🇺🇸 Kirkegaard

Go Cyclones 🌪‼️Niners; Conservative

[Coach Yac 🗣 @Coach_Yac]

Brock Purdy on the criticism he receives:

“There’s things I do need to get better at, for sure, but I think there’s also things that I’ve seen myself do, and I just want to keep replicating, and people can say what they want. But if we’re winning games, got the trust of the guys in the locker room, and more than anything, with myself, knowing that I’m doing things right, and I just got to keep doing it over and over again, it’s gotten me here, then I’m going to I’m going to stick with that. People can say what they want. There’s always going to be that. That’s part of the sport. And honestly, that sort of makes it fun because you look back and it’s like you’ve overcome all these, kinds of criticisms and stuff. But how do you do that? It’s one day at a time, just sticking to my process and believing in it, and going out and getting it done.”

via: @timkawakami | @49erswebzone

[M2 @Amer1can_Barbie]

Good morning 😃

[Insurrection Barbie @DefiyantlyFree]

And to think that they gave away their entire demolition project to the American right in April 2024.

Dugin began by telling Tucker’s overwhelmingly Christian American audience that the reason the West arrived at transgenderism, LGBTQ ideology, transhumanism, and the destruction of the human person was the Protestant Reformation.

According to Dugin Protestantism liberated the individual conscience from the authority of the institutional Church. That produced individualism. Individualism then dissolved every collective identity in succession: church, social order, nation, family, biological sex, and finally humanity itself.

Tucker did not have to tell his audience to embrace Russian Eurasianism, esoteric Traditionalism, or pagan imperial philosophy. Instead, Dugin’s anti-Protestant framework was translated through moral concerns American Christians already shared. The audience heard family, faith, natural order, masculinity, spiritual warfare, and resistance to decadence. But beneath that language was a direct attack on the covenantal inheritance of Protestant Christianity and the political order it produced.

That is why Tucker’s response was so important. After Dugin traced the path from Protestantism to individualism and from individualism to transgenderism and transhumanism, Tucker said that what he was describing was clearly happening and was horrifying.

That is the entire postliberal strategy. Use the undeniable wickedness of the present to discredit the covenantal restraints of the past. Persuade Christians that the First Amendment, religious liberty, individual rights, and jurisdictional limits are not protections against tyranny but stages in the historical process that produced transgenderism. Then offer a stronger, more unified, more coercive political order as the Christian alternative.

But that alternative is not more Christian. It is the old pagan political model of the sacred collective, the organic nation, the fusion of religious and political authority, and the subordination of the individual conscience to the supposed good of the civilization.

[Insurrection Barbie @DefiyantlyFree]

To have a third child or not have a third child. That is the question. 😩

[🇺🇸 Kirkegaard @KSNygaard]

@DefiyantlyFree Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one’s youth. Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! Ps 127: 3-5

[Insurrection Barbie @DefiyantlyFree]

I’m very confused how Christians can justify coercion. Whether it’s economic or spiritual, or any other kind. Socialism, communism, Marxism, distributist outcomes… all of those are at odds with Scripture.

Just follow my logic here.

1. God is truth and love.

“God is love” (1 John 4:8, 16).

Jesus: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).

Whatever is done in God’s name must be consistent with both truth and love. Anything that violates the nature of either is already outside the Christian way of acting.

2. Love (and genuine faith) cannot be coerced

“The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law” (Galatians 5:22–23).

“God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” (Romans 5:5).

A new heart and the Spirit are what produce obedience (Ezekiel 36:26–27).

One must be born again (John 3:3–8).

If love and obedience are produced only by the regenerating work of the Spirit in a free heart, then any attempt to manufacture those outcomes by political compulsion is an attempt to do by force what only God does by grace. That is why coerced “Christian” results are not Christian results. They counterfeit the real thing.

3. Christ Himself set the jurisdictional boundary and refused coercion

“Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21; Mark 12:17; Luke 20:25).

The person bears God’s image; therefore the conscience, faith, worship, and free response of the heart belong to God. Caesar may claim the coin. He may not claim the soul or the free obedience that belongs to God alone.

4. Christ consistently refused to coerce:

He told the rich young ruler to sell everything and give to the poor. The man walked away sorrowful. Jesus did not seize the property, send the disciples after him, or appeal to political power (Matthew 19:16–22; Mark 10:17–22; Luke 18:18–23).

When many disciples turned back, Jesus asked the Twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?” He did not compel them (John 6:66–67).

When the disciples wanted to call down fire on a Samaritan village, Jesus rebuked them (Luke 9:54–56).

He never commanded His disciples to take property by force and redistribute it or to decentralize ownership for the common good. The sharing in Acts was voluntary, and Peter explicitly protected the owner’s freedom: “While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal?” (Acts 5:4).

5. The same principle governs worship, economic life, and everything else because the boundary is jurisdictional

• Worship and faith: Compelled worship is not worship. Forced confession is not faith. The state that tries to produce Christian belief or Christian practice by the sword is usurping the work of the Holy Spirit and nullifying the very nature of the response God requires.

• Economic life: Socialism and coercive distributism attempt to produce by political compulsion the outcomes that Christian discipleship produces by free obedience which are just wages, care for the poor, generous stewardship, refusal to idolize wealth. When the state seizes property or mandates a particular pattern of ownership in the name of Christian morality, it is doing precisely what Christ refused to do. It treats free moral agency as optional and replaces the Spirit’s work with the sword.

•Everything else: Whenever civil power is used to compel the fruits of regeneration rather than to punish clear evil (Romans 13:1–7), it crosses the line Christ drew.

[Insurrection Barbie @DefiyantlyFree]

They are not just attacking today’s Democratic Party or sexual progressivism, or even just economic libertarianism. They are attacking a political order that broke with the older European system and that break began around the Protestant Reformation five centuries ago.

Patrick Deneen’s argument in Why Liberalism Failed, treats liberalism as a centuries-long project rather than a recent left-wing ideology. His targets include classical liberalism, constitutional individual rights, freedom of conscience, private judgment, and the political order that developed after the collapse of a unified medieval Christendom.

I recommend people read his book. It’s very informative because nothing I could say is better than what he says himself:

“A political philosophy conceived some 500 years ago, and put into effect at the birth of the United States nearly 250 years later, was a wager that political society could be grounded on a different footing.”

They take aim at political theology that emerged from the Protestant Reformation: freedom of conscience, individual liberty, divided authority, religious pluralism, and the refusal to let one church-state authority coerce belief.

They Reformation shattered the old theory of a unified Christian political order governed through mutually reinforcing ecclesiastical and civil authorities. Once Christians rejected the idea that one institution could conclusively bind every conscience, political authority had to be limited.

And then the founders of our constitution took it a step further. Further than the reformers ever did.

Dissenting Protestants especially Baptists, Anabaptists, Quakers, and figures such as Roger Williams argued that coerced worship isn’t just ineffective but illegitimate because genuine faith requires a free conscience.

That political Protestant theology was embedded in the American constitutional order:

Government protects the free exercise of religion, but it doesn’t establish a church, prescribe doctrine, or compel religious conformity.

They’re not opposing progressivism. They’re opposing classical liberalism. They’re opposing freedom of conscience. They’re opposing individual liberty, and they are opposing constraints on earthly power.

And that is political Protestantism.

[🇺🇸 Kirkegaard @KSNygaard]

@NancyH_60 Did you mean his was planning a solo jog..?

[Gretchen Smith🇺🇸 @GretchenPSmith]

Buy a cigar. Help a veteran. Use code CODEOFVETS, 10% comes straight to Code of Vets.

The Cigar Thief and Code Of Vets have partnered👇🏽
https://t.co/U8IvWrbKrM

[Laura Ingraham @IngrahamAngle]

Thank you for reposting this. Regular people like this man were on to the con—and the con artists. The “educated” idiots just followed in lockstep.

[Jack @jackcoder0]

A woman has hosted over 2,000 guests on Airbnb across 4 properties in 7 years.

She's also an Airbnb guest herself roughly 15 trips a year. She knows both sides of the platform better than anyone.

She told me something most Airbnb guests have never considered: "I save 30–40% on every trip I book because I know the 9 things hosts can see, do, and adjust that guests never ask about. The platform gives hosts tools to lower your price, upgrade your room, waive fees, and prioritize your booking. Guests never trigger any of them because they don't know the tools exist."

She said the gap between what a typical guest pays and what a smart guest pays on the same listing isn't about coupons or deal-hunting. It's about understanding how the host side of Airbnb actually works the pricing psychology, the calendar gaps, the negotiation system, and the 3 messages you can send before booking that change the entire transaction.

"You're not booking a hotel. You're negotiating with a person. Airbnb built the tools for that negotiation. Then they designed the guest app to make you forget negotiation is possible."

Here are the 9 things she does as a guest that most travelers never try 🧵

[DataRepublican (small r) @DataRepublican]

They love this argument: If you can’t distinguish between various factions of far-leftism, then you’re automatically disqualified from having an opinion.

Up front, here are the definitions (plus bonus Leninism definition):

Communists = Strive for a classless society with common ownership of production.
Marxists = Communists who believe in a classless society as the end of history.
Leninists = Those who idolize the man who operationalized Marxism to its logical conclusion.
Socialists = Fake meaning (Berniebros): Kids who like free stuff. Real meaning (PSL, DSA): Communists who pretend to tolerate dissent.

And now here’s the reason why they’re all interchangeable and why it’s perfectly OK for everyone to use any one of those terms to refer to the others:

They all advocate to overthrow the American government via revolution. Every single faction I’ve researched has had links to foreign hostile governments in service of revolution. Rubio’s Cuba Report from last week did a good job of documenting far left ties to Cuba. But what’s not covered is their deep ties to Venezuela, Nicaragua, Iran, China, and more.

Far-leftists are fundamentally subversive to the core, with allegiances to foreign hostile governments. All of them. That’s what makes them interchangeable. Not whether they decide their party platform via Comintern vs. parliament.

They’re “populist” only insofar as their allegiance is to some arbitrary Communist utopia rather than NATO. Which, by the way, is why I’m going to call out any right-wing commentator who proposes forming alliances with so-called “left-wing populists.”

State governments must take the lead in banning far-leftists from voting in local elections or holding statewide office.

[Dr Jordan B Peterson @jordanbpeterson]

This is the first long-form piece I've written in a year:

Why this topic? Because, for starters, 250,000 girls were raped. Unimaginable and appalling though that is—the reality is much worse:

[🇺🇸 Kirkegaard @KSNygaard]

@957thegame @ButcherBoy415 @MorningRoast957 We couldn’t run the ball last season. Pass game was good. Beefed it up, but not the oline. How are we going to run the ball?

[John Chapman @JL_Chapman]

Brock Purdy to defenses on 3rd down

[Cynical Publius @CynicalPublius]

The fruits of socialism are poverty, pestilence, famine, and genocide.

Pass it on.

[🇺🇸 Kirkegaard @KSNygaard]

@FoN9ne Yes.

[🇺🇸 Kirkegaard @KSNygaard]

@DefiyantlyFree I’m sorry you know who’s on Tucker and what they said. But thanks for the excellent response. Love you.