You can hold two ideas in your head at the same time.
You can be pro-men and also anti-sexism.
You can be pro-women’s rights and also support trans people.
You can be pro-environment and against alternative energy fraud and waste.
You can have an allegiance to a political party and also be fiercely critical of any of their mismanagement.
You can support freedom of religion, but draw the line when that religion wants to fundamentally change the structure of the US.
You can support people with new ideas, and also tell them when their ideas don’t hold water.
You can also change your mind whenever you feel like it.
Raw milk is illegal.
Red 40, MSG, and Gatorade? Fully approved.
If you think the FDA is protecting your health, think again.
It’s time to reclaim our wellness, one label at a time.
Hate speech is political code for censorship. I’ve been cancelled for telling hard truths, so I refuse to call for others to be cancelled—even when I disagree vehemently. Thats called hypocrisy & we can do better.
Maybe you’re glad Charlie Kirk is dead.
Maybe you think he was hateful and harmed your community.
I’m not going to convince you to feel sad.
But I want to show you where both sides are headed.
Because when the assassin fired, they didn’t just hit him.
They hit all of us.
Surgeon General of Florida, Dr Joseph Ladapo, joins me to discuss Operation Warp Speed the industry and political attacks on RFK Jr. He demonstrates how you can lead with courage. An honest discussion most won't have @FLSurgeonGen https://t.co/j2j8HWSs86
No one really seems to care about this anymore, but I am posting it anyways:
We all say we want free speech. It’s practically sacred—a core value that defines what it means to live in a free society. But if you look around, especially on social media and mainstream platforms, it becomes painfully obvious: most people only support free speech if they agree with what’s being said.
Here’s the truth: people are far more comfortable censoring ideas that make them uncomfortable than they are defending the right to hear something that challenges their worldview. They’ll cheer for bans, shadowbans, and deplatforming as long as it’s not their views being silenced. And that’s exactly how freedom dies—not in one big sweeping moment, but in a thousand small choices made by people who think they’re protecting society when in fact they’re feeding the very system that will one day silence them too.
Censorship rarely looks like censorship anymore. It’s framed as safety. As anti-hate. As combating misinformation. On the left, it's often about silencing 'hate speech' or 'disinformation.' On the right, it's framed as preserving traditional values, upholding moral standards, or defending national security. But underneath all that PR language is a dangerous truth: when you decide certain speech is too dangerous to hear, you’re handing the power to define truth to institutions that don’t answer to you. Once that power is normalized, it doesn’t matter who you are or what you believe—your voice can be erased just as easily.
We’ve seen this play out over and over. Whistleblowers who expose corruption are gagged. Investigative journalists who dig too deep are suppressed or labeled as conspiracy theorists. Even health experts who offer evidence that goes against the dominant narrative are censored into oblivion.
And yet, people keep supporting it. Because they think the system is targeting the "bad guys." But here’s what they don’t realize: once the system finishes with those guys, it’s coming for the rest of us.
If we want to preserve anything resembling freedom, we have to get uncomfortable. We have to defend the speech we hate. We have to allow dissent, even when it’s messy or inconvenient or emotionally triggering. Because a world where only one side gets to speak is not a safe world—it’s a controlled one. And controlled systems are never on the side of the people.
This isn’t just about principle. It’s about survival. If we don’t protect the right to speak freely now, there won’t be anyone left to speak for us when we need it most.
Robin Williams brought an entire stadium to tears with a tribute to the American flag.
Try and name one Hollywood star who’d do this today.
RIP Legend. 🇺🇸
This has been in the works for at least 25 years. In the mid 90's they had tests ongoing with Native Americans being chipped. Tracking their bank accounts and health records. Also farm animals were being tracked with this since then too. Its not new. Its just new to all of you & its become mainstream now.
There is not a housing shortage.
Mfg. high interest rates, homeowners ins, property tax and jacked rental rates created the lack of affordability.
Here's a snippet on the "affordable housing" scheme and link to my full report on the US Housing Market.
The numbers tell it all:
I’ve made no secret of the absurdity (and the hypocrisy, in my opinion) of opposing fossil fuel production in this country, while supporting the policies that allow us to import those very same fossil fuels from other places. In fact, I’ve described those policies the "height of duplicity," and the epitome of a "Not-In-My-Backyard.
I still stand by that criticism, mostly. I say "mostly," because I’ve just learned that we do the exact same thing with lumber, to a degree that's no less befuddling. Our reliance on wood is extraordinary, and we’re blessed to live in a country with over 800 million acres of forest. That’s literally a third of America, covered in trees. Unfortunately, we've decimated out timber industry. Today, we act as if forest land and timber reserves are in short supply. They are not. In fact, according to Mike Albrecht, President of The American Loggers Council, our forests are burning and rotting at record levels, due to decades of mismanagement, and we are, at the same time, squandering one of our most valuable resources.
Obviously, some people will doubt this claim, but one thing is indisputable: In spite of our unprecedented abundance, America imports more wood products than any other nation. In other words, we could easily be "wood independent," just as we could easily be "energy independent." And yet, we choose not to. We choose instead, to rely on other countries to provide us with the raw materials we need.
The question is why, and I suspect the answer will not sit well with everyone. Nevertheless, here is my whole conversation with Mike Albrecht. It you touched wood today, it's worth your time. https://t.co/U133boXCKz