Proverbs 22:6-15
Good News Translation
6 Teach children how they should live, and they will remember it all their life.
... View MoreProverbs 22:6-15
Good News Translation
6 Teach children how they should live, and they will remember it all their life.
7 Poor people are slaves of the rich. Borrow money and you are the lender's slave.
8 If you plant the seeds of injustice, disaster will spring up, and your oppression of others will end.
9 Be generous and share your food with the poor. You will be blessed for it.
10 Get rid of a conceited person, and then there will be no more arguments, quarreling, or name-calling.
11 If you love purity of heart and graciousness of speech, the king will be your friend.
12 The Lord sees to it that truth is kept safe by disproving the words of liars.
13 Lazy people stay at home; they say a lion might get them if they go outside.
14 Adultery is a trap—it catches those with whom the Lord is angry.
15 Children just naturally do silly, careless things, but a good spanking will teach them how to behave.
https://www.prageru.com/islam-101
Is Islam really a religion of peace? Can Sharia law coexist with freedom of speech and religion? What do Islamic teachings say about jihad and about the treatment of ... View Morehttps://www.prageru.com/islam-101
Is Islam really a religion of peace? Can Sharia law coexist with freedom of speech and religion? What do Islamic teachings say about jihad and about the treatment of women? And why are so many Western leaders afraid to ask these questions?
PragerUโs Islam 101 video series takes an unfiltered look at the worldโs second-largest religion, exploring the beliefs, ideas, and movements shaping the Muslim world today.
Islam 101: Understanding Sharia, Jihad & Radical Islam | PragerU
PragerUโs Islam 101 examines Islamic beliefs, Sharia, jihad, womenโs rights, and radical Islam through expert analysis and firsthand accounts.
After just one wash with fabric softener, the waxy substance latches onto the fabric and can take up to eight washes without softener to remove. This residue not only makes fabrics feel dirty, heavy, ... View MoreAfter just one wash with fabric softener, the waxy substance latches onto the fabric and can take up to eight washes without softener to remove. This residue not only makes fabrics feel dirty, heavy, and less fluffy, but according to cleaning expert Kellsie Zapata, the buildup can also make them smell worse over time. As if that wasnโt bad enough, softener can also reduce the effectiveness of detergent and other laundry aids because it forms a layer over dirt and discoloration that stain-fighters canโt penetrate.
https://betterreport.com/what-does-fabric-softener-do/
Should You Always Use a Fabric Softener? Experts Weigh In
When it comes to laundry, few things are more discouraging than ruining a new outfit or a favorite set of bath towels. While bleach stains and shrunken garments are sure to cause washroom woes, there
https://wordsmarts.com/appalachian-english/?lctg=6a9914a5-17de-43fc-9038-8b726b9098d0
โAppalachian English is actually a distinct dialect with its own consistent grammar rules, vocabulary, and pronun... View Morehttps://wordsmarts.com/appalachian-english/?lctg=6a9914a5-17de-43fc-9038-8b726b9098d0
โAppalachian English is actually a distinct dialect with its own consistent grammar rules, vocabulary, and pronunciation patterns. (While it does share many common characteristics with Southern American English, it has enough unique features to be considered apart.) Appalachian English also has a strong claim to being one of the oldest dialects in the United States. Its roots go as far back as the earliest European settlements in America.
โA Prettyful Way of Speakinโโ โ All About Appalachian English
Appalachian English is often mired in negative stereotypes, but this โmountain speakโ is a distinct and colorful dialect with a fascinating history.
Political analysts say the incident marks the first time alleged vandals have been arrested before receiving honorary contributor contracts from major media outlets.
As of press time, activists had be... View MorePolitical analysts say the incident marks the first time alleged vandals have been arrested before receiving honorary contributor contracts from major media outlets.
As of press time, activists had begun denouncing the Lincoln Memorial itself for failing to resist arrest.
https://www.dailyskrape.com/deep-left-furious-after-park-police-arrest-their-reflecting-pool-vandalism-team/
Deep Left Furious After Park Police Arrest Their Reflecting Pool Vandalism Team
WASHINGTON, D.C. โ Progressive lawmakers erupted in outrage this week after U.S. Park Police arrested multiple suspects connected to vandalism
A newly identified brain protein may play a major role in how the body ages. Researchers discovered that declining levels of Menin in the hypothalamus triggered inflammation, memory problems, bone los... View MoreA newly identified brain protein may play a major role in how the body ages. Researchers discovered that declining levels of Menin in the hypothalamus triggered inflammation, memory problems, bone loss, and other aging-related changes in mice. Restoring Menin reversed several of these effects, while a simple amino acid supplement called D-serine boosted cognition. The discovery opens a surprising new path for fighting age-related decline.
โhttps://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/05/260524012959.htm
Scientists discover hidden driver of aging โ Simple supplement reversed brain decline
A newly identified brain protein may play a major role in how the body ages. Researchers discovered that declining levels of Menin in the hypothalamus triggered inflammation, memory problems, bone los
Chet McAteer
·June 19, 2015
The Tenth Amendment’s Irrefutable Mandate: Secession as the Reserved Sovereign Right of Every State
The American Secession of 1860–61 was not rebellion, not treason, and n... View MoreChet McAteer
·June 19, 2015
The Tenth Amendment’s Irrefutable Mandate: Secession as the Reserved Sovereign Right of Every State
The American Secession of 1860–61 was not rebellion, not treason, and not even a constitutional crisis, it was the plain, logical, and unavoidable exercise of a power the Constitution itself explicitly reserves to the States under the Tenth Amendment.
Any claim that the War “settled” the question by force is mere victors’ mythology; no amount of battlefield conquest can amend, repeal, or override the text of the Constitution.
The document’s silence on secession is not ambiguity, it is conclusive proof that the power was never delegated to the federal government and never prohibited to the States.
Therefore, by the Tenth Amendment’s own ironclad command, it remains Reserved. To deny this is to deny the plain meaning of the English language, the historical record of ratification, and every principle the Framers enshrined to prevent the very consolidated tyranny the South confronted in 1860.
Begin with the text itself, for the Constitution is not a living document to be twisted by later interpreters but a written Compact whose words must be given their ordinary public meaning at the time of adoption.
The Tenth Amendment declares: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Secession, the withdrawal of a Sovereign State from a federal league, is nowhere delegated to Congress, the President, or the federal judiciary. It is nowhere prohibited to the States.
The syllogism is inescapable:
(1) only expressly granted powers belong to the federal government;
(2) Secession is not expressly granted;
(3) therefore Secession is Reserved.
James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, affirmed this exact logic in Federalist No. 45: the powers of the federal government are “few and defined,” while those of the States are “numerous and indefinite.”
The power to enter or exit a Compact of limited purpose is the most fundamental attribute of Sovereignty; the Framers left it untouched because they dared not touch it.
Every counter-argument collapses under elementary Constitutional logic. Opponents claim the Preamble’s phrase “to form a more perfect Union” implies perpetuity. Yet “more perfect” meant simply “more complete” than the Articles of Confederation, not eternal or irrevocable.
The Articles themselves declared the Union “perpetual,” yet no one in 1787 imagined that language barred a State from leaving if the Compact were broken; the States ratified the new Constitution precisely because they feared the old one’s centralizing defects.
The same States that formed the Union could un-form it when the federal agent exceeded its authority. The Supremacy Clause (Article VI) is likewise misread: it makes federal law supreme only “in pursuance” of the Constitution, i.e., within the enumerated powers.
A federal government that invades reserved State powers forfeits supremacy; it becomes the aggressor. Article IV’s provision for admitting new States says nothing about expelling old ones, yet silence here is not prohibition, again, the Tenth Amendment supplies the default rule.
Lincoln’s assertion that the Union “created” the States reverses history: the thirteen colonies declared Independence separately, formed State governments first, then united under the Articles, and only later ratified the Constitution State-by-State.
Each ratification was an Independent Sovereign act; each State could have refused. Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island expressly declared in their Ratification instruments that they retrained the Right to Resume their Sovereignty if the Compact were violated, yet even without those reservations the Tenth Amendment binds every State equally.
The Compact Theory is not a Southern invention; it is the original understanding. Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 85 described the Constitution as a “Compact” among the People of the Several States.
Madison in Federalist No. 39 called the Union “partly federal, partly national,” but emphasized that ratification was by States in their Sovereign Capacity.
The ratifying conventions were State Conventions, not a national plebiscite. When Northern States later imposed Punitive Sectional Tariffs and failed to enforce the Fugitive Slave Clause, a clear breach of the Compact, the Southern States invoked the same remedy the Framers themselves had contemplated.
Jefferson in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and Madison in the Virginia Resolutions of 1798 declared that States, as parties to the Compact, possess the Right to judge infractions and to “interpose” or nullify; Nullification is but one step short of Secession, and both flow directly from the Tenth Amendment.
Chief Justice Marshall, no friend of States’ Rights, still admitted in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) that the Constitution is a document of “enumerated powers,” leaving everything else untouched.
The Supreme Court never held Secession Unconstitutional before the war because the question was political, not judicial, and because the text left no room for such a holding.
Even the Right of Revolution, so often dismissed as extralegal, is Constitutionally anchored by the Tenth Amendment. The Declaration of Independence is not ornamental; it is the organic law that precedes and informs the Constitution.
It proclaims that governments derive “their just powers from the consent of the governed” and that whenever government becomes destructive, “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.”
The People of each State, acting through their Sovereign State government, retain that Right as a Reserved Power. Lincoln himself conceded the moral validity of revolution but denied the South had just cause.
Yet the cause was overwhelming: a sectional party had captured the federal government, refused to enforce Constitutional protections for Southern States, and threatened to subjugate the South under majority tyranny.
The Tenth Amendment protects minorities of States from exactly this consolidated despotism. To claim the South had to remain in a Union that no longer protected their Reserved Rights is to convert the Constitution into a suicide pact, precisely what the Framers rejected.
Nationalist theories fare no better. The notion that the Union is an indivisible nation whose “perpetuity” overrides State Sovereignty appears nowhere in the Constitutional text.
The States never surrendered their Sovereignty; they delegated specific powers while retaining all others. Chief Justice Chase’s post-war dictum in Texas v. White (1869) that the Union is “indestructible” was not Constitutional interpretation, it was judicial legislation after conquest.
Justice Grier’s dissent correctly noted that Texas had in fact Seceded and was treated as conquered territory; only military victory allowed the majority to rewrite history.
Conquest does not Repeal the Tenth Amendment. If force could settle Constitutional questions, then a British victory at Yorktown would have made American Independence Unconstitutional.
The logic is identical: the Sovereign People of the States decided in 1776, and the Sovereign People of the Southern States decided in 1860.
The Tenth Amendment is the Constitutional embodiment of that continuing Popular Sovereignty.
No honest critic can evade this chain of reasoning. The Constitution’s structure, enumerated powers, deputized Sovereignty, ratification by States, makes Secession the logical safety valve against federal overreach.
The Framers, fresh from breaking one Compact with Britain, deliberately withheld from the new federal agent any power to coerce a State into perpetual submission. They knew that without such a Reserved Right, the “more perfect Union” would become the old British Empire in disguise.
When the federal government breached the Compact by refusing to enforce its own provisions and by wielding powers never granted, the Southern States did what the Constitution commands: they Resumed the Sovereignty the Tenth Amendment had always preserved.
Appomattox proved only that superior force can silence argument; it did not amend a single syllable of the Constitution. The Right of Secession remains exactly where the Framers left it, Reserved to the States, inviolable, and as American as 1776 itself.
In Liberty and Eternal Vigilance,
C.M.McAteer
June 19, 2015
References
U.S. Constitution, Amendment X; Article VI, cl. 2; Article IV, § 3; Preamble.
The Federalist Nos. 39, 45, 85 (Madison & Hamilton).
Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 (Jefferson); Virginia Resolutions of 1798 (Madison).
Ratification Instruments of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island (1788).
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) (Grier, J., dissenting).
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819).
Declaration of Independence (1776).
Madison, James. Notes on the Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787.
Rawle, William. A View of the Constitution of the United States of America (1825).
Stephens, Alexander H. Cornerstone Address (March 21, 1861).
Davis, Jefferson. The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government (1881).
From the multiple assassination attempts on President Trump and the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk to the recent attack at the White House Correspondentsโ Dinner, they explore how left-wing rhet... View MoreFrom the multiple assassination attempts on President Trump and the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk to the recent attack at the White House Correspondentsโ Dinner, they explore how left-wing rhetoric, media demonization, and the breakdown of our institutions are fueling real threats. Dr. Roberts also explains why this is not a โboth sidesโ problem, citing clear polling data that shows dramatically higher tolerance for political violence on the Left.
https://youtu.be/v08d6KAT8sc?si=X3ZejJdfYB6_NFzt
What Do We Do About the Increase in Political Violence? | The Kevin Roberts Show w/Larry OโConnor
Dr. Kevin Roberts and Larry OโConnor confront Americaโs rising political violence. From multiple assassination attempts on President Trump and the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk to the recent at
ยทCourtesy of History Uncovered
A boy drummer in Confederate ranks caught the eye of Jefferson Davis, leading to a rare wartime honor that shocked soldiers.
William Nelson Boswell, a Virginia boy bare... View MoreยทCourtesy of History Uncovered
A boy drummer in Confederate ranks caught the eye of Jefferson Davis, leading to a rare wartime honor that shocked soldiers.
William Nelson Boswell, a Virginia boy barely entering adolescence, stepped into the Confederate service during the American Civil War as a drummer in the 56th Virginia Infantry. In a time when most boys were still bound to schoolbooks and childhood games, he was already marching through drill fields, keeping rhythm for soldiers hardened by war. His presence in the regiment was unusual, but his discipline and composure quickly set him apart even among seasoned men.
His soldierly bearing during drill did not go unnoticed. According to accounts preserved in regimental memory, President Jefferson Davis himself took interest in the young drummerโs conduct. Impressed by his steadiness and military demeanor, Davis is said to have personally presented the boy with a swordโan extraordinary gesture in an era when honor and symbolism carried immense weight. For a child of his age, such recognition blurred the line between innocence and the grim responsibilities of war.
Boswellโs connection to the regiment was also deeply personal. His father, Thomas T. Boswell, served in the same 56th Virginia Regiment, embedding the boyโs story within a family already committed to the Confederate cause. Even more striking, young Boswell reportedly used his own limited resources in 1861 to help uniform Company A of the regiment, part of Pickettโs Division, reinforcing his identity not just as a drummer but as a devoted supporter of the unitโs survival and pride.
As the war intensified, the image of a boy in uniform beating time for marching soldiers became a powerful symbol of sacrifice and lost youth. Drummers like Boswell were essential to battlefield communication, yet his story stood out because of his age and the attention he received from high command. In the harsh reality of Civil War camps, such moments of recognition were rare and often became legend among the troops.
Over time, William Nelson Boswellโs name became part of the broader tapestry of Confederate memoryโan example of how war pulled even children into its orbit. His story reflects both the romanticized ideals of honor and the sobering truth of youth exposed to conflict, where moments of glory were inseparable from the shadows of a divided nation.
Courtesy of History Uncovered
Chet McAteer
ยทFebruary 17, 2015
CEDED SOVEREIGNTY REVOKED: The Dormant Reversion Clauses of Fort Sumter and Pickens โ Federal Trespass on Sovereign Soil After Lawful Dissolution of the Compact
From a... View MoreChet McAteer
ยทFebruary 17, 2015
CEDED SOVEREIGNTY REVOKED: The Dormant Reversion Clauses of Fort Sumter and Pickens โ Federal Trespass on Sovereign Soil After Lawful Dissolution of the Compact
From a strictly legal and Constitutional perspective grounded in cession law, Compact Theory, and the plain text of the agreements themselves, the events surrounding Fort Sumter in late 1860 and early 1861, and their parallel at Fort Pickens, were never acts of Southern aggression but the inevitable activation of reversionary Rights embedded in conditional State cessions, once the Voluntary Union Compact was lawfully dissolved by Secession.
When a State cedes land or better described as Concurrent Jurisdiction to the United States, the acceptance must be formally acknowledged and agreed upon by the federal government.
Any jurisdiction not specifically ceded in such agreements is reserved strictly for the State, not the federal government.
South Carolinaโs withdrawal on December 20, 1860, and Floridaโs on January 10, 1861, rested on the bedrock Principle, affirmed by the Founders and by Jefferson and Madison in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, that the Union was a Compact among Sovereign States.
The Tenth Amendment reserves all undelegated powers to the States or the People, while Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution expressly limits federal acquisition of land for โForts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildingsโ to purchases or cessions made โby the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be.โ
These grants were never unconditional transfers of perpetual federal sovereignty in fee simple; they were expressly or implicitly conditioned upon continued mutual defense of the ceding Sovereign State.
Once Secession dissolved the compact, federal authority over intra-state territory lapsed by operation of law, and title reverted to the States unless the land had been purchased outright, precisely the legal mechanism the Founders designed to prevent the creation of irrevocable federal enclaves inside Sovereign States.
It was a legal design that protected the Sovereign States and State Territory while providing the general government with usage rights under stipulations agreed upon by the State Legislatures and the federal government.
The original cessions of harbor lands by South Carolina illustrate this conditional framework with unmistakable clarity. The 1805 Act of the South Carolina General Assembly transferred specific sites, including Fort Moultrie, Castle Pinckney, and Fort Johnson on the explicit stipulation that the United States must โrepair or build the works within three yearsโ and โkeep a garrison or garrisons therein,โ or โthis grant or cessionโฆ [would] be void and of no effect.โ
The statute further preserved South Carolinaโs full civil and criminal jurisdiction, permitted State processes to be served on the sites, and exempted the lands from taxation only while the conditions were met.
The 1836 resolution ceding the shoal site for Fort Sumter mirrored these terms: it conveyed โall the right, title and claimโ solely for harbor defense, again with the understanding that State jurisdiction continued unabated and that the grant served the mutual-defense purpose of the Compact.
These were not blank-check deeds; they were revocable licenses tied directly to the Constitutional purpose articulated in the Enclave Clause and the 1845 Texas annexation resolutions (which similarly limited cessions to pre-existing defense assets).
Identical reversionary logic governed Floridaโs coastal installations after the 1819 Adams-Onรญs Treaty, where Forts such as Pickens were accepted under the same mutual-defense framework.
Federal neglect, decades of incomplete construction, funding shortfalls, and sporadic civilian caretakers did not immediately void the grants while the Compact endured, but it preserved the Statesโ reversionary interest as a dormant legal safeguard.
Fort Sumter itself exemplified the conditional and incomplete nature of these federal holdings. Construction began in 1829 on an artificial island of dumped granite as part of the Third System of coastal defenses, yet by late 1860 it remained only partially finished, seventy percent complete at best, with just a handful of guns mounted and barracks unfinished.
For years the sole federal presence consisted of a lone lighthouse keeper or caretaker and civilian Corps of Engineers workmen, many of them local Charlestonians; it was never a completed, manned military stronghold.
The actual federal garrison in Charleston Harbor was at Fort Moultrie on Sullivanโs Island, housing Major Robert Andersonโs small command of about eighty-five men. Sumter was merely a construction site under renovation, not a fortified federal enclave.
On the night of December 26, 1860, six days after secession, Anderson, acting under standing U.S. Army authority executed a surprise operation that legally constituted federal seizure of State territory: his troops spiked Moultrieโs guns, burned the carriages, cut down the flagpole, rowed across the harbor, and drove the civilian construction workers out at gunpoint with stern commands and no explanation.
The workmen were forced into boats and returned to Charleston without parley. This was not South Carolina attacking federal property; under cession law it was the federal government occupying an incomplete, State-cited construction site, evicting South Carolinaโs own laborers, and planting the Stars and Stripes on soil whose title had already reverted upon the violation of the cession agreements and the dissolution of the Compact.
Moultrie, the only legitimately garrisoned post under the 1805 cession was simply abandoned and later occupied by State forces without bloodshed.
A parallel situation existed at Fort Pickens in Florida, where the installation stood dilapidated after the Mexican War yet remained under token federal control; once Secession dissolved the Compact, continued occupation likewise became Unconstitutional trespass on reverted Sovereign soil.
South Carolina authorities, acting under the plain terms of the 1805 and 1836 cessions, viewed Andersonโs move as a hostile breach of the status quo and repeatedly offered to compensate the federal government for any improvements while demanding peaceful transfer.
The federal refusal, followed by Lincolnโs armed resupply flotilla in April 1861, transformed a defensive property dispute into coercion. When South Carolina batteries finally opened fire on the now-occupied Sumter to reclaim their harbor, the action was purely defensive reclamation of Sovereign territory under reversionary rights; no one was killed in the bombardment itself, with the warโs first blood occurring only in an accidental explosion during the surrender salute.
Crucially, the complete historical silence before the 1860s demonstrates that these reversion clauses were not dead letters but safeguards lying in wait for the precise moment the Compact was broken.
Despite widespread federal neglect across the entire Third System from Sumterโs decades-long incompletion to similar delays at forts in New York, Virginia, Massachusetts, and elsewhere, no State legislature, governor, or court ever invoked reversion, passed resolutions questioning title, or demanded evacuation for non-performance.
The Nullification Crisis of 1832โ33 offers the nearest potential precedent: South Carolina prepared to resist federal coercion over the tariff and even readied its militia, yet it raised no legal challenge to the ceded harbor Forts under the unmet 1805 terms.
President Jacksonโs threats to use those same Forts were met with military readiness, not reversion arguments.
Frontier posts in the West, often on leased public-domain land rather than formal Article I, Section 8 cessions, occasionally fell into disrepair between Indian wars, but these remained operational matters under active federal command, never disputes over Sovereign title.
The Enclave Clause itself was drafted precisely to bar perpetual federal enclaves without ongoing State consent; prior to Secession that consent was presumed intact, and the conditional nature of the grants remained dormant.
Only the Sovereign acts of secession, reserved powers under the Tenth Amendment and the logic of a voluntary union activated the reversionary interests. Federal occupation thereafter became nothing less than trespass on soil that had reverted by operation of cession law and stipulations of the cession agreements.
In the end, the cessions of 1805 and 1836, like all similar conditional grants nationwide, carried both explicit time-and-garrison requirements and the implicit limitation that the property served the mutual-defense purpose of the Compact.
When those terms were ignored for decades or when the Compact itself dissolved, title and control reverted to the States as a matter of Constitutional law.
The installations had never been sold to the federal government as private real estate; they existed solely by the grace of the ceding Sovereignโs Consent for a limited defensive end.
The federal governmentโs insistence on holding disputed soil without consent turned a lawful property and jurisdictional dispute into armed coercion. Northern narratives still frame Sumter as โthe attack that started the war,โ yet a deeper examination of cession law, the Enclave Clause, and the unbroken pre-1860s historical record reveals the opposite: Fort Sumter and Fort Pickens were the first and only pre-war tests of this fundamental Constitutional Principle.
The true aggressor crossed the harbor on Christmas night 1860 in a federal rowboat under cover of darkness, evicting civilians at gunpoint and claiming territory in the name of a government that no longer possessed lawful authority under the dissolved Compact.
In Liberty and Eternal Vigilance,
C.M.McAteer
February 17, 2015
References
South Carolina General Assembly, An Act to cede to the United States certain lands and buildings for the purpose of fortifying the same (1805).
South Carolina General Assembly, Resolution ceding the site of Fort Sumter and adjacent territory (December 1836).
The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 1 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1880โ1901).
Major Robert Anderson, official correspondence and reports, December 1860โJanuary 1861.
Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1881).
Alexander H. Stephens, A Constitutional View of the Late War Between the States (Philadelphia: National Publishing Company, 1868โ1870).
Charleston Mercury contemporary accounts, December 1860โApril 1861, and National Intelligencer, 1832โ1833 (Nullification Crisis).
Ludwell H. Johnson, Division and Reunion: America 1848โ1877 (New York: Wiley, 1978) and related Southern constitutional scholarship on compact theory and reversion.
U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 (Enclave Clause).
Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States, March 1, 1845, and related cession instruments under the Adams-Onรญs Treaty framework.
๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐
๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐: ๐๐๐ ๐๐โ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐, ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐, ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐
โ๐๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ค๐ณ๐ข๐ต๐ช๐ค ๐๐ข๐ณ๐ต๐บ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ญ๐ฆ๐ง๐ต, ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ฅ๐ช๐ง๐ง๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ฏ... View More๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐
๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐: ๐๐๐ ๐๐โ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐, ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐, ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐
โ๐๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ค๐ณ๐ข๐ต๐ช๐ค ๐๐ข๐ณ๐ต๐บ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ญ๐ฆ๐ง๐ต, ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ฅ๐ช๐ง๐ง๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต ๐ด๐ฑ๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ด ๐ต๐ฉ๐ข๐ต ๐ข๐ญ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ด๐ต ๐ฐ๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ข๐ต๐ฆ ๐ญ๐ช๐ฌ๐ฆ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ช๐จ๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ๐ด. ๐๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ฃโ๐ณ๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ค๐ถ๐ญ๐ต ๐ช๐ด ๐ฌ๐ช๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ฐ๐ง ๐ข ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ช๐จ๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ. ๐๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ณ๐ข๐ฏ๐ด ๐ค๐ถ๐ญ๐ต ๐ช๐ด ๐ฌ๐ช๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ฐ๐ง ๐ข ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ช๐จ๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ. ๐๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ค๐ญ๐ช๐ฎ๐ข๐ต๐ฆ ๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ฐ๐ฑ๐ญ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ฌ๐ช๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ฐ๐ง ๐ข ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ช๐จ๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ. ๐๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ช๐ฏ๐ด๐ช๐ฅ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ด๐ฆ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ช๐จ๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ๐ด, ๐บ๐ฐ๐ถ ๐ฉ๐ข๐ท๐ฆ ๐ง๐ข๐ฏ๐ข๐ต๐ช๐ค๐ด.โ
โ๐๐ฉ๐ฆ๐บโ๐ท๐ฆ ๐ข๐ญ๐ญ๐ฐ๐ธ๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ด๐ฆ ๐ง๐ข๐ฏ๐ข๐ต๐ช๐ค๐ด, ๐ธ๐ฉ๐ฐ ๐ข๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ธ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ญ ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ต๐ด๐ช๐ฅ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ฎ๐ข๐ช๐ฏ๐ด๐ต๐ณ๐ฆ๐ข๐ฎ, ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ง๐ช๐ฏ๐ฆ ๐ธ๐ฉ๐ฐ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐บ ๐ข๐ณ๐ฆ. ๐๐ฏ๐ฆ ๐ฐ๐ง ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ข๐ด๐ฐ๐ฏ๐ด ๐๐ข๐ฎ๐ข๐ญ๐ข ๐๐ข๐ณ๐ณ๐ช๐ด ๐ญ๐ฐ๐ด๐ต ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ฑ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ด๐ช๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต๐ช๐ข๐ญ ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ฆ๐ค๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ช๐ด ๐ด๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ธ๐ข๐ด ๐ต๐ณ๐บ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ฑ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ด๐ฆ ๐ฆ๐น๐ต๐ณ๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ช๐ด๐ต ๐ด๐ฑ๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ด ๐ฐ๐ง ๐ช๐ฏ๐ง๐ญ๐ถ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ค๐ฆ. ๐๐ต ๐ฎ๐ข๐ฅ๐ฆ ๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ด๐ฆ๐ฆ๐ฎ ๐ค๐ณ๐ข๐ป๐บ. ๐๐ช๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฏ ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ต๐ด๐ฐ๐ถ๐ณ๐ค๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ฉ๐ช๐ด ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต๐ช๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ฅ๐ฎ๐ช๐ฏ๐ช๐ด๐ต๐ณ๐ข๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ด๐ฆ ๐ฆ๐น๐ต๐ณ๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ช๐ด๐ต๐ด.โ
What the Biden DOJ pro-lifer prosecutions actually were. ๐๐ก๐ ๐
๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ญ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐จ๐ฌ๐๐๐ฎ๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ ๐จ๐ ๐๐๐ญ๐ก๐จ๐ฅ๐ข๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ฏ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐๐๐ฅ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐จ-๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ ๐ฌ๐ข๐๐๐ฐ๐๐ฅ๐ค ๐๐จ๐ฎ๐ง๐ฌ๐๐ฅ๐จ๐ซ๐ฌ ๐ฐ๐ก๐จ ๐ฐ๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐ซ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐ญ๐๐ ๐๐จ๐ซ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐๐ฒ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ง๐๐๐ซ ๐๐โ๐ซ๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ง๐ข๐๐ฌ. Average federal sentence: 5+ years for elderly grandmothers and clergy with no prior record. The Biden DOJ treated peaceful prayer-vigil participants as functional domestic terrorists while declining to prosecute church arsons against pro-life pregnancy centers under the same statute. The asymmetry is the documented evidence Jennings is naming.
What the โfanatic religionsโ framing actually does politically. ๐๐ญ ๐ฌ๐ญ๐ซ๐ข๐ฉ๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐ โ๐ซ๐๐๐ฌ๐จ๐ง๐๐๐ฅ๐ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐จ๐ ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐ฌ๐ข๐ฏ๐ ๐จ๐ง ๐ฐ๐จ๐ฆ๐๐งโ๐ฌ ๐ซ๐ข๐ ๐ก๐ญ๐ฌโ ๐๐จ๐ฏ๐๐ซ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ญ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐ฆ๐จ๐๐๐ซ๐๐ญ๐ ๐๐๐ฆ๐จ๐๐ซ๐๐ญ๐ข๐ ๐ฏ๐จ๐ญ๐๐ซ ๐ซ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ ๐จ๐ง ๐ญ๐จ ๐ฃ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ญ๐ข๐๐ฒ ๐๐จ๐ง๐ญ๐ข๐ง๐ฎ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ซ๐ญ๐ข๐ฌ๐๐ง ๐ฅ๐จ๐ฒ๐๐ฅ๐ญ๐ฒ. When the policy is articulated by activists who treat third-trimester abโrtion as a sacrament, child gender transition as moral imperative, and Net Zero as eschatology, the moderate Democratic voter can no longer say โwell, thatโs not really what my party stands for.โ The cult-framing is precise because the policy positions ARE doctrinal.
My read: ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ง๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ฌ ๐๐ซ๐๐ฆ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ง๐๐ฌ๐ญ ๐๐ซ๐ญ๐ข๐๐ฎ๐ฅ๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐จ๐ ๐ฐ๐ก๐ฒ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ฆ๐จ๐๐ซ๐๐ญ๐ข๐ ๐๐จ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฌ๐ญ๐ซ๐ฎ๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฒ ๐๐จ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐๐ฉ๐ฌ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐จ๐ง ๐ข๐ญ๐ฌ ๐จ๐ฐ๐ง ๐๐จ๐ง๐ฌ๐ญ๐ข๐ญ๐ฎ๐๐ง๐๐ฒ ๐ฅ๐ข๐ง๐๐ฌ. A party defined by its three fanatic religions cannot recruit working-class voters who donโt share any of the three. The 2024 Harris loss was not a tactical campaign failure; it was the operational consequence of letting the activists define the brand. The 2028 cycle will compound the loss unless one of the three cults is meaningfully exiled, which wonโt happen because each cult controls the relevant primary donors.
๐๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐-๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐
๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐, ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐
๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐
Glenn Anderson
ยทMay 18, 2026
Forwarded for the critical thinkers:
For all the people who would rather see America burn than see Trump win, you need to understand this.
While eight American presidents... View MoreGlenn Anderson
ยทMay 18, 2026
Forwarded for the critical thinkers:
For all the people who would rather see America burn than see Trump win, you need to understand this.
While eight American presidents were sitting in the same chair, reading the same intelligence, looking at the same maps, Iran was underground.
Drills grinding through granite in the dark. Men hauling rock out of mountains by the ton. Building something they never intended to show us until it was too late.
Thatโs not theory. Thatโs what was happening while we were talking.
They told us for years their missiles had a maximum range of 1,250 miles. Said it publicly. Said it repeatedly. Then on March 20th they fired two ballistic missiles at Diego Garcia, a joint U.S. and British base sitting 2,500 miles away in the Indian Ocean.
Twice the range they swore they had.
Thatโs not a miscalculation. Thatโs a lie they told us while they finished the job.
And when the world noticed, Iran looked us dead in the eye and said you didnโt see what you just saw.
They werenโt building in warehouses. They were threading missiles the length of telephone poles into the belly of mountains, sealing them behind hundreds of feet of solid granite that would shrug off anything we could drop on it. Not because they were afraid of a fight. Because they were preparing for one and they intended to finish it.
Eight presidents knew it. Democrat. Republican. Didnโt matter. The answer was the same every time. Hand it to the next man. Loaded a wooden pallet with shrink-wrapped bundles of foreign currency, rolled it across a dark tarmac in the dead of night with the engines still running, and called it diplomacy. Pull your leg back and kick the can down the road so your children and grandchildren could settle it someday.
While we were debating the culture, they were perfecting the kill chain.
Thatโs the gap nobody wants to say out loud.
20% of the worldโs oil moves through the Strait of Hormuz every single day. Control it and you donโt just own the Middle East. You own the global economy. Fuel. Food. Shipping. Everything your family pays for every single week.
Thatโs your house.
They donโt need a single boot on American soil to bring this country to its knees.
If this goes sideways, you wonโt hear it on the news first. Youโll feel it standing at a gas pump in the Florida sun, card in hand, watching the screen freeze. And you wonโt know why.
They donโt need to invade your town to bankrupt your family.
Nobody wanted this conflict. Not one person who understands what war costs wanted this. But the people asking when things go back to normal are asking the right question about the wrong timeline. This didnโt start a month ago. It started in 1979. We just finally showed up to it.
Left alone, Iran was not quietly going into the good night. They were not going to stop arming the groups that walked into Israel and slaughtered innocent families at a music festival. They werenโt going to stop until every tunnel was sealed, every launcher was buried, every ally we have was in range, and the fortification was done.
And then we were supposed to believe they would politely wave our ships through.
That was never the deal. Everybody in that room knew it.
Every administration from both parties declared them the number one enemy of the United States. They have told us who they are. Loudly. Repeatedly. For 45 years. They wish us harm. They wish our allies harm. They wish your way of life harm.
Eight presidents heard that and chose later.
There is no more later.
The can is gone. Thereโs no road left to kick it down.
By acting now we may have put off the unimaginable. Thatโs not a comfortable thing to say. Itโs not supposed to be. But itโs the only honest answer to the people who want to know when things go back to normal.
They donโt go back. They go forward. The only question is whether we chose the moment or the moment chose us.
Nobody gets to pick the timing of history. But somebody always has to answer it.
page=1&profile_user_id=23488&year=&month=
Load More
