MAGA.ju.mp

Super Ultra Maga!

Use Control + F on your PC to search for keywords: (ie, socialism)You can search for specific text on a webpage in Chrome for Android using the Find on Page feature. Here’s how:1. Open Google Chrome on your Android device.
2. Navigate to the webpage you want to search.
3. Tap the three-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner.
4. Select Find on page.
5. Type the word or phrase you’re looking for in the search bar.
6. Chrome will highlight all instances of the text on the page, and you can use the up/down arrows to navigate between results.You can search for specific text on a website using Safari on your iPhone in two ways:### 🔍 Method 1: Using the Smart Search Bar
1. Open Safari and go to the webpage you want to search.
2. Tap the address bar and type the word or phrase you're looking for.
3. Scroll down the search results and find the section labeled "On This Page".
4. Tap "Find [your search term]", and Safari will highlight all instances of the word on the page.
5. Use the up/down arrows to navigate through the results.### 📑 Method 2: Using the Share Menu
1. Open Safari and navigate to the webpage.
2. Tap the Share icon (square with an arrow pointing up).
3. Scroll down and select "Find on Page".
4. Type the word or phrase you want to search.
5. Safari will highlight all matches, and you can use the arrows to jump between them.ALWAYS call ahead to confirm validity of information before going out.

Yes. During her March 2022 Supreme Court confirmation hearing, Sen. Marsha Blackburn asked Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?” Jackson replied, “I can’t —I’m not a biologist,” then explained that as a judge her role is to resolve legal disputes over definitions, not to offer scientific ones.In other words, she didn’t refuse on principle—she was pointing out that defining “woman” involves biological, social and legal dimensions that courts decide through argument and precedent, not lay definitions on the spot.

Here are some of the key factors driving anti-vaccine sentiment today:1. Government and institutional distrust
Many who oppose vaccines point to historical abuses (e.g., the Tuskegee Syphilis Study) and worry that pharmaceutical companies put profits ahead of safety. This breeds suspicion that vaccine recommendations are motivated by corporate or political interests rather than public health.2. Bodily-autonomy and freedom concerns
Vaccine mandates—whether for schools, workplaces or travel—are often cast as government overreach. Opponents invoke principles of informed consent and medical freedom (e.g., the Nuremberg Code) to argue people should never be coerced into vaccination.3. Misinformation and legacy of debunked studies
Despite being thoroughly discredited, the 1998 Wakefield paper linking MMR vaccines to autism continues to circulate online. Social media accelerates false connections (vaccines → chronic illness, infertility, etc.), reinforcing fears even in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence.4. Psychological and social-identity factors
Cognitive biases—like giving undue weight to dramatic personal anecdotes of adverse events—fuel hesitancy. People also look to their in-group (political, religious or alternative-health communities) for cues, so if your peer network questions vaccines, you’re more likely to as well.5. Political polarization
During the COVID-19 rollout, vaccines became tied to partisan identities. Surveys show that lower trust in government and health agencies correlates strongly with higher rates of refusal or delay, especially in regions where vaccination was painted as a political statement rather than a medical one.Understanding these motivations is the first step to addressing hesitancy.

Here are the main reasons many Trump backers stick with him despite his repeated falsehoods:1. Identity and authoritarian appeal
Trump’s rhetoric often frames politics as a battle between “us” (patriots) and “them” (elites, the swamp). That tribal narrative resonates with people who value strong, unquestioned leadership and fear cultural or demographic change. Psychological research links high-authoritarian personalities—who crave order, clear hierarchies and strong figures—to disproportionately favoring Trump’s style and messaging.2. Motivated reasoning and echo chambers
Once someone’s invested in a belief system—political, religious or social—they tend to seek out information that confirms their views and dismiss anything contrary. Conservative media outlets and social-media bubbles amplify Trump’s version of events, label fact-checking as “fake news,” and portray him as a martyr besieged by liberal elites. That feedback loop makes it hard for contradictory evidence (like documented lies) to penetrate their worldview.3. Policy alignment outweighs personal flaws
For many supporters, Trump’s stance on immigration, taxes, deregulation and the Supreme Court matters more than his honesty. Pew polling shows overwhelmingly high shares of his voters prioritize the economy and immigration above all else—and they believe Trump delivers on those fronts. In that calculus, his proclivity for exaggeration or outright lies is viewed as a tolerable trade-off for policy wins they care about.In short, a mix of in-group identity, confirmation bias and real-world policy gains helps explain why millions continue to back Trump even after countless proven falsehoods.

There’s no judicial finding that Trump’s June 21 strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites were “illegal,” but their lawfulness is fiercely disputed:1. Critics’ view – Unconstitutional without Congress
• Many Democrats (e.g., Reps. Jim Himes, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; Sens. Adam Schiff, Chris Van Hollen) say launching offensive military action without a formal war declaration or specific congressional authorization violated Article I of the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution.
• They argue Iran’s facilities posed no imminent threat, so emergency exceptions don’t apply, making the strikes “patently illegal” under U.S. war-powers law.2. Administration and supporters – Presidential war powers
• The White House contends Article II grants the president authority as commander-in-chief to use force to protect national security interests, and that Congress was notified (albeit after the fact) in accordance with the War Powers Resolution’s reporting requirements.
• Constitutional scholars note there’s no clear text forcing prior approval and point to decades of precedents where presidents have conducted limited strikes without explicit congressional consent.Bottom line
The question remains unresolved: neither Congress nor the courts have definitively ruled the strikes illegal. It’s a live constitutional debate—some legal experts say the president overstepped, while others argue longstanding practice gives the executive branch leeway for limited military actions.

Yes. In mid-June 2025 the Proud Boys’ Telegram account warned that “if the United States gets directly involved in the Israel-Iran conflict…the voters that voted for Trump because there was a hope that Trump was America First can no longer support Trump. America First does not mean war for Israel.”

No—people aren’t “each” having heart problems from COVID-19 boosters. What’s happened is that late in June 2025 the FDA asked Pfizer and Moderna to add or expand a warning about a very rare risk of myocarditis (heart-muscle inflammation) and pericarditis (inflammation of the heart lining) after their updated (2023–24) shots. The data show about 8 cases per 1 million doses, with the highest incidence in males ages 12–24.Importantly, most of these events have been mild, resolve quickly with rest or simple treatment, and occur far less often than myocarditis triggered by COVID-19 infection itself. A CDC review of government vaccine-safety databases through 2022 did not detect any sustained uptick in myocarditis following booster doses.Bottom line: the chance of a serious heart issue from a booster is extremely low, and public-health authorities agree that the benefits—preventing severe COVID-19, hospitalization and long COVID—far outweigh this small risk.

Donald Trump’s 34–count conviction in New York stemmed from falsifying business records in the 2016 “hush-money” case, but he isn’t serving prison time because the trial judge handed down an “unconditional discharge”—a sentence that affirms the conviction but carries no jail time, fines or probation. Judge Juan Merchan explained that, while the underlying crimes remain serious, the constitutional protections afforded to a sitting (or incoming) president left him no legal option but to impose that lenient outcome.Separately, Trump’s two pending federal indictments were dismissed under longstanding Justice Department policy against prosecuting a sitting president, and his Georgia election-racketeering case has been delayed by legal challenges—so there’s currently no active sentence to enforce in any of those matters.Bottom line: it’s not that the convictions were overturned—it’s that, in the New York case, the court chose an unconditional discharge, and the other cases either were dropped or remain in limbo. He is appealing the New York verdict, meaning the legal process continues even without a jail term.Would you like more detail on how unconditional discharges work, or on the status of his appeals?

