Seven-time Grammy winner Prince,  known for “When Doves Cry” and “Purple Rain,” has died at the age of 57. He was found dead in the elevator of his Paisley Park estate in Chanhassen, Minnesota on Thursday.

But this isn’t what this article is about. Rather, it’s about why his death was important enough to be the first story in the majority of the national news media’s programming that evening.

There is a real science behind how the national news is presented and why. It’s ingenuous and rather simple, but very nefarious, especially when used as a propaganda tool.

It comes at us simultaneously in the form of agenda-setting and framing.

Agenda-setting describes the media’s ability to influence public opinion by telling us the news they want us to know and telling us what to think about the news that’s being presented. This stimulates the audiences into believing a particular issues importance, while framing, which is extremely subtle, causes the unsuspecting viewer to have a particular response.

Human interest stories, which appeal to emotion (a particular response,) are an excellent example of the media’s use of agenda-setting and framing. Most every night the final segment to a national newscast is the ever-popular human interest story.

This happens every time we sit-down and watch a national newscast — we’re manipulated into believing that certain news items like the passing of a famous musician has greater relevance to our lives than all the new regulations the federal government is imposing on our God-given liberties. And so you’ll know, the Federal Registry issued 142 pages of new regulations, rules and other notices on the day of Prince’s death.

It’s been a rough couple of weeks for me. I’ve spent a lot of time hurting and feeling like I’ve been gypped or something.

Like usual, I started out whining and complaining before I realized where I should have started – on my knees. When I finally did, I came with resentment and blame and little else, pissed at Him and pissed at myself.

After two-weeks of self-imposed ‘anger and finger-pointing,’ here is my take away: Many people come to Jesus thinking it’s enough to believe, to stand on the sidelines and cheer.

Of, this, I am guilty and it is the number one reason I am not a preacher today as I had planned years ago. Jesus isn’t looking for cheerleaders, nor is He simply looking for converts.

Nope, He’s seeking those who will follow Him whatever the cost. He’s looking for radical devotion, unreasonable commitment and undivided dedication.

We may share the ‘good news’, but it’s not always the same message Jesus shared. Our version is softer.

Many take this message and omit the more ‘bad’ parts because they’ll scare people away. Instead, we make it sound comfortable and easy: You don’t have to do anything but believe.

Reducing Jesus from wanting a radical relationship of self-sacrificing love and humility to something more like an eternal ‘life insurance agent,’ has made Him made ‘safe,’ something He’s not!

By watering down the Gospel we have taken that which is all about Jesus and made it all about us, which it is not. Instead we’ve made Jesus a part of our lives when He is our life!

We all have our favorite causes, but Jesus didn’t come to take sides. Well, here’s a radical thought: Jesus came to take over and He’s poised do so again.

And instead of coming to Jesus with expectations of what He can do for us, we need to ask, “What can I do for you, Jesus?”

As Louis Baker stepped from the stage, he knew he had hit the big-time. The cheering, standing ovation, the slaps on the back from other performers and stage hands, all told him so.

Out back of the theater, Louis Baker discovered even greater adulation as a crowd of several dozen flocked around him screaming, yelling his name and begging for his autograph. Women even slip their names in his jacket pocket hoping to be his paramour in the near future.

It was all very heady for the young actor as he headed up the block to his single room flat. Once there, he lay in bed dreaming of what his new-found fame-and-fortune would bring, including a luxury suite along Fifth Avenue.

The following morning Louis Baker rose and quickly dressed. The broad sheets would be out and he wanted to know what the critics thought of his performance.

He hurriedly walked down the sidewalk to the corner where the newspaper stand held his future. Yet, before he could get there, he had a small mishap, a misstep in all actuality.

The up and coming sensation stepped in a pile of dog droppings. Immediately, he sought to find something to wipe it from his Oxford’s.

He reached down and picked up a solitary piece of paper and used to clean-off his shoe. That’s when he noticed the handwriting on the fragment of parchment – it read: “All the best, Louis Baker.”

We keep hearing about that this candidate or that candidate is “stealing delegates.” There is no such thing. First of all, it implies something illegal, or at best, nefarious. Secondly, there is no way you can “steal” delegates.

Here’s how the delegate system works. In most states, delegates are selected by the campaign of a candidate.

For example, in some states some people have been selected to be a delegate for candidate ‘A’, ‘B’ or ‘C.’ Should candidate ‘A’ wins a majority of votes in the state then the selected delegate will go to the convention to vote for ‘A.’

In many cases, that delegate is committed to vote for the candidate for the first two ballots. After that they’re “unbound.”

There are some states where the delegates are only committed to vote for their candidate for the first ballot. Then there are some states where the delegates go to the convention “unbound,” and can vote for any candidate on the first ballot.

By the third ballot – it’s a certainty that all delegates are unbound and can vote for any candidate they wish. This is a practice that has gone on since the formation of the GOP in March 1854, but the compliant media continues to call this long-time political process “stealing” delegates.

Candidates who know the system will try to get delegates to vote for them after the first or second ballots. If their candidate isn’t selected on the first ballot, or the second ballot, they will vote for candidate on subsequent ballots.

The same media also keeps repeating that the ‘establishment’ is rigging the convention so that one candidate or another can’t win – which isn’t true. The way it works is that the candidate is not nominated by a vote of the people.

The people elect the delegates and the delegates nominate the candidate. If no candidate receives a majority of votes on the first ballot it will go to a second ballot, and to successive ballots until one candidate emerges with a majority.

This is why it is incorrect for anyone to claim the U.S. is a Democracy. Instead, the U.S. operates as a Constitutional Republic, but rarely if ever do you hear this in the compliant media.

In this case, a little education (both historic and civic) and some understanding of language (namely the misuse of words) can make all the difference to how convention activity and a Constitutional Republic operate.

We keep hearing this term “fair share” nearly every day from Progressives believe businesses and the rich must pay their fair share of taxes. So what is the fair share for the wealthy?

According to Progressives, it’s simply more — more than the 42.6 percent in federal taxes being paid by those in upper income brackets. It’s apparently entirely ‘fair’ that 50 percent of Americans now pay zero federal income tax, and some even enjoy what’s called a ‘negative tax rate.’

As it stands now in the U.S, the top one percent of wage earners, those who are continually disparaged by the left in America, bring home nearly 18 percent of the nation’s income. But they pay 35 percent of all federal income taxes.

Study after study has shown that when taxes are lowered, it stimulates the economy and brings in more revenue. For example, during the Roaring Twenties, tax rates were slashed dramatically, dropping from over 70 percent to less than 25 percent.

Personal income tax revenues increased from $719 million in 1921 to $1,164,000,000 in 1928, an increase of more than 61 percent. Increasing taxes also hurts the tax base, as oftentimes people and businesses flee higher tax states for lower tax states.

In 2012, French President Francois Hollande, proposed a massive 75 percent income tax on the wealthiest citizens. The tax revenue from the super tax was down significantly from the first year to the next, while the deficit skyrocketed another $97 billion.

In January 2015, the French government quietly killed the tax. It seems that unfortunately, historic lessons once learned are being willfully ignored.

Our so-called Department of Homeland Security is constantly advising American’s, “If you see something, say something.” But what if it’s the government that’s acting suspicious?

Questions remain about the origin of a mysterious box on a utility pole near 21st and Glendale Avenues in Phoenix, Arizona. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives (ATFE) finally came forward, admitting that a box spotted and removed from a Salt River Power (SRP) pole belonged to them and was part of an ongoing investigation.

Witnesses say that the crew who installed the box came in a truck marked “Field Pros.”  A Google search of that name does not return any utility or surveillance company.

ATFE officials refused to elaborate on the investigation, if any and would not say if they were conducting surveillance in the area. At first, SRP claimed they had no idea the box was installed on their power pole – later stating there “were indications that law enforcement was connected to the box.”

What those indications were – the company hasn’t said.

They said ATFE has to let know them or work with them if they have an object on their property. The ATFE, on the other hand, claims that depending on the investigation and security priorities, they can put such equipment in place without permission.

Meanwhile, the agency didn’t hesitate to claim that in this case they “acted within their bounds.”

There are homes, a high school, an apartment complex and a strip mall in the area. The strip mall has a salon, pet grooming store, alterations business, a barber shop and an ammunition store.

Note that last one: an ammunition store. It is self-evident that the ATFE is spying on people and activities surrounding this business, which is a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

It’s obvious that the U.S. Constitution isn’t within the ATFE’s boundaries and this folks, is how tyranny starts!

The Air Force is supposedly conducting an investigation after a video surfaced of retired Senior Master Sgt. Oscar Rodriguez being forcibly removed from a ceremony at Travis Air Force Base, near Sacramento in California. The incident took place on April 3 during, the retirement ceremony of Master Sergeant Chuck Roberson.

A spokesman from the base said that the confrontation stemmed from “an unplanned participation” at the event.

“Rodriguez ignored numerous requests to respect the Air Force prescribed ceremony and unfortunately was forcibly removed,” a Travis official said. “We will continue to investigate the situation fully.”

As the American flag is unfurled next to Rodriguez on stage he begins is statement: “Our flag is known as the stars and stripes. A union consists of white stars and a blue field above it.

“Each star represents one individual state,” Rodriguez continued. “Together they stand united in the visible.”

But as he does, the two men push him off stage and eventually out of the room.

