There will be “mass reductions” in the federal government under President-elect Donald Trump‘s second administration, Vivek Ramaswamy predicted this weekend. Ramaswamy, whom Trump picked to lead the brand new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) along with Elon Musk, spoke to Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures” about plans to cut the federal bureaucracy. “We expect mass reductions,” Ramaswamy said. “We expect certain agencies to be deleted outright. We expect mass reductions in force in areas of the federal government that are bloated. We expect massive cuts among federal contractors and others who are overbilling the federal government …  I think people will be surprised by, I think, how quickly we’re able to move with some of those changes, given the legal backdrop the Supreme Court has given us.” Today on @SundayFutures with @MariaBartiromo, @VivekGRamaswamy spoke about the goals for the newly created Department of Government Efficiency.@FoxNews pic.twitter.com/Sh9CA5KZZ6 — SundayMorningFutures (@SundayFutures) November 17, 2024 Ramaswamy argued that slicing down parts of the Executive Branch can begin right away through executive action. He indicated that “over half-a-trillion dollars that’s spent every year right now was not even authorized by Congress in the first place,” and said that would be their area of focus. “The dirty little secret right now … is people we elect to run the government, they’re not the ones who actually run the government. It’s the unelected bureaucrats in the administrative state. That was created through executive action. It’s going to be fixed through executive action,” he said. Rescinding federal regulations “gives us the industrial logic to then downsize the size of that administrative state,” Ramaswamy explained, adding that “the beauty of all of this is” that Trump could get the ball rolling through executive actions without approval from Congress and then “you look at those bigger portions of the federal budget that need to be addressed one by one.” He noted that “our goal is not to be cruel, by the way, to the individual federal employees. Most of them, I do want to say this, are individually good people, and we want to be compassionate and generous in how we handle this transition. But the real issue is, there’s just too many of them. We don’t need 4 million and we shouldn’t have 4 million civil servants who can’t be elected — who aren’t even elected or can’t be removed from their positions. It’s antidemocratic.” RELATED: How Elon Musk’s DOGE Will Work Ramaswamy also suggested some departments could be moved away from Washington, D.C., to where they can “be more accountable to the people,” but stressed that downsizing would be the main focus. Though he did not explicitly name any particular agencies that would be shut down, he acknowledged how Trump has spoken about getting rid of the Department of Education. “President Trump [has] talked extensively about areas like the Department of Education,” Ramaswamy said. “Obviously, those kinds of agencies shouldn’t even exist and should be returned to the states. But it’s a culture, Maria, that’s pervaded the entire federal government of hiring people who have no accountability to everyday Americans.”

Kathleen Sebelius, who served as secretary of the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department under former President Barack Obama, warned that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. taking on her old position could  “end up killing people.” The alarming remark came during an MSNBC interview after President-elect Trump announced last week Kennedy as his pick to lead HHS during his second term. Sebelius cited Kennedy’s skeptical stance on vaccines, one which Kennedy has defended as not being outright anti-vaxx. “I think we are talking about magnitudes of danger beyond erroneously making legal decisions. This is life or death. The HHS affects people from birth to their grave and is intimately connected with every state in the country. So, this could be very dangerous. I think it is totally disqualifying for anyone who seeks to lead the major health agency in this country, and one of the leaders in the world, to unequivocally say there is no safe and effective vaccine,” Sebelius said. Former HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius: Robert Kennedy Nomination “Could End Up Killing People” More – https://t.co/ibh55FtC10 “We are talking about magnitudes of danger beyond erroneously making legal decisions. This is life or death. The HHS affects people from birth to their… pic.twitter.com/EHmMz3G0N5 — RCP Video (@rcpvideo) November 17, 2024 “That, in and of itself, from the bully pulpit of HHS, could end up killing people,” she added. “My grandson is too young to get many vaccinations yet, and having him exposed to unvaccinated people with polio and measles is a terrifying thought, especially after we have eradicated those diseases as a major health initiative. I think this is absolutely terrifying, and people should understand how serious it is.” Kennedy, who is pushing a “Make America Health Again” twist on Trump’s “Make America Great Again” platform, has insisted that he supports vaccines in general, as long as they pass sufficient testing. During a NewsNation town hall in June of 2023 — when Kennedy was still running his own campaign for the presidency — Kennedy pushed back on family medicine physician Tariq Butt’s assertion that he espoused a view on vaccines that was “dangerous” to millions of people. “I’ve never been anti-vaccine, and I’ve said that hundreds and hundreds of times but it doesn’t matter … Using a pejorative to describe me is a way of silencing me or marginalizing me,” Kennedy said. “My position on vaccines, I think is — I think virtually every American would agree with my stance on vaccines, which is that vaccines should be tested like other medicines. They should be safety tested. And unfortunately, vaccines are not safety tested, they’re not.”

