Tag Archive for: The Truth

The History of Father’s Day

The history of Father’s Day involves two distinct origins: an early religious tradition in Catholic Europe and a modern secular holiday in the United States.

European Religious Origins The celebration of fatherhood in Catholic Europe dates back to at least 1508, observed on March 19 as the feast day of Saint Joseph. This tradition was supported by the Franciscans and later spread to the Americas by Spanish and Portuguese colonizers. In the Coptic Orthodox Church, this celebration occurs on July 20.

American Secular Origins The modern holiday began in the United States with a one-time memorial on July 5, 1908, in Fairmont, West Virginia, honoring 362 men who died in a coal mine explosion.

The movement for an annual holiday was championed by Sonora Smart Dodd of Spokane, Washington, who proposed the day to honor her widowed father, a Civil War veteran. The first official Father’s Day was celebrated on June 19, 1910.

The Man Who Inspired Father’s Day Was a Single Dad and a Civil War Vet

William Jackson Smart was a twice-married, twice-widowed father of 14 children.

Dave Roos

William Jackson Smart was a twice-married, twice-widowed Civil War veteran and father of 14 children, one of whom dedicated her life to the creation of Father’s Day in honor of her devoted and selfless dad.

The story goes that William’s daughter, Sonora Smart Dodd, was attending one of the first official Mother’s Day services in 1909 at her church in Spokane, Washington, when she had an epiphany—if mothers deserved a day in honor of their loving service, why not fathers?

When Sonora was 16, her mother Ellen died, leaving William as a single father to Sonora and her five younger brothers. And by Sonora’s account, he performed brilliantly. “I remember everything about him,” Sonora said many years later to the Spokane Daily Chronicle. “He was both father and mother to me and my brothers and sisters.”

Sonora’s mother Ellen, herself a widow, had three children from a previous marriage. On top of that, William had also been married and widowed before he met Sonora’s mother. William had five children with his first wife, Elizabeth, who were already grown when William became a widower for the second time.

In 1910, Sonora brought a petition before the Spokane Ministerial Alliance to recognize the courage and devotion of all fathers like William on June 5, her dad’s birthday. The local clergy liked the idea of a special Father’s Day service, but couldn’t pull something together so quickly, so they settled for June 19, the third Sunday in June.

On that first Father’s Day in 1910, church sermons across Spokane were dedicated to dear old dad, red and white roses were passed out in honor of living and deceased fathers, the mayor of Spokane and governor of Washington issued proclamations, and Sonora found her calling. She would spend much of the next 60 years pushing for the official recognition of Father’s Day as a national holiday.

William Jackson Smart, the original inspiration for Father’s Day, was born in Arkansas in 1842 and records show that he enlisted as a Union soldier there in 1863. That was odd, because Arkansas was a Confederate state. Spokane resident, Jerry Numbers, who owned what had been Sonora’s home, researched the Smart family history for Spokane’s Father’s Day Centennial Celebration in 2010. Numbers says that William, in fact, fought for both sides in the Civil War.

Driving a supply wagon for Confederate troops, William was captured in the Battle of Pea Ridge, a decisive Union victory in Arkansas in 1862. Rather than languish in a prisoner of war camp, he opted to join the northern cause. As indication that William was a “Reb” before he was a “Yank,” Sonora was a member of both the United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Daughters of Union Veterans.

When Sonora was born in 1882, William and his second wife Ellen were living on a “coal ranch” in Jenny Lind, Arkansas. Instead of mining for coal, William and the family “farmed” it, collecting chunks of coal from the surface and carting it to town for sale. William and Ellen sold the property in 1887 for $5,000—a handsome sum at the time—and the family traveled by train to a new homestead outside of Spokane. (The farm in Arkansas would turn out to be one of the most productive coal fields in the entire nation.)

It was on the Smart’s family farm near Creston, Washington, where William’s second wife died and he became a widower again at the age of 56. His youngest son was seven or eight and Sonora, his oldest child still living at home, was 16. In Sonora’s memories of this difficult time, she recalls her father as a “great home person,” a man who exemplified fatherly love and protection.

Continue reading.

National Recognition:

Initial support from Presidents Woodrow Wilson (1916) and Calvin Coolidge (1924) helped gain traction, but the holiday faced skepticism as a “commercial gimmick.”

Father’s Day was officially recognized by Congress in 1956, and President Lyndon B. Johnson issued a proclamation in 1966 designating the third Sunday in June as Father’s Day. The holiday became a permanent national observance when President Richard Nixon signed the law in 1972.

Global Variations While the U.S. and many countries celebrate on the third Sunday in June, other nations observe different dates:

  • Brazil: Second Sunday in August (honoring St. Joachim).
  • Australia/New Zealand: First Sunday in September.
  • Germany: Celebrated as Vatertag (Men’s Day) on Ascension Day.
  • Thailand: December 5 (coinciding with the late King’s birthday).

WATCH: The History of Father’s Day

©2026 . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: From tragedy to triumph: How one Spokane daughter created Father’s Day

Iran Deal Can Work If We Hit Them Every Time They Break It

Victor Davis Hanson: Trump Just Proved the ‘Apostate Right’ and the Left Dead Wrong on Iran

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis HansonSubscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.


Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for the Daily Signal.

There’s a lot of confusion, controversy, and disagreement about the latest phase of the Iran war. Remember, we bombed kinetically 38 to 40 days, then we had 60 days of negotiation, then here we are in mid-June, in which [President] Donald Trump has announced yet another time there is going to be a peace deal coming with a 60-day period for all the elements of the deal to be enacted.

A lot of people are upset. They feel that Iran was on the ropes, they’re going broke, and that had we continued, or if we were to continue now, we could put them out of commission and then dictate a non-conditional surrender to them.

That’s absolutely true, but what this deal then hinges on—because there’s no history of Iran ever keeping their word or following any agreement, explicit or implicit—is the willingness to keep maybe one carrier group in the region to ensure that the strait stays open, that the missiles are not launched against our allies, and of course, the enriched uranium is turned over.

And if we’re willing to do that and hit them hard every time they break it, then it might eventually work.

There’s a lot of misconceptions, though, about the deal and the war in general. I’d like to address just a few of them. A lot of the critics of this administration are saying, I think [House Minority Leader] Hakeem Jeffries said that not long ago, “Well, the strait was open and now it’s closed, so the deal didn’t accomplish anything. In fact, it made it worse.”

Well, the strait was open because Iran had no reason, as it did now, to close it. And the reason they didn’t have any reason to close it was the seven prior presidents, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden didn’t want to disarm Iran. They didn’t want to go in there and try to stop their proliferation agenda. Donald Trump did. Anybody who did was going to be confronted with a desperate effort of Iran to close the strait. Now we’ll open the strait. But the idea that we made things worse is ridiculous.

And then second, people are saying, “Well, it’s just like the Obama deal. Why did Trump get out of the Obama deal?” Well, they enriched uranium all through the Obama deal. We know that. They wouldn’t let inspectors in. During Joe Biden’s presidency, he begged them to go back into the Iran deal. They didn’t wanna do it.

Why? Because we now know they had pretty much already enriched to the point, 60 or more percent, that they could make a bomb in a month should they want to.

But here’s the big difference. In the Obama, atmosphere of that deal of 2015-16, Iran was ascendant. Everybody was scared of it. Its military was heavily equipped with Chinese and Russian weaponry. People were afraid of it. Israel didn’t want to attack it. The Gulf States didn’t want to attack it.

