Americans can’t afford MCDONALD’S as Bidenomics implodes



There’s no question that under President Joe Biden, inflation is out of control, and families across the country are suffering for it.

And while Sara Gonzales doesn’t advocate for eating fast food, she can’t help but notice that the current prices of fast food illustrate just how devastating this problem has become.

At the end of 2019, medium french fries at McDonald's cost $1.79. That price has now increased by 134.1% to $4.19. Similarly, a McChicken was $1.29. Now, it’s a whopping 201.6% higher at $3.89.

A McDonald’s cheeseburger increased 215%, from $1.00 to $3.15.

“I don’t eat McDonald's, but the fact of the matter is a lot of average Americans do,” Gonzales says. “This is the bottom of the barrel when we’re talking about inflation and increase in prices.”

McDonald’s isn’t alone either. Chick-fil-A and Taco Bell, among others, have also seen massive increases in their menu prices.

“This is not sustainable,” Gonzales says. “When the average American has to take out a payday loan to purchase their groceries, I would say things are not trending in the right direction.”

Jaco Booyens notes that it’s not the fault of the food industry for these astronomical prices.

“It’s fuel. It’s transportation of food through this country. We have the most complex food-distribution network in the world. Our food travels further than any other nation’s food,” Booyens explains.

“When you stop drilling, baby, and you don’t produce fuel, and you deplete your resources, everything goes up.”


Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

CNN legal analyst: Cohen is the REAL CRIMINAL in hush money trial



After the star witness of Trump’s hush money trial, Michael Cohen, confessed to stealing $60,000 from his old boss, even CNN is admitting Trump might not be so bad.

“The way this was raised and addressed on direct is what Julia Louis-Dreyfus would call ‘yada, yada, yada,’" CNN's senior legal analyst began in a recent segment. “Michael Cohen explained this whole thing: ‘That’s what was owed, and I didn’t feel Mr. Trump deserved the difference.’”

“That’s a lot different than ‘I stole $60,000 from my boss on the transaction at the heart of this case,’” he continued.

“And by the way, the fact that he was never charged with larceny is important, because stealing $60,000 through fraud, which would be larceny in New York State, is more serious of a crime than falsifying business records,” the legal analyst concluded.

Sara Gonzales is shocked that CNN is being honest.

“From CNN,” she says, appalled. “Remember, this is the star witness. He is a liar. He is a known convicted perjurer. He is a fraud, and even CNN is forced to admit this star witness is the one who committed a more serious crime than falsifying business records.”

Jaco Booyens agrees but knows why Trump is being persecuted like this.

“The star witness is not a threat to the plan of the constant deep state government,” Booyens says. “And actually, it’s not even Donald Trump. It’s the will of the American people represented by a man called Donald Trump.”


Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'End this experiment': Florida and Iowa pass bills requiring parental consent for kids to get on social media



Republicans have advanced legislation in Florida and Iowa aimed at protecting children and empowering parents with regard to their social media use.

House Bill 3 in Florida and House File 2523 in the Hawkeye State both appear to be meaningful efforts by lawmakers to ensure that parents have a say in whether giant companies can enter into contracts with their kids, collect data about their kids, and subject their kids to potentially harmful content.

Big tech lobbyists and leftist activists have once again expressed their displeasure over such efforts to help families shield children from well-documented online harms.

Iowa's HF 2523

The "Social Media Parental Authorization Act" passed the state House with bipartisan support in a 88 to 6 vote on March 6.

The bill would preclude social media companies from allowing minors to be account holders on their platforms unless they have received prior express parental authorization. Social media companies would also be required to allow "a parent or guardian who has provided parental authorization to revoke or rescind the grant of parental authorization upon request at any time."

Facebook, TikTok, and other similar companies would be forbidden from collecting data on minors whose accounts were not created with the blessing of their parents.

Under the proposed law, social media companies would further be required to provide authorizing parents with a password or some other means to access their child's account so that they they can view posts and private messages; manage time spent on the platform; and adjust privacy settings.

