A few weeks ago, I was walking through the halls of Congress and passed Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s office which was decorated with the usual terror flag. Right now people are talking about another congressional candidate who makes a point of rejecting the pledge of allegiance.
Mai Vang is a Sacramento City Councilwoman, and a California congressional candidate for California’s 7th Congressional District. Mai Vang also refuses to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, and turns her back on the U.S. flag during public meetings. The Sacramento City Councilwoman has openly boasted about the practice of turning her back on the flag at ceremonies, drawing sharp criticism as she campaigns for higher office.
Some are now proposing that pledging allegiance be made mandatory for members of Congress. And that certainly makes sense. But members of Congress, like many federal officials, already have to take their oath of office.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
How many members of Congress take this oath without actually meaning it? How many violate their oath of office?
There’s a good argument also for modifying the oath to pledge allegiance to the nation, not just the Constitution, which is obviously the key covenant that elected officials uphold, but which in the case of the likes or Vang or Tlaib may be a matter of putting the cart before the horse. If you reject America, you can still take an oath to defend the Constitution, but only as a means of twisting it to destroy America.
We’re at the point where we have a quorum of foreign enemies in Congress. That should not stand.
The inconvenient truth for Al Gore is that his immodestly prophetic book published 20 years ago proved to be false.
The polar bear population has doubled. Wildfires are down in North America as well as every other continent. Hurricanes and other extreme weather events are milder and less frequent, and fatalities due to it are far fewer. The snows of Kilimanjaro are still there. Manhattan is not under water.
In fact, the seas have barely risen. The Netherlands are no more nether than ever, and the seas would have to rise another 5,280 feet to reach the Mile High City of Denver.
The result has been catastrophic – for sales of sales of Al Gore’s book, that is.
Don’t assume from this that I think the whole climate thing was a hoax, a laThe Piltdown Man. Most (not all) glaciers have receded in the last few generations, and the temperature looks to be up a degree or two in the last few centuries. It’s a fact that CO2 and certain other carbon gasses (particularly methane) can produce a “greenhouse effect” whereby they trap infrared radiation. That could account for the slightly higher temperatures.
Or not. The greenhouse effect, while real, is a simplistic analysis when it comes to weather and climate. In the real world, there are many confounding factors such as cloud cover and weather patterns.
Some of these confounding factors appear to countervail greenhouse effects. For example, the warmer it gets, the more the oceans evaporate into the atmosphere to produce clouds that block the sun, thereby making it cooler. The earth has hosted life for billions of years precisely because climate extremes tend to be self-correcting.
In any event, the fabulously expensive, virtue-signaling crusade to switch away from fossil fuels has been a bust. Fossil fuel energy is far greater on an absolute measure and about the same on a percentage basis as it was 20 years ago.
Blame China. While the U.S. and Europe went hog wild on “green” energy, China smirked and smoked cheap coal energy. How exactly the project of saving the earth from fossil fuels was supposed to work, without China’s buy-in, was never explained.
I suspect that, deep down, they never intended to save the earth. Rather, they intended to make a show of saving the earth. As in much of what emanates from the left, it was all theater and they were the stars.
Speaking of which, the fundamental problem with “An Inconvenient Truth” was that it was written by an attention-seeking politician, and a controversial one at that. After losing his bid for the Presidency and formally conceding defeat, and then revoking his concession and embarking on a vain, litigious election denial where he left the country in limbo for 35 days until the Supreme Court put him out of his, and our, misery, Al Gore had an ax to grind, to put it mildly.
Gore succeeded in garnering attention he sought (and several hundred million dollars he sought from “green” investment schemes) but of course he could have written fairy tales – some say he did – and gotten the same attention (but not the same money). The poodle press, almost as bitter as Gore about his election defeat, savored every word.
“Global warming” as it was called until the recent rebranding into “climate change” (the left are masters at rebranding, perhaps because they have such frequent need for it) was quickly accepted as gospel by the left, and Gore was canonized as a living prophet in the new religion of global-warming-climate-change-whatever. Call them “Warmingites.”
Meanwhile, people who already had a religion were skeptical. The Warmingites were loud and fanatical in their proselytizing zeal, as in “believe, or we’ll tie you to a stake and release the carbon in you.” That of course just served to deepened the skepticism of the skeptics. People know that “facts” that require fanatical shouting and threats are typically not facts at all.
It’s ironic that the Warmingites shouted “skeptic” as if that’s an insult. In real science, skepticism about unproven theories is a virtue. Perhaps recognizing that, belatedly, the Warmingites rebranded “skeptic” into “denier.” As if a person skeptical about the extravagant – nay, miraculous – claims of the Warmingites was on a par with Holocaust deniers.
The irony is now doubled. As things developed over the course of the last 20 years, climate skeptics are not likely to be the Holocaust deniers; rather, the Warmingites themselves are likely to be. Both the Warmingites and the Holocaust deniers share the same political party, both do a lot of shouting, both make a lot of threats, both increasingly get violent, and both are likely to have bad breath, bad hair and bad manners. Think Democratic National Convention.
This outcome is a pity from a human health and scientific standpoint. The world could have benefited from a real analysis of real climate issues from real scientists. We instead got a hysterical, divisive, attention-seeking diatribe from a bitter, losing, politician who helped spawn an era of viewpoint intolerance, all perversely in the name of science.
Al Gore’s unforgivable sin was not in being wrong – though he was indeed wrong – but in using his own power and greed to poison the discussion. Leftists are like that.
Migrants cost German taxpayers — just at the federal level — €24.8 billion in 2025, according to new data in the “refugee costs report” from the German Federal Ministry of Finance. However, the true sum is much higher.
The €24.8 billion is strictly the federal bill. The actual, combined national cost of migration for Germany is that €24.8 billion plus the massive, separate billions that the individual states and municipalities had to pull from their own local tax revenues to cover their own deficits brought on by mass immigration.
Welt notes that the total figure is indeed much higher, since it does not include states and local communes, but Welt does not provide this combined data.
Nevertheless, previous years indicate that this number is at least €15 to €20 billion. That means any total figure is likely well over €40 billion, but as in previous years, it may actually go as high as €50 billion.
The total costs cover several areas, including the federal government’s contribution to the refugee and integration costs of states and municipalities. One controversial issue is exactly how much money the federal government is transferring to the states and municipalities, which they argue is not enough to cover all their costs.
Essentially, the federal government only pays out a flat rate per initial asylum application, amounting to €7,500 from the federal government, allocated via a modification in the VAT distribution. This advance payment reached €1.25 billion for 2025. Additionally, the report assumes that the federal government holds a claim for repayment from the states totaling €250 million for 2025.
However, this only covers a fraction of the cost. The states indicate that the total costs in the area of flight and migration are significantly higher than the VAT resources available to them on the basis of the flat rate.
Of course, all of these expenses only cover specific areas like housing, direct social benefits, and integration courses. The true cost is still far higher than €40 billion to €50 billion.
The costs, for instance, do not cover expenses associated with the substantial foreign prison population. They also do not cover the need for the vastly increased police forces and counter-terrorism efforts. There are also “gray areas” that lead to other hidden taxes on Germans brought on by mass immigration. For instance, mass immigration has led to vastly higher housing prices, more road traffic, crowded hospitals, and longer wait times for medical treatments.
Germans are even paying higher health insurance premiums now due to mass immigration.
The head of the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Funds (GKV-Spitzenverband) has repeatedly criticized the federal government for creating a massive multi-billion-euro deficit that forces them to raise premiums, with the core of the complaint revolving around “non-insurance benefits.” These are social welfare benefits mandated by the government that are paid out to people who have not paid regular insurance contributions into the system. This includes long-term unemployed citizens and refugees.
When asylum seekers first arrive in Germany, they are not members of the statutory health insurance system. Under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act, their healthcare costs are covered, with local municipalities and state social offices paying their bills.
The financial friction begins once a migrant’s asylum application is approved, or if they have been in the country for 36 months without a final decision. At this point, they transition into the standard welfare system, known as citizen’s money.
Once on welfare, they are fully integrated into the statutory health insurance system. This is where the GKV-Spitzenverband argues the math breaks down, with the government only paying €108 per person per month for welfare recipients, the majority of which are migrants and those with a migration background, when the care actually costs between €300 and €350 a month.
This has resulted in a multi-billion euro deficit, which the insurance companies say now needs to be passed on to Germans actually paying for their health insurance.
In short, Germans are being squeezed from all sides due to mass immigration, and despite claims that foreigners would pay the pensions of Germany’s aging population, this is clearly unrealistic. Instead, Germany’s elderly may now be expected to work even longer, with a strong movement in the government to raise the retirement age to 73.
Lena Weissbrot, 32, made the shocking claims on her Instagram story in the wake of The Post’s unveiling of her as the daughter of 57-year-old Reina Natero, who oversees prescription drug insurance coverage rules at the healthcare giant.
Luigi Mangione fangirl Lena Weissbrot made shocking claims about her CVS exec mother over the weekend. Fellatia G/ Vimeo
“She’s a worker,” she said in the text message, a screengrab of which she posted on her Instagram story on Saturday night.
“If my mom was a health insurance executive I would have shot her myself,” she callously added, before going on to expand on her point.
“If she were a health insurance executive like Brain [sic] Thompson, and I were the same person I am now and if I knew what I do now (unlikely because coming from and [sic] ultra wealthy family would make me a fundamentally different person), and I were still in the will and thought I could get away with it, I’d inherit the money and redistribute to all the families she destroyed with her murderous company,” Weissbrot wrote.
Weissbrot, 32, made the shocking claims on her Instagram story/ Instagram/T-RIZZM
“But that’s so far from my reality it’s just a fantasy. A fantasy that makes me… wet,” she added.
“Debating: would I actually redact my mom if she was a health insurance CEO,” Weissbrot wrote in the overlay text on her Instagram story.
“When it comes to debating me about hypothetical situations that don’t exist: don’t.”
Weissbrot is one of three self-styled “Mangionistas,” a trio of fangirl “journalists” who rocked up to the New York State Supreme Court with their City Hall-approved press passes to cover Mangione’s pretrial hearing.
Two tourists in California were subject to vile antisemitism after a hotel worker asked the couple, “Are you a baby killer?” videos posted to social media showed.
The spiteful interaction allegedly took place Thursday at the Oceanpoint Ranch in Cambria, Ca. a spokesperson for the hotel confirmed to The Post.
The altercation unfolded after a female guest of the hotel, who is allegedly a dual citizen of Israel, confronted the employee after he said “Free Palestine” as the couple exited the lobby, according to the video caption on Instagram and X.
The couple were harassed by an anti-Israel hotel employee in California. X/HenMazzig
“All I said was free Palestine,” the employee says at the start of the video, which does not show the initial interaction between the worker and guests.
The woman responds by telling the employee that he needs to be “completely objective” towards hotel guests and that he “should be embarrassed of himself.”
The hotel employee then proceeds to spew a barrage of questions including “Are you a Zionist?” “Are you a baby killer?” and “Did you serve in the IDF?”
Throughout the one-minute clip, the man does not seem to interact with the hotel employee and only appears to speak in Hebrew with the woman, while the worker harasses the pair with questions.
The hotel employee was identified as 24-year-old Ryan Smith, Mossad Commentary reported. X/HenMazzig
“As for the satanic little p–sy sitting in the corner of shame, he had no words when being called what he really is… just a dirty Zionist,” the social media caption wrote of the male guest.
Oceanpoint Ranch is aware of the video, General Manager Angel Gonzalez told The Post.
“The conduct depicted in the video does not reflect the standards of professionalism, respect, and hospitality we strive to uphold. We take this matter seriously and have initiated an immediate internal review,” the statement said.
The hotel has been “in direct contact with the guest to address their concerns,” and has apologized, he said in the statement, which added that the employee resigned.
“Our hotel is committed to ensuring all guests feel welcomed, respected, and safe, and we remain dedicated to providing a positive and professional environment for every guest and employee,” the statement concluded.
The over one-minute interaction has gone viral across social media. X/HenMazzig
The employee has been reportedly identified as 24-year-old Ryan Smith who is allegedly on active military service, according to Mossad Commentary.
A man claiming to be the hotel employee wrote on Instagram that he’d been fired “for speaking up on the genocide and ethnic cleansing ongoing within the Middle East.”
Smith described himself online as a “Free Palestine activist.”
The video, which has amassed more than 400,000 views on Instagram alone, has been widely criticized — including Israeli writer Hen Mazzig and Leo Torrell, chair of the Department of Justice’s antisemitism taskforce.
“If true, this is outrageous. Termination is not good enough! This hotel needs to be investigated. I’m not satisfied with a single termination,” Torrell wrote on X Saturday.
Keep these in mind as you contemplate the direction of the American government over the past 50 years and especially since the Obama election.
The Goals of Communism
(as read into the congressional record January 10, 1963, from "The Naked Communist" by Cleon Skousen)
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament of the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand.
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use united force to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.
Posts
