Several readers have asked me how U.S. military assistance really works, so here is a quick breakdown…:
Military assistance from the U.S. isn’t just a handshake deal between nations; it’s a carefully orchestrated, multi-step process rooted in politics, legislation, and economics. Here’s how it works from start to finish: from Congress to contractor.
Lobbying Sets the Stage Defense contractors and foreign governments often employ lobbyists in Washington to advocate for military aid. Lobbyists push for continued or expanded assistance by emphasizing strategic interests, alliances, or job creation in the U.S. defense sector. Politicians are wined, dined, and pocket-lined following long-standing horse-trading customs.
Congress Writes the Check If lobbying is successful, the idea is translated into legislation. Members of Congress draft, often with the assistance of lobbyists, and pass a bill, frequently embedded in larger “must-pass” defense or foreign aid packages that allocate funding for military assistance to specific countries.
Money, But Not Cash Once approved, the funding doesn’t go directly to the recipient country. Instead, the money is set aside in U.S. government accounts, such as the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) fund. This isn’t a blank check; it’s more like a store credit card.
The “Credit Card” System The aid recipient can now use this credit, but only at U.S. military contractors. Whether it’s buying tanks, helicopters, or training programs, every dollar spent on defense returns to the U.S. economy through defense manufacturers like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Dynamics.
Ultimately, military assistance is less about charitable giving and more about strategic investment, strengthening allies while bolstering the U.S. defense industry.
Bottom line
Everybody is happy because government systems are designed to be deceptive and non-auditable. Once the materiel is shipped, it disappears into a black hole, and few are concerned or surprised where it resurfaces or which facilitators have a broad smile on their face.
Like the medical and pharmaceutical industry, the military-industrial complex is awash in waste, fraud, and abuse.
One can only hope that the right weapons are delivered to the right soldiers at the right time, and they function as advertised with minimal defects or maintenance issues.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
In a city already buckling under the weight of crime, homelessness, and collapsing public trust, Castro-loving progressive communist democrat Mayor Karen Bass has now added another crisis to the list: a deliberate campaign to undermine federal immigration law and obstruct lawful enforcement actions by federal authorities.
With the stroke of a pen, Bass signed Executive Directive No. 12, a sweeping order that does far more than offer “support” to illegal aliens. It sets up a bureaucratic shield against the lawful enforcement of U.S. immigration law, instructs city departments to refuse cooperation with federal authorities, and treats ICE officers as if they are invaders instead of agents enforcing democratically enacted laws.
A Directive Rooted in Ideology, Not Law
Mayor Bass’s directive proudly proclaims that Los Angeles “prohibits the use of any City resources, personnel, property, and data to support federal immigration enforcement.” In doing so, she is effectively nullifying federal law within the city limits —a position that is not only unconstitutional and legally dubious but also deeply irresponsible.
This is not about protecting illegal aliens from unlawful abuse. This is about creating a sanctuary for lawlessness and signaling to illegal aliens that federal law will not be respected or enforced here. This executive directive is not a policy; it’s an ideological statement, draped in the language of compassion while openly flouting the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which places federal law above state and local ordinances.
Undermining Law Enforcement — From Within
Perhaps the most alarming element of the directive is the creation of a new LAPD “working group” whose purpose is not to fight crime, but to monitor and respond to federal immigration enforcement, as if federal officers are the enemy. Involving the police department in obstructing federal activity creates a dangerous precedent: a local law enforcement body being used to second-guess or resist federal law, based on political whim.
At a time when Angelenos are already suffering from rising crime and deteriorating safety, diverting police attention toward resisting immigration enforcement is not just negligent, it’s reckless.
Unlawful Use of City Resources for Political Activism
Mayor Bass is also directing the city’s departments and contractors to undergo training so they know how to avoid helping federal immigration agents. She’s ordering taxpayer-funded liaisons and media campaigns, in multiple languages, to push back against lawful ICE operations. The message is clear: the city of Los Angeles is now a political activist, spending public resources not to serve all residents equally, but to shield a specific population from federal accountability.
She even goes so far as to demand records from ICE, a federal agency, about its operations, detainments, and costs. This is a mayor inserting herself into the operations of federal law enforcement as though she has oversight authority, which she does not.
Masking Political Theater as Public Safety
Bass’s repeated claims that these enforcement actions are “chaotic,” “reckless,” or “unconstitutional” are legal assumptions with no basis in fact. If the raids were truly unlawful, the proper forum is the federal court system, not an executive order signed in protest. However, Bass isn’t interested in legal outcomes; she’s more concerned with political optics.
Her statement claiming that “masked men” in militarized vehicles frightened children at summer camps is clearly designed for emotional manipulation. She offers no evidence that any raids had taken place or were unconstitutional, only vivid language intended to stir outrage and distract from the fundamental truth: these were lawful enforcement operations conducted by trained professionals, under federal law.
The Mayor Who Picks and Chooses Which Laws to Follow
Mayor Bass’s directive is a stark reminder of what happens when ideology overtakes governance. Rather than lead Los Angeles through its real crises, crumbling infrastructure, crime, drug addiction, and homelessness, she is waging a symbolic war against federal law enforcement to appease progressive communist democrat activists, allied media propagandists, and political allies.
Bottom Line
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has once again demonstrated that her political priorities do not align with the rule of law, but rather with appeasing fringe activists and defying federal authority. In the wake of recent federal immigration enforcement operations, Bass chose not to support public safety or the legal framework of this country; instead, she doubled down on obstructionism and defiance.
Rather than work with federal officials to ensure immigration laws are enforced in a lawful, orderly, and humane manner, Mayor Bass condemned federal agents as “masked men” and accused the U.S. government of “assaulting” her city. These aren’t the words of a responsible civic leader; they’re the words of a demagogue, using the slogans of a protester, shouted from a bullhorn, not the mayor’s office.
Bass has transformed Los Angeles into a city where the law is influenced by the mayor’s politics, rather than the Constitution. That’s not leadership. That’s abdication.
The Directive Bolsters City Protocols That Prohibit Use of City Resources for Immigration Enforcement, Expands Access to Resources For Impacted Families, Establishes New LAPD Working Group And Seeks Records From Federal Agencies About Unlawful Raids
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
The Jeffrey Epstein Paradox: Schrödinger’s Client List and the Quantum Mechanics of Power
There exists a file, real or imagined, redacted or hidden, that has come to symbolize more than mere evidence. It is a list of names, perhaps typed, perhaps handwritten, perhaps deleted. It is Jeffrey Epstein’s client list, a theoretical artifact suspended in the collective consciousness. And like Schrödinger’s cat, it exists in a quantum paradox: simultaneously real and unreal, public and private, active and buried. It is not simply a question of whether the list exists, but whether we are allowed to observe it without collapsing the wave function of elite impunity.
Schrödinger’s List
In quantum physics, Schrödinger’s cat is a thought experiment that explores the concept of uncertainty; until observed, a cat locked in a box with a poison capsule is considered to be both alive and dead. Apply this to Epstein’s list, and we enter a realm of political and social quantum mechanics. The list is whispered about, invoked on social media, leaked in dribs, and denied with shrugs. Until it is officially opened—fully declassified, confirmed, and reported without redaction, it remains in a state of superposition between truth and secrecy.
It both exists and does not. It names the powerful and protects them in the same breath.
Mutually Assured Destruction: The Power Behind the Silence
There’s another force field at play, one less abstract than quantum theory but no less complex. It’s the elite’s version of mutually assured destruction (MAD), the same doctrine that kept nuclear superpowers from annihilating each other during the Cold War. Everyone in the upper echelons of society has something on everyone else. Whether it’s financial misdeeds, illicit behavior, or untraceable favors, these shared vulnerabilities function as a distributed firewall.
To expose one is to expose all. And so the system self-regulates through silence.
In this framework, Epstein wasn’t just a blackmailer or socialite; he was a keystone node in a vast network of reciprocal compromise. If his client list became an observable reality, it could shatter reputations, destroy legacies, and trigger legal avalanches. So the list remains in the box, not because it doesn’t exist, but because opening it would force the elite into a no-win scenario.
The Quantum Ethics of Observation
The public, meanwhile, plays the role of the observer. Our attention has the power to collapse the state—but only if the system allows it. Every time an investigation stalls, a document is sealed, or a journalist is silenced or discredited, it serves as a reminder: we’re being managed. Transparency is permitted only to the extent that it doesn’t destabilize the broader architecture of power.
This isn’t mere conspiracy—it’s structural self-preservation. And it’s old.
From the Vatican archives to sealed CIA documents, history is littered with Schrödinger boxes, containers of truth waiting for someone brave, or foolish, enough to open them.
What Happens If We Open the Box?
Opening Epstein’s box doesn’t just mean naming names. It means acknowledging how networks of power protect themselves. It means questioning how far-reaching those protections go, into media, law enforcement, intelligence agencies, and cultural institutions.
Bottom Line
The Jeffrey Epstein paradox isn’t really about one man or even one list. It’s about a system that depends on secrecy, mutual blackmail, and the suppression of observation to survive. And like quantum particles, the truth shifts based on how, and if, we choose to look at it.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
Who I Tend to Trust
Alan Dershowitz, a well-respected constitutional law professor, has publicly claimed that he has seen the elusive client list and is personally aware of some of the high-profile individuals named on it. While asserting that court orders and confidentiality rulings legally constrain him from revealing specific details, Dershowitz maintains that transparency should be paramount. Having himself faced allegations in connection with Epstein, allegations he vigorously denied and which were ultimately dismissed or resolved in his favor, Dershowitz positions himself as a champion of full disclosure. He argues that truth should not be subject to privilege or power, and insists that no individual, regardless of status, wealth, or political influence, should be shielded from accountability. In his view, the integrity of justice demands that the box be opened.
Dan Bongino, a former New York Police Officer, Secret Service agent, political commentator, and now the Deputy Director of the FBI, has built his public persona on a foundation of law-and-order conservatism and personal integrity. In a climate where loyalty is often valued above truth, the challenge lies in knowing when to speak out, even if it means breaking ranks with the very team you’ve pledged to support.
The Basic Facts
1. Who Was Jeffrey Epstein?
Occupation: Wealthy financier and convicted sex offender.
Connections: Maintained relationships with many high-profile individuals, including politicians, academics, royalty, and celebrities.
Wealth: The origins of his fortune remain unclear; he reportedly ran a private investment firm serving billionaires.
2. Initial Criminal Case (2005–2008)
Investigation: In 2005, Palm Beach police began investigating Epstein after reports that he had sexually abused underage girls.
Charges: Federal prosecutors identified dozens of potential victims, mostly underage girls.
Plea Deal: In 2008, Epstein struck a controversial non-prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors in Florida (led by U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta).
He pleaded guilty to two state-level charges: soliciting prostitution and soliciting a minor.
He served 13 months in a county jail with work release privileges.
The deal granted immunity to Epstein and his unnamed co-conspirators from federal prosecution.
3. Renewed Scrutiny and Arrest (2018–2019)
Media Exposure: In 2018, the Miami Herald published a series of investigative reports exposing the scope of Epstein’s abuse and the leniency of his 2008 deal.
Arrest: On July 6, 2019, Epstein was arrested at a New Jersey airport on federal sex trafficking charges involving dozens of underage girls.
Charges: Accused of operating a sex trafficking ring from 2002 to 2005 in New York and Florida.
Assets: Federal agents found incriminating materials during a search of his Manhattan townhouse.
4. Death in Custody
Date: August 10, 2019.
Cause: Found dead in his jail cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York City; ruled a suicide by hanging.
Controversy:
Epstein was on suicide watch but was later removed.
Security cameras malfunctioned.
Guards reportedly failed to check on him.
The death prompted widespread speculation and conspiracy theories, especially given the number of powerful and influential people potentially implicated by his testimony.
5. Legal Fallout
Ghislaine Maxwell:
Epstein’s longtime associate was arrested in 2020.
In 2021, she was convicted of sex trafficking and conspiracy related to Epstein’s crimes and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Ongoing Civil Suits:
Numerous lawsuits by Epstein’s victims continue, targeting his estate and alleged co-conspirators.
“Client List” Rumors:
While flight logs, court documents, and some sealed records name various associates, a definitive “client list” has never been publicly released, fueling speculation.
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Australia is quietly rolling out what may be the most sweeping digital identity policy in the Western world, mandatory age checks for search engine users, starting December 27, 2025.
Under new regulations, tech giants like Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and others will be legally obligated to verify the age of any user who signs in, using methods ranging from facial recognition scans to ID uploads, or risk fines of nearly $50 million per breach.
While the government uses the age-old claim that it is all about protecting and shielding children from adult content, others are raising alarm bells and pointing out that Australia is fast becoming a digital surveillance state under the pretense of safety.
What’s Changing?
The new rules originate in the provisions of the Online Safety Act and have been implemented under the direction of the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant. They demand that any logged-in user’s age must be verified before accessing unfiltered search results. These checks could involve:
Photo ID submission
Facial scanning technology
AI-driven age guessing
Credit card verification
Digital ID use
Parental authorization
Third-Party verification
If all of this sounds Orwellian, that’s because it is. Not only are these policies unprecedented, even by global standards, but they also create a digital fingerprint that will be embedded in every online file and transaction. A national identity verification system justified by the near-unchallengeable claim, “it’s for the children.”
Privacy at What Price?
While aimed at protecting children, these measures erode online anonymity, set dangerous legal precedents, and normalize mass surveillance.
“This is the progression of the loss of our right to be anonymous online,” said John Pane, chair of Electronic Frontiers Australia. Others, like Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology professor Lisa Given, question the lack of public awareness and debate, stating: “It’s not clear that there is a social license for such important and nuanced changes.”
Notably, users can still browse without logging in, but they will be served restricted or blurred content. Of course, this is more about optics than impact, as kids can still use VPNs or opt out of signing in-- for now.
A Digital All-Seeing Panopticon in the Making?
What’s particularly alarming is the quiet, almost invisible rollout of this policy, hidden in dense, unpenetrable regulatory codes rather than debated in Parliament. Human and digital rights alike fear this is only the beginning of technological enslavement.
It is a logical extension to believe that any digital access mechanism for which age checks are expected to be mandated includes:
App stores
Messaging platforms
Adult and gambling sites
And ultimately, all digital devices and gateways.
That means: If you want to search, view, message, or even download an app in Australia, you may soon need to prove who you are and how old you are. One of the most serious implications of this new scheme is that it will create a mechanism that allows the government and data brokers to aggregate information under verified identification, potentially to be used against you in legal proceedings.
Bottom Line
Australia once prided itself on the “Larrikin Fairness” or “fair go” ethos and rugged individualism. But with each new regulatory mandate, that spirit seems increasingly buried under layers of state-backed digital paternalism.
This isn’t just about kids and content. It’s about who controls the future of the internet, and whether privacy and freedom still have a place in it.
As Australia is fast becoming a test bed for state-controlled digital identity systems, the entire world should take notice of how fast a freedom-loving population is morphing into a Communist China-style surveillance state.
My Aussie friends are being screwed as we are sitting idly by.
Establishes a minimum age for social media use and an obligation on providers of an age-restricted social media platform to take reasonable steps to prevent age-restricted users from having an account with the platform.
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Los Angeles is in crisis. Crime is rising. Homelessness overwhelms sidewalks, parks, and public spaces. Once-safe neighborhoods now feel lawless and abandoned. Residents are exhausted, small businesses are shutting down, and city services are stretched thin.
Amid this growing chaos, progressive communist democrat Mayor Karen Bass, the Castro-loving commie, continues to fumble the basic responsibilities of her office. Her administration reveals a stunning misunderstanding of what government is for: to protect regular people, not to indulge society’s fringes under the guise of compassion.
Bass ran on promises to “clean up” L.A., get people off the streets, and restore public safety. But since taking office, she’s delivered little more than empty rhetoric, cosmetic programs, and a steady stream of disconnected press conferences.
Governing for the Fringe, Not the Majority
Mayor Bass appears more interested in accommodating society’s most dysfunctional elements than in defending the rights and well-being of the law-abiding majority. From her indulgent, accountability-free approach to homelessness policies to her resistance to enforcing basic public order, every major decision emerging from City Hall prioritizes political posturing over public safety.
Her signature initiative, Inside Safe, was pitched as a bold solution to homelessness. In practice, it’s a costly shell game, moving encampments from one street to another with no metrics for success and zero enforcement. The tents return days later. The drug use continues. The neighborhoods remain in disarray.
This isn’t leadership. It’s managed decline, at a billion-dollar price tag, with most of the proceeds flowing to progressive special interests.
Public Safety Takes a Back Seat
Los Angeles is seeing dangerous erosion in basic law enforcement. LAPD staffing is critically low, emergency response times are up, and violent crime continues to plague key districts. Residents routinely report unanswered 911 calls and slow police response. Businesses shutter early, not from lack of customers, but fear of being targeted.
Yet Bass doubles down on policies that handcuff police while empowering repeat offenders. Instead of restoring confidence in public safety, she blames “systemic” issues and promotes reforms with no connection to the real-world dangers people face.
Law-abiding citizens, those who simply want to raise families and run businesses, are increasingly left to fend for themselves.
This is a textbook case of failed leadership: when ideology trumps accountability, and slogans replace strategy.
Homelessness Policy or Endless Enabling?
The core of Bass’s homelessness response is rooted in the illusion that services alone will solve what is often a mix of addiction, mental illness, and chronic criminal behavior. Inside Safe, for all its budgetary muscle, lacks the enforcement teeth required to maintain order. There are no meaningful consequences for refusing shelter, using drugs in public, or engaging in violence.
Outreach without enforcement is not compassion, it’s surrender. By allowing public spaces to become lawless zones in the name of empathy, Bass has effectively sacrificed community stability for the sake of activist approval.
The result: neighborhoods remain trapped in a cycle of encampment, displacement, and return, while billions are spent on programs that fail to change behavior or restore order.
Political Theater Over Public Safety: Bass’s Immigration Obsession
As these crises spiral, Bass remains preoccupied with resisting federal immigration enforcement. Rather than cooperate with agencies like ICE, even in cases involving violent offenders, she clings to Los Angeles’s sanctuary city policies, turning the city into a haven for those avoiding legal accountability.
This is more than just symbolism. When officials refuse to honor detainer requests or share data with federal agencies, dangerous individuals remain in the community, often reoffending. And ironically, the communities most harmed are immigrant neighborhoods already overwhelmed by crime and under-policing.
Bass’s refusal to enforce immigration law mirrors her broader refusal to enforce laws at all. In both cases, ideology takes precedence over public safety. Criminal behavior is shielded under the banner of tolerance, and the city foots the bill through higher crime, lower safety, and exploding service costs.
Sanctuary for Chaos
What began as a political position on immigration has expanded into a full-blown worldview: one where enforcement is oppression, lawbreakers are victims, and accountability is taboo. Bass has turned Los Angeles into a sanctuary not just for undocumented immigrants, but for chaos itself.
The same protections extended to those flouting immigration law are granted to serial offenders, drug users, and violent transients. And the cost, financial, social, and psychological, is being borne by ordinary Angelenos who played no part in creating these conditions.
Angelenos Have Had Enough
What about the people who do everything right? The workers, families, small business owners, and taxpayers who are the backbone of Los Angeles? In Bass’s city, they are an afterthought. Their parks are overrun. Their children can’t walk to school safely. Their complaints are dismissed as lacking “compassion.”
But it’s not compassion to let people overdose on sidewalks. It’s not progressive to allow cities to decay under unchecked lawlessness. And it’s not leadership to let a once-great city unravel in real time.
Bottom Line
Mayor Karen Bass has failed to lead. She has failed to enforce the law, failed to manage the city’s finances responsibly, and failed to protect the people she was elected to serve.
This is not just a policy failure. It’s a collapse of principle. Government exists to preserve order, uphold the law, and serve the majority, not indulge disorder in the name of ideological purity.
If Bass cannot fulfill that role, then she should step aside for someone who can.
Los Angeles deserves better. We all do.
We are so screwed.
— Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
American color revolutions are a type of “non-violent protest movement” that typically forms with the specific goal of regime change without military force. Instead, it uses protests, media narratives, election disputes, and legal challenges.
These movements are characterized by:
The mass mobilization of disaffected individuals, often following disputed elections or the introduction of new political actions characterized as “extreme.”
Solutions to perceived corruption and oppression that favor one party and its ideology.
Use of symbolic colors or symbols as demonstrations of protest and patriotism.
Hidden leadership, financial, and logistical support are often provided by nonprofits and other non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
Typically, they target political regimes that are portrayed and propagandized as corrupt, authoritarian, or closely tied to a particular political party.
Overwhelming legal attacks, while they might not be successful, cripple the opposition’s unrecoverable time, effort, and money.
Who is Norm Eisen?
Norm Eisen is a former U.S. ambassador, legal scholar, and key figure in Democrat legal strategy circles. He served as Special Counsel for Ethics and Government Reform in the Obama White House and later as Ambassador to the Czech Republic. After his ambassadorship, he became a political operative deeply involved in legal and political efforts surrounding accountability, especially during and after the Trump presidency.
Most notably, Eisen was a central figure in the first impeachment of President Donald Trump. He worked as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, where he helped structure the legal arguments and materials used in the impeachment proceedings. Long before that, he co-founded Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a nonprofit focused on government accountability that served as the Democrat Party's pit bull.
But Eisen’s influence doesn’t stop at courtrooms or committee hearings. He’s also known for writing extensively on how democracies protect themselves from authoritarianism and corruption, and that’s where the conversation turns more controversial.
The Democracy Playbook sets forth strategies and actions that supporters of liberal democracy can implement to halt and reverse democratic backsliding and make democratic institutions work more effectively for citizens. The strategies are deeply rooted in the evidence: what the scholarship and practice of democracy teach us about what does and does not work. We hope that diverse groups and individuals will find the syntheses herein useful as they design catered, context-specific strategies for contesting and resisting the illiberal toolkit. This playbook is organized into two principal sections: one dealing with actions that domestic actors can take within democracies, including retrenching ones, and the second section addressing the role of international actors in supporting and empowering pro-democracy actors on the ground.
Color Revolutions and the U.S. Political Landscape
Has Norm Eisen taken strategies from the color revolution playbook, typically used to influence foreign regimes, and is now deploying them domestically on American soil to target political adversaries, most notably Donald Trump?
Consider his central role in the impeachment effort, his ties to influential activist legal networks, and his co-authorship of the 2020 and 2025 Brookings reports focused on managing a contested presidential transition. Are Eisen’s actions about safeguarding democracy, using a calculated campaign to sway public opinion, weaponizing the legal system against a political rival, and blending lawfare and media influence into a potent form of domestic political warfare, or is this another progressive communist democrat attack on America?
Reality Check: Conspiracy or Strategy?
Here’s the thing: Norm Eisen is no secretive puppet master; his writings, plans, and strategies are all publicly available.
Is Eisen’s work part of a “Color Revolution” inside the U.S., or is it just the predictable clash between deeply divided political factions?
Is it destabilization and an attack on what the progressive communist democrats and their media propagandists have declared to be an authoritarian threat, or another check on our constitutional rights?
There’s no doubt that current U.S. politics today echoes the intensity and optics of foreign unrest, marked by mass protests, media wars, and legal battles waged in both public and private spheres.
How would you create a domestic army with no allegiance to America?
It is an undeniable fact that the Democrat Party supports open borders through which millions upon millions of illegal immigrants flow, many from failed states with little or no history of successful self-government or those with cultures diametrically opposed to Western core values. Illegal aliens who drag their own culture, language, dress, food, and customs into America to recreate a safer, more prosperous version of what they left behind, individuals who will not assimilate and who maintain allegiance to foreign sovereigns.
This includes thousands of fit, military-age men who can easily be manipulated and whipped into a frenzy if they think the end goal of violent protest leads to a path to citizenship.
In the guise of humanity, inclusivity, and fairness, the progressive communist democrats have introduced the seeds of destruction that they hope will collapse the West under the burden of burdening our infrastructure, healthcare, education, public safety, and existing safety net reserves paid for by ordinary citizen taxpayers.
What better political weapon than "street action shock troops" not anchored to American values and representing a demographic and cultural change leading to political destabilization? For the progressive communist democrats, immigration is a weapon in a larger ideological war.
Bottom Line
Whether you believe Norm Eisen is a guardian of the Constitution or a master of subversion depends mainly on your politics.
But one thing is certain: The battle for control over the narrative, the institutions, and the future of American democracy is far from over. And if you believe we’re in a Color Revolution now, then the next election cycle, and everything leading up to it, will feel like the next chapter in a very familiar playbook.
Our governance and quality of life are at risk.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Tucker Carlson has just released a highly anticipated interview with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, a hardline “Death to America” cleric who rose to power under the shadow of U.S. sanctions and allegations of grave human rights abuses.
Raisi is not just the leader of a rival state; he is the political face of a regime accused of backing terrorist groups that have killed American troops and civilians over decades.
Carlson gave a global platform to a man whose government has American blood on its hands, claiming it’s a “journalist’s duty” to let the public hear directly from the world’s most controversial figures, however uncomfortable that may be.
When Carlson’s interview with Raisi was posted online, millions could view it without context, disclaimers, or any indication of the regime’s human rights record. A 30-second clip of Raisi making a provocative claim about U.S. foreign policy might go viral, divorced from any critical analysis. Some viewers might not even know who he is.
A few excerpts…
Host Tucker Carlson: Mr. President, thank you very much for doing this. There is a pause or seems to be a pause in the war between the United States and Iran. How do you think this will end? How would you like to see it end?
[OCS: Notice how Carlson frames the question as if the United States were the aggressor. Iran has been “at war” with the United States for 46 years, since November 1979, when Iranian revolutionaries seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.]
Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi: We did not start this war and we do not want this war to continue in any way. From the very beginning, it was the motto of my administration that I always adhere to and that was fostering the national unity inside the country and also fostering peace and tranquility and friendship with the neighboring countries and with the rest of the world.
[OCS: The claim that Iran is interested in “fostering peace and tranquility and friendship with the neighboring countries and with the rest of the world” is patently absurd when Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism, providing funding, weapons, training, and support to many terrorist organizations, especially in the Middle East.]
Carlson: The American President Donald Trump has said that the United States bombed your enrichment facilities because the government of Iran refused to give up its nuclear program and that there can be no peace until Iran does give up that nuclear program. Would you be willing to give up the nuclear program in exchange for peace?
Raisi: I would like to tell you what has happened and it was Netanyahu who since 1984 has created this false mentality that Iran seeks a nuclear bomb and it has insinuated that Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb in the past and it has put it in the minds of every U.S. president since then and to make them believe that we would like to have a nuclear bomb. But the truth is that we have never been after developing a nuclear bomb, not in the past, not presently or in the future because this is wrong and this is in contrast to the religious decree or the fatwa which has been issued by his eminence the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran that so it is religiously forbidden for us to go after a nuclear bomb and this was always corroborated thanks to our cooperation with IAEA because they were always there to verify this and to substantiate that we have never wanted a nuclear bomb. But unfortunately, this cooperation was disturbed by the unlawful attacks against our nuclear facilities.
[OCS: This is propaganda. The Jews have created this false narrative. Ignore the fact that we build our facilities in mountainous areas. Ignore the fact that we restrict the IAEA monitors. Ignore the fact that the Israelis emptied an entire warehouse of documents that are evidence of Iran's bomb-making ambition and activities.]
Carlson: So you have, according to news reports, withdrawn your cooperation from IAEA, the International Nuclear Regulatory Agency, and so there’s I suppose no way for the rest of the world to know how much uranium you’re enriching and to what extent, to what percentage it’s being enriched. And so is there any way to verify and would you be willing to allow other nations to verify that you are not building nuclear weapons?
Raisi: Mr. Carson, sir, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that we were right in the middle of holding talks with the United States and the president of the United States invited us to hold such talks in order to have peace. And we were told during the process of these negotiations and talks that as long as we don’t give the permission to Israel, they are not going to attack you. And we were going to have the next round of the talks very soon.
But in the middle of it, suddenly Israel torpedoed the negotiating table. We were sitting at the negotiating table when it happened. And by doing this, they totally ruined and destroyed diplomacy.
And in order to answer your question with regards to the surveillance or the supervision over our nuclear program, I would like to say that we are ready to hold talks over it. We have never been the party that has run away from a verification. We stand ready to have these supervisions.
But unfortunately, as a result of the United States unlawful attacks against our nuclear centers and installations, many of the pieces of equipment and the facilities there have been severely damaged. Therefore, we don’t have any access to them. We cannot see.
And unless this access is going to be back there again, we have to wait for it and to see what happens and how much they have been damaged so that we can go for the supervision.
[OCS: Notice the masterful deflection. We are willing to talk, if not for those Jews. They have been talking, and talking, and talking for 13 years, since 2012 and the start of Obama’s “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).”]
Carlson: There have been news reports that you believe, your government believes, that the IAEA was spying on the government of Iran and passing information to Israel. Do you believe that? And if so, do you have evidence that that’s true, that the world could see?
Raisi: I would like to tell you that we were somehow pessimistic about the activities of the IAEA, because somehow we realized that Israel could get information from the inspections which were carried out by the IAEA, but it never prevented the IAEA from carrying out their activities inside Iran. And they had full access to supervise and to have surveillance over our nuclear facilities. But there was this lack of trust.
As a result of the last report by IAEA, the type of the report and the way they prepared the report somehow gave an excuse to the Israeli regime and prepared the ground for their unlawful and unauthorized attack against our nuclear facilities. And even after that, the IAEA failed to condemn these attacks or try to in any way to stop them. And this ran counter to the international law.
And this resulted in a widespread lack of trust among the Iranians, Iranian legislators, and the public opinion here.
[OCS: Iran never granted full and complete access to the IAEA inspectors, and their reports were available to the international community. Israel did not need the IAEA to spy on Iran; the Israelis had their Mossad.]
<snip>
Carlson: Do you have plans to re-enter negotiations with the United States, with Envoy Steve Whitkoff or anyone else? And if not, what do you think will happen?
Raisi: We see no problem in re-entering the negotiations. But before that, I have to remind you that because of the atrocities by the Zionist regime, by Israel, not just against my country, but in the whole region, we are now facing a crisis. The people are facing a crisis that we need to put it behind ourselves.
[OCS: Speaking of atrocities, did Iran assist in the funding, planning, and execution of Hamas’s surprise October 7, 2023, attack on Israel that killed approximately 1,200 Jews and took 250 hostages back to Gaza?] ]
Our commanders were off duty. They were spending the night at their homes with their families, but they were killed. And this is considered a war crime according to the international law, because they were off duty, as I said, or our scientists were also killed and assassinated along with their families and their wives and their children.
They were also killed, pregnant women, children. They were killed in the atrocities, in the attacks of the Israeli regime. Just because they wanted to kill one single person, they had to demolish and destroy a whole building.
And as a result of this, a lot of innocent people were killed. A lot of people were killed. And as I said, there is this crisis that we have to put it behind ourselves.
And there is a condition, there is a provision for the restarting the talks. How are we going to trust the United States again? We re-enter the negotiations, then how can we know for sure that in the middle of the talks, the Israeli regime will not be given the permission again to attack us?
[OCS: Unlike other military leaders, Iranian military leaders keep their families close, as human shields, and make them collateral damage that can be used as "martyred for the cause" propaganda. It is a combination of political culture, sacrifice, security strategy, and propaganda considerations.]
Carlson: Do you believe the Israeli government tried to assassinate you?
Raisi: They did try, yes. And they acted accordingly, but they failed. And as a true believer, I believe that it is in the hands of the God Almighty to determine when a person will die or will not die.
If he wills, the God Almighty wills, then you can die when you are walking freely in the streets. But I would like to tell you that I am not afraid of sacrificing myself in defense of my country and in safeguarding and defending the sovereignty, the freedom and the independence of my country. I’m willing to give my life, to give blood for that.
And nobody here, I mean, none of the government officials is afraid of losing their lives in line of defense. But will it bring security to the region? I mean, bloodshed, more bloodshed, assassination, killing others.
Will it bring peace and tranquility and stability to the region?
[OCS: Perhaps a better question would have been: “Did your regime attempt to assassinate President Trump?”]
So, where is the line?
Do Americans have a right to hear what the leaders of hostile regimes say, even if it’s pure self-serving propaganda, and even if it’s broadcast with minimal challenge? And what responsibility do the host and platform carry when presenting such content?
It’s time to move beyond the myth of neutrality. If you present and distribute propaganda that can be decontextualized, clipped, and algorithmically boosted for engagement, knowingly or not, you have a role in shaping public perception and bear responsibility for transparency.
At the very least, so-called “infotainment journalists” like Tucker Carlson should:
Clearly label the video as featuring a representative of a hostile foreign government.
Provide links to credible background information about the regime:
Flag known disinformation or propaganda when it appears, using existing verifiable fact-check resources.
These are not acts of censorship; they are acts of transparency.
Failing to do so risks turning America’s open information environment into a weapon against itself, where hostile regimes use our own platforms to normalize their extreme views, distort facts, and erode trust.
Just as viewers deserve a warning before controversial material on television, they deserve even more context when that same content appears on a feed curated by algorithms trained to maximize attention, not nuance.
Bottom Line
In a democratic society, access to information is paramount. Understanding the mindset, goals, and rhetorical strategies of adversaries can help citizens and policymakers make informed decisions. To that end, interviews with foreign leaders, friendly or hostile, can serve a crucial function. Ignoring or suppressing the voice of an enemy doesn’t make them go away; it simply leaves the American public uninformed.
But granting access doesn’t mean granting amnesty or letting propaganda go unchallenged. At the very least, it should be clearly understood that: “This is not a neutral voice. This is a hostile actor. Proceed accordingly.”
I reiterate: Americans should never be shielded from uncomfortable truths; they should be able to hear what their enemies are saying. But neither should they be served propaganda in the dark. Controversial programming needs to be delivered with a context that makes clear who is speaking and what is at stake.
The solution isn’t silence; it’s sunlight.
We are so screwed when we are presented with narrative, not truth.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
As the nation witnesses the recent flooding disaster in Texas that has left at least 69 people dead, including 21 children, and many more missing as search-and-rescue teams scramble to find survivors, we are treated to the un-American spectacle of the progressive communist democrats, their media propagandists, and lunatic fringe attempting to politicize this natural disaster into an attack on President Donald Trump.
Rosie O’Donnell Blames Trump’s ‘Horrible Decisions’ for Texas Floods
Comedian Rosie O’Donnell believes President Donald Trump’s “horrible decisions” are to blame for the flash floods in central Texas that have killed at least 70.
“What a horror story in Texas,” O’Donnell, who moved to Dublin, Ireland, earlier this year after Trump was re-elected, said in a TikTok video posted Sunday. “When the president guts all of the early warning systems and the weathering forecast abilities of the government, these are the results that we’re going to start to see on a daily basis.” <Source>
[OCS: Another progressive democrat and aging angry lesbian struggling for attention.]
"Some local and state officials have said that insufficient forecasts from the National Weather Service caught the region off guard. That claim has been amplified by pundits across social media, who say that cuts to the NWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, its parent organization, inevitably led to the failure in Texas." <Source>
Ignoring the fact that natural disasters like floods are chaotic, unpredictable, and often devastating, we see media “personalities” and national, state, and local officials pointing fingers at the National Weather Service (NWS) for allegedly failing to provide timely warnings.
The Facts
Rain in the Kerrville region began to fall around midnight on Friday, July 4, 2025, and the National Weather Service issued its first flash flood warning at 1:14 a.m., followed by more extreme warnings at 4:03 a.m. Reviewing the bulletins, we find that NWS issued a previous flood watch at 1:18 p.m. on Thursday.
Blaming the NWS, and by extension, President Trump and the federal government, for not accurately predicting the outcome of a natural disaster and accurately forecasting rainfall amounts is both absurd and counterproductive.
The real problem wasn’t the forecast; it was how the warnings were disseminated to the public, particularly in the middle of the night when many were sleeping, unaware that the Guadalupe River was rapidly rising. If the warnings didn’t reach the people in time, then it is the system’s fault, not the science.
What makes this situation even more aggravating is the political blame game that has followed the disaster.
The Politics of Blame
Bizarrely, the progressive communist democrats, their media propagandists, and the lunatic fringe are blaming the Trump administration’s past staffing decisions for the lack of a cohesive local emergency response system.
This is not really about forecasting failures; it’s a case where local officials attempt to absolve themselves of any inadequacies in communications or response. It’s also an opportunity for the progressive communist democrats to fall back on their traditional response to disasters, where any crisis is automatically the fault of their opposition.
Bottom Line
Yes, the Texas floods were catastrophic and the loss of lives tragic, but to blame the NWS for not forecasting or underestimating the amount of rainfall accurately enough is nonsensical and the mark of a fool.
While it is easy to get lost in the noise of progressive communist democrat politics and be tempted to make the situation fit into an ideological narrative that appeals to the biases of their base, in the final analysis, the real tragedy isn’t that politicians or government agencies failed; it’s that people lost their lives, and in many cases, they didn’t even know they were in danger until it was too late.
Unless we are serious about reducing the impact of natural disasters and ensuring that warnings are timely, clear, and reach everyone, no matter the time of day or the political climate, we are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
A House Divided: The Hidden Danger of a Charismatic Third Party in 2026 and Beyond
Musk Forms New Party in the Wake of Trump Split…
In an era of razor-thin majorities, where one Senate seat or a handful of House districts can determine the fate of national policy and a nation's future, the threat of a third-party insurgency is no longer a theoretical exercise; it’s an existential risk. And nowhere is that danger more acute than for the Republican Party.
The GOP, already a coalition of uneasy factions who are willing to place ideology over unity: libertarians, America First conservatives, traditional Reaganites, globalists, and disaffected working-class voters, is now facing a political powder keg: the rise of an outsider movement led by a charismatic figure with the willingness to spend his own funds, unmatched reach, direct access to tens of millions of followers, and a deep grievance narrative that government efforts to regulate or control only seem to amplify.
The Illusion of Choice—The Reality of Collapse
At first glance, a new political party might seem like a healthy expression of democracy. After all, isn’t more choice better? But in the real-world mechanics of U.S. elections, especially first-past-the-post contests in swing states, a divided right spells certain victory for a radicalized, unified left.
Democrats, for all their internal fractures, have mastered the art of closing ranks when it matters. They understand the math: a 34%-33%-33% split is all it takes to snatch victory in battleground states like Georgia, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Pennsylvania.
A third-party candidate pulling 10–20% from the GOP, especially one positioned as “more authentic” or “less compromised,” would leave the Democrats walking through the middle uncontested. They wouldn’t need to win hearts and minds. They’d only need to let the right tear itself apart.
Elon Musk: Spoiler or Strategist?
One of the most disruptive and overlooked wild cards in this emerging threat is Elon Musk. Once seen as an eccentric tech billionaire with libertarian leanings, Musk now commands a powerful communication platform in X (formerly Twitter) and has recently taken more public steps to politically position himself against Donald Trump, even as he flirts with America First populism.
Musk has the reach, the money, the grievance narrative, and, most importantly, the plausibility to galvanize a large swath of frustrated voters who no longer feel at home in the GOP. But here’s where it gets even more dangerous: Musk may not be playing for votes; he may be playing for leverage.
With Tesla’s dominance slipping amid competition from Chinese EV makers and a collapsing electric vehicle market in the U.S., and with SolarCity/SolarWorld fading behind the hype and decimation by Chinese solar panels, Musk may see a populist third-party movement as a high-risk game of “chicken” with Washington. The message? Give me favorable tax policy, regulatory shielding, or energy subsidies, or I will fracture your voter base beyond repair.
If this sounds conspiratorial, consider Musk’s pattern of disruptive brinkmanship, pushing into industries, challenging regulatory frameworks, and then extracting concessions after creating chaos. The stakes now? Nothing less than the White House.
If he runs, or throws his weight behind an alternative figure, he could create a modern Ross Perot scenario, bleeding critical voters from Trump and leaving the GOP fatally weakened.
A Charismatic Firebrand With a Megaphone
What makes this threat uniquely dangerous is the digital megaphone now available to any high-profile figure. A banned account becomes a badge of honor. A censored post becomes viral gold. Government intervention, whether justified or not, is instantly weaponized as proof of a rigged system.
This modern figure isn’t just a political candidate; they’re a movement. A brand. A spectacle. And with just enough populist appeal to pull in disillusioned voters from across the spectrum, they become the ultimate spoiler.
Ironically, this third-party hero often claims to be the last hope for the country while unintentionally restoring power to those miscreants they claim to oppose.
Historical Echoes: The Perot and Roosevelt Effect
History offers grim warnings. In 1992, Ross Perot helped contribute to Bill Clinton’s presidential victory. In 1912, Theodore Roosevelt’s Bull Moose run split the Republican vote, ushering in the Progressive Era and paving the way for the election of Woodrow Wilson. Each time, the ideological divide gave way to unified opposition, leading to long-term, consequential disasters for America.
Today’s scenario is far worse. With cultural polarization, weaponized media, and institutions tilted toward one ideological camp, a third party splintering the right could usher in a generation of radical progressive communist democrat dominance, unchecked and unapologetic.
Bottom Line
The American political system is not designed for multiparty viability. It rewards unity and punishes fragmentation. Any movement that ignores this lesson risks becoming the very tool that cements its own defeat.
In the age of super-thin majorities, we don’t need more voices; we need one strong, clear, unified one. The future of the republic may depend on whether the right can resist the allure of division disguised as revolution.
If you care about preserving liberty, economic sanity, and constitutional order, beware the siren song of a third-party savior. The fight ahead requires focus, not fragmentation, or else we are royally screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
WARNING: SUPER-SPREADER OF THE PROGRESSIVE COMMUNIST DEMOCRAT WOKE VIRUS
While California reels from spiraling debt, housing crises, rampant homelessness, and a floundering public infrastructure, Governor Gavin Newsom is on a Southern charm offensive — in South Carolina.
Yes, you read that right. Instead of tackling the mounting dysfunction in his home state, Newsom will be sipping coffee in rural diners and posing for selfies in South Carolina, all under the guise of “helping Democrats win back the House in 2026.” But to many Californians, and increasingly to political observers nationwide, this “On the Road” tour feels less like a mission to uplift forgotten voters and more like a soft launch of his 2028 presidential campaign.
Let’s be honest: South Carolina isn’t on the map for a governor managing a $68 billion budget deficit. It’s not home to the over 180,000 homeless Californians or the thousands of small businesses struggling under excessive regulation and taxation. It’s not where wildfires, crumbling infrastructure, or water shortages are threatening millions. That’s Newsom’s California, a state that’s becoming a poster child for democrat corruption and bureaucratic mismanagement.
And yet, while Californians brace for higher taxes and fewer services, Newsom is busy “building partnerships” in red counties that voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump. His campaign-style swing through eight of South Carolina’s most conservative rural counties, places where Democrats haven’t won in decades, raises more eyebrows than it does poll numbers.
According to the South Carolina Democratic Party, the trip is meant to show rural voters they aren’t forgotten. But who exactly is being forgotten here? The governor’s full-time job is in Sacramento, not the Pee Dee region. Californians elected him to run the nation’s largest economy, not audition for a national stage in church basements and coffee shops 3,000 miles away.
Newsom’s advisors deny he’s laying the groundwork for a White House bid, insisting he’s “squarely focused” on 2026. But his recent history, from ad buys in Texas and Florida to his nationally televised debate with Ron DeSantis, tells a different story. This is a governor who’s clearly addicted to the spotlight, and South Carolina is just his latest political backdrop.
Meanwhile, back home, California’s “progress” is stuck in reverse. Despite touting policies like free community college and universal preschool, many Californians are fleeing the state due to skyrocketing living costs, deteriorating public safety, and a dysfunctional energy grid. Newsom’s tenure has been marked more by ambition than results, more press conferences than problem-solving.
Bottom Line
The reality is this: California needs a full-time governor, not a part-time presidential hopeful. Voters didn’t send Newsom to Sacramento to be a traveling salesman for the national Democratic Party. They sent him to fix the mess at home.
Until he does, South Carolinians and the rest of America would do well to take heed. Gavin Newsom, the hair-jelled elitist, is a super-spreader of the progressive communist democrat woke virus that promises to infect other states with the very dysfunction he should be curing in California.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Our nation has never faced such an existential crisis as we find under the remnants of the Obama/Biden administration since the Civil War, when the Republicans fought Southern Democrats to abolish slavery.
July 4, 2025 — A Time to Reflect, A Time to Wake Up
As we celebrate the birth of our nation, it's worth asking some hard questions:
If you still believe that corrupt career politicians and their unelected bureaucratic enablers will ever put the American people ahead of their own ambitions and those of powerful donors...
If you believe skin color matters more than character, competence, and conviction—or that biology should outweigh merit...
If you believe the Constitution is a relic, and that equality under the law should be replaced with equality of outcome for government-approved groups...
If you trust that low-information voters aren’t swayed by slick media narratives, or that the corporate press is still fair, balanced, and honest...
Then enjoy your July 4th celebration—because it may be one of the last times you do so under the banner of real freedom.
Today should be a celebration of liberty—but it must also be a wake-up call.
We are watching the same forces that hollowed out great nations abroad gnaw at the foundations of our own: socialism disguised as compassion, censorship framed as “safety,” gender ideology masquerading as progress, and lawfare deployed to silence dissent.
This isn’t paranoia—it’s history repeating.
The Democratic Party, once a party of working people, now dances to the tune of global elites and far-left ideologues. Their policies are destroying energy independence, eroding our military, confusing our children, and endangering the very freedoms we commemorate today.
Let’s be clear: Capitalism builds. Socialism controls. And every socialist movement ends the same way: less freedom, more government, and fewer individual rights.
We still live in a magnificent country. Let’s keep it that way.
So enjoy the fireworks. Crank up some country music. Hug your family. Thank a first responder. And say a prayer for the brave Americans serving around the globe—because they still stand for the values we’re in danger of forgetting here at home.
But don’t be fooled. Look beyond the speeches and slogans. Remember: It was the Democratic Party that gave us slavery, segregation, secession, Jim Crow, the KKK, and decades of resistance to civil rights. And it’s the same party now pushing Critical Race Theory, gender confusion, open borders, and policies that divide rather than unite.
This isn’t about left versus right anymore.
It’s about free versus controlled. Sovereign versus globalist. True versus false.
This Independence Day, celebrate the miracle of 1776—but open your eyes to 2025.
Stay safe. Stay awake. Stay free.
Enjoy the fireworks...
There is nothing like country-western music to celebrate America...
Let us not forget the first responders and those who are not celebrating with us today as they stand watch worldwide, guaranteeing our safety and freedom …
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
I made the mistake of watching the early morning “debate” on the so-called Big Beautiful Bill in the House of Representatives. I want my time back.
What unfolded wasn’t a debate—it was a farce. A soul-sucking, mind-numbing, choreographed series of one-minute speeches, alternating between Republicans and Democrats like clockwork, with all the sincerity of a fast-food commercial. Not one question was asked. Not one mind changed. Just noise—empty, insulting noise.
Instead of substance, we got the same tired talking points vomited out with robotic precision. Each side clinging to its script, spewing distortions, half-truths, and outright lies without a hint of shame.
No one was there to be convinced. No one was there to think. This was pure political cosplay—a bunch of overpaid actors playing government on the taxpayers’ dime.
There was no exchange of ideas. No critical thinking. Just a parade of soundbites aimed at the nearest camera. A wasteland of lies, spin, and delusion. Truth had long left the building. Each side endlessly repeated its slogans, half-truths, and distortions as if repetition could make them real. There was no effort to engage. No attempt to reason. Just theater—bad theater.
It was pure performance. Politics as content. Government as theatre.
Story after story of the sick, the poor, the disadvantaged, heart-rending stories narrated by the elite and wealthy representatives who will never experience those tragedies they seek to exploit.
The Democrats? Marching in perfect lockstep, eyes forward, no deviation tolerated. The Republicans? Some stood firm. Others, predictably, folded—trading integrity for a pat on the head or thirty seconds of favorable press.
No deliberation. No persuasion. No actual work is being done. Just another staged spectacle meant to trick Americans into thinking their representatives are “doing something,” when in reality, they’re rehearsing for their next media hit.
What I watched wasn’t democracy. It wasn’t leadership. It wasn’t even politics.
It was a complete and utter waste of time—mine, yours, and the nation’s.
An outpouring of sewage from the so-called People’s House.
The Democrats marched in lockstep, eyes glazed over, repeating the script. And a few Republicans, in a now all-too-familiar act of betrayal, crossed the aisle—not out of courage or principle, but out of weakness, opportunism, or some twisted need to be liked by people who despise them anyway.
What a joke. What a disgrace.
And for what? What was accomplished?
Nothing.
And the worst part? They’ll do it all again tomorrow.
A morning wasted. On ego. On lies. On the Big Beautiful Farce.
And we’re supposed to thank them for their service?
This wasn’t democracy. It was an infomercial. And all I got for my trouble was the sinking feeling that this country is running on fumes and bad faith.
We weren’t just screwed, we were royally fucked!
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Established in 1971, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has long positioned itself as a champion for African American and other marginalized leftist communities, leveraging its influence to advocate for equity and justice. However, recent developments have cast a deepening shadow over the organization, with allegations of improprieties, fraud, self-dealing, and what some might describe as “shakedowns” of corporate entities.
The Target Boycott Controversy: It’s About Money and Power
In late June 2025, the CBC made headlines after threatening a boycott against Target, one of America’s largest retail chains, following the company’s decision to end specific DEI programs, including financial support for the CBC’s nonprofit arm, the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation. According to reports, Target had donated at least $1.4 million to the foundation in 2020 amid heightened corporate focus on social justice following George Floyd’s death. However, as part of a broader rollback of DEI initiatives, Target ceased this funding, prompting a strong reaction from the CBC.
CBC Chairwoman Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (D-N.Y.) and members of the Caucus’s DEI Task Force met with Target CEO Brian Cornell to address what they called the company’s “unconscionable” decision. The Caucus warned that Target’s failure to reinstate DEI efforts could lead to lasting damage to its brand and credibility, with a thinly veiled implied threat of a boycott. The CBC’s statement emphasized the financial toll already felt by Target, suggesting that their push for a boycott was gaining traction and eroding the retailer’s sales and foot traffic.
