B-Man

Ignorance display it is.

DeSantis Suggests Alternative for Musk to Focus His Resources Instead of New Political Party By Mike Miller Elon Musk, declaring the two-party system in America is broken, wasted little time after President Donald Trump on Friday signed his formerly named "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" — a historic, $3.3 trillion spending bill — into law. Musk took to X on Saturday to announce his creation of the "America Party," which he said was a direct response to what he called America's "one-party system, not a democracy." The multibillionaire tech mogul made the announcement after he posted an Independence Day poll on X in which he asked voters if they wanted freedom from the "two-party (some would say uniparty) system." With over 1.2 million votes cast — 65.4 percent of respondents said "yes" — Musk posted Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is not only among those who question the wisdom of creating a third party; he also suggests what he believes is a better alternative for Musk to focus on if he remains engaged in the political arena: The problem is, when you do another party, especially if you're running on some of the issues that [Musk] talks about, that would end up — if he funds Senate candidates and House candidates in competitive races — that would likely end up meaning the Democrats would win all of the competitive Senate and House races, so ... I don't want to see that happen. DeSantis then suggested what he considers a better alternative for Musk: I think if you want to get involved and hold accountable, you know we do have a problem in the Republican Party with these D.C. congressmen — they always run saying there's out-of-control spending and they're gonna spend less, but they never do it. DeSantis said he believes Musk could have a “monumental impact” by championing two causes that the former DOGE overseer has continually said are important to him: a balanced budget amendment and term limits for members of Congress. “As it is now," DeSantis explained, "even if somehow a third party could elect some people that were so-called fiscal conservative, I don’t think it would even move the needle, even if they got elected. And we know that they wouldn’t get elected because it’s really one of two parties.” https://redstate.com/mike_miller/2025/07/07/desantis-suggests-a-better-place-for-musk-to-focus-his-resources-than-on-a-new-political-party-n2191347

Thanks, Obama! Turns Out the 'Affordable Care Act' Made Healthcare MORE EXPENSIVE Than Food, Housing Amy Curtis We had to pass Obamacare in 2010 because it was the only thing that would stop healthcare costs from spiraling out of control. Except it didn't. Now, Americans spend more on healthcare than housing and food. {snip} These two things are related: whenever the government subsidizes something, it gets more expensive. Just like education. Men -- single men -- were required to buy insurance plans with maternity coverage so they could pay for some woman's OB-GYN. Because 'fairness' or something. https://twitchy.com/amy-curtis/2025/07/07/ag-hamilton-obamacare-federal-healthcare-spending-n2415328

So we are just going to downplay a leftist trying to shoot ICE agents today.

Beyond ignorant. MEANWHILE: Democrats retreat on climate: ‘It’s one of the more disappointing turnabouts.’ By Jeremy B. White and Camille von Kaenel SACRAMENTO, California — Donald Trump is coming for California’s signature climate policies — and so is California. Stung by the party’s sweeping losses in November and desperate to win back working-class voters, the Democratic Party is in retreat on climate change. Nowhere is that retrenchment more jarring than in the nation’s most populous state, a longtime bastion of progressive politics on the environment. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/07/democrats-climate-retreat-california-energy-00439882?utm_medium=email&utm_source=substack Yes, setting Teslas on fire followed by the mass elite’s jet-powered commute to the Bezos wedding signaled the end of the good old days of radical environmentalism.

Yeah, we know.

Made things worse. What a big deal, right Joe ?

.

There’s a lot of shady business surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein cover-up. We’ve gone from lists allegedly being reviewed to now supposedly no lists existing at all. Surveillance tapes somehow didn’t work. Prison guards were charged, then quietly had those charges dropped. Future Labor Secretary Alex Acosta gave Epstein a sweetheart deal and then all his emails from that period mysteriously vanished. The list goes on. It’s all too murky to untangle, and we have no real way of knowing which claims are true, which are false, or what really happened in any of these bizarre “coincidences.” But there is one thing that could still be definitively exposed, and it would go a long way toward explaining everything else: How did Jeffrey Epstein actually make his money? If someone could offer a clear, credible explanation—that he was just some brilliant investor who made his fortune through legitimate trading—then maybe, just maybe, the lone-wolf predator theory holds. Maybe he really was just a monster who occasionally let his powerful friends join in. But no one has offered that explanation. Not then, not now. And until they do, the cover-up speaks louder than the silence.

No surprise.

Of course they are, they are ghouls, it is what they do.

Example.

Democratic Party voters are calling for a revolution. An insurrection, if you prefer that word. In any case, they want political violence. Another told Axios that a "sense of fear and despair and anger" among voters "puts us in a different position where ... we can't keep following norms of decorum." I always find it hilarious when a Democrat warns about "norms." These are the people who have been creating hoaxes about Donald Trump for a decade, sending the FBI after Catholics and disgruntled parents at school board meetings, burning cars in the streets while waving Hamas flags, and attacking ICE agents. https://hotair.com/david-strom/2025/07/07/axios-democrat-voters-calling-for-violence-n3804535

Trump’s 'Take It or Leave It' Tariff Blitz Is Bigger Than Monday David Manney Need another example of 'this isn't your grandfather's president"? Forget quiet, back-channel diplomatic communications. President Trump grabbed a bullhorn, walked into the center of a mass of people, and blasted five words that reverberated off the walls: "Take it or leave it!" Twelve countries will receive letters from the president tomorrow, notifying them that their 90-day grace period is about to expire, much like a person realizing too late that their coffee was not decaf. If they miss their July 9 cutoff, tariffs of up to 70 percent will hit them like a falling piano on a sidewalk. The FO'd, and now they will FA. A soft handshake of sorts was shared in April in the form of a 90-day grace period. This was the quiet warning that's been in diplomatic circles for generations. Except those circles have been made irrelevant. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent cut to the chase: Those countries will be staring at that letter the way I used to when receiving service interruption notices without having a job. The president isn't pressuring them; he's simply following through on what he said he'd do. Instead of wanting to play fair with our country in trade, some of those countries seem like they're "going to the mattresses." Australia is sending warnings about increasing prices. Dairy farms in Canada are holding their breath. Manufacturers in Mexico have been holding emergency meetings. With industries totally depending on American buyers, it seems that nobody wants to be on the receiving end of a 70 percent slap. Rebalancing trade imbalance should have taken place a long time ago. One penny at a time, we've been bled dry over decades, resulting in a $12 trillion deficit. That amount isn't abstract; over time, it was factory shut-downs, pensions disappearing, and vibrant towns dependent on "the mill" being quiet. {snip} This isn’t Grandpa’s diplomacy. It isn’t a slow-burn compromise. This is fast, intentional leverage. This is American comeback energy. Whether they sign by July 9 or not, the message is the same: we’ve noticed the imbalance. We’re not silent anymore. And we expect fair play, because we built the market that enables the world. Trump just stopped waiting. And, like it or not, the rest of the world will. https://pjmedia.com/david-manney/2025/07/06/trumps-take-it-or-leave-it-tariff-blitz-is-bigger-than-monday-n4941481

Have We Reached Late-Stage Climate Hysteria? A United Nation’s report issued last month calls for the criminalization of spreading “disinformation and misinformation” about global warming. Is it the desperate act of a dying crusade – or business as usual for the climate fanatics? While our hope is the former, it’s more likely the latter. According to Elisa Morgera, the U.N. special rapporteur on climate change, governments should “criminalize misinformation and misrepresentation (greenwashing) by the fossil fuel industry” as well as “criminalize media and advertising firms for amplifying disinformation and misinformation by fossil fuel companies.” This is disturbing. Who gets to decide what is “disinformation and misinformation”? We’ve already seen, thanks to COVID-19, that the meaning of those words is determined exploitatively by the ruling class and the loudest voices, not by any objective means. Just the News quotes experts who say the call for criminalization shows a growing desperation among the climate alarmists. Given that global warming has cooled off considerably as a pressing issue for the public, this rings true. Yet demanding that skeptics be arrested and tried is not a fresh fantasy for the eco-fascists. They’ve been dreaming about a 21st-century inquisition of those who hold dissenting views (the Galileos of our time?) for more than a decade: Examples at the link https://issuesinsights.com/2025/07/07/have-we-reached-late-stage-climate-hysteria/