The final piece of the puzzle. The post The one genre Robert Plant believes had the last true rock stars first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

by Frank Bergman, Slay News: Globalist elites gathered at the World Economic Forum (WEF) summit in Davos are openly advancing plans to fight the “terrible cultural resistance from consumers” and push lab-grown “meat” and hyper-processed “tech foods” onto the general public. In addition, WEF members went further by attacking efforts by President Donald Trump’s administration […]

In 2026, Britain will hit three grim milestones. First, it will see the number of deaths exceed the number of births for the first time in modern history. Second, a third of the babies conceived will be aborted. Third, the number of migrants in its population (10.9 million) will roughly equate to the total number of children aborted (10.7 million) since the procedure became legalized in 1968. In other words, by ending unborn lives on an industrial scale, the native British population has created a demographic vacuum it now plugs with immigration, and in doing so, has brought itself to the brink of quiet obliteration. For Brits, the question of abortion is no longer only an ethical one. A nation that does not reproduce itself must import its future. That is not a moral judgment on immigrants, but a mathematical reality. A critical shortage of young people means a critical shortage of recruits for the armed forces, workers in critical industries, and taxpayers to fund defense, healthcare, pensions, and other social services. If it cannot “grow our own” workforce, it must import one from elsewhere. Of course, relying on mass immigration to plug a demographic hole of our own making is not a neutral solution. It carries serious national security implications. As has been clear in recent years, weak, strained border controls, over-used and under pressure, give way to criminal gangs, swept in undetected alongside the key workers we need. Yet while Right-wing politicians fall over themselves to condemn mass migration, hardly anyone in Westminster will risk breathing a word about the abortion crisis that has brought our nation to the point of requiring large-scale human importation. Meanwhile, Members of Parliament recently voted to exacerbate abortion culture by decriminalizing the procedure up to birth. Britain is a prime example of why the abortion debate, though emotive and divisive, is worth having. Though some Americans may roll their eyes at the March for Life or the pro-life rhetoric being championed by Republicans, they’d do well to look overseas at a nation which has let abortion destroy them. The consequences of abortion, of course, are not only macro-economic. The loss of life alone is devastating, in the case of every child. Broadly, our collective failure to focus on family has left Brits lonelier and more depressed than ever. And as for those women who have undergone an abortion, physical complications, mental health struggles, and silent grief ripple through our healthcare system and society. “Pro-choice” psychology professor David Fergusson published evidence that women who have abortions are significantly more likely to suffer from anxiety, suicidal ideation, and drug and alcohol abuse. Pretending this is a “cost-free” procedure helps no-one. What makes Britain’s situation especially tragic is that it was avoidable. Marriage – one of the greatest proximate predictors for adults to have children – is punished by the UK tax system, discouraging family formation and making it harder to depend on one salary. In the workplace, motherhood is treated as a liability. Poor maternity leave provision and the constant push of government-sponsored “free childcare” pushes women who do have kids back into taxable desk jobs, rather than encouraging them to invest in time at home with their children. All the while, the culture champions the idea that babies are inconvenient competitors to the luxuries of modern life. Abortion is the far cheaper, easier policy option in many ways. But in the long-term, it leads to a nation collapsing from within. This is why abortion is no longer just a moral issue, but one of national survival. A society cannot abort a third of its future generation and expect to remain intact. Britain is not simply declining, but aborting itself out of existence. America should take note, and continue to fight for a culture supportive of bringing babies into the world. Once a culture decides children are optional, the future becomes optional too. * * * Lois McLatchie Miller (@LoisMcLatch) is a writer and commentator from Great Britain. The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Hollywood rarely gets veterans right, portraying returning soldiers as caricatures or perfect heroes. “Sheepdog,” which opened nationwide on January 16, doesn’t have that problem. The film is intent on showing the reality of the veteran experience from all sides — something the film’s writer, director, producer, and star, Steven Grayhm, says came at a cost. “It was hard. It was really hard,” Grayhm told The Daily Wire in an interview reflecting on the film’s 14-year journey to the screen. “We could have cut corners early on that would have made our lives easier. And we would never have been able to live with ourselves. We never bent the knee, and we never kissed the ring.” “Sheepdog” is about Army combat veteran Calvin Cole, who is court-ordered into treatment and into the care of a VA trauma therapist in training.  “Things become even more complicated when Calvin’s father-in-law, a retired Vietnam Veteran, shows up on his doorstep having just been released from prison,” a description of the film reads. “As Calvin’s plan to run from his past becomes even more challenging, he learns through the support of his community, tough love and compassion, that he must put himself back together again for his family and for himself.” The film is personal for Grayhm, whose grandfather was a Polish farmer captured by the Nazis during World War II and held as a prisoner of war for five years. After being widowed, he moved in with Grayhm’s family. “I had bunk beds in my room,” Grayhm recalled. “So I slept on the top, but I would fall asleep to his stories at night. Some of them were hard … but he did share his being liberated by the American and Allied troops. As a young boy, that’s ingrained in you. That goes into the DNA of who you are.” His grandfather’s influence laid the foundation until a chance encounter planted the seed that would lead to “Sheepdog’s” creation. In 2011, Grayhm’s car broke down three hours north of Los Angeles. He said his conversation with a tow truck driver is a major source of inspiration for the film.  “He opened up about his life, the challenges in his marriage, being a father of three, financial hardship,” Grayhm said. “Then he began to share all the different medications that he was on … tethered to his post-traumatic stress from multiple military deployments.” Grayhm recalls listening without speaking. “He kept saying, ‘I can’t believe I’m telling you this. I’ve never told my wife. I’ve never told a therapist,’” Grayhm said. “And that lit the spark. The teachable moment was to sit and listen without prejudice.” The idea that it was easier for a veteran to speak to a stranger than to his own family stuck with the filmmaker. “I couldn’t stop thinking about him weeks after,” he said. “I thought there had to be more men and women like him suffering in silence.” That summer, Grayhm and co-star Matt Dallas, who plays Calvin’s best friend in the film, embarked on a nationwide road trip to interview veterans and families. Along the journey, they found many similarities in the stories. The result is not a traditional war movie, Grayhm said. “‘Sheepdog’ is not a post-traumatic stress movie,” he said. “It is a movie about post-traumatic growth.” He went on to say that too many films in this genre portray veterans as broken beyond repair. “My character has been to hell and back, but he’s not broken,” Grayhm said of Calvin. “He doesn’t feel sorry for himself.” He said Hollywood wasn’t biting, at least not without totally changing the vision. “I cannot tell you how many rooms we were laughed out of,” Grayhm told The Daily Wire. “They said, ‘These movies don’t make money. Nobody cares about these stories.’” When someone did show interest, it always had stipulations. “We started getting script notes to sanitize the story,” he said. “They wanted to turn my character into some paranoid guy having visions … almost a thriller. That’s not the truth.” Instead, Grayhm made the project independent, raising private equity out of Texas and filming on a tight budget. After making the rounds on the festival circuit, the film just opened in 500 theaters nationwide. The authenticity extends to the cast. Academy Award nominee Virginia Madsen (“Sideways”), who plays trauma therapist Dr. Elecia Knox, is a Gold Star family member. “She knew the stakes were very high,” Grayhm said. “She bared her heart and soul.” “She has this speech where she says, ‘You were willing to give your life for your country. Now maybe you should try living for it,’” Grayhm recalled. “You could hear a pin drop. She did it in one take.” Grayhm says he has just one goal for “Sheepdog.”  “If we can save a single life with this film, it will be the greatest Hollywood success story,” he said. “There are currently five million veterans not accessing their VA care,” Grayhm added. “Sometimes walking through that front door can be the longest we’ve traveled.” For civilians, the film serves two purposes. First, it’s a glimpse into what a veteran is going through. And second, it’s a chance to appreciate the freedom they’ve been given. “The one percent is defending and protecting the other ninety-nine percent,” Grayhm said. “Just being aware of that matters.” “Sheepdog” is currently showing in theaters.

