Critical Thinking in Critical Times

01/08/2025

Private equity funds and managers are salivating over your $12 trillion in 401k retirement pension assets to bail out their years of financially ra**ng the small investors to fill the pockets of billionaires.

And a provision in the crypto act and a proposed executive order may just be feeding you to the wolves.

Blackstone, Vanguard, and others need to stay away but if the fiduciary rule is removed then they can unload bad investments off on your backs in a ponzi-type scheme.

My financial advisor once played this game with me, but when I figured it out I ran like hell. If they promise you easy and big money then beware.

I must confess I have a difficult time believing this story that Trump knew about these details but it is only planned and most probably are the workings of dark staters.

There’s still time to stop this—but only if we act now.

09/07/2025

I always thought my ADHD was not a disorder but my secret “super power” seeing around corners of ideas and leaping to solutions with a single bound.

It was just hard to keep on track and follow filters. But I got better and kept those swirling thoughts and unconnected dots under the hood.

Yes, I am nuts and bouncing ball, but I sits more today. And probably write too much. But what the heck, I am still crazy after all these years. And crazy people don't think they’re crazy and know everyone else is neurodivergent.

For over three decades, I’ve been saying what the medical establishment didn’t want to hear: ADHD isn’t a disease, disorder, or defect.

08/07/2025

Red China and Its “Rare Earth” Economic Warfare

I often hear talk about asymmetric warfare, but it rarely appears clearly in news articles or social media posts. However, Chris Miller (whom I don’t know personally, but with whom I agree) has written about China’s careful planning and how it has used rare earth mineral exports—and the magnets made from them—as a powerful economic weapon.

I’ve read that each modern jet contains around 400 pounds of these magnets. They’re also found in nearly every rocket and weapon in the American and allied military arsenal.

That’s a terrifying thought, especially considering how quickly we are using these weapons in Ukraine, Iran, and the Middle East. These weapons aren’t made overnight. They take time—and China is holding back the materials needed to produce them.

Chris Miller connects the dots and raises a powerful question: Where were our policymakers at the Pentagon and the White House? Why did we allow our biggest rival to control key parts of our weapons supply chain?

We should have learned from history. During World War II, the U.S. was called the “arsenal of democracy” as we supplied the weapons needed to defeat N**i Germany, Imperial Japan, and their allies. That lesson seems forgotten.

Offense and defense go hand in hand.
• In Ukraine, we’re firing expensive missiles to take down cheap drones.
• In the eastern Mediterranean, our Navy uses high-tech weapons to protect against attacks from rebels launching low-cost missiles.

The risk is serious. If our troops can’t get the weapons they need—and if supplies run out—we face more than just problems on the battlefield. Without enough conventional weapons, nuclear options could become part of the discussion. That risk grows when any nation, including ours, is backed into a corner.

Chris Miller writes:

“Shortly after Beijing announced new restrictions on exporting rare earth minerals and the specialized magnets they make, the world’s auto industry warned of shortages that could force factory closures. China’s skillful deployment of rare earth sanctions this spring was probably the key factor in forcing Washington to reverse its tariff rises on the country. They represent a new era of Chinese economic statecraft — evidence of a sanctions policy capable of pressuring not only small neighbors but also the world’s largest economy…

The most striking aspect of China’s weaponization of rare earths is how unprepared Western governments and companies were. Even those who cannot name a single rare earth element know that China dominates their production. Nevertheless, over the decade and a half since China first cut rare earth exports to Japan in 2011, the West has failed to find new suppliers. Some modest steps were taken. Korea expanded its stockpiles. Japan invested in Australian mines. Yet most Western governments devised critical minerals strategies and then chose not to fund them. Manufacturers speak of resilience, yet some keep only a week’s supply of rare earth magnets in their inventories. This is a weapon they have been staring at for decades. They should not have been surprised when Beijing finally pulled the trigger.”

(Source: Christopher Miller, FT.com)

News, analysis and opinion from the Financial Times on the latest in markets, economics and politics

04/07/2025

JULY 4, 2025
“A Republic… if you can keep it.”
— Benjamin Franklin, upon signing the Constitution

From the Declaration of Independence (1776):
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…”

From the Constitution of the United States (1787):
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…”

It’s been said—by Lincoln most notably—that the Declaration of Independence is the apple of gold, and the Constitution its frame of silver. The two cannot be separated. One gives us the truth that rights are God-given; the other secures those rights through law and structure.