People believe in conspiracy theories due to a combination of psychological factors, including:1. The Desire for Understanding and Certainty – Humans naturally seek explanations for events, especially when faced with uncertainty. Conspiracy theories provide a sense of clarity and order in a confusing world.2. The Need for Control and Security – Believing in conspiracy theories can give people a sense of control over their environment. When individuals feel powerless, they may turn to these theories to regain a sense of agency.3. Personality Traits and Motivations – Research suggests that people who rely strongly on intuition, feel antagonistic or superior toward others, or perceive threats in their environment are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.4. Social Identity and Group Belonging – Some individuals endorse conspiracy theories to strengthen their social identity. They may believe in theories that align with their community or worldview, reinforcing a sense of belonging.5. Cognitive Biases and Mental Shortcuts – Once a conspiracy belief takes root, cognitive biases (such as confirmation bias) reinforce and strengthen it. People tend to seek out information that supports their existing beliefs while ignoring contradictory evidence.6. Evolutionary Psychology – Some researchers suggest that conspiracy thinking may have evolutionary roots. In a world where people feel powerless or alienated, believing in hidden forces plotting against them can be psychologically appealing.

There is no credible scientific evidence that climate change is a hoax. The overwhelming consensus among climate scientists and major scientific organizations is that climate change is real and primarily caused by human activities, such as burning fossil fuels.Some claims suggest that climate change is exaggerated or politically motivated, such as a declaration signed by 1,609 individuals stating "there is no climate emergency." However, many of the signatories were not scientists, and the claim misrepresents the broad scientific consensus on climate change.Additionally, some social media posts have misinterpreted scientific studies, claiming that global warming is a hoax. In reality, these studies confirm that global temperatures have been rising steadily, even if the rate of warming has not accelerated since the 1970s.

Tariffs are essentially taxes on imported goods, and while they’re paid by the importing company, the cost often trickles down to you, the consumer.Here’s how it works in practice:1. The government imposes a tariff—say, 25%—on a product like imported steel.
2. The importer pays the tariff when the goods enter the country. For example, if a company brings in $100,000 worth of steel, it pays $25,000 in tariffs to the government.
3. The importer adjusts—and this is where you come in. To maintain profit margins, the company may:
- Raise prices on the final product (like cars or appliances).
- Cut costs elsewhere (like labor or quality).
- Reduce imports or switch suppliers.So yes, in most cases, consumers end up paying more—either directly through higher prices or indirectly through reduced choices or quality.It’s like a hidden tax that shows up at the checkout line.

There isn’t any clear evidence or public record that members of Trump’s cabinet reached a formal, unified conclusion stating that Iran “had no weapons of mass destruction” right before the bombing. In fact, the intelligence assessments and internal debates at the time centered on a different—but related—concern. U.S. officials generally viewed Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, including enrichment facilities such as Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan, as a long‐term proliferation risk. Although Iran was not operating a fully built, deployed nuclear bomb at that moment, its well‐developed and expanding nuclear program was seen as having the potential to produce such a weapon if left unchecked. This potential threat was a driving factor behind the decision to carry out the preemptive strikes, rather than a conclusion that Iran completely lacked the means to eventually develop a nuclear weapon [1][6].The decision-making process in national security—especially on issues as weighty as nuclear proliferation—is rarely a matter of declaring that an adversary is completely harmless. Instead, it involves weighing the risks of allowing a nuclear program to mature against the benefits (or consequences) of intervening militarily. In this case, the Trump administration’s rationale leaned on the idea that even if Iran did not possess active weapons of mass destruction at the time, its capabilities and infrastructure could, over time, translate into a grave threat. Critics of the strike have since argued about the legal and strategic merits of acting without congressional approval, but the central point remains that the bombing was not predicated on a conclusion that Iran was entirely free of dangerous materials—instead, it was about impeding the development of a potential future nuclear threat.This distinction is important when discussing the broader issue of nuclear strategy and preemptive military action. Rather than a simple binary of “having” or “not having” WMDs, experts often focus on the continuum of risk posed by nuclear enrichment programs and the potential for rapid escalation if oversight lapses. If you’re interested, we could explore how preemptive strategies are justified in policy debates or dive deeper into historical parallels—such as the controversies surrounding Iraq—and how intelligence assessments have shaped U.S. foreign policy over time.

Since its founding in 1776, the United States has been at war for roughly 93 percent of its existence—leaving only about seventeen years of genuine “peace.” Most of those war-free windows fall in four clusters:- 1796 – 1797 (after Shay’s Rebellion and before the Quasi-War)
- 1807 – 1809 (between the First Barbary War and rising tensions with Britain)
- 1828 – 1830 (after the Creek and Seminole clashes, before the Black Hawk War)
- 1935 – 1940 (the “splendid isolation” period before U.S. entry into World War II).In every other year, whether through declared wars, Indian Wars, naval skirmishes, peace-keeping missions or covert operations, American forces saw action somewhere on the globe.

Obama faced several challenges in implementing civil policies during his presidency:1. Political Polarization – His presidency coincided with a deeply divided political landscape, making bipartisan cooperation difficult. Republican opposition in Congress often obstructed his policy initiatives.2. Midterm Election Losses – After the 2010 midterm elections, Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives, significantly limiting his ability to pass major legislation.3. Obstructionist Tactics – Congressional gridlock and filibusters were frequently used to block his proposals, particularly in areas like immigration reform and gun control.4. Economic Crisis – He entered office during the Great Recession, which forced him to prioritize economic recovery over other policy goals.5. Executive Actions vs. Legislation – Many of his civil policies were enacted through executive orders rather than legislation, making them vulnerable to reversal by future administrations.Despite these obstacles, he did achieve significant reforms, including the Affordable Care Act and advancements in renewable energy. However, many of his civil policy efforts faced resistance and were either watered down or blocked entirely.

Donald Trump isn’t known for being a regular churchgoer tied to one specific congregation. Over the years, his public appearances at churches have been largely event‐based or photo-op opportunities rather than part of a consistent, weekly routine.For example, on his inauguration day he attended services at St. John’s Episcopal Church in Washington, D.C.—a tradition shared by many presidents. In other instances, he’s been seen at places like Bethesda-by-the-Sea in Palm Beach, Florida, during holidays such as Easter and Christmas, and even at the Washington National Cathedral during special services. However, reports and accounts—including those from individuals who have been close to him—indicate that these appearances are more about optics and political messaging than a genuine, ongoing commitment to regular worship.

