Tag: politics

Cackling Sellout Kamala Harris ‘Leaning Toward Entering California Governor’s Race in 2026’

On Sunday, June 22, The Hill reported that failed 2020 and 2024 presidential candidate Kamala Harris is “leaning toward entering the [2026] California gubernatorial race, per sources familiar with the former vice president’s thinking.”

“While the sources caution that Harris hasn’t made a final decision yet and is still considering all her options, they say she has made it clear that she is not done with public service and is giving the race strong consideration. Those who have spoken to Harris about the possibility of entering the race say it has given her a renewed sense of excitement and, as one source put it, ‘a glimmer in her eyes,” The Hill reported.

The American people were forced to endure watching Kamala Harris babble and cackle her way across the 2024 presidential campaign trail, once Joe Biden finally malfunctioned to the point that Democrats launched a backroom coup to cancel Biden’s candidacy.

Now, Harris appears keen on inflicting her latest assault against the downtrodden Republic of California, the world’s 4th largest GDP, estimated at $4.1 trillion, greater than all nations of the world besides the US, China, and Germany.

Keep reading

‘Trans’ Congressman Says Democrats Went Too Far on ‘Trans’ Rights Push

Facing mounting political backlash and growing public fatigue, a high-profile Democrat is urging his party to reevaluate its aggressive push on “trans” issues. 

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE), who made history in 2024 as the first openly trans-identifying person elected to Congress, is now calling for a reset, warning that Democrats may have gone too far.

In a recent interview with The New York Times’ Ezra Klein, McBride acknowledged that the progressive movement advanced too far, too fast, without bringing the public along. 

“We as a coalition went to Trans 201, Trans 301, when people were still at a very much Trans 101 stage,” he explained.

According to McBride, the party’s absolutist stance on “trans” policies and broader progressive ideals may have alienated key segments of the electorate. 

He argued that the movement’s pursuit of “every single perfect policy and cultural norm” failed to account for where the public truly stands.

“It misunderstands the role that politicians and, frankly, social movements have in maintaining proximity to public opinion, of walking people to a place,” McBride said.

He pointed to what he called a sense of “cultural aggression” that developed around “trans” advocacy, suggesting that it allowed Republicans to present themselves as reacting to extremism rather than instigating conflict. 

“We’re punishing trans people because of their actions. Rather than: We’re going after innocent bystanders,” McBride said of how GOP messaging has reframed the debate.

The freshman congressman also leveled broader criticism at the progressive movement, saying, “We became absolutist — not just on trans rights but across the progressive movement — and we forgot that in a democracy we have to grapple with where the public authentically is and actually engage with it. Part of this is fostered by social media.”

These comments mark a notable shift from McBride’s previous public stance. 

Keep reading

Trump faces uproar from MAGA base over possible Iran strike

The prospect of a U.S. strike against Iran has exposed divisions in the coalition of supporters that brought President Donald Trump to power, with some of his base urging him not to get the country involved in a new Middle East war.

Some of Trump’s most prominent Republican allies, including top lieutenant Steve Bannon, have found themselves in the unusual position of being at odds with a president who largely shares their isolationist tendencies.

Bannon, one of many influential voices from Trump’s “America First” coalition, on Wednesday urged caution about the U.S. military joining Israel in trying to destroy Iran’s nuclear program in the absence of a diplomatic deal.

“We can’t do this again,” Bannon told reporters at an event sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor in Washington. “We’ll tear the country apart. We can’t have another Iraq.”

The anti-interventionist part of the Republican Party is watching with alarm as Trump has moved swiftly from seeking a peaceful diplomatic settlement with Iran to possibly having the United States support Israel’s military campaign, including the use of a 30,000-pound “bunker buster” bomb.

The criticism shows the opposition Trump could face from his right-leaning “Make America Great Again” flank should he join the fight, a step that Iran has warned would have big consequences for Americans without specifying what that might be.

A decision by Trump to enter the conflict would be a sharp departure from his usual caution about foreign entanglements. It could impact his campaign to foster good relations in the Gulf and could be a distraction from his efforts to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine and make tariff deals with countries around the world.

The MAGA coalition propelled Trump into office in the 2016 and 2024 elections and remains critically important to him even though he is prevented by the U.S. Constitution from running for a third term.

Upsetting that base could erode Trump’s popularity and factor into whether Republicans hang on to control of Congress in the 2026 midterm elections.

Keep reading

Green Party Politician Suggests AfD Supporters Should Be Refused Organ Donations

A Green Party councilor, Julia Probst from the city of Weißenhorn, publicly asked in a survey whether her followers would agree to an organ donation if the potential recipient was an Alternative for Germany (AfD) voter.

The survey, taken by nearly 4,000 users, saw about a quarter say they would not agree to an organ donation; however, the vast majority said they would, amounting to 76 percent.

Her post was met with severe criticism from many users, with some accusing her of linking organ donation to political leanings.

One user, who wrote he was an “AfD opponent,” argued that as a first responder, he “first helps a person and not a ‘party affiliation.” He noted that linking organ donation to political affiliation was “inconceivable.”

The user also said: The wording of the question is very confusing to me? Do I have left-wing or right-wing blood?”

Many users with green hearts in their profiles, indicating their support for the Green Party, also took offense at the question. The majority of posters said that organ donation should not be linked to voting intention.

Probst has since locked her X account.

Keep reading

The Real National Emergency: Endless Wars, Failing Infrastructure, and a Dying Republic

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.”—President Dwight D. Eisenhower (April 16, 1953)

Seventy years after President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned about the cost of a military-industrial complex, America is still stealing from its own people to fund a global empire.

In 2025 alone, the U.S. has launched airstrikes in Yemen (Operation Rough Rider), bombed Houthi-controlled ports and radar installations (killing scores of civilians), deployed greater numbers of troops and multiple aircraft carriers to the Middle East, and edged closer to direct war with Iran in support of Israel’s escalating conflict.

Each of these “new” fronts has been sold to the public as national defense. In truth, they are the latest outposts in a decades-long campaign of empire maintenance—one that lines the pockets of defense contractors while schools crumble, bridges collapse, and veterans sleep on the streets at home.

This isn’t about national defense. This is empire maintenance.

It’s about preserving a military-industrial complex that profits from endless war, global policing, and foreign occupations—while the nation’s infrastructure rots and its people are neglected.

The United States has spent much of the past half-century policing the globe, occupying other countries, and waging endless wars.

What most Americans fail to recognize is that these ongoing wars have little to do with keeping the country safe and everything to do with propping up a military-industrial complex that has its sights set on world domination.

War has become a huge money-making venture, and the U.S. government, with its vast military empire, is one of its best buyers and sellers.

America’s role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has already cost taxpayers more than $112 billion.

And now, the price of empire is rising again.

Clearly, it’s time for the U.S. government to stop policing the globe.

The U.S. military reportedly has more than 1.3 million men and women on active duty, with more than 200,000 of them stationed overseas in nearly every country in the world.

American troops are stationed in Somalia, Iraq and Syria. In Germany, South Korea and Japan. In Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Oman. In Niger, Chad and Mali. In Turkey, the Philippines, and northern Australia.

Those numbers are likely significantly higher in keeping with the Pentagon’s policy of not fully disclosing where and how many troops are deployed for the sake of “operational security and denying the enemy any advantage.” As investigative journalist David Vine explains, “Although few Americans realize it, the United States likely has more bases in foreign lands than any other people, nation, or empire in history.”

Incredibly, America’s military forces aren’t being deployed abroad to protect our freedoms here at home. Rather, they’re being used to guard oil fields, build foreign infrastructure and protect the financial interests of the corporate elite. In fact, the United States military spends about $81 billion a year just to protect oil supplies around the world.

America’s military empire spans nearly 800 bases in 160 countries, operated at a cost of more than $156 billion annually. As Vine reports, “Even US military resorts and recreation areas in places like the Bavarian Alps and Seoul, South Korea, are bases of a kind. Worldwide, the military runs more than 170 golf courses.”

This is how a military empire occupies the globe.

Keep reading

Ivy League Researchers Scaremonger About GOP Health Policy But Say Nothing About Similar Democrat Plans

Ivy League faculty members have a leftist bias — would you believe it?

That sarcastic conclusion comes from the latest example of rhetorical scaremongering over the budget reconciliation bill being considered by Congress. When Republican lawmakers decide to scale back health care benefits, the professoriate loudly proclaims that people in their legions will die. But when Democrat lawmakers do the same thing, these same commentators decide to join the Witness Protection Program.

Deaths Metric

On June 3, a series of researchers affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania’s Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics and the Yale School of Public Health released a letter regarding the House-passed budget reconciliation bill. In it, they claimed that several specific provisions in the bill “would result in more than 42,500 deaths annually.” They further claimed that allowing enhanced Obamacare subsidies to expire at year’s end, as they are scheduled to do under current law, “will cause an additional 8,811 deaths,” meaning that “altogether, we project that these changes will result in over 51,000 preventable deaths.”

The letter leaves much to unpack. For starters, the idea that anyone can know with any level of certainty the precise number of deaths attributable to a specific policy — not 8,810 or 8,812, mind you, but exactly 8,811 — is absurd on its face. If the researchers know the specific number of people who will die due to one policy change, then why not tell us the names of said individuals, and where, when, and how those people will die, while they’re at it?

Second, the expiration of the enhanced subsidies at year’s end comes because of Democrats, not Republicans. When they controlled Congress and the presidency, Democrats passed provisions letting these subsidies expire. Democrats fully expected future Congresses to extend them but wanted to try to disguise their true cost, just like they tried to hide the full $5 trillion cost of the failed Build Back Bankrupt legislation. They should neither complain nor blame Republicans for not wanting to fix or extend Democrats’ bad law. (The same applies to Republicans when it comes to tax gimmicks they might include in reconciliation.)

Ideological Bias

But the real “tell” regarding this letter comes in the form of a question the researchers didn’t answer. I emailed the lead authors, Rachel Werner at Penn and Alison Galvani from Yale, with a simple question: “Do you plan on conducting similar analyses on the number of deaths associated with Gov. [Gavin] Newsom’s proposal to freeze enrollment of undocumented immigrants in MediCal, and charge existing undocumented enrollees a $100 monthly premium? Why or why not?”

Astute readers may not be surprised to learn that, even after following up, I received nary an acknowledgement, let alone a reply. The researchers might claim they never received my message or that they only published their letter in response to a request from Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., for an analysis of the effects of the reconciliation bill. (Any Republican lawmakers in California reading this should please — please — ask the researchers for the type of analysis I requested, if only to highlight their hypocrisy.)

But it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in economics to recognize the real reason for the disparate treatment. The letter was a headline — “Republican bill will kill X people per year!” — in search of a story and a justification. That’s why Wyden and Sanders requested it, and that’s why the researchers gladly complied. But when it comes to attacking Newsom, or Democrat Govs. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois or Tim Walz of Minnesota, all of whom have proposed scaling back taxpayer-funded coverage of illegal immigrants — not because they believe such benefits should go only to citizens, mind you, but because of skyrocketing costs — they suddenly become mute.

Keep reading

Economic suicide by design

This week, Oregonians heard the announcement that Tektronix, an iconic Oregon-based company, is moving its headquarters from Oregon to North Carolina.

Tektronix has decided that it has had enough of the Oregon Democrat high taxes, poor schools, and constant degradation of the quality of life for its employees. Textronix was once one of the largest employers in the state of Oregon. Anybody working in the electronics branch of technology relied on Tektronix test equipment to troubleshoot electronic problems. Driving by the Tektronix campus was very sad for me when we moved to Oregon. The parking lots around the Tektronix buildings were mainly empty, and slowly got even emptier. As an Electronic Technician who relied on the Tektronix test equipment my entire career, this was like watching an old friend slowly die from neglect.

Elections have consequences, and so does how people vote. Voting for more taxes, higher fees, and the crazy bills the Democrat supermajority pushes through is costing Oregon thousands of highly-paid citizens who have had enough, and they then leave Oregon for different states. Yet Oregon continues down the same old path to economic disaster. Oregonians cannot figure out that Democrats are all the same; their solution to problems is to raise taxes and fees on everything. For decades, Oregonians have been voting for Democrats to lead Oregon, and nobody noticed that conservatives and Republicans were leaving over economic or freedom issues. The Democrats, Liberals, and progressives just kept on making Oregon less affordable and less desirable to raise a family or retire here.

Keep reading

Israel’s Strikes on Iran Spark Growing Dissent in Congress

On Monday, June 16, Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) introduced legislation, a War Powers Resolution, to prevent President Trump from using military force against Iran without Congressional authorization. This will force all Senators to go on record supporting or opposing the following: “Congress hereby directs the President to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces for hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran.”

Sen. Kaine, a longtime advocate for exerting congressional authority over war, blasted Israel for jeopardizing planned U.S.-Iran diplomacy. “The American people have no interest in another forever war,” he wrote.

