A judge’s obligation is to administer justice without fear or favor. The reality is that Barrett appears to have a great deal of fear, and it strains credibility to suggest that those concerns have not affected her judicial reasoning.
There is a ceiling on how much protein a human can eat, and past it the food starts to kill you.
It sits around 35 percent of your calories. Not a preference. A hard limit, set by the liver.
Protein is nitrogen-rich, and burning it for fuel leaves you with ammonia, which is poisonous. The liver converts that ammonia to urea and ships it out through the kidneys. That machinery has a maximum throughput. Flood it and the ammonia backs up faster than you can clear it.
So a man can sit down to unlimited lean meat, eat until his belly is tight, and starve anyway. He weakens, gets a splitting head and the runs, and inside a couple of weeks in the cold he is dead, with meat still sitting in the pot.
The fix is never more protein. It is fat. Fat burns clean: no nitrogen, no urea, no ceiling. Add enough of it and the same lean meat that was poisoning the man keeps him alive indefinitely.
This is why every serious meat-eating people on Earth prized the fat over the muscle. Marrow, back fat, the fatty organs, tallow rendered and stored for winter. The lean was the part you could afford to hand to the dogs.
Lean protein is a modern health slogan. To the people who actually lived on animals, it described a slow way to die.
Leftists love the term "democracy".
They want you to think it's sacred, flawless, and unquestionable. They want you to be shocked and horrified every time anyone questions it, or points out its obvious flaws.
Why?
Because if they can make you think consensus is unquestionable, all they have to do is create the illusion of consensus.
Control the social media website. Stuff the ballot box. Flood the television with lies.
Notice, here, that leftist fellow traveler Yann LeCun doesn't bother to defend democracy, or even define it. He doesn't deal with the fact that the word or concept of democracy is not even mentioned, not even once, in the foundational documents that form the basis of American law.
He doesn't talk about those things because he doesn't want you to think about those things.
He doesn't want you to ask "What kind of democracy, exactly?"
He doesn't want you to ask "Is democracy really want we want, or is it simply a means of creating a just and free society? And what if it doesn't?"
He doesn't want you to ask "Hey, wait a minute, aren't lynchings and gang rapes the ultimate form of democracy?"
No, he just wants you to clutch your pearls, shriek "oh my ears and whiskers" and follow him down onto the fainting couch.
He wants you to worship the word democracy. Not to think about the concept.
This is the same game that they played with the word "racism".
First they interpreted the word as "genocidal hate". Then they used this notion to turn the word into a symbol of pure evil. Then they reinterpreted the word to mean "White people having any ingroup preference." But they still want you to treat this as pure evil.
The Athenians only gave the office of "voter" to native Athenian men who did military service.
This was democracy. It was by definition democracy. Because "democracy" is nothing but the word Athenians invented to describe it.
But now, if you suggest that we do as the Athenians did, or something like it, the left screams "you hate democracy!"
It's a word game.
You have to remember that the left is not trying to persuade you. They are trying to trick you.
You have to remember that words mean things.
To the Americans:
I've travelled all over the world. I've familiarized myself with many places, and met many people. And I'm a Canadian, although I’m privileged to reside once again in the States.
And here's something I've noticed, and it’s a key element of America's continuing greatness:
You bloody Americans value success, and you believe in its existence.
This is something that doesn't really happen anywhere else in the world. Even in other free democracies—the United Kingdom; Finland, Sweden, and Norway; Australia, New Zealand and Canada; Germany, France, and the Netherlands (great countries all)—a counterproductive cynicism too often reigns.
Success is equated with exploitation.
Ambition is looked upon with contempt.
This happens sometimes in the United States too—particularly among the miserable progressives, who confuse their resentment, ingratitude and unearned skepticism with wisdom.
But in your great country, by and large, striving is admired and success celebrated.
This means that more people strive and succeed in the US than anywhere else. And it's increasingly obvious. You remain stunningly more innovative and productive than any people anywhere else on the planet.
And so I say, as all should who are fortunate enough to live in the western world, let alone America:
Thank God for the United States.
Thank God for the wisdom of its founders.
Thank God for its faith in the free market and in the natural rights of man.
Happy birthday, you damn Yankees and Southerners.
Long may your admirable country dominate the world.
Long may your freedom and hope provide an example to those suffering everywhere at the hands of their malevolent states.
May your two and a half centuries of unparallelled success be just the beginning.
Your country is the light of the world, and the city on the hill.