Capitalism has driven innovation, lifted millions out of poverty, and fueled global economic growth—but it’s not without serious flaws. Here are some of the most commonly cited downfalls:### ⚖️ 1. Inequality
Capitalism tends to concentrate wealth and power in the hands of a few. While some thrive, others struggle to meet basic needs. This growing gap can lead to social unrest and reduced economic mobility.### 🏢 2. Monopoly and Corporate Power
When companies grow too large, they can dominate markets, stifle competition, and manipulate prices. This undermines the very free-market principles capitalism is built on.### 🌍 3. Environmental Harm
Profit-driven systems often ignore environmental costs. Pollution, deforestation, and climate change are frequently externalized—meaning companies don’t pay for the damage they cause.### 💼 4. Worker Exploitation
In pursuit of lower costs and higher profits, some firms underpay workers or cut corners on safety and benefits. This is especially true in industries with little regulation or oversight.### 🧠 5. Consumerism and Materialism
Capitalism thrives on consumption. This can lead to a culture of overconsumption, waste, and the idea that self-worth is tied to what you own.### 🧩 6. Commodification of Everything
Even essential services like healthcare, education, and housing can become profit-driven, making them less accessible to those who need them most.That said, many capitalist societies try to soften these effects through regulation, taxation, and social safety nets.
You can also check out this breakdown from Economics Help or Simplicable’s list of capitalism’s problems for more detail.

No, Donald Trump did not fully complete the U.S.-Mexico border wall during his first term. By the time he left office in 2021, his administration had reinforced over 400 miles of existing barriers and added about 80 miles of new wall.Since returning to office in 2025, Trump has shifted focus toward deportations and border security technology, though he still aims to finish the wall by 2029. His administration has requested $175 billion from Congress to complete construction and hire more border enforcement agents.

Pizzagate was a baseless conspiracy theory that exploded online during the 2016 U.S. presidential cycle. It sprang from hacked emails of John Podesta—Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair—released by WikiLeaks. Internet sleuths on message boards like 4chan claimed the emails contained “coded” language linking top Democrats to a child-sex trafficking ring allegedly run out of Comet Ping Pong, a pizzeria in Washington, D.C. There is zero evidence supporting these claims, and fact-checkers and the D.C. police have thoroughly debunked it.Despite its lack of foundation, Pizzagate spread rapidly through social media (Reddit, Twitter, Facebook) and fringe websites. Proponents pointed to innocuous terms—“pizza,” “cheese,” “hot dog”—as supposed sex-trafficking code words. Mainstream outlets, vocal critics and law enforcement all found the theory unfounded, but the rumor mill kept churning as it morphed into further offshoots (e.g., the “Frazzledrip” lore) and later fed into the broader QAnon phenomenon.The conspiracy had real-world fallout. In December 2016, a North Carolina man drove to Comet Ping Pong armed with an assault rifle to “investigate” the claims. He fired shots inside the restaurant, narrowly avoiding patrons, before being arrested. The pizzeria’s owner and staff endured death threats, protests and online harassment for months afterwards.Today, Pizzagate is remembered as a cautionary tale of how quickly misinformation can spiral into tangible harm. It laid the groundwork for later conspiracies by demonstrating the power of “crowdsourced” decoding of private communications—and the danger when rumor overtakes facts.

Pizzagate essentially functioned as the test run for QAnon’s playbook—crowdsourced sleuthing, coded language (“pizza,” “cheese”), and the idea that a shadowy cabal of elites is abusing children. As early as late 2016, researchers and law-enforcement noted that Pizzagate wasn’t just a one-off rumor but a template for building viral conspiracy narratives. Wikipedia even calls it a “predecessor to the QAnon conspiracy theory” and points out how its offshoots (like Frazzledrip) set the stage for even wilder claims.By the time Edgar Maddison Welch—who went to Comet Ping Pong armed with a rifle—was released from prison in March 2020, QAnon had already burst onto the scene. Originating on fringe imageboards (4chan, then 8chan) in late 2017, “Q” began dropping cryptic posts about a “deep state” pedophile ring. QAnon adherents absorbed Pizzagate wholesale, treating it as proven fact, and then wove it into a broader narrative of a satanic, cannibalistic global conspiracy. Those same believers showed up on January 6th at the Capitol, many citing Pizzagate/QAnon tropes as justification for violence.Over time QAnon broadened and de-partisaned Pizzagate’s claims—shifting focus from a Clinton-centric ring in Washington to a “worldwide elite” trafficking network. It even revived Pizzagate memes on platforms like TikTok, where users with little prior interest in partisan politics picked up the old codewords. In that sense, Pizzagate never really died—it was simply subsumed into QAnon’s ever-expanding mythos.

No. Independent and expert assessments agree that, while U.S. strikes on Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan in late June 2025 dealt serious damage, they did not “completely and totally obliterate” Iran’s enrichment sites as President Trump claimed.In a June 24 review, FactCheck.org notes that American B-2 bombers “damaged the sites and set back Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, but didn’t completely destroy the sites or Iran’s nuclear capabilities.” The president’s own characterization—that Iran’s “key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated”—is not supported by the evidence on the ground.A preliminary, classified Pentagon report cited by multiple outlets confirms the strikes sealed off entrances to underground halls but left the buried centrifuges largely intact, setting back the program by only a few months. Iran had also pre-emptively moved enriched uranium to hidden locations, further blunting the campaign’s impact.Moreover, agencies like the International Atomic Energy Agency have stressed that no independent on-site inspections could occur amid ongoing hostilities. Initial U.S. battle-damage assessments describe “extremely severe damage,” but they stop short of confirming total destruction—especially of deeply buried facilities—making “obliteration” an overstatement.

The Trump Mobile T1 phone is marketed as being “proudly designed and built in the United States,” but that claim is under heavy scrutiny. According to experts, the phone is most likely manufactured in China, at least for now.Eric Trump has stated that the phones will “eventually” be made in the U.S., and the Trump Organization has mentioned future manufacturing plans in Alabama, California, and Florida. However, analysts point out that the U.S. currently lacks the infrastructure to produce key smartphone components like screens, memory chips, and camera modules at scale. So, despite the patriotic branding, the T1 is likely a rebranded Chinese Android phone for the time being.

Need to contact us? Email: itsmikefromwork[at]proton[dot]me

Forcibly removing undocumented immigrants from the U.S. would have far-reaching economic and social consequences, many of them disruptive:
1. Economic contraction: Mass deportation could shrink the U.S. economy significantly. One analysis estimated that removing 7 million unauthorized workers would reduce GDP by up to 2.6%, costing the economy $4.7 trillion over 10 years. That’s comparable to the scale of the Great Recession.
2. Labor shortages in key industries: Sectors like agriculture, construction, and hospitality rely heavily on undocumented labor. Deportations could lead to severe worker shortages, driving up wages but also raising prices for consumers and slowing production.
3. Federal revenue losses: The federal government could lose nearly $900 billion in tax revenue over a decade due to the drop in economic activity and employment. This would increase the national debt and strain public services.
4. Social and humanitarian costs: Beyond economics, forced removals would disrupt families, many of which include U.S. citizens. Communities could experience heightened fear, reduced trust in law enforcement, and long-term psychological trauma.
5. Public opinion is divided: While a majority of Americans support deporting those who commit violent crimes, only about a third support deporting all undocumented immigrants. Most oppose arrests in sensitive locations like schools, hospitals, or places of worship.
It’s a complex issue with no easy answers.

On average, U.S. federal deficits (as a share of GDP) have been smaller under Democratic presidents than under Republicans. Studies of the post–World War II era show:
- Democratic administrations run deficits averaging several points lower relative to GDP—and even surpluses under Bill Clinton—while Republican administrations tend to see larger average deficits[4].
- For instance, Reagan and both Bushes oversaw spikes in the deficit, Clinton turned those into a budget surplus by the late 1990s, Bush 43 drove deficits up past $1 trillion, and Obama cut them roughly in half before they ticked up again under Trump[3][4].That pattern holds statistically, though it doesn’t prove party alone drives deficits—factors like wars, recessions, and inherited budgets all play huge roles.