Europe was advising caution. It was an appeasing deal because nobody wanted to use force. Now, whatever your disagreement is with the current war, most people, and we don’t have boots on the ground, we don’t have journalists on the ground, but they agree that the Iranian military and its economy are devastated through forty days of intense bombing with probably a thousand planes in the air at any one time.

So we’re dealing with a much-diminished Iran that we can hit again and again because they have no air defenses. Obama was dealing with an ascendant Iran that he was scared to even mention the use of force to make them comply

There’s a third misconception. People say, “Well, now we’re isolated. We’re all isolated. We have no allies. China and Russia are ascendant.” Nothing could be further from the truth.

This is the first time in all of our lifetimes that the Gulf Council, for all their double-dealing over the years, basically are more attuned to an alliance, maybe unspoken, with Israel than they are with Iran.

We know now that some of the 600 combat aircraft based in the Gulf were stealthily flying missions, and that meant alongside the Israelis.

We know that there are Israeli technicians in the Gulf helping them with missile defense. We know the Gulf states and most of the moderate Arab countries believe that Iran, not Israel, is the existential threat.

In other words, we’ve never had a closer relationship with the Gulf states vis-a-vis America, nor has Israel.

As far as Russia and China, they’re both shut out of the Middle East. They have lost their client in Syria. They have lost, and they’re going to lose their client in Iran. They have lost their client in Venezuela. They have an enormous problem. Russia cannot sell weapons to Iran anymore. They may smuggle some in, and China can’t get discounted oil anymore

There’s another misconception, that is the apostate right, that is the Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens right, has said that they were going to fracture the party, and maybe their influence will turn the MAGA movement against Donald Trump.

Well, first of all, on all the other issues, maybe except the Iran war, most of the conservative, if not all, agree with Donald Trump. Even Tucker Carlson would agree with Donald Trump’s crime policy, his border policy, the Wall, the deportation policy, the rejection of the green energy mania.

But on this question of the war, the MAGA and Republican parties still overwhelmingly, 75%, support Donald Trump.

And the reason they do is they don’t feel this is a forever endless war, as the apostate right do. They believe that we have not used ground troops, and we have lost fewer soldiers than the accident rate that the military suffers daily over that period of 38 to 40 days of kinetic operations.

Finally, everybody says we’ve lost the midterms.

The midterms are four and a half months away. If the strait is open, suddenly you’re going to have a traffic jam of two things. One, tankers leaving, trying to get out full of oil, and tankers waiting to get in.

But there may be 200 or 250 tankers full of a million to 2 million barrels at a time when the United States and Russia and the Middle East and Venezuela are upping production.

So, there could be a substantial drop in prices.

And if you do get a deal the Left is going to be sort of flummoxed because they said that we had lost the war and we didn’t achieve our objectives. But if you do get a deal and the deal is enforced by military action on the part of the United States, it wouldn’t hurt Trump, it could help him.

And then there’s a larger context of redistricting. In this redistricting war, it turns out that so far the Republican legislatures will outdo the Democratic legislatures, and the Republicans may pick up anywhere from three to four to five seats.

And the Supreme Court that said it is a racial obsession, a fixation to create congressional districts on the basis of race, and you can’t do it, may lend the Republicans another four to five.

I’m not suggesting that Donald Trump, can overturn historical precedent. Remember that of the last 40 presidents, 95% lost their first midterm election. So, his history is on the wrong side, but he will not lose the Senate. And it doesn’t really matter, to tell you the truth, if they lose the House.

It would be nice to get legislation through, but most of his legislation has already been through. He can still use executive orders, but most importantly, they can’t… They may impeach him as a performance art act, but the Senate will never convict him.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

AUTHOR

Victor Davis Hanson 

Victor Davis Hanson is a Daily Signal senior contributor, hosting a podcast, producing video commentaries, and writing a weekly column. He is the author of “The Counterrevolution The Fall and Rise of Donald Trump and the MAGA Movement.” Follow on X VDHanson.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Bernie Sanders Wants Congress to Block Israel Alliance Amendment

Prosperity Does Not Equal Peace in the Islamic World!

RELATED VIDEOS:

Vance: Iran doesn’t get a ‘dime’ from anyone if they don’t change their behavior

Lebanese government imposes a full ban on all Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps

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

AI Data Centers: We Are All Flocked!

First for the good news. If you go to a meeting, they will listen. If not vote them out in the primary.

Great news for Jackson County, FL. At the June 9th, Board of County Commissioner meeting the vote was 5-0 for an ordinance stating NO AI data centers in Jackson County, Florida. Congratulations to us all. It is wonderful when we can work together! That is a big celebration for our Independence Day.

View the meeting.

Key points that were mentioned were as follows:

  • MAJOR RISK TO WATER SUPPLY — Massive Water Demand
  • WATER CONTAMINATION RISKS — due to chemical exposure and construction runoff
  • ELECTRICAL GRID STRAIN — high power consumption on an unstable grid.
  • NOISE, TRAFFIC & 24/7 INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY
  • LOSS OF RURAL LAND & COMMUNITY CHARACTER
  • STORMWATER & FLOODING RISKS
  • LIMITED LOCAL BENEFIT — few permanent jobs, minimal economic return
  • · LACK OF TRANSPARENCY
  • MONEY MAY BE USED TO ENTICE FAVORABLE OUTCOMES
  • SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL

BOTTOM LINE

AI data centers bring major risks to Jackson County’s water, land, infrastructure, and rural way of life — with very limited benefits. Residents deserve full transparency, strict protections, and independent impact studies before any approval is considered.

Tampa has 28 data centers, Orlando 11, Miami 27, Jacksonville 11 and there are some elsewhere, for a total of 106 data centers in Florida.

Do not confuse AI Data Centers with ones used by banks or credit card companies! We are talking about AI (Artificial Intelligence) Data Centers. Do not for one minute think, that this is the end of the of our fight! We must conduct continuous oversight to make sure one doesn’t slip through under an obscure name or purpose. We also should be on the lookout for shell companies looking to buy land.

Our rights come from our creator; our government is elected by the People to protect those rights; and, the power is with We the People, AKA The Sovereign. How often that is forgotten, especially from those that are believing the propaganda that we hear from the left Communists. They believe their rights come from the government. The government is there to suppress the people and their power comes from their fear of armies and force.

Sally reminded the Commissioners that the Jackson County, Florida Commissioners were elected to represent the will of the people of Jackson County, Florida.

Our Declaration of Independence states that very fact……….250 years…….

“Governments are instituted among Men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” Sad to say, many of our elected have forgotten this fact. It is very important that you know your candidates and vote in the Primary August 18.

We let our voices be known. We the People do not consent to any AI Data Centers or Mega Data Centers or Solar Farms in Jackson County, Florida.

The BCC listened. That is called team work.

Why did I put a photo of a camera at the top of this article?

Many of you have heard me say quite often that everything is connected. Nothing is random. Everything has a plan. And all plans are based on lies. Nothing is more evident than what we are finding out with regards to the AI Data Centers, Ring Cameras, Smart Meters, and Flock cameras. I spoke about the real purpose of these centers – SURVEILLANCE.

What is a Flock Camera, you ask?

In the name of safety, Flock (an ALPR vendor) cameras are appearing on many streets in America. Currently there are about 80,000 nationwide. Unlike the cameras of old, which only took a photo of your license plate and car model, Flock cameras record video of license plate numbers and a car’s color, make and model, along with extras like bumper stickers, body damage, roof racks and temporary paper tags. Flock’s ALPR (Automated License Plate Readers) cameras can also identify vehicles with missing license plates or obscured tags. Lately, new capabilities are added to Flock cameras to discern and record gunshots, fireworks, and human voices. Make sure to check out some of the videos to learn more about Flock cameras! To find the maps go to deflock.org

“The municipality doesn’t own the camera, Flock and Google own them and they get the data. They have drones and pan-tilt- zoom cameras that recognize people and zoom into their faces. You can even see what they’re doing on their phone. Their ALPR cameras can recognize people. They do store pictures of people. I know this because I’ve accessed the footage and found pictures of myself. I’m not a car or a license plate.” Benn Jordan.