An Air Force Reserve statement release following the incident took the insult to a higher level by openly claiming it “respects and defends the right to free speech and religious expression.”

However, the incident is actually a result of “bad blood” between Rodriguez and the current commanding officer of the 749th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron. That commander is said to have barred Rodriguez from the ceremony, and ordered that he be removed after showing up anyway.

As of September 2013, Colonel Jeffrey Pickard is commander of the 349th Maintenance Group at Travis. As group commander, it is his duty to oversee the activities of the squadron commander of the 749th.

According to Air Force tradition a retiree can invite and have anyone speak at his or her own retirement. If the commanding officer does not like someone’s ceremony, he doesn’t have to attend.

I think the commanding officer in this case needs to be relieved of his duties and issued an official written reprimand.

At first Joe Hornick of West Long Branch, New Jersey, was pleased to see police when they came to his home. He’d been complaining of vandalism to his flag.

“Here I am looking for the cops to capture these people and instead, here they come and give me a ticket for my freedom of expression,” Hornick said of the officers standing on his front porch.

He now faces a $2,000 fine and up to 90 days in jail for flying a flag reading “Trump Make America Great Again” in front of his home. He flies his flags 24 hours a day.

Acting borough administrator Lori Cole said a local law bans political signs until 30 days prior to an election. New Jersey’s presidential primary is June 7.

Hornick, who has a court date April 20, is not taking the flag down.

“I feel my constitutional right has been violated. I have the right to express myself,” he stated.

But this battle isn’t over a political candidate or a flag. It’s about free speech and the First Amendment which states: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech,” thus the ordinance is unconstitutional.

Furthermore, the Fourteenth Amendment states in Section 1, that, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

It’s too bad we’ve been rendered near-ignorant of our God-given liberties as laid out in the U.S. Constitution.

Please allow me to share with you my belief in God…

While pray nightly and have my favorite Bible verses, I am not by any means a religious man – instead I walk by faith, which to try and simply explain means my God is with me at all times and though I am a fallen man, I do my best to keep my eyes (remaining mindful of and) on Him at all times. For me faith doesn’t come with a set of hard and fast rules like religion.

My belief system is by no means one in which I insist you follow, to the contrary – I want you to explore your beliefs in a manner consistent with your personal values. For myself, my belief in God means an adherence to the broad concept of Judeo-Christian faith, which includes justice, virtue, fairness, charity, community, and duty.

Each of these concepts means different things to different people. For instance, under duty – my personal belief includes defending the U.S. Constitution up to an including my death. I hold that document as close to my heart as any member of my family or my friends, for whom I would gladly trade my life – and it is okay that you might not see ‘duty’ in the same light.

The reality of a ‘supreme transcendent authority,’ higher than any Earthly authority, naturally limits the legitimate authority of the State. No government can demand absolute obedience or legitimately attempt to control every aspect of our lives.

Thus, while I strongly disagree with such actions as abortion, I find it repulsive to limit a woman’s right to seek such a procedure through the force of law. Rather, I prefer to leave that between the medical professional, the patient and their God, reducing the State’s ability not only to interfere but to publicly fund.

Nor should the State be in the business of marriage, from enforced blood-testing to licenses and all the financial rewards the agencies benefit from. And while I may not be in favor of same-sex marriage, that again should remain between those getting married, their faith, their church, the venue and their God.

Again my belief in God does not conflate faith and politics, and it does not mean that religious disputes are necessarily political disputes, or vice versa. Nor does it mean you must believe in God, or that I have a monopoly on faith.

It does mean that there is a moral order that lies behind political order, and that order establishes the natural limits of all human authority. Finally, man is fallible and because this is so we must be a nation of virtues and values over rules and regulations, work over welfare, law over litigation, morals over money and liberty over security.

Many times throughout our lives we’ve heard the term ‘rule of law.’ It sounds simple enough but what does it really mean?

But first, we should correct our vernacular – it isn’t jus’ ‘rule of law,’ rather we should always say it correctly, ‘Constitutional rule of law,’ as the U.S. Constitution is a contract between the citizens and the State. Over the years, whether on purpose or out of laziness, ‘Constitution,’ has been redacted from the phrase.

Constitutional rule of law of insists that a predictable and consistent legal system is necessary for an ordered liberty. A lawful society consists of a government of laws, not men, in which people know what the rules are, and in which rules are enforced uniformly for all citizens.

It also means that the government itself, along with the governed, is subject to those laws. For Constitutional law to function, by contrast, even the administrators of the law must be subject to its provisions. That also means that ALL people are to be equally protected by the law.

When such a condition exists then the rule of law is present. Placing Constitutional law on a firm and decisive basis is a necessary step for assuring such a situation and in the end a Constitutional rule of law promotes prosperity and protects our liberties.