But documents alone do not keep a republic. People do.

At what cost have we kept it?

When those men in Philadelphia signed their names to that Declaration, they were not just voicing complaints against a distant monarch. They were making themselves enemies of the Crown—traitors under British law. Signing that parchment meant war, exile, prison, or death. And they signed anyway.

They weren’t idealists lost in theory. They were landowners, merchants, farmers, and lawyers who knew exactly what they were risking. But they also knew something greater: that liberty does not come from kings or parliaments—it comes from God. And just as power does not flow from rulers down to the people, they declared that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.

It was a radical thought in 1776. It still is. Because that truth makes every citizen a guardian of freedom—and every government answerable to the people it serves.

They pledged “our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.” Those weren’t just poetic words—they were the price of freedom. And many of them paid it in full.

Since then, generation after generation has added to that cost. From Lexington to Gettysburg, Normandy to Kandahar, more than 1.4 million Americans have given their lives in service to that original promise: that this nation, conceived in liberty, should not perish from the earth.

And not just against enemies abroad. We’ve had to defend it against forces within—those who would trade liberty for power, who ignore the will of the people, or believe government knows better than the governed.

Freedom is never secure just because it was once won.

What does liberty mean today?

Liberty means the right to speak freely—even when it's unpopular. It means the power to worship, to dissent, to own, to vote, to rise, to build, to fail. It means we are not subjects, but citizens—governed not by rulers, but by laws we consent to.

But liberty is fragile. It requires memory, virtue, and courage. And in a time when many take it for granted, we must ask again:
Will we be the generation that forgets the cost?

The founders gave us the tools: a Declaration rooted in truth, a Constitution built to endure, and a system that puts power in the hands of the people. But as Franklin warned, it is only a republic—if we can keep it.

In 1863, as the nation bled on its own soil, Abraham Lincoln reminded Americans why this republic matters:

“…that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

And more recently, President Reagan gave this sobering reminder:

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on… or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children what it was once like in the United States when men were free.”

Today is more than a birthday for a nation. It is a day of reckoning and renewal—a reminder that freedom has always come at a cost and that we are its stewards now.

So raise the flag, light the fireworks, and say a prayer—not just in celebration, but in commitment.

Let it not be said that we let liberty slip through our fingers—not on our watch.

19/06/2025

A strong majority of Americans support the deportation of undocumented immigrants who commit crimes. A February Washington Post–Ipsos poll found that 89% of voters support deporting those convicted of violent offenses, and 62% support it for non-violent crimes.

Yet Democratic leaders continue to oppose or obstruct these efforts. Legal maneuvers—including nationwide injunctions issued by a small number of federal judges and rulings from sympathetic state courts—have delayed enforcement. These actions, coupled with political theatrics in Washington, send the message that even criminal violations by undocumented individuals are off-limits for accountability.

Meanwhile, demonstrations against immigration enforcement have at times turned violent. Some protesters have thrown bricks, concrete, and Molotov cocktails at police, soldiers, and ICE officers—yet these events are still described in the media as “mostly peaceful.”

This framing is not only misleading; it erodes public trust. Americans can support peaceful protest and humane immigration policy while still demanding the rule of law and consequences for criminal acts.

We deserve honest reporting, responsible leadership, and a system that protects both our values and our safety.

09/06/2025

June 7, 1944 and beyond.
They had taken the beach. Now they fought inland — through hedgerows, across rivers, through frozen forests, into the heart of a broken Germany. They freed the camps. They saw what no man should see. At what cost. Through what eyes. Lest we forget.

The Eyes of War: D-Day, From Hedgerows to Victory by Michael Stevens (750 words) Posted by Michael Stevens | June 8, 2025 | General, Military | 0 | Spread the love The Eyes of War: D-Day, From Hedgerows to Victory Nineteen. Hardened now. Eyes older than their years. Moving still — for country, for...

09/06/2025

The Eyes of War: The Ramp Drops
The sea pitched. The boat rocked. Steel groaned. Hearts pounded.

The ramp dropped.

Ahead — the beach. Smoke. Fire. Sand. Death.

Behind — nineteen-year-olds. Silhouettes in steel.
Breathing ragged. Waiting. Moving.

One step into the unknown. For country. For each other.

Not the face of war — the eyes of it.
Eyes that saw what no man should see — and still moved forward.

"Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."
(John 15:13, Holy Bible)

"That from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion."
(Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address, 1863)

Lest we forget.

The Eyes of War: D-Day Through Young Eyes by Michael Stevens (673 words) Posted by Michael Stevens | June 7, 2025 | History, Military | 0 | Spread the loveThe Eyes of War: D-Day Through Young Eyes Nineteen. Waiting. Running into the unknown — for freedom, for each other. Today we remember D-Day. J...

05/06/2025

🛑 Frozen by Lawsuit: How the “Big Beautiful Bill” Fixes Injunction Abuse

Across the country, federal judges are stopping national policies in their tracks.

With one stroke of a pen, immigration enforcement gets halted, border security is frozen, energy infrastructure is delayed—and all because of a lawsuit filed hours after a new policy is announced.

But here’s what they don’t tell you:

👉 These lawsuits are often filed by activist groups with no real injury,
👉 No bond is posted, even though the rules require it,
👉 And the government—and taxpayers—foot the bill for the delays.

This is happening because of a broken system that ignores Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

⸻

⚖️ What Rule 65 Actually Says

Rule 65 governs how courts issue injunctions and restraining orders. It says:

“The court may issue a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order only if the movant gives security…”

This “security” means a bond—money that protects the other side if it turns out the injunction was wrongfully granted.

It’s there to:
• Deter frivolous injunctions
• Protect the enjoined party (often the U.S. government)
• Restore balance between courts and policy

But in politically charged cases, courts often set the bond at $0 or $1, or waive it entirely—especially when plaintiffs target federal policies they disagree with.

⸻

🧨 The Result: Delay Without Risk

Here’s how the playbook works:
1. A group rushes to court and sues the government.
2. They demand a nationwide injunction.
3. The court grants it—with no bond.
4. Policy is frozen for months—or years.
5. Even if they lose, they pay nothing.

The government, meanwhile, loses time, momentum, and millions in costs. There’s no reimbursement. No deterrent. No justice.

⸻

💡 The Solution: The “Big Beautiful Bill”

Enter the “Big Beautiful Bill,” passed by the House in May 2025.

One section—70302—makes a critical change:

“No court may enforce a contempt order for failure to follow an injunction or restraining order if no bond was posted when it was issued.”

Translation?

👉 If there’s no bond, there’s no injunction.
👉 No contempt powers, no penalties, no enforcement.
👉 The injunction is legally void from the start.

This doesn’t kill judicial oversight. It enforces the law that already exists.

⸻

🛡️ Why This Matters

This bill restores what Rule 65 was always meant to do:

✅ Make sure injunctions come with real risk,
✅ Prevent courts from handing out free freezes on federal action,
✅ Let the U.S. recover costs if the suit fails.

It doesn’t ban injunctions. It just requires plaintiffs to stand behind their claims—financially.

If you want to halt national policy, you better be ready to post bond.

⸻

📢 The Bottom Line

This isn’t just legal reform—it’s constitutional repair.

When courts hand out injunctions without standing, without bond, and without consequence, it’s not justice—it’s obstruction. And it’s become a tool to sabotage federal action without ever winning a case.

The “Big Beautiful Bill” changes that. It stops weaponized lawsuits at the gate, protects taxpayer dollars, and puts policy back in the hands of the people we elect—not activist judges or legal operatives.

No bond? No injunction. Simple. Legal. Constitutional.

05/06/2025

Firmness in Principle, But with Charity for All
A Reflection in the Spirit of Lincoln’s Second Inaugural

The Civil War was drawing to a close when Lincoln stood to speak—not to gloat, but to heal. He called not for vengeance, but for mercy. The wounds were deep. The nation torn. And yet, he asked us to bind up, not tear down.

Today, we face no battlefield at Gettysburg, but the division at home is real—sharp, bitter, and dangerous. The stakes are different, but no less grave. We are being tested again—this time not by muskets, but by malice, mistrust, and a fractured house.

The world watches. The enemies of freedom circle. If we do not stand together, they will not wait for us to get our house in order.

It is time to steady our footing—firm in principle, yes, but with charity for all. Because without unity, there will be no liberty. And without liberty, there is no America worth defending.

We must unite. And fast.

Fellow countrymen,

At this hour in our history, though the cannon of war may sound more distantly, yet its echo rolls across the earth. Though we live not beneath the same shadow that once darkened our Union with musket and mortar, still, there is division—deep, bitter, and unrelenting—not drawn upon maps, but upon hearts.

Both sides decry the other. Each claims the mantle of truth and casts the other as unworthy of it. We prosecute our politics with a zeal once reserved for the battlefield; our weapons now are words, our battles waged in courts and comment threads, through legislation and litigation, with victory measured not in peace, but in the silence of the other.

It has become easier to indict than to persuade, simpler to mock than to understand. Where once the Senate stood as a place for reasoned debate, it now serves as theatre. Where once the press sought to inform, now it contends for allegiance. And we, the people, are drawn into camps, under banners red and blue, forgetting the red and blue that bind our common flag.

Each side prays for victory, as though Providence were theirs alone to command. Yet if we are honest—and humility is the beginning of wisdom—we must confess that justice is not the sole property of any party. The Almighty has His own purposes, and we would do well to remember that His ways are not our platforms, nor His judgments written in the rhetoric of man.

Let us then strive—not to vanquish one another—but to bind up the wounds of this fractured house. Malice may cloak itself in policy; charity must reveal itself in restraint. Let us not mistake indignation for righteousness, nor fury for principle. The cost of this present conflict—though not yet measured in fields of blood—is found in broken friendships, poisoned trust, and a nation that shouts but seldom hears.

We have been met with calamities before. Civil war, depression, tyranny abroad—each generation has known its trial. Yet from each, the republic has risen—chastened, but enduring. It may be that we, too, are being refined. That from this discord might emerge a wiser people, a gentler people, slow to condemn and quick to comprehend.

The work of reconciliation is neither swift nor certain. It demands of us patience, sacrifice, and a will to see in the other not a foe, but a fellow. It begins not in chambers of government, but in households, neighborhoods, and the quiet dealings of conscience.

With firmness in principle, but with charity for all, let us press on—each in our place—to finish the work we are in. That this nation, under God, may not only endure, but mature. That our quarrels may yield, at last, to understanding, and that we may be remembered not for how bitterly we fought, but how humbly we healed.

Let us return to that better angel—the one that bade us form a union, not as parties, but as a people. And if we must contend, let it be not for triumph over each other, but for the truth, and for the grace to know it when it comes.

01/06/2025

RedDragonFiles: When Tariffs Become Strategy

President Trump’s tariff policies aren’t just legal—they’re essential to reviving America’s industrial base. But partisan interference from the Democratic Party is turning a strategic tool into a political football, injecting uncertainty into markets and weakening U.S. leverage against China.

We didn’t win two world wars with a service economy. We won with steel, oil, and industrial might. Trump understands that. Beijing understands that. The question is—do we still?

Read how lawful presidential authority is being sabotaged, and why America can’t afford to play politics with national power.

Spread the loveTariffs, Power, and Politics: Undermining America’s Industrial Revival by Michael Stevens How political obstruction of presidential authority is weakening our economy—and helping China The Constitution isn’t vague on this. Congress sets the rules, and the President enforces them...

30/05/2025

What happened between the White House and the federal court over Executive Order 14250 wasn’t just a legal fight—it was a test of constitutional restraint. The President overreached with a broad, unrefined order. The court struck back with a ruling just as sweeping. But the real strength of our system lies not in who wins, but in knowing where each branch must stop.
Separation of powers isn’t enforced with a heavy hand. It’s maintained by knowing when not to use it. Both the courts and the executive blurred the line. Both right, but both wrong.

Spread the loveWhen Two Branches Overreach: Rethinking the Balance of Power in the WilmerHale Decision by Michael Stevens Sometimes, the Constitution doesn’t give us clean winners—it demands discipline. The recent legal standoff between the Executive Branch and the Judiciary over Executive Order...