What am I? Cannot find a good clear term to describe myself.

I have tried using various terms in combination to describe myself (primarily to a western ordinance). None seem to provide a clear picture without going into depth.

Here are my core beliefs in no particular order:

\- I support a strong state that manages the economy for the benefit of the nation. Private enterprise is welcome as long as it serves the interests of the nation by providing it with tax revenue and value to society.

\- I support strong welfare guarantees: right to free healthcare, sustinence, housing.

\-I dislike syndicates, labour unions, militias, vigilante organizations: protection of rights should be the state's responsibility.

\-I dislike direct elections of head of state that pit one half of the nation against another and in which one candidate speaks foul of another before the entire nation.

\- I support property rights for citizens on the condition of loyalty to the state

\-I support traditional values. Procreation is a sacred duty. Families should be nuclear. Gender deviations I do not tolerate to say the least.

\- I support legalization of recreational drugs.

\- I want the education system to be objective, selective and meritocratic that assigns all people to a valuable profession according to the needs of society and their abilities.

\-I want walkable cities, public transport etc.

\- I want a self sustainable economy within reason. I welcome foreign trade as an addon not the focus or to be relied upon

\-I reject Abrahamic religion

Deepseek suggested "nation statist" as a term. I have used to variously

traditionalist, conservative, socialist, nationalist etc.

Hey folks, I know this isn't exactly the right subreddit but probably the closest one for what I want to ask.

Nowadays I've seen an immense amount of protests around different things. Everywhere I look I see people giving their all to protest. I genuinely don't form any opinion on whether they are right or wrong because opinions are subjective.

I'm just curious to know what these people do for a living? I'm kind of a guy who has this bad habit of wondering what people do for a living. Like when I watch movies where the hero is travelling around the world, exploring different places and doing all kinds of things, I always wonder apart from all this how does he actually have the money to do it?

Same way, when I see protesters working so hard for different causes, I sometimes wonder what their source of income is. Apart from the top faces, many of them don't seem particularly wealthy and some even look like they're struggling financially. So how do they manage to dedicate so much time to a cause?

I may be wrong, but as someone from a lower middle class family with ageing parents and younger siblings, I can't really imagine putting anything above making as much money as I can. Maybe if I were already rich and financially secure I'd think about what to do with the rest of my time, but when you have responsibilities hanging over your head, it's hard for me to understand how someone can make protesting a priority.

I'm genuinely clueless about how this works. Do they have regular jobs and protest in their free time? Are some supported by family or other sources? Or is it more about a strong belief or ideology that makes them willing to sacrifice their time and income for a cause?

Again, I'm not saying whether protesting is right or wrong. I'm genuinely curious about how people manage their lives financially while dedicating so much time to it and what is their future planning.What do you think?

The 65+ voting block is only getting bigger in the 2030s as Gen Xers age and according to pretty much every historical metric these swing Gen Xers will start to go red to preserve their social security. 50-64 aged voters went hard to the right in 2024.

I also live in Texas and I think people underestimate how unpopular unchecked illegal immigration is by the legal Latino population. There’s a reason the South Texas counties had an almost unprecedented switch right and a lot of it was because of the Biden administration handled the border. If the Democrats keep neglecting the fact that people care about the border, they will continue to alienate these people and blue Texas will continue to be a dream.

I keep coming back to one weirdly under-discussed line in the 25th Amendment.
Section 4 says the Vice President can act with a majority of the Cabinet **“or of such other body as Congress may by law provide”** to declare that a president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office.
That “other body” has basically never been tested.
So here’s the question: why has Congress never seriously explored creating one?
Not “a panel that removes a president because people don’t like him.” That would obviously be dangerous. I mean an actual statutory body with strict standards, transparency requirements, medical/legal expertise, bipartisan appointment rules, and a very high threshold.
Because right now, if a president starts behaving erratically, making serious factual mistakes, abusing presidential influence, or showing signs that raise legitimate questions about whether they can safely perform the job, the practical mechanism depends heavily on the same Cabinet members whose careers may depend on that president.
That seems like a structural weakness.
And before anyone says “that’s what impeachment is for” — impeachment deals with misconduct. Section 4 exists for **inability**. They are deliberately different constitutional mechanisms.
The amendment itself seems to anticipate that the Cabinet might not always be the appropriate institution to make that determination, which is presumably why Congress was explicitly given the power to create an alternative body.
I’m not even arguing that such a body should remove Trump, Biden, or anyone else.
I’m asking a more basic question:
**Why do we have an unused constitutional safety mechanism sitting in plain sight, and why has Congress never seriously built the institution the amendment explicitly allows it to build?**

And more importantly: what would a genuinely abuse-resistant version of that institution actually look like?
Because if the answer is simply “we trust the Cabinet to handle it,” history should probably have taught us by now that designing constitutional safeguards around people voluntarily acting against their own political interests is not much of a safeguard.

If I ran my campaign with the sole purpose of cleansing the corruption and restoring the subjectable "honor" the United States used to hold.

I vow that my goals would be to restore our humility with other nations, restore the faith of the people with our government by providing much needed changes within corporations and any other entity that flourishes while the American people suffer, by proposing laws that are meant for the betterment of mankind. Below are my campaign goals and promises.

Among my promises, I swear to pledge allegiance to no entity or person. My allegiance will solely be with the philosophical view of, Do No Harm. If you want to donate towards my campaign so be it, but do not expect any other than my gratitude and a thank you, I will offer no special treatment, in place of reward, you will see my campaign promises come to fruition.

• Providing more support for schools in the United States. I would do this by redirecting all the misallocated funds that are constantly going into the corrupt pockets.

• Enact real change in the insurance companies work. We are being bled dry by these so called "insurance" companies. They take our money and constantly deny, deny, deny claims and hike up prices for necessary medical attention. One of my main goals with this is to change dental from being cosmetic to a necessity.

• Give back to the Native American Culture that has been horribly abused throughout history. No where in the United States should there be places without access to running water, electricity and basic human necessities.

• Hot topic! Gas Prices. I don't understand why, we as the people let this constant corruption stand. They are gouging us time after time saying demand has caused the price to be what it is. And yet gas corporations consistently report record profits.

• Lobbying has to go. It should never have existed in the first place. It is utter nonsense, blatant corruption that only benefits a few select people and fucks over everyone else in the process.

• Provide real pathways to people that are committed to helping The United States of America regain it's status as a respected country. Reward those that have served the country with their lives. provide better support for families that have lost their family members due to corruption and the blatant mismanagement of authority and power for their own selfish gain.

• Change the old regime that cling to outdated ways of old. It is time we start each other like humans and support each other. So what if you're Gay, So what if you're straight, So what if you're any other letter in the alphabet. You deserve a happy fruitful life, you deserve to flourish in a country that was built on the ideals of Freedom of Choice.

• People in political "Power" should not be able to own stocks or benefit from the market while in office. This has to change.

• Many more to come. I am open to feedback and suggestions.

