The Iran War’s Costly Cycle of Retaliation

On August 30, U.S. forces struck two Iranian missile launchers on Larak Island near the Strait of Hormuz, saying the systems posed a threat to shipping. Iran answered by launching ballistic missiles at U.S. forces in Jordan. The exchange revived a seemingly simple question: What is the next response supposed to change? In the war with Iran, the relationship between military action and political results is neither linear nor predictable. A strike may destroy a target while changing Tehran’s calculations and triggering costs elsewhere. For Washington, the issue is therefore not simply choosing the next target, but determining whether each action moves the United States closer to a political objective or merely creates the conditions for another round.

The problem lies in the gap between the geography of an attack and the geography of its consequences. The United States can choose where to apply force, but it cannot exercise the same control over where it will bear the resulting cost. An attack in Iran can lead to pressure on U.S. forces elsewhere in the region, threats to partners and allies, disruption of shipping, and higher energy costs. Recent fighting around the Strait of Hormuz has shown how quickly military exchanges can spill into maritime traffic and oil markets. A limited operation can therefore acquire a reach far beyond its initial target.

That does not mean Washington should avoid using force. Deterrence without the ability to impose costs has little credibility, and failing to respond can also carry risks. If Tehran concludes that U.S. threats will not be enforced, it may judge further action to be less costly. The real choice is not between “responding” and “not responding,” but between responses that serve a defined political purpose and those that simply sustain the cycle. A credible response must impose a meaningful cost while avoiding a situation in which Washington has to strike again merely to prove the credibility of the previous strike.

This is why the meaning of “response” becomes more complicated once force is used. If Washington attacks to restore deterrence, success depends not only on the damage inflicted on Iran but on what Tehran does afterward and what new obligations the United States assumes. If Iran retaliates against U.S. forces, threatens allied infrastructure, or disrupts vital regional routes, Washington’s next decision becomes less independent. Force protection, allied defense, and freedom of navigation all enter the calculation. Each mission may be defensible on its own, but together they can create commitments that were not part of the original objective.

The costs of conflict are therefore generated well beyond the battlefield. Greater threats to U.S. personnel require more protection and readiness. Greater risks to partners increase pressure for additional security support. Insecurity along shipping routes can raise the costs of trade and energy. Even if Washington retains the operational upper hand, it may simultaneously enlarge the strategic responsibilities it must carry. Tactical success can be measured by whether a target was destroyed; strategic success must be measured by whether the United States emerges safer, with more freedom of action and fewer – not more – obligations.

Keep reading

Federal Judge Blocks New York From Enforcing $75 Billion Climate Superfund Law

A federal judge ruled on Monday that New York cannot enforce a 2024 state law that sought to impose an estimated $75 billion in charges on carbon-emitting companies for allegedly causing climate damage between 2000 and 2018.

Chief U.S. District Judge Brenda Sannes in Syracuse, New York, sided with 22 Republican state attorneys general, as well as industry groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in finding the state measure preempted by federal law. The judge said the Clean Air Act, which gave the federal Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, did not authorize states to adopt emissions compensation schemes.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed the Climate Change Superfund Act into law in December 2024. It required about three dozen covered fossil-fuel companies to pay a combined $3 billion annually for 25 years, or $75 billion in total. The funds would have been earmarked for infrastructure work, including coastal wetlands, stormwater systems, roads, bridges, and responses to extreme weather.

Sannes said enforcing the law risked upsetting the balance of protecting the environment, “a project that necessarily requires national standards and global participation,” and promoting economic growth, energy production, foreign policy interests, and national security.

West Virginia Attorney General John McCuskey led the coalition of states challenging the legislation in a February 2025 lawsuit. The attorneys general said at the time that New York’s law was politically motivated “overreach” that punished traditional energy companies, including West Virginia-based coal and natural gas companies, that now comply with applicable laws. They said payouts from coal, oil, and natural gas producers could wipe out thousands of jobs if the producers were forced to shut down.

“We were the first to challenge this law because we saw it for what it was – a money grab by the elites in New York, who want to punish West Virginians for doing the jobs that enable them to heat their homes and build their cities,” McCuskey said in an Aug. 31 statement.

Hochul’s office is reviewing the decision to determine possible next steps, spokesperson Ken Lovett said.

“Taxpayers shouldn’t have to foot the bill for damages caused by polluters,” he said.

New York was the second U.S. state to establish a superfund requiring major fossil-fuel companies to help finance infrastructure projects such as flood mitigation and coastal protection.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute sued Vermont on Dec. 30 to block that state’s superfund. That case remains pending.

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson from the Justice Department’s Energy and Natural Resources Division welcomed Monday’s decision.

“New York’s law would have expropriated $75 billion from energy companies around the world during an energy emergency and in direct defiance of American foreign policy and federal law,” Gustafson said. “We will continue to fight for affordable, reliable energy for all Americans.”

Keep reading

Adam Schiff Has Finally Found a Trump Tax Cut He Agrees With – For Totally Selfish Reasons

When you think of Trump tax cuts and Democrats, the first thing that comes to mind is Democrats complaining that the tax cuts only benefit the rich. For good measure, they typically say not only the rich, but Trump’s rich buddies, as if he is doing a favor just for a select few, powerful, connected people.

Well, now California Senator Adam Schiff has finally found a Trump tax cut idea that he likes. It’s all about a tax incentive to save jobs in Hollywood. In other words, a tax cut that would benefit a very select group.

And make no mistake, Schiff likes this idea because that is where a ton of his support comes from. When Schiff was a member of the House, Hollywood was in his district. These are his people.

FOX News reports:

One of President Donald Trump’s most persistent political foes has found common ground with him in their shared push to save Hollywood.

Trump wants to incentivize film and television production in Hollywood after years of job loss and other states and countries enticing projects to leave what has been the heart of entertainment in the U.S. for more than a century.

And Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who once led the first impeachment against Trump and has maintained a strong opposition to him since he retook office, is on board with the idea.

“I am in strong agreement with the President,” Schiff said on X. “Congress should immediately take up and pass a federal film tax incentive to bring back these good-paying jobs that we’ve lost to other countries.”

“Let’s work together — Republicans and Democrats — to get this done, and bring the movie magic back to America,” he continued.

Hollywood’s stature as an entertainment colossus has taken a hit over the last few years following the COVID-19 pandemic and the burst of the streaming bubble.

The industry has lost 49,000 jobs since 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Keep reading

SNAP Junk Food Bans in Two States on Hold Due to Court Rulings

The battle over SNAP benefits might be being waged from state to state, but federal courts are part of the action, too.

Two states that had planned restrictions on the foods that can be purchased by those using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cards have put the moves on hold after a federal court ruled in favor of SNAP recipients in a case covering five other states, Newsweek reported Monday.

Six states still have restrictions in place.

SNAP, formerly known as “food stamps,” is a federally funded program administered by the individual states. It is overseen by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Some states restrict its use from purchasing junk food, such as sodas, candy, and some juices and energy drinks. Others have plans to do so.

The states that already have restrictions that are unaffected by the ruling, according to the grocery tracking website Greenchoice, are Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and Utah.

South Carolina and North Dakota were only days away from implementing similar bans beginning Sept. 1 when Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, struck down restrictions that had already been in place in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia.

Keep reading

The Number That Should Keep Every American Parent Up At Night

Washington’s spending addiction just reached a new record. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal deficit for the fiscal year ending on September 30 will hit a stunning $2.1 trillion. This number, confirmed in the CBO’s August monthly budget review, is the highest deficit recorded outside of the years of emergency COVID spending.

The numbers say something that neither political party wants to broadcast. Even with the economy improving, federal spending jumped 5% while revenue only grew 3%. Adding to the structural imbalance, interest on the national debt jumped by 14% compared to the previous year. Spending on defense, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is also up. The government borrowed $431 billion in the month of July alone — an average of $6 billion every single day.

“We’ve borrowed an astounding $1.8 trillion this fiscal year, with $431 billion in the month of July alone, equating to nearly $6 billion per day,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “We’re on track to surpass $2 trillion in borrowing this fiscal year despite not being in a recession. That is not normal.”

The CBO’s original estimate was $1.9 trillion — revised upward by $200 billion largely because the Supreme Court struck down tariff authorities in February, cutting expected revenue by $250 billion. About $100 billion has already been refunded to companies under court orders. Even with new tariffs imposed since, the fiscal math still does not add up.

The Medicaid waiver system shows just how embedded the waste is. Congress baked a budget-neutrality requirement — Section 71118 — into last year’s reconciliation law, requiring that starting January 2027, no Medicaid waiver can be approved without a certification it will not increase federal spending. States have spent years exploiting these waivers to extract billions beyond what their programs justify. A 2014 Government Accountability Office audit found $778 million in excess spending on a single Arkansas Medicaid waiver — money the Obama administration used to bribe the state into expanding Obamacare.

Keep reading

Public Schools in Portland, Oregon Welcome Students Back With Message From a DRAG QUEEN

Public schools in Portland, Oregon welcomed students back to school for a new year with a video message from a drag queen, because of course they did.

The far-left city knows this is inappropriate and probably did it just to ‘make a statement’ about how much they despise traditional American values.

What they seem to have forgotten is that this is a ‘public’ school, meaning that their little stunt is connected to a taxpayer-funded institution. If there are any conservatives left in Portland, or even just people who aren’t completely insane, they should consider suing the people responsible for this.

FOX News reports:

Portland Public Schools (PPS) opened an official Facebook welcome-back video for teachers, principals and staff Friday with drag performer Poison Waters, who thanked district employees as the 2026-27 school year began.

Waters, whose legal name is Kevin Cook, appeared first and was identified onscreen as an advocate, educator and host. Waters thanked district employees for their work with students.

“I’m here to wish you all a successful 2026, 2027 school year and to thank all the amazing principals, teachers, and staff for your dedication to your students and their learning,” Waters said. “While we can often get caught up in the hustle and bustle, it’s so important to remember that together we rise with excellence and purpose.”

Heritage Foundation education research fellow Corey DeAngelis, a school choice advocate, criticized the district’s decision, which was flagged by Libs of Tiktok, in a statement to Fox News Digital Monday and accused PPS of promoting gender ideology.

“Portland Public Schools’ back-to-school video is beyond parody,” DeAngelis said. “The government school system is trying to groom young impressionable minds into gender ideology. They want to brainwash other people’s kids and replace their families. The school system has overstepped their boundaries and needs to stay in its lane. The public school system is rubbing it in that they have control over children whether the parents like it or not. Kids don’t belong to the government. Parents are responsible for passing down values to their children, not government schools.”

Keep reading

$40 Trillion in Debt and the Interest Bill Keeps Growing

The United States has crossed $40 trillion in gross federal debt, and Washington will treat it as another unfortunate milestone before returning to the business of spending money it does not have. The more immediate problem is what it costs to carry that debt. Treasury’s figures show approximately $1.17 trillion in gross interest expense through July, just ten months into fiscal year 2026. That works out to roughly $117 billion a month, or $3.85 billion every single day over that period. These are interest costs, not repayments that reduce the principal. Washington incurs this expense while the debt itself continues climbing.

There are two different interest figures, and they should not be confused. Treasury’s gross interest expense includes interest credited to government accounts holding Treasury securities. The federal budget’s net interest measure excludes those internal payments and includes other offsets. The Congressional Budget Office’s February outlook placed net interest at approximately 3.3% of GDP in 2026, implying more than $1 trillion for the full fiscal year. Even on that narrower measure, Washington is devoting roughly one dollar in five of projected federal revenue to interest. The distinction matters for accounting, but neither number describes a government bringing its finances under control.

The issue was never simply that government had borrowed a large sum. It was that borrowing had become a permanent arrangement, with interest added to budgets already running deficits. Politicians take credit for the original spending, while the cost of financing it survives long after they leave office. Their successors inherit the bill and issue more debt rather than confront the promises that created it.

Consider what refinancing actually means. When a Treasury security matures, its holder must be repaid. If Washington finances that redemption by selling another security, the creditor has changed, but the government has not eliminated the obligation. It has renewed it at whatever rate the market will accept. Borrowing to refinance principal is separate from the interest bill, yet both require continued access to willing buyers. This is why a government can make every payment on time while its underlying financial position deteriorates.

The mathematics of higher rates becomes brutal at this scale. Every additional percentage point on $1 trillion of debt means another $10 billion in annual interest once that debt carries the higher rate. Apply that to successive waves of refinancing and the expense builds year after year. The entire $40 trillion does not reset overnight, and it would be misleading to suggest otherwise. Existing fixed-rate securities retain their coupons until maturity. That delay, however, can conceal the developing burden and give politicians another excuse to postpone action.

There is no magic number at which a country automatically collapses. Confidence, borrowing costs, economic growth, and the ability to raise revenue all matter. The danger is that higher interest expenses require more borrowing, while concerns about that borrowing encourage investors to demand still higher yields. A deteriorating fiscal position can then begin reinforcing itself.

CBO projects net interest costs reaching $2.1 trillion in 2036, or 4.6% of GDP. That is a projection under its stated assumptions, not a guaranteed outcome, but it demonstrates that the problem does not disappear even in an orderly baseline. Washington is not merely struggling with a temporary expense left over from an emergency. It is carrying an interest burden expected to grow while elected officials continue making commitments against future revenue.

War makes this arithmetic harder. Military operations require resources today, while the interest on borrowing to finance them can remain for decades. If conflict also raises energy costs or disrupts production, it can complicate the Federal Reserve’s inflation problem. Higher rates may be necessary to restrain inflation, but they also increase the cost of new federal borrowing. Demanding that the Fed cut rates does not repair that conflict, especially when long-term investors remain free to demand compensation for inflation and fiscal risk.

Republicans cannot explain this away by blaming Democratic spending while defending every unfunded commitment of their own. Democrats cannot promise an expanding government without confronting the cost of financing it. Both parties have constituencies they refuse to disappoint and obligations they prefer to leave to the next administration. The interest bill does not recognize party affiliation, and the bond market does not have to accept a campaign promise as repayment.

The $40 trillion figure should therefore be understood through the income required to sustain it. America possesses enormous productive capacity, but that is not permission for Washington to claim an ever-larger portion of future revenue before the public receives any new service. More than a trillion dollars in annual net interest is already a substantial claim on that income. The question is how much further government intends to mortgage the future before admitting that borrowing has become its substitute for governing.

Keep reading

Trump Administration To Spend $4 Million on European Rightwing Media

The US will help Europeans free themselves from the yoke of their Leftist-Globalist elites.

Euro-Globalists are in a panic over the news that the US Donald J. Trump’s administration will reportedly spend $4 million to bolster right-wing media in ‌Europe.

This is said to be part of a package of at least $25 million for civil society groups working on conservative causes in the region.

What these sons of George Soros do not seem to understand is that this is a core Trump policy: ‘Cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.’

2025 US National Security Strategy:

“American diplomacy should continue to stand up for genuine democracy, freedom of expression, and unapologetic celebrations of European nations’ individual character and history. America encourages its political allies in Europe to promote this revival of spirit, and the growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed gives cause for great optimism.

Keep reading

Trump pushes federal tax incentives to revitalize Hollywood, U.S. entertainment industry

President Donald Trump called on lawmakers to pass legislation aimed at revamping the United States entertainment industry and revitalize Hollywood.

Urging bipartisan support in a Tuesday Truth Social post, Trump asked Congress to create federal tax incentives to bolster the economic sector.

“Hollywood is a Complete and Total Disaster! Despite the name, it is getting very little work. There is no incentive to be there, and it is hurting California very badly,” the president said.

He added that his Hollywood ambassador, legendary actor Jon Voight, shared the same concern for the industry during their Tuesday meeting.

“He is a fantastic man who loves our Country, and feels strongly about the Motion Picture and Television Industry. He hates what’s happened to it! Is is being dissipated in its entirety. It has moved to Canada and other Countries, with very little work being done anymore in the United States,” he continued.

“Jon, and many others in the Industry, are suggesting we do Federal Tax Incentives in order to Make our Movie and Television Production Business GREAT AGAIN, perhaps GREATER THAN EVER BEFORE!” he added.

Despite deep political divisions in Washington, Trump asserted that the measure should be advanced on a bipartisan basis, as it would have a major impact on Democrat-run states.

“The amount of money spent on Tax Incentives will be made up tenfold by the money pouring into the Treasury’s coffers. Meeting are being set up with the Leaders of both parties in order to get this done,” he said. “It should be Bipartisan, especially since so much money is being lost in California, and other largely Blue States.”

Keep reading

New York’s Biggest Teachers Union Fighting the Socialist Mayor It Helped Elect After Mamdani Files Lawsuit to Stop Pay Raise

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani received overwhelming support for his election from the city’s largest teachers union, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT).

Mamdani thanked them by filing a lawsuit to stop a pay raise for education paraprofessionals.

In July, the New York City Council passed the “RESPECT Check Act,” giving public-school paraprofessionals, like teacher aides, a one-time $10,000 “workforce stabilization” payment.

The Act was passed by the Council unanimously and became law without the mayor’s signature.

Although Mamdani supported a version of the bill in the past, now that he is comfortable in the Mayor’s seat, he has changed his mind.

He argued that the Act violates New York State’s Taylor Law and ultimately filed a lawsuit against the city.

Keep reading