The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
Chicago reported approximately 416 homicides in 2025, the lowest annual total since 1965 and a nearly 30% drop from 2024. Shooting incidents and victims declined by roughly one-third, alongside reductions in robberies and other violent crimes.
The decline mirrors a broader national trend, with U.S. homicides falling roughly 20% year over year, the largest single-year drop on record. FBI Director Kash Patel highlighted the data, pointing to renewed enforcement, federal-state coordination, and reduced political interference in policing.
The decline mirrors a broader national trend, with U.S. homicides falling roughly 20% year over year, the largest single-year drop on record. FBI Director Kash Patel highlighted the data, pointing to renewed enforcement, federal-state coordination, and reduced political interference in policing.
Reply
0
0
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 913
Total Cats: 217
From: Hollywood, FL
Reply
0
0
"Consider Senator Chuck Schumer's evolution. In 2020, he attacked President Trump for failing to remove Maduro, arguing that Trump had "left him more powerful and more entrenched than when he began." Schumer's criticism then was clear: Trump talked tough but failed to deliver regime change.
Fast-forward to 2026, when U.S. forces captured Maduro. Schumer's response? Sharp criticism of the operation itself. "Maduro is a horrible person, but you don't treat lawlessness with other lawlessness," he said, calling it "a violation of law" done without congressional authorization.
The 2026 Schumer apparently disagrees with the 2020 version.
Between 2017 and 2024, America sent approximately $4 billion in direct aid to Maduro's regime--likely matched by additional billions through NGOs funded via USAID.
Think about that. We were bankrolling the very dictator Schumer claimed he wanted removed.
Democrats sent billions to Venezuela while Maduro remained in power, enriching his regime and accomplishing nothing for Americans. Trump sent special forces and ended the problem."
-Michael Smith on Substack
Fast-forward to 2026, when U.S. forces captured Maduro. Schumer's response? Sharp criticism of the operation itself. "Maduro is a horrible person, but you don't treat lawlessness with other lawlessness," he said, calling it "a violation of law" done without congressional authorization.
The 2026 Schumer apparently disagrees with the 2020 version.
Between 2017 and 2024, America sent approximately $4 billion in direct aid to Maduro's regime--likely matched by additional billions through NGOs funded via USAID.
Think about that. We were bankrolling the very dictator Schumer claimed he wanted removed.
Democrats sent billions to Venezuela while Maduro remained in power, enriching his regime and accomplishing nothing for Americans. Trump sent special forces and ended the problem."
-Michael Smith on Substack
Reply
0
0
https://open.substack.com/pub/anonym...c-in-a-selfish
A republic is not built by laws alone. It is built by people, by their habits, their restraint, their willingness to place something higher than themselves above momentary comfort or personal gain. This is the paradox of our age: we inherited a system designed for a virtuous people, yet we now attempt to operate it in a culture that openly celebrates selfishness.
The Founders understood this tension clearly. They did not believe government could create virtue. They believed virtue was a prerequisite. John Adams warned that the Constitution was made "for a moral and religious people" and was "wholly inadequate to the government of any other." That statement was not a sermon, it was a diagnosis. Remove self-restraint from the citizenry, and the state must replace it with force.
A republic depends on limits: limits on power, limits on ambition, limits on desire. A selfish society rejects limits as oppression. It demands rights without responsibility, freedom without discipline, and outcomes without effort. Over time, this corrodes the very foundations of representative government.
Self-Interest vs. Self-Government
There is a difference between self-interest and selfishness. A republic can function with the former; it collapses under the latter.
Self-interest acknowledges that individuals seek prosperity, security, and dignity, but understands those goals must coexist with the common good. Selfishness, by contrast, says my wants come first, regardless of consequence. It treats society as a vending machine: insert grievance, demand reward.
When selfishness becomes the dominant ethic, civic life degenerates. Voting becomes transactional rather than principled. Public office becomes a career, not a calling. Debate becomes spectacle. Truth becomes negotiable. Loyalty shifts from the Constitution to tribes, parties, and personalities.
At that point, the republic is still standing--but it is hollow.
The Erosion of Civic Virtue
A republic requires citizens who can lose an election without burning the system down, who can disagree without dehumanizing one another, who can accept temporary sacrifice for long-term stability.
Selfish societies struggle with all three.
When comfort is treated as a right rather than a byproduct of responsibility, sacrifice feels like theft. When identity replaces character, disagreement feels like an attack on existence itself. When pleasure is elevated above purpose, patience becomes intolerable.