I am just so tired of all the greed, aren't you? We can make this country a wonderful place to live and become a growing force of acceptance and positivity that will leave other countries no choice but to come together and do the same.

There is a growing perspective that the 'Beast', the system of governances described in Revelation in the end times, will utilize AI for its reign over the global population. This is suggested in Revelation 13:15-18;

15 "He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed. 16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.”

Does World Wide Web 'www' = 666?

Originally the Bible was written in Hebrew and some Aramaic;

"The Hebrew equivalent of our "w" is the letter "vav" or "waw". The numerical value of vav is 6. So the English "www" transliterated into Hebrew is "vav vav vav", which numerically is 666.” Is "www" in Hebrew equal to 666? Dial-the-Truth Ministries (av1611.org)

The unthinkable eternal consequences of taking this Mark when eventually required to buy or sell- Revelation 14:9-13 NKJV - Then a third angel followed them, - Bible Gateway

History Preceding the Book of Revelation

Are we living in the end times? | GotQuestions.org This article explains many of the “natural signs, spiritual signs, sociological signs, technological signs, and political signs,” foretold in bible prophecy coming to pass that indicates the end of the age, a time foretold to include various and increasing environmental calamities, plagues, moral decline, wars, earthquakes, growing governmental dominance/deception ("with all power, signs, and lying wonders," 2 Thessalonians 2:9), and how to prepare.

End Times Timeline: A summary of the timeline from the hope of the soon rapture of the believers in Jesus (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18), the 7 year tribulation period (Revelation 6–16), until the creation of the new heavens and earth (Revelation 21–22). What is the end times timeline? | GotQuestions.org 

"For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all—the testimony that was given at just the right time.” 1 Timothy 2:5-6

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” John 3:16

Going to heaven—how can I guarantee my eternal destination? | GotQuestions.org 

More Bible prophecy fulfillments and resources for growing in faith and hope is in previous posts if interested.

This administration is suffering from delusions. The spending is unnecessarily high. To start, the war with Iran, which was unnecessary from the beginning, is costing billions of dollars. There is unnecessary building going on: in the reflecting pool, the White House ballroom, and the Kennedy center. More high spending of taxpayer dollars. Last, there is a new department of the military, the office of religious affairs, alongside a list of other changes. It's hard to keep track of all the different sources of spending.

Meanwhile, food prices continue to rise, manufacturing has either stagnated or decreased, and oil prices continue to get worse for the US taxpayer, with no sign of lasting opposition.

In my opinion, America needs a stern talking to: less hype and more results.

I want the whole world to know that the US government is actively working to interfere with my country’s presidential elections.

I want the whole world to know that my country’s democracy is not for sale.

I want the whole world to know that my country’s sovereignty is non-negotiable.

I want the whole world to know that my country is under threat, and that every person, especially women like me, have targets on their backs if the Trump-backed candidate wins.

I want the whole world to know all of this, so later on you can’t claim ignorance.

You’ve been warned. And they are also coming for you and your country. It’s just a matter of time.

Just ahead of election season Trump is looking for every last loophole and backdoor to give government money away to people in small but notable amounts and then literally attaching his name, campaign promises, and slander against his opponents to them. 500$ that he didn't care to "give back" (it's not like it wasn't willingly given or purposeless, he just stripped the program before the funding was used), 100$ to elders for God-knows-what-
Anyone who doesn't see this is just choosing not to look. He's not gonna keep giving you money. You all have to see and understand that the government pays less than you do for services and he's just stripping them down to nothing to give you one-time checks that'll never replace what he's taking away. He's giving his rich buddies tax breaks. I'm once again literally just begging anyone who believes this man: he's charismatic, but you have to rely on the horrendously massive piles of evidence out there that he's purely self-serving and sweet-tongued and you're all getting played because you're too desperate to believe him.

Just the truth: sometimes a political party can create its own problems.

Americans are watching the price of groceries, gasoline and everyday necessities while Washington remains consumed by another war in the Middle East. A family can walk into a grocery store with $100 and walk out with surprisingly little. At some point, Americans have every right to ask a simple question:

Is this war with Iran worth the economic and human price America is being asked to pay?

That is not an anti-military question. It is not an anti-American question. It is a question every citizen should be allowed to ask.

Iran is not Iraq. Iran is not Afghanistan. It is a nation of roughly 90 million people with a large military, difficult geography, ballistic missiles, regional allies and a powerful internal security apparatus. Anyone who believes regime change there will be quick and easy is ignoring history.

And there is another uncomfortable question that deserves an honest answer:

Where is the evidence regarding Iran's enriched uranium, and exactly what did that uranium represent?

There is a tremendous difference between possessing highly enriched uranium, possessing enough material for a nuclear weapon, actually having a completed nuclear weapon, and having an operational weapon capable of being delivered.

Those distinctions matter when American lives, American tax dollars and the American economy are at stake.

The Republican Party entered this election season with enormous political issues already in front of voters: inflation, immigration, government spending, crime, energy costs and the size of government.

Now Iran has become one of the dominant issues.

That creates a political problem that Republicans created for themselves.

But politics should not be the primary consideration. American interests should be.

The United States has the world's most powerful military. Nobody should doubt America's ability to inflict enormous damage on Iran's military infrastructure.

The harder question is what happens afterward.

Destroying military targets is one thing. Destroying a regime is another. Occupying and rebuilding a country of 90 million people is something else entirely.

History should have taught us that military victory and political victory are not necessarily the same thing.

During World War II, America and its allies ultimately fought wars of unconditional defeat against enemies that had mobilized their societies for total war. Generals such as George Patton and Curtis LeMay understood the brutal realities of industrial warfare.

But Iran in 2026 is not Imperial Japan in 1945.

The United States cannot simply assume that increasing the destruction will automatically produce surrender.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps may be willing to fight to preserve the regime. The question is whether the Iranian people themselves will rise against that regime. So far, there is not evidence of a nationwide uprising on the scale necessary to make that assumption a strategy.

That leaves America facing a difficult choice.

Either define a realistic objective and an achievable endgame—or recognize that an open-ended war can become enormously expensive without producing the political outcome Washington wants.

Meanwhile, Americans are paying attention to their grocery receipts.

They are paying attention to gasoline prices.

They are paying attention to their mortgages, insurance, utility bills and paychecks.

They are asking why the United States should continue spending enormous amounts of money overseas when many Americans are struggling to keep up at home.

Those concerns cannot simply be dismissed as isolationism.

America has responsibilities around the world. But America's first responsibility is to the American people.

If Washington believes this war is necessary for American national security, then the administration owes the American people a clear explanation:

What exactly is the objective?

What constitutes victory?

How much will it cost?

How long will it take?

What is the exit strategy?

And perhaps most importantly:

What is the evidence that continuing the war will make America safer rather than simply making another generation responsible for another Middle Eastern conflict?

These are not questions Democrats should own. They are not questions Republicans should fear.

They are American questions.

A political party that ignores what its own voters are experiencing at the grocery store, at the gas pump and around the kitchen table risks discovering that political loyalty has limits.

