit flats and streets https://medforth.biz/berlin-po….wer-outage-after-lef
The officers discovered a white Fiat car parked on the street with a man sitting behind the wheel and the engine turned off.
A check revealed that the car had been reported stolen and that the number plates had also been stolen. The 34-year-old driver, of Arab origin, did not have a valid driving licence.
During a search of the vehicle, police officers found various burglary tools in the boot, including a hydraulic crowbar. The car and tools were seized, and the 34-year-old was provisionally arrested and subsequently checked at a police station. After his identity was established, he was released. A search is underway for his accomplices, who are currently unknown.
The worst people in the world are trying to ‘save the planet’ again by causing malicious damage.
50,000 households were left without power in Berlin, including hospitals and old age homes, after the Vulkangruppe, a German anarchist organization known as the ‘Volcano Group’ committed arson to bring attention to ‘global warming’.
The leftists claimed that their vandalism was an “act of resistance” against the ongoing “greed for energy.”
Their “act of resistance” cut power to hospitals and the poor, even as the radical leftist group claimed that it had “cut the juice to the ruling class” while stating “we apologize to the less affluent residents of southwest Berlin
“We can no longer afford the rich,” the alleged letter declared, urging its victims to “have courage”.
“Shutting down fossil fuel power plants is a manual process. Have courage. We know we must stop this destruction. We know we are not alone. Don’t give up hope for a world where life has space, not greed for money, power, and destruction. Last night, we successfully sabotaged the gas-fired power plant in Berlin-Lichterfelde. The attack on the gas-fired power plant is an act of self-defense and international solidarity with all those who protect the Earth and life. The infrastructure that serves the “technological attack” and promotes the destruction of the Earth can be sabotaged. Fossil fuel energy production can be stopped.”
Now tens of thousands of people may be without power for much of the week. Has the planet been saved? No, but the Left never saves anything. It only destroys.
The good news coming from the Venezuelan operation is that President Trump wants to jump-start the oil industry. This is good because we are going to need a lot of those oil reserves to run the world, as much as the climate alarmists hate to hear that.
Let’s face it. The green energy alternative is not working. All you have to do is see what wind power is costing blue states. This is from Betsy McCaughey:
Instead of admitting that expensive electricity is a choice they’re deliberately making — your budget be damned — they lie, claiming wind and solar power are “affordable” and “reliable.”
The shameless gaslighting was on full display last week, in response to a Trump administration edict pausing offshore wind farm construction along the East Coast near Virginia, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island.
…
New Yorkers pay, on average, 58% more for their electricity than the national average because of the green mandates state politicians have imposed and the power sources they exclude, such as natural gas fracking.
Connecticut ratepayers are fleeced even more, paying nearly double the national average rate for electricity.
Climate-driven pols, almost all of them Democrats, should at least admit they’re making decisions based on ideology and, in many cases, pressure from the renewable energy lobby. Instead, they parrot falsehoods about “affordability” and “reliability.”
Offshore wind power is at least twice as expensive per kilowatt as natural gas-generated electricity or almost any other source.
There you have it. State politicians have chosen to go green, giving the consumer more red balances. It’s obvious that these policies are not working but the “blues” are afraid to say so because it means challenging the religion of climate change. After all, who wants the bears to disappear or the coastlines to get flooded anytime soon? Or oceans to dry up?
Before you call me a “climate denier” or working on behalf of the oil industry, let me say that I believe in “all of the above” as long as one of all of the “above” keeps my electricity and gasoline reasonable. Too much of this “green energy” campaign has been about symbolism rather than providing people with energy.
And this is where Venezuelan oil comes in. It can rebuild Venezuela to the prosperity it once enjoyed, and it could provide U.S. consumers with more reasonable energy costs.
So, the answer is not blowing in the wind, but rather in Lake Maracaibo or the oil reserves of Venezuela.
