My own definition of "Christian nationalism" would be this: An orientation for engaging in the public square that recognizes America as a Christian nation, where our rights and duties are understood to come from God and where our primary responsibilities as citizens are for building and preserving the strength, prosperity and health of our own country. It is a commitment to an institutional separation between church and state, but not the separation of Christianity from its influence on government and society. It is a belief that our participation in the political system can lead to beneficial outcomes for our own communities, as well as individuals of all faiths.

Today is Presidents Day. It shouldn’t be.

It’s yet another example of Washington politicians screwing around with important, organic commemorations that celebrate key national figures in our country’s history for superficial contemporary priorities.

Most recently, in 1968 a Democrat Senate, a Democrat House, and a Democrat president eliminated the national celebration of George Washington’s birthday on Feb. 22. The first president was dead, so he couldn’t object. //

News Flash! George Washington was not born today, on Feb. 17. No president was. He was born on Feb. 22, 1732, in Virginia just in time for his historical calling. He reportedly paid little attention to his birthday. No bouncy tent, no clowns and balloon tricks.

But in 1789, a grateful new nation began celebrating Feb. 22 as a government holiday in Washington, along with July 4th. In 1879, that became the official national holiday. //

The same was true for No. 16, Abraham Lincoln, who was born on Feb. 12, 1809, the first president born outside the 13 original colonies (KY). //

We did not learn much about the president’s four sons. I suspect because three of them died as children. That and the Civil War would explain their father’s sad face shortly before his murder in 1865 (on the right above). //

But that all ended in 1968.

That’s when Congress turned the third Monday in February into Presidents Day.

Who cares about actual history if you can wrangle another three-day weekend by ignoring it.

The invention of "Presidents Day" from whole cloth has sapped most of the meaning from its observance.

Largo Patriot
31 minutes ago
It's so typical of a federal bureaucracy run by Democrats for the last half century that two of the most consequential presidents in our nation's history have to share a holiday so one black civil rights hero can have his own.

KanekoaTheGreat @KanekoaTheGreat
·
Al Sharpton Asks: Can you imagine if James Madison or Thomas Jefferson tried to overthrow the government?

🙄🙄

9:04 PM · Feb 16, 2025.

One day, our children's children will read American history, and can you imagine our reading that James Madison or Thomas Jefferson tried to overthrow the government? So they could stay in power? That's what we're looking at, we're looking at American history. //

Lisa Steves @theLisaSteves
·
Replying to @KanekoaTheGreat
Thomas Jefferson along with 55 other men committed treason by signing the Declaration of Independence from the British Government. So Yes, I can 100% see Thomas Jefferson overthrowing a government.
10:28 PM · Feb 16, 2025

Almost 70 years ago, the U.S. State Department dispatched a new ambassador to a Southeast Asian nation. As often seemed to happen, the new U.S. official was no expert on the nation, its economy, or its culture. He did not speak the language. And his concerns were more geopolitical and career-oriented. //

Communism at the time of that ambassador’s appointment was the worst threat ever to global democracy. It had already taken over Eastern Europe, prompted the Korean War, and was inspiring guerrilla movements around the world, especially in Asia, where some colonial powers like France still reigned.

Using the American Revolution against Britain as his model for successful guerilla warfare, Ho Chi Minh was succeeding in ousting the French from Indochina, soon to become Vietnam.

It turns out, this story about the ignorant, bumbling new U.S. ambassador was all made up, total fiction. It was the plot of “The Ugly American,” a blockbuster 1958 novel that would shape the thinking of a future president and millions more through a successful movie starring some actor in his 30s named Marlon Brando.

The compelling book by Eugene Burdick and William Lederer was a longtime best-seller. It spoke to a deep-seated American fear, which survives to this day, that the world’s bad guys would be victorious because a naïve United States, geographically isolated from foreign trouble spots, failed to fully accept its responsibility to help other countries and thereby protect itself. //

During and long after World War I, the U.S. produced and sent millions of tons of food to feed war-torn Europe. That effort was spearheaded by an Iowa orphan and mining engineer named Herbert Hoover, who gained international fame.

He also served as Secretary of Commerce and, in 1928, became the first Quaker and last Cabinet member to win election as president.

The vast Marshall Plan to feed and rebuild Europe after World War II cemented a reputation for generosity in the minds of the world and ourselves and a dawning awareness that Americans had a strong self-interest in helping others.

As someone who read Ugly American at the time, I can say the psychological impact of that book was even stronger than the 1974 one for “Jaws,” which unleashed our inner fears of immense monsters just out of sight.

The warnings of Ugly American — that the U.S. had to be smarter abroad — so impressed first-term Sen. John F. Kennedy (D-MA) that he gave copies to every other senator. And then, two years later, he took those impressions with him into the White House with some lethal consequences. //

Just four months into his presidency, Kennedy reversed President Eisenhower’s policy of non-intervention in foreign conflicts. That had kept the U.S. out of fighting in Indochina and Egypt when France and Britain seized the Suez Canal.

Fatefully, in May 1961, Kennedy sent 500 troops to South Vietnam. They were just going to advise the local army, you understand, in its struggle against Communists infiltrating from North Vietnam. //

Fast forward to Afghanistan, 2001. The initial decision seemed reasonable for the U.S. and NATO allies to attack al Qaeda there and the Taliban, which had hosted terrorist training camps for the 9/11 attacks.

But then, once again, mission creep slipped in. //

Three hundred years before Christ, Alexander the Great could not pacify what became Afghanistan. Nor could the British in the 1800s. In 1989, the Soviets gave up their attempt after 10 years.

It took the U.S. and allies 20 years before they gave up and left in a humiliating 2021 withdrawal that Joe Biden's ineptness made worse than necessary.

The Western costs were 2,465 U.S. service fatalities, 1,144 allied and contractor deaths, and $2.3 trillion.

The Taliban won anyway.

Now, we return to the U.S. Agency for International Development, which was active there. The goal of President Kennedy, who also founded the Peace Corps, was to unite scattered foreign aid programs in one semi-independent agency under the State Department to promote social and economic progress in other countries. //

There is no doubt, however, that some of the billions distributed by USAID have benefited many millions. The agency helped eradicate smallpox, stemmed the spread of AIDS in Africa, and provides treatments.

The mission was to make investments abroad that would encourage and ignite further progress. Not provide free lunches today but teach literacy so people could get better jobs tomorrow. Help provide clean water and teach better health care, especially for infants and children. Provide nutritional guidance. Improve agricultural methods to boost production and reduce erosion and pests. //

The fact is that although the U.S. is by far the world’s largest provider of foreign aid, such spending only runs around one percent of the total federal budget of $6.1 trillion; in Fiscal Year 2023, it was 1.2 percent. //

A Warning Written for Tomorrow

January 18th, 2021.

The capital of the free world looked like a war zone.

Armed troops patrolled empty streets. Barriers rose like steel forests. And in a quiet corner of the White House, someone uploaded forty-five pages to the government website.

No ceremony. No press release. Just a document dropped into the digital void.

"The 1776 Report"

But Two days later, it vanished.

Scrubbed from official servers.

Dismissed as propaganda.

Lost in the chaos of transition.

And yet, something survived.

What most Americans never knew was that this wasn't just another government report. This was a diagnosis of what was killing the American spirit—and more importantly—a blueprint for its renewal.

Written not for 2021, but for this exact moment in 2025, as things begin to change.

"We have arrived at a point," it warned, "where the most influential part of our nation finds these old faith-based virtues dangerous, useless, or perhaps even laughable."

Simple words. Surgical precision. Like a doctor naming a disease everyone felt but no one would acknowledge.

But here's what made the report extraordinary:

it mapped the exact pressure points where renewal would begin.

Like a military assessment written for civilians like me.

A battle plan disguised as historical analysis.

"The facts of our founding," it declared, "are not partisan. They address the concerns of ALL Americans—every class, race, religion, and region. Properly understood, these facts resolve the concerns and fulfill the aspirations of our entire people."

Critics called this empty rhetoric in 2021.

They should have read more carefully.

Those weren't just words.

They were coordinates, marking exact points where American renewal would begin. //

The sun rises early in Washington. Its first rays catch marble columns that have watched over the capital for centuries. But something's different in these opening weeks of 2025. Something electric. Something unstoppable.

Inside those buildings and institutions being audited and gutted for the first time in forever, a forgotten report's prophecies are finally becoming reality.

Look closer.

The DS meeting its match in digital sunlight.

Critical Theory crumbling against hard truth.

Identity politics dissolving in the face of American renewal.

Sean Spicer
@seanspicer
·
Follow
@POTUS @realDonaldTrump kicks off #BlackHistoryMonth with a proclamation from @WhiteHouse recognizing the work of Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass
6:47 PM · Jan 31, 2025

Throughout our history, black Americans have been among our country’s most consequential leaders, shaping the cultural and political destiny of our Nation in profound ways. American heroes such as Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Thomas Sowell, Justice Clarence Thomas, and countless others represent what is best in America and her citizens. Their achievements, which have monumentally advanced the tradition of equality under the law in our great country, continue to serve as an inspiration for all Americans. We will also never forget the achievements of American greats like Tiger Woods, who have pushed the boundaries of excellence in their respective fields, paving the way for others to follow.

This National Black History Month, as America prepares to enter a historic Golden Age, I want to extend my tremendous gratitude to black Americans for all they have done to bring us to this moment, and for the many future contributions they will make as we advance into a future of limitless possibility under my Administration.

This is a long time coming. For years, the accomplishments of black Americans like Thomas and Sowell have been overlooked, downplayed, and blatantly ignored by the left, who seemingly can't handle any black person who doesn't fall into line with their radical policies. Back in 2016, the Smithsonian opened the National Museum of African American History and Culture with nary a word about Clarence Thomas to be found in the entire building, something Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) later called an "irresponsible bias." The Smithsonian eventually added Justice Thomas to an existing display about Justice Thurgood Marshall. Mighty nice of them. //

Ronster
3 hours ago
Since the very first time I heard the phrase "celebrate diversity" I have asked why not celebrate unity. As in United States. But then that's the Leftist/Marxist/Democrat way: diversity = divide and conquer.

Baja Sun Ronster
2 hours ago
Diversity is the key to controlling the population.
The more diverse the cultures, the less likely we are to stand united against a tyrannical government.
Divide and conquer.

Badgering Americans with the false claim that America was ‘founded’ by immigrants creates the idea that she is prohibited from protecting her sovereignty out of fear of being ‘un-American.’ //

On Sunday, CBS News’ Margaret Brennan tried to get one over on Vice President J.D. Vance, badgering him about immigration and claiming “this is a country founded by immigrants.” But this narrative isn’t just inaccurate, it’s a calculated lie intentionally pushed to justify radical open border policies that threaten to dismantle the very country our Founders built.

Vance held his own, refuting the baseless claim by noting the country was founded “by some immigrants and some settlers” and that such a founding is not a “get-out-of-jail” free card for having the “dumbest immigration policy in the world.”

And Vance is right.

Britain began establishing the 13 original colonies in the early 1600’s. Over the next century or so, hundreds of thousands of Brits moved to the British colonies that were established by settlers — not immigrants. There was no “nation” being immigrated to by the first settlers. //

“But what about the Native Americans? They were nations!” some may contend. But they were not. They were tribal clans. Clans are peoples, but not nations (and to boot, Native Americans are believed to have come from Asia before crossing the Bering land bridge and making their way to the present-day United States).

Yet the left will repeat the claim that America was “founded” by immigrants to serve one purpose: to erase the country’s unique identity and justify endless immigration. If we are truly a nation “founded” by immigrants, then logic would follow it would be wholly un-American to want to control mass immigration (both legal and illegal) since our inception was a result of such immigration.

But America was never just a multicultural experiment that began with and requires an endless influx of immigrants (both legal and illegal) to sustain itself. The settlers were not a hodge-podge of random cultures and religions and languages and customs. America was founded by Anglo Protestants who pulled ideas of liberty and independence from Anglo-liberalism, which grounded itself in the idea of equality, freedom, and government controlled by the people (it was most commonly associated with thinkers like John Locke). These settlers forged a new nation, instituted customs, traditions, and a national identity.

And our Founders understood the importance of a national identity, with Thomas Jefferson writing in 1776 that while he is “for extending the right of suffrage (or in other words the right of a citizen) to all who had a permanent intention of living in the country … Whoever intends to live in a country must wish that country well, and has a natural right of assisting in the preservation of it.”

In simpler terms, assimilation was a requirement of anyone coming to America. //

But if America is really just a “nation of immigrants,” then what does it mean to be “American?”

Well, nothing. If simply being born here or moving here qualifies someone as “American,” then “American” ceases to be a unique identity. It’s diluted to the point of meaninglessness.

Alexander Hamilton warned us in 1802 that “the safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common National sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exception of the citizens from foreign bias, and prejudice …”

In other words, without a common identity, we’re toast. And the annual importation of millions of foreigners threatens that national identity, especially when we no longer demand complete and total assimilation.

So the short of it is: No, America was not “founded” by immigrants. But badgering Americans with the false claim that America was “founded” by immigrants (and is therefore responsible for endlessly welcoming immigrants) creates the idea that the country is prohibited from protecting its sovereignty out of fear of being “un-American.” The goal is simple: browbeat Americans into believing that America is merely an economic opportunity zone that is open to anyone from anywhere irrespective of the cost to our country.

Our Birthright as Americans has always been known as the American Dream.

The American Dream: No matter what color you are, regardless of your social class, your level of education, or how much money you may or may not have, you can always improve your life if you work hard and keep at it. You can attain the level of success that you want. There are no limits. That's the American Dream. That's why people from all over the world want to come here and that's why they always have. The law treats us all the same, and society encourages our individuality as we try to rise out of our current situation to attain a better one. Maybe it would be more accurate if I said that is the Promise of the American Dream. That's what our founders sought to establish when they codified the values of a brand-new country.

I think MLK Jr saw this pretty clearly when he crafted his I Have a Dream speech:

When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men — yes, Black men as well as white men — would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today. //

And merit was usually at the center of many of these values. If you could perform, you could be rewarded by the natural outcomes of your actions. If you didn't perform, you kind of stayed where you were. Today's culture doesn't always reward merit. In fact, sometimes, it holds you back if you're competing in the job market. Or in academics. Identity carries more weight and often excludes one from advancement. Certain boxes that once required checking, like experience, accuracy, performance, and timeliness, have now frequently been replaced by race, sexuality, and political orientation. See Sam Brinton, see Kamala Harris, see Karine Jean-Pierre. //

How did we get like this in just a few short years? Today, you don't have to Google very far to find that values like merit or timeliness or individuality are now considered relics of whiteness and misogyny. This mindset exists in the corporate world now, which is sad, but it's also made significant headway into the military, which is dangerous and reckless. //

So again, how did we ever get to the point where presumably normal people would undermine the mission of their job to countermand it and replace it with the opposite? How did it become commonplace, if not very nearly mainstream, to undermine long-treasured American values of meritocracy (especially critical in the military) for the sake of a bunch of DEI/Utopian Unicorn Dust? And by extension, in other critical roles such as nuclear waste management or medical training or airline pilot proficiency? None of these make any practical sense. Who cares if your pilot is gay if he forgets to lower the flaps on takeoff or if your surgeon is black when he forgets which side your appendix is on? //

But I bring this up because it seems that popular culture has now become saturated with the message to the degree that it thinks this is the sum total of the American experience, and therefore, America is bad. Possibly, this has led to a general belief that we are a racist country now and beyond redemption. How did that get traction? Collective guilt, I suppose. Which, of course, when the glass gets full enough, leads to collective atonement. And when you hit that stage, you feel justified if not duty bound to usurp your once-held convictions that merit is good. Even racism can be good if pointed at the right people, and sometimes it is necessary to give up your birthright if it means adopting a new birthright where people are advanced because they are righteous in their color, sexuality, or politics and therefore oppressed.

I don't know. Maybe I have a point here, maybe not. But still, the question nags at me. How did we give up our core American values so quickly and so easily? I admit that I am still vexed.

Laocoön of Troy Steprock
3 hours ago
We've done this before...

From March 16, 1916, to February 14, 1917, an expeditionary force of more than fourteen thousand regular army troops under the command of Brig. Gen. John J. "Black Jack" Pershing operated in northern Mexico "in pursuit of Villa with the single objective of capturing him and putting a stop to his forays. Another 140,000 regular army and National Guard troops patrolled the vast border between Mexico and the United States to discourage further raids. //

anon-pkys Laocoön of Troy
36 minutes ago
Back in the 1840s the U.S. declared war on Mexico. We had two small armies that attacked, one from the north across the border, and one by sea from Vera Cruz. Our troops, although greatly out numbered kicked A$$ and took names in several battles with the Mexican Army. We conquered and held Mexico City in a battle in which we were outnumbered. Texas Rangers served as Scouts for the Army and as shock troops. They were hated and feared by the Mexicans. To this day the Mexican people have no love for the Texas Rangers. During the 1870s-80s the Texas Rangers guarded much of the border with Mexico. They were not afraid to go into Mexico after Mexican rustlers.

On January 17, 1961, in this farewell address, President Dwight Eisenhower warned against the establishment of a "military-industrial complex."

In a speech of less than 10 minutes, on January 17, 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower delivered his political farewell to the American people on national television from the Oval Office of the White House. Those who expected the military leader and hero of World War II to depart his Presidency with a nostalgic, "old soldier" speech like Gen. Douglas MacArthur's, were surprised at his strong warnings about the dangers of the "military-industrial complex."

As President of the United States for two terms, Eisenhower had slowed the push for increased defense spending despite pressure to build more military equipment during the Cold War’s arms race. Nonetheless, the American military services and the defense industry had expanded a great deal in the 1950s. Eisenhower thought this growth was needed to counter the Soviet Union, but it confounded him. Though he did not say so explicitly, his standing as a military leader helped give him the credibility to stand up to the pressures of this new, powerful interest group. He eventually described it as a necessary evil.

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. . . . American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. . . . This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . .Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. . . . In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

"Those who wished to stop our cause have tried to take my freedom and, indeed, to take my life," said Trump. "Just a few months ago, in a beautiful Pennsylvania field, an assassin's bullet ripped through my ear."

"I felt then and believe even more so now that my life was saved for a reason: I was saved by God to make America great again," Trump said. //

There was talk in the RedState live blog about whether that moment deepened Trump's faith. It appears that it did. Trump's words in his speech indicate a man who, if he didn't believe before, truly does now.

Moreover, this should be a wake-up moment for a lot of Americans. There is something far bigger than us guiding events. Trump was sworn in today, but God is the one who is truly in charge. We might have elected Trump, but God appointed him. That was made clear when the "millimeter miracle" as Pastor Lorenzo Sewell so eloquently put it during his prayer, happened in Butler. //

redstateuser
21 hours ago
As an American, and even as a Christian, I've always held back from the stated notion or suggestion that God preferred The United States of America, as that seemed in my mind to diminish the humanity of all other people in all other countries who, as my faith informs me, are just as sacred in God's eyes as is any American.
However, I must blend in to my belief the comments I've read over many years from those in other countries who indeed look up to the United States of America and who do so I must believe with no disrespect to themselves, to their fellow citizens, or to their country. I don't think I truly grasp the depth of this. It's not easily evident to me but a slow realization of how the might and intent of a well-functioning United States of America is admired, wanted, and even needed by other peoples around the world, as a force for good and a model for imitation.
So, to the extent that such admiration is actually true, I can allow the idea that God could prefer the size and might of The United States of America to succeed and be deserved of such admiration, and that He would prefer this over other less benevolent political alternatives existing in the world. As long as I don't allow ego to adulterate what I am trying to say, perhaps I can allow this blending to occur in my Christian beliefs.
I've tried to state this well. I hope I have done well enough.
Thank you.

Sarcastic Frog redstateuser
19 hours ago
I can appreciate your struggle with this.
God has a chosen people: Israel.
Having said that, at various times God has "chosen" a person or a nation to do certain things. That doesn't make them "better" than another person or nation; to the contrary, it puts a much greater burden of accountability on that person or nation. Anybody bragging about "preference" doesn't know what they're talking about.

Public Citizen redstateuser
17 hours ago
This nation was founded by Godly and God Fearing Men.
The remarks of Sarcastic Frog are pertinent.
I would add that even Israel has been subject to God's Chastisement from time to time.
The USA, because of its founding and foundational principals has served as God's Chosen Implement from time to time.
It's my belief that even Joe Biden has been one of those implements, serving as a tool to teach a nation straying from its founding principals the consequences of such waywardness.
We now have before us a time to set our collective house in order and return to those principals, including those GODLY PRINCIPALS that made this nation the Great Nation that it has been in the past.

For this final installment in the inauguration series, we talk about the inaugural balls.

On the eve of President Joe Biden’s inauguration, Mark Levin warned, “We’re standing at the precipice and we’re looking into the abyss.”. //

Weeks after Biden took office, Sky News host Cory Bernardi told viewers the only thing worse than Biden’s mental condition is the extent to which the mainstream media covers it up. He said, “Never before has the leader of the Free World been so cognitively compromised. … It’s clear to me at the least that U.S. President Joe Biden is struggling with dementia and is clearly not up to the task he’s been sworn in to do.”. //

America’s return to normalcy arguably began the moment Trump secured victory. From a global perspective, adversaries quickly recognized that a strong, unpredictable, and bold leader—occasionally ruthless—would soon replace the feeble and ineffectual figure currently occupying the White House.

Things will be very different the second time around. Trump’s unfamiliarity with Washington’s inner workings left him unprepared for the injustices he faced during his first campaign and presidency. It’s fair to say he was naive, taking advice from those who sought his failure and placing trust in the wrong people.

Yet, despite relentless attempts by Democrats to destroy him—through impeachments, indictments, and slander—Trump remains standing, stronger and wiser. //

Trump emphasized, “The bottom line is to get the right people. If you put the right individuals and teams at the heads of these massive agencies, you’ll achieve tremendous success. And now, I know these people better than anyone.”. //

We have already begun our climb out of the abyss.

DonnaM
9 hours ago
I'm thinking that a "deal deal" with Greenland and Denmark could be structured like an economic development corporation (EDC). These are nonprofits that work with geographic areas in cities cooperating with businesses to supply plans and services to develop that area. I'm a humble marketer and no expert, but I'd bet that the Trumps have worked with plenty of them. That way we get security and access to resources, kick out the Chinese (mandatory), help Denmark on their issues with Greenland, Greenlanders are part of the EDC representation, run their affairs, improve their economy, yet the Danes keep it as a territory or state. We don't take it on as a US colony or territory, but it's supervised, planned against specified goals. A win all around. //

anon-201n
9 hours ago
This idea of acquiring Greenland at first sounds crazy, but as noted Harry Truman wanted to buy it from Denmark in 1946, at a time when the USSR was beginning to flex its post-war muscles. Greenland has lots of natural resources but also. has a coastline that would open into a northwest passage. Both China (declaring itself an Arctic country!!!) and Russia are eying the Arctic Ocean for its trade routes and natural resources. Greenland has had an uneasy relationship with Denmark over the recent years and is subsidised by Denmark (but also restricted). Trump eyes Greenland as an ally and a trade source and is playing the art of the deal.

Damocles Gordon of Cartoon
9 hours ago
This from Wikipedia:
In 2016, the BBC published a report which stated that the administration of United States President Jimmy Carter (1977–1981) had extensive contact with Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his entourage in the prelude to the Iranian Revolution of 1979.[1][2] The report was based on "newly declassified US diplomatic cables".[1][2] According to the report, as mentioned by The Guardian, Khomeini "went to great lengths to ensure the Americans would not jeopardise his plans to return to Iran - and even personally wrote to US officials" and assured them not to worry about their interests in Iran, particularly oil.[1][2] According to the report, in turn, Carter and his administration helped Khomeini and made sure that the Imperial Iranian army would not launch a military coup

There are a lot of people here in the USA that do not know that Carter Gave the Ayatollah Khomeini a crap ton of money (read: Millions) and allowed them to take over Iran. The thanks for using our tax money was a bunch of hostages held for over a year.
Look it up people! //

epaddon
9 hours ago
The context of giving away the Panama Canal stemmed from all the 1970s self-flagellation America went through in the wake of Vietnam. The idea of America a force of evil in the world, which gained ascendancy with opposition to the Vietnam War, combined with the rise of "revisionist" scholarship on the Cold War which blamed America, not Stalin for why the Cold War started, and all the trashing of America over getting rid of Marxist regimes in Guatemala and Chile is why Jimmy Carter felt that giving away the Canal would be a way of showing America making amends for all those things they never had to apologize for in the first place.

It didn't help that he not only got the backing RINO Senator Howard Baker, but also the backing of William F. Buckley. Indeed, there was a big "Firing Line" debate between Buckley and Reagan on the Canal and its telling that on Buckley's side was George Will, while Reagan's side had Pat Buchanan. George Will of course now stands exposed as Never-Trumper fake. //

Almost Sane
7 hours ago
Jimmy Carter was a virulent anti-Semite. He hated Israel and did his best to always side with their enemies, even after he was out of office. He was responsible for the ayatollah taking over Iran and responsible for our embassy being overrun and our diplomats taken hostage for over 440 days. Everybody praised him for his Habitat for Humanity project, but failed to read his antisemitic writings long after he was no longer president. //

anon-pabn
9 hours ago
This all may be Trump leveraging the canal to bring to light what China is trying to do with Taiwan. "Go after Taiwan and say goodbye to controlling the Panama Canal." Of course he would refuse to take military action off the board. He is playing 3 dimensional chess while the MSM is playing Candy Crush.

The last few years revealed stark differences in philosophy regarding the role of government in our society. When the level of fear was high, people were more inclined to submit to onerous mandates. They believed restricting freedom was necessary for the common good and saw the government as a benevolent savior. It was terrifying to watch.

Some people want the government to control as much as possible.

This led me to an existential question: What is the point of government? //

“Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first a patron, the last a punisher.”

Paine described the purpose of government as providing for freedom and security.

“Here then is the origin and rise of government; namely, a mode rendered necessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world; here too is the design and end of government, viz. freedom and security.”

Steve Guest @SteveGuest
·
.@ScottJenningsKY: “In the run up to the Persian Gulf War, [Jimmy Carter] wrote letters, to all of our allies, and to Arab States, asking them to abandon their cooperation and coalition with the USA.. if it’s not treasonous, it’s borderline treasonous.” 🔥

11:18 PM · Dec 30, 2024

JENNINGS: In the run-up to the Persian Gulf War, he wrote letters to all of our allies and to Arab states, asking them to abandon their cooperation and coalition with the United States of America. If it's not treasonous, it's borderline treasonous, and so I hear what you're saying about the humanitarianism, but when you're an ex-president, and you have served in that office, I think you have a duty to the United States and only to the United States, and when he did that and other instances, to me, it showed that he cared more about his own legacy than he did about the country, and I think that is wrong. //

Scott Jennings @ScottJenningsKY
·
My thoughts on Jimmy Carter’s legacy last night on @cnn: terrible president, soundly rejected by the American people. Even worse ex-president, whose meddling in US foreign policy & virulent anti-Israel/anti-Semitic views must not be forgotten. Undermined US interests repeatedly.

6:58 AM · Dec 31, 2024
https://x.com/ScottJenningsKY/status/1874062472384307315

Ricardo Dale
4 hours ago
Carter handed us the current terror state that is Iran. Then he called Israel an "apartheid state." He is only partially redeemed by the fact that Joe Biden was worse by a large margin...

it's an opportune time to refresh ourselves on some of the traditions and rituals that occur on the death of the person who wore the illustrious mantle of the leader of the free world.

President Jimmy Carter and Panamanian Chief of Government Omar Torrijos signed the Panama Canal Treaty and Neutrality Treaty on September 7, 1977. This agreement relinquishes American control over the canal by the year 2000 and guarantees its neutrality. On May 4, 1904, Panama granted the United States the right to build and operate the canal and control the five miles of land on either side of the water passage in exchange for annual payments. For the history of the Panama Canal, visit the Library of Congress American Memory section.

Appendix B: Texts of the Panama Canal Treaties with United States Senate Modifications -- Panama

Recently, a few of my virtual pals have inquired about what it’s like to live in South Dakota, with at least a passing interest in considering a major life change. Most are clueless and have never even passed through the state and thus have no idea what it’s like to live here. To many, all they’ve heard about is Mount Rushmore, empty prairieland, the Badlands, and bitter cold winters. Little do they know!

I have compiled my thoughts below from the prospective of informing someone who may wish to move/retire here to give you just a taste of the Sunshine State.