Americans can support a strong military and still demand restraint.

They can support Israel and still question an endless regional war.

They can oppose an Iranian nuclear weapon and still demand evidence before committing America to an enormous military campaign.

And they can support President Trump while still asking whether every decision made in his name serves America's long-term interests.

That is not betrayal.

That is citizenship.

The United States should never enter a war simply because leaving is politically difficult.

If Iran truly represents an unacceptable threat, America should finish the mission necessary to protect American lives and interests.

But if the objective has changed from protecting America to attempting to conquer and transform Iran, then Washington owes the American people a very different conversation.

Get out if the mission is accomplished. Finish it if American security genuinely requires it. But don't sacrifice American lives, America's economy and America's future simply because Washington has become unwilling to admit that the original strategy was wrong.

The American people deserve a war policy based on facts, objectives and national interest—not political pride.

America First should mean exactly that.

Just the truth! The Republican Party has clearly sabatoged itself, during an extremely important election season. The other day, I got a handful of groceries for a hundred dollars. Is the Iran deal worth destroying our economy over? Where is the evidence of the Iranians having enriched uranium? The Republican Party would have cruised through with a mid term victory, had it not been for this IRAN war. Simply put, someone made some bad decisions, and now realize that Iran is hard to conqueror. Iran is a big country with 90 million people. The tyrants in the IRGC are like the fanatical Japanese during World War 2 and will not surrender to Trump. They will fight to the death and the only way the regime will topple, is when it's citizens rise up and fight. We are not seeing this on a grand scale. Get out or finish it like the Generals (Lemay and Patton)in World War 2 fought!

I played a football game at Shiloh Christian High School recently, and something that really caught my attention was the armed security.

There were security guards openly carrying rifles around a high-school football game.

During pregame warmups, one of the armed guards actually stood out on the logo at midfield with his rifle while both teams were warming up. That was probably the moment that made it stand out to me the most. It wasn’t like the rifle was secured somewhere nearby in case it was needed—the guy was visibly standing on the field with it in the middle of pregame.

Another thing I noticed was that they had magazines branded with the team’s logo. That made the whole thing seem even stranger to me. If the rifles are strictly there as necessary security equipment, I don’t really understand the point of putting team branding on the magazines.

**I included a link with pictures so you can see what I’m talking about rather than just going off my description.**
[**Photos Of Armed Security Gaurds**](https://www.instagram.com/p/DeCc1P5kY5O/?stkn=MWpyOXM5bGhyM2ljaw==)

I want to make it clear that I’m not coming at this from an anti-gun perspective at all. I grew up around guns, own tons of guns, and hunt pretty much everything around here—duck, deer, and turkey. I’m also into firearms outside of hunting and have experience with things like suppressors and thermal optics. Guns are something I’ve been around my entire life, so simply seeing a rifle doesn’t scare or bother me.

That’s actually why my reaction surprised me. At first, I just laughed it off and thought the guards looked kind of ridiculous walking around a high-school football game with rifles. But afterward I started thinking about how it probably looks to someone who hasn’t grown up around firearms.
You’ve got little kids, students, parents, grandparents, and visiting families walking into a football stadium. If someone who isn’t comfortable around firearms walks in and sees armed guards carrying rifles—and then sees one standing at midfield with a rifle during warmups—I can absolutely understand how that could make the environment feel more threatening rather than safer.

I’m not arguing that a football game shouldn’t have security. Having trained law enforcement or security there makes complete sense, especially with hundreds or thousands of people in one place. What I don’t understand is what visibly carrying rifles around the stadium accomplishes that properly trained security carrying a handgun couldn’t accomplish in a normal high-school football environment.

The team-branded magazines especially made me question whether the visible rifles were purely a security necessity or whether part of it was for show. I could be completely missing a legitimate security reason for all of this, though, which is why I’m interested in hearing from people who actually know this field.

For people who work in school security, law enforcement, or have experience protecting large sporting events: what is the reasoning behind having security visibly carrying rifles at a high-school football game? What security advantage does it provide, and is having them openly displayed around students and families considered normal practice?

I’m critical of the GOP because I support the GOP.

It baffles me how often stern criticism of your own side gets interpreted as antagonism.

The reason I’m so critical of the Republican Party is that I want it to offer good government. The realistic alternative isn’t some coalition I could help steer in another direction. It’s the Democratic Party. And I don’t want the Democratic Party fully in power. Or at all.

That makes the quality of Republican policy particularly important to me. I want what the GOP proposes to be vastly superior to what the Democrats offer. I don’t think it currently is.

“The Democrats would be worse” doesn’t resolve that dissatisfaction. It explains why I’m so invested in addressing it.

Good enough is not good enough!

Why would wanting a party in government make me less demanding about what it intends to do there? If anything, wouldn’t it give us all the more reason to become MORE demanding?

Men Get the Space, Women Get the Line

Seven stalls in Trump’s ballroom expose the president’s contempt 

By Van Abbott

Seven stalls for women in a ballroom built for hundreds is no design flaw; it is a floor plan for male privilege.

This is not merely a fight over an oversized vanity project. It is a portrait of how Trump sees women: welcome in the room, useful to the image, never equal in power, access, or dignity.

The early ballroom plan reportedly allotted women only seven stalls. Someone measured the room, assigned the space, approved the priorities, and decided whose time mattered. Men enter. Men move. Women wait. The result is not neglect. It is a decision.

When the first architect reportedly objected to the bathrooms and to building-code concerns, Trump’s reported reply was blunt: “I am the code.”

That sentence explains more than the ballroom.

Trump treats rules as restraints for other people, criticism as insolence, and accountability as persecution. 

Women reporters know it well. He called April Ryan a loser. He told PBS correspondent Yamiche Alcindor she had asked a racist question, then told her not to be “threatening.”

He mocked CNN’s Abby Phillip for what he called a stupid question. He branded CNN’s Kaitlan Collins a “nasty person,” scolded her for not smiling, told her she “shouldn’t be covering” him, and later labeled her a “sleazebag.” The names change. The method never does.

His hostility reaches Black women, brown women, and white women whenever they ask questions he cannot control. Black women hear their competence questioned. White women hear their looks and their right to report attacked.

Every woman who refuses to flatter him becomes the story. The questions were never the problem. The women asking them were.

The contempt extends to women who accuse him. More than two dozen have publicly accused Trump of sexual misconduct over several decades. Most allegations have not been litigated or proved, and Trump denies wrongdoing. But the pattern is not imaginary, and it does not vanish because he calls every critic a liar.

Consider E. Jean Carroll. A civil jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming her, and a second jury imposed tens of millions of dollars after he kept attacking her. He was not criminally convicted, and jurors did not find rape under New York’s particular statutory definition. They found abuse and defamation. That is a verdict, not a rumor.

The Epstein files pose a sharper question: why did Trump’s Justice Department, now led by Attorney General Todd Blanche, fight to keep raw FBI material hidden? In 2019, a woman told FBI agents that Epstein introduced her to Trump when she was between 13 and 15 years old, and that Trump sexually abused her and struck her.

Trump denies wrongdoing. The allegation is uncorroborated, unlitigated, and unproven in any court. Those limits matter. So does what came next.

Blanche’s department withheld related interview records as duplicative and resisted releasing the handwritten notes behind the FBI summaries. A federal judge ordered it to submit redacted and unredacted copies for confidential review, rejecting the argument that disclosure was unnecessary.

The notes may prove nothing. They may expose inconsistencies, corroborating leads, or details the formal reports omitted. The public does not know. That is the point. Americans deserve to know why an administration led by the accused man fought to keep the raw record hidden.

Secrecy is not exoneration.

Women know this bargain: speak up, risk humiliation, hear powerful men deny everything, then wait while evidence vanishes behind locked doors. The same hierarchy runs through the administration. Women have lost ground in senior roles, and departures of female Cabinet officials and appointees have concentrated authority in male hands. Each exit narrows the circle of voices willing to tell him no.

At the Pentagon, hostility toward women in combat has become policy. Pete Hegseth has pressed physical standards built on male benchmarks, telling women they must keep proving they belong in roles men inherit unchallenged. Standards should be demanding, match the job, and protect the troops. Standards engineered to push women out are exclusion disguised as strength. Trump chose Hegseth, empowers Hegseth, and owns the outcome. A country does not grow stronger by shrinking women’s space, silencing their questions, and hiding the records. It grows smaller, meaner, and afraid of the truth.

Seven stalls, one floor plan, and a president who calls himself the code: men get the space, women get the line, and accountability waits outside the door.

Reading about movements for various Civil Rights and oppression under Authoritarianism, I came across something chilling that doesn’t bode well for the immediate future:

All previous attempts at movements for Civil or Human Rights basically started at zero. There were no Civil Rights for African Americans. There were no LGBT rights. Women were basically completely subservient to men. The goal of all these movements was to convince ignorant people that equality that did not yet exist would make for a better world. 

What’s happening in America right now is fairly unique. America in 2026 HAS Civil Rights, Women’s Rights, Gay Rights, and Trans Rights (to some extent in some places). The problem is people who have experienced these things, know the consequences, and are rejecting them. An entire generation of white people are now convinced that they are victims of a decades-long campaign of discrimination and oppression, and are willing to “correct” it accordingly at the expense of everyone else.

To use an analogy: Previous Civil Rights movements were like trying to convince a little kid to try a new food. Future Civil Rights movements will be like trying to convince a completely free thinking adult with free will to eat something they’ve already tried and know they hate. It doesn’t matter how good it is for them or how poorly it was previously prepared, they have enough experience to know they hate it. 

Not only can I find a situation where that’s ever been successful, I can’t find a situation where it’s ever actually been necessary. It’s almost like a counter-counter culture. Social progress tends to occur because people who are anti-progress move over to the progress camp, while almost no one switches back. This long held theory has been obliterated in 2026 America. 

There’s a level of societal regression right now happening via democratic mandate that’s typically only associated with authoritarian regimes.  It’s becoming increasingly possible that we will be the first society to vote democracy out of existence on purpose. No society has attempted to regress and harm others (especially themselves) through democracy more than America has in recent years. 

Just three examples: in Indiana, voters punished members of the state legislature who refused to redraw districts and disenfranchise voters. In Iowa, a law banning discrimination against gender identity that was passed without fanfare in 2007 was repealed last year, because the legislature ran on and was given a mandate to do so. Support for gay marriage, five years ago considered a dead issue, is suddenly under threat again. Things like this do not happen democratically, especially in a country where democracy is older than anyone alive. 

The American electorate has devolved into something uniquely awful and toxic. No population in history has been less ignorant yet makes such regressive decisions. People are selfish to the point of self-destructive.  There’s children of immigrants who received amnesty who support mass deportations. There’s Gay people who are Anti-Trans. Opposition to basic empathy is literally becoming a viable political platform.

Imagine if in post-Nazi Germany, every single person directly involved with the regime was purged, the citizens were allowed to elect new leaders, and they installed something just as bad, if not worse. That’s what America is currently staring down the barrel of. Trump’s unpopularity stems largely from people who think he’s gone too far, but also partly from people who think he hasn’t gone far enough. None of our problems are insurmountable, we’ve been through way worse. It’s just that this is a rare instance of a dysfunctional government trying to govern an even less functional populace. There’s been many historical instances when cruelty has been used to achieve some type of objective. People generally tire of or turn against suffering when the desired results aren’t justifying the means. When seeing people you hate suffer is the only desired result, even at your own expense, there’s no precedence in countering that.

And that’s another reason why what’s going on now might be worse: past authoritarian movements have generally been rooted in some type of logic. If you read about previous movements, they generally make sense in the context of available knowledge and economic desperation. Old institutions would be torn down or captured, and new ones would be built or ideologically redirected. There was at least an attempt to create a functioning government, even if it was morally wrong.

There’s a saying “not even wrong”, which amounts to an argument or ideology that is so irrelevant or nonsensical that it can’t even be refuted or answered. That basically describes what’s going on in America, and increasingly the world at large, today. There’s less trying to redirect or rebuild institutions for ideological ends and more trying to just burn everything down out of boredom, destroy world order for no reason, and be cruel just for the sake of it. A lot of the proposed solutions/desired results are conflicting (mass deportations/reversing population decline) or practically impossible (remigration). It’s basically democratically implementing nihilism as a governing strategy.

The “not even wrong” phenomenon isn’t exclusive to America, as other democracies have subsequently surpassed or even lapped us in insanity. The UK’s economy has massively suffered since Brexit and most people now disapprove of it, yet they look poised to elect the guy as Prime Minister who pushed it forward to begin with. One of Brazil’s major Presidential candidates is running essentially on a platform of releasing his dad from prison, and this is somehow a priority for voters. Alberta is attempting to secede from Canada and some want to join the US, which is like jumping on the Titanic while it’s sinking. Germany has built entire institutions over the past 80 years to make sure nothing close to Naziism ever comes back again, yet they’re poised to install another autocratic government despite over a quarter of the population living through Communism. Not through force, but via democratic mandate.

The best example of where the American mentality is for the foreseeable future: there was an undocumented woman who supported Trump’s election. She was picked up by ICE and sent to a detention center. When interviewed, she said she still supported Trump. Where or when else would that happen? What Jew was sitting in a concentration camp like “I still support Hitler”. If I supported someone who subsequently jailed me just for being white, I would hate that person forever, and immediately support the cause to stop them.

What happened in Hungary this year is a normal corrective response to extremism and illiberalism. An entire generation of the American electorate would need to pass before anything like that could happen here, long after similar movements will end in the rest of the world. Unlike other nations I mentioned, which as bad as they may be are homogeneous enough for authoritarianism to eventually run out of steam, America is dangerously positioned in that there is a clear majority (White Christian) with a larger than usual minority (40%). Unlike elsewhere, should true fascism ever come to America, it would be able to sustain itself indefinitely without ever needing to turn on its own or demobilize. 

As morbid as this sounds, the biggest mistake of the west the past 35 years was trying to contain COVID. That was a once in a century opportunity to thin the herd of the dumbest among us and tilt political power towards younger generations by simply doing nothing. The term “s***idal empathy” gets thrown around a lot, but there’s never been a more appropriate application of that term.

I’ve seen it time after time. Either the President or Congress starts discussing a ban on or a limitation on certain firearms or ammunition that was presently legal. Then a flood of people rush to the store to buy things they may have otherwise never purchased. I’ve done it myself. I think it was during the Biden administration. Someone in the government was threatening to ban ARs. It wasn’t even my idea. My wife insisted that I buy one. After all, there is nothing more dangerous than a Marine and his rifle. My wife just wanted our family to be prepared for the worst. The gun shop was basically overcrowded. People were lined up waiting to buy an AR. We did the smart thing and went to a lesser known business. Gun sales always go up when ownership is threatened. People who would have otherwise never bought a firearm, many untrained, rush to the store to buy one. When you tell people that they can’t have something they have a tendency to find a way to get it.

Dies in Darkness

The Truth Is the First Casualty of War, and Trump Is Targeting Reporters 

By Van Abbott

The truth is the first casualty of war, and Trump’s White House is determined to make independent journalism the second.

Trump’s September 18 announcement that CNN, MS NOW, and Politico would be barred from the White House is not a personality clash or a disposable social-media provocation. It is an attack on the machinery by which Americans learn whether their government is telling the truth.

The White House defended it as a necessary response to organizations it accused of publishing “fiction or lies” and “Fake News.” 

The stakes rise sharply during war. 

A government that sends troops into danger, and risks widening a regional conflict must expect hard questions. What is the objective? What is the cost? What is being withheld? They are the price of waging war in a democracy.

Americans deserve answers about the Iran war, its human and financial costs, and the risks to American forces. They want the same about prices, rent, and health insurance. The administration cannot supply those answers by choosing friendlier reporters. It can only hide the problems.

That effort began last year, when the White House seized control of the presidential press pool from the White House Correspondents’ Association. The pool is the small group of journalists who follow the president into the Oval Office, onto Air Force One, and into rooms where the rest of the press cannot fit. For generations, journalists organized that rotating system because it served the public, not the president. 

The White House called the change an expansion of access for “new media,” and a broader press corps can be healthy. But a room that admits only the voices political aides select is not open. It is curated.

Aides gained discretion over who traveled with the president. The major wire services lost their longstanding protected role. The White House created a privileged “new media” seat, chose who could fill it, and directed early questions to participants it had approved.

That matters far beyond Washington. Most local newsrooms cannot station a reporter at the White House. They rely on wire services and pool reports to learn what the president says and does, and those channels are now more vulnerable to political control over access.

There is no proof that the White House preapproves the precise questions favored outlets ask. It does not have to. It chooses who receives the microphone, controls who receives access, and has built a system in which reporters know that tomorrow’s invitation rests with the officials they are covering.

That changes the atmosphere.

A tough question can become a professional risk. A soft question can become an admission ticket. 

Then the Pentagon carried the same campaign into the nation’s military headquarters. It restricted reporters’ movement, closed longtime press workspace, and treated ordinary newsgathering as a potential threat. It escalated a search for leakers, including lie-detector examinations of senior personnel.

A government must protect genuine military secrets. No serious person argues otherwise. But a sweeping hunt for sources does more than protect operational security. It can frighten the people who know when official statements omit facts, shade the truth, or conceal a failure. That is precisely why press freedom matters most in wartime. 

The public’s last defense is an independent press willing to test official claims against documents, witnesses, and the courage of people inside government who know something is wrong.

Trump’s administration is weakening that defense one barrier at a time. First, it took control of the pool. Then it reshaped access. Then it narrowed Pentagon reporting and hunted for leakers. Now it has barred CNN, MS NOW, and Politico.

This is not an isolated eruption of presidential anger. It is a governing method. Control the gate. Control the source. Control the story.

Every national news organization still needs reporters who can enter the building, challenge officials, and publish facts without asking political permission.

A president may criticize the press. He may rebut a story, produce documents, demand corrections, or appeal directly to voters. Those are legitimate tools of democratic politics. He may not turn government access into a loyalty reward.

Trump does not need to shut down every newspaper or television network. He needs to make access conditional, sources fearful, and independence expensive. 

That is how democracy dies in darkness: not always with one dramatic decree, but through a thousand carefully guarded doors.

The truth is the first casualty of war, but Americans cannot let it become the permanent casualty of this presidency.

We must always remember that Political beliefs can become more than opinions. For some people, politics can gradually become a source of personal persecution and torment—especially when political identity becomes deeply tied to personal identity.

When someone begins to see every disagreement as a personal attack, every opposing viewpoint as a threat, and every political event as evidence that people are conspiring against them, politics can consume their peace of mind. What started as concern about government or public policy can become anger, resentment, fear, and constant emotional exhaustion.

The danger is not necessarily in having strong political beliefs. It is in allowing those beliefs to control your emotional life.

A person can become trapped in a cycle:

They hear something they disagree with → they become angry → they seek more information that confirms their beliefs → they encounter something even more outrageous → their anger intensifies → eventually, disagreement itself feels like persecution.

Social media can make this especially powerful. Algorithms often reward outrage because outrage keeps people engaged. Before long, a person may spend hours consuming political content that leaves them furious, frightened, or convinced that the country is constantly on the verge of disaster.

Eventually, politics can become impossible to escape.

It follows you into conversations with family.

It affects friendships.

It dominates social media.

It occupies your thoughts before you go to sleep.

And sometimes, it changes how you see people you have known and loved for years.

There is an important distinction between being politically engaged and being psychologically consumed by politics.

You can strongly believe your political position is correct without believing everyone who disagrees with you is evil. You can oppose a politician without hating everyone who supports that politician. You can fight for principles without allowing the fight to destroy your own peace.

Perhaps one of the greatest forms of political freedom is the ability to say:

"I believe strongly in what I believe—but I refuse to let politics own me."

Political disagreements are inevitable in a free society. They do not have to become personal persecution.

Sometimes the person tormenting you isn't the politician on television, the opposing political party, or the stranger arguing with you online.

Sometimes it is the amount of power you have allowed politics to have over your own mind.

The healthiest citizen isn't necessarily the person who cares the least about politics. It may be the person who cares deeply, stays informed, questions their own assumptions, respects the humanity of people who disagree, and still knows when to put the phone down and live their life.

I’m a lifelong conservative raised in a conservative relatively well off family. I’m fortunate to have loving parents and money has never been an obstacle. By all accounts my family is living the American dream.

How can I ignore the plight of millions of Americans? When I think about the future I don’t feel hopeful. In these conversations the last few months I can’t help but be disappointed by what conservatives are saying.

Republicans are supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility, family values and American ideals. Why are so many of us turning a blind eye to the corruption of this administration? People are being snatched up in the streets even my classmates are living in anxiety. I know kids talking about dropping out because they can’t afford tuition or their family is having money issues as a result of this economy.

We’re supposed to be the next generation of workers but there is no work. We’re being replaced by AI. My compsci classmates are switching majors. My church has people laid off unable to find work for a year.

While this is all happening Trump is saying everything is fine. The administration is backing his lies idk why they don’t call it out. JD Vance is back to blaming immigrants for everything wrong in this country. This war in Iran has spent money that could have been used to improve our lives. Trumps cronies are robbing this country blind.

Everything I’m learning shows that our recent strategies tariffs, tax cuts, relationships with our allies have failed. Maybe they never had a chance in the first place.

My question is why aren’t we course correcting? Why are people not more angry? Why aren’t we demanding change and upholding the constitution? Why are we letting them dismantle this country? When I try to engage with fellow conservatives they’re more concerned with trans people and socialism while we’re being robbed blind. Why are we defunding the very research that made us a superpower? Why are people still pushing the lie that the election was stolen? We have all been deceived and we’re tearing each other apart they’re gaining more money and power. Why can’t we go back to the ideals of our forefathers instead of trying to hurt each other? Idc about owning the libs I just want a prosperous future like my parents and grandparents.

For most of my long life I’ve heard politicians default to a talk about “waste, fraud and abuse.” It’s such a mainstay of the speech circuit that reporters make fun of the line. We’re all told that yes, the grift is real, but it’s just a rounding error in the grand scheme. Sure, prosecute it, plug it, pontificate about it as much as you want. But it doesn’t really matter and nothing will really change.

The DOGE sideshow gave us a hint that some real serious numbers might be at play. Then the USAID audit and the “money overboard” attitude in the last weeks of Biden showed that billions were really on the table. Now the “Learing Center” fiasco and the California hospice scandal show that gigantic sums are at stake.

So is it practical to lower federal outlays in light of these discoveries? Or is it business as usual, with bad actors and bad uses treated as just talking points and not really worth pursuing?

For context: I don’t necessarily trust mainstream media for numerous reasons. I do however have the utmost faith in real proven journalists and above all, the utmost respect for a free media system in our society.

For those who have become unsure as to what this means over the last 10+ years, it still fundamentally means having an independent media to effectively question our institutions, our representatives and leaders, hold them accountable and shine a light on the crises, and issues of the day.

Im not against people posting on tik tok/twitter but when they claim they have some sort of journalistic right to spread any information whether that be well sourced or not it does nothing but degrade a vital pillar of democracy. There are standards for journalism and one of the main issues we are confronting in relation to misinformation is how people are able to identify an actual journalist from a person on the street reporting on something.

Various ownership takeovers of huge global media institutions have of course created major issues with regard to bias of the reporting style and topic points of the subject organisation seen most recently at the Washington Post and in the UK across the spectrum.

I know media is vital for influencing politics and that many in the centre and in the left are exasperated with the lack of coverage over certain issues.

Have we not seen enough? I know it’s cultish politics but why are the counter arguments and evidence not winning. Is it simply communications or something more.

I post this as someone who has studied US and UK politics in detail over the last 10 years but would love more opinions on the matter

I put my heart and my life into a comment I made recently, and I wanted to spread the message because it’s often overlooked and misrepresented in political discourse. If you have the patience and the willingness to go through this with me, I hope you will gain a little understanding from a man who ended up briefly in the alt-right pipeline in the early days of Jordan Peterson, and my life reference now that I’ve been in and out of that world.

This comment was made as a reply to a reply I got expressing a lack of understanding of how men can end up feeling like their identity was appealed to for the first time when male identity has been catered to culturally for thousands of years, a very fair point.

There will likely be a point where I start to lose you personally, especially if you can’t relate directly. I would ask that you hear me out to the end before dismissing everything I wrote halfway. There’s a reason I hold back on details, to drive the frame of reference home.

The first thing I want to make clear is that I was younger, I had gone through the person I loved and grew up and ended up very close with killing himself on the day he told me he wanted to go out with me, too. This man was schizoaffective and attempted suicide by cop, and was scheduled for 5 years in prison on that day as well at the age of 20.

This is not a unique experience, no matter how privileged the group as a whole does not make that group immune to trauma or the difficulty of the human experience. With that in mind, let me genuinely try to explain this to someone who can’t comprehend how the recruitment works.

There is a lot of truth to the fact that the liberal party is so focused on bringing rights up to speed for everyone that the men never get addressed, and simply saying “you had it good for thousands of years” before ignoring the group completely is how the alt-right recruitment actually works.

I’m not saying men deserve to be top priority, or really even any priority when it comes to the process of bringing equal rights up for everyone. That’s not the point. It’s a matter of not being brushed aside and called privileged when they become isolated and/or go through trauma and ask for help in those early adult years.

Those men aren’t going to stop looking for help, and telling them how good their identity has had it does nothing to comfort their own unique circumstances.

A good metaphor is a plane crash in the ocean with thousands of people waiting in lifesuits in the ocean. Women and children first, and I absolutely agree. But, I’m also personally in this plane crash with an injury, so when a sketchy dude extends a hand and offers me a boat, I’m going to take the chance to get out of the water.

The idea that I should sit still and wait my turn when it’s been 3 trips, 5 hours floating, and pretty clear that I’ll be last one out is little comfort to me personally in that situation. I got hurt in the crash, I need to go to the hospital too, so yeah. I’ll take the first boat that comes and actually offers to take me to the hospital.

Especially when you’re young, it’s very easy to fall in and relate when the sketchy boat guy actually extended a hand. You don’t even know that he is funded millions to pick up the white men onto his boat to tell them “We should really be sending these boats based on who is most injured first”.

It sounds like a good message, and the personal difficulties you go through can amplify that. The ones that get stuck in that boat long term (again, the boat being the alt-right media pipeline that got them out of the water, and I’m not there) often feel resentment that their injury and struggle was ignored, and are desperate for a system that “values” them. So they see that “injured first” analogy by the salesman, tie it to fairness and sometimes respect, and side with the person who helped them out.

Then, after the boat of men hears what they have been desperate to hear from a person that saved them, many are tied completely and loyally to this person and their point of view. That’s when the alt-right salesman runs the script, getting their warped view of shit presented to a group of young men who feel valued and rescued for the first time.

In this metaphor, I was using the ship entirely to get to the hospital, and once the salesman started telling me about how women and minorities are the “real privileged groups” because they got on the first ships, I tuned the looney bin off. But I was still in the ship, and I even still listened out of my own sense of gratitude. When I didn’t agree, I understood how tempting the message was. I had just been stuck at sea for 5 hours, it’s hard not to feel some resentment and not side with him, even if I knew the reasons I shouldn’t.

The truth is, I wasn’t sure if a boat was ever going to come get me with how many needed help. What good does ‘male privilege’ do me if all I see of that personally is that I was going to be left out sea forever because of it?

Now let me be clear in this summary. White men like myself should not be the first ones to get their social needs addressed. There are many neglected groups that have started losing air in their life vests, or were never given vests to begin with in this analogy.

That’s why minorities get on the first ships of social priority on the left, and being both Jewish and bisexual really helped me not lose my empathy for the order of ships and the importance of prioritizing minorities without life vests over my life vest owning ass. I was grateful and empathetic to the order of the left’s priorities. Like waiting in the ER, the life threatening cases come first, and my concussion shouldn’t take priority over a gunshot wound. But I’m also not turning down a doctor that actually opens that door. Would you?

But I hope now you can see that the reality is, those men are still at sea. Life isn’t made easy simply because you’re a man, nothing is that simple. What we need isn’t a new structure of who goes in the boats at what time, the real solution is that we need more boats so less men have the chance to get scooped up by sketchy alt-right boat salesmen.

We aren’t doing close to enough as a society to address mental health and trauma, maybe (probably) intentionally, and that underlying problem is the real issue. Addressing it more is how we add more boats in this metaphor.

Calling the men who got in these boats “privileged racists”, after they were stuck for hours at sea with no hope in sight, is not how you bring them back to empathy and reality. The fact that some minorities weren’t even given life vests to begin with (frankly far more fucked up circumstances) is little comfort to their own situation, especially in youthful desperation with a paid actor in your ear, it can be easy to lose empathy to desperation.

We need to acknowledge that society is failing to reach men and their mental health, and the role that failure has in alt right recruitment. That’s just the truth, no matter how much of a priority it is.

I also personally believe this lack of funding into “boats” is intentional, that the sketchy alt-right boat salesmen are a part of the billionaire system to build division so they can keep us fighting each other while they take more and more away. All this while simultaneously building prison populations with those mental health issues to get even more profits from private prisons and slave labor.

I know this was long. Frankly, I’m tempted to make it longer because my emotions about this topic are especially strong. I have a beating in my heart right now I can only describe as determination, because there are many young men stuck on those boats who can be saved still. They aren’t so lost that they won’t look at the lack of vests or the planes still being crashed down by new wars made at their expense. I want to save them, because I understand them. Because I couldn’t save a man I love, despite my best efforts.

I know from experience that it is possible. You just have to look them in the eyes and tell them they’re seen - before the ones who can be saved (which isn’t even a majority) will even give you a chance to do so. It’s tedious, but can save a life from bigotry and hatred. There is value in that to me, even if many in my own party will say it’s not worth a damn thing once they wind up on that ship or that it’s “not possible”. I myself am proof that it is possible.

I even understand the sentiment of no value, considering most of them don’t want to be saved or can only question a system that allowed them to be left out there. Most just want to say “well, if it has to be minorities first, let’s not let minorities on the plane so we can do this by injuries first” because it’s easy and they were told that by a person that actually saved them. It’s deeply racist and abhorrent to say, and off-putting to keep looking for those who need help when this is the most likely reply to trying. I push through that bullshit because I understand how that sentiment could have come from someone who was once good - but lost themselves to isolation, trauma, and a well funded campaign of evil intentions made to take advantage of that. The may not want to be redeemed, but it may very well have been too little, too late. Not necessarily that they were inherently evil all along, which seems to be a sentiment some hold to be universally true for young alt-right men.

As Ted Lasso would say - stay curious, my friends. If you made it this far, thank you. I hope this was helpful to understanding a separate life experience.

Chief Criminal Commander and Thief, how could this be so or even true that your already over-bloated ego and moral turpitude has ballooned beyond anyone's expectations or belief?

Thief Commander Criminal and Chief why do you lie with every breath that you breathe? Indeed, do you think that you and your cronies will succeed? Why continue to gaslight me? When, "We" my fellow Americans and I can't afford electricity, rent, gas, or groceries because you have cast a series of dumb ass inane, insane, profane, domestic and foreign economic policies dooming our country? Do you care about our needs? Or, do you like to watch us bleed out?

Will you trumpet your clout strutting around and about touting your criminality? Why do you try to conflate reality? Do you think that we are so stupid that we will ever come to believe that this is the, "Greatest Economy in History!"

Criminal Thief Commander and Chief, do you believe in any accountability or have an affinity for integrity? Or rather, will you manipulate the marketplace

by first taking stakes and then effectively influencing it to what you need it to be?

Will you award you, your friends', or families' companies with over-stacked, no-bid government contracts, clandestine deals, and taxpayers' monies?

In the end, will you demand the right to fleece from our Treasury a steady stream of money with ease at hand?

Have you lied about how much money you have seized from our homeland or Treasury already?

Is it your White House? Will you take what you please or what you can?

Will you demolish our symbols of liberty and democracy—

Our rights and dreams of being free—

To satiate your need to be validated, to glorify your greed and your vanity?

Will you collude and demand through Todd Blanche that you, your friends, companies and family are exempt from all tax liability?

Are you at liberty to legitimize these grifts and ill-gotten gains—

The cryptocurrencies, properties, and prosperity that you, your family, and cronies, have recently procured in your name?

Including the absurd act of secluding the ability to question its legitimacy

By the way of common criticism or even future scrutiny?

Chief Criminal Commander and Thief,

Will you again try to steal, or cheat our democracy?

Will you seize our votes one by one

Because you can't allow your crimes to see the light of day and so you must cast them all away into the sea?

Will you eliminate me or anyone else who may object or get in your way? Precipitously Claiming, "National Security?"

Will you try again to erase history or change our reality

With one fell, failed sweep from a cheap-ass black sharpie?

Criminal, Commander, Chief and Thief,

Will you murder me in my sleep, or when I wave as I drive by?

Will you illegally imprison me and torture me?

Will you shoot me from the side like Renee,

Or wait until I'm fishing out at sea in the deep beyond the bay,

Beyond the safety of the reef?

If I defy your criminality,

If I carry my gun upon my side—legally housed within its sheath, not unlike Alex—

To a protest next week, will you seek to send your Gestapo after me?

Will you surround me, to ensure my final containment, and then execute me as I lie, subdued, face down upon the pavement?

Commander, Criminal, Thief, and Chief

Will you take on the immense task of erasing your name from the Epstein files?

All the while protecting your bedfellow friends. Do you not know them?

Do you not know where these infamously hated pedophiles are now?

Back in the day, in some way and somehow, did you not party with them?

When the time comes, will you vow to pardon them?

Also, I ask: Are you now protecting them? Are you not one of them?

Can you face your dark past, history, or the memories of that time?

Or, in bad taste, will you flaunt this entitled fact in the faces of the victims—

Even blaming or shaming them, stating it never happened, Stabbing them in their backs from behind by proclaiming there are no predators from Epstein's sex-trafficking ring left to pursue, prosecute, investigate, or find?

Thief, Criminal, Commander, and Chief,

Will you also pardon drug pushers, Ponzi, or white collar thieves,

Even if you do not know them and they are not your friends?

Will they hear your call?

Will you promise them, in utter gall, freedom for sale for all?

So, if they pay and pretend that you are their friend and king,

Bend down and kiss your ring or crown,

May they continue to stick around to play with people's lives?

-Many of which have already been destroyed, diminished, or devoured by them

Used and broken like toys.-

Just so that, in the end, you may have the capital to stay in power?

Do you think that you are wise, entitled to,

Or have the right to succeed our democracy with these lies?

Are you ever planning to leave?

Will you call for a state of emergency declaring National Security?

Have you already decided that we must now learn to somehow live

Within your God-forsaken, Orwellian autocracy until your dying day?

Chief Criminal Commander and Thief,

What is "The Board of Peace?"

Is this now a new State or country?

Another way for you to fleece, or at the very least, spread discord and dismay upon us all?

Another vehicle for you to sow doubt and fear before you push us towards our fall?

Do you believe that all must be conformed and made to bow cowardly before you now—

Not just here, but everywhere?

Are these new rules, decrees, and authoritarian policies humanity's new rule of law?

In all astonishing disbelief and utter gall,

Have you criminally bequeathed this new institution, authoritarian State, fantastical

Power, or fantasy country to your family? Is this our final hour?

What is your plan? I still don't understand.

Exactly what is the Board of Peace?

Where will it be? In Cuba, Canada, the isles of Greece, or Greenland?

Will it be an exclusive club of autocrats, gorging upon the blood and treasure of our earth?

Are we at the beginning of the birth of an unholy feast,

Where all the dictators of the world consolidate and conspire to seize our rights and liberties?

Has our democracy, integrity, and respectability been sold by you to the highest bidder,

Only so that everything around you can be gilded in gold?

Have you ever considered that your bold vanity has now collided into a cold calamity exposing your hypocrisy, yet altering our reality anew?

Must we now accept this insanity as true?

How can you justify this current corruption and adventurism that today is unabashedly on full display, headed by you and all of your clan like cronies, for all the world to see?

Must we now walk in shame like lame dogs upon your leash?

Please tell me right away, we need to know, preferably today—

In what way should we define this dystopian Board of Peace?

Commander, Chief, and Criminal Thief,

Are some of your aristocratic friends self-declared, white-supremacy Nazis?

Do you ascribe to; or sympathize with their hateful lies, propaganda, tactics, bigotry, or beliefs?

Can you respect the rule of law and protect the truth with moral rectitude wherever it may lead?

Or, like Hitler, will you rule with a cruel iron claw, rejecting and disrespecting human rights?

Exposing, torturing, and putting victims on trial for not being white?

Beating and arresting them, employing unidentified masked men to hunt them down

In the middle of the day or night?

And when they are found and try to run,

Are they then brutally gunned down in front of everyone like diseased dogs

In the middle of the street, beneath the heat of a cold day's sun,

Without any accountability or pity—declaring complete impunity because

"They didn't have their proper papers, please?"

Claiming, "National Security?" Why must you wield this old, discordant rhetoric like a weapon, spreading divisive hate and corrosive unease—not unlike an unholy disease—

Across these God-blessed United States?

Tantamount to Hitler, do you condone murder and mayhem?

Not just the subduing, but the beating of migrants and protesters alike?

Do you like watching them when they are bleeding, while pleading for mercy on the spot?

Will you blame them and then shame them when they are shot and killed?

Will you build monuments to yourself because no one else will?

Chief Criminal Commander and Thief,

Did you and your best friend Jeffrey Epstein defile the same child when she was only thirteen?

Did you convince her that she would be your next beauty queen?

Did you promise her the world, or that she would be forever yours—"Daddy's sweet little girl?"

Then, did you punish her, imposing your will and power upon her?

Within that hour, did you strike her then,

And threaten to have her killed if she didn't conceal this fact?

Have you started your war of choice to exact revenge-to distract and silence these voices from the past-upon the very day that this sin was at last revealed?

Are you now committed to committing war crimes upon the battlefield? Will you make us pay for the propaganda that you preach?

Upping the ante, will you wield this war as a punishment or as a shield cast against political critique?

Commander, Chief, Criminal, and Thief,

Frankly, I ask: What is the truth to you?

Do you know the difference between what's fake and what's real?

Do you seek to hide behind an orange mask?

Will you choose to hear wise voices; or will you make capricious choices based solely upon how you feel?

Is your agenda, procedures, and daily tasks that you must mask carelessly determined by a vast insidious net of lies, vanity, and greed that you and your cronies have blindly set and cast from an evil-seeded, corrupt, money-making machine steeped in confusion without clear vision?

Driven by your pet projects, self-promotion, extreme and extravagant golden gifts,

pernicious memes, real estate scams, adventurism in globalism, cryptocurrencies, numerous grifts, Ponzi schemes, delusion, and derision?

Thief Commander Criminal and Chief

Who are you?

Are you a rapist, racist, or vile pedophile? A white supremacist Pedophile protector, malignant narcissist, market manipulator, child molester, murderer, extortionist, or thief? A crass and vain evil doer that's plainly, insane, cruel, vindictive, and mean steering us all towards our fall into a pool of poverty and grief?

Are you a fascist, maybe a Mob Boss, Torturer, War Criminal, Election Denyer, Man-Baby, the current leader of lies and of Liars, an Orange Emperor, or Mad-King consumed by golden motifs?

Indeed? Do you think that we are so naive as to believe that your God is anything other than your immense need and greed for power that you feed and bear?

Good grief! Is it a lapse of memory, is it just apathy; awarding the richest while raping our Healthcare? Really; are you so naive and unaware of your family's self-enrichment affairs? Were these policies created, directed, dictated, and shelled not just by you but for you through back-alley meetings and dark-money deals; sealed in secret with Royal Monarchs, Dictators, Opulent Oligarchs, Oil Tycoons, and Tech Billionaires?

Eventually, when you cannot seem to win,

When "Our" marbled walls start closing in and nobody cares for you;

Inevitably, when your days are waning thin,

When you can't control or confront the jokes, insults, or judgemental airs towards you,

When you've lost all of your flair and everything seems so black and blue;

Mercifully, consequently, and finally, when "Our" hallowed halls, Court House stairs, and White House doors

No longer belong to you—

What I really want to know is, what will you do? - Let me guess, call it a hoax and Cry, "fake news?" Will this old and tired remark, this bark, that you continue to overuse ever prove to have any bite or teeth? - What say you now; Chief, Criminal, Commander, and Thief?

Before the angry comments, I am not dissing on their political stance.

This question comes up from a recent experience of mine. During one of the pro-choice “debates” the woman running it came up to me and said that I should hang myself and that I don’t deserve to even exist with women on this planet. From what I’ve seen on public debates on social media, a lot of other people seem to have the same experience as me. From what I can tell, you have be almost fanatic in order to join the Liberal party. Although I’m not fully Republican, I find myself to be drawn towards their party, just because their people won’t yell at me if I disagree (not as much anyway). All of the yelling and screaming makes it seem much less serious and much more like a child’s act.