Since World War II, the average unemployment rate has tended to fall under Democratic presidents and rise under Republican presidents[3]. Economists attribute this partly to differences in fiscal stimulus, regulatory policy, and the timing of economic cycles.

Can the President of the United States control gas prices?No—at least not in any direct, day-to-day sense. Gasoline is a global commodity whose price is set by worldwide supply and demand, futures markets, geopolitical events and the cost of crude oil—not by the White House. Here’s why and what a president can actually do:1. Market forces rule the roost
• Oil is traded on international futures markets; prices fluctuate constantly as traders react to conflicts, production changes, economic data and more.
• No president—Democrat or Republican—can decree a lower pump price tomorrow, because those market dynamics dwarf any single nation’s policies. [1][2]2. Short-term levers are very limited
• Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) releases can boost supply briefly, nudging prices down for a short stretch.
• Executive orders can ease permitting for drilling or pipelines—but it takes months or years for new wells to come online. [1][3]3. Longer-term policy matters more
• Tax credits or incentives for domestic oil production, investment in alternative fuels, and R&D can shift supply curves over years.
• Environmental regulations or bans (e.g., halting pipeline projects) can tighten future supply and, paradoxically, raise prices down the road. [3]4. Diplomatic and fiscal tools
• Sanctions on major producers (like Iran or Venezuela) and negotiations with OPEC can influence global output, but these moves often have unpredictable side-effects.
• Fuel taxes or carbon levies set by Congress, not the president alone, also affect what drivers pay at the pump.Bottom line: Presidents can influence incentives, regulation and reserves—but they can’t dial gas prices up or down at will. Most of that power lies with global markets, OPEC decisions, trader sentiment and, ultimately, the laws that Congress passes.

Originally, woke was African American Vernacular English for being “awake” to injustice—especially racial injustice. It gained broader cultural traction during the civil rights movement and resurfaced in the 2010s with the phrase “stay woke,” urging awareness of systemic racism, police brutality, and social inequality.Today, the term has evolved—and fractured. For some, being woke still means being alert to social injustices like racism, sexism, and LGBTQ+ discrimination. For others, especially critics, it’s become a pejorative used to mock what they see as excessive political correctness or performative activism.So depending on who’s using it, woke can signal either a commitment to justice or a critique of progressive culture. It’s a word that’s been both weaponized and worn with pride.

Cancel culture refers to the practice of publicly calling out, boycotting, or withdrawing support from individuals, organizations, or public figures who are perceived to have said or done something offensive or socially unacceptable. It often plays out on social media, where collective outrage can lead to real-world consequences like job loss, reputation damage, or exclusion from public platforms.The term gained traction in the late 2010s, but the concept has roots in older forms of protest and boycott. Supporters of cancel culture see it as a way to hold powerful people accountable, especially when traditional systems fail to do so. Critics, however, argue that it can lead to mob mentality, suppress free speech, or punish people without due process.It’s a polarizing phenomenon—some view it as a tool for justice, others as a form of digital vigilantism.

Democrats are often seen as more progressive because the party has historically aligned itself with movements for social reform and expanded civil rights. But that progressivism isn’t monolithic—it’s shaped by evolving coalitions, cultural shifts, and internal debates.Here’s why the label tends to stick:1. Historical roots in reform: From the New Deal to the Civil Rights Movement, Democrats have often championed policies aimed at economic equity, labor rights, and racial justice. These legacies still influence the party’s identity.2. Coalition of diverse voices: The Democratic base includes younger voters, racial minorities, LGBTQ+ communities, and urban populations—groups that tend to support progressive policies on climate, healthcare, education, and social justice.3. Policy priorities: Democrats are more likely to advocate for government intervention to address inequality—like universal healthcare, student debt relief, and climate action. These are often labeled “progressive” because they challenge the status quo.4. Cultural perception: Media and political opponents often frame Democrats as the “left” party, even though there’s a wide range of views within it. Some moderates are pushing back against the progressive wing, especially after recent electoral setbacks.Interestingly, many Americans perceive Democrats as more focused on social issues than economic ones—even though Democratic voters often rank inflation and healthcare as top concerns. That perception gap fuels the idea that Democrats are uniformly progressive, even when the reality is more nuanced.

That’s a big question, Maga.ju.mp and one that depends heavily on what values, policies, or leadership qualities you prioritize. Rather than declare who’s “better,” it might be more helpful to look at how their presidencies differ across key areas:- Economy: Trump emphasized tax cuts and deregulation, especially for corporations, and saw strong pre-pandemic growth. Biden focused on post-pandemic recovery, infrastructure investment, and job creation. Both saw record job numbers, but under very different circumstances.- Healthcare: Trump aimed to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, while Biden worked to expand it and lower prescription drug costs.- Climate and Environment: Trump rolled back environmental regulations and withdrew from the Paris Agreement. Biden rejoined the agreement and pushed for clean energy investments.- Immigration: Trump took a hardline stance—building a border wall and restricting immigration. Biden reversed many of those policies and emphasized pathways to citizenship.- Crypto and Innovation: Trump’s recent administration has leaned into crypto innovation with lighter regulation, while Biden’s approach was more cautious and enforcement-driven.Public opinion is just as divided. Trump’s approval ratings have fluctuated with controversies and policy shifts, while Biden’s have been shaped by economic recovery and global challenges.

Some people consider Jesus a “leftist” not because he endorsed modern political ideologies, but because many of his teachings align with values often associated with the political left today: care for the poor, radical inclusion, nonviolence, and critique of wealth and power.For example, Jesus consistently uplifted the marginalized—lepers, tax collectors, women, Samaritans—and challenged religious and political elites. His Sermon on the Mount includes lines like “Blessed are the poor” and “Love your enemies,” which some interpret as a call to compassion over retribution. He also told a wealthy man to sell all he had and give to the poor—a pretty radical economic ethic by any standard.Writers like D. Allan Kerr argue that Jesus’ emphasis on mercy, peacemaking, and generosity reflects a deeply liberal spirit. Others point out that Jesus’ life as a refugee, his critique of empire, and his embrace of the outcast resonate with progressive values.Of course, as one Vatican official noted, trying to fit Jesus into modern political categories is like trying to pour ancient wine into new wineskins—it risks distorting both. But the impulse to see Jesus as a leftist often comes from a desire to reclaim his message as one of justice, inclusion, and radical love.

Hate often emerges from a complex mix of fear, pain, misunderstanding, and identity. Psychologically, it can be a defense mechanism—a way to cope with perceived threats or deep emotional wounds. When someone feels powerless, betrayed, or excluded, hate can feel like a form of control or self-protection.Philosopher Robert Sternberg described hate as having three components:
1. Negation of intimacy – creating distance from what feels threatening.
2. Passion – often anger or fear.
3. Commitment – a decision to devalue or destroy the object of hate.Socially, hate can be learned—passed down through culture, media, or group identity. It often thrives in environments where people are encouraged to see others as “less than” or as enemies. That’s why hate directed at groups tends to spread faster than hate toward individuals—it’s easier to dehumanize a category than a person.Spiritually or theologically, some traditions see hate as the shadow side of love—what happens when love is twisted by pride, fear, or the refusal to forgive. Others view it as a sign of disconnection from the divine image in others.

