Blog

Progressives misdiagnose their X problem

In the year 2002, then US-President George W. Bush did something historic: He became the first sitting US President in decades to see his party gain seats in midterm elections.

This came, at the time, as something of a shock to the still-dominant and still reliably liberal mainstream news outlets in the US. The punditry, as the votes rolled in, was one of shock and surprise and “how could this have happened?” – scenes that would be repeated on election night two years later, and then taken to their absolute extreme in 2016 as Donald Trump consigned the First. Woman. President. to an electoral footnote.

Anyway, that election night has always stuck with me because of an exchange that took place on, I think, CNN between Democrat political advisor James Carville and Bush advisor Karl Rove. “Democrats just didn’t get their message out this time”, intoned Carville, somberly. “No”, replied Rove. “You guys always say that.” “The problem is not that you didn’t get your message out, it is that you did, and people didn’t like it”.

That particular exchange has come to mind in recent days watching the latest round of the twitter/X wars. Yesterday, Una Mullally took to the pages of the Irish Times to become the latest liberal pundit to denounce X. Over in the UK, there is talk of a ban. An internet blackout, of sorts, in a democratic country, preventing the public from accessing Elon Musk’s digital playground. Similar discussions are apparently happening in Australia, Canada, and of course in Brussels.

The official reason is of course that people are shocked, shocked to discover that there is porn on the internet and that AI tools are capable of digitally altering images to remove people’s clothes (I consider myself fortunate enough that nobody would ever wish to do that to me, for the sake of their eyes). But there’s an unofficial reason too, and it’s openly admitted. Here’s Una:

“Politicians need to realise that X is not Twitter. Under Musk, X is a vast disinformation network, a hotbed of racism, hate, extremism and dystopian delusions. It is a radicalisation tool, an arena of harassment, and yes, its chatbot is a creator, publisher and distributor of awful material.”

Note the “and yes” there at the end before she gets to Grok. It’s as plain an admission that you’ll see that the AI porn problem is an ancillary reason, not the primary reason, why politicians should be taking action. The primary reasons are set out in detail before hand: Disinformation, racism, hate, extremism, and something called dystopian delusions.

(Seriously, one might have thought the notion that governments should ban online discussion forums to save democracy from the people was a “dystopian delusion”. Evidently not.)

Keep reading

When Physicians Are Replaced with a Protocol

My experience in medicine allows me to distinguish between genuine innovation and subtle reclassification that fundamentally alters practice while appearing unchanged. Artificial intelligence has recently attracted considerable attention, including the widely circulated assertion that AI has been “legally authorized to practice medicine” in the United States. Interpreted literally, this claim is inaccurate. No medical board has licensed a machine. No algorithm has sworn an oath, accepted fiduciary duty, or assumed personal liability for patient harm. No robot physician is opening a clinic, billing insurers, or standing before a malpractice jury.

However, stopping at this observation overlooks the broader issue. Legal concepts of liability are currently being redefined, often without public awareness.

A significant transformation is underway, warranting more than either reflexive dismissal or uncritical technological enthusiasm. The current development is not the licensure of artificial intelligence as a physician, but rather the gradual erosion of medicine’s core boundary: the intrinsic link between clinical judgment and human accountability. Clinical judgment involves making informed decisions tailored to each patient’s unique needs and circumstances, requiring empathy, intuition, and a deep understanding of medical ethics.

Human accountability refers to the responsibility healthcare providers assume for these decisions and their outcomes. This erosion is not the result of dramatic legislation or public debate, but occurs quietly through pilot programs, regulatory reinterpretations, and language that intentionally obscures responsibility. Once this boundary dissolves, medicine is transformed in ways that are difficult to reverse.

The main concern isn’t whether AI can refill prescriptions or spot abnormal lab results. Medicine has long used tools, and healthcare providers generally welcome help that reduces administrative tasks or improves pattern recognition. The real issue is whether medical judgment—deciding on the right actions, patients, and risks—can be viewed as a computer-generated outcome separated from moral responsibility. Historically, efforts to disconnect judgment from accountability have often caused harm without taking ownership.

Recent developments clarify the origins of current confusion. In several states, limited pilot programs now allow AI-driven systems to assist with prescription renewals for stable chronic conditions under narrowly defined protocols. At the federal level, proposed legislation has considered whether artificial intelligence might qualify as a “practitioner” for specific statutory purposes, provided it is appropriately regulated. These initiatives are typically presented as pragmatic responses to physician shortages, access delays, and administrative inefficiencies. While none explicitly designates AI as a physician, collectively they normalize the more concerning premise that medical actions can occur without a clearly identifiable human decision-maker.

In practice, this distinction is fundamental. Medicine is defined not by the mechanical execution of tasks, but by the assignment of responsibility when outcomes are unfavorable. Writing a prescription is straightforward; accepting responsibility for its consequences—particularly when considering comorbidities, social context, patient values, or incomplete information—is far more complex. Throughout my career, this responsibility has continuously resided with a human who could be questioned, challenged, corrected, and held accountable. When Dr. Smith makes an error, the family knows whom to contact, ensuring a direct line to human accountability. No algorithm, regardless of sophistication, can fulfill this role.

The primary risk is not technological, but regulatory and philosophical. This transition represents a shift from virtue ethics to proceduralism. When lawmakers and institutions redefine medical decision-making as a function of systems rather than personal acts, the moral framework of medicine changes. Accountability becomes diffuse, harm is more difficult to attribute, and responsibility shifts from clinicians to processes, from judgment to protocol adherence. When errors inevitably occur, the prevailing explanation becomes that ‘the system followed established guidelines.’ Recognizing this transition clarifies the shift from individualized ethical decision-making to mechanized procedural compliance.

Keep reading

Chaos Erupts as Hundreds of Somalis Storm ICE Operation at Strip Mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota

Hundreds of Somalis stormed an ICE operation in St. Cloud, Minnesota, on Monday after a Somali news station live streamed the raid.

ICE agents were surrounded by hundreds of Somalis blowing whistles and protesting as the officers conducted a raid on a Somali-owned business in a strip mall.

“ICE out! ICE out!” the mob of Somali protestors shouted.

Ice agents deployed tear gas to disperse the protestors after they blocked their vehicles from exiting the parking lot.

Democrat State Senator Aric Putnam was spotted amid the chaos trying to act like a barrier between the protestors and federal agents.

“Don’t even get close,” Putnam says as he pushes back on the protestors.

“It’s a stressful moment, a really intense confrontation. It’s a reasonable response when you see this in your neighborhood,” Democrat State Senator Aric Putnam said.

“The idea that you need 50 people with weapons and tear gas, and I’m not speaking real well because I got a little bit of pepper spray, those things are not needed for a normal, regular, authentic, genuine law enforcement operation,” Putnam whined.

According to CBS News, at least two people were arrested during the protest.

“Federal agents arrested one person as part of the raid, and later, two protesters in the parking lot. Many of the businesses there are run by the Somali community,” CBS reported.

Keep reading

House Dems Want Their Own Voters To Get Shot in Name of Trump Resistance

Fox News correspondent Aishah Hasnie and commentator Clay Travis discussed a resurfaced Axios report that detailed internal conversations among House Democrats about escalating confrontations at Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities as part of anti-Trump activism.

The exchange focused on the implications of the report, concerns over public safety, and the political motivations behind confrontational protest tactics.

Hasnie introduced the segment by citing the Axios reporting, describing it as alarming and newly circulating again online

“Axios story that made my jaw drop a couple of months ago, and it sort of come back online on the Twitter world, and this is what they wrote. They talked to Democrats who were talking to their constituents, and they were telling them to get shot for the anti Trump resistance. This is what one of those Democrats, House Democrats told Axios, some of them have suggested what we really need to do is be willing to get shot when visiting ice facilities or federal agencies. And then goes on to say our own base is telling us that what we’re doing is not enough. There needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public. That’s coming from House Democrats. That’s what they’re hearing from their constituents,” Hasnie said.

The Axios report described Democratic lawmakers recounting pressure from activists who believed peaceful protests were insufficient and that violent or deadly confrontations would force greater media attention and political change.

The report did not attribute the statements to named lawmakers but cited them as direct comments provided to Axios.

Travis responded by criticizing what he described as a deliberate strategy to provoke dangerous encounters with federal law enforcement.

Keep reading

Minnesota AG Keith Ellison and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey Announce They’re Suing Trump Admin. to End Surge of ICE Agents – ICE Director Responds to Lawsuit

Minnesota’s top ‘law enforcement’ official and the two Twin City mayors today took a dramatic and unconstitutional step in their efforts to send ICE agents packing from the state following last week’s deadly ICE self-defense shooting.

As KTSP reported, crooked Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, and St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her have jointly sued the Trump administration over DHS agents enforcing immigration law in the Twin Cities.

The lawsuit filed by the trio seeks to completely end the so-called “unprecedented surge” of more than 2,000 federal agents deployed by the DHS.

The filing also alleges that the federal government has violated the 10th Amendment of the Constitution by removing Minnesota’s “right’ to police itself.”

During a press conference announcing the lawsuit, Ellison accused the DHS agents of causing “serious harm” and said the Trump Administration has launched a federal invasion.

“The deployment of thousands of armed, masked DHS agents to Minnesota has done our state serious harm,” Ellison alleged. “This is essentially a federal invasion of Minnesota and the Twin Cities, and it must stop.”

Keep reading

CA Mayor Drops a Bombshell On the NGO Scheme Defrauding Americans

El Cajon Mayor Bill Wells appeared in an interview with Real America’s Voice host Dan Ball to criticize California’s homeless funding structure, arguing that billions of dollars intended to address homelessness are being allocated without input from local governments most affected by the crisis.

Wells said cities like El Cajon, which he said have absorbed a disproportionate share of San Diego County’s homeless population, are excluded from decisions about how homelessness funds are distributed.

He placed blame on the California Homeless Task Force and county leadership, saying elected local officials are sidelined while non-governmental organizations control the money.

“The County board says we have no idea how much is spent. To make matters worse. They’re in conjunction with a homeless Task Force, that they’re the people who are on that homeless Task Force decide where all the money goes,” Wells said.

“Well, guess who serves on that homeless Task Force. All the heads of the NGOs. So the NGO’s get to make the decisions about where the money is spent and guess where they spend it?”

Ball interrupted Wells to clarify his point, comparing the structure to allowing those who benefit from the funds to control their distribution.

“I’m sorry to interrupt you, but are you telling me that’s like letting the inmates run a prison, so the people that get to say where the money goes. Are the people that are getting the money in the nonprofit groups,” Ball asked.

Keep reading

Banning Wall Street From Buying Houses Is Great, But Trump Needs To Do More

While walking through a very Midwest USA mid-tier neighborhood in an outer suburb last summer, a young couple passing by with two young children told me they were admiring all the “beautiful houses.” The father was a union worker and did jobs on the side to earn more. The mother stayed with the small children. They lived in an apartment. 

There are many young American families like this — doing everything right, but still, unless given money from parents for a down payment, priced out of home ownership. Home prices relative to incomes have soared since the market bottomed in 2012, especially since the 2020 Covid panic. From 2022-2023, even as home prices relative to incomes continued to climb higher, mortgage rates doubled and remain at this higher level today. Obviously, mortgage rates have been much higher in the past. But the toxic combination is the high price of homes relative to incomes, paired with these higher mortgage rates. 

That’s why it’s encouraging that President Trump is moving to make homes more affordable. Last week, Trump announced he is “taking steps to ban large institutional investors from buying more single-family homes.” Trump specifically mentioned young Americans struggling with housing affordability and said the administration would launch more proposals in the next several weeks to make housing more affordable. The White House’s proposals need to be hard-hitting and not tinker around the edges of a major problem.

Keep reading

52-Yr-Old Apartment Manager Caught STEALING BALLOTS of Former Tenants and VOTING For Them

We’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: if anyone believes there are only one or two ways elections are being stolen, they aren’t paying attention to reports by The Gateway Pundit, which continues to reveal the multitude of ways criminal minds have worked to steal local, state, and federal elections.

On January 8, 2026, it was reported that President Trump would sign an Executive Order before the midterm election to ban mail-in absentee ballots (with rare exceptions) and voting machines. In a statement he posted first on Truth Social, President Trump said he would be leading a movement to “get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS.”

President Trump wrote: “We are now the only Country in the World that uses Mail-In Voting. All others gave it up because of the MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD ENCOUNTERED. WE WILL BEGIN THIS EFFORT, WHICH WILL BE STRONGLY OPPOSED BY THE DEMOCRATS BECAUSE THEY CHEAT AT LEVELS NEVER SEEN BEFORE, by signing an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections.”

In his statement, President Trump preemptively addressed the objections Democrats will shriek over the removal of their preferred, very insecure mail-in voting method by reminding everyone that states are merely “agents of the federal government in counting and tabulating the votes.”

Keep reading

Democrats Who Let Covid-Era Child Tax Credits Expire Now Cry ‘Crisis’ Over Lapsing Obamacare Giveaway

ontrary to the media’s blaring headlines about “the health care crisis,” there’s another question the press should answer but won’t. To wit: Why is it only a “crisis” when a Covid-era entitlement expires on Republicans’ watch?

While Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., eggs on the press by pontificating about a “health care crisis” caused by the recent expiration of enhanced Obamacare subsidies, he and his colleagues selectively and cynically ignore the recent past. The same Senate Democrats who now call the lapse of enhanced Obamacare subsidies a “crisis” let a far larger Covid-era program expire on their own party’s watch with barely a peep of objection.

Covid-era Child Tax Credit

In 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act, enacted in the Biden administration’s opening months, significantly expanded the child tax credit. The law increased the maximum available credit from $2,000 per child to $3,600 per child under age 6, and $3,000 for other kids under age 18. It also made the credit fully refundable for families with no income tax liability and provided for periodic monthly disbursements to beneficiaries. But fiscal and political constraints meant that the legislation enhanced the child tax credit for 2021 only.

House Democrats included a one-year extension of the enhanced child tax credit in their so-called Build Back Better legislation, which they passed in November 2021. But objections from Sen. Joe Manchin to the costly House bill meant Schumer spent months negotiating a slimmed-down package with the West Virginia Democrat.

Senate Democrats Oppose an Extension

When that smaller package came to the Senate floor in August 2022 without an extension of the enhanced child tax credit, Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont offered an amendment extending the program for four years, funded by a corporate tax hike. All of Sanders’ Senate colleagues present that day, including all Senate Democrats, voted against his amendment, with two not voting.

On the Senate floor, Sens. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Michael Bennet, D-Colo., both claimed they supported an extension but could not vote for Sanders’ amendment for fear it would kill the entire bill. Sanders responded with a reasonable enough question: Even if Manchin opposed his amendment, “Why would … getting 48 votes on this amendment bring the overall bill down?” He received no substantive reply.

The enhanced child tax credit that expired on Democrats’ watch had a far bigger effect than the enhanced Obamacare subsidies. Internal Revenue Service data shows that in 2021, just under 62 million children received child tax credit payments, nearly triple the roughly 21 million Americans with subsidized Obamacare coverage. The child tax credit also had a larger fiscal consequence; a permanent extension would have cost nearly $1.6 trillion over ten years, or more than four times as much as a $350 billion permanent revival of the enhanced Obamacare subsidies.

Keep reading

If Fraud In Minnesota Looks Bad, Wait Till You See Gavin Newsom’s California 

As a former California state assemblyman who spent four years on the Budget Committee, I had a front-row seat to Sacramento’s obsession with “pulling down” federal dollars, turning welfare programs into a free-for-all.

Then-state Auditor Elaine Howle ran a lean operation, issuing spot-on reports about waste and vulnerabilities — and getting ignored time and again. California maximized payments for SNAP, Medi-Cal, and unemployment insurance with little regard for fraud controls.

That same reckless mindset has fueled scandals across blue states, with Minnesota serving as the appetizer to California’s main course of fiscal disaster.

Minnesota’s Feeding Our Future fraud — where crooks were convicted last March of pocketing $250-300 million in federal child nutrition funds by claiming phantom meals for kids — was a mere fraction of what was to come.

Today, Minnesota’s likely fraud toll has ballooned, with nearly $9 billion in suspected Medicaid scams since 2018, involving fake providers, ghost services, and out-of-state hustlers. Despite 80 charged, 50-plus guilty pleas, and assets like luxury cars forfeited in the Feeding Our Future scam, recoveries are a drop in the bucket. State agencies have ignored red flags, paralyzed by fears of discrimination lawsuits — or even just being labeled “racists.” And that allowed fraudsters to run wild.

But if Minnesota’s the starter, California’s the feast.

The Golden State’s Covid-19 unemployment insurance debacle at the Employment Development Department (EDD) was a masterclass in negligence: $177 billion paid out, with fraud hitting $20 billion by official counts and up to $32.6 billion by independent estimates. Scammers exploited lax ID checks, using stolen Social Security numbers for bogus claims while the real workers who owned those SSNs labored for their daily bread.

The financial recoveries? Pathetic.

And now, in an effort to repay $20-23 billion in federal loans, businesses have been slapped with their fifth year of Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) surcharges — $84 per employee extra in 2025, rising yearly. In other words, Gavin Newsom’s California punishes job creators for his government’s failure. Interest could soon top $1 billion annually, with ongoing unemployment insurance shortfalls piling on.

Then there’s the expansion of Medi-Cal to cover illegal aliens, fully implemented in 2024. Promised costs: $3 billion or more a year. Actual costs: $9.5 billion, with $8.4 million coming from the General Fund in 2024-25, enrollment nearing 2 million, and per-person expenses soaring.

California isn’t legally allowed to spend federal money on covering illegal aliens. But through the magic of financial fungibility, California has figured out how to force taxpayers in Texas and Florida to pick up the tab. This must stop.

Facing a big budget blowout, Sacramento froze new adult enrollments from January 2026, axed dental benefits for this group, and slapped on $30 monthly premiums starting in 2027. All of this is projected to save roughly $80 million short-term but billions over time.

Yet it still drains resources from citizens, pulling in indirect federal funds while exposing taxpayers to runaway costs.

Keep reading