On Thursday, June 26, 2025, Chairwoman Yvette D. Clarke and members of the Congressional Black Caucus Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Taskforce met with Target Corporation Chair and CEO Brian Cornell to address the company’s reversal on its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The meeting comes amid growing public scrutiny and mounting consumer boycotts of Target, driven by outrage over the company’s rollback of its diversity policies—with particular focus on its commitments to support Black-owned businesses.
In the candid and direct conversation, members of the Congressional Black Caucus repeatedly pressed Target’s leadership for clear answers on the consequences of the company’s decision to scale back its diversity initiatives. The CBC directly questioned the Target leadership on the demands of the “Target Fast,”—a national campaign led by a broad coalition of activists urging consumers to redirect their resources to companies that uphold our values.
In addition to highlighting the significant financial toll Target has already taken due to its failure to uphold its commitments to diversity, the Caucus warned that efforts to restore consumer and public trust without genuine action and accountability would risk inflicting lasting damage to the company’s brand and credibility. <Source: CBC>
Critics, including Peter Flaherty of the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative watchdog group, labeled the CBC’s actions as having “all the earmarks of a shakedown.” Flaherty argued that the threat of a boycott was less about advancing diversity and more about pressuring Target to resume financial contributions to the CBC’s nonprofit arm, which has historically benefited from corporate sponsorships. This perspective was echoed across conservative outlets, with some commentators on X describing the CBC’s tactics as “race grifting” and an attempt to strong-arm corporations into compliance. <Source>
Broader Allegations of Self-Dealing and Fraud
The Target controversy is not an isolated incident but part of a broader narrative of alleged improprieties surrounding the CBC. Critics have long scrutinized the CBC Foundation’s financial practices, pointing to its reliance on corporate donations and the potential for conflicts of interest. The foundation, which supports scholarships, internships, and policy research, has been a significant beneficiary of corporate largesse, particularly during the post-2020 surge in DEI funding. However, questions have arisen about how these funds are allocated and whether they primarily serve the CBC’s political and financial interests rather than the broader African American community.
For instance, there have been accusations that the CBC uses its influence to secure donations from corporations seeking to avoid public criticism or gain favor with influential lawmakers. These arrangements can blur the line between advocacy and self-dealing, as corporate contributions may come with expectations of political support or leniency in oversight. While no concrete evidence of fraud has been substantiated in recent reports, the perception of impropriety persists, fueled by the CBC’s aggressive response to companies like Target that withdraw support.
Additionally, historical allegations of financial misconduct among individual CBC members have resurfaced in public discourse. Though not directly tied to the current Target controversy, past scandals involving CBC members—such as misuse of campaign funds or questionable nonprofit activities—have contributed to a narrative of systemic issues within the Caucus. These incidents, while dated, continue to shape public skepticism about the CBC’s operations.
Political Context and Oversight Challenges
The CBC’s actions must also be viewed in the context of its broader political activities in 2025. The Caucus has been vocal in opposing what it calls President Trump’s “big, ugly bill,” a tax and spending package passed by the Senate in July 2025. During a press conference, CBC members criticized the bill, highlighting their role as a counterweight to Republican policies. However, this assertive stance has coincided with increased scrutiny of the Caucus’s methods, particularly when it comes to leveraging its influence for financial or political gain.
Furthermore, the CBC has faced internal and external challenges that complicate its advocacy. For example, Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) recently pleaded not guilty to federal charges related to interfering with law enforcement during an ICE facility visit, a case that CBC Chair Yvette Clarke framed as an attack on congressional oversight powers. This incident underscores the Caucus’s hostile relationship with the current administration and its efforts to maintain influence amid legal and political headwinds.
A Question of Motives
The CBC’s defenders argue that its push for corporate accountability, as seen in the Target case, is a legitimate response to the erosion of DEI commitments that disproportionately affect marginalized communities. From this perspective, the CBC’s pressure on Target is a necessary tactic to hold corporations accountable for their public commitments.
However, critics counter that the CBC’s actions cross over into coercive territory, particularly when boycott threats appear tied to the restoration of funding for its own nonprofit arm. The lack of transparency around how these funds are used only fuels suspicions of self-dealing. Moreover, the CBC’s high-profile confrontations with corporations may distract from its legislative priorities, undermining the credibility of the House of Representatives.
Bottom Line
DEI, rooted in progressive Marxist ideologies focusing on wealth or power redistribution rather than individual achievement, is little more than forced equality of outcomes, undermining meritocracy and creating new power dynamics where certain groups gain preferential treatment, often tied to narratives of historical guilt or reparative justice.
The Congressional Black Caucus continues to wield significant influence as a pseudo-voice for activist African-Americans, as recent allegations of shakedowns and improprieties continue to destroy its reputation. The Target boycott controversy, in particular, highlights the grift that lies between advocacy and self-interest.
The CBC is about who pays reparations for historical wrongs, and who gets the power and benefits of who divvies up the tribute money.
We are so screwed when these un-American grifters bollix up the system for personal, professional, political, and profitable self-gain. The organization is undeniably racist to its core.
-- Steve
How many prominent congressional rabble-rousers can you spot in the CBC?
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D‑DC)
Rep. Maxine Waters (D‑CA‑43)
Rep. Sanford D. Bishop (D‑GA‑02)
Rep. James E. Clyburn (D‑SC‑06)
Rep. Bobby Scott (D‑VA‑03)
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D‑MS‑02)
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D‑TX‑18)
Rep. Danny K. Davis (D‑IL‑07)
Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (D‑NY‑05)
Rep. Barbara Lee (D‑CA‑13)
Rep. David Scott (D‑GA‑13)
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D‑MO‑05)
Rep. Al Green (D‑TX‑09)
Rep. Gwen Moore (D‑WI‑04)
Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (D‑NY‑09)
Rep. Hank Johnson (D‑GA‑04)
Rep. André Carson (D‑IN‑07)
Rep. Terri Sewell (D‑AL‑07)
Rep. Frederica S. Wilson (D‑FL‑24)
Rep. Donald Payne Jr. (D‑NJ‑10)
Rep. Joyce Beatty (D‑OH‑03)
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D‑NY‑08)
Rep. Marc Veasey (D‑TX‑33)
Rep. Robin Kelly (D‑IL‑02)
Rep. Alma Adams (D‑NC‑12)
Del. Stacey Plaskett (D‑VI)
Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D‑NJ‑12)
Rep. Dwight Evans (D‑PA‑02)
Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D‑DE)
Rep. Steven Horsford (D‑NV‑04)
Rep. Colin Allred (D‑TX‑32)
Rep. Jahana Hayes (D‑CT‑05)
Rep. Lucy McBath (D‑GA‑06)
Rep. Joe Neguse (D‑CO‑02)
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D‑MN‑05)
Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D‑MA‑07)
Rep. Lauren Underwood (D‑IL‑14)
Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D‑MD‑07)
Rep. Nikema Williams (D‑GA‑05)
Rep. Cori Bush (D‑MO‑01)
Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D‑NY‑16)
Rep. Ritchie Torres (D‑NY‑15)
Rep. Marilyn Strickland (D‑WA‑10)
Rep. Troy Carter (D‑LA‑02)
Rep. Shontel Brown (D‑OH‑11)
Rep. Sheila Cherfilus‑McCormick (D‑FL‑20)
Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D‑TX‑30)
Rep. Don Davis (D‑NC‑01)
Rep. Valerie Foushee (D‑NC‑04)
Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D‑FL‑10)
Rep. Glenn Ivey (D‑MD‑04)
Rep. Jonathan Jackson (D‑IL‑01)
Rep. Sydney Kamlager‑Dove (D‑CA‑37)
Rep. Summer Lee (D‑PA‑12)
Rep. Emilia Sykes (D‑OH‑13)
Rep. Jennifer McClellan (D‑VA‑04)
Rep. Gabe Amo (D‑RI‑01)
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Big Brother Doesn’t Need A Warrant—He’s Got Your Receipts
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, enshrined to protect citizens against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” was once the bedrock of American privacy rights. But in the digital age, it’s being systematically eroded—not through brute force or sweeping legislation, but via a shadowy workaround: the government is buying your personal data from commercial data brokers.
The Legal Loophole: Buying What They Can’t Legally Take
Under U.S. law, the government is often restricted in what personal data it can collect directly without a warrant. Geolocation data, web browsing history, and financial transactions—these are all protected under various legal frameworks. But none of those protections apply if the data is available for purchase on the open market.
Enter commercial data brokers. These companies vacuum up user data from apps, websites, retailers, and third-party aggregators, amassing detailed dossiers on virtually every American. And because this data is “commercially available,” federal agencies such as the FBI, ICE, DEA, and the Department of Defense argue that they can purchase it without a warrant, sidestepping constitutional safeguards.
This isn’t a hypothetical threat. In 2021, a report by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) confirmed that U.S. intelligence agencies have been buying data they’d otherwise need court orders to access. In doing so, they effectively bypass Fourth Amendment protections and establish surveillance systems that are beyond the reach of judicial oversight.
California SB 690: The Trojan Horse in Privacy Law
Even states with reputations for strong privacy protections are falling prey to industry lobbying. California’s California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) once set a national precedent by requiring explicit consent before companies could collect and sell personal data. But new legislation is shifting that standard.
California Senate Bill 690 (SB 690) appears innocuous on its face. But it introduces a dangerously broad “commercial business purpose” exemption that allows businesses to collect and process personal information without explicit consumer consent.
California Senate Bill 690 creates a "commercial business purpose" exemption to the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), allowing businesses to use tracking technologies (e.g., cookies, session replay software) without consent if the data processing aligns with: furthering a "business purpose" (as defined by the CCPA), or activities subject to consumer opt-out rights .
Under this law, companies can claim that nearly any data processing falls within a “business purpose”—ranging from marketing to “internal research”—and thus proceed without ever notifying the consumer. This significantly weakens the opt-in model that made California’s privacy laws effective and respected.
The result? An even richer pipeline of data for brokers to harvest and resell—often to the very government agencies that aren’t allowed to collect it themselves.
Bottom Line
Your Data, Their Loophole: This is the uncomfortable truth: Your rights don’t disappear because you “consented” to a 100-page user agreement you never read. And your Fourth Amendment protections don’t apply when the government is a customer, not a collector.
The data economy is eroding constitutional protections in a slow, yet steady, manner. And until lawmakers close the “commercial purchase” loophole and restore genuine consent frameworks, Americans will continue to live in a surveillance state where privacy is for sale—and the highest bidder wears a badge.
Big Brother doesn’t need a warrant; it just purchases your data trail and transaction receipts. To insinuate probable cause, to demonstrate intent, and to seek penalty enhancements to force a plea bargain.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
In my not-so-humble opinion, Marjorie Taylor Greene is an anti-Semite as expressed by her passive-aggressive undermining sentiments when addressing the topic of Israel, especially when it intersects with broader U.S. foreign policy, military aid, or intra-party disputes.
Examples of Passive-Aggressive Behavior or Statements:
Criticizing U.S. Aid While Claiming Support: Greene often states support for Israel while simultaneously criticizing U.S. military aid, implying that Israel should be more self-reliant or that U.S. taxpayers are being unfairly burdened. “I support Israel 100%, but we shouldn’t be sending billions of dollars abroad when Americans are struggling.” This kind of framing—"I support, but..."—is a hallmark of passive-aggressive positioning, especially when it subtly undermines the partner being discussed.
Using Israel to Score Political Points Against Fellow Republicans: Greene has called out GOP colleagues for being “more loyal to foreign countries than to America,” particularly in budget debates. Though often not naming Israel outright, these statements have drawn criticism for being dog whistles or casting doubt on pro-Israel Republicans. She has hinted that some Republicans "care more about foreign wars than our own border," often in the context of military aid packages that include funds for Israel.
Social Media Tactics: Greene’s tweets or reposts sometimes include loaded comparisons or sarcastic digs related to Israel, such as juxtaposing Israeli defense funding with a lack of funding for domestic issues like border security or veterans' care.
Questioning Dual Loyalty—Then Denying It: In some fringe remarks, she has implied that certain U.S. politicians are too influenced by Israeli interests, only to quickly walk those statements back when pressed, blaming media distortion or “misinterpretation.”
Why It’s Considered Passive-Aggressive:
She expresses nominal support for Israel while undermining key aspects of the relationship (aid, strategic alliance).
She redirects blame or criticism at political opponents under the guise of budget concerns or “America First” rhetoric.
Her tone often skirts the line between skepticism and solidarity, creating plausible deniability.
Here are some clear examples where Marjorie Taylor Greene has taken a passive-aggressive tone regarding Israel, supporting Israel in principle while undermining the relationship through criticism, provocative comparisons, or mixed messaging:
1. Claiming support “but not funding the wars”
Greene posted on X in early June 2025: “I can easily say I support nuclear armed Israel's right to defend themselves and also say at the same time I don't want to fight or fund nuclear armed Israel's wars. Nor any other country for that matter. I'm sick of funding foreign aid and foreign countries and foreign everything. I want to fund American interests and issues.” <Source>
She affirms support for Israel while actively undermining U.S. military aid, using the classic “I support, but…” framing—undermining the whole without actually opposing it outright.
2. Misleading claims on U.S. aid to Israel
In November 2023, Greene tweeted: “Israel is literally dominating … and not one single American dollar has been spent on that war yet. Just think about that.” <Source>
This tweet downplays decades of U.S.–Israel financial support. Commenters, and even X’s Community Notes corrected her, with Stephen King bluntly asking: “Are you tripping? We’ve given them aid and armaments for decades.” <Source>
By denying clear U.S. investment, she sends a message that Americans are unfairly bankrolling Israeli wars—even after professing solidarity.
3. Painting Israel aid as part of a selfish funding agenda
Greene tied military aid into a broader domestic vs. foreign trope back in October 2023:
“I will be voting NO on all funding packages for the Ukraine war … and now the Israel war. … The United States government needs to focus on spending Americans’ hard earned tax dollars on our own country and needs to serve the American people NOT the rest of the world.” <Source>
Here, support for Israel becomes conditional, cast as optional, and in tension with domestic priorities.
4. Distance from pro-Israel lobbyists
On May 14, 2025, she posted: “I’m not controlled by big pharma, the military‑industrial complex, or AIPAC.” <Source>
This sounds like an assertion of independence, not an attack, but subtly implies that most pro-Israel politics are controlled, distancing herself and casting others as puppets of powerful lobby groups.
5. Skepticism of Israeli claims
During the Israel–Iran conflict in mid‑2025, Greene said: “We’ve been told [Iran is developing nuclear weapons] for the past 20 years … Americans don’t want to bomb Iran for the secular government of Israel.” <Source>
She expresses doubt about Israeli-aligned intelligence claims while framing U.S. bombing through the lens of “secular Israeli” interests, not American. It plants the notion that U.S. involvement is driven less by American security and more by Israeli influence.
Across these examples, Greene:
Asserts support but contradicts it by opposing aid;
Denies U.S. investment despite clear evidence;
Inserts Israel aid into domestic vs. foreign spending debates;
Frames pro-Israel activism as controlled.
Casts doubt on Israeli-driven foreign policy agendas.
These tactics serve as passive-aggressive undermining: she appears supportive while subtly eroding the pro-Israel framing and questioning U.S.–Israel alignment.
Marjorie Taylor Greene’s positions on Iran are also well-known:
Opposed the U.S. bombing of Iran
On X (formerly Twitter), she wrote: “Americans don’t want to bomb Iran because the secular government of Israel says that Iran is on the verge of developing a nuclear bomb any day now.” <Source>
Later reaffirmed: “We should not be bombing foreign countries on behalf of other countries, especially when they have their own nuclear weapons…” <Source>
Against regime change or intervention
She’s publicly rejected regime-change tactics, declaring: “MAGA is not for foreign wars. We are not for regime change. … The U.S. should not be involved in fighting nuclear‑armed Israel’s war with Iran.” <Source>
Criticized Trump’s strikes on Iran
After Trump ordered strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, Greene condemned him: “Feel[s] like a complete bait and switch on the MAGA agenda.” <Source>
She also stressed: “I can support President Trump … while disagreeing on bombing Iran … this is not our fight.” <Source>
Warned of division within the MAGA movement
Greene stated attacks on Iran risk fracturing Trump’s base: “It’s going to fracture it, and it’s already fracturing it.” <Source>
Supports ceasefire and U.S. non-involvement
Applauded the Israel‑Iran ceasefire and urged focus on peace: “Peace is the only answer… This was what we campaigned on… no more foreign wars.” <Source>
Marjorie Taylor Greene and others in the “America First” isolationist wing of U.S. politics often display a profound ignorance or willful dismissal of the strategic role Israel plays in countering a nuclear Iran, particularly in ways that benefit U.S. national security without direct American involvement.
Here’s how Marjorie Taylor Greene’s ignorance plays out in the real world:
1. Ignoring Israel as a Strategic Proxy -- Greene often frames Israel as a burden, saying, “I support Israel, but I don’t want to pay for their wars.”
This ignores the fact that Israel frequently acts independently to neutralize regional threats—such as nuclear development sites in Iran—without risking American lives.
Reality: Israel bombed nuclear facilities in Iraq (1981) and Syria (2007)—both operations had global non-proliferation benefits. Israel’s intelligence operations (e.g., Mossad’s raid of Iran’s nuclear archive in 2018) exposed key data that the U.S. couldn’t access directly.
2. Downplaying Iranian Nuclear Threats -- Greene has mocked the idea of urgency: “We’ve been told for 20 years that Iran’s going to get a bomb any day now.”
This dismisses the intelligence consensus (from both U.S. and Israeli agencies) that Iran is deliberately enriching uranium toward weapons-grade capacity.
Reality: Iran has now enriched uranium to 60% purity, just steps from weapons-grade (90%). Israel’s constant sabotage operations slow down the clock, preventing a full-blown crisis that might require direct U.S. military involvement.
3. Framing Israel’s Actions as Selfish -- Greene regularly implies that Israel’s actions serve only Israeli interests, not American ones: “We should not be bombing foreign countries on behalf of Israel.”
This ignores how Israeli deterrence and intelligence provide a strategic buffer that keeps Iran focused regionally, rather than on projecting threats toward U.S. assets or allies.
Reality: If Israel weren’t confronting Iran, the U.S. might have to. Israeli air defense systems, cyber warfare, and intelligence routinely benefit U.S. agencies, especially against Iran’s IRGC and proxy networks.
4. Overlooking the Cost of Inaction -- By opposing U.S. support for Israel, Greene ignores the greater costs of allowing Iran to go nuclear unchecked.
Reality: A nuclear Iran would trigger a Middle East arms race (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey). Israel’s unilateral actions prevent escalation to the point where the U.S. would be forced to act directly, saving American lives, treasure, and political capital.
Bottom Line
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is increasingly using her platform to launch passive-aggressive attacks against Israel, America’s closest ally in the Middle East. While cloaking her rhetoric in concern for U.S. interests, her statements often mirror talking points sympathetic to adversaries of the West, including Iran, a regime known for funding terror, spreading regional instability, and being directly responsible for the deaths of American citizens.
By questioning military aid, casting doubt on intelligence assessments, and amplifying conspiratorial narratives about Israel’s role in U.S. foreign policy, Greene risks giving aid and comfort to regimes that actively target Americans and our allies. This kind of rhetoric, whether intentional or ignorant, weakens U.S. deterrence, emboldens terrorist networks, and strains alliances vital to regional and global security.
It’s one thing to critique policy. It’s another to echo propaganda that aligns, intentionally or not, with the interests of hostile foreign states. Americans should take notice.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
US did not use bunker-buster bombs on one of Iran’s nuclear sites, top general tells lawmakers, citing depth of the target
Washington-CNN — The US military did not use bunker-buster bombs on one of Iran’s largest nuclear sites last weekend because the site is so deep that the bombs likely would not have been effective, the US’ top general told senators during a briefing on Thursday.
The comment by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, which was described by three people who heard his remarks and a fourth who was briefed on them, is the first known explanation given for why the US military did not use the Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb against the Isfahan site in central Iran. US officials believe Isfahan’s underground structures house nearly 60% of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, which Iran would need in order to ever produce a nuclear weapon.
The classified briefing to lawmakers was conducted by Caine, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.A spokesperson for Caine declined to comment, noting that he cannot comment on the chairman’s classified briefing to Congress.
Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy told CNN on Thursday night after receiving the briefing that some of Iran’s capabilities “are so far underground that we can never reach them. So they have the ability to move a lot of what has been saved into areas where there’s no American bombing capacity that can reach it.” <Source>
Intercepted call of Iranian officials downplays damage of U.S. attack
The United States obtained intercepted communication between senior Iranian officials discussing this month’s U.S. military strikes on Iran’s nuclear program and remarking that the attack was less devastating than they had expected, said four people familiar with the classified intelligence circulating within the U.S. government.
The communication, intended to be private, included Iranian government officials speculating as to why the strikes directed by President Donald Trump were not as destructive and extensive as they had anticipated, these people said. Like some others, they spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence.
“It’s shameful that The Washington Post is helping people commit felonies by publishing out-of-context leaks,” said White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. “The notion that unnamed Iranian officials know what happened under hundreds of feet of rubble is nonsense. Their nuclear weapons program is over.” <Source>
Who’s Really Working For Our Enemies? Look Inside Congress
The American people have long placed their trust in elected officials to uphold the Constitution, defend national interests, and safeguard classified information. But what happens when members of Congress—many without security clearances or vetted backgrounds—become unintentional (or worse, willing) conduits of sensitive intelligence?
Welcome to Capitol Hill in the 21st century: a chamber where briefings intended to remain behind closed doors often echo loudly as anonymous leaks across social media, cable news, and hostile foreign networks.
No Clearance, No Problem
Unlike members of the executive branch, most members of Congress are not required to hold security clearances. That’s right—individuals with no formal vetting process, no background investigation, and potentially questionable ties to foreign entities are granted access to classified information simply because they hold office. It’s a loophole as gaping as it is dangerous.
Classified briefings are routinely provided to Congressional committees and subcommittees. While the information is intended to guide national decision-making, “anonymous” leaks and “summaries” often spill out within hours. Some of these leaks are intentional, politically motivated to damage rivals or shape public narratives. Others are reckless, the product of carelessness or ideological zealotry. Either way, the damage is real, and our enemies are listening.
Divided Loyalties?
There is also a growing unease about the increasing number of legislators with deep ties to foreign ethnic communities or foreign political causes. Representation is one thing—many Americans celebrate the diversity of backgrounds in Congress. But what happens when personal identity, cultural allegiance, or foreign political sympathies begin to influence how classified information is interpreted—or shared?
In recent years, intelligence officials have sounded the alarm over adversarial foreign governments cultivating influence within U.S. institutions. Congress, unfortunately, is not immune. While the media obsesses over campaign finance violations or lobbyist dinners, few dare to question how deeply some elected officials are entangled in ethnic nationalist politics beyond our borders.
The Leak Culture: Anonymous Sources, Real Consequences
Making matters worse is the now-routine collaboration between anonymous Congressional sources and a willing press corps. “According to a senior lawmaker briefed on the matter…” has become the standard preamble for intelligence leaks that shape national headlines—without scrutiny, context, or accountability.
These leaks frequently follow classified briefings and are carefully worded to maintain plausible deniability. Often, they’re fed to ideologically aligned journalists who are more interested in the political impact than in the national security consequences.
This culture of leaking has two corrosive effects:
It undermines the credibility of legitimate intelligence efforts, causing public confusion and mistrust.
It provides adversaries with early insight into U.S. operations, capabilities, and internal divisions.
What was once considered espionage-by-proxy is now often presented as “transparency” or whistleblowing. However, leaking information from within Congress—without evidence, context, or a traceable source—is neither journalism nor a patriotic act. It’s sabotage.
National Security or Political Theater?
When classified briefings become talking points—broadcast with rhetorical flair by unvetted lawmakers seeking media attention—it ceases to be oversight. It becomes a threat. Whether it’s China, Russia, Iran, or transnational terrorist networks, our adversaries are watching C-SPAN, reading tweets, and tuning in to every word.
It’s time to confront the hard truth: the weakest link in America’s national security chain might not be a spy or hacker—it might be a sitting member of Congress with a microphone, an agenda, and no clearance.
Time for Reform
Congress must be held to the same standards of security and accountability that apply across the federal government. That means:
Mandatory security clearances for any member accessing classified briefings.
Routine and nonpartisan background investigations.
Zero tolerance for unauthorized disclosure of sensitive material.
Scrutiny of foreign entanglements—financial, familial, and ideological.
Criminal penalties for leaking classified information, regardless of title.
Oversight without accountability is just theater. And theater in the age of information warfare is not harmless—it’s dangerous.
Bottom Line
America cannot defend secrets in war if it cannot keep them in peace. When elected officials treat classified intelligence like political currency—and when anonymous leaks become standard operating procedure—our enemies win without firing a shot. Congress was meant to be a guardian of the republic, not a broadcast tower for our vulnerabilities. If we don’t demand security and accountability from those entrusted with our nation’s secrets, we might soon find ourselves answering to the very adversaries we once tried to deter.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
The Catholic Church’s historic tax-exempt status in the United States is based on a straightforward principle: religious institutions are exempt from taxation as long as they refrain from engaging in overt political advocacy.
