A Line in the Sand, that would be nice, too bad Taco Man is at the other end of the stick.
Skip to content
So while from the outside it looks like: “They already won the game — why act like fools?”
“Every civil war starts with people believing they’ve got nothing left to lose. We’d lose everything. Let’s not let it start.”
Yes, it’s true, one little boy with his finger in the dyke was ignored for too long and he couldn’t get his message to be taken seriously so the whole thing failed because the repair men in RED couldn’t agree with the repair men in BLUE on how stick a cork in the insane problem.
I’ve been draggin’ these boots through the ashes,
The Intimidation Angle: Chilling Free SpeechYou’re spot on about the intimidation factor. Under U.S. law (thanks to the 1964 Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan), public figures like Trump must prove “actual malice”—that statements were knowingly false or made with reckless disregard for the truth—to win defamation cases. This high bar protects robust criticism of powerful people, but Trump’s barrage of suits bypasses it by design:
2 sources
Bottom Line:
The legal definition
The sticking point
Mayor Muriel Bowser rejects the narrative of rising crime. She’s implemented youth curfews, and critics warn that Trump’s approach risks eroding democratic governance, not improving safety.
The Promise:
The Problem:
The Politics:
The Reality:
What he’s referring to is not an IQ test, not even a memory test—it’s a cognitive screening for early dementia.
It’s a test for Alzheimer’s, not aptitude.
And when even that doesn’t work?
It’s never about answering the question.
This isn’t incompetence.
Trump’s case isn’t likely to succeed on legal grounds—New York Times v. Sullivan sets a high bar for defamation. But that may not be the point.
What this implies:
This isolates his followers from any independent source of verification—making journalism itself the enemy.
The Puppet Masters
1. He’s almost completely invisible to the public
2. He operates through permanence, not popularity
3. He has billion-dollar influence with zero accountability
4. His agenda is deeply ideological — and strategic
Why He’s Dangerous
Why People Overlook Him
But perhaps his most lasting presidential achievement was emotional:
No gold-plated towers. No angry rallies. No grievance campaigns.
“I’m inspired by the young people I meet—confident, hopeful, and unafraid to make their voices heard.”
“When they go low, we go high.”
“The best way to not feel hopeless is to get up and do something.” — Barack Obama
“Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals.”
He didn’t rage or rant.
Commanding General, European Theater of Operations, U.S. Army (ETOUSA)
George H. W. Bush may not have tweeted. He didn’t insult his rivals. He didn’t stage rallies for applause.
“Any definition of a successful life must include service to others.”
Posts By
Loyalty, is only valid when you made that choice.
Loyalty, is only valid when you made that choice. Chose wisely while you still have the freedom to chose.
Share this:
This country isn’t red or blue. It’s our home. And you don’t burn down your own home.
This country isn’t red or blue. It’s our home. And you don’t burn down your own home.
Share this:
Why Do The Ultra Rich Make Asses Of Themselves
/
RSS Feed
1. It’s Not About Money Anymore
Once you have more wealth than you can possibly spend, the “scoreboard” shifts. For some, the new currency is power, attention, and influence. Trump craves adoration and dominance. Musk craves being the center of the cultural/tech conversation. They treat the public stage the way a gambler treats the casino: the thrill matters more than the chips.
2. Addiction to Attention
Wealth insulates people from ordinary accountability. If you never hear “no,” and every outrageous move gets you headlines, you learn that being loud and provocative works. For personalities like theirs, attention becomes almost like oxygen — they can’t sit quietly with their fortune; they need to be seen.
3. Ego and Legacy
The ultra-rich often start chasing immortality through legacy. Ordinary lives can be content with family, friendships, or small communities. Billionaires sometimes need the world to remember their name in 100 years. That drive makes them behave like emperors or disruptors rather than satisfied retirees.
4. They Live in a Bubble
Surrounded by yes-men, lawyers, PR teams, and insulated wealth, many lose touch with how their behavior looks to normal people. What feels “bold” or “visionary” in their insulated world often looks childish, arrogant, or reckless from the outside.
5. Some Just Can’t Stop
The personality traits that made them rich in the first place — risk-taking, defiance, obsession, ruthlessness — don’t switch off once the money is in the bank. In some ways, those very traits make them incapable of enjoying peace or moderation.
So while from the outside it looks like: “They already won the game — why act like fools?”
Inside their heads, the game never ends.
Share this:
Every civil war starts with people believing they’ve got nothing left to lose. We’d lose everything. Let’s not let it start.
On
- Blog
“Every civil war starts with people believing they’ve got nothing left to lose. We’d lose everything. Let’s not let it start.”
Share this:
With Comey’s indictment, has the DOJ been weaponized? | The Excerpt
On the Sunday, September 28, 2025 episode of The Excerpt podcast: With the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey, some legal observers are questioning whether President Donald Trump has effectively weaponized the Department of Justice. USA TODAY Chief Political Correspondent Phillip M. Bailey joined USA TODAY’s The Excerpt for more on this developing story.
Share this:
Martrina & Jasper – Blues And Romance
On
- music
Martrina and Jasper hit the road where the neon hums, barbecue smoke drifts across back alleys, and chrome glints under Southern moonlight.
This playlist is their songbook — a journey through plates piled high, nights that never end, and the roar of engines chasing freedom. Down highways lined with magnolia and diners glowing in the dark.
Martrina & Jasper YouTube Drifters Blues Playlist
Martrina & Jasper – Keep The Lights Low
Lock the door behind you, leave the world outside, I’ve been waiting, honey, for the dark to be my guide. Don’t need no diamonds, don’t need no show, Just stay right here and keep the
Martrina & Jasper – Midnight Embers
I've been down in the delta, chasin' ghosts in the rain... Felt the weight of your leavin', like chains on my chain... Whiskey tears on my pillow, callin' out your name... But tonight in this
Martrina & Jasper – Stronger With You
Every step we’re taking, the road shines up ahead Through the doubts and shadows, I choose hope instead No one’s gonna break me, this fire’s burning true The night feels brighter when I’m walking with
Martrina & Jasper – One Lone Lover Walks Away
Listen, lovers, to a tale of hearts entwined, On a mountain, where their dreams were once aligned. In the valley, shadows whispered of a cost, Two souls bound by love, but one would soon be
Martrina & Jasper – Burning Slow
I've walked these dusty roads, where the whiskey flows like rain, Carried my broken heart, through the fire and the pain. Shadows in the alley, whisperin' your name, But you left me cold, darlin', playin'
Martrina & Jasper – Empty Midnight – Martrina
Midnight is waiting, the clock holds its breath Whispers of silence are speaking of death The stars have all vanished, the sky has no flame I call into darkness, but none hear my name
Martrina & Jasper – A Gimlet For The Lady
I've walked these dusty roads, where the whiskey flows like rain, Carried my broken heart, through the fire and the pain. Shadows in the alley, whisperin' your name, But you left me cold, darlin', playin'
Martrina & Jasper – Empty Midnight Duet
Midnight is waiting, the clock holds its breath Whispers of silence are speaking of death The stars have all vanished, the sky has no flame I call into darkness, but none hear my name
Martrina & Jasper – The Fires True
I painted my nights in shades of regret, Chased faded dreams I can't forget. The jukebox hums our old refrain, But your gravel voice calls through the pain.
Martrina & Jasper – Tijuana to Rosarito
Neon flickers down the border street, Saxophone hums where shadows meet. Laughter drifts from a cabaret glow, Secrets linger where the night winds blow.
Martrina & Jasper – Memories Linger
I hear the brass of memory, It bends the night in two. A trombone sighs a secret line, That only I once knew.
Martrina & Jasper – Rain on the Willamette — Portland Nights
Raindrops tapping on the old brick walls, Neon flickers down the empty halls. A piano hums where the shadows meet, Echoing softly in the Willamette heat.
Martrina & Jasper – Echos of Harlem
Brownstone steps and laughter on the air, Trumpet lines curling up the stair. A rhythm fades down an old back street, But the heartbeat still keeps the beat.
Martrina & Jasper – Hwy 101
Streetlamps brush the palm trees by the sand, A low bass hum, and your hand in my hand. A saxophone sighs in the corner, low, We found the tune only lovers know.
Martrina & Jasper – Coastline Blues & Midnight Jazz
Coastline blues and midnight jazz, Every room a secret it has. Headlights fade, but the road still calls, We keep the time inside these walls.
Martrina & Jasper – The fury of the lakes
The Great Lakes howl where the north winds bite, A restless churn ‘neath a starless night. From Superior’s depths to Erie’s shoal, The waters claim what they can’t console.
Martrina & Jasper – Smoke On The Soul
Rollin’ north through the pines, where the smoke still curls, From pit fires burnin’ in a fast-fadin’ world. The Delta’s in my rearview, but its heart’s in my bones, Barbecue’s my altar, built on riverbed
Martrina & Jasper – Moonshine Runners’s Blues
I got a jug of moonshine, glowin’ in the night, Corn liquor sparklin’ under pale moonlight. But all that shine don’t mean a thing, oh no, Without them drivers in their hot rods, ready to
Martrina & Jasper – Catch Me Runnin Blues
Runnin’ through the night, with the devil in my soul, Hot rods screamin’ freedom, on them backroads cold. Dodgin’ every trap, with the law’s red light glow, Them moonshine runs, where NASCAR’s roots grow.
Martrina & Jasper – Tobacco Prayer
In the Piedmont fields, where the tobacco grows, Leaves hang heavy, like the stories nobody knows. My hands stained brown, workin’ dawn to dusk, Soil’s got my soul, but the church is my trust.
Martrina & Jasper – Slow Burn Of The South
Down in the Delta, where the cotton fields fade, The smoke from the pit’s where my heart’s been laid. Piano keys moan like a river in flood, Barbecue’s my story, written deep in the mud.
Martrina & Jasper – Roughneck’s Lament
From the shacks of Clarksdale to the bayou’s edge, Roux’s thick with secrets, stirred up from the dredge. Okra and crab, filé’s green embrace, Every spoon’s a prayer in this sacred place.
Martrina & Jasper – Gumbo Soul
Down in the Delta, where the Mississippi sighs, The mud’s got a story, and the heron don’t lie. Gumbo in the pot, simmerin’ low and slow, Tastes like the heart of the places I know.
Martrina & Jasper – Drifter’s Blues (Austin at Midnight)
I came down to Austin with a suitcase and a song, Thought I’d find redemption, but I was running all along. The river cuts the city, rolling dark and deep, But it don’t wash away
Martrina & Jasper – Delta Gumbo
In the Delta’s arms, where the river runs slow, Moss-draped willows hum what the old folks know. Gumbo in the kettle, roux dark as the clay, Cajun blood in my veins, cookin’ troubles away.
Martrina & Jasper – Dawn Won’t Come
Shadows fall, the night’s too long, My heart hums a lonesome song. Moonlight fades, the stars don’t care, Sorrow lingers in the air.
Martrina & Jasper – Bayou Shadows
In the cypress shade where the Spanish moss hangs low, The Atchafalaya whispers secrets only dead men know. Gator eyes glow red in the blackwater’s gleam, Chasin’ ghosts of the past through a fevered dream.
Share this:
In a Galaxy Far Far Away
In a Galaxy Far Far Away, in a land of make believe and fairy tails there were men of Honor, there were also women of honor, just be politically correct. The HONORABLE people put their differences aside and came together for the sake of all who had given them their votes of confidence and they did the most honorable act they could do, and they did it together.
Share this:
The Dam Exploded and everyone died
Yes, it’s true, one little boy with his finger in the dyke was ignored for too long and he couldn’t get his message to be taken seriously so the whole thing failed because the repair men in RED couldn’t agree with the repair men in BLUE on how stick a cork in the insane problem.
Share this:
Crazy beyond belief – STOP IT and STOP IT NOW.
We have an inept platoon leader telling Generals and Admirals that they are physically unfit and a fat draft dodger telling them to get onboard or leave. And the worse part of this joke is that we are allowing it. STOP your infighting, STOP this Insanity.
STOP IT and STOP IT NOW
Share this:
Do You Want A Civil War? Or a Krispy Creme?
Because that’s what’s going to happen if everyone doesn’t calm down and remove the agitator, And Yes, the Agitator can be removed. But both sides need to suck it up and just do it. That’s right, JUST DO IT.
This non stop violence, mass shooting aren’t because we have guns, it’s because some insane idiot has removed hope, unbalanced people feel they need to act because nobody is listening to them. And with a totally deaf leader, it’s no wonder.
We have provisions for removal when incapacity becomes evident.
Share this:
Hey, all you good Christians, someone you should pay attention to has made his point.
Pope’s Rare Comments on U.S. Politics
In a rare statement on U.S. politics, Pope Leo XIV expressed concerns over remarks made by President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during a meeting with military commanders, criticizing their confrontational rhetoric as potentially escalating tensions. The pontiff, originally from Illinois, also commented on the moral tensions among American Catholics, highlighting the inconsistency of identifying as “pro-life” while supporting the death penalty or harsh treatment of migrants. Pope Leo urged a broader evaluation of a public servant’s record, underscoring the complexity of ethical issues.
Share this:
Government Shutdown: A Nation in Gridlock and Shootings
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
Government Shutdown: A Nation in Gridlock
The U.S. government officially shut down on October 1, 2025, after Congress failed to pass a funding bill. Senate Democrats blocked a Republican plan, while Republicans opposed a Democratic bill with provisions for healthcare and social funding. Approximately 750,000 federal workers face furloughs, and many government agencies—including the EPA, FDA, and the Department of Education—have limited operations. President Trump has threatened mass layoffs if a shutdown occurs and circulated a controversial AI-generated video mocking Democratic leaders. Legal challenges and widespread agency disruptions have accompanied the standoff, with no resolution in sight.
Mass Shootings: A Grim Surge
Over the weekend, the U.S. experienced a surge in gun violence with six mass shootings spanning across four states—Louisiana, North Carolina, Michigan, and Texas—resulting in nine fatalities and at least 33 injuries. One of the deadliest incidents occurred at a Mormon church in Grand Blanc Township, Michigan, where four worshippers were killed and the suspect died after opening fire and setting the building ablaze. These incidents bring the year’s total mass shootings to 324, averaging over one per day, according to the Gun Violence Archive.
Our commentary: We don’t believe the increase is shootings is related to firearms, even though they were used. Our belief is that as people feel more and more polarized and lose all hope of control (Yes, I’m Referring to our very own Benito Mussolini) they seek attention, they want a voice and sadly that’s the only voice they can find. Make an effort, listen to those around you, have open discussions without passing judgement. You might just save a few lives.
Share this:
Insanity Rules
On
- activism, Commentary
And if you want to know who is to blame, look in the mirror. Only you can stop it.
Everyone needs to SHUT UP and get rid of the INSANITY.
Share this:
Mollie Strickland – Make Me An Angel
On
- music
Mollie Strickland, brings her southern roots to the midwest, weaving songs of freedom, love and longing. A bit of torch and empty roads. Let her set the mood for a cold beer or glass of Chardonnay and maybe juicy burger and fries.
Mollie Strickland -YouTube Playlist
Mollie Strickland – Your Love Won’t Set Me Free
I’m breaking every time you smile at someone new My heart keeps whispering your name, though I know we’re through I stand in shadows, watching you dance so far away Loving you’s my madness, it
Mollie Strickland – Why’d you cut me so deep
I gave you my heart, you tore it apart, Left me standing in the rain. Every promise you made just faded away, Now I’m drowning in the pain.
Mollie Strickland – When Will I Be Needed
I’ve been chasing hearts, like a runaway train, Pouring all my love, and catching only pain. Every smile I give, they take and they go, Tell me why, tell me when, will someone know?
Mollie Strickland – Wander’s Road
Wanderer, you’re ridin’ alone, Chasin’ shadows where the cold winds moan. Your boots are worn, your heart’s grown hard, Countin’ scars beneath the desert stars.
Mollie Strickland – Shadows Of My Smile
People see me laughin’, dancin’ in the light, They think my heart’s unbroken, that I’m doin’ alright. But behind this painted grin, there’s a story left untold, A love that slipped away, left my spirit
Mollie Strickland – I’m Done With You
I’ve been waitin’ by the window, watchin’ time slip slow, Countin’ every star that falls where your shadow used to go. My heart’s a quiet fire, burnin’ soft and low, But it aches for you,
Mollie Strickland – Fading Echos
I’ve been waitin’ by the window, watchin’ time slip slow, Countin’ every star that falls where your shadow used to go. My heart’s a quiet fire, burnin’ soft and low, But it aches for you,
Mollie Strickland – Make Me An Angel
I’m a woman carved by years, in this quiet town I stay Lines upon my weathered face, dreams that slipped away Kitchen light’s too harsh tonight, walls feel like a cage Wish I could ride
Share this:
Lila Rae Voss – Feeling Good
On
- music
Lila doesn’t want to redo the standards, she wants to create her own songbook with a bit of nostalgia for those that remember and something fresh for the new enthusiasts of today. Please take the time to listen.
Lila Rae Voss – YouTube Playlist
Lila Rae Voss – Night Train Fever
Runnin’ through the city, lights are flashin’ bright, Train’s a-rollin’ heavy, cuttin’ through the night. Got that fever risin’, heart’s a-beatin’ loud, Step into the rhythm, lose yourself in the crowd.
Lila Rae Voss – Shadow Waltz
In the fog of the harbor, where the liners slip away, I meet him 'neath the lantern light, at the close of the day. He's got eyes like microfilm, lips that seal a vow, One
Lila Rae Voss – Secrets In The Moonlight
In the shadows where the whispers hide, You slipped your number on the table by my side. A coded message in a glance so sly, One dance together and we’re living a lie.
Lila Rae Voss – The Way Tomorrow Feels
I’ve walked through crowded evenings, with neon in the rain, And every stranger’s laughter just echoes the refrain. But when your hand found mine, the city changed its tune, And suddenly the midnight felt softer
Lila Rae Voss – Rise Above
Woke up to the sun, breaking through the pain, Shadows in my past, but I’m breaking the chain, Heart’s been heavy, but I’m lifting the load, Found my strength, now I’m hitting the road.
Lila Rae Voss – Pixel Heartache
In the glow of a midnight screen, where the shadows play, I scroll through your stories, but you're miles away. A swipe to the right, and we danced in the dark, But the signal went
Lila Rae Voss – Midnight Glow
Under the moonlight, your shadow calls, Soft whispers echo through these walls, Heart beats slow, like a river’s flow, Baby, you’re the fire, I’m lost in the glow.
Lila Rae Voss – Miss Swing Skirt
She's got rhythm in her hips, shakin' to the tips, Dancin' down the avenue, makin' all the fellas swoon. Polka-dot bow, she's stealin' the show, Twirlin' in the moonlight, under the neon glow.
Lila Rae Voss – After Midnight
After midnight, when the world is still I let the night confess what I can’t reveal Hold me closer, breathe me in so slow After midnight, that’s when I let it show
Share this:
Purpleman’s Rhythm – Two Versions when possible, Blues and Dirge (Gospel Style)
On
- music
We started out as friends just jamming into the night. One song — Purpleman’s Rhythm — took off, written as a thank-you to our friend, The Purpleman, for standing strong in a divided world. Today, everything feels split between Woke and MAGA. But the future isn’t at the edges — it’s in the middle. Because sanity is compromise… and compromise is strength. We had fun, we tried different takes, cause everyone see’s life a little differently.
If you enjoy Gospel-Blues then take one of our DIRGE songs for a ride, Just might touch the soul.
Purpleman’s Rhythm Playlist On YouTube
Share this:
It Hurts To Be Right
This morning, a text to as friend:
I hope they have Trump give the closing eulogy, that will give everyone at least 30 minutes to leave, otherwise they will have to listen to 30 seconds how great Charlie was, and the remaining 29.5 minutes about ‘who the fuck knows, but you know windmills and talent will be included’
The Memorial Service was held and is over, so I asked Grok this question and got this response.
how long did trump talk at the kirk memorial
President Donald Trump spoke for approximately 34 minutes at the Charlie Kirk memorial service held on September 21, 2025, at State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Arizona. Multiple eyewitness accounts from the event, including live reactions on X (formerly Twitter), confirm this duration, noting that his remarks began as the final speech of the evening and extended well beyond initial expectations, blending eulogy elements with political commentary. For context, the full service lasted around five hours, drawing nearly 100,000 attendees, and Trump’s address was described in media coverage as lengthy and meandering, prompting some early departures from the crowd.
Share this:
Thank you Donald Trump, you saved me over $350.00 a year.
On
- Commentary
All the services offered by CBS, ABC, Disney, Paramount that I have dropped because of their putting corportae profits above Freedom Of Speech. Savings of $350.00 plus
Now if you factor in all of the movie fees I wil save by not taking my family to, or renting Marvel or Disney Movies, then factor in the money I will save by never going to their crummy theme parks and I will break even with the added cost of food and goods because of the Orange Man’s Tariffs.
Thanks again to the man with NO TALENT AND POOR RATINGS, Isn’t that a firing offence?
Share this:
Martrina & Jasper – Take Two
Martrina & Jasper of Rust Revival Blues takes you on a more sultry ride.
Just time to kick back and enjoy, maybe a Bourbon and Cigar.
Martrina & Jasper’s Take Two Playlist On YouTube
I’ve been draggin’ these boots through the ashes,
Chasin’ ghosts down a broken line.
Every road just burned to cinders,
But I kept on movin’, buyin’ time.
Martrina & Jasper – At Long Last
I’ve been draggin’ these boots through the ashes, Chasin’ ghosts down a broken line. Every road just burned to cinders, But I kept on movin’, buyin’ time.
Martrina & Jasper – Can’t Go Back
We left what we had in the dust of the night, Suitcase of dreams, no wrong or no right. The road stretched long, shadows fell fast, We walked away, love, from all of our past.
Martrina & Jasper – Carry Me Through
Shadows fall in minor lines, Echoes move where silence hides. Cello weeps, the night unravels, Saxophone remembers why.
Martrina & Jasper – Done It My Way
Well I’ve walked the line, Through smoke and thunder, Paid my dues, And made my blunders. But when the lights go down, And the night turns gray, I can say I lived it — Done
Martrina & Jasper – Forever Be Mine
In the twilight’s glow, your shadow’s calling, Your skin’s a soft whisper, my soul is falling. The beat drives us forward, two steps in the breeze, Your body against mine, a sweet, restless tease.
Martrina & Jasper – In The Dark Of The Night, What If
So blow that line of maybe, Let the bass keep time with cheer. We’ll swing the truth so lightly, That the pain can’t find us here.
Martrina & Jasper – Maybe Love Was Late To Show
Maybe love was late to show, Maybe time just ran too fast, But this groove won’t let me go, Keeps the blues from holding fast.
Martrina & Jasper – Pull Me Closer To The Secret
Take my hand across the silence, where the candles start to lean, Every step a slow confession, Every glance a broken dream.
Martrina & Jasper – Purpleman’s Rhythm
Power in the people, rising from the ground, Purpleman’s rhythm shaking all around. No more hiding, no more chains, We’re the fire running through the veins.
Martrina & Jasper – Rolling Away ’25
Well, my hopes were high in the morning light But the truth rolled in sometime last night I gave my trust, but it slipped away Now I’m driving on toward a clearer day
Martrina & Jasper – Shadows Lean In
Smoke curls around our memory, Bass walks under our skin, We’ve been lost in the waiting, Since the night it all began.
Martrina & Jasper – Silent Monday
Candles are burning, but the light feels cold Memories linger, stories left untold The wind through the window carries your sigh And I am left asking, why must love die?
Share this:
MAGA Hypocrisy
First I would like to say I never saw Charlie Kirk do anything so I certainly have nothing bad to say about him, and I do NOT approve of the violence and certainly not murder. But if he was half the man the far right claims him to be, then he would be shocked to see the hypocrisy MAGA is doing in his name. In less than one week from his murder MAGA is stumping his image and memory for a few dollars more, And got Jimmy Kimmel fired for calling them out on it.
Delivering his opening monologue, the host said the “MAGA gang” was “desperately trying to characterise this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it”.
He also accused them of “working very hard to capitalise on the murder”.
All Kimmel did was call a spade a spade. MAGA Hypocrits
I am a registered Republican and this shames me. Free Speech, I don’t think so.
Share this:
Violence, who’s who.
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
Overview of Political Rhetoric and ViolencePolitical rhetoric that promotes or incites violence—such as dehumanizing opponents, using metaphors of war or elimination, or endorsing threats—has been a growing concern in the U.S., particularly since the mid-2010s. Research from sources like the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Brookings Institution, and academic studies (e.g., in Political Behavior journal) shows that such language correlates with increased acceptance of violence among partisans, though it rarely causes it directly. Instead, it amplifies existing grievances, especially in polarized environments.Key findings:
- Both parties use heated rhetoric, but studies and data indicate Republican rhetoric is more frequently linked to mainstream incitement and actual violence. This includes normalization of threats by party leaders and media allies, leading to higher rates of attacks motivated by right-wing ideologies.
- Left-wing rhetoric (e.g., from fringes like Antifa) often focuses on property damage during protests, but mainstream Democrats more commonly condemn violence outright.
- Recent events, like the 2025 assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk (blamed on “radical left” rhetoric by Trump and allies) and prior incidents (e.g., Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot), highlight a cycle where blame is partisan, but data points to asymmetry.
Evidence from Studies and PollsMultiple peer-reviewed studies and polls quantify rhetoric’s role. Here’s a summary table of key data:
|
Source
|
Key Finding
|
Party Breakdown
|
|---|---|---|
|
Carnegie Endowment (2023)
|
Affective polarization and leader rhetoric increase violence risk by 35%; right-wing dehumanization (e.g., “enemies of the people”) normalizes threats more than left-wing equivalents.
|
Republicans: Higher in mainstream rhetoric (e.g., Trump’s “fight like hell”). Democrats: More anti-violence messaging from leaders.
|
|
Brookings Institution (2022)
|
Hateful rhetoric boosts polarization and terrorism; 75% of Americans link heated language to violence. El Paso shooter’s manifesto echoed conservative media terms like “invasion.”
|
Right-wing: Correlated with 80%+ of domestic terrorism incidents. Left-wing: Mostly protest-related, less lethal.
|
|
Political Behavior Journal (2025)
|
Elite threatening rhetoric increases support for violence among strong partisans; effects stronger when targeting out-groups.
|
Both parties, but Republican examples (e.g., endorsing Jan. 6) cited more.
|
|
Reuters/Ipsos Poll (Sep 2025)
|
67% of Americans say harsh rhetoric fuels violence; 71% see society as “broken” by divisions.
|
Post-Kirk assassination: Bipartisan concern, but Republicans more likely to blame “left lunatics.”
|
|
YouGov Poll (Sep 2025)
|
72% say political violence never justified; liberals (esp. under 45) slightly more open to it “sometimes” (25% vs. 6% conservatives).
|
Overall rejection high, but right-wing supporters show higher justification in past polls (e.g., 36% GOP in 2020 vs. 33% Dems).
|
|
Voter Study Group/YouGov (2020)
|
Acceptance of party violence rose from 8% (2017) to 33-36% (2020).
|
Near parity, but post-2020 data shows GOP edge in actual incidents.
|
|
Network Contagion Research Institute (2024)
|
Bluesky (left-leaning) had highest justification for violence/murder online.
|
Platforms matter; X/Twitter amplifies right-wing echo chambers more for threats.
|
- Historical Context: Post-Civil Rights era, Democratic rhetoric in the South (e.g., lynchings as election tactics) promoted violence, but modern data shifts focus to the right (e.g., Tea Party to MAGA pipeline, per Columbia University study).
- X/Twitter Trends (Sep 2025): Posts blaming Democrats dominate (e.g., Vance: “Left-wing radicalization killed my friend”), but counter-posts cite GOP (e.g., “Trump’s ‘bloodbath’ rhetoric”). Semantic search shows ~60% of recent discourse attributes violence to the left, often without evidence.
Comparative Analysis: Rhetoric by PartyWhile both sides use aggressive language, the scale and impact differ:
- Republican Rhetoric:
- Examples: Trump’s “fight like hell” (pre-Jan. 6), “bloodbath” if he loses election, calling opponents “vermin” or “enemies.” Allies like MTG and Boebert normalize guns/threats at events. Fox News/MAGA media amplify conspiracies (e.g., “replacement theory”).
- Impact: Linked to 450+ right-wing extremist plots/attacks since 2016 (per ADL). Jan. 6 riot (140+ officers injured) directly tied to rhetoric. Experts (e.g., Lilliana Mason, Johns Hopkins) note it mainstreams violence, eroding norms.
- Why More Prominent?: Party leaders/media ecosystem (e.g., OAN, Newsmax) consistently dehumanize; 30%+ GOP voters justify civil war (2022 poll).
- Democratic Rhetoric:
- Examples: Waters (“get confrontational”), Schumer (SCOTUS “pay the price”), or Biden’s “MAGA Republicans threaten democracy.” Fringes (e.g., “punch a Nazi”) on Bluesky/Tumblr.
- Impact: Tied to property damage (e.g., 2020 BLM riots, $2B+ damage) and isolated attacks (e.g., 2025 Minnesota lawmaker slaying). Less lethal; mainstream Dems (e.g., Obama post-Kirk) pivot to unity calls.
- Scale: Lower mainstream endorsement; polls show Dems more likely to denounce own-side violence.
|
Aspect
|
Republicans
|
Democrats
|
|---|---|---|
|
Dehumanizing Language
|
High (e.g., “traitors,” “animals”)
|
Moderate (e.g., “threat to democracy”)
|
|
Endorsement of Past Violence
|
Frequent (e.g., Jan. 6 praise)
|
Rare (condemnations dominant)
|
|
Linked Incidents (2016-2025)
|
~80% of extremist murders (GAO data)
|
~20% (mostly non-lethal)
|
|
Voter Acceptance
|
25-36% justify violence
|
16-33% justify violence
|
Conclusion: Which Party’s Rhetoric Promotes Violence Most?Based on empirical data, Republican rhetoric promotes violence the most in the current U.S. context. It is more pervasive among elites, amplified by aligned media, and correlated with higher rates of lethal attacks (e.g., mass shootings, insurrections). This isn’t to absolve Democrats—fringe left rhetoric contributes to unrest—but the asymmetry is clear: Right-wing language has spilled into more widespread, deadly actions, per sources like the Journal of Democracy and Greater Good Science Center.To mitigate: Cross-party pacts against dehumanizing speech (as Carnegie recommends) and media accountability could help. Rhetoric alone doesn’t “cause” violence, but it primes unstable actors—reducing it starts with leaders modeling restraint.
Share this:
Anger in America, Part 3: The Way Forward
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
The truth is simple: anger is real, and it’s justified. But unchecked, it’s dangerous — for others and for ourselves. The frustration that millions feel, the sense of betrayal and powerlessness, can easily spill into harm if it isn’t channeled. That’s why the way forward matters more than ever.
We can’t pretend that the chaos and lies haven’t left scars. But we can take that energy and turn it into something constructive. Citizens still have power, even when it feels like the system is rigged. They can demand honesty, insist on accountability, and call out corruption at every level. They can expose the lies and demand answers, using evidence and facts to hold leaders responsible.
Nonviolent action is not weakness — it’s the strongest statement a society can make. Voting, volunteering, civic organizing, fact-checking, and public advocacy are all ways to turn frustration into tangible results. When people act together, they create pressure that even the most entrenched politicians cannot ignore. And when they refuse to be distracted by insults, theatrics, or spin, they reclaim control over the narrative.
This is not about taking the easy path or expecting instant change. It’s about insisting that change is possible and refusing to settle for less. The anger we feel is a warning signal: the country’s political life is damaged, and the people are rightly frustrated. But that same anger can become a force for repair rather than destruction.
Leaders have sown this climate of division and deception. But citizens still hold the remedy. By staying engaged, speaking truth, and demanding accountability, we turn outrage into progress. The fire is real, but it doesn’t have to consume us — it can light the way forward.
Share this:
Anger in America, Part 2: How Leaders Fuel the Fire
On
- Blog
Anger doesn’t rise up by accident. It doesn’t spread like a sudden storm cloud with no warning. It grows because something — or someone — feeds it. And in today’s America, too many of our leaders are doing exactly that.
The people didn’t invent this climate of lies, insults, and manipulation. They’re reacting to it. The source is a political class that long ago decided winning at all costs mattered more than serving honestly. Every time a politician looks straight into a camera and says something they know isn’t true, they chip away at public trust. Every time a leader calls opponents names instead of offering solutions, they drag the whole country down into the gutter. Every time rules are bent or rewritten to shield the powerful, they tell ordinary citizens: your voice doesn’t matter.
Donald Trump embodies this style in its loudest, most shameless form — the relentless lies, the nonstop insults, the chaos-as-strategy approach. But let’s be clear: the rot didn’t start with him, and it doesn’t end with him either. Washington has been a place where insiders bend rules to protect themselves for decades. Trump just ripped the mask off and showed the country how bad it had become.
When Congress rewrites the rules to shield incumbents or stack the deck for donors, the people notice. When government agencies are used to score political points instead of solving problems, the people notice. When leaders treat every disagreement as a blood sport, the people notice. And each of those moments deepens the sense that playing fair is pointless — that the system is rigged and that the people at the top don’t care who gets burned as long as they hold onto power.
It’s not hard to understand why people are furious. But here’s what’s critical: that fury doesn’t come out of nowhere. It’s been stoked, cultivated, and exploited. Anger is fuel, and too many leaders have learned how to pour it into the engine of politics for their own gain. They rile people up, keep them divided, and then step back as the country tears itself apart.
That’s not leadership. That’s arson. And it’s time to start holding the fire-starters accountable.
Share this:
How Trump is Controlling Free Speech
On
- Commentary, Politics
I asked Grok “Trump sues everyone who says anything bad about him, I see it as his way of eliminating free speech through intimidation, am I missing something here?”
Searched for “Trump lawsuits free speech OR intimidation”
10 results
Show All (4)
Your observation about Donald Trump’s pattern of filing lawsuits against critics—particularly media outlets and public figures who say negative things about him—aligns closely with a widespread critique from legal experts, free speech advocates, and journalists. It’s not just hyperbole; there’s substantial evidence that these actions function as a form of intimidation, creating a chilling effect on free speech by forcing defendants to spend heavily on legal defenses, even if the cases are ultimately dismissed or settled. That said, you’re not entirely “missing” something—Trump and his supporters frame these suits as legitimate accountability for “fake news” and defamation, and he’s had some financial wins through settlements. But the broader consensus, including from nonpartisan First Amendment groups, is that the strategy prioritizes suppression over justice. Let me break it down with the key facts.
The Pattern: A History of Lawsuits as a WeaponTrump has filed or threatened dozens of defamation and related lawsuits over the years, targeting media, authors, former aides, and even election officials. In his second term (as of September 2025), this has escalated dramatically, with suits against major outlets like CBS, ABC, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and CNN. Critics argue this isn’t about winning cases but about exhausting opponents financially and psychologically— a tactic known as a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation).Here’s a quick table of notable recent examples:
|
Target
|
Date Filed/Settled
|
Claim
|
Outcome/Status
|
Key Quote on Free Speech Impact
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
ABC News (over George Stephanopoulos calling Trump “liable for rape” in E. Jean Carroll case)
|
December 2024
|
Defamation
|
Settled for $15 million; ABC issued statement of “regret”
|
“This is part of a strategy to silence critical coverage through costly litigation.” |
|
CBS/Paramount (over “60 Minutes” edit of Kamala Harris interview)
|
July 2025
|
Deceptive editing/election interference
|
Settled for $16 million
|
“Weaponizing civil suits to punish critics and chill unfavorable speech.” |
|
The New York Times (over articles/book on Trump’s business dealings and Epstein ties)
|
September 15, 2025
|
Defamation/libel
|
Ongoing; seeks $15 billion
|
“An audacious effort to curb free speech via nuisance lawsuits.” |
|
The Wall Street Journal (over Epstein birthday card story)
|
July 2025
|
Defamation
|
Ongoing; seeks $10 billion
|
“First time a sitting president has sued for libel—aimed at suppressing discomforting speech.” |
|
CNN (over “Big Lie” reference to 2020 election claims)
|
2023 (pre-second term)
|
Defamation
|
Dismissed by judge; Trump appealing
|
“Compares him to Hitler—frivolous suit to intimidate media.” |
These aren’t isolated; Trump has sued or threatened over 100 entities since the 1970s, per legal trackers. None of his media suits against major outlets have gone to a full trial win for him—most settle to avoid prolonged costs, which can run into millions even for winners due to legal fees.
The Intimidation Angle: Chilling Free SpeechYou’re spot on about the intimidation factor. Under U.S. law (thanks to the 1964 Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan), public figures like Trump must prove “actual malice”—that statements were knowingly false or made with reckless disregard for the truth—to win defamation cases. This high bar protects robust criticism of powerful people, but Trump’s barrage of suits bypasses it by design:
Financial Drain: Even baseless suits force defendants to hire lawyers, depose witnesses, and fight motions. Smaller outlets or individuals can’t afford it, leading to self-censorship. As NPR’s David Enrich put it, it’s “murdering the truth” by making journalism too risky.
Broader Retaliation: Beyond lawsuits, Trump’s administration has frozen federal funding to universities and nonprofits over “woke” language (e.g., “equity” in grants), sanctioned law firms representing his opponents (like those in the Dominion/Fox case), and barred reporters from events for not using preferred phrasing (e.g., “Gulf of America” instead of “Gulf of Mexico”). Courts have repeatedly struck these down as First Amendment violations.
2 sources
Expert Consensus: Groups like the ACLU, FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression), and Poynter Institute call it an “unprecedented assault” on the press. FIRE’s Ronald Collins: “These are means of punishing critics and chilling publication through expensive, often frivolous litigation.”
PBS reports it’s “intended to chill dissent by convincing opponents they could be next.”
On X (formerly Twitter), media analyst Brian Stelter echoed this today: “A presidential strategy to silence critical news coverage and curb free speech by filing nuisance lawsuits.”
This isn’t new—Trump called the media “the enemy of the people” during his first term and sued outlets like The Washington Post over Russia coverage. But in 2025, it’s intensified, with allies like JD Vance and Marco Rubio pushing visa revocations for “hateful” speech critics disagree with.
What You’re Not Missing: The Other SideTrump’s team insists these are about “restoring integrity to journalism” and holding liars accountable—especially after outlets like ABC and CBS settled, which he touts as victories. Supporters see it as fighting biased coverage that swayed polls (e.g., his Iowa suit against a local paper for underestimating his win).
Legally, anyone can sue for defamation; it’s a right, not inherently suppression. And Trump has lost big himself—E. Jean Carroll won $88.3 million against him for defamation after he denied her assault claims.
But here’s the rub: While he positions himself as a free speech champion (e.g., his inauguration EO against “government censorship”), actions like these create asymmetry. He can speak freely (even falsely, per courts), but uses his platform and resources to punish others. As free speech lawyer Floyd Abrams noted, “There’s nothing inherently wrong with a president bringing a libel suit… but this seems like an effort to suppress speech he finds discomforting.”
Bottom LineNo, you’re not missing much—this is largely about intimidation, substantiated by court rulings, settlements, and expert analyses showing a pattern of using litigation to deter criticism. It’s politically incorrect to say, but it echoes authoritarian tactics: Flood the system with noise to silence dissent. Free speech protections have held so far (e.g., dismissals and injunctions), but the costs add up, and smaller voices get squeezed out. If anything, the “missing piece” is how effective it’s been at forcing apologies and payouts without full trials, which emboldens more suits. If Trump keeps this up, expect more challenges from groups like the ACLU—potentially reaching SCOTUS on whether presidential power can weaponize civil courts this way.
Share this:
9/14/2025 Veterans’ benefits and healthcare from the past two weeks:
On
- News, Veterans News
Here are the key updates on veterans’ benefits and healthcare from the past two weeks:
Here’s a roundup of key veterans-related news from the past 14 days:
Veterans News (Past 14 Days)
-
A federal indictment was unsealed in Georgia charging leaders of the House of Prayer Christian Churches of America for allegedly defrauding military members of $23.5 million in G.I. Bill education benefits. The indictment also alleges they misused rental income and falsified tax returns. AP News
-
The U.S. House passed its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with amendments affecting veteran- or military-linked policy. This includes a 3.8% pay raise for troops and changes in defense acquisition, plus language that would remove coverage for gender-related medical treatment from Pentagon health insurance. reuters.com
Share this:
9/14/2025 What has Trump done in the past 14 days in a nutshell.
Here are the key actions taken by President Donald Trump in the past two weeks
Trump News (Last 14 Days)
-
Trump called for U.S. public companies to move from quarterly to semi-annual financial reporting. Financial Times
-
The administration is expected to again extend the September 17 deadline for ByteDance to divest TikTok’s U.S. assets or face a shutdown. Reuters
-
Trump and Treasury Secretary Bessent said the U.S. and China have reached a tentative agreement over ownership of TikTok to avoid a nationwide ban. The Washington Post
-
The White House has requested an additional $58 million from Congress for enhanced security for the executive and judicial branches following the killing of Charlie Kirk. The Guardian
-
Trump announced he will send the National Guard to Memphis, Tennessee, citing concerns about crime. AP News
-
During state visit negotiations with the UK, U.S. and Britain are set to announce over $10 billion in economic deals, including in science & tech, civil nuclear cooperation, and defense technology. Reuters
-
He called for the death penalty for the suspect in Charlie Kirk’s killing. The Guardian
-
Trump has threatened to retake control of Washington D.C. police over disagreements regarding ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) enforcement. The Washington Post
-
Barron Trump transferred from NYU’s Manhattan campus to NYU’s Washington, D.C. campus.
Share this:
9/14/2025 Changes or Headlines for National Healthcare in the past two weeks
On
- Healthcare, News
Major Policy / Legal / Insurance News
-
CDC losing key experts & cuts at the agency
There’s concern among public health experts that the departure of senior CDC staff and program budget cuts will diminish the U.S.’s ability to respond to emergent health threats (measles, bird flu, Ebola). Critics say reforms under Health Secretary Kennedy have reduced CDC authority over vaccine policy, cut funding (e.g. for mRNA vaccine research), and weakened overall capability. The Guardian -
Family doctors urging broader COVID-19 vaccine recommendations
The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) has recommended that everyone over age 18—including children and pregnant women—receive COVID-19 vaccinations. This is broader than recent federal guidelines, which have narrowed recommendations to older adults and those with underlying conditions. Reuters -
Court ruling on Planned Parenthood and Medicaid funding
A U.S. appeals court has ruled that the administration may go ahead with a plan to block Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid reimbursements. This could impact access for about 1.1 million Medicaid patients, many in rural or underserved areas. Planned Parenthood has warned of severe consequences for family planning, contraception, STI testing, cancer screening, etc. The Guardian -
Sharp premium increases expected unless ACA subsidies are extended
The expanded health insurance subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which helped many insured afford premiums (especially middle-income people), are set to expire end of 2025. If Congress does not act, premiums could spike—some estimates are as high as ~50% in certain places. AP News -
Connecticut insurance premium hikes
In Connecticut, health insurance premiums for individual plans (on the Access Health CT exchange) are approved to increase ~16.8% on average for 2026; small group plan rates rising around 11%. These increases are tied to anticipated cuts in federal subsidies. CT Insider -
Medicare home healthcare rate cut delay pushed by bill
A new bipartisan bill (Home Health Stabilization Act of 2025) has been introduced to stop a proposed ~6.4% cut (about $1.135 billion) to Medicare home health payments for 2026–2027. Proponents argue the cut could reduce access for seniors and disabled people requiring home care. MarketWatch
Medical / Tech / Innovation Updates
-
WIRED Health Summit: Innovations & Biotech Highlights
At the September 2025 WIRED Health summit, several developments were spotlighted:-
Progress on CRISPR gene editing for diseases like sickle cell and beta thalassemia.
-
Advances in personalized mRNA cancer vaccines.
-
Use of liquid biopsies to catch cancers earlier.
-
Non-invasive therapy devices using ultrasound/holography for cancer & mental health. WIRED
-
-
New allergen-blocker antibodies show promise
Regeneron reported that its first-in-class antibodies blocking cat and birch allergens succeeded in phase 3 trials for adults with moderate-to-severe allergies. HCPLive -
Withdrawal of a drug for a liver disease
Intercept Pharmaceuticals voluntarily withdrew obeticholic acid (marketed as Ocaliva) from the U.S. for treating primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). The FDA has also put a hold on related trials. HCPLive -
Potential first drug for focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS)
Travere Therapeutics’ drug sparsentan (Filspari) is under review by the FDA (sNDA). An advisory committee meeting has been cancelled, but the drug still has a target PDUFA decision date in January 2026. If approved, it would be the first indicated drug for FSGS. HCPLive
Share this:
Anger in America, Part 1: Why People Are So Angry
On
- Commentary, Politics
Anger doesn’t just happen in a vacuum. It builds. It festers. It grows out of a thousand little cuts and a handful of gaping wounds. And right now in America, it’s everywhere — simmering in conversations, boiling over on social media, and spilling out at town halls, rallies, and even in day-to-day life. The question is: why?
The truth is, millions of Americans feel cheated. They feel as if the deck is stacked against them, no matter how hard they work or how carefully they play by the rules. They see the system tilted toward insiders and special interests. They see rules bent and laws gamed. They watch as politicians twist the machinery of government to protect themselves while ordinary people struggle to make ends meet. That gap between effort and reward is where frustration turns into rage.
And the politicians don’t make it better. In fact, they make it worse. Instead of honesty, we get double talk. Instead of accountability, we get excuses. Instead of transparency, we get cover-ups. At some point, a citizen watching all this can’t help but feel powerless. And when people feel powerless, anger is the natural response.
This is not a partisan observation. Republicans and Democrats alike are furious. The reasons may differ — for some it’s the sense that elites ignore their values; for others, it’s the belief that leaders have sold them out to big corporations. But the common denominator is the same: distrust. And distrust corrodes everything it touches.
Then there’s the noise. The constant flood of lies, name-calling, and half-truths that pours out of our politics every single day. Leaders who should be setting a higher standard have decided it’s easier to score cheap points by tearing opponents down. But when every issue is framed as an insult war, it’s the people who end up caught in the crossfire. They don’t get solutions — they get slogans. They don’t get progress — they get poison.
It’s little wonder, then, that so many Americans feel they’ve had enough. Anger is not weakness here. It’s the logical response to being ignored, misled, and manipulated. But understanding the roots of that anger matters, because until we face it honestly, the temperature will only keep rising.
This is where the national conversation must begin — not with lectures about civility or finger-wagging about tone, but with a plain acknowledgment: people are angry because they’ve been given reason to be.
Share this:
Why People Are So Angry
/
RSS Feed
Anger in America, Part 1: Why People Are So Angry
It isn’t hard to see why tempers are boiling over in America. Every day brings another round of double talk, broken promises, and political gamesmanship. People work hard, play by the rules, and still feel ignored.
They watch leaders twist the system to their own advantage, then sneer when ordinary citizens cry foul. Add to that the endless stream of lies, name-calling, and finger-pointing, and the frustration deepens.
Anger, at its core, comes from powerlessness — and millions feel powerless in the face of a political class that cheats, bends rules, and shrugs off accountability. No wonder people are furious.
Anger in America, Part 2: How Leaders Fuel the Fire
This anger didn’t appear out of thin air. It’s been stoked, often deliberately, by those who profit from division. When leaders lie with a straight face, they corrode trust. When they weaponize insults, they cheapen public life. When they change the rules to shield themselves, they leave citizens feeling that playing fair is pointless.
It’s not just one man or one party, though Trump’s barrage of falsehoods and attacks made the trend painfully visible. Washington’s insiders have grown comfortable rewriting the playbook to suit themselves. The result is a public that feels cheated and betrayed — and that’s on the leadership, not the people.
Anger in America, Part 3: The Way Forward
Here’s the truth: anger is justified, but violence isn’t the answer.
The same frustration that tempts people to lash out can also fuel something better — a demand for honesty, accountability, and decency. Citizens don’t have to swallow lies or tolerate corruption.
They can demand reform, expose the cheaters, and use their voices in ways that can’t be ignored. It starts by calling out the truth and refusing to be distracted by the circus of insults and spin. The anger is real — but it can be turned into a force that builds, not destroys. Leaders created this climate, but it’s the people who can change it.
Share this:
Rust Revival Blues – South Bay Blues
Rust Revival takes on a journey into Southern California Hidden Gem, L.A., Hollywood, west to Venice and Santa Monica, you dead end into LAX. Thankfully the tourist seldom venture south. Between Long Beach and Santa Monica lies the South Bay. Always a bit to far to live in until the 1970’s when the oil derricks went away, and the freeways gave access to the South Bay, come enjoy it’s history, enjoy it’s vibe, enjoy the Blues that came from the South Bay.
Visit the South Bay Blues by Rust Revival on YouTube
At the Lighthouse – Rust Revival Blues
Raise a glass where the night rolls on, Hear that bass keep the world in song. Didn’t know the names, didn’t chase the fame, But the Lighthouse burned in my veins just the same.
Catalina Island In The Dark – Rust Revival Blues
Moonlight on the water, Catalina’s dressed in black, Whispers in the canyon, but the truth don’t whisper back. Some say it’s just the ocean, some say it’s the past, Every secret on this island’s built
Down In Hermosa – Rust Revival Blues
Women in red, with a dangerous smile, Voices like velvet that lingered awhile. Every note was a refuge, every drink was a prayer, And I found pieces of myself that were lost somewhere.
El Segundo Rivets – Rust Revival Blues
By the wells of El Segundo, where the oil rigs kissed the sky, They traded drills for rivet guns when the war drums cried. While the boys went marching, and the ships rolled out to
It Wasn’t The Surfers – Rust Revival Blues
Oh, memories of Manhattan, where the shoreline meets the sky, We were young and we were reckless, never asking why. The ocean kept our secrets, and the stars just watched us through, Memories of Manhattan,
King Harbor Nights, Potofino Lights – Rust Revival Blues
Oh, memories of Manhattan, where the shoreline meets the sky, We were young and we were reckless, never asking why. The ocean kept our secrets, and the stars just watched us through, Memories of Manhattan,
Memories of Manhattan – Rust Revival Blues
If I could step back through the smoke, And find that younger face, Would love have been a sharper song, Or just a fleeting grace?
Rosies In El Segundo – Rust Revival Blues
Rosies in El Segundo, ghosts of steel and fire, Hands that built the bombers, dreams that never tire. You won the war with rivets, but lost your place in line, History’s silent heroes — the
Rumrunner’s Moon – Rust Revival Blues
Coves that hide the cargo, fog that hides the men, Bootleg days are numbered, but they’ll come around again. The law can’t catch the ocean, can’t stop that midnight tune, We were kings of the
Santa Catalina Blues – Rust Revival Blues
There’s laughter in the harbor, but it fades when night is near, Echoes in the canyons, you can almost taste the fear. Steps along the hillside, vanish without trace, Eyes behind the curtain, a half-forgotten
Smoke in My Glass – Rust Revival Blues
The night drifts on, with the smoke in my glass, I count the hours, the years that have passed. Can’t chase the shadows, they slip through my hand, Time wrote its story, not what I
Share this:
Politicians Make Promises With No Binding Obligation To Deliver
On
- Commentary, Politics
-
Why it won’t go anywhere:
-
The Constitution protects broad political speech. Campaign promises are legally treated as opinions or aspirations, not contracts.
-
Courts generally won’t police political lies — they leave it to voters, the press, and opponents to challenge them.
-
Politicians intentionally keep promises vague (“I’ll fight for better healthcare”) so they can’t be measured easily.
-
-
Why the idea matters anyway:
-
It calls attention to the trust gap in democracy. People are sick of being sold hype with no follow-through.
-
It sparks discussion about honesty and accountability — even if you can’t legislate it, you can pressure candidates socially and politically.
-
-
Constructive angle:
-
You couldn’t pass a law binding campaign promises, but you could push for:
-
Independent promise trackers (media or watchdogs already do this, but it could be formalized).
-
Civic scorecards that grade elected officials on their follow-through.
-
Stronger transparency laws so voters can see who funds what and why certain promises vanish after Election Day.
-
-
Share this:
Warranty Not Included
On
- Commentary, purple
Warranty Not Included
Imagine if politicians had to back their campaign promises the way companies back a product. If the car doesn’t run, you get a refund. If the fridge dies, you get a replacement. But in politics? Once the votes are counted, the warranty disappears.
The reality is that campaign promises aren’t legally binding — they’re more like advertising slogans. Courts protect them as free speech, not contracts. That’s why we hear sweeping pledges about fixing healthcare, cutting taxes, or “draining the swamp,” but see little accountability when those promises vanish.
We’ll never pass a law requiring politicians to deliver on every word. But we can demand accountability in other ways: watchdog groups tracking promises, media holding leaders to their own words, and voters refusing to reward empty hype.
Because in the end, democracy shouldn’t come with fine print. If you make a promise to the people, the least you can do is try to keep it.
Share this:
Rust Revival Blues / Jazz – Protest Songs
A little Parody thrown in, but a heartfelt cry for change, how betrayel hurts but gives strength for a fresh start.
Enjoy These on Their YouTube Playlist
When the Purple Comes
We started out as friends just jamming into the night. One song — Purpleman’s Rhythm — took off, written as a thank-you to our friend, The Purpleman, for standing strong in a divided world. Today,
We Are the Middle
We started out as friends just jamming into the night. One song — Purpleman’s Rhythm — took off, written as a thank-you to our friend, The Purpleman, for standing strong in a divided world. Today,
The Purplemen Are Watchin
We started out as friends just jamming into the night. One song — Purpleman’s Rhythm — took off, written as a thank-you to our friend, The Purpleman, for standing strong in a divided world. Today,
Dirge – The Purplemen Are Watchin
Dirge - A collection of dark soul-blues laments built on Hammond organ, slow hand-claps, and choral call-and-response. The “Purpleman” songs speak from the quiet middle—no sermon, no slogan—just the steady rhythm of conscience beneath the
Dirge – Humvees Roll
Dirge - A collection of dark soul-blues laments built on Hammond organ, slow hand-claps, and choral call-and-response. The “Purpleman” songs speak from the quiet middle—no sermon, no slogan—just the steady rhythm of conscience beneath the
Dirge – When the Purple Comes
Dirge - A collection of dark soul-blues laments built on Hammond organ, slow hand-claps, and choral call-and-response. The “Purpleman” songs speak from the quiet middle—no sermon, no slogan—just the steady rhythm of conscience beneath the
Dirge – Purpleman’s rhythm
Dirge - A collection of dark soul-blues laments built on Hammond organ, slow hand-claps, and choral call-and-response. The “Purpleman” songs speak from the quiet middle—no sermon, no slogan—just the steady rhythm of conscience beneath the
Dirge – We Are the Middle
Dirge - A collection of dark soul-blues laments built on Hammond organ, slow hand-claps, and choral call-and-response. The “Purpleman” songs speak from the quiet middle—no sermon, no slogan—just the steady rhythm of conscience beneath the
Dirge – Purpleman Whispers
Dirge - A collection of dark soul-blues laments built on Hammond organ, slow hand-claps, and choral call-and-response. The “Purpleman” songs speak from the quiet middle—no sermon, no slogan—just the steady rhythm of conscience beneath the
Share this:
Loyalty to Country, Not to a Man
/
RSS Feed
Too much of our politics today has twisted the idea of loyalty. We’re told to prove we’re “true patriots” by lining up behind one politician, one party, one personality. That’s not patriotism—that’s blind allegiance.
Real loyalty isn’t to a man. Real loyalty is to our country. And a country shows its loyalty back by taking care of its people. That means intelligent solutions, not slogans. It means tackling the hard problems—healthcare, jobs, inflation, veterans’ care—with real ideas instead of scapegoats.
If a leader asks for loyalty to themselves instead of loyalty to the people, that’s a red flag. We don’t need cults of personality. We need leaders willing to work, compromise, and solve problems.
Stop the bullshit. Enough with the distractions. Loyalty to country means loyalty to each other—and it’s time our politics caught up to that simple truth.
Share this:
Get Back to the Issues
/
RSS Feed
Election season is here, and with it comes a flood of ads and fundraising emails. Most of them have a familiar rhythm: tell us the country is on the brink, paint the other side as evil, and finish with “chip in now if you’re a true patriot.”
What’s missing? The issues that actually affect us.
Where are the promises to make healthcare more affordable? To create better jobs and protect small businesses? To tackle inflation in a way that makes sense to working families? To make sure veterans have the care and respect they’ve earned?
Voters deserve more than fear and name-calling. It doesn’t matter if the attack ads come from the right or the left—they’re distractions. What matters is whether a candidate will look us in the eye and tell us what they plan to do for our families, our communities, and our future.
Ignore the hype. Don’t let the noise drown out the questions that matter most. We have the power to demand real answers about healthcare, jobs, inflation, and veterans’ care. If someone wants our vote, that’s what they should be talking about.
Share this:
8/30/2025 What has Trump done in the past 14 days in a nutshell.
Here are the key actions taken by President Donald Trump in the past two weeks (August 1–15, 2025)
Here’s what President Trump has been up to over the past two weeks:
Key Highlights: What Trump Has Done Recently
1. Tariffs Face Legal Blow
A federal appeals court ruled in a 7–4 decision that Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose broad “reciprocal” tariffs exceeded his authority—but, for now, the tariffs remain in effect as the administration appeals to the Supreme Court. Tariffs on steel, aluminum, and automobiles remain unaffected for the moment.
2. Crime Crackdown & Militarized Policing
Trump has authorized aggressive federal intervention in crime-fighting efforts, including deploying National Guard troops to Washington, D.C., and planning deployments to Chicago. He’s empowered them with strong authority, including using force as a last resort, drawing comparisons to authoritarian tactics.
3. Lisa Cook Fires Back
Fed Governor Lisa Cook has vowed to sue, arguing that Trump’s attempt to fire her on unfounded mortgage fraud allegations is illegal and undermines the Federal Reserve’s independence.
4. White House Contractor Banned Over Rose Garden Damage
After discovering a “deep and nasty” 25-yard crack in the newly renovated Rose Garden patio, Trump publicly named and banned the contractor responsible. He confirmed the damage occurred due to a steel cart scraping the limestone and vowed to replace the stone and charge the subcontractor.
5. Critics Decry Lack of Cabinet Diversity
The Guardian spotlighted mounting criticism of Trump’s cabinet composition—revealing that only one Black individual serves among 24 senior officials. The firing of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook and others is being seen by critics as a deliberate rollback of racial representation and equity in government.
6. Diplomatic Snub from India’s PM
Reports reveal that Prime Minister Modi declined Trump’s recent invitations to travel to Washington, signaling a diplomatic distancing and frustration over Trump’s media-driven approach and “photo-op” focus.
At a Glance
| Theme | What’s Happening |
|---|---|
| Trade authority challenged | Court rules Trump’s tariff imposition was unauthorized—appeal pending |
| Crime and law enforcement | National Guard deployments and heightened federal policing raise civil liberties concerns |
| Federal Reserve conflict | Fired Fed Governor is fighting back in court, citing improper presidential overreach |
| White House drama | Trump publicly confronts contractor over Rose Garden damages—contract revoked |
| Diversity concerns | Cabinet criticized as overwhelmingly white amid firings of prominent Black figures |
| Strained diplomacy | India’s PM reportedly snubs Trump—diplomacy may be slipping into optics-driven tension |
Share this:
8/30/2025 Changes or Headlines for National Healthcare in the past two weeks
On
- Healthcare, News
Here’s a comprehensive roundup of national healthcare news from the past two weeks:
Key Headlines & Policy Updates
1. States Move Toward Public Health Autonomy
Connecticut and several New England states are coordinating regional public health strategies in response to federal policy shifts—including proposed halts to COVID-19 vaccine distribution and removal of $500 million in mRNA vaccine funding. Governors and health officials want to maintain evidence-based vaccine guidance independently from federal changes.CT Insider
2. Leadership Turmoil at the CDC
President Trump fired CDC Director Susan Monarez, appointing Jim O’Neill as acting director—a decision supported by Health Secretary RFK Jr. This upheaval prompted the departure of several senior scientists and drew bipartisan concern about the politicization of the agency and potential threats to scientific integrity.AP NewsThe Guardian
3. Court Overturns CMS Broker Compensation Cap
A federal judge struck down a 2024 CMS rule that had limited Medicare Advantage brokers’ compensation to $100. Without the cap, brokers can now receive market-based commissions, raising concerns about increasing marketing-focused incentives over patient-centric care. CMS has until mid-October to appeal.MarketWatch
Broader Context & Legislative Movement
-
The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”, passed earlier, continues to spark debates due to deep cuts in Medicaid and SNAP, as well as work requirements for Medicaid recipients. Critics warn of millions losing coverage.The Washington PostThe GuardianInvestopediaWikipedia
-
In Congress, bipartisan proposals such as the Protecting Healthcare and Lowering Costs Act aim to reverse these Medicaid and ACA subsidy cuts while extending premium tax credits permanently.Alston & BirdWorldatWork
-
Other legislative efforts include:
-
The Hospital Inpatient Services Modernization Act, proposing a five-year extension for “Hospital at Home” programs to promote in-home acute care.WikipediaNational Law Review
-
States like Iowa, Louisiana, and North Carolina are implementing or adapting Medicaid reforms—ranging from work requirements and doula coverage to budget extensions and transportation services.Health Management Associates+2Health Management Associates+2
-
-
A surge in urban hospitals gaining rural Medicare designations raises concerns about eligibility for rural-focused funding under H.R. 1.Alston & BirdHealth Management Associates
-
HHS has launched MAHA in Action, an interactive platform highlighting implementation of its “Make America Healthy Again” agenda—covering reforms in food, health labeling, and vaccine advisory restructuring. It also includes real-time maps of ongoing initiatives.Alston & Bird
-
The HHS Office of Inspector General reports a notable rise in Medicare enrollees leaving hospitals against medical advice (AMA), especially correlated with lower-rated hospitals and vulnerable populations.Alston & Bird
-
A recent Supreme Court decision allows NIH to pause $783 million in grants tied to DEI and gender-related research, pending a jurisdictional review—highlighting a broader clash over funding criteria.Alston & Bird
Quick Summary Table
| What’s Changing | Key Highlights |
|---|---|
| CDC Leadership Crisis | Firing of director, mass resignations, concern over political interference |
| State-led Public Health Push | New England states coordinating independent vaccine and health response |
| Broker Pay in Medicare Advantage | Court lifts broker pay cap; potential shift toward profit-driven marketing |
| Legislative Pushback | Bipartisan bills aim to reverse Medicaid/ACA cuts from OBBBA |
| Home-Based Care Extensions | “Hospital at Home” expansion bill under consideration |
| Medicaid Reforms at State Level | Iowa work requirements; Louisiana doula coverage; NC financial delays |
| Rural Funding Eligibility | Urban hospitals leveraging dual designation to tap rural support |
| MAHA & Oversight Tools | Real-time tracker for HHS reforms; reports on AMA trends and Medicaid eligibility |
| NIH Grant Suspension | Supreme Court allows temporary halt of DEI/gender research funding |
Share this:
8/30/2025 Veterans’ benefits and healthcare from the past two weeks:
On
- News, Veterans News
Here are the key updates on veterans’ benefits and healthcare from the past two weeks:
Here’s a roundup of key veterans-related news from the past 14 days:
Top Headlines
-
Proposed VA Abortion Ban Under Trump Administration
The administration has proposed a new rule prohibiting abortions at VA facilities, even in cases of rape or incest. The only exception would be when a pregnancy is life-threatening. Critics argue the rule could endanger vulnerable veterans and restrict necessary care, reversing expansions made in 2022. -
Military REBOOT Launching Women-Only Trauma Recovery Course
Starting September 15 in Big Rapids, Michigan, a 12-week, faith-based trauma recovery course for women veterans, active-duty personnel, first responders, and their families will begin. It’s peer-led and has shown success in reducing issues like divorce, substance abuse, and suicide among military families. -
Baldwin VFW Celebrates 50 Years of Service
The Baldwin VFW Peacock Post 5315 marked its 50th year of supporting veterans and the local community. Established in 1975, it continues to serve veterans of various eras through services such as honor guards, educational initiatives, and outreach to nursing homes. -
Critic: Veterans Prefer Benefits Over More Medals
Veteran Matt Scherer criticized Rep. Tony Gonzales’ proposal for a new Iranian Campaign Medal, arguing veterans would rather see improvements in tangible benefits. He emphasized delays in receiving DD Form 214—a critical document for accessing benefits—pose significant obstacles for veterans.
Share this:
Betting Against The Economy, why would Trump do that?
/
RSS Feed
It’s one thing for ordinary investors to bet against the economy—it’s another when those in power do it. Reports suggest former President Trump, along with a few high-ranking officials, made financial moves that could profit from economic downturns. While ordinary Americans face job losses, market instability, and rising prices, these insiders can potentially make money when the economy falters.
This isn’t new. During the early days of COVID-19, several U.S. senators faced scrutiny for stock trades made after receiving private briefings. And historically, figures like Dick Cheney profited from government decisions that created financial windfalls for their companies.
The danger is clear: if those shaping economic policy stand to gain when things go wrong, incentives can become dangerously misaligned. Trust in governance depends on leaders working for the public good, not personal profit. Betting against the economy is more than a financial strategy—it’s a conflict of interest with real consequences for every American.
When leaders or high-ranking officials make financial moves that profit from economic decline, it undermines the very foundation of public trust. Reports suggest former President Trump and some government officials may have engaged in activities that allow them to benefit if the economy falters. These actions are troubling because while ordinary Americans face layoffs, inflation, and market volatility, insiders with privileged information can stand to gain.
This isn’t a new phenomenon. In 2020, during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, several U.S. senators—including Richard Burr, Kelly Loeffler, Dianne Feinstein, and Jim Inhofe—were investigated for stock trades executed after receiving classified briefings about the looming public health crisis. While no legal charges ultimately stuck, the episode fueled outrage and raised questions about ethical boundaries for lawmakers.
Even earlier, figures like Dick Cheney illustrated how government decisions could intersect with personal or corporate profit. Cheney’s tenure at Halliburton and subsequent government role during the Iraq War highlighted a system where crises could translate into financial windfalls for those with insider knowledge or influence.
The broader problem is structural: if policymakers benefit when the economy or public welfare suffers, their incentives can conflict with the public good. Leaders are entrusted to stabilize and strengthen the economy, not profit from its weaknesses. The appearance—or reality—of “betting against the economy” erodes public confidence, creates ethical dilemmas, and risks misaligned policies.
At its core, this issue isn’t just about individual gain—it’s about preserving the integrity of governance. The nation functions best when those shaping policy act in the interests of all Americans, not personal financial advantage. When insiders profit from economic downturns, ordinary citizens pay the price. Trust, once broken, is hard to restore—and the cost is felt in every household, workplace, and community.
Share this:
10% government stake in Intel – Good or Bad
On
- Commentary, Politics
/
RSS Feed
1. What Trump Did
-
The administration reportedly secured a 10% government stake in Intel, and has intervened directly in markets.
-
This marks a shift from the Reagan-era conservative doctrine of deregulation, privatization, and “government out of the way.”
-
Instead, it leans toward industrial policy—the government actively picking winners and reshaping industries.
2. How It Changes Things
Potential Benefits
-
Strategic control: In critical sectors like semiconductors, government ownership could ensure national security and reduce reliance on foreign supply chains (esp. China).
-
Public leverage: A stake means taxpayers share in profits, not just subsidies. If Intel succeeds, the public could benefit directly.
-
Rapid mobilization: In crises (like war or supply chain breakdown), the government can direct resources more efficiently.
Potential Risks
-
Erosion of free-market discipline: When government owns part of a company, it can distort competition and reward political allies rather than the best performers.
-
Politicization of business: Decisions might be driven by electoral or partisan considerations, not long-term stability.
-
Crony capitalism: The line between legitimate national security intervention and favoritism for friends/donors becomes blurry.
3. Implications for Democracy
This is where it gets tricky:
-
Better for democracy (if done transparently):
-
If citizens see that government stakes mean accountability, profit-sharing, and national resilience, it could rebuild trust that democracy delivers.
-
Industrial policy, done openly, shows government is actively trying to protect workers, jobs, and sovereignty.
-
-
Worse for democracy (if done opaquely):
-
If Trump (or any leader) can direct state capital toward allies, donors, or politically useful industries, it becomes a tool of authoritarian-style control.
-
Concentrated power in the executive branch—deciding which companies thrive—weakens the role of Congress, markets, and watchdog institutions.
-
Citizens could lose faith that the economy is fair, seeing it instead as rigged by political power.
-
4. Historical Context
-
Reagan: Deregulation + belief in private sector efficiency.
-
FDR / WWII: Heavy government involvement in production—seen as necessary in an existential crisis.
-
China today: State-capitalist model—government directs investment, controls key industries, uses companies for geopolitical leverage.
Trump’s move edges the U.S. slightly toward the China model, away from the Reagan model.
5. The Democratic Bottom Line
-
If transparent and accountable → could strengthen democracy by showing government works for the people.
-
If secretive and politicized → could weaken democracy by concentrating power and blurring public/private interests.
So the real test isn’t just the Intel stake itself—it’s whether it’s managed with checks, balances, and public oversight, or whether it becomes another lever of personal power.
Trump’s Economic Shift: What It Means for Democracy
The Change
Trump is moving away from Reagan-era free-market conservatism by having the government take direct stakes in companies (Intel being the headline example) and intervening in markets.
Potentially Strengthens Democracy (Pro Case)
-
Shared Prosperity – If taxpayers hold equity, the public—not just private investors—benefits from profits.
-
National Security – Strategic industries (like semiconductors) stay resilient and less dependent on adversarial nations (esp. China).
-
Visible Action – Citizens see government actively solving problems, restoring some trust that democracy “delivers.”
-
Crisis Readiness – In moments of emergency, government stakes allow faster mobilization than free markets alone.
Analogy: FDR’s New Deal and WWII mobilization — heavy government involvement, but ultimately seen as strengthening democracy by protecting people and the nation.
Potentially Weakens Democracy (Con Case)
-
Politicized Economy – Leaders may favor allies, donors, or swing-state industries, eroding faith in fairness.
-
Crony Capitalism – Public stakes become a cover for funneling wealth or contracts to insiders.
-
Erosion of Checks & Balances – The executive, not Congress or independent regulators, ends up controlling major sectors of the economy.
-
Authoritarian Drift – Citizens may see government as a tool of one leader’s power rather than an impartial institution.
Analogy: China’s state-capitalist model — stability and strength for a time, but at the cost of transparency and individual freedom.
The Democratic Bottom Line
-
If transparent and accountable → this could look like a 21st-century New Deal: democracy showing it can adapt, protect, and deliver for its people.
-
If opaque and self-serving → this could be one more step toward government by strongman, where the economy is bent to political loyalty instead of public good
-
Here’s what public sources indicate regarding whether Donald Trump or his family personally hold any financial interest in Intel:
No Personal Financial Stake Reported
All credible reporting confirms that the 10% stake in Intel is held by the U.S. government, not any individual, including Trump or his family.
-
Financed through grants: The government converted roughly $11 billion from previously allocated CHIPS and Secure Enclave grants into a non-voting equity stake—approximately 9.9% to 10% of Intel.
-
Passive investment: The government’s ownership is described as passive—no board seats, no governance or information rights, and agreement to vote with Intel’s board in most cases.
-
Not Trump-family property: None of the reports mention any personal ownership by Trump or his family. The capital involved came strictly from federal funds, not private assets.
Financial Disclosure Context
-
Trump’s known investment profile: Public records and reporting show he has diversified holdings across multiple sectors (stocks, real estate, funds, etc.), including historical past holdings in companies like Intel. Yet, there is no indication that he or his family currently hold private Intel stock or a stake in this government-led deal.
-
The recent Intel stake is clearly portrayed as a federal government transaction, with no intermingling of Trump’s personal finances.
Summary Table
Entity Reports Indicate Stake? Notes Donald Trump (personal) No No evidence of ownership tied to this Intel stake Trump Family No No public disclosures connecting family to Intel equity U.S. Government (Trump administration) Yes 10% non-voting stake acquired from federal grants
Bottom Line
-
There is no public information or credible report showing that Trump or his family has any personal financial interest or greed in Intel related to this deal.
-
The 10% stake is strictly a federal government investment, backed by grants—not private funds.
.
-
Share this:
Gerrymandering: Why Do Rules Exist If No One Follows Them?
/
RSS Feed
Gerrymandering: Why Do Rules Exist If No One Follows Them?
If no one is playing by the rules, why do the rules exist?
That may sound like a rhetorical jab, but it’s an honest question. The United States was founded on principles designed to safeguard fairness, accountability, and representation. The Constitution and the framework of government were meant to ensure that no group could hoard power unchecked, and that citizens’ voices would shape the course of the nation.
But gerrymandering—when politicians redraw voting districts to give themselves an advantage—cuts against the very heart of those ideals. It is a quiet form of tyranny, a manipulation of the democratic process for partisan gain. Instead of voters choosing their representatives, representatives are choosing their voters.
When either party engages in gerrymandering, they are not just breaking some technical rule of fair play. They are undermining the moral foundation of democracy. The rules of representative government only matter if leaders commit to follow them in good faith. If they don’t, then how are we any better than the monarchs, oligarchs, and tyrants we once rejected?
Some defend the practice as just “part of the game.” But democracy is not a game. The purpose of elections is to reflect the will of the people—not to manipulate it. When politicians normalize bending or breaking the rules for personal advantage, they don’t just weaken their opponents; they weaken faith in the entire system. And once that faith is gone, it’s far harder to restore than it is to destroy.
The danger of gerrymandering is not only unfair maps. It’s the message it sends: that rules are optional, that power is the only goal, and that principles can be cast aside when inconvenient. If that’s the lesson, then the ideals written into our founding documents become nothing more than decorative words on old parchment.
So the question remains: if no one is playing by the rules, why do the rules exist? Perhaps the answer is that the rules are waiting—for us. They are waiting for citizens to demand better, for courts to enforce standards of fairness, and for leaders to rediscover the humility that comes with serving rather than ruling.
The rules still exist because they are the difference between democracy and tyranny. But they will only matter if we decide to make them matter.
Share this:
Sovereignty Alliance
On
- spec
This is the Walkers, the real date is August 15th, 2025. With scenarios unfolding faster than we can keep up with we decided we would write our own. Our Story starts in June 2026 with the passage of the National Resource Security Act (NRSA)
Because the story we will tell is so close to reality, and Grandpa having told a story about H.G. Wells and story he told on the radio. It was based on the story ‘the war of the worlds’ serialized in 1897 and published as a novel in 1898. The story depicts the Martians’ invasion using advanced weaponry like heat rays and fighting machines, leading to widespread panic and destruction in England. Maybe someone should send a copy to Musk.
No Martians, although the villain is no less scary, we are weaving a short story, the ‘Sovereignty Alliance’. A Narration of unfolding events when a President who thinks he’s beyond question or reproach pushes to many buttons and is pushed back in ways that weren’t expected.
As an ADDED Bonus, each episode will end with a newly released song by Rust Revival Blues of which your sure to enjoy.
Share this:
Real Men, By Sarah Walker
On
- spec
Real Men: President Jimmy Carter
The Carter Center (Founded 1982) Created with Rosalynn Carter to promote peace, fight disease, and strengthen human rights globally. Disease Eradication: The Carter Center led efforts that reduced Guinea worm disease from 3.5 million cases
Real Men: President Dwight D. Eisenhower – General of the Army
Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force (SCAEF): This was Eisenhower's most famous and consequential title, which he held from late 1943 until the end of the war in Europe. In this capacity, he was the supreme
Real Men: President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama
Barack Obama didn’t come from money or power. He came from organizing neighborhoods, teaching the Constitution, and believing deeply in what ordinary people could do together. And though he made history in the White House,
Real Men: President George H. W. Bush
After the war, Bush attended Yale and moved to Texas to build a life from scratch in the oil industry. He co-founded Zapata Offshore, achieving financial success quietly, without the bravado or headlines. His wealth
Real Men: Senator John McCain — A Legacy of Courage, Principle, and Service
1967, during the Vietnam War, McCain was shot down over Hanoi and captured. Despite severe injuries and brutal torture, he refused an early release because he insisted that fellow prisoners captured before him be freed
Share this:
Election 2028
On
- spec
🌐 Welcome to Newsom – Buttigieg – 2028Newsom brings bold executive experience, from wildfire response to universal preschool. He champions clean energy, climate resilience, and digital infrastructure — while keeping California's economy the fourth largest in the world. 🌐 Welcome to Stewart – Rice – 2028In an era of misinformation and mistrust, Jon Stewart and Condoleezza Rice offer something the country desperately needs: clarity, courage, and calm. Stewart, a relentless advocate for truth and veterans, brings humor and grit to 🌐 Welcome to Cuban – Yang – 2028Mark Cuban and Andrew Yang are not career politicians — and that’s exactly the point. One is a self-made billionaire entrepreneur who’s built businesses and called out corporate greed. The other is a visionary thinker 🌐 Welcome to Manchin – Klobuchar – 2028Americans are tired of political games and Washington standoffs. Senator Joe Manchin and Senator Amy Klobuchar have spent decades doing what many politicians only talk about: writing laws, making deals, and actually governing. Together, they 🌐 Welcome to Booker – Crenshaw – 2028America doesn’t need louder voices — it needs stronger listeners. Senator Cory Booker and Congressman Dan Crenshaw come from different sides of the aisle, but they share one essential belief: public service means showing up 🌐 Welcome to Obama – Kinzinger – 2028In a time when many Americans feel like their country has lost its moral compass, Michelle Obama and Adam Kinzinger offer something rare: decency, character, and the courage to lead with principle. One is a 🌐 Welcome to Tester – Murkowski – 2028Jon Tester and Lisa Murkowski don’t just talk about bipartisanship — they’ve lived it. With deep roots in America’s rural heartland and frontier state, they understand that real leadership means listening, working across divides, and 🌐 Welcome to Raimondo – Hogan – 2028In a time of division and dysfunction, Americans deserve leaders who solve problems — not create them. Gina Raimondo and Larry Hogan are two proven public servants who have led with results, reason, and responsibility. |
Share this:
The ‘Sovereignty Alliance’
On
- Sovereignty Alliance
The ‘Sovereignty Alliance’ Teaser
This is the Sarah Walker, the real date is August 15th, 2025. With scenarios unfolding faster than we can keep up with we decided we would write our own.
No Martians, although the villain is no less scary, we are weaving a short story, the ‘Sovereignty Alliance’. A Narration of unfolding events when a President who thinks he’s beyond question or reproach pushes to many buttons and is pushed back in ways that weren’t expected.
The ‘Sovereignty Alliance’ had it’s first Episode “Safe Harbor” 8/17/2025, we are well aware that we are new to this, after reviewing Episode 1 to Episode 2, which we are putting the polishing touches on we hope you stay with us.
Let the story grow with you as well as with us. The story starts in 2026 so we can keep it relevant with today’s politics and policies, but not be trying to change it to match today.
A small spoiler that’s is covered in Episode 1 which is already out doesn’t spoil very much.
Congress has just passed a bill that gives the Federal Government control over individual states natural resources.
Needless to say, Texas isn’t thrilled about big brother in charge of their Oil, California already saw what happened when the president forced them to flood northern California because southern California had the Malibu Canyon fires.
These aren’t the only two states that are standing up and saying NO.
An alliance is being built, states are declaring their sovereignty, but just how far will they go and how far is D.C. willing to go to force the states to it’s bidding.
