Most of us don't want to imagine our spouse dying, but since couples rarely die at the same time, it's a reality many of us will eventually face. It's hard to know how we would feel about remarrying if that were to happen—some people who swear they would never remarry end up hating being alone after being widowed, and some people who are open to the idea end up being perfectly content to stay single. Statistically, most people actually don't remarry after being widowed. A study published in The Journals of Gerontology found that "most repartnering after widowhood occurs within ten years of this event or not at all. Ten years after widowhood, about 7% of widows and 29% of widowers have formed a new union." Widows and widowers who have actually faced the reality of losing a spouse and decided not to remarry are sharing their reasoning, and it's a fascinating glimpse into how differently people view independence and relationships. It's also interesting to see some how men and women might view remarrying differently. Here are four big reasons widowed people on Reddit's /AskOldPeople said they've chosen to stay single.Not wanting to be a caretaker Some people who have lost partners went through intense caretaking due to illness and don't want to go through that again. But some—particularly women—had a marriage that involved taking care of someone else for decades and they simply don't want to do that anymore."My grandmother lost her husband in 1983 and never even dated again until she died in 2016. I asked her about it once, and she said, 'Why would I want to take care of an old man? Are you trying to kill me?'""That's what my grandma told me when I asked her. She said that the old guys just want someone to take care of them, cook, do laundry, clean the house, do their bidding. She was not up for that--she was very independent.""My grandmother said the same thing. Grandpa died in 1992 she lived till 2018. Went on trips with friends, had an active social life but never dated again because in her words 'I took care of 1 man for 47 years why would I sign up to take care of another.'""I have heard the phrase 'looking for a nurse and a purse' in regard to many older gents and why they want to re-marry. Likely not all older fellows but certainly some.""As soon as my mother died my father went into full wife search mode. He was definitely looking for a nurse. Mom had been his caretaker so we needed to bring in caretakers after she died, he fell in love with almost all of them and would have married anyone that would have had him. His caretakers were primarily widows and they all were very adamant that they had zero interest in remarrying. I first heard the term 'nurse and a purse' from one of them."Not wanting to dip in the dating poolYoung people often feel like the dating scene is rough, but it's often worse for people in their later years. Many people in that dating pool are divorced, and some of them for good reason. "Have you seen the dating pool? Someone took a big ol pooo in it.""This, exactly. I’m not opposed to having another partner, just haven’t found one that is worth having. In addition, the pool gets smaller as I get older. Not going to accept anything less than an actual partner.""Have you looked at the dating scene lately?? It’s a virtual cesspool!""Dating seems horrifying. Having to tell someone my whole story and learn theirs seems exhausting. I'm okay on my own."Not wanting a sexual relationshipPeople's desire for sex exists on a huge spectrum, and some people simply don't want the sexual expectations of a committed relationship. "Years ago, I asked my divorced mom if she ever wanted to date again. Her response: I don't want somebody trying to have sex with me. I let it go there.""I’m 62, divorced, and I’m of the same mind. On the one hand, I know life would be easier with a partner and two incomes, etc. but the truth is I just don’t want to be bothered with sex anymore. I have no interest whatsoever.""I honestly can’t see myself pursuing a sexual relationship and certainly don’t need a purse or a nurse. I will someday fall into a situation where someone enters my life who may like to share my company and just enjoy good conversation. Then again I may find a way to be alone without being lonely. Time will tell.""I got a big dog who sleeps on the bed with me. Doesn't pressure me for sex. All is good! ?"Enjoying the freedom of living aloneWhile living alone can be lonely for some, it's a whole new world of choices and freedom for others. "So, I loved my late husband, but living with him was a constant compromise. Every decision, every choice, also had to take his needs and preferences into account. After 35 years, I didn’t even know what my own favorite color was anymore. I am busy creating the life and the household I want now, and have no desire to bend or adjust to fit somebody else’s tastes or needs.I can watch what I like on tv.I can set the thermostat to whatever temperature I want.I can cook