The state attorney general would be empowered to bring civil action against social media companies found in violation of the proposed law and slap offenders with penalties of at least $10,000 per violation.

The Des Moines Register reported that its recent polling found that 55% of Iowans support the bill, 3% indicated they were unsure, and 42% signaled opposition to the bill.

Support for the legislation is even stronger among parents with minor children, 57% of whom expressed favor for HB 2523.

It garnered the support of 61% of Republican respondents, 39% of Democratic respondents, and 57% of independent respondents in the Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll.

"I think the intent of this bill is very good," said state Rep. Sami Scheetz (D). "As somebody who grew up during the age of social media, I know firsthand some of the harms that can have on the mental health of children in our state."

Florida's HB 3

HB 3 is the second attempt in recent weeks at an online child protections bill in the Sunshine State. Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) vetoed an earlier version of the online protections bill on March 1, noting that "the Legislature is about to produce a different, superior bill."

DeSantis wrote on X, "Protecting children from harms associated with social media is important, as is supporting parents' rights and maintaining the ability of adults to engage in anonymous speech. I anticipate the new bill will recognize these priorities and will be signed into law soon."

Whereas the previous version would have required various social media platforms to bar anyone under 16 from creating an account, HB 3 — passed by the House in a 109 to 4 vote — would require social media companies to obtain parental consent before allowing users ages 14 and 15 onto their platforms.

If ratified by DeSantis, HB 3 will require social media platforms to:

  • Bar minors under the age of 14 from entering into a contract to become an account holder;
  • Terminate any account held by persons under the age of 14 and provide 90 days for the user to dispute such termination;
  • Allow for users under 14 to request to terminate their accounts;
  • Permanently delete all information held by the platform associated with such terminated accounts; and
  • Terminate accounts for 14- and 15-year-old users if they fail to obtain parental consent.

Just as in Iowa, violations could land social media companies significant penalties.

HB 3 also requires commercial entities operating websites that contain "a substantial portion of material harmful to minors" to use anonymous or standard age verification to ensure users are 18 or older. News, news gathering organizations, internet service providers, search engines, and cloud service providers are exempt.

Florida's Voice News reported that critics of the bill, including Democratic state Rep. Angie Nixon, have suggested the bill is unconstitutional and will inevitably be challenged in the courts.

The ACLU of Florida suggested that HB 3 amounts to a "censorship bill aimed at stifling freedom of expression online by requiring all users, including adults, to verify their age by providing age verification documentation before using existing social media accounts or creating new ones."

"The age-verification requirements in HB 3 place barriers between users, whether they're adults or minors, and their constitutional right to speak online," said Kara Gross, legislative director of the ACLU of Florida.

NetChoice — a Big Tech lobby group representing Facebook, TikTok, and X — called on DeSantis to veto the bill, claiming in a March 7 letter that HB 3 "would violate minors' First Amendment rights by imposing a blanket restriction on access to constitutionally protected speech for anyone who is either under the age of 14 or refuses to comply with its parental consent requirements."

Republican state Rep. Tyler Sirois, who filed the House version of the bill with Rep. Michel Rayner (D), said, "We must end this experiment on our children. Members, we are not opening a Pandora's box, we're closing one."

Republican Speaker Paul Renner stressed the legislation will prove life-saving, reported the Associated Press.

"We know that social media is the main platform for sexual crimes against children," said Renner. "We know that it's a place where they are bullied online, where their self-image is torn down online. It leads to major mental health issues, contemplation of suicide, acts of self-harm, spikes in anorexia, and the list goes on and on and on."

Broader context

Similar laws have recently been passed with mixed success in other red states.

Utah passed SB 152 last year requiring social media companies to obtain parental consent before allowing minors to maintain or open an account. As of March 1, 2024, the state also requires age verification when opening a social media account; curfew settings on children's social media accounts; and minor accounts to be hidden from search results.

Arkansas similarly sought to protect children with SB 396, which Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) ratified in April 2023 and was supposed to go into effect on September 1, 2023; however, an Obama-nominated federal judge granted NetChoice a temporary injunction against the law in August.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!