Yes, many undocumented immigrants in the U.S. do pay taxes—often more than people realize.Even without legal status, they contribute through sales taxes, property taxes (either directly or through rent), and payroll taxes if they’re working with a false or borrowed Social Security number or an IRS-issued Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN). In fact, estimates suggest they paid nearly $100 billion in federal, state, and local taxes in 2022.However, despite paying into systems like Social Security and Medicare, undocumented immigrants are typically ineligible for the benefits those taxes fund. Some states, like California and Maryland, have expanded access to certain tax credits for ITIN filers, but at the federal level, benefits like the Earned Income Tax Credit are generally off-limits.There’s debate about the overall fiscal impact. Some studies argue that undocumented immigrants are a net drain on public resources due to lower average incomes and higher use of services—especially through U.S.-born children who are eligible for benefits. Others point out that, over a lifetime, many immigrants contribute more in taxes than they receive in services, especially when factoring in long-term economic effects.It’s a complex picture—one that blends economics, policy, and human stories.

Estimates of how many people are living in the United States without legal authorization vary depending on the methodology used, but most credible sources place the number between 11 million and 16.8 million.For example, the Pew Research Center estimated that there were about 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. as of 2022, marking a slight increase from previous years but still below the 2007 peak of 12.2 million. Other organizations, like the Migration Policy Institute and the Center for Migration Studies, offer similar figures using different data models.Some public figures have claimed the number is as high as 30 million, but fact-checkers and immigration researchers have found no evidence to support that. These higher estimates often conflate border encounters with actual residents, which can be misleading since many people are turned away or deported and don’t remain in the country.

Removing undocumented immigrants from the U.S. Census count would likely shift congressional representation—but not as dramatically as some might assume.
The U.S. Constitution mandates that congressional seats be apportioned based on the total population, not just citizens. That includes undocumented immigrants, legal residents, and citizens alike. If undocumented immigrants were excluded from the count, states with large immigrant populations—like California, Texas, and Florida—could lose seats, while states with smaller immigrant populations—like Ohio, Alabama, or Minnesota—might retain or gain seats they would otherwise lose.
A 2025 study published in PNAS Nexus found that excluding undocumented residents from apportionment data would have shifted no more than two House seats and three Electoral College votes in any census year since 1980. So while the impact is real, it’s relatively modest in terms of national political balance.
This issue has sparked political debate, especially around whether including undocumented immigrants gives certain states an unfair advantage. But historically, the census has always counted “the whole number of persons in each state”, regardless of legal status.

The Bible speaks with remarkable clarity and compassion about how to treat foreigners—often reminding the people of Israel (and by extension, us) that they too were once strangers in a foreign land. Here are some key passages that highlight this theme:- Exodus 22:21 – “Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt.”
- Leviticus 19:33–34 – “When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself...”
- Deuteronomy 10:18–19 – “He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the foreigner residing among you... And you are to love those who are foreigners.”
- Matthew 25:35 – Jesus says, “I was a stranger and you invited me in,” linking hospitality to divine presence.
- Hebrews 13:2 – “Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it.”
- Zechariah 7:10 – “Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the foreigner or the poor.”These verses don’t just suggest kindness—they command love, justice, and inclusion. The foreigner isn’t to be merely tolerated but embraced as one of your own. It’s a radical ethic of hospitality rooted in memory, empathy, and divine justice.

Socialism is a political and economic philosophy that emphasizes collective or public ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, rather than private ownership. The core idea is that resources and industries should be managed in a way that benefits society as a whole, aiming for greater equality and social welfare.There are many forms of socialism, ranging from democratic socialism, which operates within a democratic political system, to Marxist socialism, which envisions a transitional stage between capitalism and communism. Some systems advocate for full state ownership, while others support cooperative or community-based ownership models.In practice, countries like Sweden and Denmark have adopted elements of socialism—such as universal healthcare and education—within a capitalist framework, often referred to as social democracy.

If you're looking to keep tabs on how members of Congress vote, there are a few solid resources:- GovTrack.us: This site offers a comprehensive Congressional Votes Database, where you can browse roll call votes in both the House and Senate. You can even sign up for email alerts when your representatives vote.- Congress.gov: Managed by the Library of Congress, this is the official source for legislative information. It includes detailed records of votes, bill texts, and legislative histories.- Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives: This site provides real-time updates on House roll call votes and other legislative activity.Each of these lets you search by bill, date, or member, so you can see exactly how your representatives are voting on the issues that matter to you.

Not quite. While Donald Trump won the 2024 U.S. presidential election, calling it a “landslide” is a stretch by historical standards.He secured 312 electoral votes, which is a solid win but not unusually large—especially compared to past landslides like Ronald Reagan’s 525 in 1984. In the popular vote, Trump received 49.7%, edging out Kamala Harris by about 1.6 percentage points. That’s a relatively narrow margin, and analysts note that just a small shift in a few key states could have changed the outcome.So while Trump and his allies have described the win as “historic” or a “mandate,” most political observers agree it was a close election, not a blowout.

The “No Kings” protests erupted nationwide in response to what many see as authoritarian overreach by Donald Trump during his current term in office. Protesters argue that his actions resemble those of a monarch rather than a democratically elected leader.Here’s what sparked the movement:- Lavish military parade: On June 14—Trump’s 79th birthday and Flag Day—he hosted a $40 million military parade in Washington, D.C., marking the U.S. Army’s 250th anniversary. Critics saw this as a self-aggrandizing spectacle meant to glorify power rather than honor service.- Immigration crackdowns: His administration has intensified deportations and immigration enforcement, which many view as targeting vulnerable communities and violating civil rights.- Use of force against protesters: Trump deployed the National Guard and Marines in cities like Los Angeles following immigration raids, escalating tensions and drawing accusations of militarizing domestic affairs.- Cuts to social services: Protesters also cited his administration’s efforts to slash funding for programs like Social Security, Medicaid, and SNAP, while offering tax breaks to the wealthy.- Disregard for democratic norms: The overarching theme of the protests is that Trump is acting “like a king”—ignoring checks and balances, defying court rulings, and consolidating power in ways that alarm many Americans.The name “No Kings” is a direct reference to the founding principles of the U.S.—a rejection of monarchy and authoritarianism. Protesters gathered in over 2,000 cities to say, in essence, “we don’t do kings in America”.

The short answer is: extraordinary circumstances called for an expedited process.After President Joe Biden unexpectedly withdrew from the 2024 race in July, the Democratic Party faced a tight timeline to get a new nominee on state ballots—especially in places like Ohio, which had an early August deadline. Kamala Harris, as sitting Vice President, was the most prominent and prepared figure to step in. Biden endorsed her immediately, and a wave of Democratic leaders and delegates followed suit.Rather than holding a traditional in-person convention, the Democratic National Committee launched a virtual roll call vote to formally nominate Harris. This allowed them to meet ballot deadlines while still following party rules. Though she didn’t go through a contested primary, the process was technically legitimate—just accelerated.It’s worth noting that while Harris was quickly backed by a majority of delegates, she wasn’t officially the nominee until the roll call concluded. So it wasn’t quite a coronation, but it was definitely a fast-track.

