Kevin McCarthy Becomes Speaker Of The House On 15th Ballot

Republican California Rep. Kevin McCarthy became the 55th Speaker of the House in an early Saturday morning vote, after five of his staunchest GOP critics voted “present.”

McCarthy garnered 216 votes on the 15th and final ballot, while incoming House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York received all 212 Democratic votes. Reps. Andy Biggs and Eli Crane of Arizona, Bob Good of Virginia, and Matt Rosendale of Montana voted “present” after opposing the Californian on the previous 14 ballots. Reps. Lauren Boebert of Colorado and Matt Gaetz of Florida flipped to “present” on the 14th ballot.

Republican North Carolina Rep. Patrick McHenry initially moved to adjourn the lower chamber until Monday after the 14th ballot, but Republicans flipped their votes to stay after the holdouts signaled they would no longer fight McCarthy’s ascension to the gavel.

With a speaker elected, members can be formally sworn in and the House can vote on a rules package. McCarthy and his team reached an agreement with 14 of his GOP opponents on a rules package that adds Freedom Caucus members to the Rules Committee, institutes a one member motion to vacate the chair, and freezes the Fiscal Year 2024 budget at 2022 levels.

Some GOP members have expressed concern about a budget freeze’s impact on military spending. Republican Texas Rep. Tony Gonzalez has already announced he will oppose the rules package.

“We don’t want to go back to sequestration. That would be very damaging to our military in a very dangerous world,” Republican Texas Rep. Michael McCaul, the incoming chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told the Daily Caller. “That’s something we’re currently discussing right now.”

The 2023 speaker vote is the longest since 1859, and the fifth-longest in American history.

PUBLISHERS NOTE: The Christian Family Coalition Florida in an email reported:

“Republican Congressman Kevin McCarthy of California has been elected Speaker of the House on the 15th ballot, overcoming days of resistance from the conservative House Freedom Caucus and putting Republicans back in charge of Congress after four years in the minority.

McCarthy managed to win over enough conservative holdouts late Friday night after making a number of commitments, including discretionary spending caps, a vote on a border security bill, more Freedom Caucus representation on committees, and creating a committee to investigate the political weaponization of federal intelligence agencies such as the FBI.

‘The agreements McCarthy made to clinch the speakership will definitely make this a more conservative Congress, which is what we need to fight the Biden administration’s radical anti-family, anti-life agenda,’ said CFC Florida Founder and Executive Director Anthony Verdugo. ‘The country is now looking to McCarthy for principled conservative leadership, and we look forward to seeing him deliver for the American people.'”



Congressional correspondent.

RELATED ARTICLE: Here’s Why 15 Republicans Flipped Their Support To Kevin McCarthy

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Goodbye Fauci, Meet Pharma’s New Poster Boy Peter Hotez


  • Dr. Peter Hotez, dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, is enamored with dangerous virus tinkering, censorship and state-directed cyberattacks on civilians. He decries the benefits of whole food and nutrition and is a leading advocate for biomedical tyranny and the murder of independent thinkers
  • In a professionally produced PR video for the World Health Organization, Hotez refers to vaccine safety advocates as “anti-science aggressors” and claims “anti-vaccine activism” has become “a major killing force globally”
  • Hotez ignores data showing the jab does more harm than good. For example, a recent Cleveland Clinic study concluded that the risk of COVID-19 infection “increased with the number of vaccine doses previously received”
  • Cleveland Clinic also found the bivalent COVID-19 booster was only 30% effective in preventing infection “during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were represented in the vaccine”
  • In the fall of 2021, about 3 in 10 adults who died from COVID-19 were jabbed or boosted. By April 2022, 6 in 10 adults who died from COVID-19 were jabbed or boosted, and that remained true through August 2022, which is the latest data available

As Dr. Anthony Fauci steps down from his position as director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and top chief of the American bioweapons program, the scene is open for another word-wrangling science bungler to step into the limelight.

Seemingly vying for the position of lead propagandist for Big Pharma and the global Deep State is Dr. Peter Hotez, dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston — a scientist enamored with dangerous virus tinkering, censorship and state-directed cyberattacks on civilians, who decries the benefits of whole food and nutrition and is a leading advocate for biomedical tyranny and the murder of independent thinkers.

Vaccine Safety Advocates Are Now ‘Anti-Science Aggressors’

An M.D. who writes articles on Substack under the moniker A Midwestern Doctor recently addressed the hateful rhetoric being thrown about by Hotez.1 “Although I am used to seeing inflammatory approaches … being used to silence debates, I was nonetheless quite taken aback by the WHO’s recent tweet,” he writes.

The WHO tweeted out a video2 (above) featuring Hotez, in which he refers to vaccine safety advocates as “anti-science aggressors” — a term he coined in a 2021 article3 — and claims “anti-vaccine activism” has become “a major killing force globally.”4 According to Hotez, 200,000 Americans lost their lives to COVID-19 because they refused the experimental COVID jab.

Hotez goes on to claim that “anti-science now kills more people than gun violence, global terrorism, nuclear proliferation or cyber attacks” — a statement that makes anti-science sound threatening but actually absolves it, seeing how nuclear proliferation and cyber attacks have killed no one (at least not to my knowledge), and the death toll from terrorism is infinitesimal compared to things like preventable medical errors.

Pouring additional fuel to the fire, he makes the absolute statement that the anti-vaccine movement is a “far-right” political movement. “This is the new face of anti-science aggression,” he says, “so we need political solutions to address this.” In other words, he wants government to pull out the big guns and enforce a one-sided “consensus.”

Hotez Stirs the Pot With Flawed Assumptions

As explained by A Midwestern Doctor, the central claim in that video appears to be based on an October 2021 study5 that estimated 163,000 COVID-19 deaths “could have been prevented by vaccination since June 2021, when safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines were widely available to all adults in the U.S.” However, as A Midwestern Doctor points out, there are several problems with this argument:6

“Since so many deaths not caused by COVID-19 have been classified as COVID-19 deaths, we don’t actually know how many people died from the illness (this study just assumed the official but inflated figure as accurate).

In Pfizer’s trial, the survival benefit from the vaccine worsened with time (this has also been observed outside the trials), and at 6 months follow-up (where the trial was abruptly terminated).

More people who were vaccinated died than those who were unvaccinated (which means that it is impossible that there could have been a net gain of life through vaccinating). Since this is the longest clinical trial that was performed on the vaccines, its conclusion must stand until a longer trial is conducted.

The vaccines we are using have caused SARS-CoV-2 to rapidly evolve into variants for which it no longer offers protection. For this reason, the alleged benefits of the vaccine have had to be continually modified because it failed to meet each of its previously promised metrics (e.g., it does not prevent transmission of COVID-197).

The study fails to account for the fact that national death rates consistently increased or stayed the same (but never decrease) following COVID vaccination campaigns …

The estimate also fails to account for the fact that life insurance data has shown that there has been an unprecedented spike in deaths for age groups rarely expected to otherwise die, following the mass vaccination campaigns.”