These caves have played a quiet but significant role in multiple important scientific debates.

For decades, California has used its enormous market power to shape national vehicle policy, often pushing regulations far beyond its borders and into the daily lives of Americans who never voted for them. That long-running dynamic has now reached a critical moment.The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is moving to block California’s latest attempt to regulate heavy-duty trucks nationwide — a proposal first announced in 2025 but now entering a decisive phase of federal review. California’s early emissions standards helped accelerate cleaner engines and better fuel systems. But leadership can turn into compulsion.With final EPA action expected in 2026, the outcome will determine whether California can continue using its borders as a regulatory choke point for interstate trucking, or whether federal limits will finally be enforced.Freight frightAt issue is California’s Heavy-Duty Inspection and Maintenance requirement, part of the state’s air-quality plan. The rule would apply not only to trucks registered in California, but to any heavy-duty vehicle operating within the state — including those registered elsewhere in the U.S. or even abroad. In practical terms, a truck hauling goods from Texas, Ohio, or Mexico could be forced to comply with California’s rules simply by crossing its borders.The EPA has proposed disapproving that requirement, citing serious constitutional and statutory concerns.This matters far beyond California. Heavy-duty trucks are the backbone of the American economy, moving food, fuel, medicine, building materials, and consumer goods across state lines every day. Regulations that raise costs or restrict access for those vehicles ripple through supply chains and ultimately show up as higher prices at the checkout counter — including for online purchases. The EPA’s proposed action acknowledges that reality and draws a clear line between environmental policy and unlawful overreach.Out of lineAccording to the agency, California’s proposal appears to violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which prevents individual states from interfering with interstate trade. The Clean Air Act also requires state implementation plans to comply with federal law, and the EPA argues California’s approach fails that test. By attempting to regulate out-of-state and foreign-registered vehicles, California stepped into territory reserved for the federal government.EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has been blunt in explaining the agency’s position. California, he has argued, was never elected to govern the entire country, yet its regulatory ambitions — often justified in the name of climate policy — have imposed higher costs on Americans nationwide. Allowing one state to dictate trucking standards for the rest of the country undermines both federal law and economic stability.Foreigners tooThere is also a foreign-commerce issue that rarely gets discussed. California’s rule would apply to vehicles registered outside the United States, even though authority over foreign trade and international relations rests exclusively with the federal government. That alone raised red flags and reinforced the EPA’s conclusion that the state exceeded its legal authority.This proposed disapproval is part of a broader federal effort to rein in California’s emissions authority. In 2025, the Department of Justice filed complaints against the California Air Resources Board, arguing that the state was effectively enforcing pre-empted federal standards through informal agreements with manufacturers. Together, these actions reflect growing concern in Washington that California has relied on market leverage rather than lawful authority to achieve national policy outcomes.Waiver goodbyeWaivers are central to this conflict. For years, California received special permission under the Clean Air Act to set its own vehicle emissions standards, with other states allowed to follow its lead. Under the previous administration, the EPA granted waivers for California’s Advanced Clean Cars II, Advanced Clean Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Engine Omnibus NOx rules. Supporters framed them as environmental progress. Critics warned they would raise vehicle prices, limit consumer choice, strain the electric grid, and force changes the market was not ready to absorb — which is exactly what followed.In June 2025, Congress overturned those waivers using the Congressional Review Act. That move sent a clear message: Vehicle standards should be national in scope, not dictated by a single state, regardless of its size or political influence. The EPA’s current review of California’s truck inspection rule builds directly on that message.Supporters of California’s approach often point to the state’s historic role in improving air quality and advancing technology. That is true — up to a point. California’s early emissions standards helped accelerate cleaner engines and better fuel systems. But leadership can turn into compulsion, especially when it ignores regional differences, economic realities, and legal limits.RELATED: Will Trump’s unconventional plan to stop the UN climate elites work? Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesRecalibrationThe heavy-duty truck sector makes this clear. Unlike passenger cars, trucks operate on thin margins and long replacement cycles. Fleet decisions are driven by reliability, infrastructure availability, and total cost of ownership. Mandating technologies before they are ready or widely supported does not accelerate progress; it creates higher costs and unintended consequences — especially when those mandates originate in a single state but affect national commerce.The EPA’s move suggests that era may be nearing its end. By challenging California’s heavy-duty inspection requirement, the agency is asserting that environmental goals do not justify ignoring constitutional structure. Clean air matters — but so do the rule of law, economic practicality, and the free movement of goods across state lines.The proposed disapproval remains open for public comment, after which the EPA is expected to take final action later this year. Whatever the outcome, the signal is unmistakable: Federal regulators are no longer willing to automatically defer to California when state ambition collides with national authority.For truck drivers, fleet operators, manufacturers, and everyday consumers, this moment represents a recalibration. It reaffirms that vehicle regulation should be consistent nationwide — and that environmental policy works best when it respects both economic reality and the legal framework that holds the country together.

Our nose is right in front of us. So why don't we normally notice it?

MS NOW’s Nicolle Wallace is giving a verbal high-five to all the pro-illegal alien protesters in Minneapolis. On Friday, she even went so far as to say their defiance of our nation’s immigration…