This longstanding principle exists to protect both the church and the state from entanglement, manipulation, and undermining of democratic processes. When a religious institution chooses to leverage its influence to promote partisan or one-sided political agendas, such as the Catholic Church’s vocal support for open borders and mass immigration policies, it crosses a constitutional and ethical line.
This is not a matter of silencing religious belief. It is about holding institutions accountable when they act as political actors under the protection of tax-exemption designed for religious, not partisan, purposes.
Catholic Bishops Try to Rally Opposition to Trump’s Immigration Agenda Leading prelates are expressing outrage at the drive toward mass deportation.
As the Trump administration escalates its aggressive deportation campaign, Roman Catholic bishops across the United States are raising objections to the treatment of migrants and challenging the president’s policy.
For years many bishops focused their most vocal political engagement on ending abortion, rarely putting as much capital behind any other issue. Many supported President Trump’s actions to overturn Roe v. Wade, and targeted Democratic Catholic politicians who supported abortion access.
But now they are increasingly invoking Pope Leo XIV’s leadership and Pope Francis’s legacy against Mr. Trump’s immigration actions, and prioritizing humane treatment of immigrants as a top public issue. They are protesting the president’s current domestic policy bill in Congress, showing up at court hearings to deter Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, and urging Catholics and non-Catholics alike to put compassion for humans ahead of political allegiances.
The image in Los Angeles and elsewhere of ICE agents seizing people in Costco parking lots and carwashes “rips the illusion that’s being portrayed, that this is an effort which is focused on those who have committed significant crimes,” said Cardinal Robert W. McElroy of Washington, in an interview from Rome.
“The realities are becoming more ominous,” he said. “It is becoming clearer that this is a wholesale, indiscriminate deportation effort aimed at all those who came to the country without papers.”
Cardinal McElroy, who has frequently spoken against Mr. Trump’s immigration policies, was named the archbishop of Washington as one of Pope Francis’s final major actions in the United States, reflecting the Vatican’s desire to counter the Trump administration’s immigration agenda. Immigration arrests are rising sharply, and ICE has a goal of apprehending 3,000 people a day.
“A very large number of Catholic bishops, and religious leaders in general, are outraged by the steps which the administration is taking to expel mostly hardworking, good people from the United States,” Cardinal McElroy said. < Source>
A Political Pulpit, Not a Neutral Ministry
The U.S. Catholic bishops and affiliated organizations have repeatedly taken public, coordinated stances supporting permissive immigration policies, often cloaked in theological language about “welcoming the stranger.” Yet, these positions increasingly resemble lobbying efforts, rather than spiritual teachings. When bishops use homilies, diocesan resources, and even Catholic Charities to pressure lawmakers, condemn border enforcement, or shield illegal immigrants from deportation, they are not simply preaching morality; they are wading directly into the political battlefield.
Open borders are not a spiritual issue; it is a political one, fraught with economic, security, and cultural consequences. When the Church takes a one-sided stance on it, it denies the legitimacy of opposing views, even when those opposing views are grounded in genuine concerns for national sovereignty, public safety, national security, and the rule of law. Worse, it does so using resources subsidized by American taxpayers who may fundamentally disagree with it.
A Subsidized Political Machine
Tax exemption is not a divine right; it is a privilege granted by a pluralistic society in the interest of encouraging community benefit and religious freedom. It becomes a form of government subsidy when religious organizations avoid taxes yet use their resources to influence public policy.
Imagine any other tax-exempt nonprofit—say, a hospital or university, explicitly campaigning for open borders or funding legal defenses for undocumented immigrants as a central mission. They would face immediate scrutiny from the IRS and possibly lose their 501(c)(3) status. The Church should not be immune simply because it wraps its political messaging in scripture.
When Catholic institutions campaign for policies that change the electorate, reshape national identity, and overwhelm local services, all while retaining privileged tax-free status, it constitutes a distortion of democracy. American citizens are subsidizing a religious institution that acts as a powerful political lobby, often without their consent and in opposition to their values.
A Call for Consistency and Accountability
The solution is not to ban the Church from speaking out; it is to apply the law consistently. If the Catholic Church wishes to continue as a tax-exempt religious organization, it must refrain from systemic partisan advocacy. If it chooses instead to be an influential political voice, especially in favor of radical immigration policies, it must forfeit its exemption and operate on the same playing field as every other political entity in the country.
Bottom Line
No institution should be allowed to preach politics while shielded from the financial responsibilities that come with civic participation. If the Church wants to shape policy, it must do so as a political actor, not as a tax-privileged sanctuary above the law.
The Catholic Church has a right to its beliefs. But if it continues to push one-sided political agendas like open borders from the pulpit to the Capitol, it should pay its fair share like every other political organization. The integrity of both church and democracy demands no less.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
When it comes to Iran’s nuclear program, the truth is not just elusive—it’s buried beneath layers of earth, reinforced concrete, political spin, half-truths, and outright misinformation. Whether you’re watching a press conference by President Trump or his surrogates, scrolling through your feed, or tuning into cable news, one thing is clear: nobody is telling the whole story.
Let’s start with the obvious: you cannot trust Donald Trump to give an accurate account of Iran’s nuclear capacity. He openly dismisses the findings of his intelligence agencies and advisors if they contradict his narrative. He is fond of quoting others who agree with him to avoid declarative statements.
Then comes the so-called “legacy media,” a term often used to describe mainstream outlets like CNN, The New York Times, and others that frequently fail to challenge their assumptions or go beyond their corporatized talking points. Stories on the President, his administration, the military, and Iran’s nuclear ambitions often cite anonymous sources, vague intelligence, or government leaks without sufficient scrutiny. Objectivity and truth become casualties when headlines are driven by clicks and narratives shaped by geopolitical loyalties.
I Call Bullshit
What we’re being sold is a mix of speculation, spin, and outright fiction, filtered through agendas and ideologies. And if you think any of it amounts to “truth,” you’re already being played.
Iran has spent decades playing cat-and-mouse with the international community, hiding enrichment sites, stonewalling inspectors, and cooking the books on uranium production. Anyone pretending Iran has ever been fully transparent is either lying or willfully ignorant.
The so-called nuclear deal (JCPOA) was President Obama’s political theater to justify an unearned Nobel Peace Prize, not a solution, as it provided Iran with a path to a nuclear weapon and ballistic missile delivery system. It didn’t give inspectors real access. It didn’t account for military sites. It didn’t force full disclosure of uranium stockpiles. It was a game of “trust but don’t verify,” which Iran was all too happy to exploit. They knew Western diplomats were more interested in optics than in enforcement.
We Just Don’t Know
Today, it’s even worse. With international inspectors largely sidelined, no complete audits, and Iran refusing to play by any rules, any statement you hear about the destruction of Iran’s nuclear status or suggestions that Iran is “months away” or “years away” from resuming weapon production is often pure guesswork. And that guesswork is filtered through the lens of whoever benefits most from the fear or the denial.
Meanwhile, the legacy media play along, regurgitating talking points from anonymous officials and spin-doctoring intelligence leaks to match partisan narratives. And on social media, good luck finding clarity, you’re more likely to see algorithm-boosted disinformation from foreign bot troll farms or keyboard warriors who couldn’t locate Iran on a map.
Bottom Line
Some claim Iran is still “weeks or months away” from a deliverable nuclear device. Others suggest there’s “no serious threat.” But without hard data, both positions are built on speculation, not science. And that’s a dangerous game. After Israel bombed Iran's facilities, one might think that the Iranians were practical enough to load up their portable goodies and abandon a facility that was sure to be hit with a massive bunker-buster bomb.
The brutal truth: Without boots-on-the-ground inspections and a complete accounting of enriched uranium, no one actually knows what Iran’s nuclear capacity is.
So stop pretending we do.
Stop acting like your favorite politician, outlet, or influencer has a lock on the facts. They don’t. They’re guessing, spinning, and sometimes outright lying.
Until Iran allows complete, unrestricted inspections, military sites included, and delivers a verifiable inventory of its nuclear materials, everything else is just ideological fan fiction.
In national security, wishful thinking kills. And blind trust in narratives, whether from the right, left, or neighbors, isn’t just lazy. It’s dangerous.
What I do know is that Iran has the makings of a dirty bomb using widely dispersible uranium-based radioactive liquid or dispersible dust—a continuing credible threat.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
If history is a guide, and it often is, then we would be wise to view every ceasefire declared by the Islamicist regime in Tehran with extreme skepticism.
Over the past four decades, Iran’s leadership has demonstrated a consistent pattern: use diplomatic lulls and ceasefires not as pathways to peace, but as strategic pauses to regroup, rearm, and recalibrate.
From the Iran-Iraq War to the post-JCPOA period, Tehran has turned moments of de-escalation into opportunities to fortify its proxies, expand its influence across the Middle East, and deepen its military-industrial reach. Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen have all benefited from these pauses in conflict. Rather than signaling a shift in mindset, ceasefires under this regime often reflect tactical necessity, not strategic evolution.
What should concern the United States even more is not only Tehran’s unchanged approach but also the growing international environment that seems increasingly tolerant, or even enabling, of it. The continued election of progressive factions in the West, some of whom align ideologically or strategically with Islamist regimes under the guise of anti-imperialism or intersectional solidarity, is creating a political environment where accountability is selectively applied.
Betrayed by the Democrats
In the United States, we’ve seen elements within the progressive wing of the Democratic Party lend rhetorical and sometimes political support to groups and regimes whose values are fundamentally incompatible with liberal democracy. The term “progressive” is becoming increasingly elastic—capable of stretching to include causes that undermine women’s rights, religious freedom, and minority protections, so long as those causes position themselves as resisting Western “hegemony.”
We have just seen an avowed Islamicist, Zohran Mamdani, win the Democratic primary nomination for the Mayor of New York City under the aegis of the Democratic socialists.
Zohran Mamdani, an avowed Islamicist and Democratic Socialist and State Assemblyman from Queens, has just secured the Democratic primary nomination for Mayor of New York City, marking a historic moment as one of the most prominent Muslim politicians to seek control of America’s largest city.
In recent years, cities such as Dearborn, Michigan, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Hamtramck, Michigan, have seen growing Islamicist political engagement, reflecting demographic shifts and increased civic participation.
The Canary in the Coalmine: Britain’s Shift: From Blitz Spirit to Appeasement
In Britain, we have witnessed a dramatic and disconcerting shift in public and political sentiment. A nation once defined by its defiance in the face of tyranny, where ordinary citizens endured the Blitz with stoic British resilience as they resisted the Nazi war machine, now finds itself increasingly hesitant, even unwilling, to defend its foundational British values against a rising tide of Islamist ideology.
The British media appear more concerned with appeasement and protecting Islamist sensibilities than defending traditional British values.
Those who speak out against rising Islamicist extremism are dismissed as bigots, while known radicals are legitimized under the banner of multiculturalism. The labels may have changed, but the authoritarian impulse remains: a belief in a superior class of “true believers” demanding submission.
The defiance that once defined Britain is giving way to appeasement. If that trend continues, the nation risks surrendering not to bombs, but to ideological conquest from within.
This inversion of moral clarity would have been unthinkable in the days of Churchill. Today, however, under the banner of multiculturalism and inclusion, the line between tolerance and appeasement has all but vanished. British citizens, descendants of those who withstood Hitler’s rockets, are now expected to silently accept parallel legal systems, honor-based violence, and political movements that seek to replace British democratic values with theocratic rule.
Bottom Line
We are watching not just a regional shift, but a potential global restructuring. If Islamist regimes like Tehran’s can operate with ideological and material cover from segments of the West, particularly those who influence policy under banners of social justice and anti-colonialism, then the geopolitical balance that emerged after World War II is truly in flux.
This isn’t about left vs. right, it’s about clarity vs. delusion. It’s about recognizing that regimes built on religious absolutism, repression, and expansionism do not reform through goodwill gestures or ceasefires. They recalibrate.
And unless the West wakes up to that reality, the coming decades may be shaped less by democratic principles and more by theocratic ambition, ironically enabled by those who claim to fight for progress.
The spirit of America is not just about physical endurance and military might; it is a spiritual resistance to tyranny in all forms. If that spirit is not rekindled, America may find itself yielding, not to a foreign army, but to an internal erosion of everything that once made it great.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
New York City’s progressive communist democrats have officially nominated Zohran Mamdani, a radical anti-Semitic Communist Islamicist ideologue, as their candidate for mayor. A self-described democratic socialist with a record of anti-Israel rhetoric and support for terrorist positions, Mamdani doesn’t just want to govern the city; he wants to fundamentally remake it.
And no, the election was not rigged; this wasn’t a backroom decision or a fringe write-in. Mamdani’s nomination was public, popular, and celebrated by his base. Proudly supported by his prominent fellow travelers, Senator Bernie Sanders, Representative Alexandria Ocasio‑Cortez, and the radicals at the Democratic Socialists of America.
Mamdani’s platform reads less like a traditional policy agenda and more like something scrawled on the wall during a protest. It’s a blueprint for dismantling, not reforming, nearly every institution standing between civil society and chaos. His supporters call it justice. Others recognize it as ideological extremism wrapped in utopian buzzwords.
Zohran Mamdani isn’t running to manage the machine. He’s running to gut it. His campaign is a Molotov cocktail with bullet points:
Free bus fare citywide
A network of city-owned grocery stores
Rent freezes and control over private property
Abolish NYPD
Abolish prisons
Abolish medical bills
Abolish private health insurance
Ban all guns
Legalize sex work
Safe injection sites
End cash bail
Decriminalize drug possession
End sentencing enhancements
End all cooperation with ICE
This isn’t a platform, it’s a list of demands from the most extreme corners of activist Twitter and TikTok.
To his supporters, many young, online, and disconnected from practical governance, Mamdani represents “real” change. To others, he embodies a movement that believes destruction is the path to justice. He’s not campaigning to manage the city’s complex machine; he’s campaigning to tear it down and build something new, uncertain, untested, and potentially unlivable.
The most astonishing part? There’s no subterfuge. No hidden agenda. Mamdani’s radicalism is openly declared. Yet, he’s been embraced by a segment of the electorate so hungry for change that they seem indifferent to where that change might lead.
Bottom Line
This moment isn’t just about one candidate. It’s about what happens when a political party prioritizes ideological purity over pragmatic leadership. It’s about a generation disillusioned by the status quo, seduced by communist revolutionary promises, and unconcerned with consequences.
By endorsing Mamdani, New York’s progressive communist democrats have crossed a line, from hopeful reform to reckless rebellion. They’ve chosen applause over accountability, activism over administration.
This isn’t merely the rise of an unqualified radical. It’s a warning about where unchecked political extremism leads. If voters don’t realize what they’ve endorsed, they soon might—when promises meet reality, and the cost of their “change” becomes painfully clear.
New York asked for transformation. It may soon get something far more destructive.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
There are now credible doubts that a cognitively impaired President, Joe Biden, may not have been aware of official state documents to be executed in his name or authorized the use of his signature on official state documents, thus raising questions of their legitimacy.
Former White House official Neera Tanden, a long‑time Democratic political operative closely associated with Barack Obama, admitted under oath in testimony before the House Oversight Committee that she directed the use of President Joe Biden’s autopen signature, a mechanical device capable of reproducing his signature, on dozens of official documents, including executive orders, clemency warrants, and federal legislation.
"As Staff Secretary, I was responsible for handling the flow of documents to and from the president. "I was also authorized to direct that autopen signatures be affixed to certain categories of documents."
Though Tanden maintained that the process was normal, customary, and routine, inherited from prior administrations, and a matter of bureaucratic efficiency, when the President shows obvious signs of dementia and memory loss, it is a matter of national security.
According to House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, Tanden also admitted that she had minimal contact with President Biden and outlined the procedure for authorizing signatures.
“Just yesterday, we heard from our first witness, Neera Tanden, the former Staff Secretary who controlled the Biden autopen. Ms. Tanden testified that she had minimal interaction with President Biden, despite wielding tremendous authority. She explained that to obtain approval for autopen signatures, she would send decision memos to members of the President’s inner circle and had no visibility of what occurred between sending the memo and receiving it back with approval. Her testimony raises serious questions about who was really calling the shots in the Biden White House amid the President’s obvious decline. We will continue to pursue the truth for the American people.”
The Investigation
MEMORANDUM FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FROM THE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
In recent months, it has become increasingly apparent that former President Biden’s aides abused the power of Presidential signatures through the use of an autopen to conceal Biden’s cognitive decline and assert Article II authority. This conspiracy marks one of the most dangerous and concerning scandals in American history. The American public was purposefully shielded from discovering who wielded the executive power, all while Biden’s signature was deployed across thousands of documents to effect radical policy shifts.
For years, President Biden suffered from serious cognitive decline. The Department of Justice, for example, concluded that, despite clear evidence that Biden had broken the law, he should not stand trial owing to his incompetent mental state. Biden’s cognitive issues and apparent mental decline during his Presidency were even “worse” in private, and those closest to him “tried to hide it” from the public. To do so, Biden’s advisors during his years in office severely restricted his news conferences and media appearances, and they scripted his conversations with lawmakers, government officials, and donors, all to cover up his inability to discharge his duties.
Notwithstanding these well-documented issues, the White House issued over 1,200 Presidential documents, appointed 235 judges to the Federal bench, and issued more pardons and commutations than any administration in United States history. For instance, just 2 days before Christmas in 2024, the White House announced that Biden commuted the sentences of 37 of the 40 most vile and monstrous criminals on Federal death row, including several child killers and mass murderers.
Although the authority to take these executive actions, along with many others, is constitutionally committed to the President, there are serious doubts as to the decision making process and even the degree of Biden’s awareness of these actions being taken in his name.
The vast majority of Biden’s executive actions were signed using a mechanical signature pen, often called an autopen, as opposed to Biden’s own hand. This was especially true of actions taken during the second half of his Presidency, when his cognitive decline had apparently become even more clear to those working most closely with him.
Given clear indications that President Biden lacked the capacity to exercise his Presidential authority, if his advisors secretly used the mechanical signature pen to conceal this incapacity, while taking radical executive actions all in his name, that would constitute an unconstitutional wielding of the power of the Presidency, a circumstance that would have implications for the legality and validity of numerous executive actions undertaken in Biden’s name. <Source: The White House>
Biden’s Denial
In response to an investigation ordered by former President Donald Trump regarding Biden’s use of an autopen for signing documents, including pardons, Biden said:
“Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn’t is ridiculous and false.” <Source>
However, Biden has not addressed the issue directly in a public forum, and no official logs or memos have been released to confirm that Biden authorized the use of an autopen signature on controversial or high-stakes executive actions.
A Signature Without a President?
For nearly two years, from October 2021 to May 2023, Tanden exercised authority to sign documents on behalf of President Biden using the autopen. All of this occurred under the cloak of secrecy with no public awareness and virtually no media scrutiny.
If a faceless White House staffer, appointed and never elected, had functional control over binding presidential acts, from clemency to national security, it represents a clear and present danger to our democracy, which demands transparency and the consent of the governed.
Bottom Line
Who was really pulling the levers of executive power? Can any of the documents signed with the autopen be challenged in Court? Who has standing to bring these issues before the Court?
How many other presidential acts, including those under the aegis of the commander-in-chief, were decided and executed without the public’s knowledge?
Neera Tanden, a faceless bureaucrat with unlimited and unchecked power, was never elected. Yet for nearly two years, she had the legal authority to affix the President’s name to documents that directly affected both the individual lives of Americans and the direction of foreign and domestic policies. All done in near total secrecy and without oversight.
But who, at the top of Biden’s bureaucrats and bullies, actually made the decisions? It is unlikely that it was functionary Neera Tanden.
Again, democracy was subverted from within by the progressive communist democrats, and the incurious media wants you to look at their latest bright, shiny object relating to President Donald Trump.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Sanctuary Chaos: How Democrats Turned Los Angeles Into a War Zone
Los Angeles is no stranger to political unrest, but what unfolded in early June wasn’t a protest; it was anarchy. Fueled by anti-ICE rhetoric, sanctuary city policies, and a well-oiled activist machine, the city spiraled into violence that left neighborhoods scorched, law enforcement injured, and downtown looking like a war zone.
And through it all, Democratic leaders didn’t just stand by; they actively undermined efforts to restore order. This wasn’t an accident. It was the latest chapter in a dangerous pattern of creating chaos for political gain.
Why Democrats Won’t Condemn the LA Riots: Fireworks, Fire, and Failed Leadership
When the streets of Los Angeles descended into chaos following immigration enforcement actions on June 6, 2025, one thing became painfully clear: Progressive communist democrats would rather defend political optics than defend public safety, law enforcement, or the integrity of our cities.
As federal agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) carried out lawful operations, protests quickly turned into violent riots. Downtown LA was left scarred, federal buildings vandalized, small businesses looted, police vehicles set ablaze, and law enforcement officers injured by projectiles, and in a disturbing escalation, commercial-grade fireworks were intentionally aimed at them like weapons.
This Riot Wasn’t Spontaneous. It Wasn’t Grassroots. It Was Coordinated.
There is a clear pattern and practice emerging from the progressive communist democrat playbook: activating a network of left-wing agitators and activist groups using online organizing tools to manufacture outrage and mobilize “street actions” that are designed less to express grievances and more to create viral media moments of confrontation. These operations are often propped up by Democrat-affiliated nonprofits, unions, and local political operatives, who treat civil unrest as a political tool rather than a public safety crisis.
They’ve mastered the formula: provoke a standoff, flood the streets with bodies, draw in the cameras, and then look the other way as the most radical actors break off to commit acts of violence, vandalize and destroy property, and challenge law enforcement with brazen in-your-face impunity.
The new trend of using industrial-grade fireworks as makeshift explosives aimed at officers marks a chilling escalation. These aren’t bottle rockets. They’re dangerous, high-powered explosives that have already caused serious injury and chaos in multiple cities, and Los Angeles just became the latest example.
And yet… where are the Democrats?
Instead of condemning the violence or supporting efforts to stabilize the city, California’s progressive communist democrats, the oily Governor Gavin Newsom and malevolent L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, attacked President Donald Trump and the federal response. When President Trump authorized 2,000 National Guard troops to restore order, Newsom attempted to block them. Rather than stand with law enforcement, he stood with the agitators.
Blinded by Ideology, Congressional Democrats Choose Politics Over Public Safety
House Representative Young Kim (R‑CA) spearheaded a House resolution (H. Res. 516) condemning the violent unrest in Los Angeles that erupted after ICE deportation raids, garnering unanimous support from California’s Republican delegation. The measure strongly denounced acts of arson, vandalism, and assaults on officers under the guise of protest, praised the constitutional right to peaceful assembly, and urged state and local officials, including Governor Newsom and LA Mayor Bass, to collaborate with federal and local law enforcement to restore order.
In a procedural roll call (H. Res. 530) providing for consideration of H. Res. 516 condemning the violent June 2025 riots in Los Angeles, California, it appears that the Democrats wanted to avoid the issue by voting 206 against being placed on the House Calendar for further debate and consideration. (206 Democrats voted against it, zero for it, and six abstained.)
The resolution’s introduction spotlighted stark party divisions over law enforcement, but whether it passed or failed remains pending on the House floor.
This is not new behavior. We saw the same posture during the 2020 riots. Democrat-aligned groups mobilized mass street actions with little concern for where the tipping point into violence occurred. Local leaders issued orders tying law enforcement’s hands, prosecutors dropped charges, and media surrogates downplayed arson and looting as “mostly peaceful.” The only difference now is the escalation in tactics and the boldness of the violence.
Democrats have created a monster they can’t, or won’t, control. By empowering lawless protests under the guise of activism and refusing to draw a line when that protest descends into violence, they’ve undermined public trust and created an atmosphere where chaos is not only tolerated but also protected.
Bottom Line
Until Democratic leadership is willing to stand up to their own activist base and unequivocally condemn these violent tactics, including the use of fireworks as weapons and the intentional destruction of public and private property, they can no longer claim to care about law, order, or public safety.
Law-abiding Americans deserve better than politically selective outrage. They deserve leadership that defends peace, not just headlines.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Homosexuality is punishable by death in Gaza. Hamas tortured and executed members for alleged same-sex relationships. So, why don’t they see it? Why did they not hear of it? Why did they reject all the evidence right in front of them?
They don’t want to see it, and they don’t want to hear it, because their ideology and agitator-led ideology trumps reality in the moment.
Democrats, few things wreck your mental health like rooting for the very forces that want to erase your own existence.
When you back groups or regimes that totally clash with your own values or identity, like gays supporting cultures that punish or execute LGBTQ+ folks, defending violent criminals that prey on your community, or terrorist organizations that would rather see you dead, it can seriously mess with your head.
This kind of clash, called cognitive dissonance, is your brain getting stressed out because your beliefs and actions don’t align with reality (for the aging 60s democrats: it’s like harshing your mellow big time).
Over time, that internal conflict can lead to anxiety, depression, and feeling lost or confused about who you really are. Ignoring this dissonance worsens things, whether because of social pressure, ideology, or just trying to make sense of a complicated world. Mental health experts say facing these conflicts head-on is essential to keep your mind healthy and stay true to yourself.
Correlation Between Ideology and Well-being
In recent years, researchers and pollsters have paid closer attention to how political affiliation and ideological leanings may be associated with mental health outcomes. While the link between politics and mental health is complex, evolving studies suggest that one’s political beliefs, and even party identification, can correlate with psychological well-being, anxiety levels, and perceived life satisfaction.
Party Affiliation and Mental Health Trends
Double-click to enlarge
Studies conducted by Pew Research Center, Gallup, and the General Social Survey (GSS) have noted some differences in self-reported mental health across political lines.
Democrats and Mental Health: Surveys have consistently shown that individuals who identify as Democrats are more likely to report experiencing stress, anxiety, and depression compared to their Republican counterparts. For instance, a 2020 Gallup survey found that self-reported mental health ratings were lowest among liberal Democrats, with only 29% rating their mental health as “excellent,” compared to 59% of conservative Republicans.
Republicans and Mental Health: Republicans, particularly those identifying as conservative, are more likely to report higher levels of mental well-being. This could be influenced by factors such as religiosity, community integration, and a higher tendency to report personal agency and optimism.
2. Liberal vs. Conservative Ideology and Psychological Profiles
Double-click to enlarge
Beyond party lines, ideology plays a significant role in how people process emotional information and experience the world:
Liberals and Mental Health: Tend to score higher on psychological traits related to openness, empathy, and sensitivity to injustice. While these traits can foster inclusivity and creativity, they may also correlate with increased anxiety, especially during social upheaval or perceived injustice.
Conservatives and Mental Health: Tend to score higher on traits like conscientiousness and stability. Research has shown that conservatives are more likely to report feelings of personal control, which can act as a buffer against stress. However, this can also lead to resistance to change or discomfort with ambiguity.
Some psychologists suggest that liberal ideologies are more future-focused and socially critical, which may expose adherents to more frequent emotional labor, while conservative ideologies often emphasize stability and tradition, potentially offering more psychological grounding.
3. Cultural and Social Influences
Context matters. Political beliefs are not developed in a vacuum; they are shaped by your parents, peers, education, socioeconomic conditions, community structures, religion, and media consumption.
Media Consumption: Different political groups consume media differently, which can impact perceived threat levels and general mental outlook. Exposure to sensational or polarized news can elevate anxiety regardless of political leaning.
Community and Support: Conservatives often report stronger ties to religious and community organizations, which may provide more structured social support, one of the key protective factors for mental health.
4. Caveats, Cautions, and Considerations
Caveat: It’s essential to note that self-reported mental health is subjective and may reflect not only emotional states but also differing attitudes about expressing mental health struggles.
Correlation ≠ Causation: Just because mental health outcomes vary across political lines doesn’t mean politics is the cause. Personality traits, life circumstances, and socio-demographics play a significant role.
Stigma and Reporting Bias: There may be cultural differences in willingness to acknowledge or report mental health struggles. Some groups might underreport due to stigma or different interpretations of what constitutes “poor” mental health.
Bottom Line
Very Liberal respondents report the lowest mental health scores on average.
Very Conservative respondents report the highest levels of excellent mental health.
Moderates fall near the center, with relatively better average well-being than liberals but lower than conservatives.
Democrats, are you fucking nuts? Looking for a therapeutic solution? Time to leave the progressive communist democrats and their radical bullshit behind. I am not saying join the Republicans, because we don’t want you diluting our impact. Just enjoy nature and sit this one out.
HOW DO DEMOCRATS EXPLAIN VOTING FOR A COMMUNIST WHO WANTS TO DESTROY OUR AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE, AS THE DEMOCRATS' NOMINEE FOR NEW YORK MAYOR, OTHER THAN MENTAL ILLNESS?
Democrats, you are so screwed.
-- Steve
Sources:
Gallup (2020). “Americans’ Ratings of Their Mental Health.”
Pew Research Center (2022). “Trends in Psychological Distress Across Political Groups.”
American Psychological Association (APA). Studies on Personality and Political Ideology.
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Democratic Dilemma: Between Corruption and Communism
In a stunning upset encapsulating the Democratic Party’s internal tension, Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old Democratic Socialist and Queens assemblyman, defeated former Governor Andrew Cuomo in the 2025 New York City Democratic mayoral primary. The race, shaped by a corrupt ranked-choice voting scheme and a generational political divide, underscores the ongoing battle between establishment centrism and insurgent progressivism.
Backed by a massive war chest and decades of political clout, Cuomo entered the race as the establishment favorite. But his campaign, shadowed by past corruption, preventable senior citizen deaths, lying, scandals, and a “same old” policy vision, couldn’t withstand Mamdani’s grassroots progressive communist democrat machine. With 91% of ballots counted, Mamdani led with 43.5% of first-choice votes, compared to Cuomo’s 36.4%. Cuomo conceded before full tabulations were completed, acknowledging Mamdani’s insurmountable lead.
Mamdani’s campaign, built on rent freezes, city-run groceries, fare-free buses, and universal childcare, radically departed from status quo politics. He was endorsed by prominent progressive communist democrat figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and propelled by over 10,000 activist and union volunteers.
In recent years, the Democratic Party has reduced its electoral choices to a tug-of-war between corruption and communism.
On one hand, the party's top establishment poohbahs are often criticized for being too cozy with billionaires, corporate donors, unions, special interests, and entrenched corrupt power players. These ties, their opponents argue, lead to policy stagnation and a betrayal of working-class voters, echoing concerns of “corruption” or systemic compromise.
On the other hand, the party’s progressive wing pushes for bold reforms, Medicare for All, student debt cancellation, climate justice, and espouses “socialist” or “communist” ideals by supporters who see the existing system as broken and seek a fundamental dismantling and restructuring to address inequality and injustice.
Bottom Line
Democratic voters are caught between two unsatisfying options: maintain a flawed status quo or embrace radical change with uncertain consequences.
Can the Democratic Party reconcile its internal divisions and offer a coherent, inspiring vision beneficial for America and Americans?
Time and the next election will tell.
THIS ELECTION SHOULD SCARE YOU — AND NOT JUST IF YOU LIVE IN NEW YORK
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Once the Center of the World, Now in Decline: Progressive Democrats Brought New York City to Its Knees
There was a time when New York City was the undisputed capital of the world, a beacon of financial might, artistic innovation, and American ambition. The city set the pace for global culture and commerce from Wall Street to Broadway. But today, that same city is wracked by rising crime, collapsing infrastructure, unaffordable housing, and civic dysfunction.
What happened?
The answer is painfully clear: decades of leadership by corrupt, socialist, and outright communist mayors, backed by a Democratic Party that long ago abandoned moderation in favor of ideological extremism. These so-called “progressive” leaders have driven out businesses with punitive taxes and crushing regulations, dismantled policing in the name of social justice, coddled criminals over victims while violence spirals out of control, and replaced merit-based governance with identity politics and performative radicalism.
Worse still, the Democratic establishment hasn’t just tolerated this decay; it’s actively promoted it, elevating candidates who are either deeply corrupt, like Andrew Cuomo, now seeking a comeback, or openly aligned with anti-capitalist, anti-American ideologies, like Zohran Mamdani, whose rhetoric mirrors that of revolutionary movements, not democratic institutions.
These aren’t fringe outliers. They’re the face of the party in New York.
The result? Businesses are fleeing, middle-class families are priced out or moving away, and the world that once looked to New York as a model of success now sees a warning sign. Progressive communist Democrats have turned the Empire City into a cautionary tale—and if voters don’t wake up soon, there may not be much left to save.
The Democratic primary for the Mayor of New York City takes place on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, with early voting from June 14‑22, with the general election set for Tuesday, November 4, 2025. And the game is rigged with a ranked-choice voting scheme that will determine the Democrat nominee.
The key issues are all ideologically driven, including public safety and policing, housing affordability, and Trump’s handling of international crises in Gaza and Iran. (Israel‑Palestine tensions, Iran Nothing about personal freedoms, lower taxes, fewer regulations, and a smaller governing bureaucracy.
According to the polls, the front-runner is Andrew Cuomo…
Sexual harassment: A 2021 independent inquiry by NY Attorney General Letitia James concluded Cuomo sexually harassed at least 11 women—ranging from unwanted touching and kissing to inappropriate comments—and retaliated against accusers, prompting widespread calls for resignation.
COVID‑19 nursing home cover‑up: Cuomo’s administration mandated COVID‑positive hospital discharges back into nursing homes and underreported related deaths by up to 50%—actions now under federal DOJ investigation, with critics citing a deliberate attempt to suppress data.
Ethics and misuse of office: Allegations include using government staff to help with a lucrative book deal, running a patronage-style “Moreland Commission” shut down without proper oversight, and failing to fully deliver on campaign promises to reform Albany’s culture.
Corruption scandals (“Buffalo Billion”): Several convictions in the Buffalo Billion economic development initiative involved top Cuomo aides, raising questions about cronyism and bid‑rigging under his watch.
Ethics complaints in his comeback bid: As he campaigns for NYC mayor in 2025, Cuomo faces new scrutiny for failing to disclose over $2.6 million in stock options linked to a nuclear tech firm, fueling renewed concerns over transparency and conflicts of interest.
These controversies contributed to his 2021 resignation and continue to overshadow his political resurgence, even as he leads in polls and draws fierce opposition.
… in a match-up with a stone-cold communist, Muslim, Zohran Mamdani
Sparked considerable backlash for his anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, and pro-BDS positions, including defending the slogan “globalize the intifada,” praising a rap track that admired leaders of a Hamas-linked foundation, and making false claims that elected officials used taxpayer dollars for trips to Israel.
He’s also Hinduophobic and anti-Modi rhetoric, having labeled PM Narendra Modi a “war criminal,” participated in protests in Times Square that used derogatory anti-Hindu language, and later refused to participate in interfaith outreach events, drawing criticism from Indo-American leaders.
On domestic policy, Mamdani has backed reforms in child welfare that critics argue are dangerously permissive, like banning routine drug screenings for newborns and blocking anonymous reporting of suspected abuse, prompting warnings from child-safety advocates about putting vulnerable children at risk.
He has limited governing experience and administrative effectiveness, pointing to his refusal to support key budget provisions and doubts about his ability to enact ambitious progressive policies in a complex city system.
Most importantly, he is aligned with radical far-left groups, like the Democratic Socialists of America, and receives support from figures associated with radical protest movements.
These controversies, spanning foreign policy, identity politics, governance records, and ideological extremism, have combined to raise serious concerns among a broad spectrum of New Yorkers about Mamdani’s fit for citywide leadership.
Are You Surprised?
WELCOME TO SOCIALIST NEW YORK: CRIME UP, JOBS GONE, HOPE LOST
This is the party that gave you Carter, an incompetent who gave rise to Islamo-fascists in Iran; Clinton, a corrupt pervert who sold missile technology to China, and failed to stop North Korea from going nuclear; Obama, a zero-experience communist who dissed America and paved the way for a nuclear Iran; and a choice between a brain-dead senile Joe Biden, a corrupt fool who funded Iran’s terrorism, or the wildly inarticulate and incompetent Kamala Harris.
This is the Democrat Party that will destroy New York!
Bottom line…
In short, the Democrats, now dominated by radical progressives and communist ideologues, will destroy New York City because their policies punish success, reward dysfunction, and prioritize ideology over reality. By elevating corrupt career politicians and anti-capitalist activists, they are dismantling the economic engines, public safety structures, and civic values that made NYC great. If left unchecked, their agenda will turn the city from a global beacon into a failed, hollow shell of what it once was.
In short, this is New York City's vote for Democrat-assisted suicide.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Our enemies are no longer hiding. They operate from within, using the shield of process and the media platform to wage a quiet war.
In today’s chaotic world, it’s easy to point fingers at external enemies, foreign adversaries, competing nations, or ideologies that contradict our values. But the greatest danger we face isn’t always from beyond our borders. It’s from within.
There is a growing undercurrent of resistance inside our institutions, corporations, media, and even government agencies. This isn’t about disagreement or healthy debate; it’s about intentional sabotage, often cloaked in virtue or bureaucratic delay.
From whistleblowers who leak with partisan motives to decision-makers who stall crucial actions for personal or political gain, the internal sabotage we are witnessing is not random. It’s calculated, coordinated, and corrosive.
Subtle resistance might look like:
Delays in implementing policy.
Leaks framed as “transparency” but timed for maximum damage.
Bureaucratic red tape used as a weapon.
More covert sabotage can include:
Willful noncompliance with leadership decisions.
Coordination with hostile media outlets to create crises.
Public grandstanding that undermines confidence in institutions.
Media Amplification: Distortion Through the Megaphone
What might be a minor error or a manageable disagreement becomes an existential crisis once the media gets hold of it. Why? Because conflict sells, and division is profitable. But there’s more to it than that. Modern corporatized media isn’t just reporting news, it’s curating a progressive communist democrat narrative. By overreporting isolated incidents or misrepresenting intent, the media can turn a molehill into a mountain, and then blame leadership for any electoral landslide.
And in many cases, that narrative is designed to:
Discredit leadership.
Paint internal saboteurs as heroes.
Fuel public outrage rather than public understanding.
The Progressive Communist Democrats, the Globalists, and the Isolationists
While the idea of internal threats may sound abstract or conspiratorial to some, the reality is far more grounded and far more dangerous. These threats don’t always wear uniforms or wave enemy flags. Instead, they appear in meeting rooms, policy memos, anonymous leaks, and televised interviews. They manifest in both quiet resistance and loud disruption. To understand the full impact, we need to look at real examples, those that appear to be dominating the headlines. Each instance reveals just how deeply embedded and damaging this internal resistance has become.
Jihadis Embedded Within the Progressive Communist Democrat Party
Bottom Line
We must confront these internal threats with clarity, courage, and conviction to survive as a nation. The external threats will always be there, but it’s the internal ones that could truly bring us down.
External threats unify us. Internal threats divide us. And in division, we become weaker, distracted, and unable to respond effectively to genuine dangers.
Internal sabotage undermines national morale, institutional integrity, and the public’s trust in truth itself.
When the internal resistance is emboldened, and the media is complicit, damage isn’t just reputational, it’s systemic.
Policy stalls, reforms fail, and dysfunction becomes the norm.
To navigate this era, we must recognize the battle within. We must identify and expose internal agitators and activists who go beyond the bounds of free speech and protected peaceful protest into the realm of overt acts of sabotage.
We must demand accountability, not just from politicians but from the media as well.
We must rebuild institutions with integrity and transparency, not performative politics.
And, most of all, we must remind ourselves, and each other, that unity doesn’t mean uniformity, but it does mean loyalty to truth and our beloved country over ego and narrative.
Until then, we are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
"A short time ago, the U.S. military carried out massive precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime: Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan. Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise. Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity, and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success."
"For 40 years, Iran has been saying, ‘Death to America. Death to Israel.’ They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs with roadside bombs," Trump continued. "That was their specialty. We lost over a thousand people, and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate, in particular."
"Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. And Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier."
"Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes. There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight. Not even close. There's never been a military that could do what took place just a little while ago,"
-- President Trump
Iran’s Long War Against the U.S. and the Urgency of Preventing a Nuclear Iran
For 46 years, Iran has waged a relentless campaign of terror against the United States through proxies, attacks on U.S. personnel, and threats to our allies. The Islamic Republic’s aggression has cost American lives and destabilized an entire region. That’s why the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran is not just a strategic concern; it’s a dire national security threat.
President Trump was right to take a firm stand, stating that targeting Americans has serious consequences. His warning to the ayatollahs wasn’t just rhetoric—it was a message of deterrence backed by action. We must remain vigilant and resolute in ensuring Iran never acquires nuclear weapons.
The time for the Iranian Supreme Leader and his council to quit shouting “Death to America” with impunity!
As we navigate these challenges, let us not forget the brave men and women of our armed forces who stand on the front lines. Their courage protects our freedoms and keeps threats like Iran in check. God bless our troops.
President Trump Stands Up for America
Another Justification for the Second Amendment
The Enemy Within
Now is the time to recognize the enemy within, especially those who seek to impeach President Donald Trump for standing up to adversaries, both foreign and domestic, who have clearly declared themselves our enemies. As Abraham Lincoln wisely said, ‘A house divided against itself cannot stand.’ We must remember this truth as we face internal threats to our unity and resolve.”
Bottom Line
Enough is enough. Iran must understand that threatening the United States with nuclear weapons delivered via ballistic missiles will no longer be tolerated without serious consequences. The era of chanting “Death to America’ without accountability and consequences is over.
We must recognize the danger that the progressive communist democrats, the isolationists, and the globalists, all acting within our system, pose to America and Americans.
We are less screwed today than yesterday.
-- Steve
A Cable Reminder from the Clinton Era
MESSAGE TO PRESIDENT KHATAMI FROM PRESIDENT CLINTON:
THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS RECEIVED CREDIBLE EVIDENCE THAT MEMBERS OF THE IRANIAN REVOLUTIONARY GUARD CORPS (IRGC), ALONG WITH MEMBERS OF LEBANESE AND SAUDI HIZBALLAH, WERE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING AND EXECUTION OF THE TERRORIST BOMBING IN SAUDI ARABIA O F THE KHOBAR TOWERS MILITARY RESIDENTIAL COMPLEX ON JUNE 25, 1996.
NINETEEN AMERICAN CITIZENS WERE KILLED. THE UNITED STATES VIEWS THIS IN THE GRAVEST TERMS. WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE BOMBING OCCURRED PRIOR TO YOUR ELECTION. THOSE RESPONSIBLE, HOWEVER, HAVE YET TO FACE JUSTICE FOR THIS CRIME, AND THE IRGC MAY BE INVOLVED IN PLANNING FOR FURTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS AGAINST AMERICAN CITIZENS.
THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT ACKNOWLEDGES THE POSITIVE STEPS YOU HAVE TAKEN IN SEEING THAT THOSE IRANIANS INVOLVED IN CORRUPTION, DRUGS, DOMESTIC TERRORISM AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES ARE CALLED TO ACCOUNT FOR THEIR ACTIONS. HOWEVER, THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE IRGC IN TERRORIST PLANNING AND ACTIVITY ABROAD REMAINS A CAUSE OF DEEP CONCERN TO US.
THE UNITED STATES HAS NO HOSTILE INTENTIONS TOWARDS THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN AND SEEKS GOOD RELATIONS WITH YOUR GOVERNMENT, BUT WE CANNOT ALLOW THE MURDER OF U.S. CITIZENS TO PASS UNADDRESSED.
IN ORDER TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS, WHICH IS THE FIRST RESPONSIBILITY OF ANY GOVERNMENT, AND IN ORDER TO LAY A SOUND BASIS FOR BETTER RELATIONS BETWEEN OUR COUNTRIES, WE NEED A CLEAR COMMITMENT FROM YOU THAT YOU WILL ENSURE AN END TO IRANIAN INVOLVEMENT IN TERRORIST ACTIVITY, PARTICULARLY THREATS TO AMERICAN CITIZENS, AND WILL BRING THOSE IN IRAN RESPONSIBLE FOR THE BOMBING TO JUSTICE EITHER IN IRAN OR BY EXTRADITING THEM TO SAUDI ARABIA.
[OCS: IRAN REJECTED THE CABLE AND REPLIED]
IN THE NAME OF GOD, THE COMPASSIONATE, THE MERCIFUL
The allegations contained in the message attributed to President Clinton are inaccurate and unacceptable. The Islamic Republic of Iran views the recurrence of such unfounded allegations in the gravest terms. <SOURCE: CLINTON LIBRARY>
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
In an age of information overload, it’s ironic—and dangerous—that ignorance is not just surviving, but thriving. Nowhere is this more evident than in the rise of the “ill-informed know-nothings”: individuals with a large platform who confidently share opinions on complex topics with little to no understanding of the underlying facts.
We’ve all encountered them. They dominate conversations at family gatherings, shout on social media, or host podcasts that go viral not for their insight, but for their brazen self-assurance. What makes them dangerous isn’t their ignorance alone—it’s the fusion of misinformation with unshakable confidence.
The Rise of the Confidently Clueless
Today, anyone with a smartphone can become a self-declared expert. This democratization of information has many upsides, but it also means that facts, expertise, and research are too often drowned out by hot takes and conspiracy theories. What separates the know-nothing from the merely uninformed is a refusal to question their own understanding. They don’t just lack the answers—they lack the curiosity.
This phenomenon isn’t new. The term “know-nothing” dates back to the mid-19th century, referring to a nativist political movement in the U.S. fueled by anti-immigrant paranoia. The modern version is less organized, but no less destructive. It’s a mindset that rejects expertise, resents nuance, and embraces confirmation bias.
Blind Partisan Hatred: When the Actors Matter More Than the Facts
One of the most corrosive aspects of ill-informed know-nothingism is the way it fuels blind partisan hatred—not just toward ideas, but toward the people who express them. In this mindset, the validity of a fact or argument hinges not on evidence, but on who said it. This tribal instinct reduces complex debates into shallow loyalty tests.
If a well-educated, well-credentialed, and well-experienced “expert” in the field issues a finding or makes a recommendation---and does not lean left politically, they’re dismissed as a “sellout,” “denier,” “-phobe,” or a “conspiracy theorist.”
When tribal identity becomes more important than truth, good ideas die in the crossfire.
This isn’t just a dysfunction of politics—it’s a failure of emotional maturity. It’s easier to hate than to think. It’s easier to villainize a person than to engage with their ideas. The result? We get stuck in a zero-sum loop where debate isn’t about learning, it’s about defeating the “other side” at all costs.
This blind hatred often works hand in hand with misinformation. Once someone is labeled an enemy—be it a politician, a journalist, or a public intellectual—any lie about them becomes easy to believe, and any fact they present is instantly suspect. It’s not reasoned skepticism; it’s reflexive dismissal.
Why This Matters
Misinformation spreads faster than the truth. Social media algorithms reward outrage and simplicity, not accuracy. A confidently wrong tweet can reach millions before the first fact-check catches up.
Public trust erodes. When society elevates loud voices over informed ones, trust in science, journalism, and institutions weakens. This makes it harder to respond to real crises, like defensive wars, public health emergencies, or economic instability.
Democracy suffers. A functioning democracy depends on an informed citizenry. Policy becomes reactive and dangerous when decisions are made based on half-truths and emotional manipulation rather than evidence.
What Can Be Done?
Prioritize critical thinking. Schools must teach not just facts, but how to evaluate sources, question assumptions, and change one’s mind in light of new evidence.
Elevate true experts. Media and platforms need to do a better job of giving space to people who’ve earned credibility through study and experience, not just volume and virality.
Hold ourselves accountable. It’s easy to point fingers, but we all have blind spots. Staying humble, asking questions, and being willing to say “I don’t know” is a powerful antidote to know-nothingism.
Bottom Line
There’s nothing wrong with not knowing something. But there is something deeply wrong with being proudly, stubbornly, and loudly wrong—especially when the stakes are high. The danger of the ill-informed know-nothing isn’t just in their ignorance; it’s in their unwillingness to grow.
If we want a smarter, healthier, more just society, we must start by valuing knowledge—and those who seek it.
We need to return to a place where people are evaluated by the strength of their arguments, not the color of their political uniform. Disagree with ideas, challenge assumptions—but do it without assuming moral bankruptcy in everyone who thinks differently. That’s not civility for its own sake. It’s a requirement for intellectual progress.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Even though it may mean prolonging the Israel-Iran war and allowing Iran to move critical nuclear materials to another site, President Trump remains in the spotlight and dominates every news cycle.
President Donald Trump has long exhibited a deep-seated pleasure and ego gratification from being at the center of public attention, relishing the ability to dominate news cycles and command media coverage. This constant spotlight serves not only as validation of his personal brand but also as a tool for asserting control over political narratives.
This desire for attention often appears to outweigh the urgency of decision-making, with Trump sometimes delaying or prolonging critical actions to sustain media focus and public drama. By remaining unpredictable and controversial, he ensures that all eyes stay on him, reinforcing his self-image as a central, indispensable figure in American life and politics.
Go or No Go?
Trump to make ‘very big’ move on Iran, weighs bombing vs. bargaining with regime’s leaders President may grant Iranian request for White House meeting
President Trump said Wednesday that he hadn’t decided whether to deploy the U.S. military to join Israel’s bombing campaign against Iranian military and nuclear sites, even as his administration moved more aircraft and other assets to the region in preparation for an attack.
Speaking at the White House, Mr. Trump said he may not make up his mind about deploying U.S. forces until “one second before … because things change, especially with war.” He said the next few days will be “very big.”
Mr. Trump huddled with his top advisers in the highly secure White House Situation Room for the second straight day as Israel stepped up its attacks on Iran.
The president is now weighing an unprecedented move: allowing the embattled Iranian regime leaders to visit Washington to negotiate with him.
“They want to meet,” Mr. Trump said. “But it’s a little late to meet. But they want to meet and they want to come to the White House. So we’ll see. I may do that.” <Source>
[OCS: How do you negotiate with evil men who are stone-cold liars who will do anything and everything to maintain their power? Especially when one considers assembling a dirty nuclear bomb?
What role are Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar playing in the decision?
Trump to decide within next two weeks whether to get directly involved in Israel-Iran conflict: WH Trump had yet to say specifically if, how or to what extent the U.S. would get involved
President Donald Trump will make a decision within the next two weeks on whether the U.S. becomes directly involved in the Israel-Iran conflict, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday.
Trump has seemed to go back and forth in recent days about if, how or to what extent the U.S. would get involved, likely with providing some type of military support to Israel, the United States' longest and closest Middle East ally. <Source>
While The Donald Preens
Iran Taunts Trump Claims Nuclear Material In 'A Safe Place'
Iran boasted that all its nuclear material had been moved to ‘a safe place’ before Israeli missiles struck its nuclear sites.
‘Israel hit Natanz, Isfahan, Khandab, and Arak, but they werealready evacuated,’ Iranian commander Mohsen Rezaei said on Thursday.
‘All the materials have been moved to a safe place,’ he added. <Source>
Bottom Line
Ultimately, Donald Trump’s relationship with the spotlight reveals a leader more driven by personal visibility than by the steady demands of governance. His tendency to prioritize media dominance over timely decision-making has shaped his political strategy and left lasting impacts on the functioning of institutions and public trust. While his ability to captivate attention is undeniable, it raises enduring questions about the cost of leadership fueled by ego and spectacle rather than deliberation and responsibility.
Israel remains under attack, and even a few days can be critical in saving lives and infrastructure.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Juneteenth, celebrated every year on June 19th, marks a moment in American history, the day in 1865 when enslaved people in Galveston, Texas, were finally informed of their freedom, more than two years after the Emancipation Proclamation was signed by President Abraham Lincoln.
Why the two-year delay? Democrats!
At the time of the Civil War, the Democratic Party, especially in the South, was largely pro-slavery. Many Democrats vehemently opposed President Lincoln, a Republican, and his Emancipation Proclamation of 1863. They saw it as an attack on their economic system and way of life.
Texas became a refuge for slaveholders fleeing Union forces in other Southern states. Many brought enslaved people with them, believing Texas would remain a safe haven for slavery. This only reinforced efforts to suppress news of emancipation.
When President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, it applied only to Confederate states in rebellion. However, the Proclamation couldn't be enforced in places still under Confederate control, like Texas. The Union Army had little presence there, and local Democrat authorities had no intention of spreading the news.
Many slaveholders simply didn’t tell enslaved people they were free, so they could continue to exploit their labor for as long as possible.
What Changed?
Freedom officially came to Galveston on June 19, 1865, when Union General Gordon Granger arrived with federal troops and issued General Order No. 3, declaring that all enslaved people were free. This marked the beginning of emancipation enforcement in Texas.
How Did Juneteenth Become a Recognized Holiday?
State of Texas: Juneteenth became an official state holiday in Texas in 1980, thanks to the efforts of State Representative Al Edwards, a Black Democrat from Houston, who is widely regarded as the “Father of Juneteenth” for his work in making the holiday legally recognized.
United States: After the death of George Floyd and the widespread violent 2020 protests against racial injustice, President Joe Biden, himself a Democrat racist, signed a law making Juneteenth a federal holiday on June 17, 2021.
Bottom Line
Due to Democrat pandering to a long-time coalition member, this day has morphed beyond a historical oddity into a celebration of Black resilience, culture, and the ongoing pursuit of justice and equality.
What it should be is a reminder that the Democrats were the party of slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, the KKK, and opposition to civil rights legislation.
In a classic case of projection, the Democrats now blame the Republicans for all of their transgressions.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Once hailed as the vanguard of American progress, California now increasingly resembles a Confederate state in open defiance of federal authority, a kind of Democrat-led neo-Confederacy that champions selective lawlessness under the banner of “compassion” and “equity.”
But behind the progressive communist democrat slogans lies a disturbing paradox: a state that rejects federal immigration law while building a shadow economy dependent on the labor of illegal aliens who live outside the legal system—modern-day neo-slavery under a different name.
Déjà Vu
In the 19th century, the Confederacy fought to preserve a system of human bondage, cloaked in rhetoric about states’ rights and sovereignty. The goal: preserve the cheap source of labor for an agrarian society.
Today, California asserts the same kind of supremacy over federal law, refusing to cooperate with immigration enforcement, shielding undocumented immigrants, and crafting policy in near-total disregard for national standards. The difference is that California wraps its resistance in the moral high ground, insisting it’s protecting “marginalized” people, even as it traps them in exploitative labor conditions without legal protection or recourse.
The modern Californian economy is, in many sectors, dependent on cheap, undocumented labor—from agriculture to construction to domestic work. These workers often live in fear of deportation, can’t unionize, rarely report abuse, and have no path to upward mobility. In the name of sanctuary, the state ensures they remain politically voiceless and economically indispensable. Call it what it is: neo-servitude.
This is not humanitarianism—it’s a calculated political economy. Just as the Old South depended on slavery to sustain its wealth and power, California’s elite benefit from a permanent underclass that props up its progressive image while providing cheap, compliant labor. And just like the Confederacy, this system is sustained through open defiance of federal law and an ideological narrative that excuses the inexcusable.
National Impact
The question is no longer whether California is “going its own way,” but whether it’s laying the blueprint for a balkanized America—one where partisan states openly nullify federal law and operate as political fiefdoms. If red states did this, they’d be called seditious. When California does it, it’s called “leadership.”
Let’s be clear: the modern left-wing neo-Confederacy is not about states’ rights for all, but selective sovereignty for some—and it’s carried on the backs of a disposable class of modern-day serfs. The Constitution was designed to prevent this kind of disunion. Whether it still can is another matter entirely.
Cui bono? Who benefits?
It’s the central question that cuts through California’s high-minded rhetoric and reveals the actual power dynamics at play.
The ones who benefit from this modern-day neo-Confederate structure are not the marginalized communities the state claims to defend. It’s the elite political class that harvests votes through identity politics, the corporate interests that rely on cheap, unprotected labor, and the wealthy elite who enjoy the comforts of a service economy propped up by people with no legal standing.
Sanctuary policies provide political cover, but not real protection. The people caught in the middle, illegal aliens, overburdened taxpayers, and law-abiding citizens, are mere instruments in a larger ideological project.
Just as the Southern plantation aristocracy built its wealth and power on the backs of the enslaved, today’s Californian ruling class constructs its moral authority and economic advantage on a system that demands legal invisibility and economic dependence from millions.
Cui bono? Not justice. Not unity. Not the people California claims to champion. Only those elites that govern from behind the curtain of “progress.”
Deportation or Citizenship?
There are no easy answers to California’s challenges, and framing the issue as a binary choice is not as simple as choosing between deportation and citizenship.
Framing immigration as the core problem overlooks deeper systemic issues arising from long-term failures in governance, especially economic policy, urban planning, and access to education.
Offering a path to citizenship can help integrate illegal aliens into the economy and society, boosting tax revenue and civic participation. In contrast, mass deportation would likely harm industries that rely on illegal alien labor and tear apart families and communities.
However, rapid cultural and political change also carries extreme risks such as social fragmentation, political polarization, and backlash from communities that feel economically or culturally displaced.
Real solutions must balance integration with stability, addressing both economic needs and the potential dangers of societal disruption.
All I know is this is beyond the abilities of the corrupt, progressive communist democrats and the uni-party that has destroyed our formerly Golden State. The answer may lie in technology, but that, too, is fraught with danger. Whatever the solution, it will take decades to implement and be passed down to the succeeding generations.
Bottom Line
Ultimately, California’s defiance of federal law isn’t a bold stand for justice; it’s a carefully crafted illusion of moral superiority that masks a deeply exploitative system.
The state has become a paradox: preaching inclusion while enforcing exclusion through economic dependence and legal ambiguity.
If the Confederacy was condemned for building its prosperity on the backs of the enslaved, today’s California deserves equal scrutiny for perpetuating a system that keeps millions of illegal aliens in legal limbo for political and economic gain. This is not progress, it’s regression dressed in the language of virtue. And if left unchecked, it could tear at the very fabric of national unity, much like the Confederacy once did.
Since the City of Los Angeles represents a crossroads of culture, immigration, media, and diversity, many astute observers of history believe the war for America will be fought on the streets of Los Angeles.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
With Iran on the cusp of a nuclear weapon breakout and the total destruction of its military capabilities, a coalition of communists, libertarians, and anti-Israel members of Congress seeks to thwart Iran’s defeat.
Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) has been a consistent advocate for limiting presidential authority to engage in military conflicts without congressional approval, particularly concerning Iran.
Amidst escalating destruction of Iran’s military infrastructure, Massie introduced a bipartisan War Powers resolution in the House of Representatives. This resolution asserts that any U.S. military involvement in Iran would require explicit congressional authorization, aligning with the Constitution's delegation of war powers to Congress
Massie’s co-sponsors are openly anti-Israel and anti-Semitic.
Massie, Democrats move to block US strikes on Iran A strange-bedfellows coalition is looking to hamstring President Donald Trump.
Rep. Thomas Massie said Tuesday he has filed a House resolution seeking to block U.S. involvement in the burgeoning conflict between Iran and Israel.
Announcing the move on X, the Kentucky Republican said he is being joined by a coterie of Democratic co-sponsors led by Rep. Ro Khanna of California. The measure, filed pursuant to the War Powers Resolution of 1973, would block President Donald Trump from engaging in “unauthorized hostilities” with Iran.
“This is not our war. Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution,” Massie wrote, posting a copy of the resolution.
Efforts to reassert congressional power in American involvement abroad can bring together strange bedfellows — in this case, a host of leading progressives and a conservative hard-liner who is a frequent thorn in GOP leaders’ sides. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) has proposed a similar resolution in the Senate, though he has yet to announce any Republican cosponsors.
Joining Khanna as co-sponsors, Massie said, are Democratic Reps. Don Beyer of Virginia, Greg Casar of Texas, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Nydia Velázquez of New York, Lloyd Doggett of Texas, Chuy Garcia and Delia Ramirez of Illinois, Pramila Jayapal of Washington, Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, Jim McGovern and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.
Some pro-Israel lawmakers have already come out against the resolution. “If AOC and Massie are a yes, that’s a good bet that I’ll be a no,” moderate New York Rep. Mike Lawler said Monday, referring to Ocasio-Cortez.
Khanna previously said the resolution would come up as “privileged,” meaning leaders would be forced to take it up on the floor — forcing a vote on Trump’s powers that Speaker Mike Johnson would likely prefer to avoid. Republican leaders could move to short-circuit the effort in the House Rules Committee, as they did with previous Democratic efforts to reverse Trump’s global tariffs. <Source>
Bottom Line
A congressional debate might provide Iran enough time to build a nuclear device, including the possibility of a dirty bomb made of conventional components, and mated to a tested ballistic missile. This would represent a clear and present danger to Israel and the United States.
We are so screwed when un-American progressive communist democrats interfere in matters of national security, especially those who appear to have allegiance to a foreign actor.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
False Prophets of Populism: Media Personalities Attempting to Hijack the MAGA Movement
Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon Lead MAGA Resistance to Iran War
As President Donald Trump is caught in a tug-of-war over the U.S. potentially wading into the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and ex-White House chief strategist Steve Bannon have taken center stage as the face of MAGA’s resistance to U.S. involvement in the conflict.
Carlson on Monday continued his tirade against some foreign policy hawks in President Donald Trump’s orbit, accusing them of pushing for the United States to get involved in Israel’s military campaign against Iran. Bannon, meanwhile, said “we have to stop” the U.S. from playing any role in the conflict. <Source>
Changing Stripes?
Media pundits like Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson, staunch defenders of Trump’s anti-war stance, are sounding the alarm over President Trump’s increasing involvement in Israel’s war with Iran and its proxies. They are portraying support for one of this nation’s most valued allies, Israel, as a neo-conservative hijacking of Trump’s foreign policy promises, accusing elements within the administration and GOP of dragging the former president into the type of entanglement he campaigned against.
The MAGA Movement
Over the past decade, the MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement has grown from a campaign slogan into a cultural juggernaut. Originally centered around Donald Trump’s presidency, MAGA has transformed into a broader, often chaotic, coalition of nationalist, populist, and anti-establishment forces. However, as Trump’s grip on the movement evolves, a new class of media personalities is attempting to position themselves as its intellectual and spiritual leaders.
At first, these figures appeared to be merely MAGA-aligned. Carlson hosted sympathetic segments on Fox News, and Bannon served as Trump’s chief strategist. However, as Trump’s movement shifted from electoral campaigning to pragmatic governance, these media personalities began portraying themselves not as commentators but as visionaries.
Steve Bannon now openly refers to the MAGA movement as a “revolution,” with himself as a general in the ideological war. Tucker Carlson has taken his show global, painting himself as a truth-teller in exile. Each claiming pieces of the MAGA identity, often more aggressively than President Trump himself.
They aren’t just backing the movement, they’re branding it in their image, which creates a dangerous dissonance: a movement that believes it is fighting the establishment, while increasingly being led by polished insiders and professional provocateurs.
Bottom Line
What we are seeing:
President Trump’s pragmatic transactional approach to foreign policy challenges is not a betrayal of his original campaign promises of a non-interventionist foreign policy, endless wars, and a pledge of “America First” diplomacy.
Media pundits are attempting to capitalize on the artificially inflated tension within the populist right on how to reconcile Trump’s original America First rhetoric with the geopolitical realities and pressures of leading a superpower during volatile global conflict.
At its core, this attempt at MAGA leadership is about power and profit. By setting themselves up as MAGA’s mouthpieces, these personalities rake in donations, subscribers, influence, and cultural capital. They host conferences, launch podcasts, and position themselves as prophets of a populist awakening.
However, unlike the grassroots supporters who initially fueled Trump’s rise, the ordinary individuals animated by economic anxiety, distrust of elites, or nationalistic pride, these media pundits operate from safe distances. They don’t risk elections, legal jeopardy, or real-world backlash. Their loyalty to MAGA is often conditional: valuable when it’s lucrative, abandoned when it’s not.
The MAGA movement, for better or worse, was built on a promise to disrupt politics as usual. But as it becomes increasingly defined by media personalities with personal brands to build and audiences to monetize, its future looks less like a revolution and more like a podcast network.
These media personalities often lack the one thing President Trump has in abundance: charisma that bridges class divides and commands loyalty in real time. While Bannon and Carlson have niche intellectual followings, they lack Trump’s mass appeal. They can lecture, grift, and radicalize but can’t rally broad support. They can fuel anger, but not always action.
Not being threatened with nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles from a nation whose leadership shouts "Death to America" is about as "America First" as you can get--regardless of who says what. The issue is not whether we are helping Israel; it's a matter of protecting ourselves.
When political movements like MAGA arise, some people open their hearts. Others open their wallets. And the “pundit kings of pop culture” open their mouths.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
P.S. Tucker Qatarlson is not MAGA ("Make America Great Again"), he is a MAGGOT ("Militantly Anti-Government Grievance-Obsessed Tribalist)".
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
As Israel’s military campaign edges closer to what many observers are calling a decisive victory over the Iranian-aligned forces arrayed against it, the world watches with a mix of awe, apprehension, and fatigue.
The stakes are high, and the implications are global. But amidst the smoke of continuing air strikes and shifting regional alliances, a familiar silhouette looms in the background, waiting for the moment to step in and reshape the narrative—Donald J. Trump.
Because if there’s one cardinal sin in the Trumpian cosmos, it is this: allowing anyone or anything other than Trump himself to dominate the global spotlight for too long.
When War Becomes a Stage
To understand Trump’s likely calculus, one must remember that, to him, history is not a tapestry of complex international affairs; it’s a television drama, and he must always have top billing. The Israeli-Iranian conflict may be a theater of war to others, but to Trump, it’s just a theater, one from which he must emerge, somehow, as the conquering hero.
So, while Israeli forces engage in strategic operations that may shift the power balance of the Middle East, Trump is likely wondering how best to insert himself into the narrative. After all, he’s done it before. Remember when his administration unilaterally exited the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) in 2018, branding it the “worst deal ever?” That move created the very vacuum that arguably contributed to the current escalations. But Trump doesn’t do nuance. He does drama. And drama needs a comeback.
The JCPOA, Reimagined — Trump Style
Which brings us to the curious question: Is Trump intentionally stalling U.S. support to Israel in the form of advanced bunker-busting munitions and aircraft delivery systems, not out of strategic caution to avoid U.S. involvement and domestic turmoil, but to manufacture a moment?
Trump team proposes Iran talks this week on nuclear deal, ceasefire
The White House is discussing with Iran the possibility of a meeting this week between U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, according to four sources briefed on the issue.
The objective would be to discuss a diplomatic initiative involving a nuclear deal and an end to the war between Israel and Iran. <Source>
[OCS: Why would you stop before the total destruction of Iran's deeply buried nuclear facilities?]
Iran Calls on Trump to Force Israel Into Cease-Fire Amid Aerial War
A top Iranian official on Monday called on the U.S. president to broker a cease-fire between Israel and Iran.
Iran called on U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday to push Israel to engage in a cease-fire to end a four-day-long aerial war between the two nations.
“If President Trump is genuine about diplomacy and interested in stopping this war, next steps are consequential,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi wrote in a post on social media platform X. <Source>
It’s not unthinkable. Trump may very well be orchestrating a scenario in which Iran is brought to the negotiating table again, but this time with a key precondition: the deal must be his. Not Biden’s. Not Obama’s. Not even a multilateral compromise. It must bear the Trump brand, gold-plated and media-ready, announced from Mar-a-Lago or perhaps a new Trump-branded hotel in Jerusalem. In short, Trump expanded the Abraham Accords, which restrict Iran’s nuclear ambitions and normalize relations between Israel and all Arab nations in the region.
In this script, Trump’s goal isn’t to deny Israel victory, it’s to delay its final act until he can hoist the curtain himself.
Spotlight Politics and the Cost of Ego
What makes this plausible is Trump’s deep-seated instinct for narrative control. He doesn’t just seek relevance; he demands exclusivity. Whether it’s taking credit for Middle East peace deals he didn’t broker or casting global summits as extensions of his campaign rallies, Trump’s political style requires that everything loop back to his image.
So if Israel’s military achievements threaten to monopolize headlines without his involvement, rest assured, he will find a way in. Perhaps by claiming that none of it would have been possible without his past decisions. Perhaps by teasing a “new, better, Trumpified” Iran deal just as tensions crest. Continuing to accuse Obama and Biden of bungling a situation that he, Trump, would have solved over dinner with Netanyahu and “a very strong letter” to Tehran.
Bottom Line
In the coming weeks, as dust settles in the region and the geopolitical chessboard is rearranged, don’t be surprised if a freshly rebranded Trump initiative suddenly emerges, offering “peace through strength,” and, conveniently, dominating headlines just in time for the 2026 mid-term election season.
Because in Trump’s world, victory is only real if he’s the one claiming it on live TV.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
It is the height of hypocrisy for an elected official to publicly call for “peaceful protests” while simultaneously quietly instructing law enforcement to stand down and minimize arrests.
Such duplicity emboldens chaos under the guise of civic expression and erodes the public’s trust in institutions meant to uphold law and order.
By willfully undermining the enforcement mechanisms intended to keep demonstrations lawful, this official exposes a cynical manipulation of public sentiment, cloaking political theater in the language of peace while enabling lawlessness behind the scenes.
----- Original Message -----
From: Mayor Bass Communications Office <REDACTED>
To: LA Mayor News <REDACTED>
Sent: 6/15/2025 8:46:21 PM
Subject: MAYOR BASS’ EVENTS, 6/16
MAYOR KAREN BASS
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Contact: Communications Office, <REDACTED>
LOS ANGELES MAYOR KAREN BASS’ EVENTS FOR MONDAY, JUNE 16
Today, Mayor Bass visited small businesses in Boyle Heights and encouraged Angelenos to support businesses that may be experiencing slower foot traffic as a result of the recent reckless raids throughout Los Angeles. These attacks are a body blow to the economy of the nation’s second largest city.
[OCS: These are not reckless raids; they are legal, legitimate attempts to enforce existing, undisputed federal immigration laws, specifically targeting criminal illegal aliens.]
L.A. is a united front. The Mayor has organized nearly 30 federal and state legislators, more than 20 mayors and local elected officials and more than one hundred labor, business, faith and immigrant community leaders to call for an end to the reckless immigration raids. More than 30,000 Angelenos showed up to exercise their constitutional right to peaceful protest in Downtown L.A. yesterday.
[OCS: I do not recall any vote or referendum that would indicate that the legal citizens and residents of Los Angeles decided to empower their elected officials to ignore and/or violate federal immigration laws, which, in itself, is a federal crime, as is interfering with the administration of justice.
Moreover, what did occur was akin to a riot, complete with the destruction of public and private property, looting, arson, violent attacks, and attempts to interfere with duly sworn law enforcement. The Mayor continues to conflate migrants with illegal aliens who have no lawful right to be present in our community.]
Mayor Bass has made clear: Angelenos have the right to make their voices heard through peaceful protest, but anything less will not be tolerated. Violence and vandalism are unacceptable. No one should be put in danger — not law enforcement, not protestors. Hundreds of officers and first responders from California Highway Patrol, and LA Sheriff’s Department, LAFD and LA County Fire Department are working alongside LAPD through a unified command structure.
[OCS: What we saw was not a peaceful protest, but organized professional agitators and activists directing a rebellion against duly constituted authority. The empty words of “peaceful protest” and the cautionary words against violence are only self-protective rhetoric to avoid criminal charges relating to “incitement.”]
A curfew for Downtown Los Angeles remains in effect to curb bad actors who do not support the immigrant community. Mayor Bass has made resources available to impacted businesses in Downtown L.A. Tune in to an upcoming webinar.
[OCS: In the Alice in Wonderland topsy-turvy world of progressive communist democrats, why is a curfew necessary for peaceful protests? Why is the Mayor defining “bad actors,” mostly radical leftists, as those who do not support the “immigrant” (e.g., illegal alien) community when that is precisely who they support?]
Curfew Guidance:
When: 8:00 PM - 6:00 AM and going forward until lifted.
Where: Downtown Los Angeles bounded by the 5, 10 and 110 freeways.
Who: Everyone must abide by this curfew. Limited exceptions apply, including for residents, law enforcement, emergency and medical personnel, people traveling to and from work and credentialed media representatives.
See additional curfew guidance here.
###
Bottom Line
In the end, leadership demands more than performative platitudes and calculated inaction.
When an official preaches peace but facilitates disorder, they betray the very principles they claim to defend.
Genuine accountability means aligning words with actions, and when those in power deliberately sever that link, they forfeit the moral authority to lead.
The public deserves more than empty rhetoric; it deserves leaders who will uphold the rule of law, not selectively abandon it for political convenience.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
As the use of artificial intelligence rises in America, learning from centuries of human data and countless Wikipedia edits, we are left with a critical modern inquiry: “Can artificial intelligence overcome the most stubborn, well-funded form of natural stupidity — that of progressive communist democrat politicians?”
Considering, of course, that natural stupidity in progressive communist democrat politicians is not your average run-of-the-mill human cluelessness. No, this is a special strain, the kind that wears a suit, holds a press conference, and confidently misreads a pie chart upside down. Politicians who start a question with, “I’m not a scientist, but…” and then go on to propose climate legislation based on a Facebook meme.
MATH IS HARD (PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN)
Joe Biden, beloved gaffe machine and absentee president, once said: "If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there's still a 30% chance we're going to get it wrong."
AI: Calculates probabilities with precision, identifies margin of error, runs simulations. Biden: Offers Schrödinger’s Math where you’re both right and wrong simultaneously.
GEOGRAPHY (REP. HANK JOHNSON)
In 2010, Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia expressed concern that the island of Guam might “tip over and capsize” if too many people were stationed there.
AI: Understands buoyancy, physics, and how islands work. Johnson: Accidentally describes a Bugs Bunny cartoon.
TECHNOLOGY CONFUSION (SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN)
In 2017, Senator Feinstein questioned a tech CEO about "Twitter book" and how it relates to "Snapface."
AI: Can summarize digital ecosystems, machine learning models, and the TOS for 12 platforms at once. Feinstein: Just wants to know if she can get Instagram on her fax machine.
WORD SALAD WITH A SIDE OF CONFUSION (VP KAMALA HARRIS)
Kamala Harris has delivered some famously circular statements. Like: "We must work together, to work together, as we work together, because working together is how we work together."
AI: Can generate coherent essays on geopolitical dynamics. Harris: Turns a sentence into a Möbius strip.
Bottom Line
The answer to, “Can Artificial Intelligence overcome the natural stupidity of politicians, even that of the progressive communist democrats with their polished and poll-tested answers?” is absolutely.
Right after it finishes:
Decoding the 47-point climate plan written entirely in emojis,
Figuring out how “taxing the billionaires” funds everything from free college to free Wi-Fi to free emotional support llamas, after a democrat declares, “money is a social construct that demands diversity, equity, and inclusion.”
And recovering from the trauma of listening to a six-minute congressional inquiry question that never actually included a noun.
Right now, AI’s biggest challenge isn’t processing information; it’s staying functional after hearing the phrase: “This isn’t socialism, it’s compassionate collective resource harmonization.”
Let’s be honest, AI might beat natural political stupidity one day, but it’s gonna need a support group, a bottle of digital whiskey, and three therapy sessions just to recover from one debate with someone who thinks we can fund universal healthcare with artisanal hemp wallets and a Bernie Sanders-themed Etsy store.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
P.S. Stay curious. Or at least stay away from the “Send All” button.
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Americans are repeatedly told that voting is the foundation of our democracy. But in today’s political reality, it’s not voters who decide power—it’s bodies.
Thanks to how the U.S. Census counts population, millions of non-citizens, including illegal aliens, are shifting political representation and influence toward progressive communist democrat strongholds like California, without ever casting a single vote. This distortion of our representative democracy benefits one side and one side only: the Democratic Party.
California: Ground Zero for Census-Driven Electoral Distortion
No state illustrates this better than California. With an estimated 10.5 million immigrants as of 2021—nearly 4 million of whom are non-citizens, including about 2.3 million illegal aliens—California reaps disproportionate representation in Congress and the Electoral College. Despite losing native-born residents to other states in droves, California managed to hold onto all 52 of its House seats in 2020, primarily due to counting everyone, not just American citizens.
Here’s what that really means:
One in four people in California is a non-citizen.
California’s non-citizen population alone is larger than the entire population of several U.S. states.
The state has congressional districts where over 30% of residents cannot legally vote but still count toward the district’s representation.
For example, in California’s 34th Congressional District (Los Angeles), nearly half of the adult population is non-citizen. That means the votes cast in this district carry more weight per voter than in districts filled with eligible American citizens. Fewer votes are needed to elect a representative, giving progressive communist democrat strongholds an outsized influence in Washington.
In contrast, states like Alabama, Iowa, and West Virginia, with overwhelmingly citizen populations, lost seats or political influence, despite having similar or even greater numbers of eligible voters. That’s not representative democracy. That’s strategic manipulation.
Fewer Citizens, More Power
This system creates a bizarre and unjust reality: the fewer actual voters you have in a district (because of a high number of illegal or non-voting immigrants), the more power each voter wields. A citizen living in a heavily non-citizen district in Los Angeles County has more influence over federal policy than a citizen in rural Texas or Idaho.
This is the opposite of “one person, one vote.” It’s a distortion designed to inflate blue state power at the expense of conservative, citizen-heavy regions of the country.
Why Democrats Champion Illegal Immigration
The left doesn’t need non-citizens to vote—their bodies are enough. By increasing population numbers in deep-blue areas, Democrats secure more seats in the House, dominate the Electoral College, and pad their influence in every federal budget negotiation.
This is precisely why they:
Oppose a citizenship question on the Census
Advocate for sanctuary cities
Push for driver’s licenses, healthcare, and public benefits for illegal aliens
Use courts to block immigration enforcement and deportations
It’s not compassion. It’s a calculation. Every illegal alien who enters California is one more body counted toward political power, giving Democrats more representation without needing more American support.
Census Mistakes Have Already Skewed Representation
The 2020 Census didn’t just count non-citizens. It miscounted entire states, and the results—now confirmed by the U.S. Census Bureau itself—tilted political power even further toward Democrat-controlled areas. These weren’t small mistakes. They were errors with national consequences and disproportionately harmed states with strong citizen bases.
According to a 2022 post-enumeration survey, the Census Bureau admitted it overcounted six states and undercounted eight others. Here’s how it broke down:
The overcounted states that gained more representation or funding than they should have are all solidly blue and have large urban centers or high non-citizen populations. Whereas, undercounted states lost power they rightfully deserved.
In fact, if the 2020 Census had been accurate, estimates show that Florida may have gained one additional seat, Texas could have gained a third new seat, and Minnesota or Rhode Island could have lost a seat. That’s a net swing of two or three House seats—enough to shift the balance of power in close midterm elections or alter Electoral College math.
These aren’t just statistical footnotes. They are errors with real consequences:
And when combined with the already flawed practice of counting non-citizens in apportionment, it’s clear the current system does not reflect the will of American citizens.
Looking Ahead: The 2030 Census Power Grab
Experts project that if current trends hold, up to 22 House seats could shift because of immigrant-driven population changes by 2030. And again, these shifts will come without a single illegal immigrant voting, just by being counted. California, Texas (especially Democratic districts), New York, and Illinois will likely gain or maintain political power, even as their legal voter base shrinks or stagnates.
This isn’t just unsustainable. It’s unconstitutional in spirit, if not yet in law.
Bottom Line
It’s time for constitutional conservatives to sound the alarm. Representation should be based on citizenship, not illegal presence. The House of Representatives was intended to represent the people of the United States, not anyone who steps over the border.
We must demand:
A citizenship question on the 2030 Census
Legislation that bases apportionment on the citizen population, not the total population
Defunding sanctuary jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with immigration enforcement
A moratorium on further expansions of non-citizen public benefits
Until then, Democrats will continue to wield the power of the illegal immigrant population, not to help them, but to use them as political leverage against the will of the American people.
The progressive communist democrats know that for 761,000 people (as of the 2020 Census) deported, they lose one seat in Congress.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
A routine press conference can become a security crisis in the blink of an eye.
An unidentified individual in a nondescript outfit with no identifying marks suddenly rushes toward a public official. There’s no visible weapon, no verbal threat—only urgency, motion, and shouting a question. In such moments, decisive action can mean the difference between safety and catastrophe.
This scenario is not just hypothetical. With increasing public visibility and evolving threats, every security team must prepare for situations where they are forced to act before identifying intent.
See Senator Padilla For Yourself…
Followed By The Inevitable Press Conference…
Notice what Padilla is wearing and the absence of his Senate identification pin. Padilla is pushing and shoving law enforcement officers to get to the podium, exhibiting aggressive and threatening behavior.
Padilla's Statement...
Statement on Sen. Padilla’s Forcible Removal from DHS Press Conference in Los Angeles
LOS ANGELES, CA — Today, the Office of U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, released the following statement after Padilla was forcibly removed from Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem’s press conference while performing Congressional oversight in Los Angeles:
“Senator Padilla is currently in Los Angeles exercising his duty to perform Congressional oversight of the federal government’s operations in Los Angeles and across California. He was in the federal building to receive a briefing with General Guillot and was listening to Secretary Noem’s press conference. He tried to ask the Secretary a question, and was forcibly removed by federal agents, forced to the ground and handcuffed. He is not currently detained, and we are working to get additional information.” <Source>
Department of Homeland Security...
Senator Padilla chose disrespectful political theatre and interrupted a live press conference without identifying himself or having his Senate security pin on as he lunged toward Secretary Noem. Mr. Padilla was told repeatedly to back away and did not comply with officers’ repeated commands. @SecretService thought he was an attacker and officers acted appropriately. Secretary Noem met with Senator Padilla after and held a 15 minute meeting.
Here’s how professional protection details should respond to such ambiguous but potentially dangerous encounters.
Prioritize the Principal: The “Cover and Evacuate” Protocol. The first obligation of any security detail is to protect the principal—the person under protection.
If an unknown individual rapidly approaches without clearance, the team must:
Form a human barrier between the principal and the threat. Intercept and physically stop the advancing individual using the least force necessary.
Employ non-lethal measures such as tackles, body grabs, or tasers—especially when the threat does not display a weapon.
Keep lethal force as a last resort, used only if there is an imminent risk of serious harm.
In high-visibility incidents, managing the aftermath is just as critical as the response:
Issue a clear, factual public statement immediately following the incident.
Reassure the public and press that the situation is under control.
Provide ongoing updates as new details are verified.
Transparency reduces misinformation and reinforces public trust in the protection team’s professionalism.
Bottom Line
Preparedness is Protection
Unknown threats are among the most complicated challenges for any security team. The lack of overt hostility doesn’t mean the absence of danger. In these moments, the ability to act decisively while preserving life is the hallmark of elite protection.
Public officials deserve safety without sacrificing transparency and accessibility. Striking that balance is only possible through rigorous training, clear protocols, and calm professionalism under pressure.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Step aside, President Trump. Move over, Congress. Apparently, the fate of our formerly sovereign Republic now rests in the well-moisturized hands of hair-gelled California Governor Gavin Newsom, the whitest-of-the-white elite, self-declared commander of the Sanctuary Resistance Forces and unofficial president of the breakaway nation of Californication.
It’s worth remembering: Gavin Newsom was elected to run California, not to cosplay as the last hope of the Union. Yet here he is, turning California’s progressive communist democrat sanctuary policies into a full-blown rebellion and acting as if ICE agents are stormtroopers and he’s the last Jedi standing between freedom and tyranny.
Yes, California’s progressive communist democrats have always supported open borders, hordes of illegal aliens, along with pushback against the enforcement of federal immigration policy. But Newsom has taken it to the next level, turning defiance into a full progressive media production, complete with soaring rhetoric, moral posturing, and approximately 300 percent more hair product than any real rebel leader should need.
In what sounded less like a gubernatorial address and more like a Star Wars villain’s monologue, Newsom recently announced…
Excerpts...
I want to say a few words about the events of the last few days.
What’s happening right now is very different than anything we’ve seen before.
[OCS: Ignore the riot, cars on fire, concrete blocks dropped on cars from freeway overpasses, commercial-grade fireworks targeting police officers, and looting of stores.]
Like many states, California is no stranger to this sort of unrest. We manage it regularly, and with our own law enforcement. But this, again, was different.
What then ensued was the use of tear gas, flash-bang grenades, rubber bullets, federal agents detaining people and undermining their due process rights.
Donald Trump, without consulting California law enforcement leaders, commandeered 2,000 of our state’s National Guard members to deploy on our streets, illegally and for no reason.
[OCS: When California’s politicized police are ordered to “stand down,” and you can’t legally protect yourself, your family, or your property, thank heavens someone with the guts to take action is willing to step up. Once again, the progressive communist democrats created a problem they are totally incapable of solving, then desperately try to blame the Trump Administration.]
This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation, putting our people, our officers and even our National Guard at risk.
Authoritarian regimes begin by targeting people who are least able to defend themselves.
Look, this isn’t just about protests here in Los Angeles. When Donald Trump sought blanket authority to commandeer the National Guard. he made that order apply to every state in this nation.
Democracy is next.
Democracy is under assault right before our eyes, this moment we have feared has arrived. He’s taking a wrecking ball, a wrecking ball to our founding fathers’ historic project: three coequal branches of independent government.
There are no longer any checks and balances. Congress is nowhere to be found. Speaker Johnson has completely abdicated that responsibility.
The rule of law has increasingly been given way to the rule of Don.
This is about all of us. This is about you. California may be first, but it clearly will not end here. Other states are next.
[OCS: Don’t be fooled, this was not a speech about the riots, it was Newsom’s first presidential campaign speech.]
Ah, yes, “Democracy is next,” because nothing says democratic values like unilaterally defying federal law and then warning that other states will soon follow suit, like it’s some constitutional flash mob.
Newsom's speech resembled that of a “wartime president.” The only war, of course, is the one Gavin keeps acting out in his head, somewhere between reading Twitter mentions and choosing his next leather jacket photo op
Let’s break it down: ICE, the pesky federal agency tasked with enforcing immigration laws, did its job, conducting workplace raids. Protests followed. They started peacefully, until the usual professional progressive communist democrat agitators/activists took over: shouting, smashing, burning, and looting; and the inevitable calls to abolish everything from borders to law enforcement itself filled the airwaves.
President Donald Trump, doing what presidents tend to do when deliberately uncontrolled chaos breaks out, sent in the National Guard.
Cue Newsom, who burst onto the scene like a man auditioning for a political drama no one asked to see.
“Democracy is under assault right before our eyes. The moment we’ve feared has arrived,” he warned, dramatically, while democracy continued to function… right before our eyes.
Who Made Newsom Rebel-in-Chief?
Nobody. That’s the punchline. No one elected Gavin Newsom to lead a rebellion against lawful authorities. He was elected to run the most populous, and arguably the most mismanaged, state in the nation. Rising crime? Crippling homelessness? Sky-high costs of living? Don’t worry, he’s busy fighting ICE and quoting the Constitution like it’s open mic night at the Resistance Poetry Slam.
If you were hoping for a governor who’d address crowded freeways or overloaded power grids, sorry. You got a guy role-playing as Abraham Lincoln in a war he invented, defending a version of “democracy” that seems to begin and end with “ignore federal law if you don’t like it.”
The Hero California Deserves?
Is Newsom staging a national tour of defiance? Will there be branded T-shirts? A Spotify playlist?
According to Newsom, “Democracy is under assault,” not, of course, because mobs are flouting federal immigration laws or rioting in the streets, but because the federal government is enforcing them—the horror.
Still, to Newsom, this is all part of some grand, cinematic showdown between Good and Evil. Spoiler: In this movie, the guy violating federal law is the hero.
Perhaps we should take heed of the facts...
Newsom said this was chaotic, this was reckless, and he said that they were just trying to have an arbitrary deportation quota.
Twelve million people came into the country illegally. That was 3 million a year. That was 250,000 per month. That was over 8,000 a day.
They have not been able to deport more than a thousand on most days, sometimes 500.
They would have to deport 8,000 people every single day for four years to get back where we were with 20 million illegal aliens, when Joe Biden entered office.
So it’s not a quota. It’s an effort to stop an invasion.
~ Historian and Classicist Victor Davis Hanson
Bottom Line
Let’s recap: ICE targets undocumented workers breaking federal immigration law. Protesters swarm the streets of LA. Trump, shockingly, responds by enforcing the law—Cue Newsom, who leaps into action with more moral outrage than an Oscar speech.
He doesn’t just disagree, he portrays the enforcement of federal immigration policy as an assault on “democracy.” Apparently, in the Newsomverse, enforcing laws you don’t like is fascism, but defying them makes you a freedom fighter.
Governor Newsom’s public opposition wasn’t just political theater. It was a statement of solidarity with illegal aliens, or as California calls them, undocumented future democrats, and those who see the Trump administration’s actions as authoritarian, even dangerous.
Whether one sees Gavin Newsom as a rebel or a defender of democratic values depends primarily on one’s view of the Trump administration and the balance of power in America.
But five things are clear:
Rioting, looting, arson, and assaulting individuals are not protected speech under the U.S. Constitution, no matter what a judge rules.
The battle over immigration, civil liberties, and state autonomy is not just a policy dispute; it’s a defining struggle over the country’s direction.
The congressional Democrat leaders are backing Gavin Newsom and other sanctuary state governors, proving the Democrats are a clear and present danger to America.
Gavin Newsom is an empty-headed progressive communist democrat clown.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Once again, progressive communist democrat-run Los Angeles has descended into pre-planned chaos.
Urged on by professional progressive communist democrat agitators and activists, violent riots broke out last night, triggered by professional communist agitators and fueled in part by illegal aliens emboldened by the city’s lax immigration enforcement and sanctuary city policies.
The result: widespread looting, destruction, and fear across the city.
Mayor Karen Bass, a Castro-loving communist sympathizer who has long championed soft-on-crime policies and open-door immigration, scrambled to respond by issuing a late-night citywide curfew.
As with everything involving the radical far left’s shock troops, it’s too little, too late.
What we are seeing is not only the consequence of years of failed progressive communist democrat policies, but a pre-planned rebellion against the Trump Administration’s attempt to reverse the disastrous effects of open borders and the failure of local and state officials to enforce existing laws.
The Los Angeles Police Department made dozens of arrests amid the chaos, confirming that many of the instigators had no legal right to be in the country. Yet city officials have largely sidestepped this point, focusing instead on generic calls for “unity” and “calm.”
The breakdown of law and order in America’s second-largest city raises urgent questions:
How much longer will Angelenos and Californians ignore the consequences of progressive communist democrat policies that are decimating our public safety, healthcare, education, housing, employment, and infrastructure?
How many more Angelenos have to suffer before real leadership steps in?
Why are more employers not being criminally charged for hiring illegal aliens?
As the city wakes up to another day of destruction, one thing is clear—Los Angeles isn’t just experiencing a crisis. It’s paying the price for progressive communist democrat negligence.
LOS ANGELES – Mayor Karen Bass has issued a curfew for Downtown Los Angeles. The curfew will be in place starting tonight from 8:00 PM to 6:00 AM. Mayor Bass was joined by elected, law enforcement and business leaders this afternoon to make the announcement.
“I am exercising my mayoral powers to implement a curfew within Downtown Los Angeles to curb bad actors who do not support the immigrant community.
[OCS: Notice she doesn't say. "who break the law?" And, she refuses to say illegal aliens, even when the majority of legal immigrants do not support illegal aliens.]
If you do not live or work in Downtown L.A., avoid the area. Law enforcement will arrest individuals who break the curfew, and you will be prosecuted,” said Mayor Bass. “The raids must end. I thank the Governor for his partnership and especially thank our state and local officers and deputies who are working tirelessly to keep Los Angeles safe.”
[OCS: These are not raids, they are lawful federal immigration enforcement actions, mostly against criminal illegal aliens who have already experienced "due process."]
“This curfew is a necessary measure to protect lives and safeguard property following several consecutive days of growing unrest throughout our city,” said LAPD Chief of Police, Jim McDonnell. “I want to be absolutely clear: if you are within the designated curfew zone between the hours of 8:00 PM and 6:00 AM and are not exempt under the order, you are subject to arrest.”
[OCS: Unrest? How about rioting and looting?]
In addition to the curfew, Mayor Bass noted that hundreds of officers from police and sheriffs departments from across the region and state are working alongside LAPD through a unified command structure.
Curfew Guidance:
When: Tonight, 8:00 PM - 6:00 AM and going forward until lifted.
Where: Downtown Los Angeles bounded by the 5, 10 and 110 freeways. Please see map.
Who: Everyone must abide by this curfew. Limited exceptions apply, including for law enforcement, emergency and medical personnel, residents, people traveling to and from work and credentialed media representatives.
The curfew will not protect the city, which covers about 469 square miles-- it only applies to a one-square-mile area, totaling 502 square blocks. And, it is unclear how long the curfew will remain in place.
Smoke and Mirrors!
Bottom Line
What part of a peaceful protest demands looting high-end sneaker stores, restaurants, and liquor stores?
Why are the police afraid to use the necessary force to break up crowds? Why so few arrests, with egregious actions recorded, with the police observing?
The tell-tale sign: the elected officials claim it is all about Donald Trump, rarely the lawless illegal aliens and opportunistic criminals.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
CALIFORNIA ATTACKED BY INDIVIDUALS OPERATING UNDER THE MEXICAN FLAG
California SB 54: Undermining Lawful Immigration Enforcement Under the Guise of “Values”
In 2017, California enacted Senate Bill 54 (SB 54), the California Values Act, a law celebrated by the progressive communist democrats as a stand for immigrant rights.
But beneath its humanitarian branding lies a perilous policy that promotes an illegal alien invasion and actively obstructs federal immigration enforcement.
SB 54 has not just made California a so-called “sanctuary state,” it has made the state a threat to national security and public safety within California.
A Progressive Communist Democrat Effort
During the legislative process in the Assembly and the Senate, all Democrats voted in favor of the bill, while all Republicans voted against the bill. SB 54 was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown on October 5, 2017, and went into effect on January 1, 2018
What SB 54 Actually Does
SB 54 restricts local and state law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
It prohibits police from inquiring about immigration status, detaining individuals on ICE detainers, or sharing information with federal authorities, except in limited cases involving specific serious crimes. It handcuffs local law enforcement, creates gaps in national security, and sends the message that immigration laws are optional in the Golden State.
Sanctuary or a Shield for Illegal Alien Lawbreakers?
By restricting cooperation with ICE, SB 54 has allowed individuals with criminal histories, including violent offenders, to slip through the cracks. In some cases, ICE has had to track down and arrest undocumented immigrants in public places, risking both officer and public safety, because local jails would not hold them for pickup.
This deliberate obstruction of federal law raises serious concerns. Immigration law is a federal matter, yet SB 54 essentially nullifies those laws within state borders, creating a patchwork system of enforcement that undermines national immigration policy.
A Magnet for Illegal Immigration
Laws like SB 54 arguably make California a magnet for illegal immigration. By minimizing the risk of deportation, even for those arrested for crimes, California sends a message that unlawful presence will not only be tolerated but also protected.
Silencing Lawful Enforcement
Law enforcement officers across California have spoken out against SB 54, warning that it ties their hands. The law essentially forces police departments to prioritize state politics over public safety, leaving officers unable to alert ICE about repeat offenders or gang members unless those individuals meet a narrow threshold of convictions.
California’s SB 54 As A Threat to National Security
California’s SB 54 doesn’t just impact the state; it sends shockwaves nationwide. By refusing to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, California has created an enforcement vacuum that jeopardizes national security and public safety well beyond its borders.
1. Harboring Criminal Illegal Aliens
Under SB 54, state and local law enforcement are prohibited from notifying ICE when undocumented immigrants are released from custody, unless they’ve committed certain specific crimes. This means violent criminals, gang members, and repeat offenders can be released back into the community instead of being deported. In effect, California allows known public safety threats to disappear into the general population, where they can move freely, often across state lines.
2. Blocking Federal Intelligence Sharing
National security depends on information-sharing between local, state, and federal agencies. However, SB 54 blocks key communication channels, particularly regarding immigration status and criminal background checks. This breakdown in coordination hampers federal authorities’ ability to track and apprehend individuals who may pose terrorism, trafficking, or organized crime risks.
3. Creating Gaps in Border Enforcement
By becoming a sanctuary state, California sends a clear message: “Once you’re here, you’re protected.” This reality undermines the credibility of the U.S. immigration system and encourages further illegal crossings, knowing that sanctuary jurisdictions provide legal cover.
4. Undermining the Rule of Law
Perhaps the greatest danger lies in the precedent SB 54 sets. When a state openly defies federal law, it signals that immigration enforcement is optional, a notion that foreign governments, human traffickers, and bad actors can exploit. This erosion of federal authority is turning the U.S. into a fragmented patchwork of policies where national security becomes an afterthought.
Governor Gavin Newsom Is a Moron
Governor Gavin Newsom has formally asked President Donald Trump to rescind the deployment of a federalized National Guard, claiming, “We didn’t have a problem until Trump got involved. This is a serious breach of state sovereignty, inflaming tensions while pulling resources from where they’re actually needed.”
As cars were being set ablaze with Molotov cocktails, and police officers openly attacked by hostile crowds using cement blocks, commercial-grade fireworks, and other dangerous weapons, Newsom did nothing! Does this dumb son-of-a-bitch not understand that these crowds are an affront to our national sovereignty as well as the sovereignty of California?
Bottom Line
The Democrats are protecting foreign nationals, with allegiance to a foreign sovereign power and present unlawfully in the United States, from the lawful actions of the federal government. Un-American and traitorous!
California has the right to set its own policies, but those policies cannot counter the supremacy of federal law and its enforcement.
There is no magic exemption from federal law if you reside in a state governed by progressive communist democrats.
While Democrats may frame SB 54 as a moral imperative, the reality is far more dangerous. This law not only encourages illegal aliens and undermines federal authority, but it also endangers Californians by shielding illegal alien criminals who pose a clear threat to public safety.
Moreover, the unchecked influx of illegal aliens strains our healthcare system, overwhelms public education, burdens infrastructure, and weakens the very safety nets meant to protect legal residents.
By prioritizing politics over protection, California is not just putting its residents at risk but weakening the foundation of national security.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
Responding to Los Angeles Police Department Chief Jim McDonnell, who said, "It's escalated now since the beginning of this incident, increasingly worse and more violent." "Tonight, we had individuals out there shooting commercial-grade fireworks at our officers that can kill you."
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
THERE IS NO DOUBT: DEMOCRAT MANUFACTURED AND FUNDED "STREET ACTION"
What Is an Insurrection?
The word insurrection has been in the headlines a lot in recent years, but what does it actually mean?
In simple terms, an insurrection is a violent uprising against authority or government. It’s when a group of people rise up—often with force—to challenge the power of the state or those in control. Unlike peaceful protests or political disagreements, an insurrection typically involves breaking laws, using violence, or attempting to overthrow institutions.
Except when Democrats do it, it is a "peaceful protest" and nothing like what happened on January the.
Bottom line...
No community has been more heavily impacted by illegal aliens than the black community, and yet Representative Maxine Waters is placing the progressive communist democrats over her constituents.
And, YES, the COMMUNISTS ARE ON THE FRONT LINES!
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Once again, summer has arrived, and so have the protests. For many Americans, it feels like déjà vu, but for those paying attention, it’s not just familiar, it’s predictable, and it’s the radical leftists who are rioting.
If you’ve turned on the news or scrolled through your social media feed, you’ve probably seen the headlines: streets filled with angry crowds, clashes with police, and slogans echoing through Los Angeles as anti-immigration enforcement rioters clashed with police, setting cars on fire and blocking major roads and a freeway.
While every election cycle brings heightened political rhetoric, in recent years, we’ve seen a disturbing trend emerge: orchestrated unrest as a political weapon. As the mid-term elections approach, it’s clear that the progressive communist democrats, funded by well-known dark-money activist networks, are deliberately fanning the flames of division. Their goal? Disruption. Their method? Organized chaos.
Agitators Know the Summer Script
There’s a pattern here. Historically, warmer months see more protests, not just due to the weather, but because it’s prime time for media visibility and impact. But what’s different now is the professionalization of protest. These aren’t organic grassroots movements; they are coordinated efforts, mobilized with tactical precision, complete with media-ready talking points, pre-printed signage, pre-staged rocks and barriers, bail fund support, and social media amplification.
We’ve seen this playbook before:
Pre-planned demonstrations timed for political flashpoints
Escalation tactics designed to provoke law enforcement
Narrative control through selective video clips and trending hashtags
The average citizen may be genuinely protesting for a cause they believe in, and their right to do so should be respected. But behind the curtain, more coordinated dark progressive communist democrat forces are at work, exploiting emotions for political leverage.
Why Now? Timing Is Everything
Congress is divided by a thin majority, and we are approaching the mid-term elections, where turnout is historically lower than in presidential years. That means energizing and enraging the progressive communist democrat voter base is even more critical. Professional agitators understand that a summer filled with confrontation and civil unrest grabs headlines, dominates the national conversation, and keeps voters emotionally charged.
This isn’t just speculation. In past cycles, spikes in political violence and protest activity have been closely aligned with campaign surges, controversial court rulings, and hot-button legislative moves.
The Bigger Picture: Divide and Distract
While Americans argue in the streets or online, powerful institutions, political parties, media conglomerates, and activist organizations benefit from the division. It distracts from real issues like the influx of illegal aliens that are crippling our cities, states, and nation. In this context, chaos becomes a tool for those who have no right to be in the United States, and whose behavior is a byproduct of criminality.
We shouldn’t be surprised by any of this. The summer surge in protests was entirely foreseeable. The challenge now is to see through the radical left's smokescreen, demand accountability from our political leadership, and refuse to be manipulated by those who profit from unrest.
Watching the Progressive Communist Democrat Leadership
One of the most glaring hypocrisies surrounding today’s political unrest is the way the progressive communist democrat leadership handles protests, depending on who’s holding the signs.
When their opposition takes to the streets, leaders are quick to denounce it as dangerous, unhinged, and terroristic. They demand order, call for crackdowns, and flood the media with dire warnings about a “threat to democracy.” But when it’s their own radical base protesting, often with a more extreme level of violence and disruption, they suddenly rediscover the sacred constitutional values of free speech and the right to assemble.
This double standard is as transparent as it is cynical. Leaders play both sides of the narrative:
Publicly condemning violence “in all forms,” but only after their supporters have made headlines for clashing with police and damaging property.
Championing protest as a form of “necessary expression,” as long as it aligns with their ideology and power-grabbing agenda.
Tiptoeing around the word “riot” when it’s politically inconvenient to use it.
Their strategy is clear: appear reasonable, but only when it serves their image. It’s a public relations shell game designed to avoid alienating their activist base while still posturing as law-abiding public servants.
This kind of selective outrage fuels public distrust and further divides the country. People aren’t blind. They see the contradictions, the partisan blind spots, and the moral flexibility that defines so much of today’s political leadership.
Until leaders like California's Governor Gavin Newsom, Senator Adam Schiff, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass apply the same standards to all protests, regardless of politics, the message is obvious: it’s not about principle, it’s about raw political power.
Bottom Line
Since when is enforcing the existing federal immigration law a rationale for staged civil unrest and violence against federal agents in Los Angeles?
Protests are a vital part of a democratic society. But when it becomes a seasonal strategy for chaos, backed by those with hidden political agendas, it stops serving the people and starts serving power.
Stay informed.
Stay skeptical.
And above all, stay engaged, not enraged, while we are being screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Watch as this individual throws stones at passing police cars, traveling at high speeds down a city block to preserve officer safety.
Under the democrats, like Mayor Karen Bass and a radicalized City Council, Los Angeles is turning into a third-world nation, where illegal aliens openly defy laws and attack law enforcement.
This is bullshit. The people in the street are the radical left’s shock troops, ramping up the violence and chaos to influence the 2026 elections.
"They" Don't Want To Fix the Problem
President Trump deploys National Guard to Los Angeles to quell anti-ICE protests California Gov. Newsom says move will escalate tensions
President Trump on Saturday deployed 2,000 California National Guard members to Los Angeles County after federal immigration officers in riot gear battled protesters for a second straight day.
Hundreds of protesters have formed into a violent mob seeking to stop Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents carrying out deportation sweeps in Paramount, California.
In a statement, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the operations are “essential to halting and reversing the invasion of illegal criminals into the United States.”
“In the wake of this violence, California’s feckless Democrat leaders have completely abdicated their responsibility to protect their citizens,” she said. “That is why President Trump has signed a Presidential Memorandum deploying 2,000 National Guardsmen to address the lawlessness that has been allowed to fester.”
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, blasted the decision, saying it will exacerbate an already tense situation and that state and local law enforcement have the situation under control.
“The Federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers,” Mr. Newsom said in a statement. “That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.”
Mr. Newsom called the National Guard deployment “the wrong mission” that will “erode public trust.”
Mr. Trump on Truth Social blamed local and state leadership for failing to act to protect federal agents.
“IF Governor Gavin Newscum of California and Mayor Karen Bass of Los Angeles can’t do their jobs, which everyone knows they can’t, then the federal government will step in and solve the problem. RIOTS & LOOTERS the way it should be solved,” Mr. Trump wrote.
Mr. Newsom fired back, asserting local authorities had the situation under control.
“LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice. We are in close coordination with the city and country and there is currently no unmet need,” he wrote on social media Saturday.
Homeland Security urges Democrats to tone down rhetoric as ICE officers get assaulted in LA Department said it took the Los Angeles Police Department two hours to respond to ICE officers getting assaulted during raids.
"Last night, over 1,000 rioters surrounded a federal law enforcement building and assaulted ICE law enforcement officers, slashed tires, defaced buildings, and taxpayer-funded property," DHS said in a press release.
The department said it took the Los Angeles Police Department two hours to respond.
"These riots in Los Angeles and increased assaults on ICE officers come after Democrat politicians, including Hakeem Jeffries, Mayor Wu of Boston, Tim Walz, and Mayor Bass of Los Angeles, have villainized and demonized ICE law enforcement," the department stated.
Bass has had a troubling history over her admiration of revolutionary dictator/murderer Fidel Castro and his corrupt communist regime.
In 2016, as a member of Congress, she made remarks praising Fidel Castro after his death, referring to him as “Comandante en Jefe,” appearing overly sympathetic to an authoritarian regime. She also visited Cuba multiple times over the years, including a 1980s trip with the Venceremos Brigade — a group historically aligned with pro-Cuban sentiments — sparking further controversy.
The Venceremos Brigade was founded in 1969 as a U.S.-based leftist group that organized trips for young Americans to travel to Cuba in solidarity with the Cuban Revolution. Participants worked on construction and agricultural projects to express support for the socialist government.
Bass joined the Venceremos Brigade in the 1970s as a young activist. She has said she admired the country’s health care system and wanted to learn more about it, particularly how a small, developing nation could offer universal health care. Her trip was part of an interest in the international revolutionary social justice movements during her early political formation.
Welcome to the Progressive Communist Democrat Dream
Once hailed as the City of Angels, Los Angeles has become a shadow of its former self. The downtown skyline still gleams at night, but on the ground, everything is chaos — a patchwork of barricaded ethnic neighborhoods, flickering streetlights, and a population struggling to survive in what feels more like a third-world warzone than a U.S. metropolis.
The collapse didn’t happen overnight.
It crept in slowly under the governance of increasingly radical progressive democrats, starting with a whisper of progressive policy changes, budget cuts, overwhelmed systems, and mass illegal migrations. Now, the city groans under the weight of its own contradictions.
Law enforcement, stretched thin and outgunned in some sectors, has seemingly tacitly abandoned certain districts altogether, not willing to risk their lives, families, jobs, and future, knowing that the progressive communist democrats will hang them before they will prosecute criminals. In the barrio, the rule of law is more of a suggestion than a reality.
Some say the city’s failure was inevitable — corrupt, ideological leadership, too many illegals with few skills but large open hands, too little planning, and unrealistic visions of what L.A. should be. Others whisper darker things: that the city was abandoned by design to the illegal aliens and ethnic minorities who had little allegiance to the United States and could be bribed into voting Democrat with more and more taxpayer-funded perks and privileges.
There are still good people here — medics, teachers, peacekeepers doing what they can. But they are fighting uphill battles, and every day it gets harder.
This isn’t about politics anymore. It’s about survival.
Bottom line...
The progressive communist democrats are trying to take over the nation. Pray your city doesn’t become the next Los Angeles, San Francisco, or Oakland.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
In a renewed push to influence U.S. monetary policy, former President Donald Trump called on the Federal Reserve to slash interest rates by a whole percentage point, escalating his long-running criticism of Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
Mocking Powell with the nickname “Too Late” on social media, Trump claimed the Fed’s hesitation to cut rates could be disastrous, even as he touted the country’s economic strength. The unusually large rate-cut demand underscores Trump’s continued efforts to pressure the central bank, a campaign that included a recent meeting with Powell at the White House. Trump also hinted at replacing Powell, whose official term expires in May 2026, suggesting an announcement on potential successors could come soon.
Beyond Bloviation: What Does This All Mean?
When the Federal Reserve lowers interest rates, it has a ripple effect across the economy, the stock market, and the bond market. Here’s a breakdown of how each is typically affected:
1. Effect on the Economy -- Goal: Boost economic growth and avoid recession.
Lower interest rates = cheaper borrowing. This is the Fed’s way of stimulating economic activity.
Consumer Spending Increases: Lower rates make loans (e.g., mortgages, auto loans, credit cards) cheaper, encouraging consumers to spend more.
Business Investment Rises: Companies are more likely to borrow for expansion, hiring, and capital expenditures.
Weaker Dollar: Lower rates can lead to a weaker U.S. dollar, boosting exports by making U.S. goods cheaper abroad.
Inflation Pressure: Over time, increased spending can push prices up, which is often the Fed’s intention when inflation is below target.
2. Effect on the Stock Market -- Lower interest rates tend to be bullish for stocks, at least in the short to medium term.
Valuation Boost: Discounted cash flow models use interest rates; lower rates increase the present value of future earnings, making stocks more attractive.
Growth and tech stocks usually benefit the most because their value is based more on future earnings.
Dividend stocks may also rise, as their yields become more attractive compared to falling bond yields.
Increased Risk Appetite: Investors tend to move money out of safe assets (like bonds) into riskier assets (like equities) when returns on the former fall.
3. Effect on the Bond Market
The bond market reacts quickly and sensitively to interest rate changes.
Prices Go Up: Bond prices and interest rates move inversely. Existing bonds with higher coupons become more attractive when rates fall, pushing prices up.
Yields Drop: As demand for bonds rises (especially Treasuries), their yields decrease.
4. Yield Curve Impact
Short-term rates drop directly.
Long-term yields may or may not fall in tandem, depending on inflation expectations and economic outlook.
If long-term rates don’t fall as much, the yield curve steepens; if they fall more, it inverts—a potential recession signal.
Bottom line...
Professional investors closely monitor anticipated changes to the federal funds interest rate, and these expectations are often priced into financial markets well before any official announcement.
By analyzing Federal Reserve statements, economic indicators, and market signals, investors adjust their portfolios accordingly, influencing everything from bond yields to stock valuations. As a result, the financial system tends to react not just to actual rate changes, but to the forecasts and sentiments surrounding them. In many cases, the market’s response happens before the Fed acts, demonstrating how deeply embedded these expectations are within the system.
When it comes to actual trades and positions, the little guy is screwed. However, in the best-case scenario, “a rising tide lifts all boats,” and it all works out with a healthier, more vibrant economy.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
In a season of political theater that often veers into reality TV territory, the ongoing spat between Elon Musk and Donald Trump is the plot twist no one saw coming — but now can’t stop watching.
What began as a highly touted, much publicized alliance between a bombastic President Trump and an unfiltered, outspoken tech titan has publicly combusted into a clash over over a budget bill, tax credits, and a shitload lot of ego.
This isn’t just a policy dispute — it’s personal, petty, and political in all the ways that define our era of performative governance.
It is also dangerous!
National Security Implications: When Ego Undermines the Mission
Beyond the headlines and hashtags, the Musk–Trump feud carries real and immediate national security implications, especially given Musk’s central role in U.S. aerospace, satellite infrastructure, and cyber capabilities. What might seem like a petty clash between two billionaires could, in reality, threaten key strategic operations and technological stability.
1. SpaceX and America’s Strategic Edge
SpaceX isn’t just a commercial venture; it’s a national asset. Its Dragon spacecraft currently transports U.S. astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station. Its Falcon 9 rockets are integral to military satellite launches. And its Starlink satellite network provides critical communications, including secure wartime internet access in conflict zones like Ukraine.
Trump’s public threat to cancel SpaceX contracts as political retaliation introduces a dangerous precedent: national defense and space operations could be held hostage to personal grievances. Disrupting or delaying launches, even briefly, could have cascading effects on reconnaissance, communications, and GPS integrity, particularly in an intense competition with China and Russia.
In response to Trump’s rhetoric, Musk’s counter-threat to begin “decommissioning” Dragon spacecraft only underlines the volatility of relying on private sector giants for core government functions without robust oversight or redundancy.
2. Satellite Infrastructure at Risk
Starlink’s rapidly growing satellite constellation is the backbone of secure, low-latency global communications used by civilians, U.S. forces, and allies worldwide. Its utility in Ukraine has already demonstrated how vital private-sector tech has become to modern warfare and intelligence.
Suppose the feud escalates into real action, such as the U.S. severing ties or SpaceX pulling support. In that case, there’s a risk of degradation in coverage, data latency, or availability in high-risk areas. That’s not just bad for business; it’s bad for battlefield command and control.
3. The Unspoken Threat: Political Weaponization of Tech
When either Trump or Musk uses leverage — contracts, influence, or public platforms — to punish each other, the risk grows that critical infrastructure could be politicized. What happens if government decisions about space launches, cybersecurity, or satellite access are made not by the Pentagon or NASA, but based on how Trump feels about a tweet?
This isn’t hypothetical. We’ve already seen Trump suggest canceling billions in federal contracts “to save money,” while Musk flirts with abandoning the GOP and upending defense partnerships out of protest. The danger isn’t that one of them wins the feud — it’s that national priorities become collateral damage in a personal war.
4. Weakening U.S. Tech Diplomacy
Musk’s companies — especially SpaceX and Tesla — are also instrumental in projecting American innovation and influence abroad. Public instability at the top undermines confidence among allies and investors, while emboldening adversaries who thrive on internal discord. At a time when technological leadership is a pillar of American soft power, watching two of its most visible champions implode in public only weakens the U.S. negotiating position globally.
The Trump–Musk feud is more than a sideshow. It exposes a deeper vulnerability in America’s hybrid public–private security model. When the nation’s safety hinges on billionaires who feud like celebrities, the costs of ego are counted not just in likes and followers but in lives, missions, and strategic trust.
The Truth As I See It
Elon’s 130-day term allowed for working in the White House without waivers, and divestment ended. Elon was frustrated because he found that he did not have unitary power, unlike corporate America. Even the President’s range of action was limited within the constraints of politics, regulations, the Congress, the Judiciary, and a bureaucracy embedded with those who would resist any changes.
Musk is unhappy because some of his suggested budget cuts could not be implemented by executive orders and needed Congressional legislation. Legislation that did not result in substantial cuts approaching Musk’s promises and increased the national debt, making Musk look impotent and ineffective. Musk also took exception with how the Congressional Budget Office was scoring the budget. Moreover, his enterprises were negatively affected by some of the provisions of Trump’s so-called “big beautiful bill,” while other enterprises were being rewarded.
Bottom Line…
When two powerful figures engage in a public battle driven by ego rather than reason, the consequences extend beyond personal rivalry—they undermine national stability. Their feud distracts from pressing issues, fuels division, and erodes public trust in leadership.
At a time when unity and pragmatic decision-making are crucial, their conflict serves as a spectacle that weakens collective progress; the country is more vulnerable to both internal discord and external threats.
Too bad there is no one of consequence that can yell, GROW UP!”
Welcome to the petty politics that may cost the GOP the House in 2026.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
Trump on Truth Social...
Musk onTwitter/X.com...
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
Here’s what they don’t want you to say out loud: the loudest progressive communist democrat voices screaming about a dysfunctional President, a corrupt administration, and “protecting democracy” are the very ones undermining it behind closed doors.
From weaponizing federal agencies, silencing dissent, to media propagandists running coordinated media campaigns that distort, distract, and destroy political opponents, today’s progressive communist democrat elite behaves less like defenders of democracy and more like power-hungry authoritarians in disguise.
These aren’t your classic Democrat liberals of old. They’ve morphed into something more radical—communists pushing Marxist-style equity over merit, censoring opposing views in the name of “safety,” and labeling anyone who challenges them as “extremists,” “threatening,” “deniers,” or worse, racists and ‘phobes.
And their media propagandists in the legacy and social media? Far from being neutral, objective journalistic observers, they’ve become full-time defense attorneys and special pleaders for the progressive regime’s agenda. Every scandal that touches their side is minimized, reframed, or buried. Every Republican misstep—real or imagined—is magnified into a crisis.
Just look at how they handled real issues like:
The Russia hoax: Breathlessly covered for years—debunked with a whisper.
Hunter Biden’s laptop: “Disinformation,” they cried—until it wasn’t.
Censorship on Big Tech platforms: Justified in the name of “safety from disinformation,” until it conveniently silenced dissent.
So, are they protecting democracy? Or protecting themselves?
What we’re seeing isn’t just partisanship. It’s a coordinated defense mechanism—an entrenched political class fighting like hell to hold onto its power, cover its corruption, and shut down anyone who dares to question the narrative.
Is the Trump White House Really That Chaotic—Or Is It Media Warfare by Another Name?
If you’ve spent any time watching cable news, scrolling through Truth Social, Twitter, or reading headlines from legacy media, you’ve likely encountered a steady stream of stories framing the Trump White House as uniquely corrupt, chaotic, and dangerous. But how much of that perception is rooted in actual dysfunction, and how much is a carefully curated narrative shaped by a hostile opposition and its allies in the media?
It’s a question worth asking, especially as public trust in both government institutions and the press continues to erode.
Take, for instance, a recent report in The Wall Street Journal titled “Economists Raise Questions About Quality of U.S. Inflation Data.” At first glance, this story has nothing to do with politics or partisanship—it’s about inflation reporting. Yet it uncovers a deeper issue that resonates across federal agencies: the quiet dysfunction of politicized government operations, often underreported unless it can be weaponized against a political figure like Trump.
According to the WSJ, staffing shortages at the Bureau of Labor Statistics have compromised the agency’s ability to collect accurate price data. As a result, the April inflation numbers—critical data that influences everything from interest rates to consumer confidence—were generated using broader estimations rather than hard data. There’s no suggestion of foul play, but the consequences of flawed information are still serious.
Now ask yourself: if this level of dysfunction had occurred under previous administrations, would the coverage have been the same? Or would it have been quietly downplayed, if written at all? Truthfully, the numbers were always a crapshoot based on imperfect surveys and quietly revised on a scheduled basis.
A Matter of Narrative, Not Just Facts
The Trump administration certainly has its share of internal conflict, impulsive “truths” and tweets, and unconventional approaches to diplomacy and negotiation. However, the degree to which every misstep is magnified should raise questions. From the Russia investigation to impeachment proceedings, from anonymous whistleblowers to leaked transcripts, every controversy was met with breathless reporting and social media hysteria, often before the full facts were known.
Meanwhile, blunders and failures within institutions perceived as “neutral” or Democrat-leaning often receive a fraction of the attention or are couched in sympathetic tones. Case in point: questionable Covid guidance from the CDC, missteps in the Afghanistan withdrawal, or the recent inflation data issues. All real problems. All quietly downplayed.
Captive Media, Captive Minds?
Social media platforms—designed to prioritize engagement over accuracy—have played a pivotal role in shaping public perception. Algorithms reward outrage. Legacy media, increasingly dependent on these platforms for distribution, must compete in the same attention economy, creating a malignant feedback loop where antagonism, not accuracy, drives coverage.
In that ecosystem, Trump didn’t just have to battle Democrats. He had to fight the narrative-making machinery itself.
And let’s not forget the rise of “fact-checking” organizations, many of which have been caught applying double standards. When misinformation or poor governance emerges from “the other side,” the scrutiny is often less severe, the headlines less harsh, the consequences less dire.
Bottom Line
This isn’t to suggest Trump’s presidency was without controversy or fault.
But it’s fair to ask: How much of the chaos was real, and how much was reaction? Did Trump create dysfunction, or did he inherit and expose it in institutions that had long been broken? Did he stoke division or become the lightning rod for a media-political complex uncomfortable with its loss of narrative control?
When the progressive communist democrat-captured media question the reliability of government inflation data, it barely makes a ripple. Yet, every Trump misspoken word could set off a firestorm, something is off balance.
Maybe the real story isn’t just about Trump.
Maybe it’s about trust in our institutions that have been corrupted by progressive communist democrats and their media propagandists.
We are so screwed.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
As a teenager, Greta Thunberg rose to global prominence as a media creation, posing as a fearless teen demanding world leaders confront climate change.
But her focus has shifted in recent years, from fighting fossil fuels to fighting for Gaza. While her humanitarian instincts may seem admirable on the surface, the deeper reality is far murkier.
In aligning herself so passionately with Gaza—most recently by joining the 2025 Freedom Flotilla to break Israel’s blockade—Thunberg has crossed from posing as the world’s global conscience into ideological activism. And she’s doing so while ignoring some of the most glaring human rights abuses in the region. Her silence speaks volumes.
She Condemns Israel—but Not Hamas’s Terror
Greta routinely posts about Israeli “genocide” and “occupation,” but when it comes to Hamas—the U.S., EU, and others’ designated terrorist organization—she’s silent.
No mention of the 30,000+ rockets Hamas has launched into Israeli towns.
No word on suicide bombings, cross-border kidnappings, or incitement to violence against Jews.
No word about an actual call for genocide by erasing all of the Jews in existence, not just Israel.
Instead, Thunberg paints Gaza’s suffering as a one-sided story, erasing the actions of the very regime that bears responsibility for initiating and perpetuating violence, and for keeping its own people in bondage and in harm’s way.
Human Shields: The War Crime She Won’t Acknowledge
Hamas has long employed a tactic that turns innocent civilians into human shields: embedding rocket launchers and military infrastructure in schools, hospitals, mosques, and residential neighborhoods. According to reports by Human Rights Watch and the UN, this is a deliberate effort to make retaliation deadly and public, helping Hamas win the propaganda war even as their own people pay the price.
Yet Thunberg has not once publicly condemned this practice. Her framing of Gaza’s plight consistently ignores this fundamental distortion of humanitarian law, painting a picture that lacks nuance or accountability. Ever vocal about “disproportionate responses” by Israel, Thunberg refuses to acknowledge the brutal cynicism of Hamas embedding military targets among innocents. Why?
Gaza’s Women: Abused, Silenced, Forgotten
As a self-proclaimed feminist, Thunberg champions women’s rights in Europe. But Gaza? Crickets.
Under Hamas’s rule, women are subjected to:
Forced modesty laws
Gender-based violence
Limited freedom of movement
Repression in the workplace and education
Reports from Amnesty International and Freedom House have detailed systemic gender discrimination. Thunberg, however, remains mute—because calling it out would disrupt the narrative she’s committed to.
Greta proudly waves rainbow flags in Western protests. But in Gaza, LGBTQ+ individuals are hunted. Homosexuality is illegal. Many face imprisonment, torture, or even extrajudicial killings by Hamas or family members in so-called “honor” crimes.
In 2023, Palestinian LGBTQ+ activists pleaded for international solidarity. Greta Thunberg said nothing. Apparently, LGBTQ+ rights matter—just not if it complicates your politics.
Aid for Terror: The Dark Side of Humanitarianism
Thunberg recently joined a ship delivering humanitarian aid to Gaza. But where does that aid go?
Reports from The Wall Street Journal, Times of Israel, and Al-Arabiya have detailed how Hamas:
Confiscates aid shipments
Redirects food, fuel, and medicine to its fighters
Sells aid to desperate civilians to fund terror operations
Greta unintentionally strengthens the war machine she claims to oppose by pushing aid through uncontrolled channels.
So Why Won’t Greta Thunberg Speak Out?
Greta Thunberg has built her brand on shifting sands, moral equivalence rather than moral clarity—but when it comes to Gaza, her silence on terrorism, torture, and oppression is deafening.
Why? Because condemning Hamas would fracture her simplistic, black-and-white worldview that fuels her activism. It would force her to confront a messy reality: not all suffering is caused by Western democracies, and not all victims are innocent.
Who Funds Greta Thunberg?
While Thunberg presents herself as an independent activist, her campaigns received logistical and promotional support from several NGOs, including Fridays for Future (founded by her), which in turn receives donations from various progressive, Marxist, and Communist affiliated donors.
Still, transparency matters. When Thunberg’s activism moved beyond climate and into geopolitical hotbeds like Gaza, it’s fair to ask: Who is guiding the messaging, and why are Hamas abuses ignored?
Bottom Line
Greta Thunberg posing at a "safe" pro-Palestinian protest in Malmö, Sweden.
Thunberg’s Gaza activism reflects the price of selective outrage and demonstrates how quickly moral absolutism becomes moral blindness. By refusing to condemn the very forces inflicting violence, repression, and fear inside Gaza, she undermines the credibility of every cause she touches.
If she truly stands for justice, she must speak the whole truth, not just the parts that fit her pre-approved script.
Personally, I would like to see Thunberg and her 2025 Freedom Flotilla be given free passage through any Israeli blockade and see, first-hand, what happens when such aid is freely distributed without Israeli oversight. Let her walk the streets of Gaza.
We are so screwed when faux propagandists are disguised as independent activists.
-- Steve
“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it! "Acta non verba" -- actions not words
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS