Ever since Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the election in 2000, the Dems have been pitching a temper tantrum about the electoral college. It’s been a 24-year drumbeat of: The electoral college is an obsolete artifact of the 18th century. The will of the people is being ignored. It’s not democratic — in a country that’s not a democracy. Suddenly, the people who want to control every aspect of our lives, are all for pure democracy. Our founders were wise beyond the average leftist’s limited intellect. They understood that pure democracies always end in looting and tyranny. With the right propaganda and moral decay, it’s just a matter of time before some dictator wannabe convinces 51 percent of the mob to vote their feelings and give him autocratic powers to make the wealthy pay their share (i.e. redistribute the wealth from the group that earned it, to the group that didn’t). Of course, after the redistribution has been completed and the booty consumed, the prosperity will wane but the tyranny will remain. If the Dems keep pushing this bill, I may yet get to see them hoist themselves on their own petard in four years. That’s why our founders were big fans of checks and balances. They understood that the only good government is a government incapable of enslaving its citizens. To that end, they entrusted the states with power over the federal government. States have influence over legislation (via the Senate) and elections (via the choice of delegates for the electoral college). (READ MORE: The Imaginary Electoral College Advantage for Trump) But none of that matters to our leftists. If the electoral college is standing between California and New York dictating to the rest of the country how to live, it is an undemocratic relic that must be eliminated. They just needed to find a way around the Constitution without that troublesome debate and amendment process. That’s when the Dems came up with the National Popular Vote Bill. They’re trying to get a controlling majority of states to pass the bill, which would award their state’s electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote — thus circumventing the check on concentrated power which the Constitution provides. The bill has already passed in 17 states, and the District of Columbia: Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington, California, Illinois, and New York. Those jurisdictions collectively have 209 electoral votes. Even though those states have passed the bill, it does not become operational until states with an additional 61 electoral votes pass it. At that point the participating states will have the necessary 270 electoral votes needed to control the electoral college. Unfortunately, short of Supreme Court intervention, there’s nothing the peasants in flyover country can do about it. Have you noticed anything peculiar about the participating states? There’s not a single red or swing state among them. It’s a scheme designed by the Dems to use the states they control, to silence the states that they don’t control. The National Popular Vote Bill is a dirty trick to disenfranchise states like Florida and Pennsylvania, thus cementing one-party rule over the executive branch. However, there’s something proponents of the National Popular Vote Bill never understood. Republicans haven’t lost the popular vote because they can’t win it. They’ve lost it because they haven’t been trying to win it. They’ve been playing by the rules — something the Dems don’t understand. The Presidency is won by winning the electoral college, not the popular vote. It’s part of that little “checks and balances” thingy that our founders came up with. That’s why just about every Republican in modern history has competed to win enough states, rather than a popular majority. But that hasn’t stopped the Democrats from undermining the peaceful transfer of power by claiming that a loss of the popular vote delegitimized the election of George W. Bush (in 2000) and Donald Trump (in 2016). But then Donald Trump decided to try for a return to the Oval Office and ran a very unconventional campaign in 2024. He didn’t play the game as a calculated application of gamesmanship. He wanted more than the win. He wanted to give the Dems the spanking that they had coming. He campaigned for the votes of all Americans, not just those in competitive states. He held rallies across all of America, including the blue states of New York, Minnesota, California, Colorado, and Illinois. He knew he was never going to win those states, but by encouraging Republicans in those states to vote anyway, he ran up his popular vote total. Guess what? The Donald delivered a tear inducing beating to those who had impugned his character, attacked his wealth, attempted to imprison him, and celebrated attempts on his life. He won the electoral college 312 to 228, and the popular vote by almost 5 million votes. (READ MORE: The Electoral College and Slavery: A Reality Check) It has been pure schadenfreude watching the radicals melt down on national TV after the citizens of the United States selected Adolph Hitler to lead us into a brighter future (snark intended). After being called a racist womanizing semi-fascist Nazi for the past eight years, I feel entitled to trigger their anguish a bit more.  I’d like the Dems to consider how this election would have turned out if the National Popular Vote Bill had already been operational. Can you imagine Joy Reid’s tears upon finding out that the Donald had won the electoral college 521 to 17 — after being awarded the votes of the participating states? Can you visualize the tweets of “Meathead” Reiner when his home state of California was awarded to the “cancerous” Donald Trump? How many profanities would “Raging Bull” De Niro be able to scream when his home state of New York was awarded to the “convicted felon.” It would have been glorious!  If the Dems keep pushing this bill, I may yet get to see them hoist themselves on their own petard in four years. Thinking of JD Vance or Ron DeSantis with a 500+ electoral college landslide gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling all over. Note: Obviously I’m not in favor of selecting our President by popular vote. But if the Dems continue down this path, they may discover that it comes with some unintended consequences. John Green is a political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho. He is a staff writer for the American Free News Network and can be reached at greenjeg@gmail.com. The post If Only We’d Had the National Popular Vote Bill appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

“Kids these days.” We often hear older generations complaining about the younger generation because of how they’ve gotten softer and had much easier lives than previous cohorts. Young people respond with “OK Boomer,” blowing it off as something the old, cranky generations always say. It’s as universal a phrase as “back in my day.” But this time, the complaint might carry more weight. There’s evidence that young people are truly maturing more slowly than previously. The kids are staying kids for far too long. I’ve seen it in my own experiences with my Gen Z peers how young Americans have been infantilized — and the cultural implications of it. We laugh at the videos of hysterical young (and old) Americans reacting to President Trump’s landslide victory and stories of college campuses canceling classes and providing “safe spaces” for students. It’s funny, but it’s also a troubling result of our culture’s chronic coddling of young people. According to Pew Research, young Americans are reaching key life milestones — getting a full-time job, being financially independent, getting married, and more — at a much later age than previous generations. The trend of delaying full-time jobs, financial independence, and marriage reflects a culture that encourages prolonged dependence rather than independence. In 1980, 64 percent of 21-year-olds had gotten their first full-time job compared to the 39 percent in 2021. And the 32 percent of young people married at 21-years-old in 1980 dropped to a measly six percent. Both metrics have decreased by 25 percent.  Think about it.  It’s no wonder the average age for a groom is 30 and for a bride 28 when they’re being provided legos, mindfulness exercises, hot cocoa, and milk and cookies as students at the elite Georgetown University were offered post Trump-win. Our nation’s elite universities are establishing a norm that a self-care day and “safe space” is necessary and normal when you don’t get your way. They’re being treated like children who can’t deal with emotions.  So why is it surprising that they’d act how they’re treated? Just like parents who don’t want to discipline their children and hand them an I-pad instead. Obviously, these students aren’t ready to get married, have kids, and raise the next generation. Just like I-pad kids aren’t ready for the real world without Bluey. Those who’ve been coddled might be surprised to find out that family responsibilities don’t pause because they’re upset. Kids still need to be fed, clothed, and cared for when they’re sick or sad. And the university won’t be there to provide hot cocoa to ease their emotional pain after.  But my generation isn’t the victim of just bad parenting and universities catering to their every emotional need — we’ve also pushed marriage off due to hook-up culture, dating apps, pornography, and the decline of religion.  Delayed financial independence and moving out from parents’ houses is also, in part, the result of higher college attendance rates and steep housing prices. Either way, it doesn’t foster maturity in young people. And it doesn’t push them to grow up.  It’s an indicator of a culture in decline.  This decline is clearly demonstrated in our falling birthrate. In 2023, the U.S. hit of 1.62 children per woman fertility rate — lower than the 2.1 children per woman rate required to keep the population level steady.  But again, it makes sense. If women are getting married later, they have far fewer years than previous generations to have children while still able to conceive and carry a baby to term.  Now, I understand that marriage isn’t a calling for every individual. But as a single woman who’d like to get married young, I’ve personally seen the effects on my generation of not being forced to grow up. I’ve been startled by how many marriage-aged men on dating apps are presenting as frat boys who live for the weekend and spend Sundays recovering rather than at church — at age 30. We can’t just blame the men. Many women pursue hookups and partying well into their mid-to-late-20s. And then it hits them. If they want children, they’re going to need to settle down ASAP. Maturing the Young Now that I’ve spent 700 words complaining about the problems, let’s talk solutions. We must promote maturity and responsibility among young people. This means shifting the cultural narrative, calling out universities for infantilizing students and encouraging young people to join the workforce early. First, conservatives must start leveraging whatever cultural power we have to shift the Overton window back toward normalcy. We should call out, mock, and shame the universities that continue the infantilizing of students. Donors should leverage contributions to these higher education institutions until they stop the insanity. We should celebrate students who decide to go straight into the workforce after high school. College isn’t a necessity for everyone, and these young Americans learn about the real world sooner and avoid the spoiling (and indoctrination) of American higher education. While undecided college seniors apply for an often-unnecessary post-graduate degree and $100,000 in college loan debt, other young Americans have been working and building real-life skills for five years already. Lastly, we should promote the beauty and pride that comes from maturing. Boys becoming men and girls becoming women in their early to mid-20s is normal. It’s good. And it’s what our nation needs to reverse the decline. READ MORE from Libby Krieger: Yes, Furries Are Gay 12-Year-Old Student Sent Home Over Conservative T-Shirt The post Our Young Must Aim for Adulthood appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

NEW DELHI, INDIA — Perhaps the most striking first impression for any visit to India, the world’s most populous nation and most complicated democracy, is the traffic. Even in the nation’s capital the roads are barely organized chaos. Lane markings mean nothing, as drivers create as many lanes as cars will fit abreast. Smaller towns don’t bother with lights, making every intersection an extended game of vehicular chicken. Everywhere cows have priority, wandering with calculated insouciance, irrespective of the inconvenience imposed on all. When Dalits, formerly the “untouchables,” choose to convert, Hindu nationalists blame Christians for demonstrating love and concern. Nevertheless, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is pushing India toward what he hopes will be superpower status. While no one can doubt the economic prowess of the Indian people — they have prospered while overspreading the globe — the country remains often hostile to markets and entrepreneurship. The so-called Permit or License Raj continues to resist Modi’s efforts at economic liberalization. Even in the capital of New Delhi extreme poverty, so unnecessary, is evident, and life in the countryside is very hard for many. Nevertheless, Modi recently won his third general election, a remarkable feat. However, his victory was incomplete. His Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lost its parliamentary majority, forcing him into a coalition government for the first time. Moreover, Modi is officially a lame duck. After a decade as premier, the 74-old is serving his last term. That should be cause for celebration, given his campaign to turn India in an authoritarian direction. One likely successor is his long-time number two, Home Minister Amit Shah. Alas, reports Bloomberg columnist Andy Mukherjee, “Shah’s control over federal investigative agencies — and the way he used them against political opponents — has made him India’s most-feared man.” For instance, the government jailed and expelled from parliament Rajiv Gandhi, a leading opposition leader. Shah, who served with Modi in Gujarat state, “wants a Hindu nation much more than Modi,” contends journalist Rajdeep Sardesai. However, Shah may not be the worst choice. Other candidates share Modi’s political authoritarianism twinned with Hindu nationalism, which, more than economic reform, became the BJP’s overriding message. (Unfortunately, the Indian National Congress party has desperately responded by increasingly accommodating Hindu violence.). Mukherjee points to Yogi Adityanath, chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state. The latter “has acquired a reputation as a strongman. He is known for carrying out house demolitions, particularly of Muslim properties, as extrajudicial punishment following episodes of communal violence. He appeals to the hardliners as someone who can take forward Modi’s agenda of religious polarization at a national level.” Modi was a product of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, or RSS, a virulently Hindu organization, and its ideology of Hindutva, which equates India and Hinduism. The RSS is likely to play an important role in anointing his successor. He came to the political fore while running the government in Gujarat state, in which he was implicated in mob violence against local Muslims, in which some 1,200 or more were killed. Conveniently, much of the evidence disappeared and he was never held accountable. His foreign backers also have worked assiduously to whitewash his record. Yet Modi has brought his commitment to Hindu nationalism with him to national leadership: “Founded as a secular republic, India now functions as a de facto Hindu state.” Unfortunately, politics has become the greatest threat to religious minorities. Explained the Washington Post, “a broader truth about India today: that antipathy toward the Abrahamic religions of Islam and Christianity — often portrayed as alien religions brought to India by its historical invaders — can be wielded as an effective mobilizing force for political ends.” These and other religious minorities suffered greatly in the recent political campaign, targeted by Modi and the government. Reported the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom: In the leadup to the June 2024 elections, political officials increasingly wielded hate speech and discriminatory rhetoric against Muslims and other religious minorities. Prime Minister Modi repeatedly claimed that the opposition party would ‘wipe out [the] Hindu faith from the country’ and had plans to make Hindus “second class citizens in their own country.” He perpetuated hateful stereotypes about Muslims, referring to them as “infiltrators.” Union Home Minister Amit Shah echoed these statements and insisted falsely that opposition leaders would impose Shari’a if elected — despite the fact that the opposition election manifesto included no mention of Shari’a or Muslims. The growing intolerance for religious minorities poses an obvious threat to the most vulnerable communities in India. For instance, a report released earlier this year by the Religious Liberty Commission of Evangelical Fellowship of India concluded: The year leading up to the general elections in the spring of 2024 has seen an unfortunate increase in divisive rhetoric and inflammatory language. The same was not adequately addressed by official channels and sometimes it seemed to have been condoned in large and sensitive states of the Union. The resulting sense of immunity in sections of society has led to a painfully large number of incidents of violence against the Christian Community, and religious minorities in general. Data with the EFI Religious Liberty Commission (EFIRLC) shows an alarmingly steep rise in the number of violent incidents against the Christian community, climbing from 413 in 2022 to 601 at the end of 2023. The Indian political apparatus, its law enforcement agencies, and its justice system, specially at the level villages and small towns, have been found wanting and slow in its responses despite urgent pleas for help from victims, church leaders and civil society. Rising intolerance and violence like this undermines New Delhi’s claim to global leadership. Only last month, reported International Christian Concern: Two Hindu nationalist organizations are trying to stop two large public Christian conventions scheduled to take place in different provinces of the Central Indian state of Chhattisgarh. Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal have submitted appeals to the police and district administrative officials, warning that unless the conventions are canceled, authorities will be responsible for any subsequent communal disturbances. That is, unless the police suppress Christians’ right to assemble, radicals will be forced to attack. Which will then be the government’s fault! BJP-dominated states are responsible for much discriminatory legislation and action. Indeed, Christian organizations privately fear retaliation for simply criticizing government misbehavior. A U.S. group concerned with religious liberty published an article of mine, only to remove it after its India-based staff expressed fear of being even indirectly linked to criticism of Modi. For ten years BJP rule has degraded India’s status as a secular state welcoming all faiths. In October the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a painful update on India: Religious freedom conditions in India have continued to worsen throughout 2024, particularly in the months prior to and immediately following the country’s national elections. In addition to the enforcement of discriminatory state-level legislation and propagation of hateful rhetoric, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government made a concerted effort to implement election promises that negatively and disproportionately impacted religious minorities and their ability to practice their faith. Such promises included enacting the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), inaugurating the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, and introducing a national code to replace religion-specific personal laws. Each action was justified by government officials as necessary to protect India’s ‘cultural [and] linguistic heritage’ — a common