People crowned John Krasinski the Sexiest Man Alive, and many people agree. Of course, John’s come a long way from his cute guy in the next cubicle on The Office. He took the roles in Jack Ryan and A Quiet Place, solidifying him as a leading man. John Krasinski’s boy next door looks, and charm have turned plenty of heads, including Martha Stewart. The lifestyle maven recently gave People‘s choice a big thumbs up. View this post on Instagram A post shared by People Magazine (@people) Martha Stewart Thinks John Krasinski Deserved The Sexiest Man Alive Honors Martha recently told People she knows John personally and finds him very attractive. “John is pretty sexy,” Martha reportedly shared with the magazine at the opening of a Louis Vuitton store in New York City. Not only does Martha Stewart find John Krasinski sexy, but they’ve spent some time together. “He’s been over to my house, and he’s pretty sexy,” she added. Martha complimented John on his career and said, “He’s pretty good at all the work he does, too.” It’s not just John that Martha finds attractive, she once told People she had several stars on her shows that she found exceptionally attractive. “When Russell Crowe came on, he was still fit and gorgeous, just having done maybe Gladiator. He was pretty attractive. Matthew McConaughey, he still is pretty attractive. Tom Cruise in his first movies was so cute and attractive,” she said. Martha married her ex-husband, Andrew Stewart, in 1961, and the pair divorced in 1990. They had one child together, daughter Alexis. But it doesn’t seem Martha is too concerned about a man. Andy Cohen asked her on an episode of Watch What Happens Live With Andy Cohen if she’d ever join the Golden Bachelor, and she shut him down quickly. Not even for $1 million an episode, “No, the guys aren’t hot enough.” As far as John Krasinski is concerned, Martha Stewart jokingly warned his bride of 14 years, Emily Blunt to, “Watch out, wife.” This story’s featured image is by Kathy Hutchins via Shutterstock. The post Martha Stewart Gives Hysterical Warning To Wife Of Sexiest Man Alive John Krasinski appeared first on InspireMore.

Climate Change Was the Big Election Loser

Americans are tired of being told their intellect is limited by race or sex — especially women. Like other groups, women have long been taken for granted by the Democratic Party, as if pro-choice talking points alone are enough to secure their blind loyalty to the rest of the party’s platform.“The View” co-host Sunny Hostin certainly thinks this is the case, calling Trump’s victory a “a referendum of cultural resentment” merely because Americans overwhelmingly refused the policy platform of “a mixed-race woman married to a Jewish guy.”No, women didn’t vote for Trump because they are 'so severe upon their own sex.'The Sunny Hostins of the Democratic establishment refuse to engage in serious self-reflection that could explain the surge of women and other traditionally Democratic groups voting Republican in this election. Are women simply suffering from a mass self-hatred that enticed them to vote for Donald Trump? Or have Democrats made a critical mistake in assuming that abortion is the only issue women care about politically?Kamala Harris bet on winning the women’s vote by making reproductive rights the center of her campaign. This strategy isn’t new — Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and other Democrats have used it before. However, this approach has arguably become one of the Democrats’ gravest miscalculations, and Harris paid the price.Over the past four years, women have faced the same economic pressures as men — buying groceries, filling gas tanks, and dealing with higher interest rates. Men aren’t the only ones who care about the economy, and no matter how often politicians chant, “My body, my choice,” it can’t drown out the financial strain of Bidenomics. Women, like men, wanted economic solutions and found them with Trump. For them, Kamala Harris and “my body, my choice” were not nearly enough.Women’s bodies seem to matter to Democrats only when it comes to abortion. After the COVID pandemic, women have led the push for greater medical autonomy, nutritional transparency, and broader access to holistic, cycle-based health care. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promised to address these issues by holding Big Pharma and Big Food accountable, and women rallied around him in droves. But instead of supporting RFK Jr. and the women’s issues he represented, the Democratic Party labeled him an “anti-vax conspiracy theorist,” dismissing both him and the women he galvanized. Is it any wonder they followed Kennedy across the aisle to Trump?Democrats also seem indifferent to women’s health care standards beyond abortion access. Women are continually overprescribed birth control as a blanket treatment for almost any ailment, wreaking havoc on their bodies. When outlets like Evie magazine highlighted how Big Pharma profits from pumping women full of synthetic estrogens, the Washington Post labeled the writers “conspiracy theorists.” But don’t worry — if birth control fails, Democrats will ensure you still have access to abortion.Yet the “my body, my choice” mantra doesn’t seem to apply to women’s sports, bathrooms, or sororities. Kamala Harris might have played Beyoncé’s “Girls Run the World” at her rallies, but when her party cheers for an Algerian man beating elite female athletes or celebrates Lia Thomas while dismissing Riley Gaines as a “right-wing extremist,” the pretense of “women’s empowerment” becomes hard to believe.Women are also tired of being told by the “woke elite” that they’re “fatphobic” if they don’t laud Lizzo as a health and beauty icon while Adele and Rebel Wilson are criticized for promoting “unhealthy” beauty standards through their weight loss. According to MSNBC, fitness is a sign of “right-wing extremism,” so it’s supposedly better to sit on the couch and pop birth control.When Democrats celebrate being an overweight, unhealthy, androgynous “menstruating person” over a mom who works out, wears dresses, and drinks raw milk, they risk alienating a significant portion of their base.The Democrats assume women have an obligatory, blind allegiance requiring them to support any woman running for office regardless of her policies. Such an assumption that a woman’s political capacities are limited to a candidate’s sex is not only an insult to women’s intelligence — it’s frankly anti-feminist.In response to Sunny Hostin: No, women didn’t vote for Trump because they are “so severe upon their own sex.” Like birth control, your party prescribed “my body, my choice” as a cure-all for any political ailment afflicting women over the past four years of Biden and Harris’ policy failures. Trump’s platform actually listened to women. You took them for granted.

Grover Norquist on Degrees: 'They Do Look Good on the Wall'

Fox News: 'Minnesota Election Judge Faces Felony Charges Over Accepting Unregistered Votes'

Cry More! Trump and Company Attend UFC at MSG and CBS News Just Can't Deal

Want to Live the American Dream? You'll Need a Six-Figure Salary

Election Integrity Win for Huntington Beach, CA, As Judge Rules They Can Proceed With Voter ID