Yes, there is a growing body of scientific research supporting the biological and neurological underpinnings of transgender identity. While no single factor determines gender identity, studies across neuroscience, endocrinology, and genetics suggest that being transgender is not simply a matter of choice or social influence.For example, brain imaging studies have shown that certain brain structures in transgender individuals more closely resemble those of their identified gender rather than their sex assigned at birth. One early study found that the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, a region of the brain involved in gender identity, aligned more with gender identity than biological sex.Other research has explored genetic and hormonal influences, including variations in genes related to sex hormone receptors and the effects of prenatal hormone exposure. These findings suggest that gender identity may be shaped by complex interactions between biology and environment.That said, scientists also caution against oversimplifying these findings. Gender is a deeply personal and multifaceted experience, and while biology plays a role, so do psychological, cultural, and social factors.

Yes, the official White House social media account did post an image of Donald Trump depicted as a king wearing a crown. The image appeared to be AI-generated and styled like a fake Time magazine cover, with the caption: “CONGESTION PRICING IS DEAD. Manhattan, and all of New York, is SAVED. LONG LIVE THE KING!”.This post followed Trump’s announcement halting New York City’s congestion pricing plan and was shared both by the White House and Trump himself on Truth Social. The imagery and language sparked strong reactions—supporters praised it as symbolic, while critics raised concerns about authoritarian overtones and the symbolism of monarchy in a republic.

While both situations involve the idea of “expediting” a process, they operate in very different realms—immigration enforcement versus political candidacy—and the mechanisms and implications are quite distinct.Trump’s expedited deportation policy refers to the expansion of “expedited removal,” a legal process that allows immigration officials to deport certain undocumented individuals without a court hearing. Under Trump’s renewed policy, this process was broadened to apply nationwide, targeting individuals who couldn’t prove they had been in the U.S. for more than two years. It bypasses traditional legal proceedings, raising concerns about due process and civil liberties.On the other hand, Kamala Harris’s selection as Joe Biden’s running mate in 2020 followed the standard political vetting and nomination process. While some critics argued that the decision was politically strategic or accelerated due to public pressure for a woman of color on the ticket, there’s no formal “expedited” mechanism in the constitutional or electoral sense. Vice presidential candidates are chosen by the presidential nominee and confirmed at the party convention—there’s no legal or procedural shortcut involved.So while both involve speed or urgency, the similarity is more metaphorical than structural. One is a legal policy tool used to bypass judicial review; the other is a political decision made within the bounds of party strategy and public optics.

A leftist is someone who generally supports political and social ideas aimed at promoting equality, social justice, and collective well-being, often through systemic change. The term comes from the French Revolution, when those who sat on the left side of the National Assembly opposed monarchy and supported democratic reforms.In today’s context, leftists often advocate for:
- Economic equality — like progressive taxation, universal healthcare, and strong labor protections.
- Social justice — including civil rights, LGBTQ+ rights, racial equity, and gender equality.
- Environmental protection — often supporting bold climate action and sustainability efforts.
- Public ownership or regulation — especially in sectors like healthcare, education, and housing.Leftists can range from moderate social democrats to more radical thinkers like democratic socialists or even anarchists, depending on how far they believe change should go.If you're thinking about this in terms of theology or ethics—like how Jesus might align with these values—there’s a fascinating conversation to be had about compassion, justice, and the redistribution of power.

ICE agents say they cover their faces primarily for safety and operational reasons. The Department of Homeland Security has publicly claimed that assaults on ICE officers have jumped—first by 300%, then 413%, and now as much as 500%—and argues that masks protect agents whose identities might otherwise be exposed and targeted during high-profile raids.Beyond cited assault figures, ICE and DHS officials also point to the risk of “doxxing” and death threats against agents and their families. By wearing masks (and operating in plainclothes), they maintain anonymity during sensitive enforcement actions—especially undercover or intelligence-driven operations—so they can continue to carry out arrests without compromising future investigations or personal security.As to legality, there’s no federal statute or Supreme Court ruling that forbids ICE or any DHS officers from obscuring their faces. U.S. law does require police to identify themselves in certain contexts (and many local departments mandate visible badges and nameplates), but neither the Constitution nor federal regulations impose a universal “no-mask” rule on immigration agents. Courts have generally upheld qualified immunity for officers acting in good faith, meaning routine masking—even if controversial—does not by itself violate the Fourth Amendment or other legal protections.States like California have tried to push back: in June 2025, state senators introduced SB 627 (the “No Secret Police Act”) to ban local, state, and federal officers in California from concealing their faces during public duties. Exemptions would cover genuine SWAT deployments and medical emergencies, but the bill cannot legally bind federal agencies. Even if it passes, it would apply only to state law enforcement, leaving ICE masking practices intact under federal jurisdiction.

Undocumented immigrants aren’t eligible for SNAP (“food stamps”) benefits under federal rules—but you still have options to put food on the table. Here’s a roadmap:1. Check if your U.S.-born kids can get SNAP
• If you have minor children born in the U.S., you can apply on their behalf. The household’s SNAP allotment will go on an EBT card you can use for groceries. (Parents don’t need to be legal residents to sign up for benefits that go to citizen children.)2. Tap into local food banks & pantries
• Harvesters Community Food Network (Kansas City) runs pantries and mobile distributions with no proof-of-status requirements.
• Call 2-1-1 (United Way) or visit https://www.211.org to find pantries, soup kitchens and free meal sites near you.
• Churches, mosques and nonprofits often have weekly pantry hours—no questions asked.3. Enroll in WIC or school meal programs
• WIC (Women, Infants & Children) may cover U.S.-born infants and kids up to age 5, plus pregnant or postpartum moms, regardless of mom’s status.
• U.S. citizenship or lawful residency is required for the WIC participant, so focus on any children or pregnant women who qualify.
• Every public school offers free or reduced-price breakfasts and lunches to qualifying students—your kids may get free meals if their household income falls below the cutoff.4. Leverage community kitchens & meal programs
• Many faith-based groups and NGOs run drop-in cafeterias or delivered meals for seniors, families, or people with disabilities.
• Look for “soup kitchen,” “community meal,” or “free lunch” at your local library or community center bulletin board.5. Seek broader social-service support
• Catholic Charities of Northeast Kansas and Jewish Vocational Service both offer food assistance programs without asking about immigration status.
• International Rescue Committee in KC can steer you to culturally-sensitive resources and bilingual case workers.6. Explore pathways to legal status
• While you’re getting by, see if you qualify for any form of relief (asylum, U-visa, T-visa, Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, TPS, or family-based petitions). Gaining lawful status is the only route to federal benefits like SNAP for yourself.
• For low- or no-cost legal help, contact:
– Immigration Advocates Network’s legal-services locator at https://www.immigrationadvocates.org/nonprofit/legaldirectory/
– Catholic Charities Immigration Legal Services (Kansas City)
– Local law-school clinics or bar-association referral programs7. Stay safe and informed
• Always carry only essential documents when you go out.
• Be aware of your rights if approached by law-enforcement or immigration agents; “you have the right to remain silent” and to see a judge.Nobody should go hungry, and there’s a dense safety net run by charities, faith communities and local programs that don’t check immigration status. Start with 2-1-1 for immediate food-pantry listings, then layer in services (WIC, school meals, community kitchens). Meanwhile, if you can, pursue legal relief so you can access the full suite of federal assistance down the road.