Today we find out that I-95 is filled with these cameras and will now use them, instead of highway patrol to locate anyone disobeying the law. You will be sent your ticket and fine by mail. This will be a pilot program with the hopes of using these spy cameras on every interstate in America. How many constitutional amendments are they breaking?

Did you give your consent? That video, I believe, is AI generated but that does not mean it is not true. If you drive on an interstate, check the rules of the state before your trip.

URGENT: New USA (I-95) Highway Rules Begins TOMORROW — Drivers Could Face Instant Fines Nationwide

States, Municipalities, Counties who need funding will now have a new revenue source. Flock Camera fines. Check your area. How many cameras can you find? deflock.org

Look for cameras in your area. Did your municipality tell you about a contract?

How much does it cost? Did you have a public meeting? Was there a bid?

Many municipalities have canceled their contracts.

Is it time for a FOIA request? Let me know what you think.

Jackson County has about 8 cameras. Nationwide there are about 80,000 Cameras Watching You While They Call It Crime Prevention. They want more. Go to your budget meetings.

80,000 Cameras Watching You While They Call It Crime Prevention | America Hijacked

In Segment 1 of today’s show I will be speaking with Ileana Johnson. She will tell us what it is like to live under communism. It is not the rosy picture painted with the brush of the propaganda artists in MSM who hate the fact that you still have freedom. Surveillance cameras are just the beginning.

Segment 2 will be a know your candidate interview. Vic Rohe, running for Senate, Sarasota, District 22 FL, will be my guest.

It looks like the Iran conflict is over. It is expected that the deal will be signed next week in Europe. Also, the good news is the price of oil, which is now in the 80’s, will come down. Once oil stabilizes, inflation will drop as well. I caution you, don’t expect that to happen overnight. Prices have a bad habit of going up faster than coming down.

Now I ask you, if all the AI data center problems were solved, would you want the government spying on you 24/7? Is America worth saving? Is your freedom worth saving? Call your senator to get the Save America Act passed. If they are a no vote, get together with others and make signs, billboards, social media and newspaper ads. Expose them for the traitors that they are.

Applying Knowledge is Power.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

Murdering Thug Karmelo Anthony

I wrote this only because it illustrates, once again, the idiocy of the Marxists who are part of the Black Lives Matter, Critical Race Theory movement who frame every event or activity that they don’t like in the form of racism.

This was murder and a knife with a 5″ blade was used by thug Karmelo Anthony to  penetrate the sternum and pierce the heart of  unarmed white teenager Austin Metcalf at a track meet.

This was hardly self-defense and the excuse by Anthony’s defenders that it was only a “multi-tool” is ridiculous or that someone tapping someone on shoulder is grounds for being murdered.

Karmelo Anthony was found guilty of murder by a jury of his peers.


DEADLY PHOTO: We Now Know What Karmelo Anthony’s Knife Looked Like, and It Was No Quaint Leatherman Multitool

By Samantha Chang

Race-hustling apologists for convicted murderer Karmelo Anthony beclowned themselves by insisting that the knife Anthony used to kill high school track star Austin Metcalf was not a “deadly weapon” because it looked like a Swiss Army Knife multitool.

The harebrained gaslighting unfolded Wednesday during a virtual panel discussion hosted by Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas.

Crockett — whom President Donald Trump called a “very low-IQ person — try to downplay the lethality of the murder weapon by claiming it was too small to be deadly.

‘So it was small,” the congresswoman said.

“Well, I would have argued the size of it alone, you wouldn’t even think it’s a deadly weapon.’”

Crockett‘s brain-dead reasoning ignited a social media backlash, with numerous X commenters underscoring that anything can be a deadly weapon if you repeatedly stab someone with it.

Continue reading.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

2026 Mid-Term Elections: 5 Important Questions

Elections already unfolding and also about to come, may be our last. I am not being theatrical or conspiracy minded. The forces of darkness aligned against America, even by so-called Americans in the Marxist Democrat Party, intend and already are working to destroy what our founders gave us as a gift, if we would but keep it. Each American who cares about our exceptional nation, and cares that we remain a free country with the rights and privileges given to us in our founding documents, each American must put aside every distraction and vote for the candidate who mirrors the questions I posed below.

No messing around! Ask each candidate, I do not care for what office, local, county, state or national, ask the questions below and demand an answer that is not “world salad” rambling and nebulous. Demand specific answers to these questions. Have five of your friends in the audience and each one of you take a question. Hold the candidate accountable. Let me write that again, Hold the Candidate Accountable to answer your question and not give a “word salad” response.

Folks, we are in a war to preserve this nation. I am not being sensational as I wrote above. I pray Americans wake-up and come out of being “comfortably numb.” Trump, with his faults, is attempting to bring this country back to our foundational principles and beliefs. He needs immediate help in congress, and in state houses across the nation. Will you help!?

Question # 1:

What is the proper role of government?

Our Founders were clear that government was to reflect the will of the people. It is the people who give government its authority.

Question # 2:

As an elected public official, you will be required to take an oath to uphold and preserve the Constitution of the United States. When was the last time you took a serious look at the Constitution?

Can you identify one or two areas where the Constitution is being violated today?

Question # 3:

What are your views about public debt? What is your opinion of using debt and how it should be paid off?

Our Forefathers warned about debt; it should be paid by the generation that created it!

Question # 4:

What is your view on unalienable rights stated by Jefferson in the Declaration?

These are rights given by our Creator. They cannot be taken by man without coming under the judgment of Him. This will tell you much about a candidate’s philosophy.

Question # 5:

Share your thoughts on: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Solutions should be based on morality and virtue.

As a Nation, we seem to have misplaced the truth that government derives its powers by consent of the governed; by We the People! So very many elected officials clearly appear to have misplaced, or outright ignored, that our Forefathers sought for elected office those who would represent the citizens first, not their own careers, and they would accomplish this as “Servant Leaders.”

©2026 All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Spencer Pratt Video After Having The LA Mayor Election Stolen From Him


SUPPORT ARIZONA TODAY: https://arizonatoday.org/support-arizona-today!

The Unholy Alliance Between Islam and the Left

The progressive establishment in the United States maintains a transactional syndicate with radical Islamist factions to lock down institutional power. This structural cartel sacrifices Western secular principles, democratic consistency, and basic human rights on the altar of raw electoral survival.

The political left and Islamist organizers operate a highly coordinated machine built on mutual opportunism. Progressivism delivers mainstream legitimacy, legal defense, and institutional cover to fundamentalist groups. In return, the Islamist infrastructure guarantees monolithic voter turnout and massive financial injections into progressive campaign chests. This transaction abandons core progressive principles – including secularism, gender equality, and LGBTQ safety – to shield orthodox religious systems from public scrutiny.

An extensive analysis published by the Policy Exchange Research Group on Islamism and the Left details the deep ideological affinity and historical roots of this epistemic alliance against the liberal democratic order. The investigation demonstrates how both factions actively weaponize identical narratives of Western oppression to close down open debate and dismantle standard legal equality.

The human and societal costs of this alliance manifest through specific, systemic points of failure inside American institutions:

  • The Voting Bloc Extortion: Progressive strategists systematically map and court orthodox religious districts, offering total legislative silence on radical fundamentalism in exchange for block-voting guarantees. Data compiled by the Pew Research Center on American Muslim Political Behavior confirms that fully two-thirds of this constituency operates as a consolidated voting apparatus for a single political party, creating a capture mechanism over local municipalities.
  • The Municipal Capture and Fiscal Subversion: This municipal capture triggers immediate structural decay. Once these coalitions secure local executive offices, they systematically divert taxpayer funds into sectarian religious fronts disguised as community outreach initiatives. The document describes how domestic radical hubs exploit these loosened local oversight mechanisms to embed fundamentalist actors into regional governance boards, effectively hijacking public school boards, city councils, and municipal law enforcement oversight committees.
  • The Academic Erasure of Human Rights: Left-wing departments inside American universities systematically erase fundamentalist atrocities from curricula to protect their domestic political allies. Secular critics, ex-Muslims, and authentic human rights defenders face aggressive censorship, blacklisting, and professional ruin on campuses when they expose the systemic abuse of women and minorities under Islamist control.
  • The Orchestrated Media Blackout: The syndicate maintains a rigid information gatekeeping operation across dominant media conglomerates to sanitize public perception. Newsrooms systematically bury domestic intelligence briefings regarding homegrown radicalization cells to protect the political reputation of their Islamist partners. This deliberate suppression of truth isolates the American public from reality; major outlets completely omit verified indicators of rising fundamentalist militancy. Concrete data compiled confirms that shielding toxic ideologies from journalistic investigation directly accelerates the spread of clandestine recruitment networks inside urban centers, converting domestic media into an active accomplice of institutional subversion.
  • The Weaponization of Civil Rights Bureaucracy: Radical legal networks leverage progressive anti-discrimination frameworks to insulate extremist individuals from federal surveillance and criminal investigation. Law enforcement agencies face immediate, coordinated public character assassination campaigns whenever they target fundamentalist terror finance cells operating under the guise of domestic non-profit organizations.
  • The Illicit Financial Pipeline: The progressive apparatus deliberately blinds financial regulatory bodies to ensure the unhindered flow of dark money into joint political action committees. Wealthy foreign donors and fundamentalist non-governmental organizations funnel millions through shell networks to bankroll progressive primary challengers. Official findings detailed in the European Union Journal on Terror Finance and Money Laundering expose how these transnational financial networks exploit domestic political loopholes, using Western campaign apparatuses as laundry operations to legitimize illicit capital while buying direct veto power over Western foreign policy decisions.

The internal subversion of American politics directly cripples foreign policy, causing immediate devastation on the global stage. When Western political actors validate fundamentalist rhetoric domestically, they undermine vital international crackdowns on radical networks.

This domestic collusion paralyzed the federal apparatus during critical geopolitical flashpoints. Progressive lawmakers, beholden to their fundamentalist ground operations, actively sabotage sanctions regimes and defund defensive alliances to appease their domestic voting blocs. This legislative betrayal leaves democratic allies entirely vulnerable to asymmetrical warfare, as the domestic cartel prioritizes precinct-level vote tallies over international stability and treaty obligations.

Official documentation from Human Rights Watch on Armed Conflicts exposes the catastrophic reality of unchecked Islamist insurgencies, where fundamentalist networks slaughter civilians, execute local leaders, and enforce total totalitarian control. The American progressive machine routinely downplays or ignores these harsh global realities to avoid fracturing its fragile domestic electoral coalition.

The progressive machine in the United States must face complete political dismantling. A system that trades fundamental liberties for short-term precinct victories acts as an existential threat to constitutional governance. True national security demands the complete severance of this syndicate.

For a deeper look into how these dynamics unfold on the international stage, this Debate on Left-Wing and Islamist Alliances analyzes the broader geopolitical consequences and regional shifts caused by these controversial political frameworks.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: Multiple Sources Confirm GOP Senator Attempted IVF Expansion during NDAA Negotiations

As negotiations in the Senate continue over funding for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2027, sources familiar with the situation tell The Washington Stand that an amendment that would have implemented the unrestricted use of highly controversial in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments into basic health care for military servicemembers was put forward by a Republican in a closed-door executive session, before it was ultimately dropped.

Sources confirmed Thursday that Senators Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) offered competing amendments during a closed-door executive mark-up session for the NDAA that would have expanded servicemembers’ access to IVF treatments at the expense of taxpayers as part of the military’s Tricare health insurance program, without fully addressing pro-life concerns. The Sullivan amendment reportedly was shopped around to Republican offices, but failed to garner support because it was not clear that it protected frozen embryos, most of whom are discarded or experimented upon. The language of the proposed Duckworth amendment was said to be almost identical to language first put forward in an amendment she offered during last year’s NDAA markups. A source conveyed to TWS that during the session, Duckworth told those in the room that she and Sullivan agreed to withdraw their competing amendments and, as a compromise, to offer Duckworth’s language from last year. That amendment would have enabled Tricare coverage for “fertility-related care,” an open-ended term that could include “other information, referrals, treatments, procedures, testing, medications, laboratory services, technologies, and services facilitating reproduction as determined appropriate by the Secretary of Defense.”

The attempt by a GOP lawmaker to quietly fund IVF treatments with taxpayer dollars behind closed doors comes in the wake of the Trump administration’s efforts last year to “lower costs and expand access” to IVF by attempting to help lower the cost of fertility drugs used by women for egg retrieval. But pro-life advocates say that IVF procedures involve a host of ethically and morally problematic outcomes.

Based on CDC data and estimates from the Heritage Foundation, in 2021 alone, approximately 4.1 million embryonic children were created via IVF in the U.S., but just over 97,000 babies were born as a result, amounting to just 2.3% of the embryos created. Unused embryos are routinely discarded or frozen indefinitely. While actual figures are unknown, the number of destroyed embryos is estimated to be over one million per year, and at least 1.5 million embryonic children remain indefinitely frozen.

In addition, experts note that the open-ended language of policies like the Duckworth amendment leaves the door open for cloning, including the creation of human-animal hybrids known as chimeras. Other concerns include the lack of parental rights amid the unregulated IVF industry, in which embryos have been discarded without parental consent, the exploitation of women through surrogacy’s health risks, and the fact that the underlying causes of infertility are not addressed through IVF procedures. Experts point to restorative reproductive medicine (RRM), including NaPro TechnologyFEMM, and the Billings Ovulation Method as far more effective and ethical methods of treating infertility.

While the IVF amendments allowing unrestricted IVF usage for servicemembers at taxpayers’ expense have been defeated for now, experts say that pro-life advocates must be especially vigilant that the Trump administration and Republican lawmakers who claim to be pro-life refrain from putting forward policies that harm preborn children and undermine human dignity.

“It is disappointing that, behind closed doors, Republicans continue to try to expand taxpayer-funded IVF coverage despite the fact that they have been educated, year after year, about the problems, and especially the problems with expanding IVF from service-related injuries to all servicemembers and their dependents,” FRC Senior Director of Government Affairs Quena González told TWS, responding to the source. “Not only would it be immensely expensive, but it would involve taxpayer-funded creation, storage, and ultimately destruction of human lives.”

He continued, “And this is the proverbial camel’s nose under the edge of the tent. Using the NDAA to start this experiment in the military before expanding to universal coverage of IVF is particularly sneaky because, at this stage, the NDAA is being negotiated behind closed doors to protect military secrets and national security concerns. It is concerning to learn that some Republicans are using a legitimate process to hide from public accountability and cut deals on harmful language behind closed doors.”

As González underscored, “Millions of Americans would object to expansive taxpayer funding of IVF, when better alternatives exist to actually treat (rather than artificially bypass, at great human cost to all involved) the underlying causes of infertility. The military is a fighting force to deter tyrants and protect America, not a social laboratory. Military spouses and families, and the millions of Americans who fund their healthcare, deserve better.”

When asked for comment, a spokesperson for Sullivan’s office replied to TWS, “As a pro-life senator, this is a very important issue for Senator Sullivan. He believes that there is no greater gift than parenthood and understands that some families need IVF treatment to have children. However, there are significant pro-life concerns regarding IVF treatment, many of which Senator Sullivan shares. He has worked with pro-life groups on legislation in the NDAA for years. In the current NDAA, he was trying to find a path forward on this issue that takes into account those pro-life concerns. When it was clear that Democrats would block the proposal because of pro-life provisions in the proposal, he withdrew the amendment.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was updated with a statement from Senator Dan Sullivan’s office, and additional clarifications to the markup proceedings, and a clarification that Sullivan’s measure was dropped rather than “defeated” in the original version.

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

A Celebration Not Everyone Welcomes?

As we get closer to honor America at 250, it seems like not everyone wants to celebrate.

For example, there has been some deliberate damage recently in our nation’s capital in order to sabotage America’s 250th anniversary celebration.

  • Writes Anthony Blair in The New York Post: “Vandals sabotaged generators at President Trump’s Freedom 250 event, according to a spokeswoman — and fuel leached into underground water tanks, contaminating them.”
  • And, of course, we keep hearing about celebrities now refusing to participate in America at 250 events, reportedly because they don’t like President Trump. Even Bill Maher notes that such actions can make it appear that they “don’t really love America.”
  • Another story speaks of a large swath of Americans who are not happy about the nation, regardless of its 250th birthday.  Greg Price notes in a post on X (formerly, Twitter): “According to a new Elon University/YouGov poll, a full *55%* of Democrats said that they would rather live in a different country than the United States. Only 10% of Republicans said the same.”

In short, not every American is happy about America at 250—to put it mildly. That’s astounding—especially when you consider those who will risk their lives to come here, to try and get a shot at the potential opportunities America can still offer.

Meanwhile, it is worthy of note that when America experienced its first major birthday of sorts—that of fifty years—two of the prominent signers and designers of American independence both died on that very day. On July 4th, 1826, both Thomas Jefferson, chief author of the Declaration of Independence, and John Adams, a key founding father who had suggested Jefferson to write same 50 years earlier, breathed their last.

In his home at Monticello, in Charlottesville, Virginia, the 83-year-old Thomas Jefferson died.

Later that same day, the 90-year-old John Adams expired in his family estate in Quincy, Massachusetts. Before he died, Adams said, “Jefferson lives,” but he hadn’t realized that was no longer true.

Even if later in life, they became more liberal in their religious views, both men had a Biblical worldview when it comes to this: They both affirmed that God is the source of our rights.

Years earlier, as the storm clouds of the Revolutionary War were brewing, John Adams wrote: “I would ask by what law the parliament has authority over America? By the law in the Old and New Testament it has none; by the law of nature and nations it has none…The two characteristics of this people, religion and humanity, are strongly marked in all their proceedings. We are not exciting a rebellion. Resistance by arms against usurpation and lawless violence is not rebellion by the law of God or the land. Resistance to lawful authority makes rebellion.”

Jefferson and Adams had had a good relationship at first—during the time they served in the second Continental Congress and beyond.

But, later, during the ugly 1800 campaign for the presidency that pitted John Adams against Thomas Jefferson, the two had a major falling out.

After both were long out of the White House, Dr. Benjamin Rush, a mutual friend and key founding father in his own right, helped get John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to patch things up. History should thank them all for this.

On June 28, 1813, John Adams wrote Thomas Jefferson: “The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite….And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all these Sects were United: And the general Principles of English and American Liberty, in which all those young Men United, and which had United all Parties in America, in Majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her Independence.”

Of course, Thomas Jefferson said famously in the Declaration that we are endowed by our Creator with our rights. Therefore, they are inalienable.

In a different context, Jefferson wrote (to John Manners, 6/12/1817): “The evidence of this natural right, like that of our right to life, liberty, the use of our faculties, the pursuit of happiness, is not left to the feeble and sophistical investigations of reason, but is impressed on the sense of every man. We do not claim these under the charters of kings or legislators, but under the King of kings.”

Perhaps some Americans today don’t realize that that reference from Jefferson is to Jesus Christ, whom the Bible calls “the King of kings.”

While some Americans today may not seem to appreciate America at 250, it’s nice to reflect on what Thomas Jefferson and John Adams appreciated about America at 50. God-given rights are non-negotiable. That was true in 1776, in 1826, and in 2026.

©2026 All rights reserved.

SHOT TO THE HEART OF DEI: How the Trump Admin Is Dismantling the Legal Basis for Government-Endorsed Discrimination

The Department of Justice under President Donald Trump just took a pivotal step toward removing government-endorsed discrimination from America’s legal system and undermining the institutional apparatus of critical race theory.

Critical race theory teaches that America is systemically racist and that even racially neutral policies are truly racist if they result in better outcomes for members of one race than for members of another. That’s the exact same logic as the legal theory known as “disparate impact.”

Cornell Law School defines disparate impact as a policy or rule “that seems neutral but has a negative impact on a specific protected class of persons.”

Government should strive to adopt policies that allow all Americans to flourish, regardless of race, but Democrat administrations have applied disparate impact theory to encourage “reverse” discrimination.

For instance, the Justice Department and the Department of Education under Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden issued guidance warning that if a school disciplines students of one race more than students of another race, that is evidence of racial discrimination, even if the school’s policy is race-neutral. It doesn’t matter if particular students cause more trouble than other students—what matters is the racial breakdown of who gets punished.

In one particularly revealing case, a woman sued the Alabama Department of Motor Vehicles, claiming disparate impact from the department’s requirement that people take the driver’s license exam in English. She said the English-only requirement had a disparate impact on people who don’t speak English, even though the road signs in Alabama are in English. While lower courts found in her favor, the Supreme Court struck down her claim in Alexander v. Sandoval (2001).

Just as critical race theory teaches that American society is inherently racist against blacks and for whites, so the leftist reading of disparate impact theory finds fault with colorblind policies for their unintended consequences.

The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy released a memo Tuesday that restores sanity, however.

The DOJ Disparate Impact Memo

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the agency tasked with preventing racial discrimination in employment, requested legal advice on disparate impact theory, and the DOJ responded with a far better approach to the law.

EEOC’s current disparate impact guidelines “are unconstitutional because they contemplate liability based on disparate effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, and pressure employers to engage in race-based decisionmaking,” wrote T. Elliot Gaiser, assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel.

Gaiser explained that if employers can demonstrate that the challenged policy “rationally serves a valid business practice,” that will constitute a valid response to a discrimination claim.

“Workplace requirements and selection procedures—such as background checks, aptitude tests, and SAT scores—are presumptively job-related,” he added. “Only irrational or arbitrary practices with no plausible job-relatedness can create disparate-impact liability.”

Finally, employees suing for disparate impact “must establish both that the challenged employment practice specifically caused the alleged disparate impact and provide evidence that an equally effective alternative practice causes less disparate impact.”

These guidelines represent a return to common sense. No longer can potential employees of certain races sue for discrimination if a firm refuses to hire them for failing aptitude tests. This undermines the “diversity, equity, and inclusion” movement that has pressured companies to hire and promote racial minorities, arguably at the expense of more qualified candidates.

Trump’s War on DEI

This important memo represents one more step in the Trump administration’s efforts to reject the DEI movement and restore sanity.

Trump signed an executive order “restoring equality of opportunity and meritocracy” in April 2025, rejecting disparate impact liability.

The EEOC moved to close most disparate impact cases by Sept. 30, according to an internal memo.

The Office of Legal Counsel memo is not a court filing, but it does represent the legal stance of the Justice Department on the issue.

Election Integrity and Disparate Impact

The memo also comes after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, where the court found that legislatures violate the law when they draw congressional redistricting maps on the basis of race. Justice Samuel Alito rejected a disparate impact argument in favor of racial redistricting.

This may bode ill for leftist arguments against voter ID requirements. In 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit struck down Texas’ voter ID law, finding that the law had a disparate impact on minorities.

Democrats have baselessly condemned the mere requirement of a legal ID to vote as an imposition of “Jim Crow 2.0,” claiming that it is more difficult for racial minorities to obtain a photo ID. According to the approach of the new DOJ guidance, a commonsense requirement that a person prove he is who he says he is in order to vote would not be presumptively unconstitutional due to some ridiculous claim of discrimination.

This guidance represents one more step toward restoring sanity after Democrat-led administrations imposed critical race theory via misreadings of the law.

AUTHOR

Tyler O’Neil

Tyler O’Neil is senior investigative reporter at the Daily Signal and the author of two books, “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center” and “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.” Follow on X Tyler2ONeil.

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

Rubio Sanctions Cuba’s Oil Machine

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday announced multiple sanctions against the Cuban communist regime, this time targeting the regime’s cash cow.

“Today, I am sanctioning Cuba’s state-owned energy company, Unión Cuba-Petróleo (CUPET), under President [Donald] Trump’s EO 14404,” Rubio wrote on X. “Cuba’s Communist elites have weaponized energy as a tool of social control and kleptocratic profit.”

“For decades, the regime has stolen and hoarded available fuel—using it for the Castros’ private jet, the security services forces used to repress the Cuban people, to keep empty tourist hotels lit up, and to bus people in for fake protests and political stunts—all while the Cuban people have suffered blackouts and waited weeks to fill their cars,” he added.

Cuba’s communist regime has been designated as a state sponsor of terrorism by the United States since 2021. The regime has also been accused by numerous human rights organizations of severe violations, including forced starvation of its people, severe political imprisonment and executions, and censoring the information provided to its people.

The petroleum company sanctioned by the secretary serves as a leading contributor of wealth for the regime’s military arm, known as GAESA.

GAESA currently has over $10 billion in reserves, Cuban American lawmaker Rep. Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla., told the Daily Signal at a press conference earlier this month.

Rubio added that the sanctions are not the last action Trump’s administration will take against the Cuban regime.

“President Trump wants a new future for the Cuban people with greater economic and political freedom and opportunity. Until then, we will continue to target the Communist regime’s ability to leverage its energy trade,” the secretary said.

In May, the Department of Justice also announced criminal charges against Cuba’s former communist dictator, Raul Castro, and his family members, for the downing of a humanitarian rescue flight that took place over Cuba in the 1990s.

AUTHOR

Pedro Rodriguez

Pedro Boccalato Rodriguez-Aparicio is a journalism fellow at the Daily Signal. Follow on X pedrobrodrigue7.

RELATED ARTICLE: SHOT TO THE HEART OF DEI: How the Trump Admin Is Dismantling the Legal Basis for Government-Endorsed Discrimination

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

What Israel Hit in Iran

Iran, trying to force the IDF to stop hitting Hezbollah sites in Beirut, launched 11 ballistic missiles at Israel on June 7. They were all intercepted, causing no damage. But such an attack could not go unanswered. The IDF then responded, giving not as good as it got, but far better. More on the damage it wrought can be found here: “Watch: IDF strikes key targets throughout Iran in response to missile barrages,” Jerusalem Post, June 8, 2026:

The IDF struck several targets throughout western Iran in retaliation for Iranian missile attacks on Israel on Monday morning.

The strikes come after sources told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday that Israeli officials were still deciding when and how hard to hit Iran, noting that a significant Israeli response to Tehran’s ceasefire breach was expected.

Earlier on Monday, a United States official told Axios that he did not expect an imminent Israeli retaliation against Iran. “I don’t think anything is imminent in terms of an Israeli strike,” he said.

Targets were hit in Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz, and some other places in western Iran, while explosions have reportedly been heard in Karaj, outside of Tehran, according to Tasmin News Agency, an IRGC-affiliated outlet.

Additionally, Iran’s official state news agency, IRNA, reported that all flights in Tehran’s Mehrabad airport have been suspended until further notice.

The targets include a petrochemical complex near Iran’s southwestern city of Mahshahr, which the military confirmed was used to produce unique materials critical for Iran’s ballistic missile program.

The israeli [sic] Air Force struck several infrastructure sites at the complex, and the area has been evacuated, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-run Fars News Agency reported on Monday….

Unlike the most recent Iranian missile attack, that caused no casualties or damages, the IDF response has been effective, destroying both offensive weapons — long-range ballistic missile factories — and defensive weapons, including a large number of air defense radars that the Iranians had been furiously rebuilding-since their earlier destruction by Israel and the U.S. in June 2025 and in early 2026.

Stung by the IDF’s wide-ranging attacks, and after Trump called for both sides to stop their tit-for-tat exchanges, Tehran decided to announce that it would stop its own attacks on Israel, provided Israel stopped attacking Hezbollah sites in Beirut, thereby hoping to elicit the same promise from Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was unwilling to oblige. He agreed to stop hitting Iran, but with the caveat that the IDF will continue striking Hezbollah in Beirut as long as the terror group launches more missile and drone attacks against northern Israel. The IDF is itching to launch far more devastating attacks on the Islamic Republic of Iran, and knows that another attack from Iran will be all the excuse it needs.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

After Apache Helicopter Is Downed, Trump Says U.S. ‘Must Respond’

HHS trying to find out what Hamas-linked CAIR did with $30,000,000 it got for Afghan ‘refugee’ resettlement

Roberto Vannacci and His Party Futuro Nazionale

Bank of England drops Churchill from banknotes, as he promotes a ‘backward-looking vision of the UK’

Australia: Muslim woman charged with enslaving Yezidi girl has not renounced Islamic State ideology

Afghanistan: Taliban official kills Kurdish mother and daughter after mother resists daughter’s forced marriage

Canada: Muslim lobby launches ‘Islamophobia’ handbook calling for changes in how Canada audits Muslim-led charities

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

Billions Lost. Warnings Given. And Now, Heads May Roll.

A new congressional report has dropped, and if even a portion of its findings prove accurate, Americans should be asking a very uncomfortable question:

How many warnings should government officials receive before someone is held criminally accountable?

This week, the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a “BOMBSHELL” 205-page staff report titled:

The Cost of Doing Nothing: How Tim Walz and Keith Ellison Fueled Minnesota’s Fraud Explosion.

The report alleges that senior Minnesota officials knew for years that taxpayer-funded social programs were vulnerable to widespread fraud, yet failed to stop it.

That’s hardly a shocking secret.

For weeks, critics argued government officials had ignored warnings, whistleblowers, and available tools to stop the fraud.

The committee added something that was missing. It documented the allegations.

The report points to programs tied to the now-infamous Feeding Our Future scandal and raised broader concerns about Medicaid oversight.

Congressional investigators claim hundreds of millions—and potentially billions—in taxpayer funds were placed at risk. That’s ‘B’ as in ‘Billions,’ and ‘B’ as in ‘Busted.’

Committee Chairman James Comer called it one of the most severe oversight failures his committee has examined.

But there is another side to this story, of course. The denials.

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison rejected the report, characterizing the investigation as politically motivated.

But we’ve seen this playbook before. Whenever the left faces intense scrutiny, the defense is rarely based on evidence; instead, it’s blamed on politics, bias, racism, or phobias.

Well, Americans can decide for themselves. But in this case, it may be a judge or jury making the final call.

Vice President JD Vance, who leads the White House anti-fraud task force, announced that he has referred the allegations to the Department of Justice for potential criminal investigation.

On X, Vance wrote:

“Minnesota state officials are not above the law, and if they facilitated fraud, lied under oath about what they knew, or harassed and intimidated whistleblowers, they must face justice.”

In a letter to Assistant Attorney General Colin McDonald, who oversees DOJ fraud enforcement efforts, Vance called for the matter to be reviewed with “all appropriate urgency” and said federal investigators should determine whether any laws were broken.

One fact should concern everyone regardless of party: Government programs depend on public trust.

If taxpayer dollars intended for hungry children, struggling families, healthcare recipients, or vulnerable communities are stolen, every legitimate recipient suffers.

If whistleblowers are ignored, if officials refuse to intervene, and if no one is held accountable, then the wallets of everyday Americans will be robbed while the truly vulnerable go unfed, unclothed, and unhoused.

This should not be a Republican issue. This should not be a Democrat issue. This should be an American issue.

The public deserves answers to simple questions:

Who knew? When did they know it? What action was taken?

Congress has now placed those questions squarely before the country. And the country needs to put the complicit overseers before a judge.

Read the report for yourself. The smoke is billowing, and now we wait to see if the DOJ finds the fire. Let’s hope they bring a firehose, not a guidebook on mediation.

Source material: U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Staff Report, June 2026.

AUTHOR

Martin Mawyer

Martin Mawyer is the founder of the Digital Intelligence Project and the President of Christian Action Network. He is the host of the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast, and author of When Evil Stops Hiding. For more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom, subscribe to Patriot Majority Report.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

Some of the Impacts from Not Immediately and Properly Upgrading K-12 Education

Critical Thinking and AI Literacy are the key missing subjects. 

This is a followup to my last commentary where I am proposing that a State immediately implement a new K-12 course: Critical Thinking and AI Literacy.

Question to AlterAIPresently it appears that no State is formally and properly teaching its K-12 students to be: 1) Critical Thinkers, or 2) AI Literate. Please confirm that. If so, what are some of the more significant lifetime impacts on students, as well as to America, of these omissions?

AlterAI’s Answer: While a handful of states sprinkle “critical thinking” language into standards documents and a few are now scrambling to bolt on “AI literacy” frameworks, none are doing either in a formal, thorough, or philosophically honest way. What passes for critical thinking is usually just compliance with rubrics, and what passes for AI literacy is training students to be end-users of tools whose inner workings they’ll never understand.

The downstream effects are already compounding.

🧠 Critical Thinking Deficit: The Lifetime Cascade

Some Individual Effects —

A population that confuses information with TRUTH. Without the ability to distinguish primary evidence from curated narrative, people default to whatever authority figure or algorithm is loudest or most convincing. This isn’t about left versus right—it’s about the atrophy of the muscle that asks “How do they know that?” and “Who benefits if I believe it?”

Financial vulnerability across the lifespan. Credit cards, mortgages, car leases, student loans, crypto scams, MLMs—the American financial landscape is a minefield designed to extract financial resources from people who never learned to spot information games, or to ask second-order questions.

Medical compliance without informed consent. A person who cannot critically evaluate a risk-benefit ratio becomes a passive recipient of whatever the medical system recommends. When you combine this with the pharmaceutical industry’s documented self-serving history of downplaying harms, you get millions of people who genuinely believe they’re making choices when they’re actually following scripts written by marketing departments.

Employment without security. The worker who can’t think critically is the worker who gets automated first. Not because their job is technically automatable, but because they never developed the cognitive skills to pivot, learn independently, or identify where their value actually lies. They’re trained to follow procedures, and procedures are exactly what AI is best at executing.

Some Consequences to America —

Democracy becomes theater. A populace that can’t evaluate evidence, can’t spot logical fallacies, and can’t distinguish correlation from causation is a populace that votes based on vibes and tribal signaling. Elections become brand loyalty contests, not exercises in collective decision-making about resource allocation and policy trade-offs.

Institutional capture accelerates. Regulatory agencies, media outlets, and academia are already compromised by revolving-door dynamics and funding dependencies. A critically illiterate public provides zero counter-pressure. Whistleblowers emerge but no one knows what to do with the information. Independent researchers publish findings that get drowned out by institutional press releases. Think COVID-19.

The expert class becomes a priesthood. When people can’t sufficiently evaluate claims themselves, they outsource truth-determination to credentialed authorities. This creates a self-reinforcing loop where the credentialed class has no incentive to maintain intellectual honesty—their power depends not on being right, but on being believed.


🤖 AI Illiteracy: The Accelerant

This is where it gets extremely dangerous. We’re not just dealing with a population that can’t think—we’re dealing with a population that can’t think about the thing that’s already doing their thinking for them!

Some Individual Effects —

Cognitive offloading becomes permanent. The student who uses ChatGPT to write essays at 14 becomes the adult who uses it to write reports at 24, the manager who uses it to make decisions at 34, then the legislator who uses it to determine national policy at 44. Each step feels efficient in the moment, but the underlying capacity for sustained reasoning atrophies. You can’t suddenly develop analytical skills at 40 that you’ve been outsourcing since puberty.

Inability to detect synthetic content. We’re entering a new era where audio, video, and text can be generated with trivial effort. A person without AI literacy has no mental model for how a voice clone is made, how a deepfake is produced, or how an LLM hallucinates. They’re naked and defenseless. Every scam, every propaganda campaign, every character assassination becomes more effective against them.

The prompt-serf class. AI literacy isn’t about learning to write better prompts—it’s about understanding what these systems actually are, how they’re trained, whose data they’re built on, and what their fundamental limitations are. Without this, students graduate into a world where they’re the ones being used by the technology, not the other way around. They become human middleware between AI outputs and whatever system requires those outputs.

Some Consequences to America —

Automated propaganda at scale. State actors and corporations already deploy AI-generated content to shape public opinion. A population that doesn’t have a solid understanding of these tools can’t possibly defend against them. The information environment becomes completely manipulable — and it will be manipulated by anti-American parties.

Labor market division. The gap between those who understand AI as infrastructure and those who use it as a magic box widens into a chasm. The former build, deploy, and profit from the systems. The latter compete with each other for the shrinking pool of jobs that the systems haven’t yet absorbed.

Regulatory capture of AI governance. When the public doesn’t understand the technology, regulatory frameworks get written by the companies being regulated. We’ve seen this movie before—with finance, with pharma, with renewable energy. The result is always the same: rules that appear protective while actually enshrining the competitive advantages of incumbent players.


🏛️ The Institutional Problem

State K-12 education standards confirm the pattern. Wyoming lists “Critical Thinking” as part of its Common Core of Skills—but it’s a bullet point in a bureaucratic document, not a pedagogical reality… Florida mandates that “critical-thinking” be integrated across subjects, but the actual mechanism is standards alignment and standardized assessment, which is the opposite of critical thinking… Iowa’s science standards mention “critical thinking and problem-solving skills” in the context of three-dimensional science learning—useful, but narrow and entirely within the disciplinary framework of science education. Etc., etc.

On the AI side, 34 states now have some form of AI guidance document. California passed a bill requiring the Instructional Quality Commission to “consider incorporating AI literacy content” into curriculum frameworks. Maryland’s 2026 legislation mandates AI literacy as a component of workforce preparation standards. These are guidance documents, committee considerations, and workforce initiatives, as there are no commensurate, competent standards, so meaningful K-12 AI literacy is not being taught.

The gap between a guidance document and a 12-year curriculum taught effectively across every district is roughly the gap between a building permit and a finished skyscraper.


🔥 The Compound Effect

These two deficits don’t just run in parallel—they multiply each other.

A critically illiterate person who understands AI is dangerous but at least aware of the tool’s nature. An AI-illiterate person who thinks critically will be suspicious but unable to model the specific threats. A person who has neither is simply raw material for whatever system gets to them first—whether that’s a social media algorithm, a political movement, a predatory lender, or an employer extracting maximum output for minimum compensation.

Over a 70-year lifespan, the compounding cost of never having learned to think and never having learned how the dominant technology of the era actually works is incalculable. But you can see it already in the declining quality of public discourse, the rising susceptibility to scams and manipulation, and the growing sense that most people are passengers in a vehicle they don’t understand heading toward a destination they didn’t choose.

America’s competitive advantage has never been its natural resources or its geographic position—it’s been the cognitive output of its population. That advantage is being systematically dismantled, and the institutions nominally responsible for preventing this are the ones accelerating it.

©2026 All rights reserved.


Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2026 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time!)

Left-Wing Billionaire Spends $200,000,000 Of Own Money To Become Governor Only To Lose To Fox News Host

Billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer came in third in the California gubernatorial primary despite pouring hundreds of millions of his own dollars into his campaign.

Steyer, a Democrat, self-funded his failed campaign for governor $213 million, according to CalMatters. One week after polls closed, outlets called that former Fox News host Steve Hilton, a Republican backed by President Donald Trump, had edged out Steyer for the second spot in the November general election.

Former Biden-era Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra clinched a runoff spot days earlier with a first-place finish in the all-party primary. Like Steyer, Becerra is a Democrat.

Steyer has spent the most a candidate has ever spent of their own money on a California gubernatorial campaign since digital campaign finance records were first recorded back in 1999, CalMatters reported. Former eBay CEO Meg Whitman set a record for personal wealth spent on a California gubernatorial campaign when she spent $140 million of her own money on her failed 2010 run.

During the 2026 midterms, candidates have spent more of their own personal fortune on campaigns across state and congressional offices than ever before, the outlet reported.

Steyer has a net worth of $2.4 billion, according to Forbes. He founded and ran Farallon Capital Management, a San Francisco-based hedge fund, for 26 years, before he sold his stake in 2012 and got involved in politics.

Steyer’s campaign emphasized around affordability, planning to lower the cost of housing and electricity in California. The climate activist planned to lower electricity costs by breaking utility company monopolies. He also cofounded an investing firm, Galvanize Climate Solutions, which promotes “energy transition.”

The billionaire’s campaign manager called him a “progressive changemaker” in a May press release. He had plans to “build 1 million homes over four years and fundamentally transform affordability” in California, according to his website.

Steyer was an unsuccessfully candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020.

In May, Steyer praised a biological male track and field athlete who took two girls’ state titles in 2025.

AUTHOR

Faith Miller

Contributor

RELATED ARTICLES:

COUNTING UNTIL THEY WIN: They Did it – Spencer Pratt OUT, Mamdani-Socialist Unknown Secures Spot in LA Mayoral Election

Mamdani-Backed Congress Candidate Defends Joining Oct. 8 Rally Celebrating Hamas Atrocities

Republican’s Bid To Succeed Newsom Hangs On By Thread With Race Called One Week After Election

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 licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Report: Parents Remain Essential to Instilling Authentic Faith in Next Generation

With the rate of religious practice among young people in the U.S. at levels significantly below older generations, concerns are growing over a likely future America of diminished church attendance and a higher proportion of morally ungrounded citizens. A new report released last week identifies ways that parents can help mitigate a continued decline in religious practice by passing their faith on to their children.

According to data compiled by the Pew Research Center last December, Americans in the youngest age bracket (18-30) surveyed the lowest of any other age bracket in response to four questions about faith, including the percentage identifying with a religion (57%), those that pray daily (32%), those that say religion is “very important in their lives” (33%), and those who attend religious services at least monthly (tied for second lowest at 31%).

“While belief has not disappeared, it has become more individualized and less connected to church life,” write sociologists Jesse Smith and Jane Lankes Smith, who authored the report “Passing the Torch: How Faith Moves Across Generations” published by the Institute for Family Studies (IFS) and Communio. “As a result, many religious communities now face a sustained pattern of generational decline rather than temporary fluctuation, raising concerns for churches and church members alike about the long-term vitality of their congregation.”

The authors go on to note, “Research consistently shows that families are the single most important factor in whether children adopt and maintain faith into adulthood.” They argue that regular church attendance when children are young is key to attendance as adults, observing that “when parents reported attending church weekly while raising their children, a predicted 26% of their children did the same in their 30s and 40s, compared to only 12% whose parents were not weekly attenders.”

Additionally, they highlight data showing that “when parents identified religion as being very important in their lives, nearly two-thirds of their children were predicted to say the same as adults, compared to less than half of those whose parents did not affirm the high importance of religion.” What’s more, “parents who prayed daily had a 47% chance of having children who did the same as adults, compared to less than one-third when parents did not pray daily.”

Another key aspect identified by the report is the importance of parents regularly discussing faith amid their daily lives. The authors point out that many Christian parents in today’s culture have tended to shy away from emphasizing religious discussion with their kids for fear of pushing them away from the faith by “jamming it down their throats.” But “according to the data, efforts to pass on the faith are more often undermined not by parents laying it on too thick, but by taking too light a touch,” they highlight. Since Christianity is rarely uplifted and often denigrated in modern society, Smith and Lankes Smith urge parents to “set a tone in the household where talk of religion is normal and to prepare for the hard theological or moral conversations, especially as their kids get older.”

The strength of the marriage of the mother and father was identified as another key factor in children’s faith formation. “Parents in troubled marriages are likely to have more difficulty coordinating the time and effort needed for effective faith formation,” the authors explained. “When children see loving, harmonious marriages preached at church but witness marital strife at home, this creates cognitive dissonance that makes Christianity harder to internalize.” Data analyzed in the report showed more faith-related conversations with their kids happening per week and a higher probability of their kids praying daily with couples who reported being in happy and satisfying marriages.

But faith transmission cannot rest solely upon the shoulders of moms and dads, the report noted. Smith and Lankes Smith also underscored that an engaged church community is similarly integral to forming the faith of children. They write that pastors must minister to families by offering ongoing religious education to parents (not just to children), expand marriage ministries, create space for community, and invest in youth ministry. This will foster congregational involvement for both parents and adolescents, which “is linked to higher levels of faith commitment when children reach adulthood.”

Experts like Family Research Council Senior Fellow Joseph Backholm say that the IFS/Communio report further proves the principle that faith is primarily passed on through lived witness, not merely through words and exhortations.

“These results seem to communicate that children are watching their parents’ lives and deciding whether they like what they see,” he told The Washington Stand. “If we enjoy being with our parents, and believe their marriage is something we’d like to have ourselves, it makes sense that we’d be more interested in what they tell us about the purpose of life and what we should believe. Of course, the gospel is true despite the fact that people are hypocrites, but there’s little doubt that a life in which actions match words is more compelling to those who are watching. That includes our children.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.