How a viral video exposed the fall — and rise? — of California



Social media often serves as a cultural barometer, providing useful insight into cultural trends and their shifts. Consider a song parody video that recently went viral. “California Freedom” is an AI-generated satirical reimagining of the 1960s classic “California Dreamin’” by the Mamas and the Papas. Remember that one?

The original song painted California as a paradisiacal escape from the drab and dreary East Coast, a dream only a lucky few could call their home: “All the leaves are brown, and the sky is gray. I’ve been for a walk on a winter’s day. I’d be safe and warm if I was in L.A. — California dreamin’, on such a winter’s day.”

California Freedom gets closer every day as locals rise to the challenge and opportunity in front of them.

The song predates the internet era, but its imagery is timeless: golden sunshine, palm trees, beaches, teens in drop-top cars cruising down Sunset Boulevard. It depicted California as a place of effortless joy — life as it ought to be.

— (@)  
 

This is a starkly different California. The scenes are familiar but jarring: riots, wildfires, corrupt officials with clown faces, piles of money from China and other state malefactors. Set to the same tune, the new lyrics deliver a biting contrast:

Our governor’s a clown, so’s the mayor of L.A. Corruption at the top, arrogance on display. Always assumed we would conform — we’re finally awake. California freedom gets closer every day ...

At first glance, this parody video might seem dark and pessimistic, a major fall away from the sunshine of the original. But the opposite is true. The Mamas and the Papas’ version is the one with a sad, nostalgic, depressed message despite its lovely harmonies and lilting flute interlude. The writer is resigned, stuck. He has little agency in his condition. He tells us:

Stopped into a church I passed along the way. Got down on my knees, and I pretended to pray. You know the preacher liked the cold, he knows I’m gonna stay ... if I didn’t tell her I could leave today… California dreamin’ on such a winter’s day ...

The lead singer contributed nothing to the California dream he longed for and felt no control over his own life. Many in his generation shared that attitude. Baby Boomers who came of age in the mid-1960s soaked up messages that told them they were powerless over their future. They grew up and raised children with little resilience, unprepared to face adversity.

These were the kids who never walked alone in the woods or dug up worms by hand. They grew into college students who needed “safe spaces” and coloring books to cope with opposing viewpoints. They are the fragile offspring of a generation that surrendered its agency — and passed along the habit.

RELATED: LA wildfires point to a long list of failures by California authorities

  Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images

 

But the “California Freedom” video tells a different story. Early on, the bear from the state flag rears up, growls, and bares its teeth — startling Nancy Pelosi. We see ICE and law enforcement pushing back on rioters. And after a litany of the corrupt and destructive acts of key state leaders, the original song’s flute solo plays once again — but this time, Donald Trump is shown performing it in front of California’s most iconic and breathtaking landscapes.

Trump playing the flute may draw laughs — a wink at his claim of childhood musical talent — but the image carries weight. His administration has moved swiftly and forcefully to restore order where leftist leaders welcomed chaos and destruction. Through initiatives like the Department of Government Efficiency and budgetary reform, Trump has choked off taxpayer funds to activist groups pushing bloated, often corrupt government control over everyday life.

The video places Trump against California’s most iconic landscapes — redwoods, poppy fields, the Golden Gate — transforming a moment of satire into something more. It’s not just a gag. It’s a statement: California’s promise still lives. Freedom, prosperity, and integrity don’t flow from bureaucrats or ideologues. They come from the land itself — and the people who choose to defend it.

The video speaks clearly: We have agency. California doesn’t have to remain broken. Beneath the corruption, arrogance, and engineered collapse lies a chance to rebuild. The bear — California’s symbol — rises, growls, and shows its teeth. And through the noise, the music plays again. Behind the drug camps and trash-choked boulevards, the state’s beauty and strength still hum with life.

This energy, stronger than COVID lockdowns that crushed working people while Gavin Newsom dined at the French Laundry, signals something new. The future is coming — and it looks nothing like the ruins left behind.

I first traveled to the San Francisco Bay Area in the early 1970s to meet my fiancé’s family, and I fell in love immediately with the land and the sea. Later, while living in Silicon Valley, we explored the state whenever possible. In the L.A. area, I walked the ocean paths often.

What happened to California in the decades since grieves me. It’s one reason I refused to retire there.

But now, a new generation offers hope. Young people inspired by Trump are shedding the passive fragility their parents too often embraced and indulged. They’re building a different California — one rooted not in globalist pretensions or bureaucratic arrogance but in the sea, the mountains, and the enduring beauty of the land itself.

California freedom gets closer every day as locals rise to the challenge and seize the opportunity in front of them.

Democrats unanimously vote against condemning 'mostly peaceful' anti-ICE riots



House Democrats unanimously voted against a resolution Tuesday formally condemning the destructive anti-ICE riots that took place in Los Angeles, California.

The resolution narrowly passed the House, with 217 Republicans voting in the affirmative while 206 Democrats voted in the negative. The riots protesting ICE deportations in Southern California involved rocks being hurdled at law enforcement and attendees waving foreign flags.

'Peaceful protests are a constitutional right, but vandalism, looting, violence, and other crimes are not.'

Even as multiple cars burned in a news clip, one anchor described the riots as "relatively peaceful" and "relatively calm," reminding many viewers of the "fiery but mostly peaceful" BLM riots of 2020, according to CNN.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries took issue with the resolution, saying he "will not be lectured by extreme MAGA Republicans about questions of law and order." He also disagreed with the classification, saying there was "unrest" but refusing to acknowledge that it was a riot.

RELATED: Republican senator makes a stunning admission: 'I can't be somebody that I'm not'

  Photo by Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images

 

Notably, the resolution "recognizes the right to assemble and protest peacefully" and "condemns unequivocally the violence perpetrated against Federal, State, and local law enforcement." Despite claiming to hold the same values outlined in the resolution, Jeffries and his 205 colleagues voted against the resolution.

RELATED: Republicans clash with Democratic lawmakers defending violent anti-ICE rioters

  Photo by Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images

 

California Republican Rep. Young Kim spearheaded the resolution, emphasizing the distinction between peaceful protests and outright chaos and lawlessness.

"Peaceful protests are a constitutional right, but vandalism, looting, violence, and other crimes are not," Kim said. "Protecting public safety shouldn’t be controversial, which is why I am leading the California Republican delegation in a resolution to support law and order as we continue to see unrest."

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

David Hogg removed as DNC vice chair, attacks Democrats weeks after spilling beans to undercover reporter



Gun control advocate David Hogg was elected the Democratic Party's youngest vice chairman on Feb. 1.

This proved controversial among some of his fellow travelers, including an electoral loser who complained that the Democratic National Committee had violated its own DEI bylaws by not electing enough people with preferred immutable characteristics.

Despite the party previously stating that the election was "conducted fairly, transparently, and in alignment with the rules," party elites subsequently declared Hogg's election null and void, then removed him on Wednesday through a virtual vote of 294 to 99. Hogg was therefore put in the undesirable position of competing for a seat he won 130 days earlier but had stolen from him.

'We will continue to lose.'

Rather than suffer more humiliation at the hands of his party, the gangling Democrat threw in the towel on Wednesday, announcing he was not running for the new DNC vice chair election.

Prior to explaining his surrender, Hogg revisited critiques of the party that previously got him in hot water with the old guard and dubbed a "twerp" by Democratic strategist James Carville.

Hogg stated in a thread on X, "I started Leaders We Deserve for a simple purpose: to be the Emily's List for progressive young Democrats."

RELATED: David Hogg targets Pelosi, unwittingly deals Democrats more damage ahead of likely DNC ouster

 David Hogg. Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Leaders We Deserve is an outfit that tries to help young leftists get elected to Congress and state legislatures in order to "defeat the far-right agenda and advance a progressive vision for the future."

"After seeing a serious lack of vision from Democratic leaders, too many of them asleep at the wheel, and Democrats dying in office that have helped to hand Republicans an expanded majority, it became clear that Leaders We Deserve had to start primarying incumbents and directly challenging the culture of seniority politics that brought our party to this place to help get our party into fighting shape again," Hogg wrote.

Hogg, warned not to challenge Democratic incumbents earlier this year by DNC Chairman Ken Martin, noted further, "We have a real challenge ahead of us. We lost voting share with almost every demographic across the board, and despite all that Trump has done, our approvals remain at 27%. If we don't show our country how we are dramatically changing and provide an alternative vision for the future as a party, we will continue to lose."

After that throat-clearing, the 25-year-old Democrat noted that while he sought to play a positive role in the position of DNC vice chair, it has become clear to him that "there is fundamental disagreement about the role."

'I respect his decision to step back from his post as vice chair.'

Hogg claimed that he ultimately decided not to run "so the party can focus on what really matters."

Had he stuck it out, Hogg would likely have faced significant criticism over his recent disclosures to an undercover Project Veritas reporter.

RELATED: David Hogg spills the beans to undercover reporter about who really controlled the Biden White House

 Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Project Veritas released undercover footage last month that appeared to show Hogg both hammering California Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D) over her alleged insider trading and identifying Jill Biden's former chief of staff, Anthony Bernal, as an individual in the Biden White House who wielded "an enormous amount of power" — a troubling admission amid investigations into the potential misuse of the presidential autopen in the finals days of the Biden administration.

Despite reportedly giving Hogg a tongue-lashing over the weekend, DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a statement obtained by Semafor, "I commend David for his years of activism, organizing, and fighting for his generation."

"While I continue to believe he is a powerful voice for this party, I respect his decision to step back from his post as vice chair," continued Martin. "I have no doubt that he will remain an important advocate for Democrats across the map. I appreciate his service as an officer, his hard work, and his dedication to the party."

The DNC is holding new elections for the roles beginning on Thursday.

Kalyn Free, the American Indian who originally challenged the DNC's February election, tried and failed to secure the role of vice chair earlier this year. Now with Hogg out, she is reportedly trying again.

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

Liberals Squander First Chance To Learn From 2020 Mistakes

Democrats are stuck in a trap of their own design

No Amount Of Nancy Pelosi’s Revisionist History Can Erase Her Key Role In J6 National Guard Delay

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-11-at-10.01.23 AM-e1749654185503-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-11-at-10.01.23%5Cu202fAM-e1749654185503-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]Pelosi’s claim that she ‘begged’ Trump to send the National Guard to the Capitol on January 6th is a proven lie.

Fact-check: President Trump authorized 20,000 National Guard troops for duty on Jan. 6, 2021



The former Democrat co-chairman of the House Select Committee on Jan. 6 continues to lie about President Donald J. Trump’s authorization of the D.C. National Guard on Jan. 6.

Amid the backdrop of the Los Angeles anti-ICE riots, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) took to social media on June 8 and claimed, “Trump refused to call the National Guard during the Jan 6th insurrection.”

'Pelosi will never go for it.'

— (@)  
 

The truth is that several days ahead of time, President Trump authorized up to 20,000 National Guard troops for duty on Jan. 6. Under the law, those troops would need to be requested by a governor or, in the case of the District of Columbia, the mayor.

Democrat politicians refused Guard help

Democrat Mayor Muriel Bowser rejected the offer of National Guard troops in a Jan. 5 letter to the Department of Defense.

Former Capitol Police Chief Steven A. Sund requested Guard troops days in advance during meetings with the House and Senate sergeants at arms. At the time, the House sergeant at arms, Paul Irving, reported to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). The late Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael Stenger reported to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Sund was later told by Stenger that the National Guard request would not have flown because, as Irving put it, “Pelosi will never go for it.”

The sergeants at arms are two of the three voting members of the Capitol Police Board, which is responsible for security at the Capitol. The board refused Chief Sund’s requests for the National Guard until mid-afternoon on Jan. 6, after the Capitol had been breached and the grounds overrun with tens of thousands of protesters.

According to the U.S. Department of Defense inspector general’s report regarding the events of Jan. 6, 2021, the use of National Guard troops was discussed during a White House meeting on Jan. 3, 2021.

In attendance were acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley, presidential Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, and Sec. Miller’s chief of staff, Kash Patel.

  

“The president told Mr. Miller that there would be a large number of protesters on January 6, 2021, and Mr. Miller should ensure sufficient National Guard or soldiers would be there to make sure it was a safe event,” Milley said.

Patel, who is now FBI director, said Trump did all he was constitutionally allowed to do.

“He said, ‘If you need up to 20,000 National Guardsmen and women, not just in Washington, D.C., but anywhere in the country, you have my authorization,’” Patel recalled.

Miller recalled the discussions this way: “The president said while we’re leaving, ‘Hey, one more thing,’ and we all sat back down and discussed what was going on on Jan. 6,” Miller said.

'I am stunned by the repeated statements by Pelosi.'

“The president was doing just what I expect the commander in chief to do, any commander in chief to do. He was looking at the broad threats against the United States, and he brought this up on his own. We did not bring it up.”

During a series of conference calls on Jan. 6, the Pentagon balked at the “optics” of having National Guard troops at the Capitol. Thus began a critical three-hour, 19-minute delay in putting boots on the ground at the Capitol.

The career officers at the Pentagon were more concerned with politics than with ensuring that the National Guard made it to the Capitol, said Casey Wardynski, former assistant secretary of the Army for manpower and Reserve affairs and a 30-year U.S. Army veteran who served former President Donald Trump at the Pentagon from 2019 to 2021.

“Instead of looking after what’s best for the country, they were looking to cover their asses and do what was best for their careers and for the perception of their favorite institution, the Army,” Wardynski told Blaze News.

  

New Jersey police arrived before National Guard

U.S. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), chairman of the Committee on House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight, said information uncovered by his investigators was ignored by the now-defunct Jan. 6 Select Committee and left out of the Pentagon inspector general report issued in November 2021.

“It took too long for the D.C. National Guard to arrive at the Capitol. The 113th Wing Capital Guardians have a proud history protecting our nation’s capital and serving our nation’s leadership. Nevertheless, the New Jersey State Police from nearly 150 miles away responded to the Capitol before the D.C. National Guard.”

  Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

In Jan. 6 HBO documentary footage obtained by Loudermilk’s subcommittee, Pelosi expressed exasperation that the Guard was not at the Capitol, at nearly the same hour that her House sergeant at arms was refusing Sund’s desperate pleas for National Guard help.

Sund told Blaze News in 2024 that if Pelosi had simply granted his Jan. 3 request for the National Guard, “I don’t think we would be here discussing this today.”

“I am stunned by the repeated statements by Pelosi about there not being any National Guard deployed to the Capitol in advance of the attack on January 6,” Sund said, “when it was her sergeant at arms for the House of Representatives who denied my request for support on January 3, and then again repeatedly for 71 minutes while we were under attack on January 6.”

Sund said the response to his urgent request for help was “absolutely abysmal,” noting that by the time Guard members arrived at the staging location near the Capitol, they were no longer needed.

“They could have not shown up and it wouldn't have changed a thing,” Sund told Blaze News.

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

REPORT: Congressional Dems Pledge To Boycott Upscale Washington DC Restaurants

'We can have big policy debates, but we also have to show the American people some concrete examples'

Media, Democrats Breathlessly Defend Having Naval Ship Named After Gay Pederast

Unsurprisingly, Democrats did not mention Milk's pedophilia or his predatory activities. And apparently every corporate news outlet screeching about removing his name miraculously forgot to mention those details as well.