Federal prosecutors released a first tranche of Epstein-related documents in late February, but the bulk of the files still haven’t hit the public domain for two main reasons:1. Outstanding Material Held by the FBI and the Southern District of New York
Attorney General Pam Bondi received roughly 200 pages in that initial “phase one” dump, but was later told there are “thousands of pages” still locked away in FBI and SDNY vaults—many of them sealed under grand-jury and court orders. Bondi even gave the FBI a Feb. 28 deadline to hand over the rest, and as of early March they’d yet to comply.2. Mandatory Redaction and Privacy Reviews
Even once those documents arrive at DOJ, they can’t simply be posted online. Every page must be screened to remove grand-jury testimony, protect confidential witnesses, shield victim identities and excise any genuinely sensitive national-security material. That process of line-by-line review and legal vetting takes time—and until it’s complete, the Justice Department won’t publicly release the remaining files.There’s also political pressure at play. Recent calls from members of Congress and high-profile allegations (like Elon Musk’s unfounded claim that the files implicate President Trump) have only intensified demands for transparency. But until the agencies deliver the full trove and DOJ finishes its redactions, Americans will have to wait for the next batch.

People who put in a full 40-hour week deserve pay that actually covers life’s basics and preserves their dignity. Here’s why:1. Covers cost of living and prevents poverty
A true living wage is calculated so a full-time worker can afford essentials—housing, food, healthcare, transportation—and still have a cushion for emergencies. For a couple with two kids to earn a living wage at federal minimum rates, each parent would need to work 76 hours a week—far beyond a standard full-time schedule.2. Respects human rights and labor fairness
International human-rights frameworks (e.g., Amnesty International) hold that no one should have to work excessive or exploitative hours just to survive. A living wage in a standard workweek is seen as the baseline for fair treatment and bodily autonomy, ensuring work doesn’t trap people in poverty.3. Upholds the social contract and personal dignity
As Warren Buffett put it, “In a super rich country, anybody who’s willing to work 40 hours a week has a decent living.” When workers know their labor is valued, they gain agency and community respect—vital ingredients for a stable society.4. Boosts the economy and reduces public costs
Paying a living wage isn’t just altruism—it ripples through local economies. The Economic Policy Institute estimates that raising the wage floor would generate $118 billion in additional wages, circulating through families and communities, while also cutting reliance on social-safety-net programs.5. Prevents corporate exploitation
Despite record corporate profits, millions still juggle multiple jobs to make ends meet. Laws raising minimums (and expanding overtime eligibility) counteract the imbalance of power between employers and workers, forcing companies to share prosperity more equitably.Bottom line: if someone works 40 hours a week—no matter the job—they’re entitled to a wage that sustains life, upholds their rights, and strengthens the economy.

Donald Trump’s involvement in the recent U.S. Army military parade stirred controversy largely because he reshaped what was originally a nonpartisan celebration into something closely tied to his personal image and political messaging.The event marked the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, but Trump announced it would also coincide with his 79th birthday, effectively intertwining a national military celebration with his own personal milestone. He added a large-scale military parade to the day’s events, including tanks, drones, and even a robot dog, which hadn’t been part of the original plan.Critics argued that this move blurred the lines between honoring the military and promoting a political figure. The parade was seen by some as an authoritarian-style display of power, especially since Trump had long expressed admiration for military parades in countries like France and even North Korea. His statement—“We want to show off a little bit”—didn’t help ease concerns.The backlash was significant. A movement called “No Kings” organized protests in over 2,000 communities across the U.S., drawing millions of participants who viewed the parade as a symbol of Trump’s growing assertion of presidential power.So while the parade was technically a celebration of the Army, Trump’s decision to align it with his birthday, his prominent role in the event, and the political overtones made it feel—at least to many observers—like he had made it his own.

Blank Label Society

816-467-4767 8164674767 816.467.4767 #memememefrog #memememefrog memememefrog meme meme frog #memememefrog

𓆏

memejump agapejump hustlejump magajump

#agapejump #memejump #magajump #hustlejump #kidseatfree frog army 666 frogarmy666 @frogarmy666 #frogarmy666

Removing undocumented immigrants from the U.S. Census count would likely shift congressional representation—but not as dramatically as some might assume.
The U.S. Constitution mandates that congressional seats be apportioned based on the total population, not just citizens. That includes undocumented immigrants, legal residents, and citizens alike. If undocumented immigrants were excluded from the count, states with large immigrant populations—like California, Texas, and Florida—could lose seats, while states with smaller immigrant populations—like Ohio, Alabama, or Minnesota—might retain or gain seats they would otherwise lose.
A 2025 study published in PNAS Nexus found that excluding undocumented residents from apportionment data would have shifted no more than two House seats and three Electoral College votes in any census year since 1980. So while the impact is real, it’s relatively modest in terms of national political balance.
This issue has sparked political debate, especially around whether including undocumented immigrants gives certain states an unfair advantage. But historically, the census has always counted “the whole number of persons in each state”, regardless of legal status.

Recognizing signs of cult involvement can be challenging, as cults often use psychological manipulation to control members. Here are some common warning signs:### 1. Absolute Authority
- The leader is seen as infallible and unquestionable.
- Members are discouraged from critical thinking or questioning leadership.### 2. Isolation from the Outside World
- Members are cut off from family, friends, or independent sources of information.
- The group promotes fear of outsiders or claims the world is against them.### 3. Financial Exploitation
- Members are pressured to donate large sums or surrender assets.
- There is no transparency about how money is used.### 4. Thought Reform & Mind Control
- The group uses love-bombing (excessive praise and attention) to recruit members.
- Members are subjected to guilt, shame, or fear to maintain loyalty.### 5. Extreme Us vs. Them Mentality
- The group claims to have exclusive truth and dismisses all outside perspectives.
- Leaving the group is seen as betrayal or leads to punishment.### 6. Suppression of Individuality
- Members are expected to conform completely to group beliefs and behaviors.
- Personal identity, hobbies, or relationships may be erased.

Forcibly removing undocumented immigrants from the U.S. would have far-reaching economic and social consequences, many of them disruptive:
1. Economic contraction: Mass deportation could shrink the U.S. economy significantly. One analysis estimated that removing 7 million unauthorized workers would reduce GDP by up to 2.6%, costing the economy $4.7 trillion over 10 years. That’s comparable to the scale of the Great Recession.
2. Labor shortages in key industries: Sectors like agriculture, construction, and hospitality rely heavily on undocumented labor. Deportations could lead to severe worker shortages, driving up wages but also raising prices for consumers and slowing production.
3. Federal revenue losses: The federal government could lose nearly $900 billion in tax revenue over a decade due to the drop in economic activity and employment. This would increase the national debt and strain public services.
4. Social and humanitarian costs: Beyond economics, forced removals would disrupt families, many of which include U.S. citizens. Communities could experience heightened fear, reduced trust in law enforcement, and long-term psychological trauma.
5. Public opinion is divided: While a majority of Americans support deporting those who commit violent crimes, only about a third support deporting all undocumented immigrants. Most oppose arrests in sensitive locations like schools, hospitals, or places of worship.
It’s a complex issue with no easy answers.

kids eat free in overland park ks kids eat free in shawnee kansas kids eat free in shawnee mission ks kids eat free in olathe ks kids eat free in kansas city kansas kids eat free in kansas city missouri kids eat free in the northland missouri kids eat free in wyandotte county ks kids eat free in johnson county ks kids eat free in leavenworth county ks kids eat free in gladstone mo
kids eat free in riverside mo kids eat free in basehor ks kids eat free in tonganoxie ks kids eat free in lawrence ks kids eat free in eudora ks kids eat free in bonner springs mo kids eat free in blue springs mo kids eat free in leavenworth ks kids eat free in lansing ks kids eat free in parkville mo

Religious Memes Political Memes

corn and guac club

Text

Blank Label Socialists

ᓚᘏᗢ

When discussing domestic violence, it’s important to note upfront that definitions and data collection methods vary. For example, some rankings focus on the lifetime prevalence of any domestic abuse (encompassing physical, psychological, sexual abuse, and stalking), while others might concentrate on specific outcomes such as homicide rates or physical abuse alone. Because of these differences, “top” states can vary depending on the study and metric used.One frequently cited snapshot comes from a 2025 ranking (as reported by Data Pandas) that examines the percentage of women who report having experienced domestic violence in their lifetime. On that basis, the ranking is as follows:1. Kentucky – 45.3%
2. Nevada – 43.8%
3. Alaska – 43.3%According to this dataset, these three states top the list based on reported experiences of domestic violence among women[3].Another source—the World Population Review—presents a table that includes lifetime prevalence across various forms of domestic violence. In that table, the District of Columbia (which isn’t a state) leads with a rate of 67.1%. Excluding D.C. and comparing only states, Alaska consistently appears near the top (65.4%), followed by Wyoming (63%) and Idaho (62%). This shows that when the definition is broadened or measured differently, the rankings can shift[2].In summary, if we refer to the Data Pandas figures (focused on reported domestic violence among women), the top three states are Kentucky, Nevada, and Alaska. However, if you consider another survey that includes multiple forms of abuse, the picture can change—often placing Alaska at the forefront, with Wyoming and Idaho also showing very high rates.These differences underscore that domestic violence is a complex issue, and statistics can vary considerably depending on definitions and survey methods. Regardless of the specific ranking, every percentage point represents individuals and families affected, highlighting the importance of prevention, policy intervention, and community support.

Below is a list of some of the most widely reported violent events over the past 10 years that have been driven by far‐right extremist ideologies. Note that while each event is unique, they all share an element of ideologically motivated violence that has shocked and reshaped national and international conversations about hate and political extremism:1. Charleston Church Shooting (June 17, 2015)
At the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, white supremacist Dylann Roof opened fire during a Bible study, killing nine and injuring several others. This attack was rooted squarely in a far‐right, racist ideology.2. Charlottesville “Unite the Right” Rally (August 2017)
A convergence of far‐right groups in Charlottesville, Virginia, quickly devolved into violence. Clashes between extremist demonstrators and counter-protesters were marked by aggressive rhetoric and, most notably, vehicular violence that claimed the life of counter-protester Heather Heyer.3. Tree of Life Synagogue Shooting (October 27, 2018)
In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, an anti-Semitic attack on the Tree of Life Synagogue resulted in 11 fatalities. The shooter’s actions were motivated by extremist, far‐right beliefs that specifically targeted the Jewish community.4. Christchurch Mosque Shootings (March 15, 2019)
In one of the world’s deadliest mass attacks, an assailant influenced by far‐right ideology attacked two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, killing 51 people and injuring dozens. This event reverberated globally, highlighting the international reach of such extremist views.5. Poway Synagogue Shooting (April 27, 2019)
A far‐right extremist attacked a synagogue in Poway, California, killing one person and injuring others in an act widely recognized as an anti-Semitic hate crime.6. El Paso, Texas Mass Shooting (August 3, 2019)
Targeting a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, a shooter driven by white nationalist and anti-immigrant sentiments killed 23 people. Authorities and investigations linked the attacker’s motives to far‐right extremist ideology.7. U.S. Capitol Riot (January 6, 2021)
Hundreds of far‐right supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol in a violent, coordinated effort to overturn the results of a presidential election. The riot resulted in multiple deaths—including law enforcement fatalities—injuries, and significant property damage, marking it as one of the most consequential acts of political violence in recent memory.8. Attempted Assassination at a Trump Rally in Butler, Pennsylvania (July 2024)
At a campaign event, an individual attempted to assassinate former President Donald Trump. This incident, marked by sudden violence and extreme political motivations, is emerging as another example of far‐right extremism influencing acts of political violence.Each of these events has not only affected the immediate communities involved but has also fueled national debates on political rhetoric, extremist ideology, and how societies respond to hate-driven violence. These examples serve as a stark reminder of the practical implications of extremist beliefs—and the ongoing challenges faced by law enforcement and policymakers in addressing politically motivated violence.

Yes, there are more violent far-right events in the past decade. Here are additional incidents that have been documented:1. Buffalo Supermarket Shooting (May 14, 2022)
A gunman motivated by white supremacist ideology attacked a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, killing 10 people. The shooter had posted a manifesto expressing racist beliefs and conspiracy theories about "replacement" ideology.2. Club Q Shooting (November 19, 2022)
A shooter attacked Club Q, an LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado Springs, killing five people and injuring many others. The suspect had ties to neo-Nazi ideology and expressed anti-LGBTQ sentiments.3. Attempted Kidnapping of Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer (October 2020)
A far-right militia group plotted to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, citing opposition to COVID-19 restrictions. The FBI thwarted the plan, leading to multiple arrests.4. Rise in Political Violence and Extremism-Related Murders (2022)
A report from the Anti-Defamation League found that all 25 extremism-related murders in the U.S. in 2022 were linked to right-wing extremists, with mass shootings accounting for the majority of casualties.5. January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol Riot
A violent mob stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The riot resulted in multiple deaths, injuries, and extensive property damage.These events highlight the ongoing concerns about far-right extremism and political violence in the U.S.

Republicans have voted against several veteran-related bills over the past 20 years, though their opposition has often been tied to concerns about fiscal responsibility rather than outright disregard for veterans' interests.Here are some notable instances:
- PACT Act (2022): 11 Senate Republicans initially voted against this bill, which aimed to provide healthcare access to veterans exposed to toxic burn pits.
- Honor Our PACT Act (2022): 174 House Republicans voted against expanding veteran benefits, citing the bill's estimated $300 billion cost over 10 years.
- Veterans Job Bill (2015): The GOP-controlled Senate voted down a fully funded $1 billion bill that would have provided jobs for unemployed veterans.
- Comprehensive Veterans Health Benefits Act (2014): Senate Republicans blocked this bill, which would have expanded healthcare access and protected veteran pensions.
- VA Healthcare Cuts (2011): House Republicans attempted to end VA healthcare benefits for certain disabled veterans, particularly those with conditions not officially recognized by the VA.While these examples show a pattern of opposition to certain veteran-related bills, the reasoning behind these votes often involved concerns over budgetary impact rather than a direct stance against veterans. If you're interested in a more detailed breakdown of congressional voting records, you can explore GovTrack's database.

carter carter cartercarter elimundae

@respawnedchristian69 @frogarmy_666

national food boycott 2023

#nationalfoodboycott national food boycott

#nationalfoodboycott #fightgreedflation

Don't wub it too hard

Updated Widget
Updated: