Ashley King

(-)Government. +Freedom.

[Ron Rule @ronrule]

In 2001 George W Bush proposed a partial privatization plan for Social Security so you could put 10% of your SS contribution into the markets.

People rejected this.

We can now see that if it had passed, the 10% that went into the markets would have outperformed the 90% the government managed, the program would be solvent, and the average SS recipient would be receiving 2X what they currently receive.

The worst bet you’ll ever make is betting on government.

[Alex Rosen @iFightForKids]

CASE UPDATE On One of the most GRAPHIC PEDOS of this year!!

Thanks to Sheriff Travis Hakes of Chippewa County, Wisconsin, Tyler was charged!

Chippewa County, go vote Hakes in the primary August 11th! Polls close 7pm!

[Collin Rugg @CollinRugg]

On July 4 2012 in San Diego, California, 7,000 fireworks accidentally went off all at the same time.

What was supposed to be a 17 min show, lasted just 30 seconds, thanks to a computer glitch

It is one of the greatest firework shows of all time

Happy 250th birthday, America 🇺🇸

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

@chamath Love you boys! Happy to be one of the million.

[Peter B @realpeteyb123]

Ok… most of you know I was in the organic baby formula business, but what you don’t know is I dabbled in diapers as well.

I also know this baby2baby “non profit” and have had past interactions with them.. I’ll leave that out for now..

Let’s dive into this absolute grifting nonsense. Prepare to be shocked.

California is about to spend $20 million of taxpayer money to give 100,000 newborns 400 diapers each through Baby2Baby.

Do the math with me:
100,000 babies × 400 diapers = 40 million diapers

$20,000,000 ÷ 40,000,000 = $0.50 per diaper!!!!!

Now walk into any Costco in California and you can buy the same quality diapers for .12 to .15 cents each!

That’s $48 to $60 for 400 diapers.
So the state is paying 8–10x more per diaper than a regular family buying in bulk.

They could’ve just handed every low-income new mom $100 cash and told her to go to Costco. She’d get more diapers, better ones if she wanted, and still have money left for formula, wipes, or whatever the hell she actually needs.

But nah… that wouldn’t let Gavin and his connected “nonprofit” girls running the show there cut ribbons, take photos, do galas and be friends with celebrities and brag about the “first-in-the-nation” program while skimming their cut for “administration” and “partnerships.”

This is peak government stupidity!!!

Spend way more money to feel good and look good, instead of just trusting parents with their own damn money.
We’re not helping babies. We’re funding another bloated nonprofit-government grift.

Math doesn’t lie. The diaper math is brutal.

What a scam and a joke!!!!!

[Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 @pmarca]

I have never been so bullish on the United States of America.

[Barry @BarryOnHere]

I'm old enough to remember when Tebow first blew up at Florida. Always thought he had to have been hiding some big secret bc there's just no way anybody is really that good of a person.

20 years later he is the only guy I can think of who was built up by the media to be a saint and has actually lived up to it. Also has a higher playoff passer rating than Tom Brady.

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

😍

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

@LeahLibresco Something way cooler than a minivan is coming

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

@MurrayHillGuy1 Come to Wisconsin. We'll introduce you to this thing called the Friday night fish fry.

[joe handrick @joeminocqua]

Well, it does in WI where only 1/2 the senate is up each cycle. So, when a district number is changed from odd to even (or the other way around), a large number of voters are disenfranchised.

This has been one of the measures the courts have used to evaluate maps in Wisconsin since 1992. The court in Prosser v Elections board wrote, "Speaking of disenfranchisement and gerrymandering, redistricting a legislative body whose members have staggered terms unavoidably creates the former, though only temporarily, and with it possibilities for the latter."

Some tried to argue that the disenfranchisement of one voter is offset by another voter being able to vote in an additional election. In response to this argument the three-judge panel wrote, "But taking away one person's vote is not remedied by giving someone else two votes."

The map introduced by Governor Evers in 2024 flipped the number of SD19 to 18 resulting in a large disenfranchisement. And, has been previously demonstrated, it split multiple (6 of 9) municipalities and has a Polsby compactness score of .1009 (which is really, really bad).

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

@megynkelly @MegynKellyShow Oh, how you've fallen. It's really quite sad.

[Will Flanders @WillFlandersWI]

District admins in the districts currently suing over a lack of funds all make nearly $150K per year-about 3X the median income for a US worker. 3 pay their admins more than $200K in taxpayer money/year. Yet they have the audacity to demand more from taxpayers around the state?

[Dutch Rojas @DutchRojas]

You pay for healthcare seven times.

Once through your premium. Once through your deductible.

Once through Medicare payroll taxes.
Once through Medicaid via state income taxes. Once through local hospital district levies.

Once through charity care baked into every negotiated rate.

And once through your employer’s “contribution,” which is your compensation, redirected before you see it.

After all seven payments,

30 cents of every dollar still goes to administration.

Other developed nations average 12%.

The money isn’t missing.
It’s just going somewhere else.

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

@wiz_political Go for it. It's much much more difficult to make a move like this once you have a wife and kids. Now is the time.

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

@TNFreedom21 @USDA In Wisconsin we have a "garage fridge" from December-March.

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

This is why I love X. 😂

[Whole Mars Catalog @wholemars]

the child was conceived with the wig on

[The Biblical Man @Biblicalman]

A man said "I accept Jesus Christ" on his deathbed.

The church asked if he really meant it.

I need to ask you something.

When did we become the gatekeepers of grace?

I've watched Christians dissect Scott Adams' final words like prosecutors.

They parsed his phrases. They weighed his tone. They measured his faith against some invisible scale and found it wanting.

"That doesn't sound like surrender," they said. "That sounds like a man hedging his bets."

And I understand the instinct. I do.

But there's a verse that haunts me. Not because it's obscure—because it's too simple.

"Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
(Romans 10:13)

Whosoever.

Not "whosoever truly believes in their heart of hearts." Not "whosoever demonstrates sufficient sincerity." Not "whosoever calls early enough in life that we trust their
motives."

Whosoever.

The moment we add prerequisites to that promise, we've traded the Gospel for religion.

We've smuggled works back in through the side door labeled "authentic faith."

I know what some of you are thinking.

But he admitted he wasn't a believer.
He talked about "risk and reward."
He said he hoped he'd "qualify."

Yes. He did.

And those words make us uncomfortable. They don't sound like the confident declarations we want from converts. They sound uncertain. Calculating. Human.

But here's what I need you to hear:

The thief on the cross didn't have time to develop mature theology either.

He was a criminal. Hours from death. He looked at Jesus and said, "Lord, remember me when you come into your kingdom."

That's it.

No profession of belief in the resurrection. No renunciation of his former life. No evidence of transformed character.

Just a desperate man, reaching for a hand he wasn't sure would take his.

And Jesus said, "Today you will be with me in paradise."

We have a problem, and it's not Scott Adams.

It's us.

We've internalized a law that God never gave us. A natural sense of fairness that says late arrivals should get less. That deathbed conversions are suspicious. That the math
should somehow work out—more faith, more years, more sacrifice equals more standing before God.

Jesus told a parable about this.

We skip over it because it offends us.

A landowner hired workers throughout the day. Some came at dawn. Some at noon. Some showed up with one hour left.

At the end, he paid them all the same.

The early workers were furious.

"These who were hired last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day."
(Matthew 20:12)

And the landowner replied:

"I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?"

There it is.

The scandal of grace is that it feels unfair.

A man who mocked God for sixty years gets the same inheritance as the saint who served since childhood. A skeptic who hedged his bets at the last breath stands in the same kingdom as the martyr who gave everything.

And something in us recoils.

That's not grace rejecting us.

That's us rejecting grace.

Let me tell you what I see when Christians interrogate a dead man's faith.

I see the older brother standing outside the party, refusing to go in.

The prodigal came home reeking of pig filth and poor decisions. The father ran to him. Threw a robe on his back. Killed the fattened calf.

And the older brother?

"Look! All these years I've been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!"
(Luke 15:29-30)

He couldn't celebrate the return because he was too busy auditing the journey.

Sound familiar?

Here's the truth we don't want to face:

We can't see hearts. We can only see words.

And the words Scott Adams spoke were: "I accept Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior."

Were they perfect? No.
Were they confident? No.
Were they the words we would have scripted? No.

But they were the words.

And the God who receives those words is not checking for tone. He's not running sentiment analysis. He's not grading on a curve.

He's looking for open hands.

Paul wrote something that lands differently now:

"Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand."
(Romans 14:4)

Scott Adams was not our servant to judge. He answered to his own Master.

And the Lord is able—able—to make him stand.

That's not my promise. That's Scripture's promise.

The question is whether we'll submit to it.

I know why we do this.

I know why we parse and weigh and question.

Because if grace is really this free, then we didn't earn our place either.

If the deathbed convert gets in, then our decades of service weren't the price of admission. They were the privilege of knowing Him longer.

And that reframes everything.

It means the faith we've built isn't a resume. It's a relationship.

It means our years weren't buying something. They were receiving something.

It means we were never the workers earning a wage.

We were always the prodigals coming home.

So did Scott Adams get saved?

I don't know.

But I know what the Scripture says.

Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

I know what Jesus promised the thief who had nothing to offer but a desperate plea.

I know what the father did when his son came crawling home with a rehearsed speech that never even got finished.

And I know what the landowner said to the workers who were angry that grace didn't do math the way they wanted.

"Are you envious because I am generous?"

The gate is narrow, but it's not locked.

The standard is high, but it's not ours to enforce.

The Judge is holy, but He is also the one who ran to meet the prodigal while he was still a long way off.

Stop auditing the dead.

Start marveling at the grace that let you in.

"Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Whosoever.

Even him.

Even you.

What saith the Scriptures?

That's the only question that matters.

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

@wiz_political @MurrayHillGuy1 Settle down, Wiz.

[Mark Cecchini, CFP® @markcecchini]

COMMANDER: We’re fighting for freedom. And part of that freedom… is the freedom to retire with dignity. So we’re going to start accounts called 401(k)s.

SOLDIER 1: What’s a 401(k)?

COMMANDER: It’s a retirement account. You put money in, it grows tax-free, you take it out when you’re old.

SOLDIER 2: So I don’t pay taxes on it?

COMMANDER: Well, you pay taxes later. When you withdraw.

SOLDIER 2: So it’s not tax-free.

COMMANDER: It’s…tax-deferred.

SOLDIER 2: What’s the difference?

COMMANDER: You pay taxes later instead of now.

SOLDIER 1: What if I want to pay taxes now?

COMMANDER: Then you do a Roth 401(k).

SOLDIER 3: What’s a Roth?

COMMANDER: You pay taxes now, and it grows tax-free.

SOLDIER 2: That’s what I thought the first one was.

COMMANDER: No, the first one you pay taxes later.

SOLDIER 1: Which one’s better?

COMMANDER: Depends on your tax bracket in retirement.

SOLDIER 1: …How would I…know that?

COMMANDER: You don’t. You just guess.

⸻

SOLDIER 4: What if I don’t have a 401(k) through my employer?

COMMANDER: Then you open an IRA.

SOLDIER 4: What’s the difference?

COMMANDER: One’s through your job, one’s on your own.

SOLDIER 4: Can I have both?

COMMANDER: Yes.

SOLDIER 4: Should I?

COMMANDER: Maybe.

SOLDIER 3: Can I do a Roth IRA?

COMMANDER: Only if you make under a certain amount.

SOLDIER 3: What’s the limit?

COMMANDER: Changes every year.

SOLDIER 2: What if I make too much?

COMMANDER: Then you do a backdoor Roth by putting it in a Traditonal first.

SOLDIER 2: …Is that legal?

COMMANDER: Surprisingly, yes.

SOLDIER 1: What’s a backdoor Roth?

COMMANDER: You contribute to a traditional IRA, then convert it to a Roth…but watch out for “pro rata”.

SOLDIER 1: Why wouldn’t I just contribute to the Roth directly?

COMMANDER: Because you make too much money.

SOLDIER 1: But this way I can?

COMMANDER: Yes.

SOLDIER 1: That feels like a loophole.

COMMANDER: It is. But the IRS is cool with it.

⸻

SOLDIER 5: I just changed battalions. What do I do with my old 401(k)?

COMMANDER: You roll it over.

SOLDIER 5: Into what?

COMMANDER: An IRA. Or your new 401(k). Depends.

SOLDIER 5: On what?

COMMANDER: The funds. The fees. Whether your new plan accepts rollovers.

SOLDIER 5: What if I just take the money out?

COMMANDER: You’ll pay taxes plus a 10% penalty.

SOLDIER 5: What if I’m 59?

COMMANDER: Penalty.

SOLDIER 5: 59 and a half?

COMMANDER: No penalty.

SOLDIER 5: …The half matters?

COMMANDER: The half matters.

⸻

SOLDIER 3: What’s a mega backdoor Roth?

COMMANDER: Okay. So. Your 401(k) has a limit of how much you can contribute.

SOLDIER 3: Right.

COMMANDER: But the total limit including employer contributions is higher.

SOLDIER 3: Okay…

COMMANDER: So if your plan allows ~after-tax~ contributions, you can put in more, then convert that to Roth.

SOLDIER 3: Does my plan allow that?

COMMANDER: I don’t know. You have to ask Betsy.

SOLDIER 3: Will Betsy know?

COMMANDER: Probably not.

⸻

SOLDIER 2: Can I deduct my IRA contribution on my taxes?

COMMANDER: Are you covered by a retirement plan at work?

SOLDIER 2: Yes.

COMMANDER: Then only if you make under a certain amount per year.

SOLDIER 2: What’s the amount?

COMMANDER: Depends if you’re married.

SOLDIER 2: What if my wife has a plan but I don’t?

COMMANDER: Different limit.

SOLDIER 2: What if neither of us has a plan?

COMMANDER: Full deduction.

SOLDIER 2: So it’s better to not have a 401(k)?

COMMANDER: No…

⸻

SOLDIER 1: Can I just keep my money in a sock?

COMMANDER: You could. But inflation will slowly destroy it.

SOLDIER 1: What’s inflation?

COMMANDER: (sighs)…

[Ashley King @_AshleyKing_]

@AmericanDebunk Yes!