WATCH: “Junk Food-Acholic” scientist wants anti-vax surveillance || Ryan Cristiàn

Research Shows COVID Jab Raises Risk of COVID-19 Infection

Hotez, the WHO and the PR firm that made that video also ignore data showing that the COVID jab increases your risk of contracting COVID-19 over time. For example, a Cleveland Clinic preprint8 posted December 19, 2022, concluded that the risk of COVID-19 infection “increased … with the number of vaccine doses previously received.”

Moreover, the bivalent COVID-19 booster was only 30% effective in preventing infection “during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were represented in the vaccine.”

Click here to view Cumulative incidence of Covid-19 (proportional) chart.

So much for “safe and effective.” The boosters provide minimal protection when well-matched to the circulating strain, and as its protection wanes, it leaves you at higher risk of infection than before. Deceiving people into taking this product? Now THAT’S anti-scientific aggression.

The Jabbed Now Account for Most COVID-19 Deaths

We also have U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data that confirm Cleveland Clinic’s findings. As reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF):9

“The share of COVID-19 deaths among those who are vaccinated has risen. In fall 2021, about 3 in 10 adults dying of COVID-19 were vaccinated or boosted. But by January 2022, as we showed in an analysis10 posted on the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker, about 4 in 10 deaths were vaccinated or boosted.

By April 2022, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data11 show that about 6 in 10 adults dying of COVID-19 were vaccinated or boosted, and that’s remained true through at least August 2022 (the most recent month of data).

The data from this chart come from the CDC, which collects data on the number of deaths by vaccination status from 30 health departments (including states and cities) across the country.

In order to be counted as vaccinated, a person must be at least two weeks out from completing their primary series … Similarly, to be counted as having a booster, a person must be at least two weeks out from their booster or additional dose before testing positive. People who were partially vaccinated are not included in this data.”

The irony here is that the data Hotez cites in the video match an earlier KFF Health System report, but when he was presented with the updated dataset from the same source, now showing that 170,000 vaxxed Americans have died from COVID, he simply blocked the person who shared it.12

A Poster-Boy for Emotional and Physical Ill Health

Of course, maintaining a propaganda narrative demands that you ignore everything that might poke holes in it, and Hotez is no stranger to propaganda tactics. He’s been a relentless vaccine pusher and denier of vaccine-induced autism, even though (or perhaps because) his own child is autistic. As noted by A Midwestern Doctor:13

“Prior to this recent push to criminalize those questioning vaccine safety (which is evil), I viewed him as a comical individual who I genuinely felt bad for, and someone — who like many that do immense harm to the world — is simply controlled by habitual fixations they are never able to move beyond.

I have not done a deep dive into his background. However, everything I’ve seen is consistent with an unhappy, frustrated individual who frequently gets scammed by life and is both physically and emotionally unhealthy.”

Case in point: Hotez’s Joe Rogan interview (clip of which is featured in the video above), where he admitted being a junk food-aholic and intends to stay that way. Rogan, who is neither a doctor nor a nutritionist, actually ended up lecturing Hotez about the merits of a healthy diet. As noted by Dr. Pierre Kory:14

“In just a few minutes, Peter Hotez inadvertently shows the world exactly what has gone wrong with our medical system and why his endless push for more vaccines will never create health.”

Indeed, as Ryan Cristiàn, editor-in-chief of The Last American Vagabond, points out in the video above, Hotez nonchalantly discusses his unhealthy choices (and on the largest podcast on the planet) as if it’s perfectly OK to cast the foundations for health aside — because we have vaccines.

“I think he genuinely, to some degree, doesn’t understand why that’s so stupid,” Cristiàn says. “But on the other side of it, there’s obviously a push to make it about, ‘that’s not real health [i.e., food and lifestyle], vaccines are real health.’ It’s just this alarming undertone.”

What’s in a Vaccine?

In that Rogan interview,15 Hotez also makes the ridiculously unscientific claim that vaccines contain just antigens in saline, basically mimicking an advertisement by the Colorado department of health (click here to view Covid Vaccine Ingredients). Anyone who knows anything about vaccines — especially the COVID shot — can see how utterly and shamefully deceptive this is.

Another gross piece of propaganda was recently put out by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (video16 below). The ad chastises the West for withholding COVID shots from Africa, resulting in it having one of the lowest jab rates in the world.

Set three years into the future, it claims the virus kept mutating into ever more dangerous variants, which is the complete opposite of what’s been happening in the real world. It portrays Africa as a continent ravaged by COVID-19 due to lack of COVID shots, yet in the real world, Africa has fared far better in terms of cases and deaths than highly-jabbed nations. Frankly, it’s so distorted and contrary to facts, it’s hard to watch.

Hotez Implicated in Creation of Chimeric Coronavirus

Since the beginning of the COVID outbreak, Hotez has repeatedly accused those who disagree with him of committing a hate crime, which is a rather infantile defense mechanism. It’s quite typical for people who know they have no grounds for their argument to resort to name-calling and threats instead.

Not only has he called on government to use its military and intelligence forces to quash public discussion about COVID jab dangers, he’s also been a vocal defender of the natural origin theory, dismissing evidence of a lab leak as pure fiction and conspiracy theory.

This too is an example of that same defense mechanism. It was recently revealed that Hotez funded risky gain-of-function research on coronaviruses in Wuhan, China, so no wonder he wanted people to shut up about the possibility of the virus being a lab creation. His own work might be implicated in its creation. As reported by U.S. Right to Know (USRTK):17

“While casting concerns about Wuhan’s labs as ‘fringe,’ Hotez has not mentioned his own connection to a project involving a laboratory-generated chimeric SARS-related coronavirus that has come under Congress’ microscope. The project was helmed by Zhengli Shi, a senior scientist and ‘virus hunter’ at the Wuhan Institute of Virology nicknamed the ‘Bat Lady.’

As part of his NIH grant, Hotez subcontracted funding for research on combined or ‘chimeric’ coronaviruses, a scientific paper18 shows. Hotez’s grant19 underwrote two of Shi’s collaborators on the project.

In the 2017 paper20 co-funded by Hotez, Shi and her colleagues generated a recombinant virus from two SARS-related coronaviruses: ‘rWIV1-SHC014S.’ It’s not clear whether the paper co-funded by Hotez should have been stopped under a temporary ‘pause’ on gain-of-function work before 2017.

However, some independent biosecurity experts have said research on this chimeric virus in some ways epitomizes lapses in NIH oversight of risky research in the years before the COVID-19 pandemic.

A prior study21 of one of the coronaviruses that comprised the chimera, WIV1, found it to be ‘poised for human emergence.’ Another prior paper22 on the other coronavirus, SHC014, stated that its future study in lab-generated viruses may be ‘too risky to pursue.’

‘The work here should have been at the very least, heavily scrutinized,’ said David Relman, a Stanford microbiologist and biosecurity expert. ‘This work should have been heavily reviewed for [gain-of-function], and probably should have been subject to the pause prior to December 2017.'”

Hotez, One of the Most Shockingly Hateful People in Medicine

Hotez has made headlines a number of times through the years, typically delivering some kind of hateful rhetoric. He’s publicly stated he wants to “snuff out” vaccine skeptics,23 for example, and in May 2021 called for cyberwarfare measures to be deployed against people who share vaccine safety information.24

Hotez has repeatedly spewed vitriol at parents of vaccine-injured children and called for physical harm and imprisonment of people who don’t agree with the one-size-fits-all vaccine agenda, so it was rather funny when he whined and complained about getting bombarded with “anti-vaxx hate speech” in response to his cyberwarfare call.25

Hotez is not above casting an evil eye on other scientists either. As reported by journalist Paul Thacker in an August 9, 2022, Substack article titled, “Peter Hotez Sees Aggression Everywhere But in the Mirror”:26

“Patrolling scientific discourse, Hotez has a knack for discovering ‘antiscience’ in anyone who disagrees with him. Jeffrey Sachs, economics professor at Columbia University and chair of an international commission on COVID-19, charged in a wide-ranging interview27 last week that the National Institutes of Health and allied scientists were impeding an investigation into how the COVID-19 pandemic started …

Hotez went on the assault, tweeting that Sachs, as leader of the Lancet Commission, did not represent the views of science. Much like a Pentagon general wrapping himself in freedom and the flag to demand more federal monies for another foreign war … Hotez has been shrouding himself in the mantle of science to denigrate anyone who questions taxpayer funding for dangerous virus research by the National Institutes of Health.”

What Is Hotez Really Fighting For?

In his article,28 Thacker goes on to review several other bizarre incidences involving Hotez. For example, he referred to the scientific experts invited to testify before Congress as “fringe elements” testifying and promoting “outlandish conspiracies.” So much for Ph.D.s and med school. He also accused Sen. Rand Paul of promoting conspiracies.

Here’s the take-home: The reason Hotez rails against “anti-science” is because he can sense the danger the research community and vaccine industry are in.

If SARS-CoV-2 is conclusively proven to be a lab creation, it would put a massive spotlight on scientists involved in dual purpose viral research. Gain-of-function research may be banned altogether (as it should), which would sink many a career, including his own.

Similarly, public acknowledgement that the COVID jabs are a public health disaster would permanently and perhaps lethally injure the vaccine industry. So, all that hateful rhetoric? It really comes down to protecting self-serving interests.

Sources and References

The Federal Reserve’s Housing Market Lessons to Be Learned [Once Again]


The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic were unprecedented in terms of widespread lockdowns, skyrocketing unemployment, and a financial market crash. The Federal Reserve took aggressive expansionary efforts in the form of Zero Interest Rate Policy (ZIRP) and quantitative easing (QE) to stabilize the economy, while Congress enacted massive fiscal stimulus. However, one of the results was a runaway home price boom.

Recently Chairman Powell admitted that the Federal Reserve bore some responsibility for this boom, noting that:

“… the housing market was very overheated for a couple of years after the pandemic as demand increased and rates were low. … the housing market needs to get back into a balance between supply and demand.”

November 2, 2022, FOMC press conference; italics added

It is now generally acknowledged that the Federal Reserve ended up overshooting by not recalibrating its policies in light of both overwhelming fiscal and housing market responses.  Both of these fueled an explosion in aggregate demand, especially for goods and houses.

By the end of August 2020, near-real-time credit card data indicated that sales for July 2020 were up 2% on a year-over-year basis, indicating a recovery from the initial pandemic shock.  By mid-December 2020, these same data indicated that sales for late October 2020 to late November 2020 were up 6% on a year-over-year basis, signaling a policy-induced acceleration of demand. Spending in the lowest two quintiles of zip codes by income was growing at 13% and 9% year-over-year, reflecting the especially large fiscal stimulus for lower-income households.[1]

For the rest of our analysis, read the full report

PDF to full report

[1] In addition, stock and home prices were booming by late 2020.  The ensuing wealth effect, which develops with a lag, should have been well known to the Fed.

EDITORS NOTE: This AEI report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

After Coast Guard Academy ‘Excommunicated’ Cadets For Refusing Vaccine, Pleas For Reinstatement Go Unanswered

  • The Coast Guard Academy has not reinstated seven Coast Guard cadets discharged for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine after the academy denied religious exemption requests, representatives of the cadets told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
  • The cadets hoped a new law nixing the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate would allow them to re-join.
  • “They are the only cadets that are getting screwed,” retired Coast Guard Vice Adm. William Dean Lee told the DCNF.

Seven Coast Guard cadets booted in September after commanders denied their vaccine exemption appeals were not reinstated after a last ditch effort to allow them to start the new semester, which began Wednesday, representatives of the cadets told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The cadets hoped that law overturning the Department of Defense (DOD) COVID-19 vaccine mandate would persuade the Academy to permit the cadets, already behind by one semester, to re-join with their cohort, one of the cadets involved and advocates for the group told the DCNF. Among the military schools, the Coast Guard Academy, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in peacetime, is the only one to have officially dismissed unvaccinated cadets, the advocates said.

“I sent a letter to the Coast Guard Academy superintendent asking him to use his administrative powers to have us go back in since the [National Defense Authorization Act] was signed by the president and the mandate should be lifted soon,” Sophia Galdamez, one of the seven discharged, told the DCNF.

“However, all he responded with is that it’s out of his control, and you don’t have authority over that decision. And for me and my family to have a happy holidays,” she added.

Although operating under DHS authority, the Coast Guard went along with the mandate after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced it in August 2021 as the FDA officially approved the first COVID-19 vaccines for use. Congress’ defense bill for 2023, signed into law on Dec. 23, overturned the service-wide vaccine mandate.

Despite being a semester behind the other cadets in their cohort, the seven could still achieve their commissions if the Coast Guard allowed them to rejoin, retired Coast Guard Vice Adm. William Dean Lee, who, along with retired Rear Adm. Peter J. Brown, is lobbying to have the cadets reinstated, told the DCNF. Cadet processing began Wednesday, while classes are slated to begin on Jan. 9.

After initially refusing the vaccine on the grounds of religious belief in the fall of 2021, “I was immediately treated differently than all my other classmates that were vaccinated,” Galdamez told the DCNF. “I was bullied by my command and administrators, faculty at the academy.”

Administrators confined her behind a plexiglass barrier at the back of the classroom, she told the DCNF. One teacher pulled her aside to commend her performance as a student, but said her unvaccinated status would impede academic progress, Galdamez said.

She and her fellow unvaccinated cadets submitted requests for religious exemptions, which authorities are required to review on an individual basis.

Citing the government’s “compelling interest in mission accomplishment,” the force’s time sensitive role in emergency response and high rate of interaction with the general public, Coast Guard adjudicator Capt. Eugenio S. Anzano shot down Galdamez’s exemption request in a letter, dated March 4, 2022, that was shared with the DCNF.

“I do not question the sincerity of your religious belief or whether vaccine requirements substantially burden your religious practice. The Coast Guard reserves the opportunity to make these determinations, but I do not need to address them here to resolve your request,” Anzano wrote.

When the Coast Guard denied Galdamez’s request, she appealed, but the answer remained firm. The Coast Guard struck down Galdamez’ appeal on May 2, according to a copy of the response letter shared with the DCNF.

Days after reporting to campus for the fall semester on Aug. 15, the cadets were called into the office and told they had 24 hours to pack and leave campus, Galdamez said, a statement echoed by Michael Rose, a pro-bono legal counsel for several of the cadets, according to The Day newspaper. Two of the cadets did not have homes to which to return.

The cadets were formally discharged on Sept. 23, according to Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, where Rose serves as general counsel.

“I sent letters to the academy, senators have written letters on [sic] the cadets’ behalf. And so far we have heard nothing regarding our reinstatement or if I’d be able to finish my degree and commissions,” Galdamez told the DCNF Wednesday.

Academy superintendent Rear Adm. William Kelley acknowledged receipt of Galdamez’ letter and wished her a “good holiday season” but did not indicate future action in an email dated Dec. 22 that was shared with the DCNF.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina wrote to Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Linda Fagan pressing for the servicemembers’ reinstatement, according to a Dec. 22 letter the senator’s office shared with the DCNF.

Galdamez is one of thousands of servicemembers who remain in limbo as the DOD develops new guidance on COVID-19 vaccination, while lawsuits challenging the legality of the mandate and whether military leaders appropriately considered exemption requests continue to make their way through court.

The Air Force and Navy and Marine Corps have been placed under an temporary injunction against discharging unvaccinated troops, while the Army has paused separations.

“They are the only cadets that are getting screwed,” Lee told the DCNF.

The National Defense Authorization Act gave DOD a 30 day period to develop new COVID-19 guidance but stopped short of calling for reinstatement or restitution to the roughly 8,400 already discharged for refusing to receive the vaccine.

“The Coast Guard, in coordination with the Department of Defense, is evaluating policies with respect to previously separated members, including cadets,” a spokesperson for the Coast Guard told the DCNF.

“I think it’s important to let the service members back in, and for the service members to accept going back in, because this mandate and then the subsequent denial and basically excommunication of all these service members was getting rid of a good group of people … enlisted and officers alike that display true leadership qualities that are needed in our military at the moment,” Galdamez said to the DCNF.

The Coast Guard Academy did not return a phone call from the DCNF.




RELATED ARTICLE: Coast Guard Illegally Denied Hundreds Of Vaccine Exemptions, Attorneys Say

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

Palestine: The Perverse—and Perplexing—Paradox

Why do professed liberals persist in support for an entity that would comprise the utter negation of all the values they allegedly cherish?

“We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”widely attributed to Albert Einstein

Recently, the idea of a Palestinian state has—much like a ghoulish zombie arising from its erstwhile grave—re-emerged as a topic of relevance in the international discourse.

Tyrannical dictates of political correctness

After being thrust aside to the outer margins of the debate during much of the Trump term in the White House, the Biden administration has managed to breathe new life into a failed and fatally flawed formula, whose attempted implementation has wrought trauma and tragedy on Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Perversely, far more than any others, the Palestinians, the intended benefactors of the ill-conceived notion, were by far its greatest victims. Indeed, the casualties and the socio-economic disruption they suffered greatly outstripped anything endured by Israel.

But this is not the only element of perversity regarding Palestinian statehood and the advocacy therefor. Indeed, support for the two-state formula—i.e. the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan river alongside Israel—became the sine-non-qua for access into “polite company”. Indeed, it was considered an indispensable credential for anyone aspiring to be part of “bon-ton” liberal circles. Daring individuals with the temerity to question the prudence of the idea had to brace themselves for grave consequences to their personal and professional standing that almost always resulted from such recalcitrant resistance to the dictates of political correctness.

Impervious to past precedents & future probabilities

But vindictiveness aside, liberal support is not only decidedly perverse, but equally paradoxical and perplexing as well.  After all, there is virtually no doubt that any future Palestinian state will be the embodiment of values that are the diametric antithesis of those to which Left-leaning, progressive liberals profess to subscribe.

Indeed, there is little reason to doubt that a prospective Palestinian state, in any conceivably plausible configuration, will be anything but what most other Arab states are, in some form or another: A homophobic, misogynistic Muslim majority tyranny—whose hallmarks would be gender discrimination against girls/women, persecution of homosexuals, religious intolerance against non-Muslims and oppression of political dissidents.

Accordingly, it is a decidedly baffling conundrum why so-called “progressives,” who purportedly cherish liberal values of societal diversity, religious freedom, and individual liberty, would cling so doggedly to support for a Palestinian state that would, in all likelihood, comprise the utter negation of everything to which they claim to hold dear. Yet impervious to past precedents and future probabilities, they adhere resolutely to their defective dogma.

No reason to believe that, which was in the past, will not be in the future

This is particularly pertinent given what has transpired in Gaza—perhaps the ultimate indictment of two-statism—where Palestinians were first given a shot at self-governance, and which has become a brutal bastion of Islamist governance and a safe haven for jihadi terror.

Of course, there is scant cause to believe that what was in the past will not be again in the future. After all, even the most fervent two-state enthusiast has yet to offer up a persuasive argument why the envisioned Palestinian state would not quickly emerge as the said homophobic, misogynistic tyranny.

As Albert Einstein reportedly commented: “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” Clearly, the turmoil of today is indisputably the result of trying to foist statehood on the Palestinians. Accordingly then, there is little reason to believe that persisting with the same thinking that created the seemingly perennial violence will contribute in any way to its cessation. For, the problem of the current violence cannot be resolved by using the same level of thinking (i.e. aspiring to Palestinian statehood) that created it.

This perverse—and perplexing—paradox is something that has not been adequately addressed in the public discourse on the Middle East. Indeed, it is rarely—if ever—fully articulated. The time has come to do so.

©Dr. Martin Sherman, 2023. All rights reserved.

Border Crisis: Ten Percent for the Big Guy?

Big border news today.  Joe Biden announced a new approach to the crisis at the southern border.  Admission for some migrants from Haiti, Cuba, and Nicaragua will be expanded while a return-to-Mexico policy will apply to others.  The return-to-Mexico policy is the part Biden likes to talk up.  But the humanitarian parole program being used to expand entry has already been challenged in court by Florida.

So here’s what can happen: the administration builds acceptance for the idea of expanded parole, then stops returning people to Mexico.  Why am I skeptical Biden really wants to do anything to curb illegal immigration?  Because the administration has already instituted three dozen policy changes opening the border – changes I’ve documented in previous commentaries – and a leopard doesn’t change its spots, that’s why.  The new approach is a way to look tough while maneuvering to open the border further.  That’s the way it looks to me.

Now let’s go back to what I had planned for today:  who’s profiting from the record illegal immigration Biden has brought about and what influence do they have on policy?  Let’s follow the money and see where it leads.

Without question, the Mexican drug cartels are profiting handsomely from Joe Biden’s open borders policies, through drug distribution, sex trafficking, and demanding migrants pay up to cross the border.

The cartels are not the only ones with a racket going.  The shelter and resettlement contractors get hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to process, transport, house, and administer social services to illegal aliens.  Catholic Charities is one such contractor, but an investigation found 30 more engaged in a mass resettlement operation in collusion with the Biden administration.  The contractors were active in the 2014 border surge under Obama.  An interesting phenomenon then was government officials leaving their posts to get paid big bucks to run the contractors.  The new wrinkle now is that the contractors appear to be crossing the line and instigating more new arrivals so they will have more business.  Texas Governor Greg Abbott has called for an investigation into reports these organizations are actually assisting with illegal border crossings.  How would you like to be some poor woman from Guatemala, get raped on the way up here, and learn that your purpose in life is to make more money for Catholic Charities?

Another pot of money comes from left-wing advocacy groups.  The local sheriff in Arlington County Virginia said she would stop turning illegal alien detainees over to ICE after attending an event put on by pro-immigration groups.  I pulled on the thread of one of these groups a little, and found they have millions of dollars of annual income at their disposal.  The 2019 tax form 990 for Legal Aid Justice showed some of the money came from the Fairfax County Virginia government and lots came from other left-wing groups (Schedule B – p. 2).  Left-wing advocacy groups are drowning in money and some of it is going toward opening the border.  A 2019 book named George Soros, the Koch brothers, Jack Dorsey, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, and others as among those putting money into this effort.

Could the Biden crime family have found ways to get in on the action?  The answer appears to be yes.  Hunter Biden owned an 8 percent stake in ePlata, a mobile banking platform for illegal aliens.  The Hunter Biden laptop shows he profited from the arrangement and introduced ePlata’s founder to Joe Biden.  More illegal aliens, more mobile banking profits, more dividends for Hunter, and 10 percent for the Big Guy Joe Biden – that’s certainly plausible, unless someone can show me otherwise.

bribery scandal in Europe suggests things could be worse in America than we currently know.  The scandal involves one-and-a-half million Euros in bribe money from Qatar and Morocco.  The investigation has reached into the European Parliament and the European Commission.  In 2017, a former commissioner then in charge of immigration called for the admission of six million more migrants into European countries.  He is now being investigated in the bribery scandal.  A former Parliament vice-president, also involved in the scandal, is actually awaiting trial on bribery charges.

I heard some years ago from someone in a position to know that government officials in Washington were taking money to look the other way on illegal immigration.  I don’t have proof the Bidens or anyone else in Washington is on the take on this issue.  But I do have a lot of questions.  The point for today is, when you hear open borders crazies talk about the poor, pitiful migrants, don’t take it at face value.  Follow the money.  Who’s getting paid and how much?

©Christopher Wright, 2023. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

Searching For Reason Among The Rubble Of War

Satire: Why did Vladimir Putin invade Ukraine? And why are there wars anyway? Well, we know this about wars: They are usually fought over energy-producing resources such as oil, gas, coal, and uranium. And they always end in some kind of negotiated settlement.

Recall, the parties to the Peace of Westphalia (1648) at the end of the Thirty Years War hated each other so much they would not meet to discuss peace terms in the same German town. Using the forerunner of the Bundespost, the parties gave us the world’s first All Mail-in Peace Treaty.

But what was the origin of violence between members of early Humankind? Professor Jared Diamond recounts how roving bands of hunter/gatherers would come into violent conflict with other hunter/gathering bands. Knowing the “why” behind their violence may be the key to understanding why wars begin.

Let’s say Fred and Wilma Flintstone are in pursuit of a Woolly Mammoth. They run into Og and Ogla who are after the same entrée. By Christian-Judeo standards (which, of course, had yet to be established), the two families should enjoy a Kosher BBQ together. But maybe False Evidence Appearing Real (FEAR) overcame both families and they felt the need to attack each other.

Did Fred fear that Og fancied Wilma? Or, wanted to re-gender little Pebbles? Did Og fear that Fred fancied Ogla? Who knows? For sure, they were in fear of each other.
But, as they evolved from roving hunter/gathering bands into stay-at-home agricultural tribes, Fred, Wilma, Og, and Ogla, grew weary of violence. Their solution was to appoint a Chief, an arbiter to decide when violent aggression or self-defense was justified. Or, not.

But wait. While the Chief system cut down on the violence, some Chiefs decided to become hereditary Kings, and thus, the State, complete with Police and Military, was born. Fortunately, Fred and Og forced the King to adopt a Magna Carta, including a 2d Amendment that insured their right to keep their stone axes for hunting, for self-defense, and for in case the King got too big for his loincloth.

Archeologists can ID the gravesites of Kings by how much cool stuff is buried with them. Actually, many Kings were running a profitable protection racket. In exchange for taxes, Kings provided the masses with protection from each other and with secure borders to protect them from invading Kings and illegal migrants.

Thus, Feudalism was born — a system that employed a lot of stone masons until Chinese gunpowder was imported and put the stone masons out of work. Then, even though one of the King’s sons left a Slabtop lying around revealing how the King and his family were ripping off the masses, the Police hid the Slabtop, and the Metamorphic Media refused to inform the masses.

Maybe the genesis of violence is related to “recognition.” When God recognized Cain’s gift less worthy of praise than Abel’s gift, Cain, in a fit of jealousy, slew Abel. Maybe Putin, like Rodney Dangerfield, feels he gets no respect and not enough recognition. Maybe Putin is jealous of others with whom he must share the spotlight. Putin should note that God assigned Cain the off-camera role of wandering in perpetual darkness.

Suggested reading: The World Yesterday: What Can We Learn from Traditional Societies? by Jared Diamond, 2012. Genesis 4:11-14., RSV.

©2023. William Hamilton. All rights reserved.

DeSantis Announces Plan To Squash ‘Equity’ At New College Of Florida And Restore Merit

Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis announced his plan to overhaul the ideological education system at New College of Florida (NCF) and restore its original mission.

DeSantis will appoint six new members of NCF’s board of trustees: activist Chris Rufo, Dr. Mark Bauerlein, Dr. Matthew Spalding, Dr. Charles Kesler, lawyer Debra Jenks and educator Jason “Eddie” Speir. The Florida Board of Governors will also appoint a seventh member.

The 13-member board now has enough members to reshape the public college’s ideological courses and campus environment.

“As Governor DeSantis stated in his second inaugural speech: ‘We must ensure that our institutions of higher learning are focused on academic excellence and the pursuit of truth.’ Starting today, the ship is turning around. New College of Florida, under the governor’s new appointees, will be refocused on its founding mission of providing a world-class quality education with an exceptional focus on the classics,” Bryan Griffin, the press secretary for DeSantis, said in a statement.

NCF currently lists among its values “a just, diverse, equitable and inclusive community,” echoing the progressive ideology of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), better known as critical race theory. The school is “actively working toward eliminating outcome disparities for underrepresented and underserved groups,” it says in its values section.

“It is our hope that New College of Florida will become Florida’s classical college, more along the lines of a Hillsdale of the South,” James Uthmeier, Chief of Staff for DeSantis said.

The school provides certain services, like its Office of Inclusive Excellence, a gender studies program and its Gender and Diversity Center. It celebrates “latinx” history month through films, workshops, concerts and lectures, its website says.

NCF’s Office of Inclusive Excellence, the DEI office on campus, documents “outcomes and learnings from Phase I of the Inclusive Campus Climate initiative” and develops “campus-wide DEI key metrics and milestones, and support departmental implementation,” according to its page.

The NCF gender studies program offers courses in queer studies, queer history and feminist philosophy as part of its curriculum. It lists “community relations and organizing” among its potential career paths.

It also provides students with “gender identity affirmation resources” to assist students with legal name changes and updating their pronouns, according to a resource form.

In 2001, the Florida legislature separated NCF from the University of South Florida (USF) system and outlined a mission “combining educational innovation with educational excellence,” and to “provide a quality education to students of high ability who, because of their ability, deserve a program of study that is both demanding and stimulating.”

DeSantis’ promised to challenge ideological education in his inaugural address Tuesday.

“We must ensure school systems are responsive to parents and to students, not partisan interest groups, and we must ensure that our institutions of higher learning are focused on academic excellence and the pursuit of truth, not the imposition of trendy ideology,” DeSantis said




RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: Trump Insiders Speak Out On His Real Views About DeSantis

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

J6: What we knew then, and what we know now

We take a lot of heat for what we do at the Center for Security Policy, but our eyewitness account of the violence at the U.S. Capitol two years ago provoked an especially intense response.

The Center’s report concluded that a handful of agents-provocateurs executed the violence, which was planned and coordinated in advance, and exacerbated by a lack of intelligence, poor discipline, and poor leadership from Capitol Police. We also directly confronted the false narrative of “thousands of armed insurrectionists.”

How does our first-person report, written by our senior analyst for strategy hours after the event took place hold up after two years of criminal investigations, congressional hearings, and media reports?

The Federalist reprinted the report the day after we posted it. Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) read portions into the record at the first Senate investigative hearing.

Senator Amy Klobuchar, co-chairman of the Senate panel investigating the violence, called our report and Johnson’s questions “disinformation.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer foamed that it was “mindless garbage.” CNN slammed our evidence as a baseless conspiracy theory.

Not the first time the willingness of the Center to call it as we saw it has provoked hysterics among those pushing false narratives.

But Johnson asked a senior FBI official if our analysis made sense and FBI Assistant Director Jill Sanborn surprised Johnson by confirming Center’s report “absolutely” reflected what the Bureau had found. There were no tens of thousands of armed insurrectionists. There were a small number of provocateurs.

The report also told of suspected fake anti-Trump militants, but we didn’t suspect the FBI.

Then, some of those arrested and charged with leading the violence were identified as FBI informants and assets. When others posted videos of an apparent provocateur named Ray Epps goading people to attack the Capitol and leading the first confrontation at the outer security perimeter, the Center pushed for answers.

The break came when Sanborn, recently promoted to Executive Assistant Director of the FBI’s National Security Branch, was again scheduled to testify at a January, 2022 Judiciary Committee hearing. We worked with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) to shape questions that would get to the bottom of the allegations.

Cruz asked Sanborn directly: “Did any FBI agents of confidential informants actively participate in the events of January 6th? Yes or no?”

Sanborn: “I can’t answer that.”

Cruz kept pressing hard. A simple “no” would have ended the matter. In the 3-1/2 minutes of questioning, the FBI official would not budge.

The FBI never provided senators with an answer afterward. And the Bureau has obfuscated ever since. Cruz’s questions – and the FBI’s reaction – changed the terms of debate about who was behind the violence at the U.S. Capitol.

The evidence now suggests that the FBI knew about the prospect for violence well in advance but did not inform the U.S. Capitol Police or the Secret Service, which was at the Capitol on January 6 to provide security for Vice President Mike Pence.

And at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, the FBI official in the best position to know refused to answer if the FBI itself was involved in “criminal acts of violence” at the Capitol on J6.

The video of Senator Cruz grilling the FBI made C-SPAN’s Top 10 most-watched videos for 2022.

We have hundreds of new questions for Congress to ask in 2023.


J. Michael Waller

Senior Analyst for Strategy

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: Agent Shot Near Border Days Ahead Of Biden’s Visit

A Border Patrol agent was shot near Lordsburg, New Mexico, along a local highway ahead of President Joe Biden’s expected trip to the southern border, National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd told the Daily Caller News Foundation Thursday.

“Border Patrol agents made a vehicle stop. In the course of the vehicle stop a suspect shot a Border Patrol agent in the chest and I believe also in the arm,” Judd said, adding that the bullet didn’t penetrate the agent’s protective vest.

“The vehicle then fled and a pursuit took place where it’s my understanding that the vehicle then crashed and rolled with the suspect fleeing,” Judd continued.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) confirmed the incident occurred in a subsequent statement to the DCNF, where the agency said the agent had been shot “multiple” times in the chest.

“The agent was able to return fire as the suspect’s vehicle sped away. Ultimately, the fleeing vehicle was involved in a rolled over accident a few miles down the road and agents took six persons into custody. Two occupants required additional medical attention and were flown to a trauma center in El Paso, Texas,” CBP said.

The agent who was shot was medically evaluated and released. The FBI, the Office of Professional Responsibility and the New Mexico State Police are conducting probes into the incident, according to CBP.

Agents later apprehended the suspect, who Judd said may have been a smuggler.

Biden is set to visit El Paso, Texas, which is in the same sector as Lordsburg, in the coming days. Border Patrol agents have recently seen a record surge in illegal immigration, with more than 2.3 million migrants encountered by CBP in fiscal year 2022.

Biden said Wednesday that he wanted to travel there to see “peace and security” and to “see what’s going on.” The president last visited the border in 2008, when he drove by the area, former White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in 2021.

Editor’s note: This is a breaking news story and will be updated.



Investigative reporter.


Major City Tried A New Policing Trick To Curb Violent Crime — And Quickly Got Results

Biden Blames Republicans, Defends Illegal Immigrants In Speech Announcing Border Restrictions

3 NYPD Cops Attacked with Machete Near Times Square on New Year’s Eve, Suspect with Alleged Islamic Extremist Ties in Custody

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

VIDEO: SCOTUS Update on Case 22-380 Brunson v Adams et al with Raland Brunson

This week, on the cusp of J6, Defend Florida is excited to bring on Raland Brunson. Raland is the actual plaintiff on the case that is docketed at SCOTUS. If you recall, two identical cases were filed, one under Loy, the other under Raland.

In this interview, we will cover the case, Q&A’s and hear Raland’s unique insight into the what is next to come. Please mark your calendars for Thursday, January 5th at 9:00 PM EST so you can join the Brunson Charge coalition.

Thank you for being part of this initiative, our country needs you more than ever. Now that you have written your letters, please invite your friends and family to watch so they too can become participants in this historic lawsuit. For instruction on the letter writing campaign, go to The Brunson Charge.

As a reminder, the addresses are: Supreme Court of the United States, Case 22-380 Brunson v Adams et al, 1 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20543

And a copy should be sent to: Loy & Raland Brunson, 4287 South Harrison Blvd., #132, Ogden, Utah 84403

©Defend Florida. All rights reserved.

Rep. Matt Gaetz Votes For Trump For House Speaker

Republican Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz cast a vote on Thursday for former President Donald Trump to be speaker of the House.

House Republicans failed to elect a speaker on the seventh ballot, with opponents to Republican California Rep. Kevin McCarthy refusing to increase his vote tally. McCarthy received 201 votes, Republican Florida Rep. Byron Donalds garnered 20 votes, and Gaetz was the sole representative to vote for Trump.

The race for the speakership will continue until a candidate reaches a majority of 218 votes.

Gaetz said he would vote for Trump for speakership in March.

“Give us the ability to Fire Nancy Pelosi, take back the majority, impeach Joe Biden and I’m going to nominate Donald Trump as Speaker of the United States House of Representatives,” Gaetz said at the time.

Trump urged Republicans to vote for McCarthy on Wednesday to “close the deal, take the victory” and “watch Nancy Pelosi fly back home to a very broken California.”

“Republicans, do not turn a great triumph into a giant & embarrassing defeat. It’s time to celebrate, you deserve it,” Trump said on Truth Social.

He also said if Republicans are going to fight, they should be fighting against Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.



White House correspondent.


House Rejects Kevin McCarthy For Seventh Straight Vote

‘VOTE FOR KEVIN’: Trump Doubles Down On McCarthy’s Speaker Bid

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Pentagon’s Pronoun Wars

Our woke military brass don’t know how to win wars, but know their pronouns.

In 2020, the Air Force conducted a classified war game which showed Communist China launching a biological attack and then invading Taiwan.

And we lost.

“At that point the trend in our war games was not just that we were losing, but we were losing faster,” Air Force Lt. Gen. S. Clinton Hinote stated.

With abysmal readiness rates that have an average of only 7 out of 10 planes operational, and down to 50% for the F-22 stealth fighter, 50% for the CV-22 Osprey and 40% for the B-1 Lancer, the Air Force isn’t even trying to win a possible war, but it’s fighting one for pronouns.

Gina Ortiz Jones, a two-time losing congressional candidate who wasted millions before being appointed by Biden as Air Force Undersecretary, declared that adding pronouns to the emails of air force personnel will make them “a more inclusive force”.

”An inclusive force is a mission-ready force,” she contended, all evidence to the contrary.

This proposal was cheered by Lt. Col. Bree (Bryan) Fram, LIT Transgender Policy Team co-lead. He describes himself as a “Rocket Scientist, Author, Advocate, Nerd”. Warrior does not make the list. But he was in attendance when Biden signed the Disrespect for Marriage Act, abolishing religious freedom and marriage.

“The use of correct pronouns is an easy way to show care and respect,” Mr. Fram insisted.

It’s a short hop from pronouns being voluntary to becoming mandatory.

Pacific Air Forces went further by warning its personnel not to use “he/she” pronouns. The Air Force Academy, always in the vanguard of wokeness, told cadets to stop referencing “mom and dad”, and to ask people for their gender identity. This was described as a “warfighting imperative”.

The Navy, like the Army, has jettisoned the use of ‘ma’am’ or ‘sir’ for drill instructors.

Earlier this year, the Navy released a video teaching personnel to use proper gender pronouns. An editorial at the Naval Institute complained about the use of such terms as “manpower, manning, man overboard, man the rails, sideboy, man hours”.

The authors even urged replacing “man overboard” with “shipmate overboard.”

Now when a man falls overboard, there will have to be a debate about gendered language and what he identifies with before he can be rescued. And by then he’ll probably have drowned.

The Navy’s Special Ops creed changed its wording from  “elite brotherhood of sailors” to “elite group of maritime warriors”. SEALs no longer mention “brave men who have fought and died building the proud tradition and feared reputation that I am bound to uphold.”

Nor do they say, “I am that man.”

There are no female operators because none have met the standards. But it’s only a matter of time until those standards are lowered.

Chris Beck, the retired Navy SEAL who became the poster boy for the transgender movement when he spent a decade claiming to be a woman, has returned to his senses, and calls it the “worst mistake of my life.”

Beck describes getting a prescription for hormones after a brief consultation at the VA.

“I got propagandized. I got used badly by a lot of people who had knowledge way beyond me,” he admitted. “They knew what they were doing. I didn’t.”

The VA, whose delays are still killing veterans, offers a special field for gender identity and a list of pronouns for “nonbinaries” that include xe/xem. Earlier this year, House Democrats blocked an effort to expose VA delays in veteran care. Some VA facilities still have delays that drag on for months, but pronouns remain a leading priority. Patient care takes a back seat to wokeness.

As it does across the military in the Obama and Biden eras.

Military policy demands that personnel “should be sensitive to the use of pronouns when addressing others.” There is no expectation that the men who wake up one morning and decide that they’re women should stop putting their fetishes and neuroses ahead of the mission.

The United States is following in the footsteps of the Canadian Armed Forces which mandates the use of gender neutral pronouns and the British Ministry of Defence which orders officials to state their gender pronouns.

“Pronouns aren’t just used inside the 2SLGBTQI+ communities but are used by everyone,” Canada’s Department of National Defence states.

The only people who use pronouns are ordered to use them by their employer or institution. With control of the military, the Trudeau regime and other woke governments have a sizable class of personnel that, to their endless delight, they can order to do anything they want.

Western nations can’t think of any better use for their militaries than performative dogma.

NATO has a 38-page manual on “gendered language” which emphasizes that it is “important to distinguish between grammatical gender and gender as a social construct.” What would have been an obscure dilettante academic’s thesis in the 80s are now military marching orders.

During the Cold War, NATO focused on tactics and strategy while the Russians wrote papers on Marxism-Leninism. Now NATO is stuffed with personnel writing papers on cultural Marxism.

We no longer have a serious military leadership and so we’re not ready for a serious war.

But that’s because our ideologically captured institutions have no interest in fighting one. If China invades Taiwan, South Korea or Hawaii, they’ll issue a strong statement, supply some weapons to the remaining defenders and go back to emphasizing pronoun discipline.

These are the preoccupations of ideologically captured institutions which are not interested in winning military conflicts, only ideological ones.

As Clausewitz suggested, war is politics by other means. Inversely, politics is also war by other means. The Left is fighting a political civil war and has little interest in foreign wars. Leftist control over any institution transforms it into another battalion in its culture war against us.

While China and other enemy nations expand outward, America is stuck in a civil war. That’s why we continue to lose to China in our war games. Instead of being prepared for a war, our woke military brass, men like Secretary of Defense Austin, Gen. Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Air Force Chief of Staff, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Gilday, and others have made it abundantly clear that their priority is enforcing wokeness.

They have no plan to fight or win a war against any substantial enemy. They’re here to enforce the identity politics mandates on the military in between schmoozing at D.C. cocktail parties.

Ask them how to beat China and they don’t have an answer, but just ask them their pronouns, ask them about green energy, systemic racism and abortion and they’ll talk your ears off.

The woke military brass with its pronouns and allegiance to the ideals of the same enemy they were tasked with fighting during the Cold War is a national security threat to our nation.



Swiss Government Bans Gender Ideology, Only Recognizes Men and Women

Here’s What the Feds Are Teaching in “Diversity” Training

Understanding Why Banning Words is Worse than Burning Books

Islamic Republic of Iran: Police resume warnings that women must wear hijabs even in cars

Racist Profs Complain They’re Too Afraid of DeSantis to be Racist

Biden’s handlers send air marshals to border: ‘We’re not going to catch al Qaeda trying to grab a plane in El Paso’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Study—The More Vaxxed You Are, The Higher The Risk Of Getting Covid

In what will almost certainly be Dr. John Campbell’s last YouTube video, he reveals the real stats on mRNA injections and your risk of getting Covid. This of course doesn’t deal with the risks of other things from the mRNA.

The risk of COVID-19 also varied by the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses previously received. The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of covid infection.

Download free high-res PDFs of the posters, download free copies of Dr. John Campbell’s two text books. Any donations using this link help the work of Dr. Campbell’s teaching.

Order a hard copy Physiology book in the UK.

Vaccine doses versus risk of Covid during the 3-month study period,

  • One dose, 1.7 times more likely to test positive for Covid
  • Two doses, 2.63 times more likely to test positive for Covid
  • Three doses, 3.1 times more likely to test positive for Covid
  • More than three doses, 3.8 times more likely to test positive for Covid

So compared to the unvaccinated,

1, x 1.7

2, x 2.36

3, x 3.1

4, x 3.38

P = 0.001 means 999 out of 1,000 likely to be a genuine result.

That 99.9% likely to be a genuine result.

Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Bivalent Vaccine

In 2020 (published in 2021)

Evidence that vaccines prevented Covid infection

This was when the human population had just encountered the novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus

Things Have Changed (Dylan)

Bivalent antigens

Original vaccine and BA.4/BA.5 lineages of Omicron.

(Approved without demonstration of effectiveness in human clinical studies)

(Approved without demonstration of safety in human clinical studies)


To evaluate whether a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine protects against COVID-19.


Employees of Cleveland Clinic, n = 51,011

Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was examined over the following weeks.

Protection provided by recent and prior vaccination was evaluated

First bivalents given, 12 September 2022

Three-month study results among 51,011 employees,

20,689 (41%) had had a previous documented episode of COVID-19,

42,064 (83%) had received at least two doses of a vaccine.

10,804 (21%) were bivalent vaccine boosted

COVID-19 occurred in 2,452 (5%) during the study.

(Pfizer 89%, Moderna 11%)

Risk of COVID-19 increased with time since the most recent prior COVID-19 episode

Risk of COVID-19 increased with the number of vaccine doses previously received. Note, this is based on large numbers:

Doses, 0 = 6,419 (12.6%)

Doses, 1 = 2,528 (5%)

Doses, 2 = 14,810 (45.9%)

Doses, 3 = 23,396 (45.9%)

Doses 4, 3,757 (7.4%)

Doses 5, 85 (less than1%)

Doses 6, 16 (less than 1%)

The bivalent vaccinated state

Was independently associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (HR, 0.70)

(over the 3 months of the study)

Leading to an estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 30%

CDCs latest variant data

Things Have Changed (Dylan)

RELATED ARTICLE: Covid Vaccines Fueling New Covid Variants

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog post by Eeyore is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Want a Better Life? Go to Church

Is religion good for society? One man who would answer in the affirmative is Gourverneur Morris, the founding father who spoke at the Constitutional convention more than anyone else. He originated the phrase “we the people of the United States.”

He once said something that virtually all of the founding fathers would have agreed with: “Religion is the only solid basis of good morals; therefore education should teach the precepts of religion, and the duties of man toward God.”

How is the church good for society? Through the years I have asked Dr. Byron Johnson of Baylor about the impact of faith on society. He has taught at Vanderbilt, the University of Pennsylvania, and Princeton. For the last several years, he has headed up Baylor’s Institute for Studies of Religion (ISR).

The website describes its mission:  “Baylor ISR exists to initiate, support, and conduct research on religion, involving scholars and projects spanning the intellectual spectrum.”

In a radio segment, Dr. Johnson told me, “Churches are phenomenally important to society and important in so many different ways.” That includes volunteering and charitable giving. He told me that Americans give more than a billion dollars a day to charities—much of that coming from church-goers.

Johnson added, “If you just look at dollars and contributions, it’s staggering. One study shows that religion brings about 1.2 trillion dollars to the U.S. economy each year.”

Johnson keeps abreast of the psychological and sociological studies on the impact of church on society. For example, Oxford University Press published a study two years ago showing the positive impact of church-going on the health of individuals.

They found that “compared with those who never attended religious services, individuals who attended services at least once per week had a lower risk of all-cause mortality by 26%…heavy drinking by 34%…and current smoking by 29%.”

The study also found that depression, anxiety, hopelessness, and loneliness—as well as physical maladies like hypertension, heart disease, and strokes—were lower in those who regularly attended church, while satisfaction with life, social connection, and a feeling of purpose were higher.

In short, living for Christ is good for you. Not that we live for Christ in order to live longer or lives with a higher quality. But that apparently is a happy by-product.

We live for Christ because He who is divine became human, lived a perfect life, and died in our place, so that we might be forgiven for our sins through faith in Him. He sealed the deal by rising from the dead and will one day return.

Dr. Johnson has written a scholarly book highlighting the kind of research featured in the study cited above. It’s called “Objective Religion.” The ignorant may rail against church—and surely there are many who have bad experiences at church because of abusive leadership. But the studies show that, all things being equal, the Gospel really is good for you.

Another man who studied the impact of religion on society came to Baylor because of Johnson. Dr. Rodney Stark, who died in July, wrote many books documenting religion’s impact.

One of my favorites was his 2012 tome, America’s Blessings: How Religion Benefits Everyone, Including Atheists. On a vacation once, I read the book carefully and took many notes.

Stark writes, “Americans benefit immensely from being an unusually religious people—blessings that not only fall upon believers but also on those Americans who most oppose religion. In America, militant atheists are far less likely to have their homes broken into or to be robbed on their way to work than they would be in an irreligious society, because of the powerful deterrent effects of religion on crime.”

He also adds, “Religious Americans also enjoy superior physical health, having an average life expectancy more than seven years longer than that of the irreligious”

Another scholar who has also been studying the impact of faith on society for years is author Dr. Joseph Loconte. He has written for the Heritage Foundation, taught at The King’s College in New York City, and is now a distinguished visiting professor at Grove City College.

He told me, “Skeptics and secular critics of Christianity have to circumvent an awful lot of history to argue that political societies are better off without it. The rights and freedoms that our secular friends take for granted—freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, government by consent—grew from philosophical soil that was watered by biblical religion….Take away the Christian ethic of love of neighbor—even love of enemy—and you sweep away nearly everything that makes modern life tolerable and humane.”

Atheists like Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris see the increasing secularization of our culture as a good thing. But in reality, ostracizing faith and marginalizing churches will ultimately only harm all of us. Literally.

©Jerry Newcombe, D.Min. All rights reserved.