The Left is floating a new line of attack against Trump and his supporters: we’re now the Brutal Americans. We’re just so mean. So cruel. We don’t understand the subtle relationships of the world.
You know: that’s where we pretend that credentialed morons know what they’re talking about and that cowards who are letting Islamists assault their women are the brave guys.
Our failure to hold up our end here has “shattered” European illusions about the USA. Well, I guess we’re supposed to feel bad about that. Of course, once upon a time, Brutal Americans were more appreciated…like back when Easy Company was drinking Goering’s booze on Hitler’s patio:
Those were some pretty Brutal guys, I guess. But, times change.
I know that some of MAGA – including Trump – are urging Europe to live up to their NATO commitments but I’m more and more wondering what we’re even defending over there? Turkey has slid into anti-Israel Islamism, in Germany you can get arrested for being upset about Islamist violence and in Britain I understand you need an ID to buy a knife. I’m supposed to send some 18 year old kid from Kansas to die for that?
The most recent European entry into my bloodline arrived in the USA in 1849 – that is 176 years ago. I ain’t European. I’m American. I’m Native. I know that some people will get upset at that but I figure after a while the Settler is Settled. My rule of thumb is that if you own a couple great-great-grandparents born in the land, then you are Native to it. I own a lot of them. My earliest American ancestor got here some time before 1640. We’re just a stone’s throw from 400 years in the area. I have no connection to any other land than America. What I’m saying is that if I’m to care about Europe they have to give me a reason to care…just because I look like some of the people in Cork, Ireland doesn’t mean I give a darn about them. Don’t know them. Never met them. Have no intention of ever going there. So, tell me why I’m suppose to care what happens to them?
Oh, sure, in the general, Christian sense I do care…if they suddenly were struck by catastrophe I’d be willing to help them out of the jam…but if someone decides their idiotic population which keeps electing people who hate Ireland should now be governed by a Russian proconsul, I don’t see how this matters to me. Might suck for them but it won’t suck any worse than what they have now. Anyways, the way the Irish are going they will soon impose upon themselves Sharia law. And, hey, if that’s what they want – and they seem to want it – then who am I to complain? People get to choose their own path. But what would I be sending American soldiers to defend over there? Nothing that is of our interest, as far as I can see.
It is said that RFK Jr has plans to ban pharmaceutical advertisements on TV. We older folks remember a time when you never saw such ads…but there were court cases in which it was argued that a ban on such ads was a violation of the First Amendment…but I also understand that even in these rulings there is wiggle room to restrict “direct to consumer” ads of such things as drugs. We’ll see how this plays out – but as I have said again and again, the Constitution isn’t a suicide pact. I am dead certain that people are taking way more medicine than they have to for a host of maladies because the TV told them to. A prescription medication should only be taken fairly rarely. I’m 60 and I take none of them – and I do suffer from chronic pain and, like all human beings, I’m sometimes sad or anxious. I don’t go the medicine route for two reasons:
- I have my doubts that these drugs – especially the newer ones – are the result of a first-rate scientific method development.
- Human bodies learn to tolerate what they ingest. Not 1 for 1 but it happens…and we see it happening with the overuse of antibiotics…we’re developing Attila the Germ because we’re taking antibiotics when just a clean bandage would do the trick. If you take a med for something on the regular, your body is going to try to make that med ineffective because it isn’t what your body is naturally producing. The more you take it, the more your body will get used to it. Take medicines rarely (yes, I understand for some people a chronic condition requires daily, weekly, monthly dosing or they die…but some people are popping pills for things they don’t really need pills for).
My view on the ads is that the weak-minded person who believes the TV sees the ad and goes “you know, I have that ache, too!” and they’re off to the doctors who may not be totally on the level in their prescriptions. Especially if the customer calls the company for advice and they refer the customer to a doctor who might really be no more than a pusher of the drug. Take the ads off the air. It will get us back towards more of a system of a person feeling really bad, going to the doctor and then getting prescribed something the person never heard of before.
The new Snow White has flopped. It isn’t because Snow White isn’t White – it is because it is hot garbage. The apparent re-telling of the tale bears little relation to the original story. To review; Snow White is born of a Queen’s wish to have the most beautiful daughter. This comes true but the Queen dies. Later, Snow White’s father marries the Evil Queen who becomes obsessed with jealousy over Snow White’s beauty. She tries one strategy after another to kill Snow White and fails in all of them…but the last one seems to work and so Snow White is buried in a glass casket, which is discovered by a Prince out in the woods for a hunt. He rescues Snow White and they get married – the Evil Queen discovers that Snow White is alive and tries again to kill her, but is thwarted and executed. Just a fine fairy tale with the obvious moral that jealousy and pride are sins and you’ll get punished eventually for them. Meanwhile, if you are brave and good you’ll live happily ever after. Disney appears to have loused this up – I understand there really isn’t even a Prince character in this. Which kinda kills the whole story because it is the fortunate arrival of the Prince that changes defeat into victory for Snow White (always in fairy tales the actual victory must be of a miraculous nature…the destruction of the Ring in the Lord of the Rings only happens because Gollum trips and falls into Mount Doom’s flames). And in addition to butchering the actual story, the reviews indicate that it is badly written, badly acted and visually atrocious.
I don’t know how long Disney and the rest of Hollywood can go on losing money like this – I haven’t been to a theater in ages and it is hard to find a major studio production over the last 20 years that is even watchable. I do find some foreign and Indy stuff that is good – that is, actually has a story with some good writing and some interesting cinematography but even that is getting rarer. It is like everyone has been forbidden to tell tales and must, instead, either produce insipid drivel offending nobody or go on a Woke Fest which makes the story ridiculous (I’ve been watching the Walking Dead series – still sticking with it even though it went pretty woke after a while because the Daryl and Negan characters are intriguing and very well acted…they have various spinoffs going right now and in one of them a 5’7″ female character goes toe to toe in a fight with a 6’4″ males character…sure, they did have her ultimately lose the fight but the reality is there wouldn’t have been a fight…but Super Chick must always show up these days; it isn’t the worst thing, but it is irritating). There are stories to tell. Heck, I know this guy who has 9 books in a series which would make an awesome Netflix adaptation. But Hollywood can’t tell them…until they go broke, I guess.
Blogs For Victory 
The Left has really dug themselves into a bottomless pit, and they’re still digging. They ultimately can’t implement their policies without force, and there just aren’t a lot of forceful Leftists.
I’m remembering the bada*ss Antifa thug who, when arrested, curled up on the ground and sobbed like a baby.
And they do seem to view Sanders and AOC as their Chosen Ones to lead them to the promised land (resumed USAID grants).
Now, to be sure, let’s not get cocky here but those two, old and young, represent what was just rejected last November…
But such it always is on the Left – every time they lose, they figure it was because they didn’t go Left enough.
And their entire schtick is about PEOPLE, not ideology. It’s “oligarchs” (though only some of them) and the focus is on them as individuals.
If only people would start asking Sanders and Sandy to explain why their Central Authority version of government, instead of the Constitutional model, is a better blueprint for governing the country.
And BTW, it turns out (in my best Gomer Pyle imitation, “surprise surprise”) that most of the “crowd” at their rally in Denver was hardcore Lefties, many from other cities and states. They are not only preaching to the choir, they are preaching to the choir they hired and brought to the party.
““In the hundreds of rallies that I have done, we have never ever had a rally as large as this,” said Vermont Sen. Sanders” referring to the alleged 34,000+ people who went to hear him and Sandy Cortez speak in Denver.
Yet analysis of the crowd indicates that not only is this number wildly inflated, much closer to 20,000 than 34,000, most were hard-core Dems, many of whom were brought to the “rally” by the organizers. Supposedly more than 51,000 RSVP responses were received and 20,289 cell phones were in the crowd, indicating a crowd of approximately that size. In addition, to get an idea of the nature of the crowd, 84% of the devices present had attended 9 or more Kamala Harris rallies, antifa/blm, pro-Hamas, pro-Palestinian protests, and 31% had attended over 20.
Considering how Leftist Colorado has become, especially in the Denver area, this seems like a pretty small crowd.
Yep – it wasn’t quite like having a rally on the Harvard campus, but its close.
It wasn’t quite like an Oprah rally, but it was close
This tiger looks pretty mellow. I wonder what he’s on.
LOL
When in doubt, just ask your doctor.
amuseonX poses a question that will resonate with Mark: “Should GDP measure what is produced, or what is spent?”
In an article on new Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick‘s proposed reform to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) this is the question he posits. And his opinion is that our economy should not be measured by what the government spends as much as by what it produces. “Lutnick’s insight is devastatingly simple: not all government spending constitutes production.”
We are in the midst of changes we never even considered. From the prospect of the executive branch exercising its implied power under the Constitution to check an out-of-control judiciary to the restructuring of how we measure our economy, not to mention the radical measures being taken to slash government’s wasteful spending, the next few years are going to have some major impact on the future of the nation.
Here’s the thing: we don’t care.
Yes, yes, YES!!!
What we make, mine and grow; that is all. Nothing else matters in measuring national wealth. And it even measures the intangibles because if such isn’t helping us make, mine and grow then it isn’t adding to national wealth.
