Old clip of Trump talking about Iran in 1980 goes viral

#Trump #Iran #MiddleEast

Iran: In Case Your Forgot ...

 Yup, in case people forget.

Iranian action against the US.

• November 4, 1979: Seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and taking 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

• April 18, 1983: Bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut by Iran-backed Hezbollah, killing 63 people including 17 Americans.

• October 23, 1983: Bombing of the U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut by Iran-backed Hezbollah, killing 241 U.S. servicemen.

• December 12, 1983: Bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait by Iran-backed operatives, killing five and injuring 86.

• September 20, 1984: Bombing of the U.S. Embassy annex in East Beirut by Iran-backed Hezbollah, killing two Americans.

• December 3, 1984: Hijacking of Kuwait Airways Flight 221 by Hezbollah affiliates with Iranian complicity, killing two U.S. officials.

• June 14, 1985: Hijacking of TWA Flight 847 by Iran-backed Hezbollah, killing one U.S. Navy diver.

• April 14, 1988: Iranian mine damages USS Samuel B. Roberts in the Persian Gulf, injuring crew and causing extensive damage.

• June 25, 1996: Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia by Iran-backed Hezbollah, killing 19 U.S. airmen.

• October 12, 2000: Provision of support to al-Qaeda for the bombing of USS Cole in Yemen, killing 17 U.S. sailors.

• March 20, 2003 - 2011: Supply of weapons, advisors, and support to Iraqi insurgents, causing thousands of U.S. casualties.

• January 20, 2007: Attack on Karbala provincial headquarters by Iran-backed militants, killing five U.S. soldiers.

• 2006 - 2021: Supply of weapons to Taliban in Afghanistan, contributing to U.S. casualties.

• October 11, 2011: Foiled IRGC Quds Force plot to assassinate Saudi ambassador in Washington, D.C.

• December 4, 2011: Capture and refusal to return U.S. RQ-170 drone.

• 2011 - 2013: DDoS cyber attacks on U.S. banks and financial institutions.

• September 15, 2013: Hacking into U.S. Navy's unclassified network.

• January 12, 2016: Detention of 10 U.S. sailors in the Persian Gulf by IRGC.

• March 24, 2016: Indictment of Iranians for cyber attacks on U.S. banks and attempt to hack New York dam.

• October 30, 2019: Series of attacks on Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops by Iran-backed militias.

• December 31, 2019: Storming of U.S. Embassy in Baghdad by Iran-backed militias.

• January 8, 2020: Ballistic missile attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq, injuring over 100 troops.

• March 11, 2020: Rocket attack on Camp Taji in Iraq, killing two U.S. troops.

• February 19, 2021: Rocket attack on U.S.-led coalition base in Erbil, Iraq.

• March 4, 2021: Rocket attack on Ain al-Asad air base hosting U.S. troops.

• July 13, 2021: Foiled kidnapping plot against Iranian-American journalist Masih Alinejad.

• October 20, 2021: Drone attack on Al-Tanf base in Syria.

• January 5, 2022: Attacks on U.S. sites in Iraq and Syria by Iran-backed militias.

• March 13, 2022: IRGC missile attack on Erbil targeting U.S. interests.

• June 1, 2022: Cyberattack on Boston Children’s Hospital.

• August 10, 2022: Murder-for-hire plot against former U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton.

• August 13, 2022: Stabbing of Salman Rushdie, linked to Iranian fatwa.

• October 7, 2023 - Ongoing: Over 180 attacks by Iranian proxies on U.S. forces in the Middle East, including a January 2024 drone strike in Jordan killing three U.S. troops.

• 2024: Plot to assassinate Donald Trump and Masih Alinejad.

• June 23, 2025: Missile attack on U.S. forces at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar.

#Iran #Terrorists

What Did The Secret Service Know About Clinton and Epstein

  

Assistant FBI Director Dan Bongino

What Did The Secret Service Know About Clinton and Epstein

Dan Bongino Told A Story via 2nd Party ...

Clinton and Epstein:

Dan Bongino is the current Assistant FBI Director. Before that he had a Podcast and a show on FOX News. Before that he was a NYPD Cop, then on Obama’s Secret Service Detail. He said once "When Obama got a few Heinekens in him he would tell what he thought about Joe Biden."

Anyway, Bongino explained on his Podcast a conversation he had with a friend who was a younger Secret Service Agent. This Agent didn't really know much about Bill Clinton.  He referred to him as 'This Guy' - being Clinton. So he was assigned to Clinton's detail on Epstein’s plane to 'the island'. He told Bongino that after takeoff 'This Guy' goes to the back of the plane with two young girls and they were giggling about something. They made a stop. The young Agent found the Detail Supervisor and told him what he saw. He told the Supervisor "I am not getting back on that plane." They had to fly that Agent home on a separate flight.

Clinton flew over 25 times on that plane. Trump has his own plane that he paid for with his own money and not money stolen from Haitian Disaster Relief  ... JUST SAYIN' ...

OPINION

The Two Planes: A Tale of Elite Corruption and the Smokescreen of "Whataboutism"

In the annals of American political corruption, certain stories cut through the partisan noise to reveal a deeper, more unsettling truth about the powerful. The account of Bill Clinton’s travels on Jeffrey Epstein’s “Lolita Express,” punctuated by the moral revulsion of a young Secret Service agent, is one such story. It is not merely a salacious anecdote from a bygone era; it is a stark emblem of a permanent political class that operates by a separate set of rules, insulated by its own institutions and protected by a media willing to look the other way. The contrast drawn—between a former president cavorting with a convicted sex trafficker on a plane synonymous with depravity, and a political opponent who used his own, privately-funded aircraft—is about more than just the men involved. It is about the fundamental difference between a system of unaccountable elitism and one of transparent, if flawed, populism.

The story, as relayed by Dan Bongino—a former Secret Service agent with an unimpeachable law enforcement pedigree—is damning in its specifics. A young agent, so new to the detail he referred to the former President of the United States as “this guy,” witnesses behavior so alarming on a flight to a known pedophile’s private island that he refuses to continue the assignment. He risks his career rather than be complicit in the scene unfolding around him. This is not a hearsay rumor from a political opponent; this is the testimony of a sworn federal officer, one trained to observe and protect. His instinctual recoil speaks volumes. It tells us that what he saw violated not just protocol, but basic human decency. The fact that Clinton took over two dozen such flights, developing a long-standing association with Epstein long after his initial conviction, paints a picture of a man who believed himself to be above the moral and legal constraints that bind ordinary citizens.

This pattern of alleged behavior points to a culture of impunity that surrounds the political left’s elite. For decades, Bill Clinton has been shielded by a protective carapace of political power, legal maneuvering, and media complicity. From the scandal with Monica Lewinsky, where he was credibly accused of abusing a power dynamic with a young intern, to the numerous allegations of sexual assault and harassment that have followed him, he has consistently been given a pass. His friendship with Epstein is the most grotesque chapter in this long narrative. The media, which rightly pursues allegations of misconduct with relentless vigor when they involve conservative figures, has often treated the Clinton-Epstein connection as a tangential, secondary story. The message is clear: for the right kind of powerful person, with the right kind of political affiliations, the rules are different. The guardrails of accountability are removed.

This brings us to the crucial counterpoint: the case of Donald Trump. The post’s comparison is instructive. It is true that Trump flew on Epstein’s plane on a handful of occasions, a fact he has never denied and one that his opponents cite in a desperate attempt to create a false moral equivalence. But the equivalence is shattered by the details. Trump owned his own plane, the famed “Trump Force One,” a symbol of his private sector success and personal brand. He had no recurring need to hitch a ride on a predator’s jet. More importantly, when Epstein’s crimes came into full view, Trump cooperated with authorities and publicly banned Epstein from his properties. The relationship ended. This stands in stark contrast to Clinton, who continued his association and, according to flight logs, took multiple trips *after* Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor.

The attempt to blur these lines is a classic tactic of “whataboutism,” designed not to defend Trump, but to provide cover for Clinton by muddying the waters. It is a smokescreen. The conservative perspective here is not that any association with a bad person is automatically disqualifying; it is about the nature, duration, and context of that association. A handful of flights a decade before Epstein’s first conviction, followed by a clean and public break, is not the same as two dozen flights, including many after the world knew Epstein was a criminal, to an island specifically designed for the exploitation of young girls.

Furthermore, the post’s jab about “money stolen from Haitian Disaster Relief” touches on another key conservative grievance: the Clinton Foundation. For years, serious questions have been raised about the foundation’s operations, with allegations that it functioned as a de facto slush fund, trading access and influence for donations from foreign governments and entities with business before the State Department. The perception, whether proven in a court of law or not, is that the Clintons leveraged public office for vast private enrichment, operating in the grey areas between philanthropy, diplomacy, and personal gain. This stands in contrast to a figure like Trump, whose wealth was accrued in the private sector, and whose assets were placed in a blind trust upon taking office.

The story of the two planes is a metaphor for the choice facing America. On one side is the “Lolita Express”—a symbol of a corrupt, unaccountable, and decaying establishment that believes power grants it license. It is a world of hidden dealings, compromised principles, and a profound contempt for the citizenry it purports to serve. On the other side is a privately-owned plane—a symbol of brash, transparent, and self-made success. It may be gaudy and controversial, but its ownership is clear, its funding is known, and its trajectory is not hidden in the flight logs of a sex offender.

The young Secret Service agent who refused to get back on that plane represents the conscience of a nation that is slowly awakening to the corruption of its ruling class. His instinct was to distance himself from the stench of decay. Conservatives understand this instinct. It is the same impulse that drives the movement to drain the swamp, to challenge the media narrative, and to hold the powerful accountable, regardless of their party affiliation. The Clinton-Epstein story is not a partisan issue; it is a test of our nation’s character. Will we continue to excuse the grotesque behavior of the elite, or will we, like that young agent, finally declare, “I am not getting back on that plane”? The future of the Republic may depend on the answer.

#DanBonjino #Epstein #JeffreyEpstein #BillClinton 

 

Black History Month and the Democratic Dead End: A Conservative Reckoning

This Day in History: February 25 – A Conservative Reflection on Memory, Principle, and Nation

What is history, if not the collective memory of a people? For conservatives, the past is not a foreign country to be raided for talking points or discarded when inconvenient. It is the foundation upon which we build the future a repository of wisdom, tradition, and the hard-won lessons of those who came before us. Looking through the newspapers and archives of February 25 across the decades reveals a tapestry of moments that remind us why the conservative vision, rooted in ordered liberty and institutional continuity, remains essential.

The Peril of Partisan Bitterness (1954)

Seventy-one years ago today, on February 25, 1954, a letter to the editor appeared in Utah's Daily Herald that could have been written this morning. The author, Willard Hawkins, deplored the political bitterness of his era, quoting Kipling's *Recessional* with its haunting plea: "Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet, Lest we forget lest we forget!" 

Hawkins observed something that remains true: nations that achieve greatness can crumble into oblivion when they lose their moral bearings. He watched as Republicans and Democrats hurled charges of "creeping Socialism and Communism" at one another, while unemployment mounted. He specifically noted the venomous attacks of Senator McCarthy, warning that "a house divided against itself will fall."

The conservative understands that political passion must be tempered by prudence. We fight for principles, not personalities. We recognize, as Hawkins did, that the things Christ condemned most severely were hypocrisy and spiritual pride. A conservatism that forgets humility is no conservatism at all it is merely power-seeking dressed in traditionalist clothing.

When Statesmen Abandon Principle (1888)

Travel further back to February 25, 1888, and we find *The Spectator* offering a searing critique of liberal statesman William Gladstone. The conservative publication accused Gladstone of abandoning principle to court the Irish nationalist vote, praising men who had "poisoned domestic life" and "strangled liberty" .

The lesson here is timeless: political leaders who sacrifice moral clarity for short-term electoral gain betray not only their country but the very concept of statesmanship. Gladstone, once admired for his "brilliant and patriotic services," had, in the view of conservatives, cast his lot with those who threatened the Union. The conservative tradition has always insisted that principle matters more than power that there are some alliances too degrading to make, some compromises too corrupting to accept.

Building, Not Tearing Down (1891)

Yet February 25 also offers moments of constructive patriotism. In 1891, Democrats in Provo, Utah, gathered on George Washington's birthday to organize a political party committed to local self-government, tariff reform, and the protection of every qualified elector's voting rights . They invoked the Founders Jefferson, Madison, Jackson and understood themselves as heirs to a great tradition.

The conservative sees in such gatherings the genius of American self-government. Free people, associating voluntarily, building institutions that channel conflict into constructive debate rather than violence. The speaker that night told a story of three boys asked their politics—one a Democrat, one a Republican, and one with no politics at all, who admitted "I want that coon." The conservative prefers the boys with principles, even when we disagree with them, to the man with none.

The Danger of Historical Amnesia

Which brings us to our own moment. As one recent analysis of conservative constitutional thought reminds us, "narratives matter". The stories we tell about our past shape our future. For decades, conservatives warned that abandoning our constitutional heritage would lead to a dangerous expansion of state power and the erosion of local community. Those warnings were dismissed as alarmism. Today, even progressive scholars acknowledge that the administrative state has grown beyond anything the Founders envisioned.

The conservative approach to history is neither blind nostalgia nor cynical manipulation. It is the understanding that, as Kipling wrote, "The tumult and the shouting dies; The captains and the kings depart" but that "an humble and a contrite heart" remains the foundation of national greatness .

On this February 25, we might reflect on what endures. Political majorities come and go. Today's outrage becomes tomorrow's footnote. But the principles of limited government, individual responsibility, and reverence for our inherited institutions remain the surest guide through turbulent times.

The conservative does not worship the past. But neither does he imagine that he can build a stable future on the ruins of everything that came before. He knows, with the poet, that "still stands Thine ancient sacrifice" and that the task of each generation is not to discard that sacrifice, but to prove worthy of it.

Sources: Daily Herald (Provo, Utah), February 25, 1954 ; The Spectator Archive, February 25, 1888 ; Provo Dispatch, February 25, 1891 ; Balkinization symposium on conservative constitutional thought .

#BlackHistory #Blacks #History 

Guess Who Testified Today ...

 

Guess who is about to testify ... This isn't AI. This was a painting at Epstein's house.

Hillary Clinton said she didn't know Jeffrey Epstein.

LADIES: Work with me on this: If your husband flew over 25 times on a guy's private jet to the Bahamas YOU wouldn't want to know who the guy was? 

Maxwell went to her Daughter's wedding! Don't you know the people at your DAUGHTER'S wedding?!?!

Maybe I got bad information. Maybe I'm STUPID.  Something is not adding up on what she is saying.

#Trump #Clinton #BillClinton #HillaryClinton

Normal vs Crazy

 Normal vs Crazy

WILD STRATEGY: Democrats tried to distract from President Trump’s State of the Union address by holding other events, including one where people dressed in animal costumes.

The distraction attempts drew ire from prominent conservatives, including Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

#Democrats #Arkansas #SarahHuckabee#Sanders

 

Ilhan Omar Is Not For America

 

Ilhan Omar Is Not For America

"BREAKING NEWS" Ilhan Omar's emergency bid to halt the DOJ probe into her explosive wealth surge was brutally DENIED by federal judge — no hearing, no mercy, doors sealed shut in seconds — as the Somali-born congresswoman faces imminent subpoena storm, while Senator Marco Rubio fires off: “This isn’t justice delayed — this is corruption EXPOSED, her $40M+ mystery fortune is about to unravel the whole progressive facade”, millions shocked as hidden financial trails linked to overseas accounts surface, plus the judge’s chilling final remark leaked: “No more games”, and Rubio’s vow to push full congressional audit that could strip her committee seats and trigger impeachment-level chaos rocking Washington!

#MarcoRubio #IlhanOmar #Somalia

We would be better off if Democrats would stop killing their babies and have their own kids as opposed to trying to brainwash other people's kids.

 

We would be better off if Democrats would stop killing their babies and have their own kids as opposed to trying to brainwash other people's kids.

The Demographic War: How Democrats Abandoned Their Own Future to Control Yours

There is a truth so obvious that it has become invisible, so foundational that it is rarely spoken aloud in polite political discourse. Yet it underpins nearly every cultural and political battle of our time. The Democratic Party has made a calculated decision: they will not have enough children to sustain their own vision of society, so they have set about gaining control of everyone else's.

The social media post that prompted this reflection puts it with refreshing bluntness: "We would be better off if Democrats would stop killing their babies and have their own kids as opposed to trying to brainwash other people's kids." This is not merely a rhetorical jab. It is a profound observation about the demographic reality of modern America and the political strategies that have emerged in response to it.

The Demographic Divide

The numbers are stark and undeniable. According to the Pew Research Center, religiously affiliated Americans who lean conservative have higher birth rates than secular Americans, who lean liberal. The fertility rate among white evangelical Protestants is 2.1 children per woman, above the replacement level of 2.1. Among white mainline Protestants, it is 1.8. Among white Catholics, it is 1.7. Among religiously unaffiliated Americans the fastest-growing demographic group and the core of the progressive coalition the fertility rate is just 1.4 children per woman.

This is not an accident. It is the product of a worldview that prioritizes individual fulfillment over family formation, career advancement over child-rearing, and sexual liberation over marital commitment. The progressive value system, whatever its rhetorical commitment to "inclusivity" and "diversity," has proven itself demographically sterile. It produces fewer children than it needs to sustain itself, let alone to grow.

The Abortion Question: 65% and Counting

The post's reference to "killing their babies" points to the most direct expression of this demographic reality. Since the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision returned abortion policy to the states, the abortion industry and its political allies have fought to enshrine abortion on demand, at any stage, for any reason, funded by taxpayers. The numbers are staggering: approximately 65% of abortions are now performed at home using abortion pills a practice that has an 11% complication rate, higher than FDA standards for most medications.

For conservatives, this is not merely a policy disagreement. It is a moral catastrophe. The Democratic Party has positioned itself as the party of abortion absolutism, opposing even modest restrictions like parental notification laws, late-term abortion bans, and protections for babies born alive after failed abortions. This position is not supported by the majority of Americans, who favor reasonable limits, but it is demanded by the party's activist base and the billion-dollar abortion industry that funds its campaigns.

The consequence is that Democratic-leaning populations abort their children at higher rates than Republican-leaning populations. According to the Guttmacher Institute, blue states have higher abortion rates than red states. New York, California, and Illinois states with the most permissive abortion laws also have the highest abortion rates. Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas states with the most restrictive laws have among the lowest.

This is not correlation without causation. When a party champions abortion as a positive good, celebrates it as "healthcare," and demands that taxpayers fund it, it should not be surprised when its constituents avail themselves of the service. The Democratic Party has effectively subsidized the non-birth of its own future voters.

The Schoolhouse Strategy

Which brings us to the second half of the post: "trying to brainwash other people's kids." Having failed to produce enough children of their own, progressives have set about capturing the children of those who do.

This is not a conspiracy theory; it is a stated strategy. The progressive left understands that if they cannot outbreed conservatives, they must out-teach them. And so they have poured enormous resources into capturing the institutions that shape young minds: public schools, teachers' unions, curriculum boards, textbook publishers, and now, increasingly, the family itself.

Consider what has happened to American education in the past generation. Schools that once taught reading, writing, and arithmetic now teach critical race theory, which divides children by skin color and teaches them that their country is irredeemably racist. They teach gender ideology, which tells children that they can be born in the wrong body and that their biological sex is a social construct. They teach sexual education that normalizes every form of sexual expression while denigrating traditional morality as oppressive.

Parents who object to any of this are labeled bigots, extremists, or domestic terrorists. School boards that once answered to local communities now answer to federal bureaucrats and national teachers' unions. Curriculum is designed not by parents but by activists with advanced degrees in grievance studies and a deep contempt for the American way of life.

The Department of Education, originally created to ensure equal access to education, has become a weapon of cultural warfare. Under Democratic administrations, it has threatened to withhold funding from schools that do not adopt progressive curricula. It has investigated parents who dare to speak at school board meetings. It has imposed Title IX interpretations that require schools to allow biological males who identify as female to compete in girls' sports and use girls' locker rooms.

The Family Under Assault

This assault on parental authority is not accidental. It is the logical extension of a worldview that sees the traditional family as an obstacle to progressive transformation. The family, after all, transmits values from one generation to the next. It preserves traditions, instills morality, and creates loyalty to country, community, and faith. For progressives who seek to remake society from the ground up, the family is a rival institution that must be weakened and, ultimately, replaced by the state.

Hence the relentless attacks on parental rights. Hence the insistence that children have "privacy" from their parents when it comes to gender transitions. Hence the laws that allow minors to receive hormonal treatments and surgeries without parental knowledge or consent. Hence the efforts to remove parents from the process entirely, replacing them with school counselors and social workers who share the progressive worldview.

The irony is that the same progressives who demand absolute autonomy for women to abort their unborn children insist that parents have no right to direct the education and upbringing of their living children. The unborn child is a matter of private choice; the born child is a matter of public control. This is not consistency; it is ideology.

The Cultural Capture

Beyond the schools, progressives have captured virtually every major cultural institution. Hollywood produces entertainment that relentlessly promotes progressive values while mocking traditional ones. The news media filters every story through a progressive lens. Social media platforms censor conservative voices while amplifying progressive propaganda. Corporations that once stayed out of politics now compete to demonstrate their progressive credentials, imposing diversity quotas, celebrating Pride Month, and punishing employees who dissent.

Children absorb this propaganda constantly. They watch television shows that feature every form of sexual deviance as normal and healthy. They use smartphones that deliver a constant stream of content designed to shape their values and attitudes. They attend colleges where conservative speakers are shouted down and conservative students are marginalized. By the time they reach adulthood, many have been thoroughly indoctrinated in the progressive worldview even if their parents raised them differently.

This is what the post means by "brainwashing." It is not an exaggeration. It is an accurate description of a coordinated effort to shape the minds of the next generation in ways that parents cannot control and often cannot even see.

The Conservative Response: Reclaiming the Future

Conservatives cannot match progressives dollar for dollar or platform for platform. We do not have Hollywood. We do not have the mainstream media. We do not have the universities or the major corporations. What we have is something more powerful: we have children.

The demographic advantage conservatives enjoy is not accidental. It flows from a worldview that values life, family, and tradition. It is the product of communities that still believe that children are a blessing, not a burden; that marriage is a sacred covenant, not a disposable contract; that the purpose of life is not individual fulfillment but service to God, family, and country.

If conservatives will simply have children and raise them in the faith, we will win the future. Not through political manipulation or cultural capture, but through the simple arithmetic of reproduction. Our children will outnumber theirs. Our values will be transmitted naturally, through the love and teaching of parents, not imposed artificially through state power.

But we must also fight for the children who are not ours. We must defend parental rights against the encroachments of the state. We must demand transparency in education and accountability from school boards. We must create alternative institutions classical schools, homeschool networks, conservative media that can compete with the progressive monoculture. We must never surrender the public square, even when it seems hopelessly stacked against us.

Conclusion: The Arithmetic of Freedom

The Democratic Party has made a choice. It has chosen abortion over birth, the state over the family, and indoctrination over education. It has chosen to kill its own babies and brainwash everyone else's. And it now finds itself demographically dependent on immigration to replace the native-born population it has aborted out of existence.

Conservatives have made a different choice. We choose life. We choose family. We choose the messy, demanding, glorious work of raising children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. We choose to pass on our faith, our values, and our heritage to the next generation. And we choose to fight for the right of all parents to do the same.

In the long run, this choice will determine the outcome of every political battle. Demography is destiny. The side that has children will inherit the earth. The side that kills them will inherit the wind.

So let the Democrats cry about unaffordability and illegal immigration and all the other consequences of their own choices. Let them wring their hands about why working-class voters have abandoned them. The answer is simple: those voters have children, and they have noticed that the Democratic Party does not value them.

We would be better off if Democrats stopped killing their babies and started raising their own. But since they won't, we will raise ours and we will raise them to know the difference between freedom and tyranny, truth and propaganda, life and death. That is the conservative mission. That is the conservative future. And that is why, in the end, we will win.

#abortion #indoctorination #Democrats #Policy

The Party of Consequences Denial: How Democrats Caused the Crises They Now Blame on Everyone Else

 

The Party of Consequences Denial: How Democrats Caused the Crises They Now Blame on Everyone Else

Democrats Are Crying Over The Unaffordabilty That They Caused And ILLEGALS. So Much For You.

There is a particular form of political gaslighting that has become the Democratic Party's signature move. Create a crisis through decades of failed policy. Blame the crisis on Republicans, on corporations, on "greed," on anyone but themselves. Then, when the public finally rebels against the unaffordability and chaos they have engineered, express bewilderment that voters are not rewarding them for their "compassion." The latest iteration of this performance is almost too predictable to be believed: Democrats are now crying about the unaffordability that they caused and the illegal immigration they encouraged, asking plaintively, "So much for you?"

The answer, from a conservative perspective, is simple and devastating: yes, so much for us. So much for the working families priced out of housing by your zoning policies. So much for the American workers whose wages were suppressed by your open borders. So much for the children trapped in failing schools protected by your teachers' unions. So much for the communities devastated by the fentanyl you allowed to flood across a border you refused to secure. You created this. You own it. And your tears are not an argument for more power; they are a confession of catastrophic failure.

The Affordability Crisis: A Democratic Masterpiece

Let us begin with housing, the most visible and painful manifestation of unaffordability in America. In cities and states controlled by Democrats for decades New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland the cost of shelter has become astronomical. The median home price in California now exceeds $800,000. In New York City, the average rent for a one-bedroom apartment hovers around $4,000 per month. Young people are giving up on homeownership entirely. Families are doubling up in cramped apartments. The American Dream of owning a home with a yard is slipping away for an entire generation.

And who is responsible? Democrats will tell you it is corporate landlords, or greedy developers, or Airbnb, or the weather. But the truth is that Democratic governance created this crisis through a simple, relentless formula: make it impossible to build.

For decades, Democratic-controlled cities have enacted some of the most restrictive zoning laws in the developed world. They have empowered neighborhood activists to block any new construction through endless environmental reviews and community board hearings. They have imposed rent control policies that discourage new development while accelerating the decay of existing housing stock. They have created permitting processes that take years and cost millions, ensuring that only the most expensive luxury projects can survive the gauntlet.

The result is exactly what any economist could have predicted: when you make it illegal to build enough housing, housing becomes unaffordable. The laws of supply and demand are not suspended by progressive good intentions. Yet Democrats continue to act surprised that their policies have produced precisely the outcomes they were designed to produce.

The Inflation Tax: Paid for by Progressive Spending

Then there is inflation, the cruelest tax of all because it falls hardest on those with the least. Since 2020, the cost of everything groceries, gasoline, utilities, insurance has soared. The Biden-Harris administration inherited an economy recovering from a once-in-a-century pandemic and proceeded to pour trillions of dollars of new spending into it, overheating an already strained system.

The American Rescue Plan. The so-called Inflation Reduction Act, which did nothing to reduce inflation and everything to increase spending. Student loan forgiveness schemes that added hundreds of billions to the national debt. Green energy subsidies that distorted markets and raised energy costs. Regulatory assaults on domestic energy production that sent gasoline prices to record highs.

Every one of these policies was championed by Democrats. Every one was opposed by Republicans who warned of exactly the consequences that followed. And now, when Americans go to the grocery store and wince at the price of eggs and milk, Democrats blame "corporate greed" and "supply chain issues" and "Putin's price hike." They never blame themselves. They never acknowledge that their own spending spree devalued the currency in every American's wallet.

The Border: Open Doors, Closed Minds

Perhaps no issue demonstrates Democratic hypocrisy more vividly than immigration. For four years, the Biden-Harris administration systematically dismantled every border security measure put in place by President Trump. They ended the Remain in Mexico policy. They stopped construction of the border wall. They instituted catch-and-release on a massive scale. They broadened the definition of asylum to include claims that would never survive a court challenge. They instructed ICE to focus enforcement on "priorities" that excluded most illegal border crossers.

The result was the largest wave of illegal immigration in American history. Millions of people crossed the border illegally. Communities across the country from small towns in Ohio to major cities like New York and Denver were overwhelmed by the influx. Shelters filled to capacity. Schools struggled with students who did not speak English. Hospitals provided uncompensated care. Local budgets were blown apart by the cost of services.

And what did Democrats do when their own cities and states began to feel the strain? They blamed Texas. They blamed Florida. They blamed anyone but themselves. Mayor Eric Adams of New York, who had spent years praising "sanctuary city" policies, suddenly began begging for federal help and complaining that the buses from Texas were overwhelming his capacity. Governor Gavin Newsom of California, who had turned his state into a de facto sanctuary for the entire country, remained largely silent as border crossings shattered records.

The cruelty of this approach is that it uses human beings as political props. Democrats encouraged people to make a dangerous journey across thousands of miles, often at great personal cost, based on the implicit promise that they would be welcomed and supported. Then, when the numbers became politically inconvenient, they turned around and blamed the very people who had warned them this would happen.

The Double Standard: Compassion for the Foreign, Contempt for the Citizen

Underlying all of these policy failures is a profound moral inversion that has come to define the modern Democratic Party. The party that once claimed to speak for the working class now speaks almost exclusively for the donor class, the academic class, and the activist class. Its "compassion" is reserved for those who are far away the migrant crossing the border, the victim of climate change in Bangladesh, the oppressed minority in some distant land. For the American citizen struggling to afford rent, or the American worker displaced by immigration, or the American child trapped in a failing school, Democrats have nothing but lectures about privilege and demands for more patience.

This is the "so much for you" moment that the original post captures so perfectly. After decades of Democratic governance that has made life less affordable, less safe, and less secure for ordinary Americans, Democrats now express hurt and confusion that those same Americans are not more grateful. They cannot understand why the working-class voters who once formed the core of their coalition have drifted away to a Republican Party that at least pretends to notice their existence.

The answer is that working-class Americans are not stupid. They can see that Democratic policies have made their lives harder. They can see that Democratic priorities do not include them. They can see that the party's "compassion" is a rhetorical performance, not a governing philosophy. And they have decided, rationally and correctly, that they would rather vote for a party with flaws that at least acknowledges their existence than for a party that treats them as an obstacle to its progressive ambitions.

The Conservative Alternative: A Vision of Abundance

Conservatives offer a different vision, one rooted not in scarcity and redistribution but in abundance and opportunity. On housing, we advocate for deregulation, property rights, and the removal of barriers to construction. On inflation, we advocate for fiscal discipline, sound money, and an end to the spending sprees that devalue the currency. On the border, we advocate for enforcement, sovereignty, and an immigration system that serves American interests rather than globalist fantasies.

These are not radical ideas. They are common sense. They are the policies that built the American middle class in the first place. And they stand in stark contrast to the Democratic agenda of control, dependency, and decline.

Conclusion: The Tears Are Not Convincing

So Democrats are crying now. They are crying about unaffordability they created. They are crying about a border they opened. They are crying about voters who have abandoned them. And they are asking, with genuine bewilderment, "So much for you?"

Yes. So much for you. So much for your promises of free stuff paid for by someone else. So much for your open borders and closed minds. So much for your contempt for the working class and your devotion to the donor class. So much for your performative compassion and your actual cruelty. So much for you.

The American people have rendered their verdict. They have seen what Democratic governance delivers: unaffordability, insecurity, and chaos. They have chosen a different path. And no amount of crocodile tears will change that calculation.

The only question that remains is whether Democrats will learn anything from their defeat. Will they finally acknowledge that their policies have failed? Will they finally listen to the voters they have lost? Or will they continue to cry about the consequences of their own actions, blaming everyone but themselves for a future they have made unbearable?

The answer, based on decades of evidence, is that they will not learn. They will not change. They will continue to double down on the same failed policies, expecting different results. And they will continue to wonder, with genuine confusion, why the American people keep rejecting them.

So much for you, indeed.

#Affordability #Democrats #Policy 

#Immigration #Law #ILLEGALS 

How the United States Immigration System Works

While they were chanting 'USA' Rashida Tlaib was yelling 'KKK'. GO BACK TO GAZA AAND TRY THAT BEHAVIOR!!!

While they were chanting 'USA' Rashida Tlaib was yelling 'KKK'.

GO BACK TO GAZA AND TRY THAT BEHAVIOR!!!

#RashidaTlaib #Tlaib #Gaza #StateofTheUnion

Trump says lawmakers Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib should be removed from USTrump Trump President Donald Trump lashed out at two lawmakers after their protests.

 Muslim lawmakers should be sent 'back from where they came' after State of the Union clash

Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan went back and forth with Trump during his State of the Union address.

uslim lawmakers should be sent 'back from f the Union clash

Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan went back and forth with Trump during his State of the Union address.Trump says Muslim lawmakers should be sent 'back from where they came' after State of the Union clash

Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan went back and forth with Trump during his State of the Union 

Trump says Muslim lawmakers should be sent 'back from where they came' after State of the Union clash

Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan went back and forth with Trump during his State of the Union address.

She Made The Ultimate Sacrifice

 

She Made The Ultimate Sacrifice

"In the predawn darkness of June 28, 1969, mortar rounds slammed into the 312th Evacuation Hospital in Chu Lai, Vietnam. Explosions tore through buildings, scattering debris and igniting fires amid the chaos of incoming wounded soldiers.

Lt. Sharon Lane, a 25-year-old Army nurse from Ohio, was on duty in the shock ward. As sirens wailed and staff rushed to evacuate, she refused to leave her patients—men immobilized by injuries, unable to move on their own.

Medics urged her to go. She shook her head. "Go without me," she said, turning back to stabilize the bleeding and administer aid under the barrage.

A direct hit struck her ward minutes later. Shrapnel pierced her chest and neck. She died en route to surgery.

Lane became the only U.S. servicewoman killed by enemy fire in Vietnam. Posthumously, she received the Bronze Star with "V" for valor—the only one awarded to an American woman there—and a Purple Heart.

God bless this American hero forever.

#nurses #vietnamwar #neverforget

How Kamala Harris Helped Create a Crime Wave in CA

Kamala Harris is trying to run for President right now as “California’s Prosecutor” — but she’s actually one of the biggest reasons why California is experiencing a dangerous crime wave.

#KamalaHarris #Harris #Crime #California

Hillary Clinton Is As Bad As Her Husband

 

#Hillary #HillaryClinton #Rape

Five Ways Barack Obama’s Presidency Harmed America

 VIA 'I LOVE THE USA' - FROM FACEBOOK:

Five Ways Barack Obama’s Presidency Harmed America

"Listen, folks, when Barack Obama swaggered into the White House back in 2009, the media hailed him as some kind of messiah, the guy who was gonna fix everything with hope and change. But let’s cut through the nonsense what we got was eight years of policies that weakened our economy, emboldened our enemies, ballooned the debt, divided the nation, and shoved big government down our throats. It wasn’t just incompetence; it was a deliberate agenda that put America last. Here are five big ways his presidency did real damage, and don’t let the revisionist history fool you.

1. Wrecking the Economy with Socialist Schemes

Obama came in during a recession, sure, but instead of unleashing free-market solutions, he rammed through that trillion-dollar stimulus boondoggle, loaded with pork for his union buddies and green energy scams like Solyndra that went belly-up faster than you can say “taxpayer waste.” Unemployment stayed sky-high for years, and the so-called recovery was the weakest in modern history growth barely crawled along at 1-2% while regulations strangled small businesses. Then there’s Obamacare, that monstrosity that jacked up premiums, forced people off their plans, and turned healthcare into a bureaucratic nightmare. Millions lost their doctors, despite his famous lie: “If you like your plan, you can keep it.” It was all about control, folks, expanding government power at the expense of your wallet and your freedom.

2. Weakening America on the World Stage

Remember how Obama went around apologizing for America, bowing to foreign leaders, and drawing “red lines” in Syria that he never enforced? That emboldened tyrants everywhere. He pulled troops out of Iraq too soon, creating a vacuum that let ISIS rise up and slaughter innocents. The Iran deal? What a joke handing billions to the mullahs in Tehran so they could fund terrorism while pretending it stopped their nukes. And don’t get me started on the pivot to Asia that never pivoted, leaving China to build islands in the South China Sea and steal our jobs. His foreign policy was all talk, no action, making America look like a pushover and putting our troops and allies at risk. We paid the price with more chaos in the Middle East and a resurgent Russia under Putin.

3. Exploding the National Debt to Astronomical Levels

Under Obama, the national debt doubled yes, doubled from about $10 trillion to $20 trillion. He spent like a drunken sailor on shore leave, with deficits over a trillion bucks year after year in his first term. All that borrowing didn’t build lasting infrastructure; it funded failed experiments in big government, like bailing out banks and car companies that should’ve faced the music. Future generations are stuck with the bill, higher taxes, and inflation eating away at savings. And for what? A “recovery” that left millions underemployed or out of the workforce entirely. It was fiscal malpractice, plain and simple, prioritizing liberal pet projects over sound economics.

4. Dividing the Country with Identity Politics

Obama promised to unite us, but he did the opposite, stoking racial tensions and pitting Americans against each other. From Beer Summit nonsense to jumping into local issues like Ferguson and Trayvon Martin, he fanned the flames of division instead of calming them. His administration pushed radical social agendas, like forcing schools to let boys in girls’ bathrooms under the guise of transgender rights, and ramming through same-sex marriage without a real national debate. Immigration? He ignored the law with DACA, rewarding illegals while our borders stayed porous. All this identity politics garbage eroded trust in institutions, empowered the grievance industry, and set the stage for the cultural wars we’re still fighting. America became more fractured, not the post-racial paradise he sold us.

5. Assaulting Energy Independence and Job Creators

Obama declared war on American energy, killing the Keystone Pipeline to appease his environmentalist donors while propping up unreliable wind and solar with subsidies. Coal miners lost their livelihoods as regulations shut down plants, driving up energy costs for everyone. Remember the BP oil spill? His moratorium crippled Gulf Coast jobs. And for all the green hype, we still depended on foreign oil from unstable regimes. It was anti-growth extremism that hurt working families, especially in the heartland, and delayed the energy boom we finally got later. His climate obsession, like joining the Paris Accord, tied our hands while China and India polluted away. It was all about virtue-signaling over real prosperity.

There you have it the Obama years weren’t some golden age; they were a setback that America is still recovering from. His legacy? Bigger government, weaker security, deeper divisions, and a mountain of debt. If we don’t learn from this, we’ll keep repeating the mistakes. 

Time to put America first again."

#Obama #Politics #Socialism #Marxist

 

California's High-Speed Rail: A $200 Million-Per-Mile Boondoggle That Still Hasn't Laid a Single Track

#California #HighSpeedRail

Seventeen years. Nearly $15 billion spent. Zero feet of track laid. By any objective measure, California's high-speed rail project stands as perhaps the most egregious example of government mismanagement in American history and that's saying something for a state that specializes in bureaucratic failure.

What voters approved in 2008 seemed ambitious but plausible: a $33 billion bullet train connecting Los Angeles to San Francisco by 2020. Today, those projections look like cruel fiction. The cost has ballooned to over $135 billion for the full routeb. The completion date has been pushed to the 2030s at the earliestand that's only for a truncated Central Valley segment that one critic aptly describes as a "train to nowhere". Meanwhile, the project continues burning through taxpayer money at a staggering rate that deserves closer examination.

How Much Does This Project Spend Per Day?

The numbers are almost too absurd to comprehend. According to recent reporting, the high-speed rail authority has spent approximately $14.7 billion to date. With the project now entering its eighteenth year, that translates to roughly $2.3 million every single day since voters were sold the original dream.

But that's just the historical average. The bleeding is accelerating. The authority needs an additional $7 billion by June 2026 just to keep the lights on. When you consider the actual physical progress or lack thereof the waste becomes even more obscene. One partially completed segment in the Central Valley consists of 22 miles of raised dirt and 11 overpass structures at a cost of $1.4 billion. That's $63 million per mile for what amounts to an earthen berm through farmland.

Perhaps most damning: recent analysis suggests the per-mile cost for the project now approaches $215 million. For context, China builds high-speed rail for a fraction of that cost. Even Brightline's privately funded Florida project which actually operates and carries passengers came in at roughly $25 million per mile .

The Conservative Case Against This Disaster

From a conservative perspective, California's high-speed rail represents everything wrong with progressive governance: breathtaking fiscal irresponsibility, contempt for taxpayers, fealty to union special interests, and a complete disconnect between government promises and government performance.

Let's start with the dishonesty. Voters were told that more than 20 percent of the project would be privately funded. That prediction proved laughably wrong. Taxpayers are on the hook for virtually the entire cost, with 82 percent of funding coming from state coffers. When President Trump rightfully moved to reclaim $4 billion in unspent federal funds, Governor Gavin Newsom responded by suing the federal government rather than acknowledging the project's terminal condition .

Then there's the labor question. Unions have been among the biggest beneficiaries of this fiasco. The rail authority's community benefits agreement mandates that union members receive hiring preference, and workers on site for more than eight days must pay union dues effectively creating a closed shop with state money. This isn't infrastructure building; it's a patronage system disguised as public works.

The Permitting Nightmare

Conservatives have long argued that excessive regulation kills projects before they break ground. High-speed rail provides the ultimate proof. According to a Circulate San Diego study, local governments along the route have imposed arbitrary and costly demands that have added years and hundreds of millions to the project's timeline .

Consider the city of Wasco, population 27,000. A dispute over closing a single street at the rail line resulted in five extra years of delays, 37 contract change orders, and $26 million in additional costs. Madera County imposed conditions that added another $30 million. This is what happens when dozens of local jurisdictions each hold veto power over a project it dies by a thousand cuts.

The "Stonehenge" of the Central Valley

Perhaps the most devastating critique comes from within California itself. Representative Alexandra Macedo, whose district includes part of the Central Valley route, recently toured completed construction and emerged with a damning comparison. She described an incomplete concrete structure as "Stonehenge" a monument to nothing.

"What do we have to show for that $15 billion?" Macedo asked. "Just some flashy videos and graphics to make us believe this is still feasible".

Her frustration echoes that of Central Valley residents who were promised economic transformation but have received only disruption. Meanwhile, Democrats in the legislature are advancing Assembly Bill 1608, which critics say would allow the inspector general to withhold audit reports detailing vulnerabilities in the project. When government starts hiding information from the public paying the bills, you know the situation is dire.

A Tale of Two Approaches

The contrast with Florida couldn't be starker. While California chased federal grants and union approval, Florida rejected Obama-era high-speed rail funding and let the private sector do what government cannot. Brightline now operates 32 daily trains between Miami and Orlando, covering 235 miles in just over three hours . The project cost $6 billion all private money—and is already planning expansion to Tampa. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has been clear: state taxpayers won't fund rail construction .

This is the difference between conservative and progressive governance. One approach trusts markets, private capital, and consumer demand. The other trusts central planners, environmental reviews, and political cronyism. One produced an operating railroad. The other produced 22 miles of dirt and a $200 million-per-mile price tag.

The Path Forward

President Trump's decision to reclaim federal funding was not just justified it was merciful. As Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy put it, "It's time for this boondoggle to die". Continuing to pour money into a project that has demonstrated zero ability to deliver results is the definition of insanity.

Some will argue that we've come too far to stop now that the sunk costs justify additional investment. This is precisely the thinking that traps governments in failing endeavors. When a private company faces a failing project, it cuts its losses and reallocates resources. Only government treats failure as an argument for continued funding.

The 14,000 jobs allegedly created by high-speed rail could have been deployed toward actual infrastructure needs: water storage, road repair, energy production. Instead, they've been wasted on consultants, environmental studies, and litigation defense. A 2025 poll found that 53 percent of California voters have lost confidence in the project, with only 28 percent believing it will ever be completed .

Conclusion

California's high-speed rail was always a fantasy a progressive dream of European-style social democracy crashing into the reality of American governance, environmental litigation, and fiscal limits. Seventeen years and $15 billion later, not a single track carries a single passenger. The project spends millions daily while producing nothing but dirt mounds and broken promises.

Conservatives have been proven right at every turn. We warned that the cost estimates were fiction. We warned that government couldn't manage a project of this scale. We warned that union demands and environmental reviews would strangle progress. And we were right.

The only remaining question is whether California's leadership will finally admit defeat or continue pouring good money after bad. Given the legislative push to hide audit records and the governor's reflexive lawsuits against anyone who questions the project, don't expect accountability anytime soon. In Sacramento, failure is not a reason to stop it's a reason to ask for $7 billion more.

Mamdani’s Proposed 9.5% NYC Property Tax Increase Stirs Debate

Mamdani says if the state doesn’t tax Millionaires more then NYC will need to impose an additional 9.5% property tax increase. He campaigned on lowering rent. If you raise taxes on property owners what do you expect to happen to the rent [Is too damn high]?

STUPID ~ You Get What You Voted For 

#Mamdani #NYC #Taxes #PropertyTax #Affordability

Mamdani wants to cut 22 Million from NYPD and cut 5,000 Cops. He also wants to spend more on ILLEGALS.

 

Mamdani wants to cut 22 Million from NYPD and cut 5,000 Cops. He also wants to spend more on ILLEGALS.

Mamdani plan pours millions into ‘racial equity’ offices and six-figure diversity jobs, cuts 5,000 NYPD jobs ... Socialist NYC Mayor Mamdani clashes with Hochul over tax hikes as some critics warn of catastrophe

#NYC #NewYork #Mamdani #GovernorHochul