Voters loved the socialist slogans. Now comes the fine print.



Zohran Mamdani’s surprise victory over Andrew Cuomo in last week’s New York City Democratic mayoral primary catapulted a full-bodied Democratic Socialist program onto the national marquee. In his midnight speech, he claimed, “A life of dignity should not be reserved for a fortunate few.” His win marks Gotham’s sharpest left turn in a generation — and that’s saying something.

The recipients of his promise are slated to receive an economic makeover that treats prices as political failures. His platform freezes rents on more than 1 million apartments, builds 200,000 publicly financed “social housing” units, rolls out city-owned grocery stores, makes buses fare-free, and lifts the minimum wage to $30 by 2030, all bankrolled by roughly $10 billion in new corporate and millionaire taxes.

If Mamdani’s program collapses under its own weight, the case for limited government will write itself in boarded-up windows and outbound moving vans.

A week later, reality is beginning to set in.

Mamdani means what he says. On his watch, public safety would become a piggy bank. During the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, Mamdani posted, “No, we want to defund the police.” He wasn’t being metaphorical. His current blueprint would shift billions from the NYPD into a new “Department of Community Safety” — even as felony assaults on seniors have doubled since 2019.

Mamdani’s program may feel aspirational to affluent progressives, yet to many New Yorkers it lands like an ultimatum.

Forty-two percent of renter households already spend more than 30% of their income on shelter; now they are told higher business taxes and a slimmer police presence are the price of utopia, which helps explain why tens of thousands of households making between $32,000 and $65,000 — the city’s economic backbone — have left for other states in just the past few years.

Picture a deli cashier in the Bronx. She’s not reading City Hall memos, but she feels the squeeze when rent rises and her boss mutters about new taxes. She doesn’t frame her frustration as a debate about “big government” — but she knows when it’s harder to get by and when it’s less safe walking home. The politics of the city aren’t abstract to her. They’re personal.

Adding insult to injury, the job Mamdani wants comes with a salary of roughly $258,750 a year — more than three times the median city household income — plus the chauffeurs, security details, and gilt-edged benefits package that accompany the office. Telling overtaxed commuters that their groceries will now be “public options” while banking a quarter-million dollars in guaranteed pay is the policy equivalent of riding past them in a limousine and rolling down the window just long enough to raise their rent.

Layer onto that record a set of statements many Jewish New Yorkers regard as outright hostility. Mamdani is one of the loudest champions of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement; last year he pushed a bill to bar certain New York charities from sending money to Israeli causes and defended the chant “globalize the intifada,” drawing sharp rebukes from city rabbis. The day after Hamas massacred 1,200 Israelis on October 7, 2023, he blamed the bloodshed on “apartheid” and “occupation.”

All this lands in a metropolis with the world’s largest Jewish community outside Israel — about 1.4 million residents — whose synagogues, schools, and small businesses have weathered a steady rise in hate crimes. For them, a would-be mayor who treats Israel as a pariah and shrugs at chants of intifada isn’t dabbling in foreign policy; he’s telegraphing contempt for their safety and identity at home.

Republicans see an inadvertent gift. Mamdani’s New York will soon be measured against the lower-tax, police-friendly model many red states — especially my home, Florida — have advertised for years.

Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ Law Enforcement Recruitment Bonus Program has mailed more than 7,800 after-tax checks of $5,000 to officers relocating from 49 states, including hundreds from New York precincts, while Florida touts a 50-year low in index-crime reports and unemployment below the national average. IRS data shows Florida netted 33,019 New York households in the latest year, with average adjusted gross income near $185,000.

Project those trend lines a few years and Mamdani’s New York grows grim: a shrunken police force responding to more 911 calls; fare-free buses draining MTA dollars and stranding riders; municipal groceries undercutting bodegas until subsidies vanish; office-tower vacancies sapping property tax receipts just as social housing bills come due. The skyline still gleams, but plywood fronts and “For Lease” placards scar street level. Meanwhile states that fund cops, respect paychecks, and let entrepreneurs stock the shelves siphon away residents and revenue.

RELATED: Don’t let rural America become the next New York City

Terraxplorer via iStock/Getty Images

Republicans running in 2026 scarcely need to draft the attack ads, yet they must pair fiscal sobriety with moral urgency — protecting the vulnerable, rewarding work, and defending faith. Mamdani’s primary victory shows romantic egalitarianism still electrifies young voters; statistics alone won’t counter a pledge of universal child care and rent freezes. This indeed won’t be a case of “promises made, promises kept.”

If his program collapses under its own weight, the case for limited government will write itself in boarded-up windows and outbound moving vans.

Should the city somehow thrive — safer streets, balanced books, real wage gains — progressives will demand that Congress replicate Mamdani’s policies nationwide. That is federalism at its most honest: two competing philosophies running side by side under the same national sky, with citizens free to relocate from one laboratory to the other.

For now, the lab results favor the model that backs the blue, protects the paycheck, and keeps the ladder of opportunity in good repair. Voters — and U-Hauls — are already keeping score. By decade’s end, the scoreboard will show which vision truly loved New York’s working families and which merely loved the sound of its own ideals.

This 7% of Earth’s surface burns more fuel than anywhere



The ruling class trades in carbon outrage like it’s gold. Sanctimony fuels its crusade against oil, gas, and coal — never mind that those very fuels built the modern world. The comforts we take for granted — from longer lives and stocked shelves to clean water and lifesaving medicine — all trace back to the energy abundance that hydrocarbons made possible.

Still, the decarbonization faithful press forward. They dream of a carbon-free Eden, even as the global power grid, still humming on fossil fuels, refuses to cooperate.

Critics keep forecasting a shift away from fossil fuels. Reality keeps proving them wrong.

You won’t find a clearer contradiction than in the Yuxi Circle.

Draw a circle with a 2,485-mile radius around the southern Chinese city of Yuxi. British geographer Alasdair Rae did just that — and inside it resides 55% of the world’s population: some 4.3 billion people crammed into just 7% of Earth’s surface. The region includes China, India, much of Southeast Asia, and parts of Pakistan. Some of it — like the Tibetan Plateau and the Taklamakan Desert — is barren. But the rest is packed with cities, factories, and the aspirations of hundreds of millions clawing their way toward modern life.

Why does this matter? Because this region now anchors the world’s biggest fight over energy, growth, and climate policy.

While bureaucrats in Brussels sip espresso and activists glue themselves to the pavement in London, the real action plays out in Asia’s economic engine. In cities like Shanghai, Delhi, and Tokyo, energy demand soars — and fossil fuels do the heavy lifting. Coal and gas plants keep the lights on, while wind and solar trail far behind.

China burns more coal than the rest of the world combined. India burns more than the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom combined. The 10 ASEAN countries rank third. Oil use tells the same story: China and India sit alongside the U.S. atop the global leaderboard of consumption. Economic growth, it turns out, runs not on hashtags but on hydrocarbons.

Critics keep forecasting a shift away from fossil fuels. Reality keeps proving them wrong.

Hundreds of millions in the Yuxi Circle are still striving for what Westerners call a “decent life.” That means refrigerators, washing machines, air conditioning — and with them, a dramatic spike in electricity demand.

RELATED: Climate orthodoxy punishes the West

Photo by Thomas Lohnes/Getty Images

For context: The average American consumes 77,000 kilowatt-hours of energy each year. The average Indian uses a 10th of that. A Bangladeshi? Just 3% of what the average Norwegian consumes.

Now multiply that gap by a population of billions, and you begin to understand what’s coming.

The living room revolution is only the start. An industrial boom is building behind it — factories, office towers, and shopping malls all hungry for electricity. The coming surge in energy use across the Yuxi Circle will make the West’s climate targets look like a quaint relic of the past.

In this part of the world, the green fantasy runs headfirst into human need. Wind and solar can’t meet the moment. Coal, oil, and gas can — and do.

Just as they did for the West, these fuels now power the rise of the rest. And no amount of Western guilt or climate alarm will change that.

Supreme Court: Kids deserve protection from porn, period



The Supreme Court last week delivered not just a legal decision but a resounding moral affirmation: Children deserve protection from online pornography.

For decades, I’ve been told that “free speech” includes the right to exploit. I’ve watched Big Porn hide behind the First Amendment like a shield, as if this billion-dollar industry, built on addiction, abuse, and shattered innocence, was a sacred American institution. But on Friday, in upholding Texas’ pornography age-verification law, the court drew a line in the sand.

For children, exposure to pornographic material isn’t a neutral event. It reshapes the brain. It numbs empathy. It seeds confusion, fear, and addiction.

And I say: Thank God.

As the brother of a child survivor of sexual exploitation, I know firsthand the consequences of a culture that normalizes sexual harm. I know what it’s like when an industry like porn sees children as commodities. I’ve seen too many young people stumble into the world of violent, degrading content with nothing more than a click. No gatekeepers. No warnings. No protection.

That ended last week.

Texas’ age-verification law was never about silencing speech. It was about defending the voiceless and restoring the most basic responsibility we have as a society: to guard our children from harm.

That’s why my team at Jaco Booyens Ministries joined this case as a friend of the court. Our team submitted a brief to the Supreme Court that shared the lived experiences of survivors, the neurological science on childhood trauma, and the irrefutable consequences of exposure to online pornography.

As our brief stated in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton: “There is no liberty in trauma. There is no freedom in addiction. When minors are exposed to pornography, they are not exercising constitutional rights, they are being wounded by the unchecked rights of others.”

Still, the porn industry screamed “censorship.” Companies sued, claiming this was a violation of their “rights.” But what about our children’s right not to be harmed? What about the parents fighting to keep predators out of their homes?

The court acknowledged what every honest parent already knows: Access to this kind of content isn’t harmless. It isn’t “education.” It is psychological, emotional, and spiritual violence. During oral arguments, Justice Amy Coney Barrett captured the heart of the issue when she asked, “Why should it be so easy for a 12-year-old to access this kind of material online, when we all know it can be incredibly damaging?”

That wasn’t a rhetorical flourish; it was a recognition of truth.

For children, exposure to pornographic material isn’t a neutral event. It reshapes the brain. It numbs empathy. It seeds confusion, fear, and addiction. I can no longer pretend this is just about speech. This is about harm. Real harm. And the court, at long last, chose to see it.

RELATED: Supreme Court slaps down Big Porn — putting kids before profit

Photo by Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

I can’t change what happened to my sister. But I can fight to make sure it doesn’t happen to someone else. I can help protect the next generation. I can work to make it harder for exploitation to find its way into our living rooms, our schools, our smartphones. I can help make justice more than just a word. I can help make it action.

To the justices who stood with us: Thank you. You did not bow to corporate pressure. You honored the Constitution as a document of liberty, not license. You remembered that freedom must be rooted in truth, and the truth is that unrestricted pornography destroys lives.

This victory isn’t just for Texas; it’s a win for every child in America. It sends a clear message to every state in this nation: You have the power to protect your children. You can draw the line. You don’t have to wait for permission. And beyond our borders, this ruling sends a powerful global signal: I still believe — and I know many others do too — that children are worth protecting, that their innocence is not up for sale, and their safety is not negotiable.

Let this ruling be a turning point — for our families, for our faith, for our future.

Why leftism attracts the sad and depressed — and keeps them that way



By now, the trope of the “sad leftist” has become so popular that it’s essentially a meme. Multiple studies show leftists are, on average, far less happy than conservatives. That aligns with the experience of many who observe self-professed leftists exhibiting more anxiety, gloom, and hostility than others.

It’s not difficult to understand why. If your main news sources tell you the president is a fascist, half of your countrymen are bigots, and the world is about to end due to climate change, you’re bound to feel — and vote — blue. Yet, even in Democratic administrations, leftists never seemed content.

People latch onto progressive narratives because they offer someone to blame. That brings short-term relief, but it quickly fades.

This suggests the root of their discontent isn’t merely political messaging but something deeper. Rather, the ideas implicit in leftism seem antithetical to a happy life and human flourishing — even if well-intended. Leftists push for diversity, equity, and inclusion in place of meritocracy, support a more powerful state to implement those ideals, advocate open borders to globalize them, and demand wealth redistribution to fund them. In the sanitized and euphemistic language they often prefer, leftists are about fairness, progress, and kindness.

Sad people lean left

Nate Silver recently weighed in on the happiness gap between conservatives and progressives. His take? People might have it backward. It’s not that leftism makes people sad but that sad people gravitate toward leftism: “People become liberals because they’re struggling or oppressed themselves and therefore favor change and a larger role for government.”

If this is true, it still doesn’t explain why leftism is correlated with sadness and why it offers no remedy. Conservatives, for their part, offer a diagnosis and a cure: Leftism is foolish and destructive — so stop being a leftist. That’s the gist of Ben Shapiro’s infamous line, “Facts don’t care about your feelings.”

While clever and catchy, this oversimplifies the problem. People who ascribe to liberal or leftist causes don’t merely do so because they prioritize feelings over facts. Yes, some are true believers, but most are reacting to powerful cultural pressures and personal struggles. These feed destructive habits that, in turn, make them more susceptible to leftist propaganda.

After all, the narratives that comprise leftist propaganda are easy to understand and adopt since they lay the blame of all society’s ills on someone else. People are poor because rich people exploit them; people of color are marginalized because white people are racists; queer people are depressed because straight people don’t accept them; third world countries are dysfunctional because Americans and Europeans meddled in their affairs too much or too little; and leftists are unpopular because Trump and other conservative populists are effective con men.

The media’s vicious cycle

These narratives not only offer paltry short-term solace — they breed resentment. Instead of directing their efforts to personal improvement, leftists are encouraged to push their anger outward — sometimes through direct violence (vandalism, looting, even political violence) and sometimes indirectly by cheering on those who perpetrate it. In this way, left-wing media weaponizes its audience.

Nevertheless, the principle motivation behind leftist propaganda is not necessarily weaponization. It’s monetization. Beyond adopting leftist narratives and positions, audiences need to continue consuming leftist media and become addicted to it.

RELATED: Breaking the ‘spell of woke possession’: Why America is choosing tradition

Karolina Grabowska/Pexels

As Georgetown professor and computer scientist Cal Newport explains in his book “Digital Minimalism: Choosing a Focused Life in a Noisy World,” society has now entered the era of the “attention economy,” where media companies do everything in their power to hold people’s attention — for forever. In conjunction with tech companies, these outlets turn otherwise healthy people into helpless junkies enslaved to the apps on their smartphones.

Like any addiction, this one feeds a destructive cycle. People latch onto progressive narratives because they offer someone to blame. That brings short-term relief, but it quickly fades. The need for comfort drives them to consume even more leftist content, which distorts their view of the world and fuels resentment. Anxiety deepens. Misery spreads.

As their emotional state deteriorates, they seek comfort in even more content. Eventually, this behavior sabotages their ability to function. They become dependent on the very content that made them feel worse in the first place. Many even join the performance, filming themselves crying, ranting, and broadcasting their despair for clicks.

Meanwhile, the titans of the attention economy grow wealthier and more powerful. They refine their algorithms, suppress dissent, and tighten their grip. The last thing they want is for their users to wake up — to take Newport’s advice, unplug, and rediscover meaning in the real world. They might just find happiness. And stop drifting left.

Model a different life

This presents an opportunity for conservatives hoping to transform the culture. The answer isn’t just a matter of advocating time-tested ideas but of modeling the habits that reinforce these ideas. Rather than view leftists as incorrigible scoundrels and idiots who refuse to open their eyes, conservatives should see them as unfortunate people who have been seduced, reduced, and enslaved by powerful corporate and government interests.

This means that conservatives should do more than offer political arguments — we must pull them away from the vicious cycle through modeling a better life. Leftists (and many on the online right, for that matter) must be reminded that being perpetually online and endlessly scrolling is a recipe for sadness. In contrast, church, family, friends, and meaningful work are what empower people. They are what make us human — and happy.

Once the cycle is broken — and the leftist has regained some control over himself — the case for conservatism becomes much easier. If Nate Silver is right that sad people gravitate to the left, then it’s only logical to assume happy people should be attracted to the right. Conservatives should cherish those values and habits that make them, on average, happier and more fulfilled. It’s time to stop drinking leftist tears and help them out of their malaise.

Sackler cash can end fentanyl carnage — if we use it right



In a long-overdue reckoning, the Sackler family and Purdue Pharma have agreed to pay $7.4 billion as partial atonement for unleashing America’s opioid crisis. This historic settlement offers more than symbolic closure. If allocated wisely and aggressively, the funds could signal the beginning of the end for the deadliest drug epidemic in U.S. history.

Once fueled by prescription pills like OxyContin, the opioid crisis has evolved into something far deadlier. Illicit fentanyl and its analogs now kill more Americans ages 18 to 49 than any other cause. These drugs claim lives faster than guns, car crashes, or COVID-19 in many demographic groups. Children as young as 12 are overdosing on fentanyl-laced substances. The crisis isn’t looming — it’s already here.

We can’t afford to keep confusing addiction with criminality or leaning on obsolete tools while the chemistry of death evolves.

Fentanyl packs 50 times the potency of heroin and 100 times that of morphine. Just two milligrams — akin to a few grains of salt — can kill. Carfentanil, used to sedate elephants, is even more lethal. New synthetic opioids like nitazenes now appear in toxicology reports nationwide, catching users unaware. Xylazine, a veterinary sedative not approved for human use, is increasingly found in street drugs, leading to skin ulcers, amputations, and deaths that don't respond to naloxone, the opioid overdose reversal drug.

Yet harm reduction efforts lag behind. Most of the country relies on outdated, fragmented, and dangerously insufficient infrastructure. The system meant to save lives barely functions — just as the death toll keeps rising.

For years, America’s harm reduction efforts have stumbled through a maze of failures and contradictions. Even when available, fentanyl test strips often miss the mark, lacking the sensitivity to detect tiny — but still lethal — amounts. Many publicly funded programs still hand out tools that can’t catch analogs like carfentanil or nitazenes. Others depend on clunky, lab-grade machines only found in major cities, leaving rural and underserved communities wide open to catastrophe.

State laws make matters worse. In several places, outdated statutes still label drug-checking tools as “paraphernalia,” turning safety into a crime and criminalizing the very people trying to protect themselves and others.

RELATED: FBI director Kash Patel to Canada: Control your border

Photo by Artur Widak/NurPhoto via Getty Images

The A47 test from the Fentanyl Test changes the game. These are the only commercially available tools that detect trace levels of fentanyl and its analogs — down to a single grain of salt. They also identify nitazenes, xylazine, carfentanil, and a growing list of synthetic poisons, all with speed, accuracy, and field-tested reliability.

This is beyond innovation. It’s lifesaving intervention at the molecular level.

To eradicate fentanyl poisonings, America needs a bold, coordinated strategy. That means universal access to ultra-sensitive testing kits like A47. It means decriminalizing drug-checking tools nationwide, building real-time data and distribution networks, and launching mass public education campaigns about synthetic opioid risks. State and federal governments must guarantee free access to testing in every community — rural and urban alike.

This plan doesn’t require trillions. A fraction of the Sackler settlement could fund it. What we can’t afford is to keep confusing addiction with criminality or leaning on obsolete tools while the chemistry of death evolves. The Sackler-Purdue deal isn’t just restitution — it’s a once-in-a-generation chance to build a system that saves lives before they need saving.

The choice is clear. The money is available. Now we need the courage to act.

Don’t let rural America become the next New York City



Elect strong conservative leaders in your state — or watch it go the way of New York City. That’s the unmistakable warning conservatives should take from New York voters nominating a Hamas sympathizer and self-proclaimed socialist for mayor.

How could this happen just one generation after 9/11? How does the city that suffered most from jihadist terrorism now embrace a foreign-born Islamist who wants to “globalize the intifada”?

When Trump calls for more farm labor from the third world — so long as the workers aren’t 'murderers' — he misses the deeper issue. Violent crime isn’t the only threat.

Several factors explain the city’s decline, but one stands out: immigration. Forty percent of New York City’s population now consists of foreign-born residents — not including the children of immigrants. Mass immigration on that scale, especially from Islamic and third world countries, doesn’t just change the labor market. It imports foreign values and embeds them in the culture.

Trump should think twice about demanding more foreign agricultural workers for red-state America. His arguments about labor shortages miss the larger picture. This isn’t just about harvesting crops — it’s about reshaping schools, neighborhoods, and eventually, the ballot box.

In 2022, the Center for Immigration Studies mapped 2,351 Census Bureau-defined Public Use Microdata Areas to show the percentage of schoolchildren from immigrant households. No surprise: Urban districts in places like New York and Los Angeles show overwhelming majorities of immigrant families.

But that trend now stretches deep into red states. Cities and even rural counties are seeing shockingly high proportions of students from immigrant families.

In southeast Nashville, 65% of public-school students come from immigrant families. Iraq ranks as the second-largest country of origin. In Dallas, all 20 school districts report at least one-third of students from immigrant households. In most of those districts, a majority of families are foreign-born.

This trend extends well beyond major cities. In southwest Oklahoma City, 43% of students come from immigrant families. Greenville, South Carolina, stands at 35%. Birmingham and Chattanooga each hover around 20%.

Red-state cities and midsize towns now reflect immigration levels once limited to coastal urban hubs. That leaves rural America as the last holdout — and even that is changing.

The so-called farm labor trade has transformed heartland communities. These public school districts report the following immigrant family enrollment rates:

  • Texas Panhandle (outside Potter and Randall Counties): 31%
  • Oklahoma Panhandle: 21%
  • Southwest Kansas (Dodge City, Garden City, Liberal City): 55%
  • Central Nebraska: 27%
  • Canyon and Owyhee Counties, Idaho (Caldwell and Nampa): 30%
  • Whitfield County, Georgia: 43%
  • Woodbury and Plymouth Counties, Iowa (Sioux City): 26%
  • Washington County, Arkansas: 26%
  • Fargo, North Dakota: 23%

Until recently, these areas were overwhelmingly native-born. They maintained a strong continuity of American culture and civic tradition.

What happens when the next generation of these children grows up, votes, and brings in more from similar backgrounds? These red counties may not stay red for long.

Mitt Romney won Washington County, Arkansas, by 16 points in 2012. Just 12 years later, Donald Trump carried it by only six — even as he expanded his statewide margin. What changed? More than a quarter of the local student body now comes from immigrant households.

RELATED: New York City’s likely next mayor wants to ‘globalize the intifada’

Photo by ANGELA WEISS/AFP via Getty Images

Trump won rural Sampson County, North Carolina, by a 2-to-1 margin. Yet, by the 2022–23 school year, Hispanic students made up 44.2% of public school enrollment. The district now runs extensive English as a Second Language programs to meet ongoing demand. Even if Hispanic voters shift modestly right, when has such rapid demographic upheaval ever worked to conservatives’ advantage?

The pace of change is impossible to ignore. Importing foreign labor into rural counties inevitably reshapes culture — and, soon after, voting patterns.

Greene County, Iowa, illustrates the point. In 2023, Hispanic residents accounted for just 3.3% of the total population. But that number underrepresents their influence. Iowa State University researchers found Latino populations in rural Iowa tend to skew young, meaning they disproportionately fill the schools even when their overall numbers look small. That imbalance compounds over time.

When Trump calls for more farm labor from the third world — so long as the workers aren’t “murderers” — he misses the deeper issue. Violent crime isn’t the only threat. The more serious loss lies in surrendering the very communities that naturally align with traditional American culture.

As Vice President JD Vance put it during his Republican National Convention acceptance speech: “America is not just an idea. It is a group of people with a shared history and a common future. It is, in short, a nation.”

That is the nation Trump must promise to defend — not just with words but with sound policy.

Republicans and Democrats both faced an important reckoning last week



Democrats and Republicans alike have wrestled internally this past year over the direction and future of their parties. A lot of attention has been paid to Democrats’ ugly, public civil war, but inside the Grand Old Party, different interests have wrestled as well, struggling for ownership of an ideological movement still run by one man. We learned a lot last week about who’s winning and who’s losing. And right now, the winners are the American left and the losers are the non-interventionists.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ implosion never allowed for the important soul-searching any party that loses the White House after a single term must engage in. While less radical Democrats were quick to point to the massive unpopularity of the party’s faculty-style left-wing policies, transgender obsessions, and unserious immigration policies, the guilty didn’t want to hear it. They called their accusers traitors and blamed their popular defeat on Joe Biden’s clear mental collapse, his late withdrawal from the race, and the years-long cover-up that had tried to conceal it. When you’ve got external boogeymen, it’s a lot harder to look inward.

The Democrats’ civil war is over. Republicans still have a choice ahead.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a presumptive lead candidate for the Democratic nomination in 2028, was the most major figure to attempt a political course-correction, and it quickly blew up in his face. The left openly attacked him, while tepid allies declined to attach their names to their own newspaper quotes for fear of the same treatment.

Then in New York, the Democratic mayoral primary was won by a young man who is pro-intifada, pro-drug legalization, pro-public injection sites, and pro-child genital mutilation, but anti-police, anti-cash bail, anti-private gun ownership, anti-private health care, and anti-cooperation with federal immigration authorities. It was a stunning rebuke to a tired Democratic Party establishment, and more is on the way.

The party’s old guard is aging out, and the reality is that men like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are among the last forces attempting to restrain the unbridled anti-Americanism of the party’s younger generation. They may win a few rearguard actions, possibly propelling party exile and current New York Mayor Eric Adams (I) to victory in New York this fall, but even that would be a last gasp. They are in retreat. The left has won.

Republicans faced an important reckoning last week too. In their case, it was over the strikes on Iran. Neoconservatives and other robust interventionists beat out the nascent doves and non-interventionist wing of the MAGA movement when President Donald Trump did what he always said he’d do: make sure Iran was unable to acquire nuclear weapons. Their political triumph, however, was more a side effect of the doves’ blunders than their own salience.

While the pro-interventionists were quick to crow about their victory and the thus-far limited spillover effect of the bombings, their victory was constrained by the president’s unwillingness to topple the Iranian regime.

That didn’t hurt the non-interventionist wing of the party. The doves could easily have rallied when the president limited his strikes, gave proper warning, de-escalated in the region, and publicly chastised an Israeli government long used to public deference from the Oval Office. Instead, the non-interventionists’ reputational wounds were self-inflicted.

While there were well-reasoned arguments against regime change (or war at all), Republican doves panicked. Hyperbole dominated. Comparisons to the Iraq War quagmire and even predictions of World War III abounded. The crack-up wasn’t even constrained to the usual anonymous corners of X — some of the most effective advocates of non-interventionism were guilty of emotional outbursts.

It’s understandable to distrust American intelligence agencies’ calls for intervention in Muslim states. It’s also understandable to distrust America’s more prominent Israel-security advocates, who often lack the prudent restraint practiced by the Jewish state’s own wartime prime minister.

Calls for war to prevent weapons of mass destruction are easy emotional triggers for those old enough to remember the post-9/11 call to battle. But that doesn’t justify showing your butt in the manner that so many did. The neoconservatives are not back in power — but the already vulnerable non-interventionists inflicted a lot of unnecessary damage on their reputations and influence, at least for the near future. You can only predict world war so many times.

Meanwhile, the Democrats’ civil war is over. Whatever comes next from the American left is merely a mop-up action. A defeat in the next presidential election might change this dynamic, but that’s more than three years away — and the ingredients needed for a less radical Democratic Party are dying, not growing.

Republicans still have a choice ahead. The non-interventionist purists imploded this time, but their allies in top White House positions performed their duties admirably and professionally, while President Trump powerfully restated his case for projecting power without nation-building — an important thing in a dangerously interconnected world. The fate of the non-interventionists will be decided when, and if, a Republican wins the presidency in ’28. And that’s a long way off.

Daniel McCarthy in Compact: How Trump surprised hawks and doves

Sign up for Bedford’s newsletter
Sign up to get Blaze Media senior politics editor Christopher Bedford’s newsletter.

Christopher Wray must be prosecuted



The director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation has one job above all: Tell the truth. The FBI’s motto — “Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity” — demands it. But beyond the moral and professional imperative, the director has a legal duty when communicating with Congress. Former Director Christopher Wray failed that duty. On Thursday, the Oversight Project submitted a criminal referral to the Department of Justice and FBI, calling for an investigation — and prosecution if warranted.

The case against Wray centers on two major failures.

Transparency matters, but accountability is what the American people demand.

First, U.S. Customs and Border Protection intercepted 20,000 scannable fake driver’s licenses produced by the Chinese Communist Party. The licenses were part of an election interference scheme aimed at boosting mail-in ballots for Joe Biden in 2020. Current FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino confirmed this in recent disclosures to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), noting that prior FBI leadership “chose to play politics and withhold key information from the American people.” Wray had to have known. He testified repeatedly that the 2020 election was secure. That was a lie.

Second, Wray misled Congress about the FBI’s so-called “Catholic memo.” He claimed it came from a single Richmond office and had been withdrawn. But new documents show the FBI circulated over a dozen related files to more than 1,000 employees and even drafted a broader version for wider circulation. As Grassley put it, “[Wray] is lying, and he ought to be followed up. Because if people that lie to Congress aren’t held accountable, it encourages more people to lie.”

The Oversight Project’s referral highlights three key moments when Wray gave sworn testimony contradicted by documented evidence. In September 2020, appearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, he denied any coordinated voter fraud effort. In March 2021, he flatly repeated his claim that foreign interference posed no threat — despite growing evidence suggesting otherwise. Yet Wray received regular briefings from Nikki Floris, head of the FBI’s 2020 election security and Foreign Influence Task Force. He acknowledged China’s malign influence campaign as early as July 2020. That alone undercuts his claims of ignorance.

The idea that Wray didn’t know about either scandal doesn’t hold water. Either he knew and lied — or he didn’t want to know. In both cases, that’s disqualifying.

And Wray’s record doesn’t earn him the benefit of the doubt.

He dismissed Antifa as an “ideology,” despite clear evidence of coordinated violent activity across multiple cities. He created the Foreign Influence Task Force that censored speech protected by the First Amendment — flagging the Hunter Biden laptop story and labeling credible sources as conspiracy theorists. He unleashed unprecedented FBI resources to pursue low-level January 6 offenders while ignoring real threats from abroad.

Under Wray, the bureau chased Republicans over flimsy allegations and turned a blind eye to millions flowing from Communist China to the Biden family. He rewarded agents who knelt for BLM while punishing whistleblowers who questioned the bureau’s politicization.

RELATED: The FBI was completely correct to keep an eye on Catholics

jnatkin via iStock/Getty Images

He effectively turned Pride Month into Pride Years, flooding the agency with DEI and LGBTQ propaganda instead of focusing on mission-critical tasks like national security and counterintelligence.

The FBI under Wray mocked its legal obligations — not just to Congress, but to the public. The bureau continues to fight in court to block the release of documents that would confirm its abuse of power.

Wray’s legacy is a textbook case of weaponization: Act aggressively when evidence hurts the political right, and bury it when it implicates the left. His repeated failures to disclose vital election-related information — and his lies about targeting Catholic Americans — expose a deeper pattern of deception.

The Oversight Project’s criminal referral gives the Justice Department and the FBI a chance to restore trust. Transparency matters, but accountability is what the American people demand.

And this case is only the beginning. We believe Wray and others at the FBI participated in a broader conspiracy to violate Americans’ civil rights. Investigating that conspiracy should begin with one simple act: prosecuting Christopher Wray.

Congress just saved your credit card rewards — for now



Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) just failed — again — in their bid to ram through the Credit Card Competition Act, a sweeping regulatory proposal that would overhaul the U.S. credit card system to resemble Europe’s heavy-handed financial regime. Their latest attempt to sneak the measure into a stablecoin bill collapsed under scrutiny, marking yet another setback for legislation that critics say would harm consumers, weaken data security, and empower retail giants.

This outcome is welcome but unsurprising. The bill is wildly unpopular with consumers — for good reason. As written, it’s a thinly veiled giveaway to big-box retailers at the expense of virtually everyone else. Its sponsors claim it would inject competition into a noncompetitive market.

Senate leadership clearly got the message. Americans don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken.

In reality, the CCCA would allow retailers to continue accepting name-brand credit cards while processing payments through lesser-known networks — all without consumer knowledge or consent. Lawmakers should stand firm against any future efforts to resurrect this awful proposal.

The central premise of the bill — that the credit card market lacks competition — is unfounded. As of 2025, 152 companies in the United States issue credit cards. Between 2020 and 2025, market entry has grown at an average annual rate of 8.1%. This kind of steady growth does not indicate a broken market, but rather a dynamic and competitive system that continues to serve consumers well.

Kiss rewards goodbye

If passed, the CCCA would jeopardize that progress. Fraud rates, already on the rise, would skyrocket. Unvetted payment processors would be handed vast troves of sensitive consumer data. The only beneficiaries of using these cheaper alternatives are the retailers, who lack a vested interest in cardholder safety. Meanwhile, smaller institutions — including community banks and credit unions — would see revenue streams dry up.

RELATED: SCARY: President of European Central Bank admits 'digital Euro' is ready for launch

dem10 via iStock/Getty Images

Retailers insist these alleged “cost savings” would trickle down to their customers. That’s about as likely as the claim that businesses absorb tariffs or taxes without raising prices. History suggests otherwise.

Worse still, the bill would also end the ability of banks and credit unions to operate popular credit card rewards programs. These programs are funded largely by the interchange fees charged by payment processors. When Durbin succeeded in passing his debit card price controls, consumers lost card benefits and experienced no savings. A Wall Street Journal article highlighted this history:

Debit-card rewards programs have nearly disappeared since the Durbin amendment, part of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that cut retailers’ fees nearly in half. Stores didn’t pass the savings to customers, while the banks that issue the cards found other ways to recoup revenue.

A failed Trojan horse

Like a one-trick pony, Durbin and Marshall have not given up — despite the bill neither gaining traction nor receiving a committee markup. As they have done previously, the senators once again tried to tuck their proposal into a “must-pass” bill. Their first target in the 119th Congress was the GENIUS Act, a bipartisan bill focused on stablecoin regulations. Thankfully, Senate leadership saw right through this ploy.

Polling confirms that Americans are largely content with the current credit card marketplace. In fact, 77% of respondents trust credit card companies to handle key responsibilities, such as fraud prevention. Three-quarters of respondents trust that their private payment networks will handle the protection of personal data. The poll also showed that 79% of cardholders use rewards cards, and more than half (58%) use those rewards regularly. Rewards are a tool many families and businesses rely on to make purchases while also earning cash back.

Senate leadership clearly got the message. Americans don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken — which is why they rightly rejected the addition of Durbin’s credit card mandates to the GENIUS Act.

Consumers can breathe easier

It is a relief the bill didn’t slip in as an amendment with no opportunity for debate. Any legislation with sweeping financial implications deserves full congressional scrutiny — and the voices of constituents must be heard. Still, Durbin and Marshall are reportedly eyeing the National Defense Authorization Act as their next legislative vehicle.

Taxpayers must remain vigilant to hold their representatives accountable. Policymakers must also be vigilant in defending the interests of their constituents. But for now, millions of Americans can breathe a sigh of relief.

Build back better? Then stop outsourcing our agricultural soul



Drive through our country’s heartland — past golden fields, cattle-speckled hills, and humming dairies — and you’ll see the soul of America at work. But look closer, and a bitter truth emerges: The hands harvesting our crops and milking our cows are too often foreign-born laborers here illegally or on a costly visa program.

In my state, the Idaho Dairymen’s Association admits a staggering 70% or more of dairy workers are using phony documents — illegal labor propping up Idaho’s top commodity and our country’s No. 3 milk-producing state.

Today, we’re fed a line that Americans have gone lazy, addicted to cubicles or city lights. Nonsense.

We’re told Americans won’t do these jobs. Really? From the 1880s through the 1940s, Americans built these very industries. So what changed? It’s not the workers. It’s the bosses who stopped believing in them.

American grit built our farms

Idaho’s dairies, ranches, and construction sites can thrive with American grit — if employers stop making excuses and start making offers.

Go back to the late 19th century, when Idaho’s Snake River Valley was raw desert. Local settlers — farmers, laborers, families — dug canals, built dams, and turned dust into fields of potatoes and alfalfa, as historian Mark Fiege shows in his 1999 book “Irrigated Eden.” These weren’t hired foreigners; they were Americans, mostly Western settlers, whose sweat and cooperation built an agricultural empire through the Depression and wartime into the 1940s.

Those were hard years. Yet, these people showed up, sleeves rolled, ready to work. They weren’t too soft for the sun on their necks or the ache of a long day.

Employers abandoned American workers

Today, we’re fed a line that Americans have gone lazy, addicted to cubicles or city lights. Nonsense. Some yes, but fewer than imagined. The problem isn’t our people; it’s an industry that’s forgotten how to call them home.

Don’t tell me Americans won’t work. Plenty of us still hunger for the kind of labor that smells of earth and steel — jobs that build calluses and communities. Idaho’s fields offer purpose: the roar of a tractor, the precision of robotic milkers, the quiet triumph of a harvest under wide skies.

Vice President JD Vance nailed it when he sarcastically gave in to the notion that deporting tens of millions of illegal aliens will send us back to 1960 — when homes apparently couldn’t be built without illegal labor. Absurd! The same goes for agriculture.

RELATED: Glyphosate 101: What you need to know about America’s most popular pesticide

Anton Skripachev via iStock/Getty Images

These aren’t dead-end gigs; they’re the backbone of our nation. But employers need to stop acting like foreign workers are the only option. If you are one of these employers who show up to the town parade waving Old Glory, singing Lee Greenwood’s “God Bless the U.S.A.” — if you claim to be America First — then hire Americans first. Anything less is just talk.

Illegal workers cost more

Here’s where the elites squirm. As state Rep. Stephanie Mickelsen (R-Idaho) noted during a House debate, Idaho employers often admit that foreign labor isn’t even cheaper. Visas, travel, lodging, meals, and transportation add up — often rivaling what an American might earn in salary and benefits. Yet, they claim no amount of money will lure American workers.

Have they tried? Really tried? Take those bloated costs — every dime spent on foreign logistics — and pour them into wages, health plans, or housing for locals. Build training programs to teach kids how to run today’s high-tech rigs. If tech giants can sell college grads on coding in Silicon Valley, Idaho’s dairies can sell our youth on feeding America.

It’s not rocket science. It’s will.

The same elites twist unemployment numbers to prop up their narrative. They cite low jobless rates to argue that no one’s left to hire. But the Bureau of Labor Statistics excludes a key group: able-bodied men ages 25 to 54 who’ve dropped out of the workforce entirely. They’re not working, not looking, and not counted. That forgotten group alone includes an estimated seven million Americans.

Make American farming great again

Picture this: billboards across Idaho showing a young farmer steering a drone-guided planter, grinning like he owns the future. Community colleges partnering with ranchers to train veterans and high schoolers. County fairs where dairies hand out scholarships — not just milk samples. That’s not fantasy. That’s strategy. Businesses that want loyalty don’t wait for workers to show up — they go find them.

Right now, 70% of dairy workers rely on falsified papers. That’s not a workforce. It’s a failure of imagination. Legal, local labor builds trust, strengthens communities, and proves we take sovereignty seriously.

Idaho can lead the way. America’s watching.

Employers, quit hiding behind old excuses. Redirect your budgets, roll out campaigns, and watch Americans answer the call. Lawmakers, reduce or eliminate regulations that incentivize foreign labor.

Neighbors, cheer these jobs as the honorable work they are. Picture our fields alive with Americans, dairies humming with citizens who know this land as home.

That’s not just Idaho’s future, it’s America’s. We’ve done it before. We can do it again. All it takes is the guts to try.