euphemism for Hindu supremacy, often at the expense of religious minorities. In raw numbers Muslims suffer the most from such public disabilities and private violence. However, Christians have faced special hostility for their evangelism, especially to those historically left behind by India’s Brahmin elite. When Dalits, formerly the “untouchables,” choose to convert, Hindu nationalists blame Christians for demonstrating love and concern. The CAA discriminates against Muslims in determining citizenship. The National Register of Citizens is used to expel those lacking citizenship, which also is biased against Muslims. Moreover, “Since the beginning of 2024, Indian authorities have facilitated the expropriation of places of worship, including the construction of Hindu temples on the sites of mosques,” including the Ram Temple, long a RSS priority. BJP-dominated governments have continued to transform laws governing family relations. The BJP also has maintained a nationwide assault on evangelism, restricting conversions and even prayer for healing. Christians are the chief victims of these restrictions: “Since the beginning of the year, authorities have arrested dozens of Christians on allegations of conducting or participating in forced conversions. In June, for example, police in Uttar Pradesh detained 13 Christians, including four pastors; in July, seven Christians faced accusations of violating the state’s anti-conversion law in two separate incidents.” Indeed, according to the Fellowship anti-conversion statutes have become a prime weapon of persecution. “For Christians, the main whip hand is the false bogey of proselytization which is used to justify horrific crimes against the community. Dalit Christians, Adivasi Christians, and Christian women are vulnerable to violence and discrimination due to their intersectional identities.” One of the worst sources of violence is cow vigilantism. Non-Hindus are threatened by both state governments and private mobs. Indeed, “20 of India’s 28 states currently enforce anti-cow slaughter laws. Vigilante groups and self-proclaimed ‘cow protectors’ frequently exploit such laws to target religious minorities, including Muslims, Christians, and Dalits.” One mob killed a Hindu student mistakenly accused of smuggling cattle. Alas, government officials often promote violence: “perpetrators of such attacks often operate with impunity; they rarely face punishment and are often released on bail within 24 hours.” Unfortunately, such assaults are common. A special United Nations panel noted reports of violence and hate crimes against minorities; dehumanizing rhetoric and incitement to discrimination and violence; targeted and arbitrary killings; acts of violence carried out by vigilante groups; targeted demolitions of homes of minorities; enforced disappearances; the intimidation, harassment and arbitrary and prolonged detention of human rights defenders and journalists; arbitrary displacement due to development mega-projects; and intercommunal violence, as well as the misuse of official agencies against perceived political opponents. Violent Hindu nationalists spare no religious minority from their wrath. Reported the Commission: From January to March 161 incidents of violence against Christians in India were reported — 47 of which occurred in the state of Chhattisgarh. Such incidents ranged from violent attacks on churches and prayer meetings to physical assaults, harassment, and false allegations of forced conversion. Muslims continued to be targeted, as well. In March, a group of Hindus in Gujarat violently attacked foreign Muslim university students as they gathered for prayer during Ramadan. The university subsequently issued new guidelines, instructing students not to pray in common spaces. Moreover, following the election results, during which the BJP lost its national majority, at least 28 attacks against Muslims occurred from June to August. Unfortunately, this is unexceptional. Last May saw the start of substantial, continuing violence against Christians in the Northeast state of Manipur that a year later had “led to the loss of over 100 lives, the destruction of at least 228 churches, 300 people being injured and tens of thousands displaced.” Last October a meeting of an even smaller sect, Jehovah’s Witnesses, was bombed by Hindu extremists. As 2023 dawned, the Washington Post reported: “Since December, Hindu vigilantes in Chhattisgarh state in eastern India, enraged by the spread of Christianity and rallied by local political leaders, have assaulted and displaced hundreds of Christian converts in dozens of villages.” The UN panel warned against the violence. Like the People’s Republic of China, New Delhi punishes its critics in foreign nations. In 2023 the Modi government apparently plotted the assassination of an Indian-born Canadian Sikh. Moreover, reported USCIRF: “In 2024 the government of India has expanded its tactics of repression to target religious minorities and their advocates abroad…. including the revocation of Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cards as well as threats of violence and surveillance.” In response to this awful record, the Commission recommended that Washington designate India as a “Country of Particular Concern.” That remains unlikely, running afoul of policymakers of both parties who hope to make New Delhi into another informal “partner,” if not formal ally. However, India has made clear it will not be America’s catspaw. Indeed, Indians have dramatically increased trade with Russia since the latter’s invasion of Ukraine. At the same time, India will naturally continue to expand its military and watch China warily, while engaging in naval exercises with Japan and others. Washington should see India plain. Concluded USCIRF: The Indian government continues to repress and restrict religious communities through the enforcement of discriminatory legislation like anti-conversion laws, cow slaughter laws, and antiterrorism laws. In doing so, authorities have arbitrarily detained individuals highlighting violations of religious freedom, including religious leaders, journalists, and human rights activists, without due process — in some cases for years. Indian officials have repeatedly employed hateful and derogatory rhetoric and misinformation to perpetuate false narratives about religious minorities, inciting widespread violence, lynchings, and demolition of places of worship. Americans in and out of government should call on New Delhi to act the part of a major international leader. It is particularly important for India’s friends to do so. After leaving most of its population in immiserating poverty for decades, the government has finally adopted more realistic economic policies. Now it should take a hard look at its increasingly authoritarian domestic practices. To become great India must be good, treating all of its people, irrespective of their religious faith, as Indians. READ MORE from Doug Bandow:  Constitutionalists Should Use Biden’s Judicial Proposals to Thwart the Legal Left North Korea: The World’s Worst Human Rights Black Hole Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute.  He is a former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan and author of several books, including Beyond Good Intentions: A Biblical View of Politics and Foreign Follies: America’s New Global Empire. The post Hindu Nationalism Against Religious Freedom appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Though now proud to call America my home, I was born in the Atlas Mountains of Morocco, in a rural, semi-nomadic community with no modern amenities whatsoever. I grew up surrounded by people who worked very hard, but they never spoke of hard work as a moral virtue. They worked hard for one simple reason: if they didn’t, they wouldn’t survive.  If you accept that the presence of obstacles means that your hard work may never pay off, then you’ve already lost. When I first arrived in the U.S., I used to hear Americans speak proudly of pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. In recent years, though, I’ve noticed a decline in the frequency with which my fellow Americans mention their bootstraps. The tenor of the national conversation about hard work has changed. A new belief seems to be spreading, especially Among younger, more politically progressive Americans: a conviction that hard work does not always pay off. (READ MORE: Snowflake Work Habits)  Supposedly, institutional biases, corruption, and greed prevent hardworking people like me from reaping the fruits of our labor. It’s true, of course, that corruption sometimes occurs. Though I’ve won the respect and support of merit-based institutions like the Fulbright Program and the MacDowell Foundation, I’ve also encountered corrupt organizations that have misled, exploited, and abused me. These experiences are real, and I have learned a lot from them. They have not, however, shaken my faith in the idea that hard work always does pay off. They never will.  Since such obstacles alone do not explain why some lose faith in hard work, I’d like to explore a few factors potentially driving this trend.  The first is a failure to distinguish between two related concepts: “work” and “effort.” Physicists define “work” as the change of state that results from the application of force to an object or system. Built into the definition of “work” is the concept of change. Effort alone does not imply change. You can apply force to an object for years, but if your effort is met with an equal and opposite force, you will never get anywhere. You will have done no work. To work hard, you must apply leverage. You must think strategically.  The second is a failure to distinguish between hard work and the mere idea of hard work. Recently, a woman complained to me that her son couldn’t find a job. When I asked her what kinds of jobs he was looking for, she said that he wanted to be a C-level executive. When I asked about his credentials, she said he’d never gone to college. She’d raised him to believe that hard work always pays off, but apparently she’d failed to make him understand that simply saying the words “hard work” over and over doesn’t actually get you anywhere — that you actually have to do something hard if you want to get results.  The Hard Work Pay Off This leads us to the third factor: an unhealthy fixation on external rewards. Almost two thousand years ago, Marcus Aurelius knew better. “It is not in our control to have everything turn out exactly as we want,” he wrote. “Our control and power are limited to our own thoughts.” But, he added, “When you control your thoughts, you control your destiny.”  Too often, we assume that if we do not get the outcome that we want — if we do not secure the grant, or get the client, or land the job — then our work has not paid off. Too rarely do we realize that simply by doing what we can, approaching the client or submitting the application, we’ve already reaped the rewards of our labor. “I never lose,” Nelson Mandela once famously said. “I either win or learn.” (READ MORE: Claudine Gay: Another DEI Success Story) If you accept that the presence of obstacles means that your hard work may never pay off, then you’ve already lost. Whenever you approach a challenge with the fear of failure, you instinctively hold something back. What you hold back may turn out to be the very thing that makes the difference between success and failure, hunger and satiation, life and death.  The overwhelming majority of Americans used to understand this, not so very long ago. That’s why I feel so at home in this country, so honored and proud to call America my home. I’m troubled by Americans’ loss of faith in hard work, but I also trust that such a deeply rooted ethos cannot simply be eradicated from the culture overnight. Some Americans still remember. Many more teeter on the brink of remembering. I offer you this dispatch from the Atlas Mountains of Morocco to remind you of what you still know in your bones: that hard work always pays off.  Itto Outini is an author, journalist, and Fulbright Scholar. The post Does Hard Work Pay Off? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

from Candace Owens:  TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

by Jordan Conradson, The Gateway Pundit: The Gateway Pundit has obtained damning excerpts from Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer’s June 21, 2024, deposition transcript in his defamation lawsuit against Kari Lake and her husband, showing that Richer contemplated running for Senate to “make life hell for Kari Lake” and admitted that he is “anti-MAGA” shortly […]

Decision Desk HQ has declared Democrat Rep. Ruben Gallego the projected winner to become Arizona’s next senator. “Decision Desk HQ projects Ruben Gallego (D) wins the US Senate election in Arizona,” the outlet wrote. Decision Desk HQ projects Ruben Gallego (D) wins the US Senate election in Arizona.#DecisionMade: 8:57 PM EDT Follow live results here:https://t.co/Dalbgd1kjG pic.twitter.com/7uYO8QdVjH — Decision Desk HQ (@DecisionDeskHQ) November 10, 2024 With 88% reporting, Decision Desk HQ has Gallego ahead of Lake 49.7% to 48.2% (about 45,000 votes). * Image from Decision Desk HQ * From the New York Post: Gallego, an incumbent congressman in a Phoenix-area district since 2015, and Lake, a former local news anchor who previously ran for governor, faced off for the seat Democrat-turned-independent Kyrsten Sinema will soon vacate. Both candidates aimed to tackle moderate and disaffected voters, particularly Republicans. Gallego won the endorsement of the Arizona Police Association, which backed President-elect Donald Trump. “I am proud to have the APA’s support and look forward to working with them in the Senate to ensure Arizona’s law enforcement officers have the resources necessary to combat fentanyl trafficking, train the next generation of officers, and, above all, keep Arizona families safe,” Gallego said of the APA endorsement. Meanwhile, Lake won the endorsements of Ducey and her former gubernatorial primary rival Karrin Taylor Robson – two key figures who are considered popular among moderate Republicans and some independents. BREAKING: Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) is projected to beat Republican Kari Lake in Arizona Senate race https://t.co/k4cz1Mwtud — The Hill (@thehill) November 10, 2024 The Hill reports: His victory comes as a small but significant relief for Democrats, who had a crushingly disappointing election cycle this year. Though they managed to protect their Senate seats in the battleground states of Nevada, Wisconsin and Michigan, in addition to Arizona, they also lost seats in Ohio, Montana and West Virginia, and look poised to lose in Pennsylvania as well. They also lost control of the White House, while their prospects for keeping the House look exceedingly dim. Lake is a former local news anchor who previously ran for Arizona governor in 2022, narrowly losing to Gov. Katie Hobbs (D). Lake became well known during her 2022 bid as a prominent election denier — something that came back to haunt her again during her Senate bid even as she continued to fight her 2022 loss in court. Lake also attracted controversy over some of her remarks. She angered some Republicans for making critical statements invoking the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) — statements she argued that were made in jest.

The National Football League (NFL) fined San Francisco 49ers defensive end Nick Bosa $11,255 for wearing a MAGA hat during a postgame interview last month. Bosa wore the hat during a televised interview after the 49ers defeated the Dallas Cowboys on “Sunday Night Football” on October 27th. NEW: 49ers Defensive Lineman Nick Bosa has been fined $11,225 by the NFL for wearing a MAGA hat on the field during interviews Worth EVERY single penny! pic.twitter.com/o0ZZMOcuK7 — Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) November 10, 2024 Bosa told reporters he knew there could be a fine. He said it would be “well worth it.” Nick Bosa of the San Fransisco 49er’s has been fined $11,255 by the NFL for wearing a MAGA hat. Bosa’s response: “It was well worth it” pic.twitter.com/jg2C7iV6ym — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) November 10, 2024 From the New York Post: Per multiple reports, the hat violated Rule 5, section 4, article 8 of the NFL rulebook, which reads: “Throughout the period on game-day that a player is visible to the stadium and television audience (including in pregame warm-ups, in the bench area, and during postgame interviews in the locker room or on the field), players are prohibited from wearing, displaying, or otherwise conveying personal messages either in writing or illustration, unless such message has been approved in advance by the League office.” When addressing reporters this week, Bosa acknowledged that he knew a fine from the league could follow, but said that it’d be “well worth it.” “Well, I don’t think my position on speaking about it is going to change,” Bosa said this week when asked why he decided to make the political statement. “Clearly, the nation spoke, and we got what we got.” After the 49ers’ Week 8 game, when they defeated the Cowboys, 30-24, without stars Christian McCaffrey and Brandon Aiyuk, quarterback Brock Purdy, tight end George Kittle and running back Isaac Guerendo — three of the pieces that allowed San Francisco to still hit 30 points despite the absences — were being interviewed by NBC’s Melissa Stark on the field, and Bosa walked over behind Purdy and motioned toward his hat. He exited the camera frame moments later, and Stark said, “Alright, Nick Bosa with a message there.” WATCH: BOOM!!!! Nick Bosa just sported the MAGA hat on National Television! EVERYONE is speaking out now. More will come. THE TIDE HAS TURNED! pic.twitter.com/ZHdVYz1Urf — Graham Allen (@GrahamAllen_1) October 28, 2024 Per ESPN: After wearing the hat in support of former President Donald Trump’s candidacy during the postgame interview, Bosa made his way to the podium for his usual postgame session. When asked multiple times about his decision to wear the hat, Bosa declined to elaborate on his reasoning, saying, “I’m not going to talk too much about it, but I think it’s an important time.” The 49ers had their bye after the win against the Cowboys. Bosa did not speak to media again until his usual Wednesday session, which followed Tuesday’s election, where Trump was declared the winner. On Wednesday, Bosa, who signed a five-year, $170 million extension in 2023, again declined to discuss his decision to wear the hat but noted that he had a “good time” watching the election coverage and stayed up for the results. “I don’t think my position on speaking about it is going to change,” Bosa said. “Clearly, the nation spoke. And we got what we got.”

Commenting on streaming revenues, Alice In Chains mainman says "It's a bad business model"

One In Four Americans Say THIS Was The MOST Stressful Event Of The Year!