Black conservatives and moderates are the only black racists. The post According to Anti-Racism‚ Any Black Person Who Isn’t a Leftist… is Racist appeared first on Frontpage Mag.

U.S. intelligence officials warn of a growing threat posed by the Lebanese Hezbollah terrorist group. According to four officials familiar with the intelligence‚ they could hit inside the United States. They might first hit Middle East interests. The Iran-backed militant group would likely target U.S. personnel in the Middle East first‚ the officials said. And […] The post Hezbollah Could Attack on US Soil As Borders Remain Open appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

At a time when Americans struggle to pay for their own housing‚ a new program in Maine will provide asylum seekers – illegal aliens – with free housing for up to two years‚ Newsweek reports. Maine is launching a program to give some illegal aliens free housing. How about sending them home? Brunswick‚ Maine‚ plans […] The post Maine to Give Free Housing to Illegal Crossers appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Iran-backed Houthis rebels in Yemen are likely to retaliate for U.S. and U.K. airstrikes on dozens of targets used by the rebels to launch attacks on commercial shipping and U.S. military vessels‚ a top Pentagon military officer said Friday. Neither the U.S. nor the Houthis yet know the extent of the damage from Thursday evening’s bombardment‚ Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Sims‚ who heads the operations directorate of the Joint Chiefs of Staff‚ said on a call with reporters. But‚ Sims said‚ it’s “within the DNA” of the Houthi clan to continue attacks that don’t bring them any immediate benefit despite realizing that the U.S. will not relent in efforts to secure free international waters. “My guess is that the Houthis are trying to figure things out on the ground and trying to determine what capabilities still exist for them‚” Sims said. “As you know‚ their rhetoric has been pretty strong and pretty high. I would expect that they will attempt some sort of retaliation.” U.S. aircraft‚ warships‚ and a submarine fired over 150 kinds of munitions at dozens of targets in 28 locations‚ Sims said. After striking more than 60 targets‚ including radars‚ missile launch sites and storage facilities‚ and munitions depots at 16 locations‚ the U.S. conducted a second round of strikes on 12 more targets‚ he said. The Houthis launched a ballistic missile at a commercial vessel Friday after the U.S.-U.K. airstrikes‚ Sims confirmed. The missile missed its target‚ but demonstrates the group’s persistence in attempting to shut down trade through a critical waterway‚ he said. “We know that they have fired at least one missile in retaliation‚” Sims said. Although the Houthis claim they target only ships heading toward Israeli ports or linked to Israel in opposition to that country’s war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip‚ a senior Biden administration official noted Thursday that Houthi targets have been indiscriminate. Tehran has provided the Houthis with funding‚ training‚ and weapons the rebels have used to launch attacks on international maritime transit. The Houthis take direction from Iran‚ Sims said. Reporter: “The bombing of the Houthis — if the attacks don't stop‚ will you continue with the strikes?”President Biden: “We will make sure that we respond to the Houthis as they continue this outrageous behavior‚ along with our allies.” pic.twitter.com/xJoXA6fcdL— The Recount (@therecount) January 12‚ 2024 Iran should realize that continued conflict in the region “is not advantageous to them‚” Sims said. “The hope would be that any real thought of retaliation is based on a clear understanding that‚ you know‚ we simply are not going to be messed with here.” “I don’t think they would want us to strike‚” he said. “If you were operating a ballistic missile launcher last night‚ you certainly didn’t want us to strike.” Sims expressed optimism that the Houthis no longer have the capability to carry out complex operations‚ such as one Tuesday involving multiple U.S. warships downing 24 drones‚ cruise missiles‚ and ballistic missiles in a single attack. “I know we have degraded capability‚ I don’t believe that they would be able to execute the same way they did the other day‚ but we will see‚” he said. This report originally was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.   The post ‘Not Going to Be Messed With’: US Expects Houthi Response to Airstrikes‚ Pentagon Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A large percentage of Americans don’t know or outright disagree that marriage builds stronger families and is linked to better well-being for children‚ according to the annual American Family Survey. This is despite the fact that such benefits have been proven time and again. These attitudes may be due in part to nearly half of all U.S. children today spending at least part of their childhood in a non-intact family. Overall‚ the majority of U.S. adults have a positive view of marriage‚ agreeing it has benefits for individuals and society. Still‚ a significant portion of respondents seem unclear about the value of marriage. For example‚ 54% of people didn’t agree that society is better off when more people are married‚ with 19% disagreeing and 35% being unsure. As to the questions about family stability‚ 48% didn’t agree that marriage is needed to create stronger families and 46% didn’t agree that marriage makes families and children better off financially. The ninth annual survey was conducted by Brigham Young University‚ the Wheatley Institute‚ YouGov‚ and Deseret News and released in December. In most cases‚ about half of participants agreed at least somewhat with each of the statements about the benefits of marriage. On most of the questions‚ though‚ nearly half of survey participants were unsure what they thought about the benefits of marriage. Researchers have well established that marriage is associated with numerous positive outcomes for both adults and children. Marriage is the factor most strongly associated with human happiness‚ and it is also linked with greater financial well-being and better health. Marriage provides the best environment for children to grow and develop into thriving adults. Children raised by their married parents are much less likely to be poor; have a far lower risk of being abused; and are more likely to graduate from high school‚ attend college‚ and to experience social mobility. The share of married parents in a community is one of the greatest factors predicting social mobility for children. Marriage is also significantly more stable than cohabiting relationships. Children born to married parents are much less likely to experience parental breakup compared to children whose parents are only living together.  Despite the numerous proven benefits of marriage‚ it makes sense that quite a few Americans are agnostic regarding its value. Marriage rates in the U.S. have declined precipitously during the last several decades. Unwed childbearing is the norm in many communities‚ and nearly half of all children in the U.S. spend at least a part of their childhood in a non-intact family. Thus‚ fewer Americans have been raised in homes and communities where they see examples of strong marriages. Family instability is particularly common among Americans with less than a college education. While‚ in general‚ Americans with more education and from stable families themselves tend to reinforce traditional norms around marriage for their own children (getting married and having children within marriage)‚ norms surrounding marriage have dwindled in many other communities. Many Americans’ increasing sense of non-judgmentalism surrounding sexual relationships has led to widespread silence on the benefits of marriage. Our culture needs more messages about the importance of marriage. Leaders in private organizations‚ like churches‚ schools‚ and the media‚ as well as policymakers‚ should help people understand why marriage matters and assist them in building the knowledge and skills necessary to achieve healthy marriage relationships. Some private organizations and policymakers are working to build and strengthen marriages in their communities using a variety of creative tools. For example‚ Utah just celebrated the 25th anniversary of its statewide effort to promote healthier marriages‚ primarily through relationship education. A handful of states have a “premarital education promotion policy” that incentivizes premarital education for engaged couples by offering a discount or waiver of the marriage license fee. A program called Communio helps churches establish and operate marriage and relationship education courses for their congregants and surrounding communities. More work like this is needed to help rebuild a culture of marriage in America. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post The Growing Ignorance of the Benefits of Marriage—and Why It’s Dangerous appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you were barred from the road you take to work‚ would you care? Thankfully‚ those who pave our roads aren’t picking and choosing who uses Them‚ but the same cannot be said of Big Tech. Social media’s expansion into our everyday lives has succeeded in replacing asphalt for algorithm‚ yet social media platforms are regularly blocking people’s access to the information superhighway by blocking what people can post as well as others’ access to those posts. Every year that our public conversations and debates become more digital‚ protecting speech online becomes more important. Under the misleading guise of “content moderation‚” social media platforms have engineered a pattern of biased censorship against conservatives. There are obvious examples like Facebook removing satirical Babylon Bee posts or Twitter locking the New York Post’s account for breaking the Hunter Biden laptop story. Just as perilous are the more hidden manipulations between the users and content‚ where algorithms and human moderators can shadow ban “undesirable” persons and statements‚ suppressing others from viewing the content without notifying the authors. Last year’s “Twitter Files” release provided damning evidence of the platform using “visibility filtering” (the company’s code for shadow banning) to punish popular but institutionally disfavored accounts like Libs of TikTok. Regardless of its form‚ Big Tech’s prolonged addiction to censorship reveals a market failure. In other industries‚ the remedy would be competition. If barred from one road on the way to work‚ why not take another? Due to network effects and myriad anti-competitive practices‚ a small number of successful social media companies today function as oligopolies‚ able to work together to throttle your access to all viable roads at their discretion. Twitter bypassed the censorship problem because an eccentric billionaire mortgaged himself for his beliefs. We should not expect more calvary like Elon Musk in the Silicon Valley. Thankfully‚ Texas and Florida had their eyes wide open. These states passed first-of-their-kind laws to establish their citizens’ right to speak online over Big Tech’s right to censor. Texas focused directly on preventing social media bans over political viewpoints. Florida required platforms to publish their censorship rules and to give their users proper notice of changes to those policies‚ while also giving political candidates immunity from censorship during their campaigns. Unsurprisingly‚ Big Tech‚ represented by industry associations like NetChoice‚ sued these states to protect their unregulated oligopoly over the digital public square. This yearslong fight is coming to a head with oral arguments scheduled for next month at the Supreme Court. Although NetChoice raised numerous complaints‚ the court limited the case to only two questions: Do the laws’ restrictions on Big Tech’s censorship of posts comply with the First Amendment? Do the laws’ requirements that social media companies provide an explanation for each instance of censorship comply with the First Amendment? Perhaps the most important assumption in these questions that could decide this case is‚ whose speech is whose on social media? When Grandma posts on Facebook‚ does the statement belong to her as the author or to the website as a publisher whose algorithm inserted it into your feed? NetChoice argues that Grandma’s story belongs to Facebook and‚ therefore‚ Facebook receives First Amendment rights for choosing to feature or censor her comments through its editorial discretion. The Heritage Foundation partnered with the Scott Rasmussen National Survey to survey 1‚000 American adults‚ asking them this very question: “Who is primarily responsible for the content of posts on social media sites?” Sixty-six percent‚ representing a majority of men‚ women‚ the young‚ the elderly‚ conservatives‚ and liberals attributed ownership to “the people who post the content.” Only 27% agreed with NetChoice that posts are actually the platforms speaking to you‚ with 8% of respondents being uncertain. Public opinion is clear: Grandma speaks for Grandma. However‚ even if the vast majority of Americans are incorrect and social media websites can claim your speech as their own to protect their right to censor‚ these companies are hypocrites every time they invoke what is called Section 230 to protect themselves. This is a 1996 statute meant to shield nascent online platforms from the liabilities of being a publisher. For example‚ if something illegal was posted on Myspace‚ the website was protected because it was not Myspace’s speech. Yet today‚ Big Tech is telling us that they deserve to have it both ways—that posts on social media are simultaneously the platforms’ (to benefit from First Amendment protections) and not the platforms’ (to benefit from Section 230 protections). If no other institution‚ logic‚ or physical law of the universe has this sort of bold inconsistency‚ I am skeptical of Big Tech’s entitlement to it. Only last year‚ Google was in the Supreme Court arguing that YouTube’s targeted recommendations to users were not editorial speech and‚ therefore‚ merited Section 230 protections‚ contradicting this year’s NetChoice legal arguments. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling on this case was loud and clear: “Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say.” Big Tech is wrong on the facts and expects Americans to trust them to behave as they engage in doublespeak. Let’s bring them to court. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post Key Legal Question for Big Tech Censorship: Do Social Media Platforms Own Your Posts‚ or Do You? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

More on the Substack Nazi Problem

Prescriptions for medications to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder‚ or ADHD‚ surged during the COVID-19 pandemic‚ according to a new study. Prescriptions for stimulant and non-stimulant ADHD medications spiked during the coronavirus pandemic‚ according to a new study published in JAMA Psychiatry on Wednesday. The sudden demand for ADHD drugs helped fuel a shortage. There were approximately 5.9 million new prescriptions for stimulants in the first two years of the coronavirus pandemic — roughly 700‚000 more than in the two years before the pandemic started‚ or a 14% increase. Non-stimulant ADHD drug-use soared by 32% during the pandemic. Stimulant prescriptions for American adults ages 20 to 39 flared up 30% compared to before the pandemic. Meanwhile‚ non-stimulant ADHD prescriptions for the same age group skyrocketed by 81%.The use of stimulants and non-stimulant ADHD drugs rose by 25% in women. Meanwhile‚ prescriptions for other behavioral health issues — including antidepressants‚ benzodiazepines‚ and buprenorphine — did not change significantly in that same time period. Dr. Ann Childress told Time magazine that the increase in ADHD medication usage is likely due to more people working from home and getting easily distracted. The Las Vegas-based psychiatrist added‚ “People are more open to talking about mental health issues now."Telemedicine also increased ADHD medication use because it made it easier to get the medications. In October‚ the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services announced it had extended telemedicine flexibilities through Dec. 31‚ 2024.Another possible factor was people becoming more aware of adult ADHD on social media. A study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released in March also found that ADHD drug use increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. The CDC said stimulant prescriptions rose from 3.6% in 2016 to 4.1% in 2021. However‚ stimulant prescriptions rose more than 10% for females aged 15-44 years and males aged 25-44 years during 2020-2021.There was previously a "demand-driven" shortage of Adderall — a common stimulant used to treat ADHD.In October 2022‚ the Food and Drug Administration announced a shortage of the "immediate-release formulation of amphetamine mixed salts‚ commonly referred to by the brand name Adderall or Adderall IR."An FDA spokesperson told ABC News on Thursday that some manufacturers of ADHD medications are still having "supply issues‚" but there are currently nine manufacturers with availability. The spokesperson added that "there will be additional supply returning in the coming months."The DEA and FDA previously called on manufacturers to increase production to meet the elevated demand. Adderall production is limited by the DEA because it is a controlled substance.The Mayo Clinic defines attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder as a "chronic condition that affects millions of children and often continues into adulthood" that "includes a combination of persistent problems‚ such as difficulty sustaining attention‚ hyperactivity‚ and impulsive behavior."The CDC estimates that there are approximately 6 million children between the ages of 3 and 17 — about 10% — who have been diagnosed with ADHD.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A man who has filed lawsuits in dozens of states in a vain attempt thus far to knock former President Donald Trump off the primary ballot has now been accused of filing false tax returns for financial gain.On Wednesday‚ a statement from the U.S. Attorney's Office of the Northern District of Texas announced that John Anthony Castro has been charged with 33 counts of aiding and assisting in the preparation and presentation of a false and fraudulent return. The allegations stem from Castro's "virtual tax preparation business‚" Castro &; Company LLC‚ which has locations in Washington‚ D.C.‚ Orlando‚ and Mansfield‚ Texas.According to the allegations‚ for years‚ Castro bamboozled prospective clients by‚ first‚ giving them estimates of the tax returns that his competitors were likely to get them and then promising to secure a much larger return. Oftentimes‚ he would convince them to split the larger return with him‚ the statement claimed.To achieve those higher returns‚ Castro "generated false deductions without the taxpayer’s knowledge‚" the press release said.In 2018‚ an undercover federal agent may have caught Castro red-handed. According to the press release‚ Castro gave the agent the same spiel about securing a much better return than his rivals could‚ guessing that they would likely get him about $300‚ and then passed the agent along to one of his employees. During their conversation‚ the employee reportedly "did not identify any deductions" for which the agent might qualify‚ and the agent "denied any facts that would support deductions‚" the press release said. Nevertheless‚ Castro drew up the agent's filing‚ "claiming $29‚339 in fraudulent deductions‚" the statement said. As a result‚ the agent supposedly received a $6‚007 refund‚ of which he kept just over half‚ $3‚008. The other $2‚999 allegedly went into Castro's pocket.These and other alleged false tax returns resulted "in hundreds of thousands of improperly paid claims‚" the statement insisted."This is precisely the type of conduct IRS Criminal Investigation and our law enforcement partners are committed to deterring‚" said Tammy Tomlins of the Newark Field Office. "Today’s indictment sends a clear message‚ you will be held accountable‚ if you abuse our tax system for your personal financial gain."Castro‚ 40‚ appeared in court on Tuesday‚ though whether he entered a plea is unclear. As each of the 33 counts carries a sentence of up to three years in federal prison‚ he faces a total of 99 years behind bars if convicted.Castro unequivocally denied the charges in an interview with Newsweek‚ calling them "totally bogus." He also insisted they were politically motivated after his numerous lawsuits to try and remove Trump from the ballot because of supposed "insurrection.""We discussed the issue in 2020‚" he explained. "It was resolved in 2021. Why wait three more years to issue the indictment? And why impanel the grand jury right when I start taking on Trump? It's pure and total political retaliation."Newsweek noted that the charges against Castro were brought under the Biden administration by a Biden-appointed prosecutor.Castro‚ who is running for president as a Republican‚ has filed lawsuits in almost 30 states‚ and many of them — including those filed in Arizona‚ Florida‚ and Nevada — have already been dismissed. A district court in New Hampshire also rejected Castro's lawsuit there‚ ruling that Castro never "provided any evidence suggesting that he has voters or contributors in New Hampshire" or that he would "benefit from voter or contributor defections from Trump to himself." That decision was later upheld on appeal.Castro's campaign website‚ which appears to have been deactivated‚ positioned him as a blue-collared conservative who pulled himself up by his bootstraps. "John Anthony was born into a working class family who did not have the means to pay for his college or law school. Against all odds‚ John Anthony eventually graduated from Georgetown Law‚ founded his own law firm‚ started an Ai tech company‚ and is now ready to offer his leadership to his country as President of the United States‚" it said‚ Law&;Crime reported.Castro did graduate from law school but "is not licensed to practice law in the United States‚" according to the indictment. To date‚ not one of Castro's lawsuits against the former president has prevailed. Presidential candidate from Texas sues to keep Trump off NH ballot www.youtube.com Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Celebrated' Author Joyce Carol Oates Steps in it Again While Trying to Claim That the Bible is 'Fiction'