Far-left radicals protested earlier on Thursday at the Alameda Coast Guard base. The media claims it was a mostly peaceful immigration protest, but it was an illegal immigration protest, and not always peaceful. Later that same day, the White House announced they would not launch an immigration surge to San Francisco after Tech CEOs and […] The post Attack on Personnel at the Coast Guard Base in Alameda appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

On this second anniversary of the passing of my friend, and co-founder of The Retro Network, Jason Gross, we want to share with the world some audio featuring him that few have ever heard. We’re CONTINUE READING... The post After Hours With Jason appeared first on The Retro Network.

Is America seeing a religious revival, or is the anecdotal evidence of another Great Awakening simply evidence of anecdotes? I set out to attempt to answer that question with Ryan Burge, a nationally recognized expert on religious demography in the United States. Burge is in the unique position of being both an observer and practitioner of the Christian faith as a professor in the John C. Danforth Center on Religion and Politics at Washington University in St. Louis and as a pastor who had to close his church. I reached out to ask if the religion expert was seeing signs of a revival in the data from the United States. “[T]he answer, at least as far as we can tell, data-wise is no,” Burge stated, adding: “There’s no evidence of a massive return to religion.” He did caveat that he was still waiting to see some of the numerical figures following the assassination of conservative influencer Charlie Kirk, which has produced a cornucopia of anecdotes about Americans responding to Christianity. The political scientist described how a substantial religious revival would show up in the numbers.  “The share of people going to church weekly is around 25% right now. Let’s say, let’s assume 28% would be a religious revival, 3% increase,” Burge said. According to the professor, that would translate to around 10 million to 12 million new church attendees arriving for worship on Sunday, compared with three months ago.  There are “about 300,000 churches in America,” Burge explained. “That means every single church in America would be averaging 30 to 35 new attendees now that they did not have in July,” he stated. The political scientist acknowledged the good vibes appearing in popular culture and from the media, but at the end of the day, he said, there just simply wasn’t much evidence to support the notion of a macro-level nationwide revival currently underway in the U.S. What there is evidence of is a plateau in the data documenting the decline of religious affiliation between generations in the U.S. Over the past several decades, each successive generation has come to identify less with Christianity than its predecessors. But that trend has appeared to have ended with the Zoomers.  “Specifically, the religiosity of Gen Z is not that much different than the religiosity of millennials,” Burge noted. But that in and of itself does not mean we are experiencing a large-scale resurgence in Christianity. “Saying that 50 years of religious decline is now reversing in the last three months, that’s an extraordinary claim, and it requires extraordinary evidence, and we don’t have that,” Burge said. The political science professor agreed that more investment in religion research would be helpful in reconciling the accounts of revival with the broader scope of reported data. “There are threads in American Christianity that need to be pulled on, right? I think the Orthodox Church is one of them, because it’s what the data says, and what people tell me is so conflictual,” he said. When asked what was one thing he hoped a revival in the U.S. would accomplish, Burge said he hoped it “would get people back into real-life community, you know, meeting in person on a regular basis and doing social things with other people on a regular basis.” “So, it obviously would lead to, you know, spiritual awakening, which I think is good, but also would lead to a social awakening. We’re going to reverse this trend of isolation and scrolling social media that we’ve been doing so much for the last 15, 20 years,” the professor stated. The post Does the Data Show America Experiencing a Religious Revival? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Planned Parenthood facilities in Ohio have been affected by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4. While a federal lawsuit plays out when it comes to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act defunding the abortion provider for a year, Planned Parenthood continues to face troubles in the Buckeye State. Affiliates face termination of Ohio Medicaid provider agreements. Axios had a scoop on Friday morning with regards to Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio and Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio facing such terminations. “Late last month, the Ohio Department of Medicaid (ODM) sent letters to Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio (PPGOH) and Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region (PPSWO) informing that, beyond the reimbursement ban, they face termination of their Ohio Medicaid provider agreements,” Axios mentioned, also detailing how the affiliates “requested an administrative hearing to contest the decision” on Thursday. Dr. Michael New, a senior associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, shared with The Daily Signal that “while the recently signed federal budget largely excludes Planned Parenthood from receiving federal funds, Planned Parenthood still receives taxpayer dollars from state Medicaid programs.” He also mentioned that “it is easy to see why Planned Parenthood’s Ohio affiliates are contesting this decision,” given that “Planned Parenthood is very dependent upon taxpayer funds.” Ohio Right to Life meanwhile shared the Axios piece over on X as an “ALERT!!” The Daily Signal also reached out to the pro-life group for comment. ALERT!! Planned Parenthood plans to fight to stop the Ohio Department of Medicaid from terminating their provider agreements. https://t.co/dlGpWBdSZI— Ohio Right to Life (@ohiolife) October 24, 2025 A statement from Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio President and CEO Nan Whaley focused on politics. “We are disappointed but not surprised by this latest politically motivated attack on our ability to care for patients who rely on Medicaid. Anti-abortion politicians are once again using every tool at their disposal to block people from accessing essential, life-saving care at Planned Parenthood, indefinitely. This move is part of a broader, coordinated strategy to push reproductive health care out of reach,” Whaley said. “Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio has always complied with all applicable laws and regulations in providing high-quality care. There is no misconduct, no wrongdoing, only a political agenda trying to interfere with our patients’ ability to get the care they deserve.” Whaley’s statement concluded by further denouncing the move. “Let’s be clear: There is no legal basis for this action. This is about power and control, not patient health, or safety. We won’t back down, and we’ll fight for every person who counts on us,” she added. New is singing a different tune, however. “Planned Parenthood and their supporters will claim that Ohioans will lose access to health care. However, that is not the case. According to the Charlotte Lozier Institute, Ohio has 201 federally qualified health centers in Ohio which accept Medicaid,” he added. “In contrast, there are only about 16 Planned Parenthood facilities in the state. Furthermore, these FQHCs are spread out throughout the state and serve rural areas. In contrast nearly every Planned Parenthood facility is based in a city or a college town.” Although Ohio is an increasingly red state, voters in 2023 approved Issue 1, a ballot initiative enshrining a so-called right to abortion in the state constitution. As for how Planned Parenthood is expected to do with Medicaid, New noted it “is unlikely that Planned Parenthood will prevail in Ohio,” pointing to the example of other states. “As a matter of public policy, state Medicaid programs have latitude in deciding which health care facilities they will reimburse. Furthermore, it is doubtful that any subsequent litigation on the part of Planned Parenthood would be successful,” he reminded. The U.S. Supreme Court in Medina v. Planned Parenthood of the South Atlantic, as New brought up, found that South Carolina could exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program. “The same precedent would almost certainly apply to Ohio’s decision to exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program,” he added. Although a controversial judge ruled against defunding Planned Parenthood, that provision was allowed to move forward in September. As Axios previewed, oral arguments for Planned Parenthood’s federal lawsuit on funding are scheduled for Nov. 12 in the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Defunding Planned Parenthood is a battle Congress has been grappling with for decades, and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s provision has to be renewed or else expire. This termination notice isn’t quite affected in the same way. “Termination could mean further-reaching effects than the year ban, which would expire if not renewed by Congress in the next budget cycle,” Axios mentioned. The abortion industry received further bad news from the Trump administration. As Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell covered exclusively on Friday, The Daily Signal has learned that the administration is “moving to roll back a Biden-era regulation that allows taxpayer dollars to pay for unaccompanied illegal alien children in the U.S. to travel to get abortions.” The post More Bad News Comes for Planned Parenthood in Ohio appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Do Actual Facts and Evidence Matter Anymore?

New York Times columnist David Brooks and Boston Globe counterpart Kimberly Atkins Stohr joined forces on Friday’s PBS News Hour to lament the nation’s redistricting “race to the bottom,” which they blamed solely on Republicans. Moderator Geoff Bennett began with Stohr, “I mentioned in the introduction the redistricting battle. You have got both parties escalating, Republicans in North Carolina, Democrats in Virginia. Is there any off-ramp in this fight right now?”     Stohr immediately put the onus on Republicans as she claimed history started in Texas, “Well, so far it the only out ramp that I could see — off-ramp I could see is if the Republicans finally stop the push. What you have seen from the Democratic leaders in the states is that they are reacting to what Republicans are doing. I was heartened by California's move to actually build into their law a sunset that basically says, look, when Texas stops, we will too. But we can't have a redistricting war race to the bottom.” Moving on to the Supreme Court, Stohr added, “That is terrible for democracy for everyone. It skews representation and it makes our government work better for nobody. There is a Congress. You would think that they could come together and fix this, but they won't. The Supreme Court, I fear, with their decision on the Voting Rights Act that's going to come later this term that guts — will likely gut a bigger hole out of it, will only make it worse.” Ironically, if the Court rules against Stohr’s wishes, it will be ending racial gerrymandering that gives Democrats a free 19-seat head start. Nevertheless, Stohr claimed the current situation is just Democrats defending themselves, “I really don't know how we get to the end of this, but I certainly don't think a race to the war bottom is the way to go. But I also think if somebody is advancing bad policy, the other side has no — has every right to try to defend itself.” Bennett then turned to Brooks, “And there is this dynamic where you have lawmakers choosing their voters, as opposed to voters choosing their lawmakers.” Brooks agreed and tried waxing poetic, “Yeah, I mean, people died in Valley Forge or at least got cold there. People died on the beaches of D-Day to preserve American democracy.” After lamenting that states are in the process of eliminating competitive races, Brooks hinted that Republicans are to blame for starting the decline by urging Democrats to be above it: I think it's a mistake for the Democrats to join the race to the bottom, both for moral reasons, which I just tried to express, but also for political reasons. I do think the country is going to be in the mood for integrity, for upholding the standards, defending the Constitution just the way after Watergate the country went for Jimmy Carter because they thought they were getting integrity. And I think that's the play here. And in the long run, the Democrats, not only morally, but politically, would be better off by saying we don't play that game. Ultimately what PBS is upset about is not gerrymandering per se. It is that Texas decided to redistrict in the middle of the decade. They were perfectly content to see blue states gerrymander Republicans out of existence in New England or to have the VRA provide Democrats free seats despite the era of Jim Crow being long over. Here is a transcript for the October 24 show: PBS News Hour 10/24/2025 7:37 PM ET  GEOFF BENNETT: Yes, I mentioned in the introduction the redistricting battle. You have got both parties escalating, Republicans in North Carolina, Democrats in Virginia. Is there any off-ramp in this fight right now? KIMBERLY ATKINS STOHR: Well, so far it the only out ramp that I could see — off-ramp I could see is if the Republicans finally stop the push. What you have seen from the Democratic leaders in the states is that they are reacting to what Republicans are doing. I was heartened by California's move to actually build into their law a sunset that basically says, look, when Texas stops, we will too. But we can't have a redistricting war race to the bottom. That is terrible for democracy for everyone. It skews representation and it makes our government work better for nobody. There is a Congress. You would think that they could come together and fix this, but they won't. The Supreme Court, I fear, with their decision on the Voting Rights Act that's going to come later this term that guts — will likely gut a bigger hole out of it, will only make it worse. I really don't know how we get to the end of this, but I certainly don't think a race to the war bottom is the way to go. But I also think if somebody is advancing bad policy, the other side has no — has every right to try to defend itself. BENNETT: And there is this dynamic where you have lawmakers choosing their voters, as opposed to voters choosing their lawmakers. STOHR: Yeah. DAVID BROOKS: Yeah, I mean, people died in Valley Forge or at least got cold there. People died on the beaches of D-Day to preserve American democracy. STOHR: Yes. BROOKS: And what stuns me, frankly, is why the voters in Texas and California and I guess Virginia and North Carolina and all these other states are not, like, saying, you're disenfranchising. Why bother to vote in a House race in 2026 when the outcome is already predetermined? They're basically trying to eliminate competitive races. And they're going to succeed, apparently. And so I just think it's atrocious that people don't put the democracy and their country above their party. They think as long as it's my party that's doing the rigging, fine. I'm fine with that. I think it's a mistake for the Democrats to join the race to the bottom, both for moral reasons, which I just tried to express, but also for political reasons. I do think the country is going to be in the mood for integrity, for upholding the standards, defending the Constitution just the way after Watergate the country went for Jimmy Carter because they thought they were getting integrity. And I think that's the play here. And in the long run, the Democrats, not only morally, but politically, would be better off by saying we don't play that game.