Thank God for the USA.
Happy 250th.
Dr. Jordan B. Peterson
We make it far too easy for senators in the minority to use the filibuster to kill bills supported by the majority.
The whole idea behind the filibuster has, from the beginning, been to protect and prolong debate—not to cut off debate, forcing the Senate to abandon any bill that doesn’t immediately receive the support of at least 60 senators.
Filibustering is supposed to require far more than opposing cloture.
Especially for bills of exceptional national importance—like the SAVE America Act—senators should be required to hold the floor and speak.
The minute filibustering senators stop doing that, the legislation can and should be passed at a simple-majority threshold.
This is not a radical idea.
This describes what the filibuster is, how it has historically operated, and how it should work today.
Share this message if you agree that the Senate—and the country as a whole—would be well served by a return to this approach.
Conspiracy theorist here.
When someone says “they” it is fine to ask if this person knows who “they” are likely to be, but it is not indicative of a logical error if the person advancing the hypothesis can’t name “them.”
If the inability to name “them” was logically invalidating, then anyone who can conceal their identity is in a position to, not only get away crimes, but to force us to accept a deliberately constructed, false pattern of evidence—where they frame a patsy or fall guy—no matter how shoddy the cover story.
If the “Who are they?” test were valid, we wouldn’t even be able to advance a competing hypothesis so it could be compared with the official story relative to the evidence. The police couldn’t investigate a crime before identifying a suspect. Science itself becomes impossible, where we often identify a consequence and then go looking for a cause based on competing hypotheses.
The “Who are they?” test is tailored-made to protect powerful entities with the capacity to commit the most consequential crimes, such as political assassinations and false flag attacks. These are the most important crimes to identify, and we mustn’t allow our hands to be tied with a generic, reflexive fallacy.
🚨 BREAKING:
MATT BRUNER DOUBLES DOWN…. AFTER MISTREATING @ScottPresler.
MAKES AN ABSOLUTELY CLASSLESS POST. WHAT AN ASSHAT.
@johnthune@LeaderJohnThune, are you really ok with this?
🚨 HUGE NEWS: The US Postmaster General has just told Congress that the Post Office WILL NOT deliver mail-in ballots in the 2026 midterms to states who refuse to comply with President Trump's election integrity executive order
This order makes sure mail-in recipients are CITIZENS and are who they say they are — on top of making mail-in voting more secure
LFG!! Don't let the Dems defeat this in court! 🔥
The reason that soccer is the largest international sport is because it’s a sport perfectly designed for scammers.
Even in the World Cup, supposedly the highest and most prestigious level of international sport, there’s a stoppage of play roughly every 60 seconds for some guy writhing in pain from some tiny incidental contact. Interestingly, once he gets the call, he gets right up and runs for another hour just fine. It’s almost as if he wasn’t actually hurt at all.
Watch what happens when someone scores a goal - the defending team will immediately throw their hands up in protest, looking for any excuse to disallow the goal. Offsides, incidental contact, anything to refuse admitting they got scored on.
Whenever a ball goes out of bounds, each team starts fervently pointing at one another like toddlers on a playground saying “I didn’t do it, HE did it!”
Every single aspect of the sport is childish scamming. This doesn’t happen in any other sport - Hockey players don’t act this way, and almost all hockey players come from high trust countries. Almost all soccer teams come from low trust countries. They gravitate towards the sport because it rewards scammers. That’s it.
When the dermatologist was just on Fox News debunking the idea that some chemicals in sunscreen aren't good for us, it sounded illogically dismissive of the studies and research.
I took a quick look.
I didn’t hear her disclose her paid relationships with big sunscreen makers. ☀️
This is part of a trend that I discovered decades ago. It permeates our news media landscape.
I learned that nearly every member of the national board of experts that lowered cholesterol guidelines and basically recommended that people should take more statins, worked for the statin makers.
I learned that many members of the board set up during Covid that restricted hydroxychloroquine... were paid by the companies that made other controversial treatments for Covid like remdesivir that were then prioritized over hydroxychloroquine.
It doesn’t stop there.
When the government and the cosmetics industry tried to falsely debunk the scientific studies linking antiperspirants and breast cancer, they referred me to the American Cancer Society for an interview. I learned that the expert at the American Cancer Society hadn’t even read the relevant studies, and yet was claiming the link was a myth. I asked and found out that the American Cancer Society takes money from the antiperspirant industry and other allegedly cancer, causing industries. However, they wouldn’t tell me how much.
When the nonprofit “every child by" was illogically denying the proven vaccine autism link, I dug in and found out the nonprofit was actually started by a vaccine maker in order to defend vaccine companies, and to controversialist those of us exposing the risks.
I was the first journalist to ask and report that the expert the government kept referring us to in order to debunk the vaccine autism link, Dr. Paul Offit, was not an independent expert at all, but was a vaccine inventor and vaccine industry insider… though that was never disclosed in the media at the time. He was always presented falsely as if he were an independent expert.
When I saw a lead dietary group giving questionable advice about nutrition, I learned that the group takes money from the sugar, cola, fast food, and preservative snack industry.
In short, whenever I’ve looked for a tie between experts defending a chemical or risk that could impact an industry's bottom line... I’ve always found one. Food for thought.
"Dr. Jody Levine has financial and professional relationships with several prominent consumer product companies that manufacture and market sunscreens.
Because sunscreen is legally regulated as an over-the-counter drug and is a core component of commercial skincare lines, her consulting roles inherently create potential conflicts of interest when she recommends sun protection or reviews skincare products in the media.
Her specific ties to major corporate sunscreen manufacturers include:
1. Johnson & Johnson / Kenvue
Dr. Levine has served on the Medical Advisory Board for Johnson & Johnson. Johnson & Johnson’s consumer health spin-off, Kenvue, owns Neutrogena and Aveeno, two of the largest and most widely distributed sunscreen brands in the United States. In her media and print features, she has regularly recommended product categories or specific options overlapping with these brands, such as recommending Neutrogena Sport Face in broad consumer media interviews.
2. Galderma (Cetaphil)
She has acted as a consultant and advisor for Cetaphil, a brand owned by Galderma. Cetaphil produces a substantial line of daily facial moisturizers with SPF, mineral sunscreens, and broad-spectrum sun protection lotions marketed heavily toward sensitive skin and pediatric care.
3. Beiersdorf (Eucerin)
Dr. Levine has maintained consulting arrangements with Eucerin, a brand under the Beiersdorf corporate umbrella. Eucerin manufactures a wide range of daily anti-aging lotions with SPF, sensitive skin sunscreens, and body sun protection products.
Impact on Media Appearances
When Dr. Levine appears on networks like Fox News or in print publications to deliver general public health messages—such as advising viewers to apply sunscreen 15 minutes before going outside or warning against the dangers of tanning beds—she is providing standard medical advice aligned with the American Academy of Dermatology. However, because she does not routinely issue on-screen financial disclosures listing her corporate partners during short news segments, viewers are generally unaware that she is paid by the parent companies of the very products sitting on drugstore shelves."
Politics just got so boring to be honest
It just consists of programming childless women to look at some groups as helpless, sad, marginalized, and discriminated against, so that twisted maternal instincts kick in and all reason and fiscal restraint goes out the window
✝️ History will repeat itself ✝️
The Crusades were launched after seven centuries of constant Islamic aggression. Before the very first crusade was launched in 1095, Muslims had invaded the following Christian lands.
They had invaded Christian Syria, Christian Jordan, Christian Palestine, Christian Egypt, Christian Algeria, Christian Libya, Christian Morocco, Christian Portugal, Christian Spain, Christian France, Christian Sicily, Christian Turkey, Christian Armenia, Christian Italy. All before the first crusade.
The crusades are a legitimate response to Islamic aggression and Islamic violence.
For the people who are critical of the whole Q thing, have you ever read the drops?
We’ve witnessed damn near every other “conspiracy theory” end up being true, yet this one is too far?
Do people even know what it’s really about? It’s mostly about Uranium One, and the rogue nuclear material. The Q drops allege that the nuclear material from Uranium One ended up in Iran, Syria, and North Korea, and that the Obama administration did this intentionally, and their plan was to initiate WW3 and implement a new globalist one world order.
Obviously there’s a lot more that is discussed in the drops, but the overall message revolves around Uranium One, hence the reference to “Q clearance”, meaning the Department of Energy. Nuclear. The uranium…
Is it an accident that the Trump admin is openly drawing attention to Q, right as we are securing the uranium in Iran? I don’t think so. I think the Trump admin is urging the public to read the Q drops, particularly the opening ones, which are mostly about Uranium One.
I’ve been subtly injecting this narrative into the mainstream the entire time, planting the seeds for when this moment arrived. Where do you think I learned it all?