Keep in mind that there’s nothing wrong with studying philosophy and discussing the deep questions of life – but that don’t pay the rent.
some services DO matter which aren’t directly manufacturing.
I say no to that on determining national wealth.
The work I do is useful and important but it doesn’t directly make, mine or grow anything – it can and often does facilitate such activities, but it isn’t the activity, itself.
I’d work it out like this:
Primary GDP is what we make, mine and grow – actual physical goods.
Secondary GDP is economic activity which supports the making, mining and growing of things – like providing a loan to a farmer, the interest payments made on that loan are GDP (the principle amount isn’t – that is wealth already created and now being used to fuel additional wealth creation).
Government spending is not GDP – even if it is used to, say, buy structural steel to build a bridge, the money for it is wealth created by others and extracted from the wealth pool of the society via taxation. The making of the steel is wealth, the purchasing of it is not.
What we use today is Gross Domestic Product – I want it to be Gross Domestic Production. Seems like a small difference, but it is huge – and it will allow us to finally dispense with the nonsensical idea that dollar-value is wealth. It isn’t – not when dollars are decoupled from any tangible asset. Gold dollars are wealth – federal reserve notes aren’t. They don’t really represent anything but a hope that someone will always accept them in lieu of actual money. Actual money is backed by things…gold, silver, copper…but also iron, nickel, wheat, soybeans, coal, oil…
I agree about Gross Domestic (or National) Production but there is value in some of the money spent on things that do not directly result in products.
And I agree about it – I just don’t want it all counted. Some sort of forumula for my work…maybe 33% of my salary counts as GDP because I do add value.
Yes, and the article addresses that.
Pot meet Kettle.
Small minds discuss people.
With your permission, I might amend that to “small minds ONLY discuss people”. We here do talk about people sometimes, and even make fun of them, but anyone reading this blog can see that most of its content is about ideas and actual, real, POLITICS.
You do care, you are just so in the grip of TDS that you can’t even acknowledge the obvious. There’s no low to how low it gets. I can hardly wait for the resident former intelligence officer to chime and say this is SOP.
I’m surprised your comment is still here. You project a lot, and this post is a classic example. It’s you who has terminal TDS. It’s you who comes here coated in mud because you’ve been wallowing in it. Why you’re so interested in my take that you “can hardly wait,” well, I think there’s probably medication for that. I’m not sure exactly what you would have Conservative like those of us here on this blog do when someone we trust and admire, who is generally doing what we elected them to do messes up. Write a strongly worded letter? Call out the firing squad? Condemn them and tell them we don’t like them anymore? You’ve been coming here long enough to know that we’re much more critical of our side that you are of yours.
Also, on the merits, what do we have here? Even supposing that Goldberg – a known liar – isn’t embellishing the tale?
We’ve got a bone-headed mistake. You know: like human beings will do from time to time.
Contrast this with the objectively evil acts done by our opponents day in and day out – they want to keep criminals in the USA. They want to allow Hamas to survive. They want to keep transing kids. They favor abortion until birth.
I trust Trump. He’s earned that from me. If there was an error here, it’ll be corrected and not repeated.
Jeff Childers addressed this mistake in his own inimitable and thoroughly entertaining fashion, making a couple of salient points about Goldberg’s lack of ethics in the whole matter.
“On March 11th, the Atlantic’s executive editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, was ‘accidentally’ added to a group Signal chat including most of Trump’s national security cabinet and Vice President Vance (but not President Trump). Golberg’s invitation to join —which the media immediately assumed was a mistake— apparently came from Mike Walz, Trump’s national security advisor.
Goldberg, of course, accepted the unsolicited invitation. He never announced his presence. He didn’t exit the chat after realizing he’d walked into the wrong digital dressing room. Instead, he became a peeper. He quietly huddled under some discarded Cats costumes in the corner, proving he is an unethical hyena instead of leaving any scrap of doubt.
Peeping-Goldberg claimed to have read real-time operational details of last week’s strike on the Houthis. Goldberg insisted he refrained from reporting the military details out of his praiseworthy concerns over US troops. But his restraint was probably also motivated by concerns over his own pimply backside, since if he had leaked them, Goldberg would have been arrested before he could finish saying, “Elon Musk is a Naz…”
Nor did Goldberg’s high principles extend to other parts of the group’s private discussion that Goldberg deemed unclassified. Yesterday, the Atlantic’s top editor reported that JD Vance, in particular, said he was disgusted the US was even bothering to attack the Houthis, since most of the trade affected by Houthi mad-missiles and dynamite-laden drone ships is European trade. Let the free-loading Europeans fight the Houthis themselves, was JD’s rather pointedly delivered theme.
“I just hate bailing Europe out again,” Vance complained at one point. SecDef Pete Hegseth agreed with JD’s sentiment and went further, calling the Europeans “PATHETIC” (in all caps). “If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost, there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return,” unidentified user SM chimed in.
In other words, make the Europeans pay for it somehow.
Like clockwork, corporate media and Democrats descended into sheer hysteria, attempting to seize the classified breach and use it as a political drone to take down the entire Trump national security team. In his story in the Atlantic, Goldberg opined that, from his elite perspective, using Signal to discuss military strikes “may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of national defense information.” He forgot how much Biden’s team used Signal. Furious Senator Elizabeth “Firewater” Warren (D-Mass.) called it “blatantly illegal and dangerous beyond belief.” She sneered, “Our national security is in the hands of complete amateurs.”
And so on, ad infinitum. They’re madder than Houthi militants.
And Vance is right – only a tiny amount of US trade flows through the Red Sea – where are the European navies?
Oh, that’s right – they ain’t got one. So it is irritating that we’re bailing out Europe again…while they call us the bad guys.
I’m sure Rocks thought he had a point but let’s start with the fact that Jeffrey Goldberg has zero credibility considering he has in the past promoted the fake Russia collusion narrative and failed to report on the mental decline of Joe Biden … in fact Goldberg helped cover that up. So now Mike Walz accidentally includes Goldberg in an innocuous chat between officials re: strikes on Houthi’s. No detailed war plans were discussed and no national security details were mentioned, but Goldberg is trying to elevate this to national security blunder (as he did with Russia Collusion), and people like Rocks takes the bait again. Democrats are vile Americans. All of them
No detailed war plans were discussed and no national security details were mentioned, but Goldberg is trying to elevate this to national security blunder (as he did with Russia Collusion), and people like Rocks takes the bait again.
As Jeff Childers notes this morning, the discussion was more about it being a European problem, and the fact that the Europeans weren’t stepping up to the plate (as usual).
Any political party that allowed up to 20 million unvetted illegal immigrants into the country in four years, have no room to lecture anyone about national security.
Exactly.
I have to say, the more I read Childers the more I realize how dishonest he is.
LOL – says the guy who is one of the most dishonest people to ever post here.
These comments, like about Childers being dishonest, are just tossed out there, without backing them up with facts.
On the other hand, Goldberg wrote an excellent book describing the Leftist origins and structure of fascism, but the emergence of one man broke him so badly that he did a complete 180. He now aligns himself with the basic political structure he so skillfully dissected in his book.
I think the points about Goldberg lacking the integrity to step out of the discussion, or more importantly to inform those there that there had been a security lapse, tells us all we need to know about his honesty. Childers very accurately called him a sneak and a “peeper”.
I read Childers’ blog every day and find it well thought out, well written, and full of fascinating information, including scholarly takes on current events seen through the eyes of a talented lawyer.
Back to Goldberg as a lying weasel:
“Was it an unforced error by the Trump team? One hundred percent—they’re no angels here, but no classified information was disclosed. There were no war plans. We have a bunch of top officials speaking candidly and in generalities about anti-Houthi operations. These were unclassified discussions, and Signal is an approved app. Biden’s people used it. It was already downloaded on the devices of the principals involved. CIA Director John Ratcliffe was on those chats—no classified information was disclosed.”
So did Goldberg simply lack the intellect to really understand what he was hearing, or did he realize this was a generalized discussion and decide to lie about it and blow it up to try to implicate Trump, directly or indirectly, in some serious violation of national security? I’d say it’s not necessarily an either/or. After all, he did completely restate (lie about) the propriety of using Signal, whining that “…using Signal to discuss military strikes “may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of national defense information” with absolutely nothing to back this up, and he claims he left the chat when he realized what it was about and that he did not belong there, yet Goldberg was part of the chat for four days before removing himself. He also published what CNN fawningly referred to as ” the richly reported details of the report”.
Tony Kinnett
@TheTonus
Gabbard says it’s not classified. Hegseth says it wasn’t “war plans,” so now it’s time for Goldberg to show his cards.
Any political columnist knows how to do what Goldberg did: release enough to be “damning” then exaggerate the daylights out of stuff in what you don’t release.
Bonchie
@bonchieredstate
This is Goldberg doing the “I’ve totally got more sources for the suckers and losers story….just you wait” ploy all over again.
He made a claim. The administration is on record under oath saying it’s not classified. So release it. Prove your claim.
So, not only was no classified information shared in the Signal chat, using this app is commonplace for people in these positions.
Gabbard and Ratcliffe denied the Democrats the narrative they so desperately sought to use against the Trump administration.
Yes, accidentally inviting Goldberg into the chat was a mistake. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, who is alleged to have sent the invitation, has received his fair share of criticism. But President Donald Trump didn’t seem to believe the mistake was worth losing his job.
The president indicated that Waltz “has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man” during an interview with NBC News. He further explained that it was one of Waltz’s staffers who accidentally invited Goldberg to the chat and that his presence had “no impact at all” on the military operation against the Houthis. He said this incident was “the only glitch in two months, and it turned out not to be a serious one.”
I keep hitting this point:
1. Unauth guy is allowed in a meeting.
2. 10 million unvetted illegals allowed to enter the USA.
Let’s discuss which is actual treason.
Not to mention that the unauth guy stayed in the chat for FOUR DAYS before leaving, and then played the “I am so honest I only revealed some of what I overheard” card. He never raised his hand, so to speak, and said “Hey, Jonah Goldberg here—-are you guys sure you want me to sit in on this?” It took him FOUR DAYS to say “oops—wrong door” and leave. And then he lied about Signal and scurried to feed what he hoped would be damaging “quotes” of some of the attendees.
While the Left is obediently raging about this, they are conveniently forgetting all the security breaches caused by Hillary’s illegal server, tucked into a bathroom where it handled who knows what secret, top secret and/or classified information readily accessible to any of the many hackers who easily broke into it. They have studiously ignored the fact that the only way Vice President Biden could have had documents from a SCIF would be if he stole them, maybe getting tips from Sandy Berger on how to stuff them into his underwear to smuggle them out, and that stealing such sensitive documents from a SCIF is a serious crime. (So is then storing them in an unlocked office in a building compromised by Chinese intelligence, and/or a garage at a house occupied by a hard-partying drug addict.)
And there IS the possibility that the Trump team (correctly) identified Goldberg as a loser who could be counted on to sneakily hang around in a closed chat even after realizing his inclusion was a mistake, to set him up as the weasel perfect for getting some information out in a way that looked like a mistake while at the same time branding him as a sneak and a tattletale who lies to get attention. Or to expect him to reveal what he overheard, setting him up for major legal problems. There would literally be no downside to any of that.
Rocks is concerned about a journalist not being honest?? 😂😂😂 holy fuck is he stupid. Goldberg is one of the worst violators of the truth. The good thing about our current political climate is that only the freaks listen to Democrats and their agents on the media. But it’s a dying breed.
Restoring America will require eliminating prescription drugs ads. These are very destructive to our culture and offer no benefit. I mean fore the love of God, they advertise bi polar drugs … what percentage of the population are actually bi polar? And what percentage of the population can be talked into thinking they are bi polar?? There is no upside to that. America thrived in 1950’s, 60’s, and 70’s when politics was not engrained in every segment of our culture. Let’s restore that.
We need to obliterate “buffer zones”. You can not change the culture unless you speak hard truths, and abortion IS NOT A CHOICE. You’re right Mark …. Europe is lost
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/03/northern-irish-pastor-prosecuted-sermon-john-316/
I think they are lost – they are too far gone to come back. I was pondering it yesterday, actually, that in any European country, it wouldn’t take more than a few thousand armed and determined men to simply take over. Islamists or patriots – whoever screws up the courage, first. And I suspect it’ll be the Islamists.
I remember back in ancient days when I was serving in Italy – this shipmate who was much older than I had got himself a local Italian girlfriend and they had invited me over for dinner at her place. And it was all very pleasant but the discussion ran to the overall NATO vs Warsaw Pact thing. I believe it had been triggered because this was during the Reforger Exercise in 1985 when a huge number of US troops had been sent as a test to reinforce Germany in case of a Soviet attack. I was 20 and I was quite impressed with our ability to move the troops quickly but the lady disliked it intensely. So, I pointed out that if the Russians attacked, she’d be grateful for it. Her answer: no she wouldn’t.
As I said, she was older – perhaps 35, like my shipmate – so supposedly a bit more knowledgeable than I and I admit to being astounded. So, I asked: if the Soviets were to successfully invade they would impose the Soviet system on Italy. Wouldn’t you like to stop that? Not at all, she replied: maybe it was a better system. They’d try it out and see if it worked. I honestly had no answer at the time – I couldn’t conceptualize this. Outside any frame of reference I knew about and, at 20, I hadn’t experienced all that much. The subject was dropped. I was never invited to dinner again – likely because I was unsuccessful in hiding my contempt for the idea of not fighting to defend one’s country when attacked.
But that incident has been at the back of my mind ever since – and as I’ve watched Europe over the last 40 years ever indicator is that the lady’s views had become the general position of Europeans. No patriotism. No belief in God. No willingness to sacrifice. An asinine view that they’ll always be able to vote themselves out of any difficulty. And keep in mind she was like 35 in 1985…so, born in 1950. Imagine what sort of attitude her like passed on to the following generations? Later education informed me that right after WWI the Europeans schools largely started to teach a pacifist, internationalist ideology along with the large doses of anti-Christian ideology they had started imparting in the late 19th century. It never stopped. Nobody ever tried to stop it. We’re now more than a century into this with generation after generation taught that their country means nothing, war is always wrong and there is no God. This is why they sit passively while some Islamist savage orders a woman to give up her seat on the bus to him.
And once those Islamist savages figure it fully out, they will take over…easily. All you’ve got to do is gain control of the TV system and the internet service providers and just tell the people this is how it will be and they’ll supinely go along…figuring it isn’t worth dying for.
Only a historically illiterate person could believe that people under the control of a tyrannical leftist system could just “vote their way out”. Anyone living in Italy, so close to Germany and the Berlin Wall, who thought that those people risking their lives to escape to West Berlin had the option of just opting out of Soviet oppression was willfully stupid. Even a Left-leaning educational system could not have blanked out the news stories showing bodies hanging on the Wall where they had been machine-gunned down as they tried to escape.
It really surprised the heck out of me – the total cowardice involved. The unwillingness to even contemplate the scenario where you sacrifice yourself for liberty. She was Italian – a citizen of a major NATO power. And she was willing to surrender it all because her life was more important than any other consideration. And, heck, its not like she would have had to fight! Mere approval of other people risking their lives was all that was required. Nothing doing. It might have interfered with existence.
I’m sure she’s now a 75 year old Italian pensioner absolutely disgusted with Trump when she’s not hanging out a “refugees welcome” sign…
Not to mention her abject ignorance of what her life would be like under Soviet rule. People were not kept prisoner in Italy in 1985. They could come and go as they pleased. Yet people were not allowed to leave the USSR, not even its satellite of East Berlin, and efforts to do so were met with lethal force.
My very basic criterion is this: Would I rather live in a country that has laws to keep people out, or one that has fences to keep people in?
President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed a sweeping executive order to overhaul elections in the U.S., including requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and demanding that all ballots be received by Election Day.
That sounds good, till we realize that foreign nationals can have state-issued photo IDs, and have been offered the chance to register to vote when they got those drivers’ licenses, under Motor Voter laws.
If a state wants to have a free-standing kiosk at a DMV location to make it easier for people to register to vote, that’s fine, but this should be entirely separate from the licensing process. I have repeatedly seen DMV clerks process temporary driving licenses for people in the country on work visas, licenses specifically written to expire when the visas expire, and then—sometimes while holding the foreign visa or passport—-say “would you like to register to vote”? And when I have objected, every single one of those clerks has informed me that they were required by law to offer this.
Requiring a photo ID is a step in the right direction, but we need to be careful and not fool ourselves into thinking this will stop illegitimate voters from voting. Not until we stop Motor Voter and stop offering voter registration to foreign nationals and start requiring proof of citizenship when getting a license or state-issued ID will the mere possession of state-issued photo ID be of real value.
This, along with eliminating Motor Voter, will get our elections, if not fraud-free, at least vastly harder to rig.
What do you all think of Michael Snyder’s analysis of 7 Actions That NATO Countries Are Taking Which Indicate That Something Really Big Is Coming
Certainly something like these are a little alarming:
Then there is this, among other signs of societal and cultural disintegration:
I don’t take any medications at all—which seems to surprise every medical person filling out an intake form for me at any doctor’s office. So someone else is getting my 19 prescriptions.
It is sad – and a bit frightening. I assign the collapse of religious belief as the primary cause…just as that is the cause of our demographic crisis. People who have no faith in the life of the world to come first try to fill that hole with sex or possessions and when that doesn’t do the trick, they turn to all manner of odd things. One thing you see all the time on social media is variations on the theme of “you deserve to be happy!”…said a hundred different ways, and all of them false. What we all deserve is a good whipping…fortunately, Our Lord has provided an out for us on that. But if you start to believe that you deserve to be happy then when you’re not happy you’ll think you’re ill in some way…off to the pshrink and then to the pharmacist.
Don’t get me wrong – some of the medications for depression are good. Someone who is having a genuine crisis in life can be helped through it with such things. But people have got themselves permanently on these drugs and then look for drugs to help the drugs (I’ve seen those ads…”is your anti-depressant making you depressed? Try this drug to fix that drug!”). They’re taking a crutch and turning it into a way of life – forgetting that medicine is supposed to help you back to health, not take over your life. Someone who goes through a messy divorce or loses a loved one eventually has to get over it…move on. Find something else to do. Drug companies don’t sell that – they sell drugs.
When my husband died some friends suggested that I try antidepressants to deal with the grief, and I refused. I said that depression was a very normal and healthy response to suddenly losing a spouse. After the initial shock had passed I realized that we are usually about as happy as we decide to be, and though I never tried to bury honest feelings of sadness or grief I focused on having a good life. I’ve had some rough patches since then but have looked at them, and me, as objectively as possible and decided that what I call “situational depression” is a perfectly normal and predictable temporary state in any life.
Fortunately, I have not had to deal with the kind of depression that comes from chemical imbalance, other than a couple of times when I didn’t eat right for quite a while and my blood sugar got so low I got a bit goofy. But all that took was a comment from my mom—“are you eating right?”—-and a trip to the market for hamburger and eggs and it was corrected. After that I learned to pay more attention.
I do remember asking a Lib once what he thought the meaning of life was and his response was to “be happy”. Not to make the world a better place, or even a small part of it better for him being there—-it was totally self-directed. And that is something I think pretty much defines the Left—even its virtue signaling seems to be focused more on feeling virtuous than an objective outcome for others, as the outcomes are so often quite negative.
Yep – and when they can’t get it, they try to buy it at the drug store…or the surgeon: the origin of the trans movement really lies in breast implants and nose jobs, IMO…it might seem trite but it is all about appearance, isn’t it? People are desperately grasping at any perceived life line…because they don’t want to die as they don’t believe in anything after.
The worst thing on this I’ve seen of late is some con-artist who has started a “don’t die” cult…claiming that diet and exercise can extend human life indefinitely. Other people are following along with cheaper plans but still based on the same premise. It is all so ridiculous but millions of people are eating it up. I mean, I don’t want to be a Debbie Downer here, but we are all going to die. My Dad lived to be 82, grandpa lived to 85. So, its a reasonable expectation that I’ll make it to 80-85; with a bit of luck maybe all the way to 90. If I went flat out on diet and exercise to get myself into the best possible health I’d extend that to…what?…95? 100? I’m not going to live forever.
I do figure we can extend human life and perhaps a significant amount…there are things we’re learning about ageing which might eventually result in some things which could extend our lives so that the average human lives to 110 or 120 and that means some real geezers making it to 140. But even if we found a way to go 1,000 years…still gonna die. There ain’t no way out of this life alive! But people keep going after their magic elixer…make me thin! Make me pretty! Make me happy! Make me live forever!
Its all pathetic.
Did anyone else hear or read about this?
Well, it’s definitely not a magical projection of Lontaria into this world to aid Rajan in his plan to escape the prison Celeste placed him in. Definitely not that!
OTOH, I don’t really know what to say about it…I doubt it, of course…ground penetrating radar was used to start the “native schools mass graves” hoax in Canada, after all. It is an imprecise technology – only digging would reveal the truth for certain.
It DOES seem incredible that a previously unknown advanced civilization has gone undetected. Reminds me of the saying, “we don’t know what we don’t know.”
Oh, yeah – and that is something I point out usually to blank stares: given the rise of ocean levels since the end of the Last Glacial Maximum (estimates of this are 26,000 to 16,000 years ago) a huge amount of land humans used to live on is now underwater. Humans, of course, always live near water. Even today with cars, trains and planes, a majority of the human population lives in proximity to water (oceans, seas, rivers). It is where life is easiest. As sea levels rose the early humans stayed near water…and so we’ve got bags of archealogical evidence of early humans along the current coastlines…but great-grandpa to these people lived what is now a mile out to sea. What did great-granpa do? No idea. Its all underwater.
I was keyed into this by the discovery in the Black Sea of all sorts of stone age settlements found underwater…we know that the after the LGM the Black Sea massively grew in size to its current extent…but the oddity of that sea is that the ancient sea is still there…under a layer of salt water. It is nearly anoxic down there – almost no dissolved oxygen…which means almost no life and thus nearly no decay. Ships sunk 2,000 or more years ago look pretty much like they did the day they sank. That is where human civilization originated…that area of the world and all around the world where humans settled after exiting Africa. And we know nothing about them because their artefacts are all under water. This is why, IMO, when we see the earliest forms of writing we (a) don’t know how it developed – it seems to be just suddenly “there” as if it had been there for quite a while and (b) those early documents already record sales contracts, legal disputes and inventories of goods as well as tax records. The origins of all that are in my opinion underwater…and likely gave rise to the various Atlantis legends around the world…that there was a high civilization drowned in the sea.
But even on land, lots will be lost. After the LGM not only did the ice melt, but the climate changed. Even without SUVs! Areas that had been fertile and temperate ceased to be that – huge swaths of the Sahara Desert, for instance. People moved on…likely starting the Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations (which, once again, seem pretty advanced right out the gate). What did they build in the places they lived before? Nobody really knows. In 2020 a grape farmer discovered a gorgeous Roman mosaic floor a few feet under his vineyards. This was less than 2,000 years ago…the vineyard has been in operations for ages, perhaps centuries given how vineyards go in Italy. All this time that floor was down there an nobody suspected. Think how fast it took just for the natural course of events to bury that thing so deep that only odd fortune would bring it back up? Now, if the LGM ended 20,000 years ago…how deep are the human settlements of the Sahara buried?
Bottom line – maybe there is something down there? Don’t know. Have to dig. 80% of human history is drowned in the sea or buried deep.
They are always finding ancient ruins buried in England—perhaps because the soil is so soft. (Planes that went down during the Battle of Britain often just arrowed in fifty feet or more, where they became protected graves. My husband and I were once invited to accompany historian friends on a sanctioned excavation of a German bomber that had been buried since the 40s, but bad weather delayed the excavation until we had to leave.) About thirty years ago I was in London when they opened viewing of a Viking settlement that had been unearthed in an excavation for, if I remember correctly, a new Tube station. The viewing was much like that of a salmon ladder, if you have ever seen one of those—stairs parallel to viewing windows looking into excavated rooms. It was fascinating.
And we have some cities where buildings have just sunk into the ground, making the old ground floor into a basement level. That’s just within the last 100 years or so.
I am always fascinated by Christians who say they believe in an omnipotent God and then declare that something is just “not possible”.
This very topic was discussed on a TV program “Unknown” or “Unknown History” or something along those lines, just last week. I’m guessing most of the imagery was computer generated as opposed to actual excavation though.
I don’t usually listen to podcasts, except for catching “Verdict” with Ted Cruz every now and then, but there is evidently a podcast called Faith All Over The Place, and there is a comment on the latest production, Faith All Over the Place, Episode 9: Rough Week for Pope Francis Haters , by podcaster Chris Queen:
It is, of course, a bit of a mixed bag with Francis – and I do think his accessibility to the MSM (which is inherently hostile to Catholicism) can cause him to get tripped up into making statements which are unwise as often as they are maliciously distorted in reporting. But the Church is secure! Suppose we did get a Pope that wanted to allow SSM in the Church…it would take a Vatican II-style Council to get something like that and the opposition of almost all African and Asian prelates would ensure such a proposal goes down in flaming defeat (and, in truth, most Western prelates would also be opposed). It just ain’t gonna happen.
Francis is vigorously orthodox in theology – just Left politically and socially. IMO, we did need this corrective after St John Paul II and Benedict. In this, though, It hink that Francis has not successfully carried out his task, too often getting wrapped up in controversies as the Left elements in the Church try to push for things even Francis won’t go for.
First, let me say that I 100% subscribe to Church teaching. There is no element of it I think incorrect nor any part of it that is not obligatory on Catholics. That said, when the Pope early on pointed out that the Sacraments were medicine on the battlefield and not the reward for perfection, he was definitely on the right track. Lots of people have gotten mad at him over allowing divorced and re-married people to receive communion. And it is true that what God has joined let no man split asunder…but what, in the event, are we to do if what God joined has been split asunder by a man (or, of course, a woman)? The rigid Trads are saying “too bad, so sad” but I can’t see that as at all in accord with the letter or spirit of what Jesus taught. I do understand that easy divorce was and remains the opening step in the social destruction we’re living in now…but, still, if a woman is faithful to her vows but her husband runs off with his secretary, how is that in any way her fault?
Sure, she is still to love him. Sure, she is still to forgive him. These are the commands of God…but if he’s gone and married to a different women and having children (sinning, of course, in each and every action here), how is that her fault? Why can’t she be freed from her vows which have been annulled through no fault of her own? And so freed, able to try again with a new man and, of course, receive all the sacraments of the Church? This I believe was the direction Francis wanted to go but he didn’t get there because a message of mercy was too often drowned in a fear that he’d allow the German bishops to marry two guys in the cathedral. He still has time to right the ship of his Papacy, but if it ends soon, it will end as a failure…in that he didn’t obtain what its pretty obvious he wanted to obtain: rigid orthodoxy administered with mercy.