Share this:
Gerrymandering, The Cowards Confession
On
- Commentary, Politics
/
RSS Feed
Gerrymandering: The Coward’s Confession
“Gerrymandering isn’t politics, it’s theft.”
“It’s how cowards confess they can’t win fair and square.”
“It’s cheating, dressed up in legal paperwork.”
Gerrymandering isn’t politics, it’s theft. It’s the art of stealing voters’ voices before they ever reach the ballot box. A strong leader convinces the people. A weak leader redraws the lines until only his loyalists remain.
MAGA, well the girly boys finally show their pedal pushers.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t clever strategy, it’s cowardice. It’s the political equivalent of moving the goalposts because you’re afraid to lose a fair fight. Even when done in retaliation, it’s still rigging — a confession that persuasion has failed, that truth has lost, and that the only path left is manipulation.
The real crime is not just that districts are warped beyond recognition. It’s that a president — the one person sworn to serve the whole country — openly asked for it. Not because it serves democracy, but because he knows he wouldn’t stand a chance in an honest contest.
Gerrymandering is not a show of strength. It is the signature of weakness, stamped across the map of our democracy.
It’s the Coward’s Tool
Gerrymandering as a politician’s admission that they can’t win a fair fight.
Line of attack: “It’s the political equivalent of asking to move the goalposts because you’re afraid of losing.”
Cheating the People
Compare it to rigging a casino — the house always wins, but the citizens are the ones paying.
It’s not just local greed, it’s a national power grab.
“Strong leaders convince the people. Weak ones redraw the lines until only their friends are left.”
Sorry MAGA but is this what Trump has turned you into?
Share this:
A Morning Note to a Friend That Isn’t Like Me
/
RSS Feed
We started out with him sending me a clipping,
The five most dangerous cities in the United States have been revealed – and they are all run by Democrats.
Memphis, Tennessee, has been ranked as America’s most dangerous city in a r…
I sent him a quick rebuttable, something like ‘BULLSHIT” then he sent back another conservative article and I realized neither od us was right, the problems and answers and solutions can be thrown about at will, so I finally wrote back what follows.
Good and bad. Good that you’re looking for backup data to support your position. My real issue with the stuff you send is that it’s so biased, often from outlets like the Washington Post or the internet’s version of The Inquirer.
The key here isn’t affirmation—it’s truth. Yes, I do think the woke philosophy has made a mess of things. I’ve seen Portland’s steady decline firsthand, living just outside the city. We even considered Boise, Idaho at one point, but realized it’s on the same path because many of the people who damaged Portland have moved there.
Democrats often avoid real solutions, framing these problems as the result of a failed society. The reality is many of these so-called “downtrodden” are instead lazy, addicted, or opportunistic—knowing they can live off handouts and steal without consequence. On the other hand, Trump’s “arrest them all” approach isn’t a solution either. These people still have rights. What happens after the arrests? Deport them? Ignore the Constitution? That’s where he has his head up his ass.
I want crime addressed just as much as Trump supporters do. My problem is with his methods—and his obsession with power. He wants to be king for life. He doesn’t appoint competent people because he can’t stand anyone with an independent mind. He takes credit for everything, fixes what isn’t broken, and expects everyone to bow afterward. He doesn’t think or care beyond his own glow.
Take his use of the National Guard as an example. Those Guardsmen have civilian jobs—they’re pulled away, employers aren’t required to pay them, and Guard pay is lousy. Does Trump care about the impact on them or their families? Not at all.
Everything he does is about what he feels he deserves. That’s why I distrust him so deeply.
But back to your point: don’t just accept headlines at face value. Fact check. Dig deeper. These cities can’t be explained in a headline or pinned on one political party. You have to look at economic decline, population shifts, local industries that collapsed—Detroit’s auto industry, coal towns, steel cities, and so on. Poverty, opportunity, and history matter more than whether a mayor has a D or R next to their name.
I don’t claim to have the answers. Sometimes I just want to run from it all. But I know this: I’m against both violent and non-violent crime, against leaving people to rot on the street, and against pretending shelters alone are a fix. The system needs an overhaul—and Trump isn’t the one to do it.
Just a Monday morning cup of coffee..
Share this:
Coming soon, The ‘Sovereignty Alliance’
On
- Blog
This is the Walkers, the real date is August 15th, 2025. With scenarios unfolding faster than we can keep up with we decided we would write our own.
Because the story we will tell is so close to reality, and Grandpa having told a story about H.G. Wells and story he told on the radio. It was based on the story ‘the war of the worlds’ serialized in 1897 and published as a novel in 1898. The story depicts the Martians’ invasion using advanced weaponry like heat rays and fighting machines, leading to widespread panic and destruction in England. Maybe someone should send a copy the Musk.
No Martians, although the villain is no less scary, we are weaving a short story, the ‘Sovereignty Alliance’. A Narration of unfolding events when a President who thinks he’s beyond question or reproach pushes to many buttons and is pushed back in ways that weren’t expected.
The ‘Sovereignty Alliance’ is coming this weekend.
Share this:
8/15/2025 What has Trump done in the past 14 days in a nutshell.
Here are the key actions taken by President Donald Trump in the past two weeks (August 1–15, 2025)
🇺🇸 Domestic Policy
1. Federal Control of Washington, D.C. Police
On August 11, President Trump issued a presidential memorandum titled “Restoring Law and Order in the District of Columbia,” directing the mobilization of the District of Columbia National Guard to active service. This move was justified as a response to what the administration described as an “epidemic of crime” in the nation’s capital. The deployment includes 800 National Guard troops and represents a significant assertion of federal authority over local law enforcement. The White House+1Reuters+2The Times of India+2
2. Executive Orders on Competition and Trade
On August 13, President Trump signed several executive orders aimed at enhancing U.S. competitiveness and addressing trade relations:The White House
-
Enabling Competition in the Commercial Space Industry: This executive order seeks to foster competition and substantially increase commercial space launch activities by 2030 through streamlined licensing and permitting processes. New York Post+9Holland & Knight+9Office of Space Commerce+9
-
Ensuring American Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Resilience: This order directs federal agencies to fill the Strategic Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients Reserve, aiming to strengthen the nation’s pharmaceutical supply chain. The White House+2The White House+2
-
Modifying Reciprocal Tariff Rates with China: In response to ongoing trade discussions with China, this executive order adjusts tariff rates to reflect the current state of negotiations. The White House
3. Executive Order on Fair Banking
On August 7, President Trump signed the “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans” executive order. This directive mandates federal agencies to address the issue of “debanking,” which involves the denial or termination of financial services based on political views, religious beliefs, or industry affiliation. The order aims to ensure that all Americans have access to fair banking services. Sidley Austin+1
🌐 Foreign Policy
4. Summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin
On August 15, President Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, for a summit focused on negotiating an end to the ongoing war in Ukraine. President Trump expressed urgency for an immediate ceasefire and signaled severe economic sanctions if Russia fails to engage seriously. He also hinted at possible U.S. security guarantees to Ukraine in coordination with European allies, though not within the framework of NATO. The Guardian
Share this:
8/15/2025 Changes or Headlines for National Healthcare in the past two weeks
On
- Healthcare, News
Here are the key updates on healthcare from the past two weeks:
🏛️ Major Federal Healthcare Legislation
1. Medicaid and ACA Changes Under the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”
Signed into law on July 4, 2025, this sweeping legislation introduces:Grantmakers In Health+3The Guardian+3JH Bloomberg School of Public Health+3
-
Medicaid Work Requirements: New eligibility criteria and work requirements for Medicaid recipients.JAMA Network+2The Guardian+2
-
Affordable Care Act (ACA) Premium Subsidy Reductions: Declines in ACA premium subsidies, potentially increasing out-of-pocket costs for many.The Guardian
-
Projected Coverage Losses: An estimated 11.8 million people could lose health insurance by 2034 due to these changes. Grantmakers In Health
Democrats have introduced the Protecting Healthcare and Lowering Costs Act, aiming to reverse these cuts and extend ACA premium tax credits. Senate Finance Committee
🏥 Medicare and Medicaid Updates
2. Medicare Payment Increases
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced:
-
2.6% Increase: A net increase in Medicare inpatient payments, translating to approximately 1.9% after adjustments.DeBrunner & Associates
-
$2 Billion Boost: Additional funding for Medicare Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) uncompensated care payments. DeBrunner & Associates
3. Medicaid Managed Care Rate Guide
CMS released the “2025–2026 Medicaid Managed Care Rate Development Guide,” providing states with updated standards for setting capitation rates in managed care programs. Alliance of Safety-Net Hospitals+1
🩺 Telehealth Policy Extensions
4. Medicare Telehealth Services Extended
Medicare beneficiaries can continue accessing:
-
Non-Behavioral/Mental Telehealth: Services in the home through September 30, 2025, including audio-only options.telehealth.hhs.gov
-
Behavioral/Mental Health Telehealth: Permanent access to services in the home, with no geographic restrictions. telehealth.hhs.gov
💊 Pharmaceutical Industry Shifts
5. Direct-to-Consumer Drug Sales
Pharmaceutical companies like Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk are exploring direct-to-consumer sales for medications such as Zepbound and Wegovy. This approach aims to reduce costs and bypass intermediaries, though it may primarily benefit wealthier patients. Barron’s
🧪 FDA Approvals
6. New Drug Approvals
-
Lung Cancer Treatment: The FDA approved a new antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) for treating lung cancer. Medscape+1
-
Chronic Lung Disease: Insmed’s drug became the first approved treatment for a specific chronic lung disease. Reuters+1
These updates reflect significant changes in healthcare policy and access. If you need assistance understanding how these developments affect you or your family, feel free to ask.
Recent Healthcare Developments
Barron’s
Big Pharma Has a New Vision for Selling Drugs. It’s Going to the Mattresses.
Today
The Guardian
Trump’s sweeping bill looms large over Democrats and Republicans as they head for recess
5 days ago
Reuters
Trump health commission expected to miss its deadline, Bloomberg News reports
6 days ago
Share this:
8/15/2025 Veterans’ benefits and healthcare from the past two weeks:
On
- News, Veterans News
Here are the key updates on veterans’ benefits and healthcare from the past two weeks:
💰 VA Disability Compensation – August 2025
Veterans receiving VA disability compensation will see a 2.5% increase in their monthly payments, effective August 29, 2025. This adjustment aligns with the 2025 Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA). For example, a single veteran with a 100% disability rating and no dependents will receive approximately $3,357 per month, while those with dependents or Special Monthly Compensation (SMC) may receive up to $4,196 monthly .The Economic Times+1Sjnhmch.org
🏥 VA Healthcare – Staffing Challenges
A recent audit by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Inspector General revealed severe staffing shortages across all 139 VA medical centers in the U.S. 94% reported shortages in medical officer roles, and 79% in nursing roles. These shortages have worsened over the past year amid significant workforce reductions and fewer medical recruits .The Washington Post+2AP News+2AP News
Additionally, the VA has announced plans to reduce its total staff by nearly 30,000 employees by the end of fiscal year 2025, achieved through normal attrition, early retirements, and deferred resignations .AP News+3VA News+3The Washington Post+3
📚 Education Benefits – Fry Scholarship Expansion
The Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry Scholarship, which provides education benefits to the children and spouses of service members who died in the line of duty, has temporarily expanded eligibility. This expansion applies to terms with a start date on or after August 1, 2025, and before October 1, 2027 .Benefits
🧾 VALife Insurance Program – Over $2 Billion in Coverage
The VALife program, which provides up to $40,000 of whole life insurance coverage to veterans with service-connected disabilities, has already provided over $2 billion in total coverage to more than 60,000 veterans since its launch in 2023 .GovDelivery
⚖️ Supreme Court Ruling – “Benefit-of-the-Doubt” Standard
In the Supreme Court case Bufkin v. Collins, the Court held that the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must apply clear error review when reviewing the VA’s application of the “benefit-of-the-doubt rule” regarding a veteran’s claim to a service-related disability .Wikipedia
🏥 VA Clinic Lease Renewal – Stamford, CT
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has renewed its lease for the Stamford Community Based Outpatient Clinic at 1275 Summer Street for one year. Despite ongoing rumors of potential closure, the lease renewal marks the 12th extension since the VA established the clinic’s location in 2005 .Stamford Advocate
Share this:
QR Codes to Share
Please share the codes, help us build traffic and spead our message. Remember, we fact check our messages and commentaries.
SANITY Save America Now, Integrity, Truth and You – No Hate and not radical, just a good common approach to solving our problems.
Share this:
The Most Important Political Move You Can Make
/
RSS Feed
Check the Values and the Agenda of the Political Party You Think You Are
A long time ago, in a land far, far away, I found out my father was a Republican. And if he was a Republican, well, that’s what I was too.
For decades I voted the party line. There was only one box I shaded in, and it was the one that said “Republican.” After a while, I started to actually think about who I was voting for, not just what. I began making independent decisions — something most of us never do. But I’ll admit, on the issues I wasn’t up on, I still voted the party.
This little note about Charlton Heston — one of the actors I admired — makes sense to me. Not because he changed from being a Democrat to a Republican, but because of why he changed:
“By the 1980s, Heston supported gun rights and changed his political affiliation from Democratic to Republican. When asked why, he replied, ‘I didn’t change. The Democratic Party changed.’ In 1987, he first registered as a Republican.”
Now, let’s take a step back — because this isn’t about Democrats or Republicans. It’s about us.
When I look at MAGA and what they’ve done to the GOP, I feel despair. They’re so extreme I can’t feel ownership of that party anymore. Over the years I’ve probably become more liberal, or maybe I’ve just admitted it to myself. Either way, I don’t consider myself a Republican — not if being Republican means I have to be MAGA.
I have friends on the other side of the fence — long-time Democrats who are not “woke.” We’ve let the extremes take over on both sides.
So, back to the most important political move you can make: discover who you are, not who you thought you were.
There are plenty of political-leaning questionnaires online — some good, some just trying to get your money. Take a couple of them. Don’t be afraid of the labels. They don’t really matter. What matters is that they can give you some insight and help you find a direction based on your beliefs — not Bubba’s, and not Karen from the HOA.
Once you’ve found your center, celebrate. And if you feel generous for the push, I drink Jim Beam.
Share this:
The Hidden Cost of Calling Out the National Guard
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
/
RSS Feed
Okay, call out the National Guard, we can hear the echoing across our living rooms, in our cars and during breaks at work. But what does that cost and more importantly what does it do to the weekend warriors that aren’t trained for civil disorder or prepared financially to be forced to leave their paying employment so Trump can beat his chest and scream he saved us all, Yes, saved us from another overblown or made up crisis.
1. Cost to Guardsmen
A. Personal Income & Career Impact
-
Many Guardsmen are part-time reservists and also work civilian jobs.
-
When called to active duty, they may lose pay from their civilian employers if it isn’t fully covered. The federal law USERRA protects jobs, but gaps in pay and benefits can still occur.
-
For longer deployments, career projects, side hustles, or family responsibilities can suffer.
B. Stress & Mental Health
-
Sudden activation to a politically charged situation (like a presidential order) can cause stress and moral dilemmas, especially if the orders conflict with their personal beliefs.
-
Deployments can disrupt family life and schooling for their children.
C. Physical Risk
-
Guardsmen are trained, but they are often not equipped or trained for full-scale combat or civil unrest policing at the same level as active-duty soldiers.
-
Exposure to rioting, tear gas, or physical confrontations carries real risk.
2. Cost to Taxpayers / Public
A. Direct Financial Cost
-
Pay & benefits for Guardsmen during activation come from federal or state budgets. This includes base pay, hazard pay, travel, and per diem.
-
Activation costs include transportation, housing, equipment, fuel, and logistical support — often millions for large-scale operations.
B. Opportunity Cost
-
When Guardsmen are deployed, they are unavailable for their usual missions: disaster relief, local emergencies, and community support.
-
Local services may be understaffed, slowing responses to fires, floods, or other emergencies.
C. Political / Social Cost
-
Deploying troops for political purposes can undermine public trust in the Guard’s neutrality.
-
Using part-time citizen-soldiers in domestic political maneuvers can affect morale and recruitment long-term.
Example: Washington, D.C. (Jan 6, 2021 & other activations)
-
Guard troops were activated with little notice, often sleeping in parking garages or unheated gyms, sometimes for weeks.
-
Costs ran into tens of millions of dollars for housing, meals, and pay.
-
Many Guardsmen reported stress, PTSD symptoms, and resentment over being caught in politically charged deployments.
Bottom line: When Trump or any politician calls out the National Guard, the burden isn’t abstract — it hits individual soldiers, their families, local communities, and taxpayers. The part-time nature of the Guard amplifies these costs because they are not career combat troops; they are civilians asked to drop everything for politically motivated missions.
So, for concise recap:
The Hidden Cost of Calling Out the National Guard
Who They Are:
-
Part-time citizen-soldiers with civilian jobs, families, and responsibilities.
-
Not full-time combat troops — often under-equipped for large-scale civil unrest.
Cost to Guardsmen:
-
Income & Career: Potential loss of civilian pay or disruption of work.
-
Family & Life: Missed time with children, disrupted routines, and personal stress.
-
Physical & Mental Risk: Exposure to unrest, injury, and long-term stress/PTSD.
Cost to Taxpayers:
-
Financial: Base pay, hazard pay, per diem, housing, transport — millions per activation.
-
Opportunity: Guards unavailable for fires, floods, and disaster response.
-
Political / Social: Morale and recruitment take a hit; public trust erodes.
Example: Washington, D.C. (Jan 6, 2021)
-
Guardsmen slept in gyms and parking garages, deployed under stressful conditions for weeks.
-
Deployment cost tens of millions; personal and community disruption was immense.
Bottom Line:
Calling out the National Guard isn’t abstract theater. It’s a real burden on people, families, communities, and taxpayers, amplified when used for politically motivated missions rather than true emergencies.
During the January 2021 inauguration of President Joe Biden, thousands of National Guard troops were deployed to Washington, D.C., to provide security following the January 6 Capitol breach. Initially, many Guardsmen were housed within the Capitol complex itself, including the Capitol Visitor Center and other areas, where they rested between shifts. However, shortly after the inauguration, these troops were ordered to vacate the Capitol and were relocated to a nearby parking garage. Reports indicated that the garage lacked adequate facilities, with only one electrical outlet and two bathrooms for thousands of soldiers, leading to widespread criticism.
After bipartisan outrage from lawmakers, the Guardsmen were allowed to return to the Capitol complex and were provided with better accommodations. Some were also allowed to rest in nearby hotels. These events highlighted concerns about the treatment and conditions faced by National Guard members during domestic deployments.
In ending, Guardsmen are not full time soldiers, they are not trained for insurrection and most importantly, they are forced to make their friends and neighbors the enemy.
But if it makes potus feel the mostus, go for it.
Putz, oops, did I say that?
Share this:
Gaza
On
- International
Opinion as of August 12, 2025
Is What’s Happening in Gaza Genocide?
The legal definition
Under the Genocide Convention, genocide means:
-
Acts like killing, causing serious harm, or creating life conditions meant to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group; plus
-
Specific intent to destroy that group, in whole or in part.
What the courts have said so far
-
ICJ (World Court) – In South Africa v. Israel, the Court did not rule genocide is happening, but found a plausible risk of genocidal acts and ordered Israel to:
-
Prevent such acts
-
Allow more humanitarian aid
-
Stop incitement to commit genocide
These are emergency measures, not a final ruling.
-
-
ICC (Criminal Court) – The Prosecutor has sought arrest warrants for Israeli leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity (including starvation as a weapon). This is separate from genocide charges.
Facts pushing it toward the “genocide” line
-
Mass civilian deaths – Over 60,000 Palestinians reported killed, many women and children.
-
Destructive living conditions – UN reports famine-level deprivation, child deaths from malnutrition, and aid far below survival needs.
-
Patterns of conduct – Ongoing strikes in civilian-heavy areas and restricted aid delivery despite court orders.
The sticking point
The key unresolved question is specific intent — whether the goal is to destroy Palestinians as such or, as Israel claims, to destroy Hamas while minimizing civilian harm. Courts often infer intent from patterns, policies, and rhetoric — but this is still under litigation.
Bottom line
-
Already established: Alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.
-
ICJ finding: Plausible risk of genocide, urgent prevention measures ordered.
-
Not yet decided: Final ruling on genocide — hinges on proving intent to destroy the group.
-
Human reality: Civilian death toll, destruction, and deprivation are at levels many scholars say are perilously close to meeting the legal definition.
Share this:
Trumps Line in The Sand
/
RSS Feed
So there you have it, short, sour and simple. You do know we have enabled comments. If you want to spew hate, stay away. And that doesn’t matter which side you hate. If you want to discuss solutions, then welcome.
Share this:
What we hear about us.
The Michael and Sarah Walker podcast from “Elephant in the Ink Room” is a political commentary podcast that focuses on the current political climate in the United States. The episodes are often quite short, with many lasting only a few minutes.
The podcast’s commentary often addresses the polarized nature of politics and the role of truth and facts in public discourse. Topics covered include:
- Foreign Policy: For example, a recent episode discussed the rationale behind supporting Ukraine.
- Journalism and Media: The podcast frequently examines issues like the weaponization of context, the challenges of reporting in a polarized environment, and the chilling effect of lawsuits on journalism.
- Social Commentary: They also touch on broader societal issues and how they are manipulated for political gain, such as manufactured outrage and immigration policy.
Essentially, the podcast offers a critical perspective on contemporary political events, urging listeners to look beyond easy answers and consider the complexities of the issues at hand.
Share this:
When Crime Is a Convenient Excuse: Trump’s Selective Martial Law Target List
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
/
RSS Feed
When Crime Is a Convenient Excuse: Trump’s Selective Martial Law Target List
Donald Trump’s recent threats to impose martial law have sent chills through the nation. But behind the bluster and fear-mongering lies a disturbingly clear political agenda: targeting cities that dare to resist his authority while ignoring those that align with it — no matter their crime rates.
Take a look at the cities Trump has publicly set his sights on: Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle. These are places branded as “woke,” fiercely protective of immigrant rights, and openly hostile to the kind of mass deportations and ICE raids Trump champions. For him, these cities aren’t just trouble spots — they are the heart of an “Evil Empire” that must be brought to heel.
The justification? Sky-high crime rates. Trump and his allies wield “crime” like a weapon, confident that most Americans won’t bother checking the facts. But here’s the inconvenient truth: violent crime in these cities has often been declining in recent years. While not crime-free by any means, these urban centers aren’t the out-of-control war zones Trump portrays.
Meanwhile, some of the most dangerous cities in America fly under the radar. St. Louis, Missouri, with violent crime rates far exceeding those in Seattle or Portland, remains off Trump’s radar. Little Rock, Arkansas, another high-crime city nestled in a deeply Republican state, doesn’t warrant a mention in Trump’s crackdown plans. Why? Because these cities don’t challenge his authority. They don’t defy his immigration policies. They are loyal to the political order he demands.
If crime were truly the issue, the list of cities facing martial law would look very different. But it doesn’t. Instead, the threat of military intervention is wielded as a blunt instrument of political control — reserved for cities that resist, ignored where loyalty prevails.
This is not about safety or justice. It’s about power.
The real danger lies not in the streets of America’s “woke” cities but in the unchecked ambitions of a man eager to silence dissent under the guise of law and order.
So next time you hear “crime” used as a reason to militarize a city, remember: crime only matters when it votes blue.
Share this:
Fires Everywhere
Daily Ramble: Fires Everywhere
I keep coming back to analogies when I think about Trump. The simplest? A kid playing with matches. The question is, is he just a foolish kid with a new toy, or an experienced arsonist starting little fires on purpose to keep us distracted?
Whether accidental or deliberate, there are too many fires to do anything but run around putting them out. Take the DOJ. We hear of resignations — principled people saying, “Enough. We won’t be part of your crimes. We took an oath.” Sounds noble. But in reality, it’s functioning more like a stay of execution for Trump.
As more lawsuits pile up against him and his executive orders, everything in the courts gets delayed. The DOJ says it lacks the lawyers to handle the cases, so courts grant more time. And that extra time is a gift to Trump: he keeps ignoring injunctions, moving his agenda forward. By the time he’s forced to stop, either no one cares anymore or he’s already achieved what he wanted.
Today’s ramble is sparked by Trump’s federalizing of Washington, D.C. Is this just a crime-fighting measure? Or is it the first step toward martial law, holding onto power by claiming the country “needs” him — or by removing the barriers altogether? Make no mistake: he does not want to leave office. Who spends $200 million on a ballroom nobody wants unless they plan on sticking around to use it?
And this isn’t a one-track operation. Trump can multitask chaos. He’s in a panic as the Epstein mess keeps unraveling — a mess he helped create. Maxwell is suddenly being moved to a minimum-security prison after allegedly threatening Trump. Gossip says she’ll get work-release privileges. Why? Because Trump wants her silent. She must have documentation he hasn’t found yet; otherwise, she’d have “committed suicide” by now.
The danger here is losing focus. This isn’t just about Trump and Epstein. Or Trump and the DOJ. Or Trump and martial law. It’s about the endgame — and what we can do to prevent it. In our earlier editorial “Okay, He’s Been Impeached, Now What?” we explored the idea of power passing to a bunch of nobodies. Not comforting.
Would removing Trump solve the problem? Or is it better to strip him of power but leave him in place? Honestly, I don’t know. What’s clear is that he’s surrounded himself with spineless loyalists — spineless because otherwise they’d be a threat to him.
That leaves us with a bigger question: if we ever clean this mess up, who fills the vacuum? Replacing all the Trump loyalists means nothing if we don’t have sane, competent leadership ready to step in. I call myself “purple” — a moderate — and even in my own family, we don’t have an answer that satisfies us. The Woke movement is as dangerous as the MAGA movement.
So, who do we start grooming to bring sanity back? Maybe it’s time for you — the Magnificent Seven who actually follow these posts — to start weighing in. Leave comments. Start discussions. And let’s try to do it without hate. The country’s going to need that.
Share this:
Martial Law, if you Allow It. Kiss Freedom Goodbye
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
/
RSS Feed
He is doing it again, he tried it in Los Angeles and was pushed back. He was swamped with No King protests and changed the subject, deflection 101. He let it cool down. You have to remember that Trump relies on the proven two week rule. That we have an attention span that’s less than two weeks, and we are stupid.
Trump has repeatedly declared he is the smartest man in the room and in his words. “They don’t know what the fuck they are doing” and you thought he was talking about the Middle East.
It’s time to get those no king signs out of the garage or trash because it has just begun again and he isn’t going to stop trying.
Let me ask you one question, “What idiot would spend two hundred million dollars to add a Ball Room nobody else wants if he wasn’t planning on using it for a long, long, time?”