This is how republics decay, not through invasion, but through indulgence.
History is merciless on this point. Rome did not fall when it was strong, disciplined, and duty-bound. It fell when citizens demanded bread without labor, entertainment without meaning, and leaders who would flatter rather than lead. The machinery of the republic survived long after the soul was gone.
Why Laws Alone Cannot Save Us
Many believe the answer to societal selfishness is more regulation, more enforcement, more centralized control. This is a mistake.
A government strong enough to force virtue is strong enough to crush liberty. External compliance can never substitute for internal discipline. You can mandate behavior, but you cannot legislate conscience.
Every time the state expands to compensate for moral failure, individual responsibility contracts. The more we outsource duty to institutions, the weaker our civic muscles become. Eventually, the people become subjects, dependent, managed, and easily controlled.
A republic cannot be sustained by surveillance and coercion. It must be sustained by trust, and trust is built on shared values.
...
The Choice Before Us
A selfish society will always drift toward authoritarianism, because chaos eventually demands control. A virtuous society can sustain liberty, because order comes from within.
The question is not whether our system can survive another election cycle. The question is whether our culture can remember what a republic requires.
No constitution can save a people who refuse self-restraint. No army can defend a nation that has lost its sense of duty. No technology can replace character.
A republic is not inherited once and kept forever. It must be rebuilt, generation by generation, by citizens who understand that freedom is fragile, discipline is necessary, and selfishness is the fastest way to lose both.
...
A republic is not built by laws alone. It is built by people, by their habits, their restraint, their willingness to place something higher than themselves above momentary comfort or personal gain. This is the paradox of our age: we inherited a system designed for a virtuous people, yet we now attempt to operate it in a culture that openly celebrates selfishness.
The Founders understood this tension clearly. They did not believe government could create virtue. They believed virtue was a prerequisite. John Adams warned that the Constitution was made "for a moral and religious people" and was "wholly inadequate to the government of any other." That statement was not a sermon, it was a diagnosis. Remove self-restraint from the citizenry, and the state must replace it with force.
A republic depends on limits: limits on power, limits on ambition, limits on desire. A selfish society rejects limits as oppression. It demands rights without responsibility, freedom without discipline, and outcomes without effort. Over time, this corrodes the very foundations of representative government.
Self-Interest vs. Self-Government
There is a difference between self-interest and selfishness. A republic can function with the former; it collapses under the latter.
Self-interest acknowledges that individuals seek prosperity, security, and dignity, but understands those goals must coexist with the common good. Selfishness, by contrast, says my wants come first, regardless of consequence. It treats society as a vending machine: insert grievance, demand reward.
When selfishness becomes the dominant ethic, civic life degenerates. Voting becomes transactional rather than principled. Public office becomes a career, not a calling. Debate becomes spectacle. Truth becomes negotiable. Loyalty shifts from the Constitution to tribes, parties, and personalities.
At that point, the republic is still standing--but it is hollow.
The Erosion of Civic Virtue
A republic requires citizens who can lose an election without burning the system down, who can disagree without dehumanizing one another, who can accept temporary sacrifice for long-term stability.
Selfish societies struggle with all three.
When comfort is treated as a right rather than a byproduct of responsibility, sacrifice feels like theft. When identity replaces character, disagreement feels like an attack on existence itself. When pleasure is elevated above purpose, patience becomes intolerable.
This is how republics decay, not through invasion, but through indulgence.
History is merciless on this point. Rome did not fall when it was strong, disciplined, and duty-bound. It fell when citizens demanded bread without labor, entertainment without meaning, and leaders who would flatter rather than lead. The machinery of the republic survived long after the soul was gone.
Why Laws Alone Cannot Save Us
Many believe the answer to societal selfishness is more regulation, more enforcement, more centralized control. This is a mistake.
A government strong enough to force virtue is strong enough to crush liberty. External compliance can never substitute for internal discipline. You can mandate behavior, but you cannot legislate conscience.
Every time the state expands to compensate for moral failure, individual responsibility contracts. The more we outsource duty to institutions, the weaker our civic muscles become. Eventually, the people become subjects, dependent, managed, and easily controlled.
A republic cannot be sustained by surveillance and coercion. It must be sustained by trust, and trust is built on shared values.
...
The Choice Before Us
A selfish society will always drift toward authoritarianism, because chaos eventually demands control. A virtuous society can sustain liberty, because order comes from within.
The question is not whether our system can survive another election cycle. The question is whether our culture can remember what a republic requires.
No constitution can save a people who refuse self-restraint. No army can defend a nation that has lost its sense of duty. No technology can replace character.
A republic is not inherited once and kept forever. It must be rebuilt, generation by generation, by citizens who understand that freedom is fragile, discipline is necessary, and selfishness is the fastest way to lose both.
...
Reply
2
2
"The federal government will stop paying physicians based on the number of patients they vaccinate, and is urging state health agencies to stop using similar financial incentives."
"In a Dec. 30, 2025, memo to state health officials, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) said it "does not tie payment to performance on immunization quality measures..."
The federal government was previously tying the reimbursement rate to doctors for everything they do under Medicaid and CHIP to their vaccination rates of children in their care.
https://open.substack.com/pub/vigila...eive-financial
"In a Dec. 30, 2025, memo to state health officials, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) said it "does not tie payment to performance on immunization quality measures..."
The federal government was previously tying the reimbursement rate to doctors for everything they do under Medicaid and CHIP to their vaccination rates of children in their care.
https://open.substack.com/pub/vigila...eive-financial
Reply
0
0
"On Tuesday, investigative journalist Paul Sperry discovered recently and posted on Tuesday that Former Lt., now Captain Mike Byrd, has been running an unaccredited day-care center with his wife in their Maryland home since 2008.
The Byrds have received $190 million in this HHS day-care scheme.
In one of his autopen's last acts before Joe Biden left office was to pardon Capt. Mike Byrd, the DC officer who shot and killed unarmed January 6 protester Ashli Babbitt, an Air Force veteran, during the protests on Capitol Hill on January 6, 2021."
The day-care has been operational for 17 years and has zero reviews online.
The Byrds have received $190 million in this HHS day-care scheme.
In one of his autopen's last acts before Joe Biden left office was to pardon Capt. Mike Byrd, the DC officer who shot and killed unarmed January 6 protester Ashli Babbitt, an Air Force veteran, during the protests on Capitol Hill on January 6, 2021."
The day-care has been operational for 17 years and has zero reviews online.
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
https://open.substack.com/pub/anonym...c-in-a-selfish
A republic is not built by laws alone. It is built by people, by their habits, their restraint, their willingness to place something higher than themselves above momentary comfort or personal gain. This is the paradox of our age: we inherited a system designed for a virtuous people, yet we now attempt to operate it in a culture that openly celebrates selfishness.
The Founders understood this tension clearly. They did not believe government could create virtue. They believed virtue was a prerequisite. John Adams warned that the Constitution was made "for a moral and religious people" and was "wholly inadequate to the government of any other." That statement was not a sermon, it was a diagnosis. Remove self-restraint from the citizenry, and the state must replace it with force.
A republic depends on limits: limits on power, limits on ambition, limits on desire. A selfish society rejects limits as oppression. It demands rights without responsibility, freedom without discipline, and outcomes without effort. Over time, this corrodes the very foundations of representative government.
Self-Interest vs. Self-Government
There is a difference between self-interest and selfishness. A republic can function with the former; it collapses under the latter.
Self-interest acknowledges that individuals seek prosperity, security, and dignity, but understands those goals must coexist with the common good. Selfishness, by contrast, says my wants come first, regardless of consequence. It treats society as a vending machine: insert grievance, demand reward.
When selfishness becomes the dominant ethic, civic life degenerates. Voting becomes transactional rather than principled. Public office becomes a career, not a calling. Debate becomes spectacle. Truth becomes negotiable. Loyalty shifts from the Constitution to tribes, parties, and personalities.
At that point, the republic is still standing--but it is hollow.
The Erosion of Civic Virtue
A republic requires citizens who can lose an election without burning the system down, who can disagree without dehumanizing one another, who can accept temporary sacrifice for long-term stability.
Selfish societies struggle with all three.
When comfort is treated as a right rather than a byproduct of responsibility, sacrifice feels like theft. When identity replaces character, disagreement feels like an attack on existence itself. When pleasure is elevated above purpose, patience becomes intolerable.
This is how republics decay, not through invasion, but through indulgence.
History is merciless on this point. Rome did not fall when it was strong, disciplined, and duty-bound. It fell when citizens demanded bread without labor, entertainment without meaning, and leaders who would flatter rather than lead. The machinery of the republic survived long after the soul was gone.
Why Laws Alone Cannot Save Us
Many believe the answer to societal selfishness is more regulation, more enforcement, more centralized control. This is a mistake.
A government strong enough to force virtue is strong enough to crush liberty. External compliance can never substitute for internal discipline. You can mandate behavior, but you cannot legislate conscience.
Every time the state expands to compensate for moral failure, individual responsibility contracts. The more we outsource duty to institutions, the weaker our civic muscles become. Eventually, the people become subjects, dependent, managed, and easily controlled.
A republic cannot be sustained by surveillance and coercion. It must be sustained by trust, and trust is built on shared values.
...
The Choice Before Us
A selfish society will always drift toward authoritarianism, because chaos eventually demands control. A virtuous society can sustain liberty, because order comes from within.
The question is not whether our system can survive another election cycle. The question is whether our culture can remember what a republic requires.
No constitution can save a people who refuse self-restraint. No army can defend a nation that has lost its sense of duty. No technology can replace character.
A republic is not inherited once and kept forever. It must be rebuilt, generation by generation, by citizens who understand that freedom is fragile, discipline is necessary, and selfishness is the fastest way to lose both.
...
A republic is not built by laws alone. It is built by people, by their habits, their restraint, their willingness to place something higher than themselves above momentary comfort or personal gain. This is the paradox of our age: we inherited a system designed for a virtuous people, yet we now attempt to operate it in a culture that openly celebrates selfishness.
The Founders understood this tension clearly. They did not believe government could create virtue. They believed virtue was a prerequisite. John Adams warned that the Constitution was made "for a moral and religious people" and was "wholly inadequate to the government of any other." That statement was not a sermon, it was a diagnosis. Remove self-restraint from the citizenry, and the state must replace it with force.
A republic depends on limits: limits on power, limits on ambition, limits on desire. A selfish society rejects limits as oppression. It demands rights without responsibility, freedom without discipline, and outcomes without effort. Over time, this corrodes the very foundations of representative government.
Self-Interest vs. Self-Government
There is a difference between self-interest and selfishness. A republic can function with the former; it collapses under the latter.
Self-interest acknowledges that individuals seek prosperity, security, and dignity, but understands those goals must coexist with the common good. Selfishness, by contrast, says my wants come first, regardless of consequence. It treats society as a vending machine: insert grievance, demand reward.
When selfishness becomes the dominant ethic, civic life degenerates. Voting becomes transactional rather than principled. Public office becomes a career, not a calling. Debate becomes spectacle. Truth becomes negotiable. Loyalty shifts from the Constitution to tribes, parties, and personalities.
At that point, the republic is still standing--but it is hollow.
The Erosion of Civic Virtue
A republic requires citizens who can lose an election without burning the system down, who can disagree without dehumanizing one another, who can accept temporary sacrifice for long-term stability.
Selfish societies struggle with all three.
When comfort is treated as a right rather than a byproduct of responsibility, sacrifice feels like theft. When identity replaces character, disagreement feels like an attack on existence itself. When pleasure is elevated above purpose, patience becomes intolerable.
This is how republics decay, not through invasion, but through indulgence.
History is merciless on this point. Rome did not fall when it was strong, disciplined, and duty-bound. It fell when citizens demanded bread without labor, entertainment without meaning, and leaders who would flatter rather than lead. The machinery of the republic survived long after the soul was gone.
Why Laws Alone Cannot Save Us
Many believe the answer to societal selfishness is more regulation, more enforcement, more centralized control. This is a mistake.
A government strong enough to force virtue is strong enough to crush liberty. External compliance can never substitute for internal discipline. You can mandate behavior, but you cannot legislate conscience.
Every time the state expands to compensate for moral failure, individual responsibility contracts. The more we outsource duty to institutions, the weaker our civic muscles become. Eventually, the people become subjects, dependent, managed, and easily controlled.
A republic cannot be sustained by surveillance and coercion. It must be sustained by trust, and trust is built on shared values.
...
The Choice Before Us
A selfish society will always drift toward authoritarianism, because chaos eventually demands control. A virtuous society can sustain liberty, because order comes from within.
The question is not whether our system can survive another election cycle. The question is whether our culture can remember what a republic requires.
No constitution can save a people who refuse self-restraint. No army can defend a nation that has lost its sense of duty. No technology can replace character.
A republic is not inherited once and kept forever. It must be rebuilt, generation by generation, by citizens who understand that freedom is fragile, discipline is necessary, and selfishness is the fastest way to lose both.
...
and then there's this:
Reply
0
0