with butter. Or not cook at all.I don’t have to ask what anyone else thinks.I’m enjoying my self discovery.""A friend of mine, a widow for about a decade, told me recently that she prefers the freedom of being single. Her schedule is her own. Wakes up, goes to bed, eats and travels when she wants. When her husband was alive, their marriage wasn't good so she isn't interested in taking a risk on someone again.""My sister’s husband died unexpectedly and suddenly after 34 years of marriage. He was her first and only love. She has been approached numerous times by men, but she isn’t interested. She says 'I already had love, I don’t need it again. Besides, I like living alone with no one to tell me where or when I have to do anything.'”"My mom died at 41, dad was 43. He never remarried. He passed last year at 76. He said he did not want to remarry (he never said never) because compromise was so hard. He said he loved my mom, and he compromised for her, but he didn’t want to compromise for anyone else. As a teenager when he told me that, I couldn’t comprehend what he meant. As an adult, I completely understand."Undying love and knowing no one will live up to itFinally, some don't remarry for the simple fact that they loved their spouse so much they have no desire to ever be with someone else. One perfect love was enough for one lifetime. "I lost my husband coming up on 2 years ago suddenly and honestly have no plans of remarrying. I'm in the process of building a new life with my new normal and I don't see someone else in that new life. Once you have your soulmate, nothing else has any interest.""My husband died 2.5 years ago. He's the only guy who ever asked me out ( I was 25). We were married 45 years. He's my first last and always. I count myself lucky. There's no place in my life for anyone else.""I've told people that I barely survived losing my husband. I suppose I might be able to survive that kind of loss again, but I don't want to have to try. And, I'm not interested in making room in my life for anyone who wouldn't leave that kind of hole.""Never again. My husband was absolutely perfect for me and I would constantly compare any other men to him - and that’s not fair to anyone or to my late husband’s memory. No one could hold a candle to him.I don’t wear my wedding band anymore, but I do wear a band. It has two hearts and the words 'Forever Love' on it.""I will always be married to my late wife.""I already had the best."Awww.

Want a picture that sums up what the Democratic Party has been, at least since it became a business branch of the Obamas? It’s this: Joe Biden pardoning Hunter Biden. You don’t need to know much more. Their word means nothing, they have no morals, and they don’t care about the people, much less about justice and the law. They have no time to waste when it comes to getting out of jail, which is what Biden has devoted his efforts to during his last few months. If anyone thinks the man has been working for the United States, they are wrong. Unless the United States is now made up exclusively of various members of the Biden family. An amusing observation about the postmodern left is that they do everything they can, officially, to attack the family, as an institution, as a source of values, and as a cell of society (as Pope John Paul II used to say). But if you read the fine print of the contract you see that, when they attack, they always refer to the family of others. For their families they become the most traditional and conservative there is: “Hands off my people.” In the pardoning of Hunter Biden resides something worse: The truth is that Joe Biden is pardoning himself. He is tired, he doesn’t want trouble, he wants to rest — or more precisely, he wants to continue resting as he has been doing for the last few years. The funniest thing has been to watch the faces of the Democrats upon hearing the news, and their failed attempts to act as if nothing happened. Biden has blown up the Democratic Party over the last few years and that is the only thing we will have to thank him for when all is said and done. There exists something of a melancholy farewell during the last days of the Biden administration and a widespread madness amongst the left in the face of Trump’s victory that just confirms the moral exhaustion of a project that should never have existed. Those girls shaving their hair and lining up with the 4B movement crazies to protest the election result proved that the war against the postmodern left, at this point, must be continued without bombs or brainy discussions, but by parachuting psychiatrists into their ghettos. Some of the shaved girls assured on social media that they would punish men with four years of no sex (as long as Trump is in the White House) and most of us men — seeing their faces — wondered aloud, “Couldn’t they punish us sine die?” I’d rather procreate with a salamander than go near a shaven-headed anti-Trumpist who seems to have eaten the rest of her kin prior to taking her photo, and who touts about as much femininity as a telegraph pole. As the Democrats are in hiding, radical feminists are a minority that is closer to being put in a straitjacket than swaying public opinion, and Biden is doing everything he can to shatter the Democrats’ already non-existent prestige. The left, battered throughout the West right now, has had to resort to climate fear urgency. Indeed, today we read in the press around the world that the Arctic will melt by 2027, “much sooner than previously believed.” The amazing thing about the Arctic melting in 2027 is that, in the last four decades, this is the umpteenth time the Arctic is going to melt immediately. It’s not that I’ve become skeptical, but I’m more confident in the biblical odds of a camel passing through the eye of a needle. For years we have been criticizing the alleged moral superiority of progressives. It is increasingly evident that they have no moral superiority, and Argentine President Javier Milei was more and more right when he shouted during the election campaign, “We are going to win because lefties are worse. We are better than them.” The problem is that leftists still believe they are superior, I don’t know who has convinced them of such nonsense, and it makes them incapable of self-criticism. So they are in a phase of denial that can last forever, while, with a little luck, the people who supported them are gradually abandoning the show and asking for their money back. Biden has done a great service to freedom in America by portraying himself as what he really is — for what the progressive elites are. Today the postmodern, woke left is closer to disappearing down the sinkhole of history of imposture and irrelevance. Today the people who voted for Trump are even happier they voted for Trump. READ MORE from Itxu Díaz: Make Government Small Again Ten Priorities for Trump’s New Administration Big City Air The post Biden’s Penultimate Betrayal appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

In their quest to “Trump proof” California, Gov. Gavin Newsom and state Attorney General Rob Bonta invoke “California values.” If people across the country wonder what exactly these values might be, state politicians have provided clues. As they gear up for the holiday season, California retailers stock items they think people will want to buy. California politicians want the state to determine what stores must offer to their customers. Assembly Bill 1084, signed by Newsom in 2021 and effective Jan. 1, 2024, mandates that large retail department stores that sell childcare items or toys must maintain a “gender-neutral” section for these items or face fines. “By requiring large retailers to maintain a gender-neutral section,” Bonta’s office explains, “AB 1084 makes it more difficult for these retailers to engage in gender-based pricing discrimination and reduces the imposition of gender stereotypes on children.” In support of this cause, the attorney general recruits shoppers as informants. “If you do not see an adequate gender-neutral product section in a large retail department store in California that you believe is covered by this law, you may take pictures, document, and file a complaint with our office at oag.ca.gov/report.” As Californians and people across the country should know, deploying citizens to inform on each other was a value of East Germany, a Stalinist dictatorship. Other similarities may also be apparent. California workers value their independence and many strive to be their own boss. Newsom doesn’t value that effort. In 2019, the governor signed Assembly Bill 5, by San Diego Democrat Lorena Gonzalez, a veritable declaration against workers’ independence and their ability to earn a living. The measure primarily targeted truck owner-operators and ride-share drivers, but in its original form, it was more far-reaching. Assembly Bill 5 targeted all kinds of independent contractors including freelance writers who did not provide more than 35 submissions per publication, per year. Musicians became de-facto employees of the venues where they played, effectively reducing their already meager pay. During the pandemic, a group of 151 prominent economists and political scientists from 40 universities and think tanks, called for the suspension of Assembly Bill 5 to permit independent medical contractors to fill key positions in understaffed hospitals and clinics. Newsom kept the measure in place so he must value what may be the most repressive legislation in California history. A prime mover of the measure was Julie Su, the Biden–Harris administration’s “acting” labor secretary, and overseer of California’s $30 billion unemployment scandal during the pandemic. Strictly speaking, accountability is not a California value. On the other hand, Golden State politicians always support their pillage of people. California imposes one of the heaviest tax burdens of any state, and Californians are now fleeing in droves. When he was a member of the California Assembly, Rob Bonta promoted Assembly Bill 2088, the California Wealth Tax that would have slapped a 0.4 percent tax on the portion of a taxpayer’s net worth that exceeded $30 million. Assemblyman Bonta also wanted to keep taxing people for 10 years after they left California. The Yale law alum should know the state can’t do that. Government greed is a value for politicians but not for California’s working people. In 1978, when seniors were being taxed out of their homes, voters passed Proposition 13, the People’s Initiative to Limit Property Taxation. Californians also thought it was wrong to exclude people from state colleges on the basis of their race, so they passed the California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209, on the November 1996 ballot. The measure banned racial and ethnic preferences in state education, employment, and contracting. California politicians have defied state law by establishing a vast DEI bureaucracy that serves no educational purpose but does help to bulk up the University of California’s $500 million budget deficit. Safe to say, California’s woke politburo does not value merit and fiscal responsibility. When Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta tout “California values,” they mean high taxes, quashing workers’ independence, dictating what stores can sell, and transforming shoppers into informers for the state. Happy holidays everybody. Lloyd Billingsley is a policy fellow at the Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. READ MORE from Lloyd Billingsley: University of California at Planned Parenthood Oh Say Can UC? Election Aftermath in California The post The Golden State Unleashes the Anonymous Snoop Dogs appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Since the Wright Brothers’ invention of the airplane, Americans have been captivated by the technology of flight. The ability to soar the skies, at speeds previously unimaginable for transportation, is one of the greatest feats of mankind. It has enabled people to visit family more frequently or embark on same-day business trips across the country. Airplanes have also played a critical role in our economy with the shipping of goods, bringing those in cold climates year-round access to tropical fruits and quality coffee beans. Unfortunately, commercial air travel remained steeply expensive for most of the 20th century and was largely considered a luxury. Flying commercial was a special occasion, during which one wore professional attire and dined on lobster. But those times have passed. Millions of people fly every day, many doing so for work as routinely as others commute by car, bus, or train. Middle-class families once limited to 8-12 hour drives to Florida, now can vacation anywhere by taking a more affordable flight. This all comes thanks to the growth of low-cost budget airlines — from the U.S.’s Southwest and Frontier to Europe’s controversial Ryanair and Wizz Air. Known for their à la carte luggage and beverage pricing, paired with substantially lower ticket rates, these airlines have opened business and leisure opportunities to a wider array of people than traditionally served. To ordinary American (and European) consumers, this shift in flight prices is welcomed. But lawyers and regulators from the outgoing Biden administration disagree. (RELATED: Biden’s Airline Antitrust Efforts Will Not Boost Competition) One of the most prominent budget airlines, Spirit Airlines, is well-known for its bright yellow planes and no-frills services. Despite facing scrutiny for in-flight turbulence and strict carry-on baggage policies, many appreciate Spirit for its uniquely low-cost flights across the country. If booked with enough advance, one can fly from New York City to Miami, Fla. for as little as $27 on Spirit Airlines. Unfortunately, news broke in early November that Spirit would file for bankruptcy, becoming the first major U.S. airline to file for Chapter 11 in over a decade. The announcement comes after the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), led by antitrust activist Chair Lina Khan, blocked an attempted merger between Spirit Airlines and JetBlue Airways earlier this year. Leaning into a preemptive judgment of mergers & acquisitions, while casting aside consumer welfare concerns, the FTC posited the Spirit–JetBlue negotiations as fundamentally monopolistic (despite the two companies being only the sixth and seventh largest airlines in the country). More recently, the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (DOJ) and Department of Transportation (DOT) opened an investigation into anticompetitive behavior by air travel companies. The case initiated 12 days before the election, invites public input on various airline industry issues, including competition, past mergers, exclusionary practices, airport access, aircraft manufacturing, sales channels, pricing, rewards programs, and labor market concerns. Yet, customer satisfaction with U.S.-based airlines, and the affordability of tickets, has never been better. The actions taken by the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Transportation represent the gross politicization of business that has plagued the outgoing administration. Rather than tailoring efforts to support airline safety concerns or reduce airport security wait lines, the federal government seeks to play games with the private sector by hamstringing Spirit (and, in the future, potentially its once competitors) into bankruptcy. But more regulation, legal rat mazes, and administrative bloat will not invigorate a prosperous American transportation sector. To achieve broad, cheap, and efficient airfare across America, lawmakers should look to the benefits of airline deregulation over the past half-century. Since 1978, domestic airline fares have dropped nearly 50 percent (adjusted for inflation, including fees) with numerous choices in airlines and travel plans. Letting market forces respond to the demands of consumers, uninterrupted by petty legal fights, allows companies to deliver on what American travelers truly desire. The incoming administration should proceed with a consumer-led approach, as opposed to the current antitrust and transportation policy. Flyers want lower costs, greater variety in destinations, and a wider range of flight availability. Endlessly demonizing the airline business has proven only to work against these goals. But these mistakes can be avoided if only we learn from the not-so-distant past. Sam Raus, a recent graduate of the University of Miami, is a Tech and Consumer Freedom Fellow with Young Voices. Follow him on Twitter: @SamRaus1. READ MORE: Why the FTC Is Bad for Business Google’s Found Guilty for Illegal Monopoly on Internet Search Tilting at Antitrust Windmills: Department of Justice Sues Apple   The post A Spirit of Bankruptcy in the Air appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Rejection of incumbent parties has been a global theme in a year in which more voters than ever have cast ballots. It has been a talking point of Democrats seeking to make sense of their failures in last month’s elections. According to Harvard’s Steven Levitsky, incumbents have suffered losses in 40 of 54 Western democracies since 2020. Over 80 percent of incumbent parties have lost parliamentary seats or vote share this year. So it was striking when Irish voters opted overwhelmingly for the status quo in last Friday’s general election. Ireland has a complex ranked-choice system with vote transfers, which establishment parties navigated to secure the lion’s share of seats in the Dáil (Parliament). A unique feature of post-independence Ireland has been “civil war” politics, with power alternating between Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, the political party manifestations of the two sides in the country’s 1922-23 civil war. Now, over a century after hostilities ceased, the parties are increasingly difficult to distinguish ideologically. These reliable champions of left-wing social policies and neoliberalism each won just over 20 percent of first-preference votes. Left-nationalist (another quirky concept endemic to the Celtic world) Sinn Féin, once the political arm of the Irish Republican Army, earned just under 20 percent. The left-wing Social Democrats and Labour rounded out the top five, followed by upstart socially conservative parties Aontú and Independent Ireland, and finally the decimated Greens. Conservatives can relish small victories and harbor some optimism in a country that hasn’t featured any truly conservative politics in this millennium. Aontú and Independent Ireland have secured a combined six seats, up from one in 2020, in the 174-seat Dáil. Both earned enough first-preference votes to receive government funding, the lack of which has handicapped their campaign activities to date. Independent (party-unaffiliated) candidates won 16 seats, and some of these Teachtaí Dála (parliamentarians) have rebuffed a milieu where social conservatism is scorned. County Offaly’s Carol Nolan, for example, fell out with Sinn Féin over her pro-life views and persevered in government as an independent — she easily won reelection this year. Yet, small victories might offer too little, too late in a country that has undergone thorough social engineering. Recent Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael governments (they entered a grand coalition together in 2020) have overseen abortion and gay marriage measures, pervasive transgender activism, unrestrained immigration, and hostility to conservative governments abroad. The previous government forced through a controversial “hate speech” law and backed constitutional referenda on the role of mothers and the definition of family, both of which ultimately failed. If these two dominant parties are “center-right,” as establishment media outlets maintain, surely that designation has become meaningless. The left-wing Sinn Féin, Social Democrats, Labour, and Greens (the latter were part of the previous government) largely maintain these measures didn’t go far enough. For the time being, Irish politics is a destructive monoculture. The immigration issue unquestionably entails a point of no return. As of 2023, 22 percent of the Irish population was foreign-born. Ireland-born children of immigrants further swell the island’s non-Irish population. Between 2016 and 2024, the Irish state spent over €5 billion on asylum accommodation and other asylum-related expenses, an arrangement that enriches hoteliers and landlords. Resulting pressures on the real estate and labor markets are driving young Irishmen abroad, further altering the country’s ethnic composition. Migrants often arrive without passports or other documentation, almost always via one or more safe countries; generous Irish government benefits are a draw, and there is little threat of deportation, even for criminals. Tent cities characterize parts of central Dublin, while the vaunted tourism industry has hemorrhaged hundreds of millions of euros in recent years. A criminal court judge called Dublin’s famous Temple Bar a “violent, post-apocalyptic no-go area.” (READ MORE: ‘Ireland Is Full’ Say Thousands in Dublin) One poll this year found that 66 percent of respondents believe Ireland has accepted “too many refugees,” and 72 percent believe the country should institute “very strict limits on the number of immigrants coming to live in Ireland.” The staggering immigration figures suggest Irish society can only be preserved with both a freeze on inward migration and large-scale deportation. However, the top five parties in the new Dáil are certain to double down on their social-engineering policies. Institutional realities ensured a modest ceiling for conservative electoral achievements last week, but the scale of establishment victory proved demoralizing. After all, the Irish people have demonstrated ample embitterment over the last year. Mass protests erupted after an Algerian migrant stabbed several schoolchildren last November. Grassroots protests at migrant relocation centers have rankled government officials who have steadfastly avoided consulting locals. In March, the motherhood and family referenda shockingly failed despite universal institutional support. In October, a contentious “hate speech” bill passed only after its most authoritarian elements were jettisoned. Yet, no conservative or populist wave materialized. Some Irish cynically maintain only a massive external shock, like a new financial crisis, can extricate Ireland from the activism of its political class. (READ MORE: Ireland Imposes Draconian ‘Hate’ Laws) One such shock might be brewing in Washington. President-elect Trump has vowed to incentivize American multinational corporations to return business functions to the United States and insisted he is prepared to implement tariffs to advance American interests. Ireland, with its low corporate tax rates and high concentration of American firms, is sure to draw attention. These American multinationals employ 11 percent of the Irish workforce and facilitate Ireland’s bloated public spending. So it was a particularly unconscionable bit of political showmanship when, prior to the U.S. elections, Fine Gael Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Simon Harris posted a picture of a Kamala Harris campaign hat to his Instagram account, with a caption reading, “If the cap fits…” The incoming president isn’t known for laughing off such matters. The Irish, to their credit, preserve their sense of humor through it all. Commenting on the Social Democrats potentially replacing the Greens as the minor party in government, journalist Sarah Ryan, of the independent news outlet Gript, remarked, “Less windmills, more men in dresses.” For now, Ireland will get the latter no matter whom it elects. READ MORE from Michael O’Shea: Trump and the GOP Sidestep Government Staffing at Their Own Peril Germans Say They’re Fed Up, Nazi Accusations Be Damned Why Isn’t Poland Smiling? Just Ask the Protesting Farmers Attacked by Police Last Week.   The post Gains for Irish Conservatives May Be Too Little, Too Late appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

by Derrick Broze, Activist Post: Why are so many freedom loving, privacy aware people using a military contractor’s satellite service, and turning a blind eye to the surveillance grid he is co-creating with the U.S. military and intelligence? On Monday, former Texas Congressman Dr. Ron Paul told his audience on Twitter/X that due to an “internet outage […]

by Michael Snyder, End Of The American Dream: The west coast just got a major league wake up call.  There has been an unusual number of sizable earthquakes along the California coast in 2024, and on Thursday we witnessed the largest one so far.  A magnitude 7.0 earthquake stuck about 40 miles offshore, and authorities […]