When Israel launched a surprise military strike on Iran last week, it did more than risk igniting a catastrophic regional war. It also exposed long-simmering tensions in Washington – between entrenched bipartisan, pro-Israel hawks and a growing current of lawmakers (and voters) unwilling to be dragged into another Middle East disaster.

“This is not our war,” declared Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), a Republican and one of the House’s most consistent antiwar voices. “Israel doesn’t need U.S. taxpayers’ money for defense if it already has enough to start offensive wars. I vote not to fund this war of aggression.” On social media, he polled followers on whether the U.S. should give Israel weapons to attack Iran. After 126,000 votes (and 2.5 million views), the answer was unequivocal: 85% said no.

For decades, questioning U.S. support for Israel has been a third rail in Congress. But Israel’s unprovoked attack on Iran – coming just as the sixth round of sensitive U.S.-Iran nuclear talks were set to take place in Oman – sparked rare and unusually direct criticism from across the political spectrum. Progressive members, already furious over Israel’s war on Gaza, were quick to condemn the new offensive. But they weren’t alone.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) called Israel’s strike “reckless” and “escalatory,” and warned that Prime Minister Netanyahu is trying to drag the U.S. into a broader war. Rep. Chuy García (D-IL) called Israel’s actions “diplomatic sabotage” and said, “the U.S. must stop supplying offensive weapons to Israel, which also continue to be used against Gaza, & urgently recommit to negotiations.”

Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA) was even more blunt. “The war criminal Netanyahu wants to ignite an endless regional war & drag the U.S. into it. Any politician who tries to help him betrays us all.”

More striking, however, were the critiques from moderate Democrats and some Republicans.

Keep reading

Europe’s Populist Parties Keep Gaining Ground, But Cannot Get Into Power

Across the European continent, despite gaining considerable proportions of the vote, populist parties are increasingly being frozen out of governing in coalitions by political opponents who regard them as extremist.

Proponents of the tactic known as a “cordon sanitaire” or “firewall” say it’s not an attack on democracy but a defense of it. But one war expert said the tactic will only arouse anger in voters and that “there is no potential for peaceful political change.”

Coalitions are part and parcel of political life in many European countries.

But the cordon sanitaire, a measure normally directed at keeping out fringe outliers, is now being used to keep out parties that are gaining majority-level support.

Such parties include the Alternative for Germany, France’s National Rally, Austria’s Freedom Party, Spain’s Vox, and the Netherlands’ Party for Freedom.

They all deny being “far-right” as they are often dubbed by media, opponents, or academics, but their political opponents regard them as beyond the pale and have formed coalitions on the promise of shutting them out of governance.

Keep reading

Professor Of War Warns Many European Countries Are In A ‘Pre-Civil-War’ State

One of the globe’s leading experts on war has warned that many European countries are on the verge of civil war and may already be past the point of no return.

David Betz, Professor of War in the Modern World at King’s College London, says his research shows is a statistically significant chance of a civil war breaking out within five years in a major European country, with a distinct possibility that the conflict could spill over to neighbouring Nations.

Speaking to documentarian Andrew Gold, Betz further noted that it is likely too late to prevent things getting “very much worse” in Europe, and that governments may only be able to better prepare for the inevitable.

“I would probably avoid big cities. I would suggest you reduce your exposure to big cities if you are able,” Betz chillingly urged.

He added, “there isn’t anything they can do, it’s baked in. We’re already past the tipping point, is my estimation… we are past the point at which there is a political offramp. We are past the point at which normal politics is able to solve the problem.”

Betz emphasised that “almost every plausible way forward from here involves some kind of violence in my view.”

“Anything the government tries to do at this point… you can solve one kind of problem, but it will aggravate another kind of problem in doing so, and you get back to violence,” the professor continued.

“The question really is about mitigating the costs, to my mind, not about preventing the outcome, I’m sorry to say… I have not heard a credible political way forward and I don’t see a single political figure who is credible in the role of national saviour, or even inclined to do so,” he added.

“The bottom line is I don’t think there is now a political solution to this which takes the form of everything just working out OK after some period of difficulty,” Betz grimly concludes, noting “Things are bad now, but they are going to get very much worse.”

“Hopefully after they will get better, but you will have to go through the period of very much worse before you get there,” he predicted.

It’s a downward spiral, essentially.

Keep reading