What is to be talked about in a moment should have just a little preface.
-
What the Data Tells Us About Washington DC
Crime Is Actually Falling
Violent crime in D.C. is down significantly:
26% drop in 2025 compared to last year
12% decline in homicides, 29% drop in robberies
The city hit a 30-year low in violent crime in 2024 (The Biden Administration)
What’s Trump Saying and Proposing
Federal Takeover Talk …
Trump has publicly threatened to federalize D.C.—essentially overriding the Home Rule Act if city authorities don’t get crime under control. He’s exploring whether Congress could revoke local autonomy
National Guard & Police Control …
He has floated deploying the National Guard, potentially taking control of D.C.’s police force, and even sending homeless individuals out of the city. Flyers on Truth Social warn of making the city “safe” by replacing local with federal order
Crime Surge Claims …
Trump framed the city as being “out of control,” referencing a high-profile attempted carjacking of Edward “Big Balls” Coristine, to justify his hardline approach.
Now to repeat the preface.
What the Data Tells Us
Crime Is Actually Falling
Violent crime in D.C. is down significantly:
26% drop in 2025 compared to last year
12% decline in homicides, 29% drop in robberies
The city hit a 30-year low in violent crime in 2024
Local Officials Push Back
Mayor Muriel Bowser rejects the narrative of rising crime. She’s implemented youth curfews, and critics warn that Trump’s approach risks eroding democratic governance, not improving safety.
What’s Actually Happening On the Ground
Federal Law Enforcement Surge
The White House has ordered a weeklong deployment of federal officers from over a dozen agencies—including the FBI, ATF, DEA, and Capitol Police—in “high-traffic tourist areas” of the city
Minimal Visible Impact So Far
Early observations found little overt difference from usual policing levels. However, one report indicates 450 federal officers were active on a recent Saturday night, though city police say the situation remains stable.
Bottom Line
While Trump is ramping up rhetoric around an alleged crime wave in D.C., the actual numbers tell a different story: crime rates are falling, not rising. His push for federal control—via the National Guard, eviction of homeless camps, and taking over local policing—appears to be a power play rather than an urgent safety measure. Whether Congress or courts would allow such actions remains highly uncertain.
So back to Martial Law, Washington DC is not a State and it has considerably less control over actions that can be taken by Trump, But what Washington D.C. does have, is us. The people of the United States of America. Don’t just sit there and say that this is their problem because it is a problem for all of us.
We stopped him in Los Angeles, we need to stop him in Washington D.C. Oh, hell, we just need to stop him.
Share this:
Martial Law, The Beginning of the End
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
/
RSS Feed
Historically, authoritarians rarely start with sweeping power grabs. They start with one example that “makes sense to the public” and then expand it until it becomes the new normal.
Here’s the blunt truth:
If Trump uses crime in Washington, D.C. as his pretext for asserting direct federal control, the concern is that it could be less about solving the crime problem and more about creating a legal and political foothold to normalize bypassing local authority.
D.C. is unique — it’s not a state, so Congress already has extraordinary oversight powers. That makes it a tempting testing ground for executive overreach. If a president successfully assumes direct operational control of its government or police under the banner of “restoring order,” it could set a precedent for similar moves elsewhere, especially in Democrat-led cities.
The risk here isn’t just what happens to D.C. — it’s the potential for a proof of concept for federalized policing or even quasi-martial law in targeted regions. If crime statistics are manipulated or selectively publicized, he could manufacture justification for interventions in other cities by declaring them “failed” or “in insurrection.”
That’s why civil liberties lawyers, local leaders, and constitutional scholars are already warning that the real fight isn’t over crime numbers — it’s over whether we accept the normalization of federal takeovers of local governance. Once that door is cracked open, closing it again could be nearly impossible without a major court battle or political shift.
If Trump used crime in D.C. as the opening wedge for federal intervention, the big question is whether it would be a contained, temporary measure or the start of a broader power grab. Based on his past rhetoric, his leadership style, and the constitutional tools available to him, here’s how it could unfold:
Step-by-Step Risk Progression
| Step | What Could Happen | Why It Matters | Risks of Escalation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Targeted D.C. Takeover | Federalizes D.C. police, replaces local leadership, suspends city control “to restore law and order.” | Sets precedent for bypassing local government. | Establishes legal and political justification for further interventions. |
| 2. Expansion to Other Cities | Uses similar “emergency” declarations in Chicago, Philadelphia, Atlanta, etc., citing rising crime. | Selective targeting of cities could be politically motivated. | Blurs the line between legitimate crime control and partisan enforcement. |
| 3. Creation of a Federal Security Force | Deploys DHS, DOJ task forces, or even military units in urban areas. | Federal policing on a broad scale is rare and controversial. | Public acceptance could normalize permanent federal presence. |
| 4. Invocation of the Insurrection Act | Claims civil unrest or political violence requires military deployment inside U.S. borders. | Law allows bypassing governors and legislatures. | Opens door to nationwide martial-law-like conditions without declaring martial law. |
| 5. Soft Martial Law | Controls protests, media access, curfews, and assembly rights “for public safety.” | Framed as temporary, but lacks clear end date. | Can become permanent under “continuing emergency” logic. |
| 6. Consolidation of Power | Redefines “domestic threats” to include political opposition or journalists. | Destroys checks and balances at the practical level. | Moves from crime control to authoritarian rule. |
Why This Isn’t Far-Fetched
-
Past behavior: Trump has already floated ideas of “sending in the military” during protests, and praised leaders who used harsh crackdowns.
-
Legal mechanisms exist: The Insurrection Act and certain emergency powers are broad enough to be abused if courts don’t act quickly.
-
Psychological strategy: Framing the moves as “temporary safety measures” makes them easier for the public to accept.
-
Weak local defenses: D.C. is not a state, so it has fewer legal protections against federal takeover.
Share this:
Robert F. Kennedy Independent Thinker, I Think Not – Part 3
/
RSS Feed
The Dangerous Allure of “Independent Thinking” — When Anti-Establishment Becomes Anti-Truth
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has built his entire campaign on one central appeal: “I don’t trust them, and you shouldn’t either.” Them, of course, being the government, the media, public health officials, scientists, pharmaceutical companies, and in some cases even common sense. It’s a seductive narrative. It gives people permission to throw away anything that makes them uncomfortable — and label it a lie.
Kennedy isn’t just tapping into populist skepticism. He’s exploiting it.
And that exploitation is dangerous.
He’s framed himself as the truth-teller in a sea of deception. But the truths he’s telling aren’t based in fact. They’re based in fear. And fear spreads faster than reason.
The Myth of the Medical Maverick
RFK Jr. has no medical degree. No epidemiological background. No formal training in public health.
What he does have is a recognizable name, a passionate speaking style, and decades of practice weaving compelling-sounding arguments from cherry-picked data and fringe science. And when that doesn’t suffice, he leans on conspiracy.
Let’s be clear: questioning authority is healthy in a democracy. But rejecting every expert opinion as “part of the machine” while offering no credible alternative is not courageous — it’s reckless.
Anti-Vax, Rebranded
RFK Jr. claims he’s “not anti-vaccine.” He says he’s just asking questions.
But those questions often come laced with misinformation:
That vaccines are causing autism (a claim long debunked).
That the COVID vaccine is more dangerous than the virus itself (false).
That government and pharma are in secret cahoots to suppress natural immunity (no evidence).
This isn’t healthy skepticism. This is repackaged paranoia.
And worse, he’s giving it a respectable face — one the public instinctively associates with credibility because of his family name.
When Influence Outpaces Integrity
With social media reach, podcast appearances, and alternative media platforms, Kennedy’s views are no longer fringe. They’re front and center. And when people make healthcare decisions based on his claims, real people suffer.
Parents skip vaccinations, endangering herd immunity.
Vulnerable communities turn to unproven treatments.
Trust in public health institutions erodes further — even when they’re telling the truth.
Freedom of speech is sacred. But freedom to deceive should not be without scrutiny.
A Country Starved for Trust
What makes Kennedy so appealing to many voters isn’t his policies, which are vague or self-contradictory. It’s his posture. He positions himself as the last honest man in a dishonest world.
And for people who feel lied to by politicians, doctors, or the media — that’s intoxicating.
But it’s a mirage.
He’s not offering independence. He’s selling suspicion.
He’s not empowering people. He’s leaving them lost — unsure who to believe, who to trust, or whether truth even exists anymore.
And in a democracy, that’s a dangerous place to be.
Share this:
Veterans’ Healthcare: The Promise, the Politics, and the Price
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
/
RSS Feed
Clickbait-Style Headline Options:
-
“They Fought for Us. Now They’re Fighting the VA.”
-
“Veterans to the VA: We’ll Take Our Chances With the Private Sector!”
-
“Rural Vets Are Ditching the VA—And Congress Just Made It Easier”
-
“Trump Says He Supports Vets—But This Healthcare Move Tells Another Story”
-
“The VA Is Broken—And Lawmakers Just Admitted It”
No body cares unless you scream the sky is falling. Click bait is what gets the views, “Epstein points the finger from the grave”, or “Trump give rude gesture after Courts find him lying, again”. It gets frustrating, after all going viral is the thing today. But after looking over these titles.
We decided to stick to our tried and true format, the facts, just the facts (credited to sergeant Joe Friday) for those old enough to have voted for the past 60 years.
In his second term, Donald Trump has made bold claims about transforming veterans’ healthcare. But behind the headlines and hashtags, the reality for many veterans—especially those in rural or underserved areas—remains murky. The question is not whether veterans deserve better; it’s whether they’re actually getting it.
The Promise:
Trump has pushed forward a second-phase expansion of the VA MISSION Act, originally signed in 2018. It now places even more emphasis on privatized, community-based care—with the argument that choice and speed matter more than bureaucracy. Veterans who live more than a 30-minute drive from a VA facility or face long wait times are now more easily referred to private doctors.
In theory, this sounds like freedom of choice. But choice is only meaningful if there’s quality behind it.
The Problem:
Many rural areas simply don’t have adequate medical providers to meet the new demand. Some veterans now wait longer for community appointments than they did under the VA system. Worse, these providers aren’t always trained in the unique mental and physical health needs of veterans—PTSD, combat injuries, military sexual trauma—leading to subpar or even harmful treatment.
And there’s another wrinkle: privatized care often costs more. While Trump touts efficiency and market-based solutions, critics argue that siphoning money from the VA weakens its capacity over time. What’s being called “choice” might in fact be a slow-motion dismantling of the system that was built for veterans in the first place.
The Politics:
Let’s be honest: veterans are a reliable Republican voting bloc, and Trump knows it. His messaging isn’t subtle—he claims to be “the best president veterans have ever had.” But when political loyalty becomes the goal, instead of actual outcomes, veterans become pawns rather than patriots.
Meanwhile, attempts to reform or expand mental health services have been delayed or diluted, often buried in partisan fights over budget ceilings and “woke” policies. Some of Trump’s allies in Congress have actively blocked bipartisan bills that would have improved suicide prevention programs and housing support for homeless vets—because they didn’t align with the broader MAGA narrative.
The Reality:
Veterans aren’t looking for fanfare. They want competence, consistency, and care. They want promises that are kept—not headlines that disappear the next news cycle.
If this administration truly believes veterans are the backbone of America, it’s time to stop using them as a backdrop for political theater and start treating their healthcare like the sacred duty it is.
Share this:
RFK Jr. and the Weaponization of Doubt – Part 2
/
RSS Feed
RFK Jr. and the Weaponization of Doubt – Part 2
When Mistrust Becomes a Business Model
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was once a respected environmental attorney and activist. But today, he’s better known for something else: a steady stream of anti-science rhetoric dressed in the language of rebellion and “truth-telling.” What began as skepticism has now hardened into dogma — and the consequences are not harmless. They’re deadly.
RFK Jr. has no medical degree, no epidemiological credentials, and no experience treating illness — yet he presents himself as a public health expert, urging millions to ignore doctors, scientists, and regulatory agencies in favor of his own conspiratorial worldview. And it’s working. His brand is thriving. He’s become a symbol for those who distrust institutions — not because he’s offering real answers, but because he’s selling fear.
The Vaccine Misinformation Machine
Kennedy’s primary claim to fame in recent years has been his crusade against vaccines — long before COVID-19, he was peddling disproven theories linking childhood vaccines to autism. Study after study refuted his claims. Major platforms removed his content for spreading dangerous misinformation. Even members of his own family publicly denounced him. But none of that slowed him down.
In fact, he built an empire around it.
Through his organization Children’s Health Defense, Kennedy amplified falsehoods and sowed doubt — not just about the COVID vaccine, but about vaccine science as a whole. In 2021 alone, his group earned tens of millions in donations, a sign not of legitimacy, but of how profitable paranoia has become. And in a country where millions were desperate for clarity during a global health crisis, Kennedy gave them seductive chaos.
The result? Higher vaccine hesitancy. Lower trust in science. And a pandemic death toll that might have been lower if fewer people had listened to voices like his.
Turning Doubt into Doctrine
This isn’t just about vaccines. Kennedy has claimed that Wi-Fi causes cancer, that COVID was engineered to spare Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people, and that mass shootings are often tied to antidepressants. He paints a picture of a shadowy cabal controlling everything from medicine to media, and he sells himself as the lone voice of truth.
It’s an effective strategy — not because it’s true, but because it plays into a primal instinct: fear of betrayal. But governing a nation, leading people, or protecting lives requires more than just triggering emotions. It requires evidence. It requires humility. It requires some tether to reality.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has severed that tether.
Share this:
RFK Jr. and the Collapse of Credibility — When Fringe Becomes Dangerous – Part 4
/
RSS Feed
RFK Jr. and the Collapse of Credibility — When Fringe Becomes Dangerous
In a time when science is under siege and public health hinges on trust, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has chosen to go to war with the very idea of consensus. He frames himself as a whistleblower, a rebel against corrupt institutions—but his rebellion is less about truth and more about traction. And the cost? The safety of Americans who take him at his word.
Kennedy has claimed, without evidence, that both COVID-19 and AIDS were possibly engineered or exaggerated for profit. He’s promoted the long-debunked link between vaccines and autism. He’s suggested that chemicals in the water supply are feminizing boys and harming masculinity. Each claim might be brushed off if he were just another internet crank—but this is a man who ran for President of the United States but became Voodoo Doctor extrodinaire, he became Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. And that makes the danger real.
RFK Jr. is a master of half-truths—statements that contain just enough kernel of reality to confuse the public and just enough innuendo to suggest shadowy forces at work. He constantly positions himself as the last honest man standing, the one voice willing to speak “what others won’t.” But his rhetoric is not grounded in evidence—it’s grounded in performance.
This isn’t an intellectual pursuit. It’s a campaign strategy based on distrust. And it’s working—because distrust is a potent political fuel, especially when people are hurting, confused, and exhausted from years of whiplash-inducing headlines.
But here’s what that strategy is really doing:
It erodes the fragile trust we need during public health emergencies.
It leads people to delay or refuse life-saving vaccines, tests, and treatments.
It undermines legitimate scientists and doctors who are already overburdened and under attack.
RFK Jr. argues he’s just asking questions. But when a public figure with the Kennedy name spreads misinformation in the form of questions, the consequences are no less severe than if they were shouting lies outright.
This isn’t harmless curiosity. It’s weaponized doubt.
And while the public may enjoy the drama, or feel validated by the suspicion, we can’t ignore the end result: Americans will die because of what they didn’t believe—because a trusted name told them not to.
This isn’t theory. It’s already happening.
RFK Jr. is not a doctor. He is not an epidemiologist. He is not an expert in pharmacology, virology, or public health. What he is, is a celebrity with a platform—and that platform is now being used to sow mistrust that costs lives.
And now in a position of power, he is dismatling what took us decades and billions of dollars to accomplish, He will single handly be resposible for the deaths of millions of Americans, many to youmg to make their own decisions.
This isn’t about politics anymore. It’s about the line between skepticism and sabotage.
If Kennedy truly cared about the public, he would amplify evidence—not conspiracy. He would platform facts—not fear. And he would take responsibility for the real-world effects of his words.
Until then, he remains not a public servant—but a public threat.
Share this:
Promises and Prescriptions: The Reality of Veterans’ Healthcare in Trump’s Second Term
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
/
RSS Feed
Veterans’ healthcare has always been a sacred pledge — a promise exchanged for sacrifice. But in Donald Trump’s second term, that promise is being reshaped, repackaged, and, in some cases, quietly outsourced.
Trump’s rhetoric remains bold: “No one has done more for veterans than me.” But behind the slogans, a different reality unfolds — particularly for those living in rural America, where access to quality care is already a logistical challenge. Under the guise of “freedom of choice,” the Trump administration has accelerated a shift toward privatization, outsourcing more care to the private sector. That sounds good — until you realize that for many veterans, especially in underserved regions, it means longer waits, fewer specialists, and an increased reliance on providers who don’t fully understand the VA system or military-related conditions.
The expanded use of private clinics through the VA Mission Act (initially passed in 2018 but dramatically expanded during Trump’s second term) has created what critics call a “two-tiered system.” The best care remains in VA hospitals, but the funding and resources are quietly being drained away — diverted to private providers whose oversight is looser and whose outcomes vary.
Rural veterans — those who arguably need the most consistent and integrated care — now face a fractured healthcare network. Many have to drive hours, not to the nearest VA hospital, but to a private clinic that may or may not accept them. If they don’t like the care? Tough. The much-touted “choice” is often an illusion.
Meanwhile, Trump’s political allies paint the issue in black-and-white terms: government care bad, private market good. But this ignores a fundamental truth — the VA system, for all its flaws, was built to treat the unique health challenges of veterans: PTSD, burn pit exposure, prosthetics, military sexual trauma. These aren’t routine ailments, and generic civilian care doesn’t cut it.
To make matters worse, partisan messaging has drowned out nuance. Anyone who criticizes the shift is branded as “anti-veteran.” But if honoring veterans means more than applause at rallies, we must ask: what kind of system are we building, and for whom?
Ironically, some of the loudest voices calling for the privatization of the VA have never served. And some of the most outspoken defenders of the VA — doctors, nurses, and veterans themselves — are struggling to be heard above the political noise.
In Trump’s second term, the battle for veterans’ healthcare isn’t just about clinics and co-pays. It’s about priorities. Do we value loyalty to slogans, or loyalty to those who served? Do we want a healthcare system that rewards political donors, or one that keeps its promise to the people who wore the uniform?
Veterans didn’t ask for this ideological experiment. They asked for care, dignity, and respect. It’s time we deliver.
Share this:
Gerrymandering: The Fire Trump Lit—and Why Everyone’s Getting Burned
On
- Commentary, Politics
/
RSS Feed
In a democracy, voters are supposed to choose their leaders. But once again, in 2025, Donald Trump has flipped that idea on its head—this time by pressuring Texas Republicans to redraw their congressional map mid-decade. Not because the population changed. Not because there was a court order. But because they saw a political opportunity.
The new Texas map, rammed through under Trump’s influence, would give Republicans nearly 80% of the state’s congressional seats—even though they win just over half the vote. This isn’t just a tilt; it’s a landslide created by slicing up Democratic communities, particularly Black and Latino districts, and burying their votes under carefully carved boundaries. It’s called gerrymandering, and Trump’s making it an art form.
Naturally, it didn’t stop there. Democrats—especially in California and New York—are now gearing up to respond in kind. California Governor Gavin Newsom has already signaled that if Texas wants to play dirty, California’s ready to fight fire with fire. And suddenly, the very people who pioneered this game—Trump’s MAGA base—are screaming foul.
That’s the hypocrisy of the moment. After more than a decade of Republican-led redistricting across states like North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Ohio, Trump has simply escalated the tactic to a new level. And now that Democratic states are considering similar power plays, the cries of “unfair” from the GOP ring hollow.
But let’s be clear: this isn’t a win for either party. It’s a loss for the country. Gerrymandering erodes the principle of one person, one vote. It rigs the game before it starts. And when both sides begin weaponizing redistricting, we move further away from representative government and deeper into partisan trench warfare.
This isn’t about balance—it’s about manipulation. And the more we normalize it, the more we teach future leaders that power matters more than process, and winning matters more than fairness.
So yes, Trump lit the fire. But now it’s spreading. And unless we find the courage to put partisan advantage aside and restore independent redistricting across all states, we’ll all be standing in the ashes—wondering when democracy burned down.
Share this:
Politicization of Economic Data. When it sounds too good to be True, it Usually Is
/
RSS Feed
Firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner
On August 2, 2025, Trump abruptly dismissed Erika McEntarfer, commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), after a jobs report showing slow employment growth. He accused her of fabricating data without evidence—a claim widely condemned by economists and former officials who argue this politicization could seriously undermine faith in U.S. economic statistics and market stability. Experts warned such actions risk eroding credibility in one of the world’s most respected data agencies
Below we get into more specific areas of how The Trump Administration is falseifing economic data. A feel good tactic for the Loyalist and a way to hide correct data for everyone else. Investing for our future and budgeting for today is impossible when the TRUTH is hidden, and the LIES are the only barometer we have to ‘depend’ upon.
1. Labor‐Market Statistics (BLS Reports)
What’s changing?
The BLS’s monthly employment and unemployment figures—long regarded as nonpartisan—are now subject to leadership appointments based on political loyalty rather than technical expertise. Surveys that underlie these reports already suffer from declining response rates (down from ~82% to 57.6%), increasing volatility and revisions in the headline numbers .
Threats:
Erosion of credibility in one of the world’s most trusted labor‐market gauges, which companies and policymakers rely on for hiring and rate‐setting decisions .
Heightened market volatility, as investors demand larger risk premiums to compensate for “flawed instrument panels” when interpreting jobs data .
2. Inflation Measurement (CPI & Producer Price Index)
What’s changing?
The BLS also compiles the Consumer Price Index and Producer Price Index—benchmarks for cost‐of‐living adjustments, Federal Reserve inflation targets, and Social Security benefits. Staffing cuts and budget shortfalls have already forced the BLS to scale back data collection, relying more heavily on statistical models rather than fresh survey information .
Threats:
Misleading inflation signals, which could delay or accelerate interest‐rate changes inappropriately, risking either unnecessary tightening (stoking recession) or easy money (fueling runaway prices).
Undermined public trust in price‐stability measures, potentially spurring “second‐order” effects like wage‐price spirals if workers and businesses doubt official CPI figures.
3. Federal Reserve Governance
What’s changing?
By publicly disparaging Fed Chair Jerome Powell and engineering board vacancies (e.g., the recent resignation of Governor Adriana Kugler), the administration is seeking a more “rate‐cut‐friendly” leadership team .
Threats:
Compromised central‐bank independence, which is crucial to anchoring inflation expectations. If markets believe the Fed must defer to political pressures, long-term borrowing costs rise and the U.S. dollar’s reserve‐currency status could weaken .
4. National Accounts & Trade Data
What’s changing?
While less visible, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis (GDP, trade balances) and Census Bureau (manufacturing, retail data) could face similar leadership swaps or budget assaults, tilting headline growth and trade‐deficit figures to suit political narratives.
Threats:
Distorted growth metrics, making it harder to gauge the true health of the economy and leading to ill-informed fiscal and monetary policies.
Diplomatic friction, if “adjusted” trade stats are used to justify tariff escalations, it could fuel international legal disputes and market dislocations.
Bottom Line
Political control over these data channels risks undermining the bedrock of policy and market decision‐making. Without reliable, transparent statistics:
Investors face murkier risk assessments.
Policymakers lose their compass for calibrating interest rates and fiscal stimulus.
The public may come to distrust not just one agency but the entire system of U.S. governance.
Restoring trust will require both technical fixes (e.g., adequate funding, survey improvements) and institutional safeguards (statutory protections for data‐agency independence), lest the U.S. slide toward the very instability past cases in Greece, Argentina, and elsewhere have shown.
When power resides in one man, and one man alone, you might as well bend over and say goodbye. Jerome Powell isn’t one man giving orders, he is the front man for a board that evaluates the economy and then sets interest rates. Trump want to be in charge of everything and is destroying America in the process.
Your voice does count and is heard. It may sound weak and small by it’s self, but when it joines 10 thousand voices, it starts to demand attention. Get the picture?
Share this:
Canceled Kennedy Center Shows, 1st 6 months of Trump Taking the Center Over.
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
/
RSS Feed
Since President Donald Trump took over as chairman of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in February 2025, at least 26 shows have been canceled or postponed, as reported by the Kennedy Center in a statement released on March 7, 2025. This list, described as a “complete account of program cancellations over the last six months,” includes 15 cancellations attributed to reasons unrelated to illness, availability, sales, or finances, with several artists explicitly citing Trump’s takeover as their reason for pulling out. Notable cancellations include:
-
Hamilton, a Tony- and Pulitzer Prize-winning musical, canceled its 2026 run due to the “new spirit of partisanship” at the center.
-
Eureka Day, a play about the anti-vaxx movement, canceled due to “financial circumstances” shortly after Trump’s appointment.
-
Finn, a children’s musical with an LGBTQ+ subtext, canceled for financial reasons.
-
A Peacock Among Pigeons, a National Symphony Orchestra concert featuring the Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington, D.C., removed from the schedule during World Pride 2025, listed as a financial decision.
-
An Evening with Issa Rae, a sold-out show canceled by the actress citing an “infringement on the values” of the institution.
-
Low Cut Connie, a rock band, canceled their March 19, 2025, performance in protest of Trump’s leadership.
-
Fellow Travelers, an opera about gay government workers, withdrawn from the 2025–26 Washington National Opera season due to the takeover.
-
Les Misérables, where 10 to 12 performers boycotted a July 11, 2025, performance tied to a Trump fundraiser.
-
International Pride Orchestra’s Pride Celebration Concert, scheduled for June 4, 2025, canceled after Trump’s comments against drag shows.
-
Performances by artists like Louise Penny, Amanda Rheaume, Rhiannon Giddens, Peter Wolf, and Christian Tetzlaff, who cited ideological conflicts or Trump’s leadership as reasons for canceling.
The Kennedy Center’s statement claims cancellations since February 12, 2025, were due to low ticket sales or artist availability, but artists like Lin-Manuel Miranda, Issa Rae, and others explicitly protested Trump’s takeover, suggesting a mix of financial and political motivations. The exact number may vary slightly as some cancellations, like those by Ben Folds or Renée Fleming, involved resignations rather than specific show cancellations, and others may not be fully documented.
The Kennedy Center was one of the first things Trump attacked after taking office in second term, This begs the question, why? Is his fragile ego that needy, was he trying to impress Melania, or more likely, he just doesn’t care what he corrupts. Where ever he goes, he leaves an orange stain. Hopefully this can be cleaned after he is gone.
Share this:
Renaming The Kennedy Center
On
- Commentary, The Fallout
/
RSS Feed
John F Kennedy was a President that served his country as a Naval Officer in World War II and as President helped defuse the Cuban Crisis in the 1960’s and now we have a draft dodger degrading his name and accomplishments because his overblown EGO needs the attention it doesn’t deserve.
House Republicans have proposed renaming the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., after President Donald Trump, with a bill introduced by Rep. Bob Onder on July 23, 2025, called the “Make Entertainment Great Again Act.” The legislation aims to designate the venue as the “Donald J. Trump Center for the Performing Arts.” Additionally, on July 22, 2025, the House Appropriations Committee passed an amendment (33-25) to rename the Kennedy Center’s Opera House the “First Lady Melania Trump Opera House,” citing her role as honorary chair of the center’s board and her supposed support for the arts.
These proposals follow Trump’s appointment of himself as chairman of the Kennedy Center’s board in February 2025, after replacing Biden-appointed trustees with his own allies, including Richard Grenell as president.
The Kennedy Center, established in 1971 as a living memorial to President John F. Kennedy under Public Law 88-260, is a major cultural institution hosting thousands of performances.
Critics, including Kennedy’s grandson Jack Schlossberg and niece Maria Shriver, argue that renaming it violates federal law, which prohibits additional memorials or plaques within the center. Schlossberg called the move an attempt by Trump to overshadow JFK’s legacy, while Shriver labeled it “petty” and “small-minded.”
Legal experts, like Georgetown law professor David Super, note that the center’s board, even with Trump as chair, lacks authority to rename the facility, and such changes would require congressional approval, which faces significant hurdles.The proposals have sparked controversy, with opponents arguing they disrespect Kennedy’s legacy as a supporter of the arts and reflect an unusual push to name public institutions after living figures.
The bill to rename the entire center has not yet been voted on by the full House, which is on summer break, and the opera house amendment requires further House and Senate approval to become law. Public sentiment on X reflects polarized views, with some decrying the proposals as cultural vandalism and others supporting Trump’s influence. The Kennedy Center has not officially commented.
Is this just another diversion, another slap across the face designed to make us look the other way, or is this an unchecked ego running rampant?
Share this:
WOKE – Got Lost
/
RSS Feed
When Woke Became a Weapon
A prime example is what just happened to Sydney Sweeney and American Eagle Jeans.
And naturally, the internet lit up — because what’s more American than a blonde woman in tight jeans under a waving flag?
To some, it was patriotic.
To others, it was white nationalism in high-waisted denim.
Because apparently, if you’re blonde, busty, and not apologizing for it, you’re now one step away from a book burning.
Like MAGA, the Woke just became angry, if it wasn’t their way, it was wrong, so wrong it was as affront. They had to have demonstrations, they needed to shout, when all they really had to do was calm down. Not everything is a personal attack.
Good movements can lose their way when they become obsessed with control. The ideals that began as a call to conscience slowly hardened into a set of dogmas, and then into a kind of cultural authoritarianism.
In the name of inclusion, speech was policed. In the name of justice, individuals were shamed, fired, or silenced for using the wrong word, asking the wrong question, or simply disagreeing. Forgiveness was replaced with punishment. Grace became weakness. The only safe position was total, uncritical agreement.
Soon, people began to notice that the movement had stopped persuading — and started enforcing.
Woke culture turned into something that often felt more like a religion than a political cause: complete with rituals, heresies, and moral purges. Even longtime progressives — writers, professors, comedians, feminists, even civil rights leaders — found themselves under fire for stepping slightly outside the ever-shifting lines of acceptable thought.
Worse, the obsession with language and symbolism began to overshadow real progress. Elite institutions performed grand gestures of virtue signaling while doing little to address deeper problems like poverty, housing, education, and opportunity. Identity became the central lens for everything, while class — the great unifier of struggle — was pushed aside.
As the movement turned inward, it lost public support. Ordinary people, even sympathetic ones, began to walk away — not because they didn’t believe in justice, but because they didn’t recognize the movement anymore.
Share this:
WOKE – In the Begining
/
RSS Feed
The Heart of the Movement
There was a time not long ago when the progressive Left captured the moral imagination of an entire generation. The promises were simple, powerful, and overdue: treat people with dignity, include those left out, right the wrongs of history, and build a more compassionate society.
The movement that would later be labeled “Woke” began as something far more grounded: a call to awareness. Awareness of how racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of exclusion had quietly embedded themselves in the systems we live under. Schools, police departments, housing, healthcare, hiring — none of it was ever neutral, and people began to wake up to that.
Young people especially were drawn to the energy. They saw injustice and wanted to fix it, now — not later. They marched, they organized, they read and listened and learned. They believed that progress wasn’t just possible — it was urgent. Many institutions, from universities to corporations, responded with new policies and pledges. In those early days, the moral center of the Left was strong: driven by empathy, energized by truth, and guided by a desire to include, not exclude.
This was the Left at its best — idealistic, honest, impatient in the right ways, and serious about improving the lives of others. No reasonable person could deny the importance of what they were trying to do.
But over time, something changed.
Share this:
WOKE – What It Can Be
/
RSS Feed
Growing Beyond Woke
There’s a better way forward.
The solution isn’t to abandon the values of justice, inclusion, and equity — it’s to grow up with them. Maturity doesn’t mean compromise with cruelty; it means knowing the difference between real harm and honest disagreement. It means building bridges, not burning them. It means remembering that people are flawed, not evil — and that progress is measured by outcomes, not slogans.
The future of the Left — the sane, principled Left — will be made by those who:
-
Refuse to dehumanize people they disagree with
-
Embrace open dialogue instead of purity tests
-
Fight for fairness without becoming fanatics
-
Focus on policy over posturing
-
Reclaim empathy as a strength, not a weakness
If the original Woke moment was a kind of moral adolescence — angry, idealistic, sensitive to hypocrisy — then this next phase must be adulthood. Clear-eyed. Humble. Strategic. Compassionate.
America still needs a Left that speaks to its better angels — that reminds us of our shared responsibilities, not just our separate identities. A Left that stands for something, not just against everything. A Left that leads by inspiration, not intimidation.
We don’t need to tear down the house of justice. We just need to rebuild it with stronger beams and wider doors.
Share this:
MAGA – Is it too Late Getting Back on Track
“The Middle Way Forward”
So where do we go from here?
We don’t need to abandon what we believed — we need to reclaim it. Not with rage, but with resolve. Not by burning everything down, but by rebuilding what’s worth saving.
Border security still matters. So does fair trade. But we can defend our borders without losing our soul. We can prioritize American jobs without picking scapegoats.
We need leaders who speak to working people — and actually know what work is. Leaders who serve, not perform. Who understand that compromise is not weakness — it’s how democracy breathes.
We need to stop mistaking cruelty for strength. And start valuing competence over charisma.
It’s time to turn off the noise machines — the talk show politics, the endless culture wars, the rage-for-ratings economy. And get serious again.
The path forward isn’t extreme. It’s steady. Practical. Real. It’s the road where decency isn’t mocked, facts still matter, and being wrong isn’t a sin if you’re willing to learn.
You don’t have to abandon your values to escape the chaos. You just have to decide: What kind of country are we trying to save?
Because if it’s one worth saving — it won’t be saved by a circus. It’ll be saved by grown-ups who show up, think clearly, and still believe in something bigger than themselves.
Share this:
MAGA – What Trump Turned It Into
“Hijacked by the Showman”
We started with ideas — real concerns. We wanted jobs brought back, borders respected, and a government that actually worked for its people. But somewhere along the way, it stopped being about the country… And became entirely about one man.
Trump didn’t build on the core of MAGA — he hijacked it. He turned a movement meant to restore dignity into one that demands loyalty over honesty, anger over results, and spectacle over service.
He didn’t drain the swamp. He waded in and brought his own gators — using the presidency to enrich himself, reward allies, and punish anyone who dared tell the truth. It became less about what we believed, and more about who we hated.
Concerns about immigration turned into cruelty at the border. Valid skepticism of government turned into unhinged conspiracies. Criticism of media turned into an all-out war on reality.
The promise of “America First” became “Trump First, Always.” Every institution that didn’t bow — the courts, the military, elections themselves — became the enemy.
MAGA was supposed to be a wake-up call. Instead, it became a cult of grievance, a reality show powered by rage and reruns.
We didn’t get better jobs or stronger families — we got hats, hashtags, and a heap of broken trust.
If you ever felt disillusioned, it’s not because you were wrong to care. It’s because the man who claimed to represent you used your hope as a prop. And he’s still doing it — running again, not for your future, but for his freedom.
Share this:
MAGA, What is MAGA? Before Trump Turned it into a Cult
/
RSS Feed
When we look at the original core beliefs of MAGA — before they were distorted by authoritarianism, disinformation, and grievance theatrics — there were some genuinely resonant themes that connected with millions of Americans. Here’s a breakdown of those core ideas, framed without the Trump spectacle:
1. Economic Nationalism
Belief: American jobs should come first — especially in manufacturing and industry.
Motivation: Decades of globalization and free trade deals like NAFTA were seen as hurting U.S. workers while benefiting multinational corporations.
Goal: Bring jobs back to American soil, reduce outsourcing, and protect domestic industries with fair trade policies.
2. Border Security and Immigration Reform
Belief: A sovereign nation must control its borders.
Motivation: Concerns over illegal immigration, wage suppression, and national security — mixed with cultural anxiety about changing demographics.
Goal: Enforce immigration laws, secure the border, and reform the system so it serves U.S. interests while maintaining lawful pathways.
3. Government Accountability & Drain the Swamp
Belief: Washington is corrupt, elitist, and out of touch.
Motivation: Anger at career politicians, lobbyists, and bureaucrats who seemed to serve donors and corporations instead of the people.
Goal: Shake up the system, reduce special interests, and return power to voters.
4. America-First Foreign Policy
Belief: The U.S. should stop being the world’s policeman.
Motivation: Frustration with costly wars (Iraq, Afghanistan) and foreign aid while domestic problems were ignored.
Goal: Focus on national interests, avoid entangling alliances, and use diplomacy and economic leverage over military force.
5. Respect for Working-Class and Rural Americans
Belief: The voices of rural and working-class people have been ignored or mocked.
Motivation: Cultural resentment toward urban elites, media, academia, and Hollywood.
Goal: Reassert the dignity and importance of everyday Americans — especially those in smaller towns and traditional industries.
6. Skepticism of Global Institutions
Belief: Organizations like the UN, WTO, and WHO don’t always act in America’s best interest.
Motivation: A feeling that globalism had undermined American sovereignty.
Goal: Reassert national independence in decision-making.
7. Cultural Traditionalism
Belief: Traditional values — faith, family, patriotism — are under assault.
Motivation: Rapid cultural change, secularism, and progressive social norms created anxiety and backlash.
Goal: Defend what many saw as the moral foundation of the country.
Summary:
MAGA began as a reaction to lost trust in institutions — economic, political, and cultural. It channeled authentic frustration with globalization, elitism, and cultural displacement. Many of its early supporters were not racist, authoritarian, or conspiracy-driven — they were disillusioned voters looking for someone to listen.
What Went Wrong:
Trump harnessed that energy but weaponized it, shifting the focus from policy solutions to personal loyalty, vengeance, and spectacle.
MAGA became less about “Make America Great Again” and more about “Make Trump Untouchable.”
But if you strip the narcissism and noise away, what remains are concerns that deserve serious, non-extremist attention — and could form the basis of a healthier populism if reclaimed from demagogues.
Part 2: What Trump Turned it Into
Part 3: Is It Too Late Getting Back on Track
Share this:
The Real Threat Isn’t Trans — It’s Distraction
On
- Commentary
/
RSS Feed
“The Real Threat Isn’t Trans — It’s Distraction”
When Donald Trump talks about transgender issues, it’s rarely about protecting rights or understanding complexity. More often, it feels like a distraction — a shiny object dangled to redirect public outrage while more consequential matters unfold in the background.
Transgender Americans make up an estimated 0.6% to 0.8% of the U.S. population — a small but visible group. They live in every state, pay taxes, raise children, serve in the military, and simply want the same freedoms promised to everyone else.
So why the obsession?
Trump has increasingly focused on transgender participation in sports, access to bathrooms, and visibility in education. But his tone isn’t one of thoughtful debate — it’s one of mockery, fearmongering, and misdirection. If he truly cared about competitive fairness, why not address disparities in funding between men’s and women’s sports? If it’s about children, why ignore gun violence, hunger, and educational inequity?
The answer may be simpler than ideology: distraction works.
Trump is under legal fire, facing courtrooms instead of campaign rallies. Every time news tightens around his legal troubles, another wedge issue surfaces. Immigration. Crime. And now, gender identity. These aren’t just issues — they’re tools. And transgender people, many already vulnerable, are being used as props in a political play.
This isn’t to say all questions about fairness and inclusion are invalid. There are good-faith discussions to be had about how to ensure athletic equity. But those conversations deserve reason, respect, and science-based policy — not culture war theater.
It’s possible to believe in fairness without cruelty. It’s possible to protect kids without persecuting others. And it’s essential to recognize when outrage is being manufactured for manipulation.
Trump isn’t speaking out because he cares. He’s speaking out because it sells.
Share this:
What’s With the Windmills?
On
- Commentary
/
RSS Feed
Trump and the Windmill: A Case Study in Manufactured Enemies
Donald Trump’s bizarre vendetta against wind turbines might seem like comic relief—a sideshow of sound effects, bird-killing accusations, and cancer conspiracies—but it actually offers a telling window into how he operates politically. Like so many of his obsessions, the war on windmills began as a personal grievance, was inflated into a populist symbol, and has now become a permanent part of his rhetorical arsenal.
The origin is almost petty: Trump’s long, losing legal battle in Scotland, where he tried to block an offshore wind farm near his Aberdeenshire golf course. He claimed the turbines would ruin the view and diminish property values. When the courts and the Scottish government didn’t side with him, the issue metastasized into something larger. It was no longer about one golf course; it became about betrayal, liberal overreach, and the indignity of being told “no.”
And so, from that personal defeat, Trump built a narrative villain: the windmill. Not just a clean energy device—but a symbol of everything he resents: environmental regulation, international cooperation, changing technology, and a world where his preferences don’t automatically carry the day.
Trump’s windmill rants are more than comic outbursts. They’re a blueprint for his political style. He takes something real (wind energy), attaches a lie or distortion (“they cause cancer”), sprinkles in some emotional bait (“your property values will collapse”), and then sells it as a righteous fight. Facts don’t matter—what matters is that his audience feels under attack and sees him as their champion. Even when the “enemy” is a giant fan.
By mocking wind energy, he also draws a line in the sand between traditional energy (coal, oil, gas—industries tied to his base) and the future he’s convinced his supporters to fear. It’s climate denialism packaged in slapstick, grievance dressed up as policy. His windmill routine is both absurd and strategic.
It also fits into a larger pattern: Trump doesn’t battle real problems; he invents ones he can beat. Immigrants are “invaders.” Journalists are “enemies of the people.” Wind turbines are death machines. These inflated threats allow him to present himself as a larger-than-life warrior defending the country—when in fact, he’s just tilting at windmills.
In Don Quixote, Cervantes gave us a man so lost in his own delusion that he charged at windmills thinking they were giants. In Trump, we’ve somehow elected the same archetype—with a gold-plated golf cart instead of a horse, and a microphone instead of a lance.
We laugh at his windmill tirades because they’re ridiculous. But underneath the absurdity is a political strategy: Create the enemy. Exaggerate the threat. Declare yourself the savior. Rinse and repeat. The windmill is just the punchline. The pattern is the warning.
Share this:
The Trump Deflection Doctrine
On
- Commentary
/
RSS Feed
“The Trump Deflection Doctrine”
Every time Donald Trump is cornered by truth, he doesn’t defend—he deflects.
The pattern is so consistent it might as well be strategy.
Epstein connections start surfacing?
Suddenly:
“Obama has been caught. Biggest scandal in American history.”
No evidence. No facts. Just noise—louder and louder—until headlines forget what they were originally chasing.
His mental sharpness gets questioned?
He rolls out the old story:
“I took the test. I aced it. No one’s ever done better.”
What he’s referring to is not an IQ test, not even a memory test—it’s a cognitive screening for early dementia.
Questions like:
-
“Name three words: cat, shy, kitchen.”
-
“Draw a clock: the big hand is on 12, the little hand on 11.”
It’s a test for Alzheimer’s, not aptitude.
And yet, he brags about it—because he knows the headline isn’t the truth. It’s his confidence in the lie.
And when even that doesn’t work?
It’s “Biden’s fault”.
Or “The election was rigged.”
Or “They’re coming after me because of you.”
The Game Isn’t Defense—It’s Distraction
It’s never about answering the question.
It’s about changing the subject so fast and so furiously, the public can’t keep up.
It’s political sleight of hand.
While we’re staring at the noise, the truth quietly disappears.
This isn’t incompetence.
It’s a formula.
And unless we start recognizing the pattern, we’ll keep falling for it.
He does it because it works for him, but this stuff gets old and we get tired of it. Call him on all of it, all the time, over and over. Let him know we aren’t as stupid as he thinks we are, and yes, he thinks everyone but him is STUPID.
Share this:
Reporting Under Fire: How Trump’s Lawsuit Against Murdoch Is Reshaping Political Journalism
On
- Commentary, Politics
/
RSS Feed
The most recent development in the lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump against Rupert Murdoch, The Wall Street Journal, and its parent companies, Dow Jones and News Corp, occurred in July 2025. Trump initiated a $10 billion defamation lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida federal court on July 18, 2025, following a Wall Street Journal article published the previous day. The article alleged that Trump sent a “bawdy” birthday letter and a sexually suggestive drawing to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2003. Trump denies the authenticity of the letter, calling it “fake” and claiming it does not reflect his writing style or behavior, and accuses the defendants of acting with malicious intent to harm his reputation.
The lawsuit names Murdoch, News Corp CEO Robert Thomson, and reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joe Palazzolo as defendants, alleging libel and slander. Trump’s legal action followed his direct warnings to Murdoch and the Journal’s editor, Emma Tucker, against publishing the story, which he claims they ignored. The Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones have stated they stand by their reporting and will vigorously defend against the lawsuit.
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles, who previously handled a 2023 lawsuit Trump filed against his former lawyer Michael Cohen, which Trump dropped before a scheduled deposition. Legal experts have expressed skepticism about the lawsuit’s merits, noting that Trump must prove “actual malice” to succeed in a defamation case, and the $10 billion damages sought are considered unusually high and potentially unrealistic.
The lawsuit has strained the long-standing, complex relationship between Trump and Murdoch, a media mogul whose outlets, including Fox News, have historically supported Trump but have also faced his criticism. Some reports suggest the suit serves as a warning to other media outlets, raising concerns about press freedom. There are no updates beyond July 2025 indicating further court proceedings or resolutions as of my last available information.
This isn’t just a defamation suit—it’s a tactic. Trump’s lawsuit is part of a larger pattern in which journalism isn’t merely questioned, but threatened—by legal firepower intended to force editorial compliance, intimidate sources, and discourage scrutiny. It tests whether a free press can operate freely when powerful political figures use litigation to police narrative boundaries.
1. Weaponizing Lawsuits to Regulate Truth
Trump’s case isn’t likely to succeed on legal grounds—New York Times v. Sullivan sets a high bar for defamation. But that may not be the point.
Like SLAPP suits (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation), this action imposes financial and legal burdens meant to:
-
Stall or chill investigative reporting
-
Shift editorial policies toward “safer,” less critical ground
-
Force outlets to weigh the legal cost of “getting it wrong” against journalistic boldness
What this implies:
A political figure can regulate journalism not with laws, but with lawyers.
2. Political Oversight Through Fear, Not Policy
Unlike traditional government censorship or regulatory control, this is oversight through intimidation:
-
Editors become risk managers
-
Reporters self-censor to avoid being the next target
-
Media companies weigh “is it worth it?” instead of “is it true?”
This form of “soft censorship” doesn’t require legislation—it requires deep pockets, loyal followers, and a willingness to attack institutions.
3. Eroding the Public’s Trust by Destabilizing the Source
When Trump sues The Wall Street Journal, it’s not just about setting the record straight. It’s a message to his base:
“Even your trusted conservative outlets are lying—only I speak the truth.”
This isolates his followers from any independent source of verification—making journalism itself the enemy.
The result?
-
Loyalty trumps objectivity
-
Tribal narratives override shared facts
-
Journalism is seen as either “ours” or “theirs”
4. The Long-Term Cost: Press as Political Risk, Not Public Service
The chilling effect doesn’t stop at WSJ. Smaller outlets, freelance journalists, even whistleblowers see what happens when you challenge political power with inconvenient facts.
If the new precedent is:
-
“Report on power at your own risk,”
then journalism is no longer a civic tool—it’s a liability.
In an era where power no longer needs to pass laws to control speech, it simply needs to raise the cost of telling the truth. And that cost is now being paid in court.
And one more thought, just who do you think is paying for all this?
Share this:
Seeking the Truth as opposed to Affirmation
On
- Commentary, Politics
/
RSS Feed
In an age of rampant misinformation, understanding the distinction between genuine fact-checking and merely seeking evidence to support a preconceived notion is crucial. While both involve reviewing information, their fundamental goals and methodologies are worlds apart. Actual fact-checking is a process of impartial verification, while searching for supporting documentation is often an exercise in confirmation bias.
The Goal: Truth vs. Affirmation
The primary objective of fact-checking is to determine the accuracy of a claim, regardless of the outcome. A fact-checker starts with a question: “Is this statement true?” They then embark on a comprehensive and unbiased investigation, gathering all relevant evidence, both for and against the claim. The ultimate goal is to present a verified and accurate picture to the public.
Conversely, the principal aim of searching for supporting documentation is to find evidence that validates a pre-existing belief or argument. The starting point is not a question, but an assertion. The individual is not seeking to test the validity of their claim, but rather to find proof that they are correct.
The Process: Investigation vs. Advocacy
The methodologies employed by fact-checkers and those simply seeking support differ significantly.
Fact-checking is a meticulous and often lengthy process that includes:
-
Identifying verifiable claims: Not all statements can be fact-checked. Opinions, for instance, are not subject to this process.
-
Gathering diverse evidence: Fact-checkers consult a wide array of sources, including primary documents, expert opinions, and data from reputable institutions. They actively look for conflicting information to ensure a well-rounded view.
-
Evaluating sources: A critical component of fact-checking is assessing the credibility and potential bias of each source of information.
-
Synthesizing and concluding: After weighing all the evidence, a conclusion is drawn about the veracity of the claim, often with a nuanced explanation of the findings.
Searching for supporting documentation, on the other hand, is often characterized by:
-
Cherry-picking data: Individuals may selectively choose evidence that aligns with their views while ignoring contradictory information.
-
Ignoring source credibility: The reliability of a source may be overlooked if the information it provides is favorable to the individual’s argument.
-
Avoiding contradictory evidence: There is no active effort to find information that might challenge the initial belief.
The Mindset: Objectivity vs. Confirmation Bias
At its core, the difference between these two activities lies in the mindset of the individual. A fact-checker approaches a claim with a healthy dose of skepticism and a commitment to objectivity. The goal is to be a neutral arbiter of facts.
In contrast, someone searching for supporting documentation is often operating under the influence of confirmation bias. This is the psychological tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one’s prior beliefs or values. This can lead to a skewed and inaccurate understanding of an issue.
In essence, a fact-checker’s loyalty is to the truth, wherever it may lead. For someone simply seeking to support their own views, their loyalty lies with their pre-existing beliefs.
Share this:
The song “Love Makes the World Go Around”, On X it’s HATE.
Sometimes you just wake up and the first thing you see is some Troll posting something they found and out of ignorance have fact checked it while cruising X dot Com while having their morning constitution sitting on their porcelain throne and ….. Get the idea?
Okay, so what got me going? The Muslims, those horrid decapitators of the innocence.
So to start off, here it the image posted showing how evil the Koran is.
My goal is to encourage you to think critically and formulate your own questions. To preserve your freedom, rely on intelligence as your primary tool, supported by strength, because oppressors depend on force paired with ignorance.
All of this was done while my Pot of Coffee was brewing, (Yah, because you all are to cheap to buy me a cup).
Since I was on X I took a copy of the image and asked Grok to analyze it.
‘Grok, can you analyze and fact check this image?’
Yes, I can analyze the image you provided. The image contains a list of alleged Quranic verses (Koran 2:191, 3:28, 3:85, 5:33, 8:12, 8:60, 8:65, 9:5, 9:30, 9:123, 22:19, 47:4) with interpretations suggesting violent or intolerant actions toward non-believers, Jews, Christians, and others, framed under the question “A religion of peace?” The image appears to be designed to provoke or challenge perceptions of Islam.However, without the ability to perform a web search at this time, I cannot fully fact-check the exact wording or context of these verses against the Quran. Based on my general knowledge, some of these citations may be taken out of context or inaccurately quoted. The Quran, like many religious texts, contains a range of verses that can be interpreted in different ways depending on historical context, scholarly analysis, and translation. Many of the verses listed are associated with specific wartime situations or defensive measures, and mainstream Islamic scholarship often emphasizes verses promoting peace and tolerance, such as “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256).For a precise fact-check, I would need to consult the original Arabic text and authoritative translations, which I cannot do without searching. I suggest you provide the specific verses or context you’d like me to address further, or I can offer to search for more detailed information if needed. Would you like me to proceed with a search?
‘YES’
Thank you for confirming. I have analyzed the image and fact-checked the listed Quranic verses using available information. The image provides interpretations of verses (Koran 2:191, 3:28, 3:85, 5:33, 8:12, 8:60, 8:65, 9:5, 9:30, 9:123, 22:19, 47:4) that suggest violence or intolerance, but many of these are either misquoted, taken out of context, or lack complete translation.
- 2:191: The verse mentions killing those who wage war against Muslims and expelling them from where they expelled Muslims, but it specifies this is in response to aggression and oppression, with a call to cease if they stop (2:192-193).
- 3:28: This advises not taking disbelievers as allies during war, not a general prohibition on friendship.
- 3:85: States that Islam is the only acceptable religion in the sight of God, but this is a theological claim, not a call to violence.
- 5:33: Describes punishment for those who wage war against God and the Prophet, including crucifixion, but applies to specific crimes like highway robbery or sedition, not all non-believers.
- 8:12: Refers to striking the necks of enemies in battle, a wartime context, not a general command.
- 8:60: Encourages preparing military strength to deter enemies, not to terrorize indiscriminately.
- 8:65: Urges Muslims to urge others to fight, but in the context of defending the community.
- 9:5: Known as the “Verse of the Sword,” it calls to kill polytheists who broke treaties, but is limited to a specific historical context and followed by offers of peace (9:6).
- 9:30: Criticizes Jews and Christians for certain beliefs, calling them accursed, but does not mandate fighting them.
- 9:123: Instructs fighting disbelievers near Muslims, again in a defensive or wartime context.
- 22:19: Describes punishment in hell for disbelievers, not an earthly command.
- 47:4: Permits striking disbelievers’ necks in battle, with instructions to release or ransom them if they surrender.
These verses often relate to specific historical conflicts (e.g., battles during the Prophet Muhammad’s time) and are moderated by other verses promoting peace, such as 2:256 (“No compulsion in religion”) and 60:8 (kindness to non-hostile non-Muslims). The image’s interpretations exaggerate or omit context, presenting a skewed narrative. For a deeper understanding, consulting a full Quran translation (e.g., Sahih International) or Islamic scholars is recommended. Would you like me to search further or focus on a specific verse?
Compare Quran and Bible
‘YES’
Thank you for confirming. I have analyzed the image and fact-checked the listed Quranic verses using available information. The image provides interpretations of verses (Koran 2:191, 3:28, 3:85, 5:33, 8:12, 8:60, 8:65, 9:5, 9:30, 9:123, 22:19, 47:4) that suggest violence or intolerance, but many of these are either misquoted, taken out of context, or lack complete translation.
- 2:191: The verse mentions killing those who wage war against Muslims and expelling them from where they expelled Muslims, but it specifies this is in response to aggression and oppression, with a call to cease if they stop (2:192-193).
- 3:28: This advises not taking disbelievers as allies during war, not a general prohibition on friendship.
- 3:85: States that Islam is the only acceptable religion in the sight of God, but this is a theological claim, not a call to violence.
- 5:33: Describes punishment for those who wage war against God and the Prophet, including crucifixion, but applies to specific crimes like highway robbery or sedition, not all non-believers.
- 8:12: Refers to striking the necks of enemies in battle, a wartime context, not a general command.
- 8:60: Encourages preparing military strength to deter enemies, not to terrorize indiscriminately.
- 8:65: Urges Muslims to urge others to fight, but in the context of defending the community.
- 9:5: Known as the “Verse of the Sword,” it calls to kill polytheists who broke treaties, but is limited to a specific historical context and followed by offers of peace (9:6).
- 9:30: Criticizes Jews and Christians for certain beliefs, calling them accursed, but does not mandate fighting them.
- 9:123: Instructs fighting disbelievers near Muslims, again in a defensive or wartime context.
- 22:19: Describes punishment in hell for disbelievers, not an earthly command.
- 47:4: Permits striking disbelievers’ necks in battle, with instructions to release or ransom them if they surrender.
These verses often relate to specific historical conflicts (e.g., battles during the Prophet Muhammad’s time) and are moderated by other verses promoting peace, such as 2:256 (“No compulsion in religion”) and 60:8 (kindness to non-hostile non-Muslims). The image’s interpretations exaggerate or omit context, presenting a skewed narrative. For a deeper understanding, consulting a full Quran translation (e.g., Sahih International) or Islamic scholars is recommended. Would you like me to search further or focus on a specific verse?
Compare Quran and Bible
Comparing the Quran and the Bible involves examining their origins, content, structure, and theological perspectives. Here’s a concise overview:Origins
- Quran: Revealed to the Prophet Muhammad in Arabic over 23 years (610–632 CE) in Mecca and Medina. Considered by Muslims to be the literal word of God (Allah) as dictated by the angel Gabriel.
- Bible: Comprises the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible, completed by ~100 BCE) and New Testament (written 50–100 CE). Compiled over centuries, it includes writings by multiple authors inspired by God, according to Christian belief.
Structure
- Quran: 114 chapters (surahs) of varying lengths, arranged roughly by size (longest to shortest), except the opening chapter. Written in poetic Arabic, with verses (ayahs) revealed in different contexts.
- Bible: 66 books (in Protestant versions), divided into Old Testament (39 books) and New Testament (27 books), including historical narratives, poetry, prophecy, and letters. Organized by genre and chronology.
Content Themes
- God: Both affirm monotheism. The Quran emphasizes Allah’s oneness (Tawhid) and transcendence, rejecting the Trinity. The Bible presents God as one but with a Trinitarian nature (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) in Christianity.
- Prophets: Both recognize figures like Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. The Quran views Muhammad as the final prophet, while the Bible ends with Jesus as the fulfillment of prophecy.
- Jesus: In the Quran, Jesus (Isa) is a prophet and messenger, born of the Virgin Mary, but not divine or crucified (4:157). In the Bible, Jesus is the Son of God, crucified, and resurrected for humanity’s salvation.
- Law and Morality: The Quran provides legal and ethical guidance (e.g., Sharia), including dietary laws and prayer. The Bible includes the Mosaic Law (Old Testament) and Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Sermon on the Mount) emphasizing love and forgiveness.
- Violence: Both contain verses on warfare (e.g., Quran 9:5, Bible Deuteronomy 20:10-18), often tied to historical contexts like defense or conquest, though interpretations vary widely.
Key Differences
- Revelation: The Quran is seen as unaltered and final; the Bible’s texts evolved through translation and canonization.
- Afterlife: Both describe heaven and hell, but the Quran details physical rewards/punishments (e.g., 22:19), while the Bible focuses more on spiritual states.
- Scriptural Authority: Muslims believe the Quran supersedes previous scriptures (including the Bible), which they view as corrupted. Christians see the Bible as the complete revelation.
Similarities
- Both promote faith, prayer, charity, and moral living.
- Shared stories (e.g., Noah’s flood) reflect a common Abrahamic heritage.
For a deeper comparison, specific topics (e.g., specific verses, ethics) could be explored. Would you like me to focus on any particular aspect?
“NO”
Share this:
When Truth Is a Liability and Laughter a Crime
On
- Commentary, purple
When Truth Is a Liability and Laughter a Crime
There was a time in America when satire was celebrated — a necessary pressure valve in a democracy, a mirror that reflected uncomfortable truths through the safety of humor. But today, that mirror is being shattered, not by mobs or movements, but by boardrooms and political power.
The recent cancellation of The Late Show — conveniently following an administration’s sustained pressure campaign — is more than a programming change. It’s a warning shot across the bow of every parent company, streaming platform, and publication: comedy that speaks truth to power is no longer good for business. Or rather, it’s no longer safe for business.
Why did Paramount fold? Why now? And who’s next?
We are witnessing a quiet but forceful reshaping of the public square. Instead of government censorship, we get corporate compliance. Instead of storming newsrooms, leaders merely have to hint — threaten a lawsuit here, suggest regulatory pressure there — and truth buckles under the weight of liability.
Donald Trump’s threat to sue The Wall Street Journal if it published an article linking him to Jeffrey Epstein isn’t just a blustering headline — it’s an attempt to preemptively kill reporting that may be factual, inconvenient, or worse: undeniable. Whether or not the story sees daylight, the chilling effect already spreads.
What we’re left with is a hollowed-out discourse. Facts are rebranded as attacks. Jokes become “fake news.” And networks — fearing backlash more than boredom — simply choose silence.
It’s not about whether you liked Colbert or hated him, whether you trust the Journal or cancel your subscription. This is about whether we still believe truth matters. Whether satire still has a place. Whether comedy, critique, and inconvenient reporting are signs of a functioning democracy — or symptoms to be suppressed.
Because when power no longer fears the truth, it doesn’t argue with it. It simply erases it.
Share this:
I Grew Up with the Truth — Now I Watch Them Bury It
/
RSS Feed
I Grew Up with the Truth — Now I Watch Them Bury It
I grew up believing truth had power. That facts could stand on their own — maybe bruised in the headlines, maybe doubted in the moment — but ultimately stronger than lies. And when the truth got too hard to face, we had satire. A comedian could say what a politician couldn’t. Laughter was a lifeline — not just for humor, but for honesty.
Now I watch that lifeline being cut.
The recent cancellation of The Late Show hit harder than I expected. Not because I thought Stephen Colbert could save the country with a monologue, but because I saw the message behind it. This wasn’t just a show ending — it was a warning. When those in power start making parent companies like Paramount nervous, satire becomes expendable. Not because it isn’t working — but because it is.
Then came the threats against The Wall Street Journal. Trump warning of lawsuits if they print a story connecting him to Epstein — whether the article is airtight or not — sends a message louder than any denial: “Tell the truth, and I’ll destroy you.” And just like that, the reporting gets delayed, the story shelved, the truth silenced.
This isn’t about left or right. It’s about a shift in the ground we’re standing on. We used to debate the facts. Now we debate whether they matter at all. Truth has become a liability. Satire, a threat. I never thought I’d see the day when a punchline could get you canceled — not by angry audiences, but by political pressure disguised as business decisions.
I don’t know where we go from here. But I do know this: when leaders fear jokes more than journalists, we’re in trouble. And when journalists start pulling punches to keep the lawyers away, we’re already there.
So yeah, I miss the laughs. But what I miss more is what those laughs meant — that we still had the freedom to question, to expose, to say it out loud.
And I’m not ready to give that up.
Share this:
Covert Agency Manipulation
On
- Politics
COINTELPRO, short for Counter Intelligence Program, was a series of covert and often illegal projects conducted by the FBI from 1956 to 1971, aimed at surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting domestic American political organizations deemed subversive.
Authorized by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, it targeted groups like the Communist Party USA, civil rights movements (including Martin Luther King Jr.), Black Panther Party, American Indian Movement, and anti-Vietnam War organizers, among others.The program used tactics like wiretapping, smear campaigns, forged documents, psychological warfare, and encouraging violence between groups (e.g., between the Black Panthers and other organizations).
Notable examples include attempts to discredit MLK by spreading false information about his personal life and pressuring him to commit suicide. COINTELPRO’s actions often violated civil liberties and constitutional rights.It was exposed in 1971 when activists stole documents from an FBI office in Media, Pennsylvania, and leaked them to the press.
This led to public outcry, congressional investigations (notably the Church Committee in 1975), and the program’s official termination. However, its legacy raised lasting concerns about government overreach and surveillance of citizens.
MKUltra was a covert CIA program, officially running from 1953 to 1973, focused on developing mind control and interrogation techniques through human experimentation. Authorized by CIA Director Allen Dulles, it aimed to counter perceived Soviet and Chinese advances in brainwashing during the Cold War. The program involved illegal and unethical experiments on unwitting subjects, including U.S. and Canadian citizens.Key aspects:
-
Experiments: MKUltra tested drugs (notably LSD), hypnosis, sensory deprivation, electroshock, and psychological manipulation. Subjects included prisoners, mental patients, and unaware civilians, often without consent.
-
Scope: It spanned 80+ institutions, including universities, hospitals, and prisons, with 44 colleges involved. Over 150 subprojects explored everything from chemical interrogation to behavioral modification.
-
Notable Cases: Experiments like dosing people with LSD in public settings (e.g., Operation Midnight Climax in San Francisco) or the death of Frank Olson, a scientist who was unknowingly given LSD and later died under suspicious circumstances, highlight the program’s recklessness.
-
Secrecy and Destruction: In 1973, CIA Director Richard Helms ordered most MKUltra records destroyed, leaving limited documentation. Surviving details emerged through 1975 Freedom of Information Act requests and investigations.
The program was exposed publicly during the 1975 Church Committee hearings, alongside COINTELPRO, revealing gross violations of ethics and civil rights. It was officially halted, but its legacy fuels distrust in government and speculation about continued covert programs.
The following is a fictionalized storyboard outlining potential Covert Programs, fictionalized to avoid legal or other repercussions. But feel free to read between the lines. The setting is somewhere else.
“Invisible hands leave visible fingerprints.”
“The Architects of Influence”
The Setting: Republica
A modern democratic nation, constantly on edge. Its people vote, protest, and dream freely — but shadows linger behind the curtain.
1. The Watchtower Agency
(Inspired by the CIA)
A secretive agency born after the Great War. Officially foreign-focused, it keeps Republica safe. Unofficially, it seeds coups abroad and whispers narratives at home.
Key Tactic: “Feather & Quill” — placing storytellers in key media posts to control the plotline without writing it themselves.
-
Notable Operation: “Mockbird” — where agents whispered headlines into trusted ears, shaping what the people feared, hated, and ignored.
-
Modern Twist: Funded a network of independent news “hubs” that subtly echoed official lines with a local accent.
2. The Sentinel Bureau
(Inspired by the FBI)
Meant to defend from internal sabotage, but often defined what “subversion” meant based on the politics of the day.
Key Tactic: “Echo Disruption” — infiltrating activist circles and sowing paranoia, false friendships, and betrayal.
-
Notable Operation: “Harpy” — a campaign to dismantle the Unity March Movement by labeling them enemies of order and peace.
-
Fallout: The movement imploded from within; the leaders never fully trusted each other again.
3. The Listening Vault
(Inspired by the NSA)
A faceless cathedral of code. It doesn’t act — it watches, collects, connects.
“If you whisper, they can hear it. If you think it, they may predict it.”
Key Tactic: “Mind Lattice” — linking data from every citizen into behavioral profiles for “national security modeling.”
-
Revelation: A rogue technician leaked the truth to the public. Instead of outrage, the people shrugged. “If you have nothing to hide…”
4. The Forge
(Inspired by Cambridge Analytica, military psyops, and political data firms)
A private, unregulated lab where public will is melted and recast into programmable segments.
Key Tactic: “Soul Maps” — personalized emotional profiles built from likes, clicks, and idle complaints.
“They don’t sell ads — they sell certainty.”
-
Use Case: A political faction buys access before the election, deploying fear-based ads to suppress enemy voters and ignite their own.
5. The Ministry of Tomorrow
(A fictional mashup of think tanks, media outlets, and social platforms)
Not officially government. Not officially anything. But its ideas somehow always reach the top.
Key Tactic: “Consensus Sculpting” — the art of turning radical ideas into breakfast-table common sense.
“The people chose it — we just helped them want it.”
-
Example: A new law restricts protest zones. Within a week, every morning show host is saying “Well, you can’t just let mobs run the streets…”
Epilogue Chapter: The Mirror Room
A small room beneath the Capitol of Republica. No one lives there — but the walls reflect every decision made upstairs.
In the center, a marionette stage, strings dangling. But no puppets.
The message?
“If the people believe they chose the show, do they need to know who built the stage?”
Republica isn’t real. But the shadows behind it often are.
We’re not told to think anymore — just to choose sides.
But when the stage is rigged and the script already written… what good is a vote?
Share this:
The Puppet Masters
On
- Menu
The Puppet Masters
Intro to the Series
We get caught up in the little stuff — who’s president, how it happened, who to blame. We fixate on the face in front of the curtain — the clown or the statesman — but rarely ask who’s pulling the strings behind them.
We toss around vague culprits: “corporate America,” “the global elite,” “one world government.” But I don’t think it’s the oligarchs or the CEOs. I believe it’s the idealists — the ones who believe so deeply in their vision that they’ve become the puppet masters, manipulating outcomes in the name of the greater good.
So in this arena called politics, I’ll try to pull back the curtain. To shine some light on the power brokers we don’t elect, the movements we don’t see coming, and the hands guiding the show. I’ll offer some insight, some opinion — but the real mysteries? Those are yours to solve.
Because in the end, maybe the only real truth… is your truth.
10% government stake in Intel – Good or Bad
Trump’s known investment profile: Public records and reporting show he has diversified holdings across multiple sectors (stocks, real estate, funds, etc.), including historical past holdings in companies like Intel. Yet, there is no indication that
2028 – The Presinator – Constitution, what Constitution?
Constitution, what Constitution?
A Conservative Case for Restraint
It falls to Republicans to make a hard but patriotic choice: Preserve one man’s ego, or preserve the constitutional order. The conservative answer should be obvious.
An Open Letter to Governor Tina Kotek and Mayor Keith Wilson: Portland’s Welcome Wagon for the Uninvited Guests
Commandeer the Food Trucks: Rally a squad of our iconic mobile kitchens—Voodoo Doughnut for the sugar rush, Nong's Khao Man Gai for that Thai soul food hug, and a fleet of taco wagons from the
Anger in America, Part 1: Why People Are So Angry
The truth is, millions of Americans feel cheated. They feel as if the deck is stacked against them, no matter how hard they work or how carefully they play by the rules. They see the
Back to that Daily Coffee.
So what is below is jumping into the middle of a discussion, but you should get the drift. We need to figure this stuff out, we need to act, not always react. You may say,
Ballrooms and Breadlines: When Power Loses Touch With People
I can understand the conservative point of view here. I’m conservative by heart and by history. I believe in responsibility, not dependency. I’ve seen the waste, the abuse, the fraud that creeps into welfare systems.
Betting Against The Economy, why would Trump do that?
When leaders or high-ranking officials make financial moves that profit from economic decline, it undermines the very foundation of public trust. Reports suggest former President Trump and some government officials may have engaged in activities
Between Socialism and Capitalism: Finding the Compromise
Between Socialism and Capitalism: Finding the Compromise Margaret Thatcher once said that “the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” She meant that systems built entirely on redistribution can
But I always thought..
What's it going to cost to tear all that crap down? and what are we going to do with that pile of extra D's and T's?
Covert Agency Manipulation
Notable Cases: Experiments like dosing people with LSD in public settings (e.g., Operation Midnight Climax in San Francisco) or the death of Frank Olson, a scientist who was unknowingly given LSD and later died under
Do some elites or movements support depopulation — quietly or not?
RFK Jr.’s rhetoric around detoxing children, rejecting vaccines, and elevating “natural immunity” taps into those old, unscientific veins — and when implemented from a position of power, they do carry population-level consequences.
Electorial College or Popular Vote
Democrats overwhelmingly favor the popular vote. Republicans strongly prefer the Electoral College. Independents lean toward the popular vote but are more divided. Overall, most Americans favor switching to a popular vote system.
Federal Judge Mark L. Wolf resigned, did we lose or gain a Champion?
Federal Judge Mark L. Wolf recently resigned from the District Court for the District of Massachusetts to protest President Trump's actions. In a published essay, he stated his resignation was necessary to speak out against what he
Gerrymandering, The Cowards Confession
Let’s be clear: this isn’t clever strategy, it’s cowardice. It’s the political equivalent of moving the goalposts because you’re afraid to lose a fair fight. Even when done in retaliation, it’s still rigging — a
Gerrymandering: The Fire Trump Lit—and Why Everyone’s Getting Burned
The new Texas map, rammed through under Trump’s influence, would give Republicans nearly 80% of the state’s congressional seats—even though they win just over half the vote. This isn’t just a tilt; it’s a landslide
Get Back to the Issues
Voters deserve more than fear and name-calling. It doesn’t matter if the attack ads come from the right or the left—they’re distractions. What matters is whether a candidate will look us in the eye and
Governing requires Thought not Fear
Governing requires thought, compromise, and foresight; dictating only needs instinctual levers: fear, greed, loyalty, and outrage.
Guilt by Association: Your Silence on MAGA’s Shadow, You’re So Screwed
You didn’t run when you had the chance. Post-2020, when whispers of independence could’ve saved you, you drowned them out with the roar of primary fears and donor demands. You gave eulogies for the old
Hey SCOTUS, it’s time to start doing what’s right.
It's time to put the Nation first and tell the Pumkin Head where to put it. Current Status Payments on Hold: Full November SNAP benefits are paused nationwide pending the 1st Circuit's ruling and potential
Hey Senator, the President didn’t Elect you, we did.
Stop pretending the party and the philosophy are the same thing “Rapid swings create unintended consequences — let’s slow this down.”
Hey, all you good Christians, someone you should pay attention to has made his point.
In a rare statement on U.S. politics, Pope Leo XIV expressed concerns over remarks made by President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during a meeting with military commanders, criticizing their confrontational rhetoric as
High‑Level Analysis: How a Bipartisan Containment Strategy Could Incentivize Both Parties
If the Epstein materials threaten individuals far more powerful than Trump, then Trump’s resistance to transparency might be driven by external pressure. In such a scenario, the political system — including members of both parties
How about some Real Free Speach
I'm thinking of a free speech challenge to Elon, is bot traffic free speech, is ad revenue theft free speech, is radical left or right hate bot meme attacks free speech or is an honest
How REAL Social Media FREE SPEACH Could Work
No child exploitation No credible threats of violence No doxxing of private individuals No coordinated foreign interference No impersonation or fraud #FreeSpeechTest #BotFree #SocialExperiment #HumanDiscourse #FreeSpeechTest #SocialExperiment
How Trump is Controlling Free Speech
I asked Grok "Trump sues everyone who says anything bad about him, I see it as his way of eliminating free speech through intimidation, am I missing something here?" Searched for "Trump lawsuits free speech
If it’s war he wants, he may very well get it. King Leprocy may be in over his head.
California Governor Gavin Newsom says the Trump administration is dispatching 300 California National Guard members to Oregon. Politico+3AP News+3AP News+3 Oregon Governor Tina Kotek confirmed that 101 California Guard members had arrived overnight (Saturday to
In My Opinion. Trump hasn’t lost it, he never had it.
The following is un edited, my question and the reponse. And I asked for permission to use it. Question: Looking for an opinion, doesn't have to be fact and this is conversation, not fact checking.
Liar, Liar, pants on fire.
Sometimes a little education is in order. I'm not calling anyone out, I'm explaining a condition. A condition I sadly to aware of. I was raised by a Pathological Liar, I bear the scars but
MAGA – Is it too Late Getting Back on Track
So where do we go from here? We don’t need to abandon what we believed — we need to reclaim it. Not with rage, but with resolve. Not by burning everything down, but by rebuilding what’s
MAGA – What Trump Turned It Into
Trump didn’t build on the core of MAGA — he hijacked it. He turned a movement meant to restore dignity into one that demands loyalty over honesty, anger over results, and spectacle over service. He didn’t
MAGA, What is MAGA? Before Trump Turned it into a Cult
When we look at the original core beliefs of MAGA — before they were distorted by authoritarianism, disinformation, and grievance theatrics — there were some genuinely resonant themes that connected with millions of Americans. Here's
Meet the Man America Should Be Watching, But Isn’t
Through his networks (like the Marble Freedom Trust), he’s moved $1.6 billion from donors into judicial appointments, legal activism, and media shaping — with almost no oversight or press scrutiny.
Midterms 2026, get ready to make a difference. Tell Edgar enouph is enough.
Only through education can you understand the issues. Only through observation can you make informed decisions. Only by thinking for yourselves can you make a difference. And only by voting can you be heard.
National Guard Deployed in Washington D.C – What the truth may actually be?
The effects of the National Guard deployment in Washington, D.C. are mixed, and people are seeing both “positive” and “negative” outcomes depending on perspective, values, and what metrics they use. Here’s a breakdown of what
No Kings — Waking Up Together
Imagine if someone finally asked the right questions. An honest poll of the No Kings protests. Not the headlines, not the pundits, not the spin — just the people there.
Oath of Office for Commissioned Officers
"I, [state your name], having been appointed an officer in the [branch] of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
Palisades Fires, who’s to blame?
I grew up in Southern California and my perspective is someone who lived the Southern California cycle with a clarity that a lot of outsiders, politicians, and even reporters miss. Southern California has always been
Pay to Be Heard by Trump
So if you’re still sending in your “urgent $25 contribution” to make sure your opinion matters, maybe ask yourself: Are you part of a movement — or just another mark in a long-running con? Because
Politicians Make Promises With No Binding Obligation To Deliver
The Constitution protects broad political speech. Campaign promises are legally treated as opinions or aspirations, not contracts. Courts generally won’t police political lies — they leave it to voters, the press, and opponents to challenge
Politicization of Economic Data. When it sounds too good to be True, it Usually Is
On August 2, 2025, Trump abruptly dismissed Erika McEntarfer, commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), after a jobs report showing slow employment growth. He accused her of fabricating data without evidence—a claim widely
Politics and the Pendulum – Part One, The Swingers
There’s no guarantee, but yes — many of the “puppet-masters” behind Donald Trump and his movement are likely to try to transition if the political pendulum swings to the left. Whether they’ll succeed — and
Politics and the Pendulum – Part Three, The Losers
Recap What This Means for “Pivoting” if Power Swings Left Some will quietly shift — donors and institutions whose core interest is economic stability and influence may try to support or infiltrate left-leaning coalitions
Politics and the Pendulum – Part Two, The Survivors
There are several powerful donor networks, think-tanks and political-funding institutions that look likely to survive beyond any one election or personality. If things shift left (or even just toward a new balance), these players are
Project 2025 and Donald Trump
Project 2025 is a comprehensive plan developed by the Heritage Foundation, a prominent conservative think tank, to reshape the U.S. federal government if a Republican—likely Donald Trump—returns to power in 2025. It's officially called “Mandate
Reporting Under Fire: How Trump’s Lawsuit Against Murdoch Is Reshaping Political Journalism
In an era where power no longer needs to pass laws to control speech, it simply needs to raise the cost of telling the truth. And that cost is now being paid in court.
Seditious my Ass
By labeling this “sedition,” Trump is effectively punishing someone for advocating compliance with basic military ethics and the law. Historically, this looks like a leader rewarding disobedience to law for political gain, which can backfire
Seeking the Truth as opposed to Affirmation
In essence, a fact-checker's loyalty is to the truth, wherever it may lead. For someone simply seeking to support their own views, their loyalty lies with their pre-existing beliefs.
Senators, Congressmen and Wannabees
I don't see you putting that distance between King Putz your future. The Election that just ended should be more than the hand writing on the wall. I will be your obituary if you don't
The easy way, or the hard way?
The point I am trying to make is you have just been told to Fuck Off, and not politely, he just told you, he is above the law, he is untouchable and if you don't
The economy is absolutely booming — the greatest it has ever been
This report comes straight from the 15th hole at the Mar-A-Lego County Club, where transparency is high, standards are low, and the economy has never been better.
The Forward Party, end the in fighting
To be clear, the Forward Party has no connection to Elephant in the Ink Room or Purpleman, has not endorsed our work, and to my knowledge is unaware of it. This endorsement runs in one
The Greatest Econony Every, FOR TRUMP.
Forbes' Detailed Breakdown: Their September 2025 report attributes the $3 billion year-over-year gain (from $4.3 billion in 2024) directly to his presidency, including a 580% jump in licensing revenue to $45 million (e.g., deals in
The Man Who Would Never Leave
That’s why the real safeguard in this moment isn’t the law, the courts, or even the voters. It’s the Republican Party. Only Republicans have the institutional power to restrain him. Only they can join with
The Republicans Announce their new Health Plan, Don’t think about Fake Epstein
In an effort to keep rates down and National Park attendance up as well as another Epstein diversion, the Republicans ('Appeal Again, Trump' has finally announced his new all inclusive Health Plan, the greatest health
The Trump Donation Loop: How Taxpayer Money Could Indirectly Fund a White House Ballroom
As you can see, he is hard at work providing healthcare and food for those gullible Republicans MAGA #SanityNow #politics #oregon #politicslover #oregonlife @OPB @KOINNews
The Trump Kiss of Death or when the Party becomes one person.
If Trump’s endorsement were to impose even a modest general-election penalty on endorsed Republicans (≈ 1–3 points among general voters), it could cost the GOP half a dozen to a dozen+ House seats in the
To stay in the fight, just what fight where they staying in?
That means the narrative of “stay in the fight” — or justification of the strike as combat — is highly contested, deeply ambiguous, and legally dubious given what is known so far. Got news for
Trump behaves as if everything is personal — because for him, it is.
But the consequences of his behavior are not personal. They plug into larger forces he barely understands.** Let me break this into the three layers that actually explain his behavior. 1. Inside Trump’s mind, everything
Trump Derangement Syndrome
Upon careful reflection and consideration by the top psychotic minds of the field, it has been determined that only one person actually has Trump Derangement Syndrome, Guess who?
Trump Releases the Epstein Files
Looks like he has had enough time to get the job done.
Trump’s abusive remarks toward women on the news are reprehensible.
Attacking women journalists after being confronted with a lie is not leadership — it is bullying. It is unacceptable, and it should be called out every time.
Two Kinds of Beauty
One is free, timeless, and meant to be shared — a mountain lake untouched by greed. The other is gilded, fleeting, and built for self — a golden ballroom where beauty serves only ego. Some
U.S. Navy is “too intimidated” so they have to KILL THEM ALL
Could it be, Trump wants the Oil and there wasn't any Drugs? The Navy vaporizes fishing boats like they’re the Death Star, and the Coast Guard arrests an entire tanker crew like they’re checking fishing
We all end at the same crossroads
The journey you take is all yours, and when you get to the end, no bitching allowed.
We don’t need to worry about MAGA anymore
Because if this is the intelligence level of the average MAGA supporter, natural selection isn't in their favor.
What goes around comes around
"What goes around comes around" is an idiom meaning that your actions, whether good or bad, will eventually have a consequence for you, much like the law of karma or the principle of "as you sow,
What If Only the Truth Was Spoken
They tell us inflation is down, gas is cheaper, and rents are easing — and maybe some of that’s true. But what if only the truth was spoken? What if we stopped polishing numbers to
What’s left when the Noise is Gone?
Amplification artificially inflates some voices over others. Honest human discourse often gets lost in the noise. This experiment could reveal whether platforms encourage real dialogue or just echo chambers. By temporarily halting bot reposting, we
What’s Actually Going On: Halligan & Bondi and Disbarment – Part One, Halligan
prosecuting without probable cause CBS News+2Common Dreams+2 making false statements to court and grand jury Campaign for Accountability lacking competence (“bringing a case she may not have been qualified to handle”) MS NOW+1 abusing her
What’s Actually Going On: Halligan & Bondi and Disbarment – Part Two Bondi
There’s also a separate ethics complaint filed with the Florida Bar accusing Bondi of “serious professional misconduct.” Newsweek The complaint highlights alleged episodes where Bondi’s leadership pressured DOJ lawyers to act unethically, including forcing resignations.
What’s Actually Going On: Halligan & Bondi Part Three, Is Disbarment (or Other Discipline) Likely?
Yes, both Halligan and Bondi are under serious scrutiny, legally and ethically. The allegations are significant, especially for Halligan: abuse of power, potential violation of appointment law, and prosecutorial misconduct.
When Reality Out-Parodies Parody
I'm running into a real creative problem that political satirists have struggled with for decades: when reality out-parodies parody, you lose the exaggeration gap. If the thing itself is already clownish, corrupt, or incoherent, how
White House Planning Commisions Recomendations.
White House Planning Commisions Recomendations. Room for the entire administration. And he can keep his name on it.
Who is behind the Venezuela actions?
This crew—many recycled from Trump's first term or Project 2025—handles the heavy lifting: Rubio at State calls the shots on designations and diplomacy, Miller ties it to domestic wins like fentanyl seizures, and the CIA
Why Modern Authoritarianism Doesn’t Require a Genius
Lesson: You don’t need a mastermind to wield extraordinary power. You need loyal enablers, aligned institutions, and someone willing to step into the public role. That’s how complex authoritarian operations are sustained — even when
Why Modern Authoritarianism Doesn’t Require a Genius (continued)
They provide the legal justification — sometimes extremely stretched — that turns an idea into a supposedly lawful order.
WOKE – Got Lost
Like MAGA, the Woke just became angry, if it wasn't their way, it was wrong, so wrong it was as affront. They had to have demonstrations, they needed to shout, when all they really had
WOKE – In the Begining
The movement that would later be labeled “Woke” began as something far more grounded: a call to awareness. Awareness of how racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of exclusion had quietly embedded themselves in the
WOKE – What It Can Be
The solution isn’t to abandon the values of justice, inclusion, and equity — it’s to grow up with them. Maturity doesn’t mean compromise with cruelty; it means knowing the difference between real harm and honest
You Can Make a Difference
Most people don’t realize how powerful their voice truly is. Your elected representatives work for you — and when they hear directly from their constituents, it matters. Whether it’s by email, phone call, or even
YOUR MONEY — JANUARY 2025 – DOGE Launches, First Round of Claims and FEBRUARY 2025 – Major Data Errors Emerge
An ICE contract listed as $8 billion was actually $8 million. A USAID contract for $655 million appears to be listed three separate times. Numerous contracts had obligation amounts far smaller than listed. Some contracts
YOUR MONEY — JUNE–AUGUST 2025 – DOGE Verification Conflicts
Several agencies confirm their obligations did not match DOGE’s posted amounts. Procurements canceled by DOGE were later reissued, reducing net savings. Watchdog groups request DOGE’s calculation methods; no formal response provided.
YOUR MONEY — Mar-A-Lago weekend trips Jan to Nov $17.4 million ?? We Can’t afford a Turkey, Pun Intended
Trip count reflects confirmed and pooled-press-reported presidential visits to Mar-a-Lago or Trump’s Florida golf properties through mid-November. Cost estimates are based on publicly released federal operating rates and FOIA-identified flight times for Florida runs. All
YOUR MONEY — MARCH 2025 – DOGE Removal of Over 1,000 Entries and APRIL–MAY 2025 – Lease & Workforce Claims Questioned
Some leases required federal buyouts, reducing or eliminating net savings. Workforce reductions generate short-term savings but unclear long-term costs. DOGE does not publish full methodology behind its workforce-savings figures.
YOUR MONEY — More on DOGE — What the Reporting Shows
Taxpayer Risk of Illusion: If DOGE’s numbers are largely based on inflated ceilings and double-counts, then the “savings” might be more PR than real return to taxpayers. False Justification for Cuts: Using exaggerated figures to
YOUR MONEY — DOGE: Claims vs. Reality — A Timeline (2025)
DOGE stated savings: $54.2 billion Independently verified savings: $1.4–$2.3 billion Primary issues found:
YOUR MONEY — Kristi Noem’s ad work is connected to a limited number of LLCs with close personal/political ties
Until accountability with consequences is forced on these thieves, it will continue. This is what you voted for. What the Reporting Shows Safe America Media, LLC (Delaware) DHS awarded roughly $143 million of its $220
Share this:
Meet the Man America Should Be Watching, But Isn’t
On
- Conspiracy theories, Politics
Meet the Man America Should Be Watching, But Isn’t
By Elephants Ink Room
Most Americans can name Donald Trump. Many can name Joe Biden. Fewer can name Brett Kavanaugh or Amy Coney Barrett. But almost no one knows the name Leonard Leo — and that’s exactly how he prefers it.
While the country fights over policies, Leo quietly builds the structures that decide them. He’s not an elected official. He doesn’t run for office. But over the past 20 years, Leonard Leo has done more to reshape the American legal landscape than any senator, any president, or any judge. And he’s done it behind the curtain.
A former vice president of the Federalist Society, Leo helped handpick the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade, narrowed voting rights, and stripped environmental protections. But he didn’t stop at the high court — he built a pipeline. From district courts to appeals courts, Leo’s influence extends like a legal shadow network, placing loyal ideologues where precedent used to live.
And now he has the money to go even further.
In 2022, Leo received a jaw-dropping $1.6 billion donation — the largest single political gift in American history. Not to fund a campaign, but to build the future of American governance in his image. That means legal challenges against government regulation, climate policy, abortion access, and even how elections are certified. The playbook? It’s already written. It’s called Project 2025, and Leonard Leo is one of its architects.
He’s also the man behind the lavish, undisclosed gifts and trips to Supreme Court justices like Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas — the kind of perks that would get a public servant fired, but which glide past ethics rules in a judiciary with no meaningful oversight.
And yet, the headlines rarely mention his name. That’s the danger. While we’re busy arguing on social media about candidates and slogans, Leonard Leo is writing the footnotes of history — in fine print most of us never see.
This isn’t conspiracy. It’s coordination. And it’s working.
So the next time you wonder how a fringe legal theory became binding law, or why public trust in the courts has cratered, remember this name. Not because he shouts it — but because he doesn’t have to.
Leonard Leo. The most powerful unelected man in America. And we’re letting him do it in silence.
1. He’s almost completely invisible to the public
Most Americans couldn’t pick him out of a lineup, and yet he has arguably reshaped more of the American political landscape than any living figure — without ever running for office.
2. He operates through permanence, not popularity
While presidents come and go, Leo’s real power comes from engineering a judicial supermajority and embedding his ideology into the law for decades — particularly through lifetime federal judges.
3. He has billion-dollar influence with zero accountability
Through his networks (like the Marble Freedom Trust), he’s moved $1.6 billion from donors into judicial appointments, legal activism, and media shaping — with almost no oversight or press scrutiny.
4. His agenda is deeply ideological — and strategic
This isn’t just about being “conservative.” It’s about remaking the constitutional framework:
Weakening federal oversight
Empowering state-level theocracy
Rolling back decades of precedent on voting rights, reproductive rights, regulatory power, and civil protections
He’s the architect behind decisions like Dobbs, Shelby County, and now the Chevron deference rollback — each systematically shifting power away from elected government and toward courts, corporations, and Christian legal theory.
So, a quick recap:
Former executive vice president of the Federalist Society
Longtime judicial kingmaker on the American right
Architect of the conservative legal revolution, including stacking the Supreme Court
Quiet hand behind Project 2025 — the policy playbook for a post-democracy conservative state
Why He’s Dangerous
He doesn’t run for office. He runs people who do.
He’s behind the curtain shaping judicial, legal, and policy infrastructure that outlasts any election.
His fingerprints are on decisions gutting voting rights, abortion access, campaign finance law, and federal agency power.
He builds systems, not headlines.
While Trump tweets and shouts, Leo writes the manual, places the judges, and engineers the undoing of the administrative state.
Bureaucratic reprogramming disguised as “liberty.”
He understands how to leverage chaos.
The louder the MAGA noise, the more quietly Leo’s network rewires the levers of power: Supreme Court, state AGs, education boards, religious coalitions, media outlets.
He has billions at his disposal now.
In 2022, he received $1.6 billion from Barre Seid, the largest known political donation in U.S. history — and he’s using it not to run ads, but to reshape the legal battlefield.
Why People Overlook Him
No bombastic rallies, no orange spray tan, no obvious cult of personality.
The media mostly sees him as “that judicial guy from the Federalist Society.”
But under the radar, he’s weaponizing legal legitimacy, which is far more enduring than any single politician’s charisma.
If Trump is the actor, Leonard Leo is the playwright — and the stage manager, and the guy who installed the trapdoor under the audience.
Share this:
Do some elites or movements support depopulation — quietly or not?
Do some elites or movements support depopulation — quietly or not?
Yes, in the shadows of policy — though rarely called that:
-
Through environmental Malthusianism: “Too many people, not enough resources.”
-
Through selective policy neglect: Cutting public health programs or social safety nets knowing full well which populations will suffer.
-
Through experimentation: Historically, there’s a dark record — from Tuskegee to forced sterilizations — where “health” was used to justify control or reduction.
RFK Jr.’s rhetoric around detoxing children, rejecting vaccines, and elevating “natural immunity” taps into those old, unscientific veins — and when implemented from a position of power, they do carry population-level consequences.
It’s not always a Bond villain with a red button — sometimes it’s slow, ideological erosion of protections that keeps the vulnerable… vulnerable.
Share this:
President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama
On
- Real Men
/
RSS Feed
“Still Building Something Bigger”
Barack Obama didn’t come from money or power. He came from organizing neighborhoods, teaching the Constitution, and believing deeply in what ordinary people could do together. And though he made history in the White House, his legacy—along with Michelle’s—has only grown since he left it.
Before the White House: A Foundation of Service
Barack Obama began his career not in politics, but on the streets of Chicago’s South Side. With a Columbia degree in hand, he became a community organizer, helping struggling residents fight for jobs, housing, and opportunity. It wasn’t glamorous—but it was real.
Later, he graduated from Harvard Law School and became the first Black president of the Harvard Law Review. But instead of chasing prestige, he returned to Chicago—working as a civil rights attorney and teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago.
He didn’t seek the spotlight. He sought impact. That ethic followed him through the Illinois State Senate and into the U.S. Senate, where he gained national attention with a single line:
“There is not a liberal America and a conservative America—there is the United States of America.”
Michelle Obama—Princeton and Harvard-educated—also began in corporate law but chose a different path. She left a high-paying job to work in public service, first in city government and later as the founding executive director of Chicago’s Public Allies, helping young people become leaders in their own communities.
Before becoming First Lady, she was a hospital executive developing programs that connected the University of Chicago Medical Center with underserved neighborhoods. She never needed fame. She chose purpose.
The Presidency (2009–2017): Calm in the Storm
Barack Obama’s presidency was historic—but more than that, it was steady.
He took office during the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. His actions helped prevent another one.
The Affordable Care Act expanded health coverage to over 20 million Americans.
The Recovery Act saved jobs and rebuilt infrastructure.
Dodd-Frank added safeguards to a reckless financial system.
He ended the war in Iraq.
He repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
He ordered the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.
But perhaps his most lasting presidential achievement was emotional:
He led with dignity, grace, and zero personal scandal—modeling what character in leadership could look like.
After the White House: Service, Not Celebrity
When they left the White House, Barack and Michelle Obama didn’t disappear—but they didn’t cling to the spotlight, either. They started building again.
The Obama Foundation
Launched to train and empower the next generation of leaders. Its key initiatives:
The Obama Presidential Center in Chicago: More than a museum—it’s a hub for activism and leadership development.
My Brother’s Keeper Alliance: Created to support boys and young men of color facing systemic barriers.
Michelle Obama’s initiative to educate and empower girls around the world.
Higher Ground Productions
Their Netflix-based storytelling company highlights hope, resilience, and truth. Its debut, American Factory, won an Oscar for Best Documentary. Projects like Crip Camp and Waffles + Mochi mix education with cultural connection.
The Written Word
Barack’s A Promised Land and Michelle’s Becoming became publishing phenomena, offering not gossip—but depth, vulnerability, and clarity.
Their book tours and speaking engagements continue to inspire civic engagement across generations.
They Could’ve Cashed Out—They Paid It Forward Instead
There are easier paths for ex-presidents. But the Obamas didn’t take them.
No gold-plated towers. No angry rallies. No grievance campaigns.
Just libraries, documentaries, classrooms, and community centers.
“I’m inspired by the young people I meet—confident, hopeful, and unafraid to make their voices heard.”
— Barack Obama
“When they go low, we go high.”
— Michelle Obama
Barack Obama didn’t just make history. He and Michelle are still making a future—one book, one girl, one young leader at a time.
“The best way to not feel hopeless is to get up and do something.” — Barack Obama
“Your story is what you have, what you will always have. It is something to own.” — Michelle Obama
That’s what real leadership looks like.
Share this:
President Dwight D. Eisenhower – General of the Army
On
- Real Men
/
RSS Feed
“The Commander Who Warned Us All”
Dwight D. Eisenhower wasn’t just a five-star general and two-term president—he was a builder, a unifier, and in the end, a truth-teller.
The Presidency (1953–1961): Steady Hands in Unsteady Times
As the 34th President of the United States, Eisenhower brought calm leadership to a nation caught between Cold War anxiety and rapid post-war change.
Built to Last: His Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 created the 41,000-mile Interstate Highway System—transforming commerce, defense, and daily life for generations.
Civil Rights Action: Though cautious by modern standards, he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1957, the first since Reconstruction, and sent federal troops to Little Rock to enforce desegregation—putting law above politics.
Space Age Vision: In response to Sputnik, he created NASA in 1958, launching America into the Space Race and sparking a new era of scientific achievement.
Peace Through Strength: He ended the Korean War and adopted the “New Look” defense strategy—emphasizing deterrence, not escalation. Yet, in his farewell address, he warned Americans of a new danger: the growing influence of the “military-industrial complex.”
“Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals.”
— Eisenhower, 1961
After the White House: Still Serving
Eisenhower didn’t disappear when his presidency ended—he just kept serving.
A President’s President: From his Gettysburg farm, he advised both Kennedy and Johnson, offering counsel on crises like the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam.
A Thoughtful Legacy: He authored two presidential memoirs and a personal reflection, At Ease, sharing wisdom without self-glorification.
Still a General: In a rare honor, President Kennedy restored his five-star rank after he left office—an acknowledgment that some titles transcend politics.
He Could Have Led Forever—But He Chose to Warn Us Instead
Eisenhower was a man who won wars but didn’t glorify them, built systems without seeking credit, and spoke hard truths when silence would’ve been safer.
He left us highways, a space agency, and a cautionary note we still haven’t fully heeded.
He didn’t rage or rant.
He didn’t sell hats.
He just served.
That’s what real leadership looks like.
During World War II, Dwight D. Eisenhower held several key command positions, culminating in the highest-ranking and most influential role in the Allied war effort in Europe, His rank and titles evolved as his responsibilities grew throughout the conflict.
At the time of the United States’ entry into the war in December 1941, Eisenhower was a Colonel. However, his rise through the ranks was swift. His most notable ranks and titles during World War II were:
General of the Army: This five-star rank was conferred upon Eisenhower in December 1944, making him one of a select few to hold this distinction in American history. It signified his immense authority and contribution to the war effort.
Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force (SCAEF): This was Eisenhower’s most famous and consequential title, which he held from late 1943 until the end of the war in Europe. In this capacity, he was the supreme commander of all Allied forces in the European Theater of Operations. He was responsible for planning and executing Operation Overlord, the Allied invasion of Normandy on D-Day, June 6, 1944, and the subsequent campaign to defeat Nazi Germany.
Prior to his appointment as SCAEF, Eisenhower also held other significant commands, including:
Commanding General, European Theater of Operations, U.S. Army (ETOUSA)
Allied Commander-in-Chief of the North African Theater of Operations
In essence, Dwight D. Eisenhower’s ultimate rank during World War II was General of the Army, and his most critical title was Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force.
Share this:
President George H. W. Bush
On
- Real Men
/
RSS Feed
George H. W. Bush
“The Quiet Strength of a Life Well Lived”
41st President of the United States • WWII Hero • Diplomat • Humanitarian
Before politics, before power, and long after the spotlight faded, George H. W. Bush led a life defined not by ego, but by service. In an era increasingly obsessed with celebrity and dominance, Bush represented something rare: a man who could lead without the need to be worshipped.
From Cockpit to Character
Bush enlisted in the U.S. Navy on his 18th birthday during World War II — becoming the nation’s youngest naval aviator at the time. He flew 58 combat missions, was shot down over the Pacific, and rescued by submarine. For completing his bombing run even as his plane burned, he earned the Distinguished Flying Cross.
That moment of courage wasn’t just a war story. It was a window into a life defined by duty, sacrifice, and resolve — values that remained steady through war, peace, politics, and personal tragedy.
The Businessman Who Didn’t Brag
After the war, Bush attended Yale and moved to Texas to build a life from scratch in the oil industry. He co-founded Zapata Offshore, achieving financial success quietly, without the bravado or headlines. His wealth wasn’t flaunted — it enabled him to serve, not to posture.
Service in Every Season
Bush’s rise through public service was old-school and hands-on:
-
Congressman.
-
U.N. Ambassador.
-
Envoy to China.
-
CIA Director.
-
Vice President.
He accepted each role with humility, rarely complaining, never self-promoting.
A Presidency of Prudence and Principle
As President, he navigated some of the most delicate moments in modern history:
-
Oversaw the peaceful end of the Cold War.
-
Managed the reunification of Germany.
-
Built a broad coalition to repel Saddam Hussein from Kuwait.
-
Signed the Americans with Disabilities Act.
-
Called Americans to service with his “Thousand Points of Light” — a lasting initiative that celebrated community and volunteerism over ideology.
He was mocked for being careful with his words, thoughtful in his diplomacy, and unwilling to boast. But history has grown kinder with time.
Loss, Grief, and Grace
In 1953, he and Barbara lost their daughter Robin to leukemia. It left a wound that never fully healed — but it also deepened their compassion and drove their charitable work. Later in life, his devotion to Barbara and their family stood in contrast to the performative masculinity often worshipped in politics.
Post-Presidency: The Best Years?
Bush’s most admired acts may have come after he left office:
-
The Letter to Clinton (1993): After losing reelection, Bush left a handwritten note in the Oval Office — gracious, hopeful, and supportive. A final act of statesmanship.
-
Bipartisan Humanitarianism:
Teamed with Bill Clinton to raise over $100 million for global disaster relief. Their friendship became iconic — a reminder that decency can rise above party.
-
A Volunteer to the End:
Continued parachuting into his 70s and 80s — not for headlines, but to honor his past and inspire others.
Through the Points of Light Foundation, he kept calling Americans to serve — not a party, but each other.
Legacy Beyond Power
He lived to see his son become President — and handled both agreement and disagreement with quiet dignity. He outlived his wife by just months, and was laid to rest with her and daughter Robin, carried by the same plane he once flew into war.
Final Reflection:
George H. W. Bush may not have tweeted. He didn’t insult his rivals. He didn’t stage rallies for applause.
But he did risk his life for his country, govern with humility, admit mistakes, extend a hand to his opponents, and continue serving long after power was gone.
Quote to Frame It All:
“Any definition of a successful life must include service to others.”
— George H. W. Bush
National Guard Deployed in Washington D.C – What the truth may actually be?
The effects of the National Guard deployment in Washington, D.C. are mixed, and people are seeing both “positive” and “negative” outcomes depending on perspective, values, and what metrics they use. Here’s a breakdown of what I found — what seems to be working, what’s criticized, and what the ambiguities are.
👍 Positive / Intended Effects
Deterrence / Public Safety Appearance
The Trump administration claims the Guard + federal law enforcement presence has “stopped violent crime” and restored “total safety” in tourist-heavy / landmark zones. Al Jazeera+3Wikipedia+3Foreign Policy+3
There have been arrests (~700 according to some reports) and seizures of illegal firearms (~91 in some time periods) since the deployment began. Wikipedia
Visible Government Action
For some residents, seeing a large federal presence could signal that something is being done about complaints — crime, homelessness, perceived lawlessness. It’s a kind of psychological reassurance (for some) that authorities are making crime control a priority.
Use of Guard for certain “non-law-enforcement” tasks (crowd control, presence, etc.) may reduce visible risk in certain spaces, for example around federal property, tourist zones, etc. Wikipedia+2Foreign Policy+2
Political Leverage & Messaging
The deployment gives political cover to arguing that the administration is “doing something serious” about public safety, which can resonate with portions of the electorate concerned about crime.
It also boosts leverage in legal/political battles over federal vs local control, home rule, etc. The administration’s ability to invoke certain statutory powers (Home Rule, etc.) is being tested. Wikipedia+1
👎 Negative / Criticisms & Side Effects
Fear, Confusion, Distrust
Many D.C. local officials, residents, and civil rights advocates argue the deployment creates more fear than safety, particularly in communities already wary of policing. Al Jazeera+2Foreign Policy+2
The attorney general of D.C. pointed out that the Guard and federal forces “create confusion, sow fear, erode trust, inflame tensions, and harm the crucial relationship between police and communities they serve.” Al Jazeera+1
Legal and Constitutional Concerns
Questions over whether the deployment violates the D.C. Home Rule Act (which gives local government control over its police / governance) or laws that limit military involvement in domestic policing (e.g. Posse Comitatus). Al Jazeera+1
Challenges in court: lawsuits from D.C., pushbacks from states and judges. Some deployments blocked or constrained. https://www.wdtv.com+1
Cost / Resource Questions
High financial cost to taxpayers. Guard deployments, lodging, operations, etc., are expensive, especially given that in some areas crime has been trending downward already, raising the question of whether the marginal benefit is worth the cost. Wikipedia+2Army Times+2
Opportunity costs: the Guard and federal forces may be pulled away from other mission-critical gaps.
Morale / Legitimacy & Public Perception
Internal documents indicate that some portion of the troops feel shame, confusion, or demoralization about being used for what they see as political or symbolic missions rather than clear public safety tasks. Reddit
Among residents, there’s substantial opposition. Polls show many residents do not support the deployment. Wikipedia+1
Effectiveness Unclear / Possibly Minimal
Because crime trends in D.C. were already improving / trending downward in many categories before the deployment, it’s hard to definitively credit the Guard for positive changes. Correlation vs. causation is murky. Wikipedia+1
Some deployment areas are more symbolic (tourist zones, major monuments, etc.) rather than neighborhoods with high crime, which reduces potential impact on daily safety for many residents. Wikipedia+1
⚠️ Ambiguities / What Is Still Unknown
Long-term effects: Does this increase in federal/military presence change community relations for the worse in ways that cost more (social trust, economic activity, local cooperation)?
Displacement vs. reduction: Are crimes just being pushed somewhere else (other neighborhoods, near thresholds) rather than reduced overall?
Legal precedent: Deploying Guard units across state lines, federalizing local law enforcement, and using them for continuous high-visibility “patrol” tasks sets new precedents. It’s unclear how much pushback or legal restrictions will emerge.
Public health of democracy: There are concerns this normalizes military presence in cities in ways that weaken civil liberties or set up frameworks for repression in future.
🔍 Conclusion: Net Effect
Overall, the deployment in DC seems to have partially delivered what was promised (visibility, symbolic control, some arrests/seizures, possibly deterrence in certain zones), but at substantial cost — legally, socially, financially — and with serious damage to trust and perception in many parts of the city.
If I had to sum it up: modestly effective in narrow, high-visibility zones, but deeply problematic elsewhere, especially in terms of rights, legitimacy, community relations, and scope creep.
Share this:
Like this: