Charlie Kirk, after the 2016 election, created a Professor Watchlist to expose professors deemed “radical left.” Professor Matthew Boedy, who has been on the list, is now concerned about Kirk being portrayed as a martyr following his recent death. Boedy, who was planning a presentation about Kirk’s “Seven Mountains” strategy for Christian influence, now contemplates how to address the topic of martyrdom and the potential for increased division. He views the situation as a tragic national moment, referencing Kirk’s assassination on a college campus due to gun violence, echoing his past involvement with the group, Turning Point USA. Boedy fears that framing Kirk as a martyr could exacerbate existing societal divides and incite further conflict.
Read More
Hegseth says Pentagon ‘tracking’ service members, civilians who celebrate Charlie Kirk killing, and that’s where we start. It’s a claim that immediately raises eyebrows, especially given the political climate and the inherent complexities of free speech in the modern era. The core of the issue seems to be a response to reactions following the news of a potential event involving Charlie Kirk. The Pentagon’s stated concern is the celebration or mockery of the potential incident, aiming to foster an environment where military personnel and civilian employees of the Department of Defense aren’t seen as expressing approval of violence.
Hegseth’s statements, and the broader conversation surrounding them, inevitably bring up the ever-present question of free speech.… Continue reading
Following the assassination of his associate, Charlie Kirk, President Trump declined to call for national unity. Instead, in an interview, he identified “vicious and horrible” radicals on the left as the primary problem. Trump’s response, contrasting with past presidential calls for unity, focused on retribution and hyper-partisanship, threatening investigations and action against perceived enemies. He further blamed the “radical left,” escalating tensions rather than seeking common ground.
Read More
During a recent statement, Trump claimed that the “radicals on the right” are motivated by a desire to prevent crime, implicitly excusing their actions. He placed the blame on “radicals on the left,” labeling them as the problem. This follows a pattern of Trump defending those who commit violence aligned with his political views. This stance is consistent with his past support for individuals and groups accused of violence, including those involved in the January 6 Capitol riot and the 2017 Unite the Right rally.
Read More
During a recent interview, President Trump stated he was indifferent to the idea of uniting the country. When questioned about strategies to bridge divisions, Trump dismissed the concern, emphasizing his lack of investment in the effort. This stance suggests a prioritization of other matters over fostering national unity, according to the interview’s context. Trump’s remarks offer insight into his perspective on national cohesion.
Read More
Trump says, “we have to beat the hell” out of “radical left lunatics” after a shooting involving a prominent conservative figure, and this statement immediately sets off alarm bells. It’s not just the words themselves, which are undeniably aggressive and inciteful, but also the context and the person saying them. This isn’t the first time Trump has used such language, and the pattern is becoming increasingly clear: inflammatory rhetoric followed by claims of victimhood when the predictable consequences arise. It’s a dangerous game, playing both sides of the violence coin.
The most striking element here is the rush to judgment. Before any investigation can take place, before any facts are established, Trump is already blaming “radical left lunatics.”… Continue reading
The author, drawing on their experience observing societal collapses in various countries, argues that the United States is experiencing a similar decline. Through their work with the Northern Kentucky Truth & Accountability Project, they have documented corruption within law enforcement, the courts, and local media. The author details a breakdown of institutional integrity, including the silencing of whistleblowers and the manipulation of legal processes, mirroring patterns observed in failing states around the world. The author emphasizes a loss of public trust and a need for individuals to take responsibility for uncovering and sharing the truth, as official channels of accountability have failed.
Read More
House Democrats unable to move freely after their return to the Texas capitol is a situation that has quickly escalated, drawing a lot of attention and concern. It’s a striking image: elected officials, back in the legislature, now facing restrictions on their movement that seem almost absurd in a free society. The requirement to sign “permission slips” and be shadowed by a Department of Public Safety escort just to leave the House chamber? It’s a step that feels more at home in a totalitarian regime than a democratic one.
So one democrat refuses to move, and her defiance is a powerful act of solidarity and a clear indication that something is deeply wrong.… Continue reading
Texas House fails to reach quorum as Democratic walkout hits sixth day. It’s hard not to be struck by the intensity of the situation unfolding in Texas right now. The news of the Democratic walkout, stretching into its sixth day, and the resulting failure to reach a quorum in the House of Representatives, paints a picture of deep political division and high stakes maneuvering. It’s a reminder of how sharply partisan politics have become, and how willing each side is to use every tool at their disposal, even to the point of disrupting the normal functioning of government.
The frustration and outrage expressed in many of the comments is palpable, with anger directed towards the Republican Party and their tactics.… Continue reading
Senator Josh Hawley has proposed the American Worker Rebate Act of 2025, which would provide $600 tax rebates to Americans, specifically targeting “Trump blue-collar voters” and excluding “Biden voters.” The rebates would be funded by tariff revenues, with income-based phase-outs. Critics point out that the tariffs that fund the rebate would increase consumer costs. The plan mirrors previous stimulus checks, with some questioning its potential inflationary impact and the benefit of the rebate.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood