'Competing priorities stretched their capacity'

'hold harmless'

'Identify, disrupt, dismantle, and destroy'

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos. Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. Not long ago, the House of Representatives passed a resolution commemorating the tragic shooting of the speaker of the Minnesota State Legislature and her husband and the wounding of another representative and his spouse. And it was unanimous. All, I think it was 425 votes of the 436 or 437 representatives that were present, voted unanimously. It was nonpartisan. The shooter was a fanatic anti-abortionist, but he also had been appointed to, I think, a board by Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. So, nobody really quite knew what his politics were, other than he was violent. So, this time there was another resolution to honor the life and legacy of Charlie Kirk. But this time there was no such bipartisanship. One hundred and eighteen of the Democratic members of the House either voted “no” or voted to abstain from voting “yes” by voting “present,” or just wouldn’t vote or didn’t show up. That was a majority of all the Democrats. It did pass, but 118 Democrats wished that it hadn’t. In other words, they didn’t even want to have the courtesy, after a man had been assassinated, who had such a wide influence on youth of this country, to honor what he had done. And this brings up a greater question: Why? Well, if you listen to what Rep. Ilhan Omar said about him, that he was a racist and he was a racist every day of his life. And Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said she was not going to honor him. And Rep. Jasmine Crockett said Caucasians, only two Caucasians—that was not true, by the way, as everything she says is almost not true. She was angry because only two Caucasians, she said, had voted “no.” In fact, if you include the presents and those who didn’t vote, there were quite a lot of proverbial white people that did not want to honor him. But all three of those representatives that are often mentioned as the future of the new Democratic Party had one thing in common. They either did not quote or cite evidence that Charlie Kirk was a racist or, to the degree they tried to quote or refer to something he said, they did it inaccurately. Because he was not a racist. In fact, there are plenty of clips when he is the master of ceremonies, and someone in the audience says he is a racist, a white supremacist, Charlie Kirk gets very angry and debates him and refutes him. So, it was just the opposite. What they’re angry about was—what was Charlie Kirk? I said in an earlier video, he was very successful in channeling the natural rebelliousness of youth to focus against the establishment. He’s saying to young people: The establishment are baby boomer leftists, and these are the people who are responsible for a lot of our unhappiness. And that’s why they’re angry. And he was also angry at racialists, tribalists—like Jasmine Crockett, like AOC, like Ilhan Omar—who self-identify, essentially, by their skin color or appearance rather than incidentally. You got to collate when this event, this callousness took place. This is at a time when Tyler Robinson just simply killed Charlie Kirk, murdered him, and was a hardcore leftist, and had trans issues. This was at a time when, we talked about earlier, Iryna Zarutska had been murdered by a 14-time released felon. This was a time when Luigi Mangione assassinated a UnitedHealthcare executive and was canonized by the Left. This is a time when my governor, Gavin Newsom, in a series of tweets, just recently said to Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, who oversees the Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, that you’re going to have a bad day. In fact, just today, as I am speaking, a left-wing gunman who engraved his bullets with “Get ICE” or “Hate ICE,” or something to that effect, started shooting at an ICE detention center in Dallas, Texas. Killed one and severely injured two. And these were probably detainees. So, in addition to that, Gavin Newsom, in August, had said that he wants to take on the bully president and beat him up, smash him “in the mouth.” Then he said, to half the country, I want to take these SOBs and hit “them in the mouth.” This was a governor of a state. Collate it all. I have a final question, for all of us. Does this hatred that manifests itself among the Left, is it top-down? Does it trickle down from Gavin Newsom? Does it trickle down from Jasmine Crockett? And it goes all the way down and then we see people like Tyler Robinson absorb it? Or Luigi Mangione absorb it? Or Antifa absorb it? Is that what’s happening? Or is it bottom-up? In other words, the Black Lives Matters of the world, the Antifas of the world, the shooters of the world, the crazy trans shooters, lately, they are the shock troops and their attack on Tesla or their attack on ICE facilities, that filters up. And then the politicians are in panic, start to reflect those views and amplify them, so that they don’t feel they’ve lost their base. What’s the answer? I don’t care. I don’t care if it’s top-down or bottom-up, or both, or neither. Something is very wrong with the Left. They have embraced violence. And they have justified it. They feel that their superiority, in terms of morality and wisdom, justifies any means necessary. And they become very dangerous people. Thank you for tuning into The Daily Signal. Please like, share, and subscribe to be notified for more content like this. You can also check out my own website at victorhanson.com and subscribe for exclusive features in addition. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Why 118 Congressional Democrats Snubbed Charlie Kirk appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Over the last century, car insurance was a sleepy numbers game. You filled out a form, declared your age, gender, and ZIP code, and were handed a rate based on the wreckage left behind by people who happened to look like you. But in 2025, that kind of proxy guessing is apparently too quaint for a trillion-dollar industry. Now, it’s not about who you are, it’s about how often you brake too hard near a Starbucks. Become a Member and Keep Reading… Reclaim your digital freedom. Get the latest on censorship, cancel culture, and surveillance, and learn how to fight back. Join Already a supporter? Sign In. (If you’re already logged in but still seeing this, refresh this page to show the post.) Having trouble logging in? Get help here. The post Your Car Is Talking Behind Your Back and The Insurance Company Is Listening appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

This Week's Keith Olbermann Award for Cranky Pathetic Unemployed Whiner Wuss Boy

U.S. mayors cite juvenile crime as the biggest crime problem in their city – and half say firearm crimes are the most common for juveniles – results of a survey conducted by the U.S. Conference of Mayors released Thursday finds. Fully 44% of the mayors participating in the national survey say crimes involving juveniles represent one of the “biggest crime problems” their city faces, topping all other responses. And, 59% call juvenile crime a serious problem, including more than one in five who rate it a “very serious” problem. Only seven percent say it’s “not serious.” Because multiple responses to a single question were allowed, the combined percentages of a question’s responses do not total (and far exceed) 100%. Asked to list the crimes juveniles are most often involved in, more than half cited car theft (54%), followed by firearms (51%). Robbery/theft (15%), assault (8%) and larceny (5%) are among the juvenile crimes less frequently cited. Asked to name their city’s most effective programs addressing juvenile crime, three-fourths (74%) cited mentoring programs, followed by those providing “violence intervention” (67%). “What are the biggest crime problems your city currently faces?” Crimes involving juveniles (under 18): 44% Shootings: 37% Homicides: 32% Robberies: 25% Gang-related crimes: 14% “How serious do you consider the juvenile crime problem in your city?” Very Serious: 22.4% Serious: 36.5% Mildly Serious: 35.0% Not Serious: 7.0% “In what crimes are juveniles most often involved?”: Car thefts 54% Firearms 51% Retail theft 42% Disturbing the peace 35% Loitering 21% “What do you consider to be the most effective programs to reduce juvenile crime in your city?” Mentoring programs: 74% Violence intervention programs: 67% Employment programs: 44% Sports programs: 44% Anti-bullying programs: 11% The survey, conducted September 4-15, reflects the response of mayors from 60 cities in 28 states, disproportionally distributed throughout the U.S. For example, 13 cities of the 60 cities polled are in California. Thus, 22% of the cities surveyed are in a state that is home to only 12% of the nation’s population.

Leave it to the lefties at Reuters to act like they’re actually shaming President Donald Trump while behaving like media minions for the communist Chinese government. “China leads nations with new climate plans, defying US climate denial,” read the September 25 headline screed belched out by Reuters reporters Valerie Volcovici and Yukun Zhan. They began:  China led several countries in announcing new climate plans on Wednesday and offered a veiled rebuke of the U.S. president's anti-climate rhetoric a day earlier at the U.N. General Assembly. What does "anti-climate" even mean? Trump opposes the weather?  Now stay with us here — could it be possible commie China is lying again about its "plans"? Say it ain’t so! But Volcovici and Zhan just appeared to be pushing readers to just take Xi’s word for it as he took a veiled swipe at Trump: China's reduction target marked the first time the world's biggest emitter pledged a cut in emissions, rather than just limiting their growth, though the reduction was less than many observers had expected. Xi urged stronger climate action from the world's developed countries. He referred, though not by name, to the United States for moving away from the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change. Reuters readers wouldn’t know until the fourth paragraph that China is “the world’s largest emitter,” and nowhere did Volcovici and Zhan disclose how China notoriously ramped up its fossil fuel production against its previously held commitments to go green. Carbon Brief reported in February that China’s construction of coal-powered plants reached a 10-year high in 2024. Citing new research at the time, Carbon Brief summarized that “[t]he accelerated buildout, fueled by investment from the coal-mining sector, ‘raises critical concerns’ about China’s ability to transition away from fossil fuel, the report warns.” In fact, it was Reuters itself that reported in February on China’s coal production reaching a ten-year high, “hampering the country's transition away from fossil fuels.” Even the eco-extremist Sierra Club admitted in a September 23 item that China “continues to dominate in coal production.” The Stockholm Environment Institute recently co-authored a major report finding that “The Chinese government continues to invest heavily in oil and gas exploration, spending nearly CNY 93.75 billion (USD 13.3 billion) in 2023, the highest amount in over a decade (Ministry of Natural Resources, 2024).”  VC Elements also reported in April that China “generated nearly 60% of its electricity from coal,” just behind India and  vastly ahead of the United States, which is powered primarily by “natural gas” and only gets 15.6 percent of its energy resources from coal.   Oops. All of this is easily researchable of course, and would ideally cause any journalist with a functioning brain — apparently not Volcovici and Chan — to scrutinize China's green commitments, given that its government has a chronic aversion to the truth. In fact, according to ReCharge, China’s new climate plans aren’t even all its being cracked up to be in the first place: But the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) think tank said in a statement that setting a target for solar and wind capacity of over 3.6TW by 2035 would mean a ‘sharp slowdown of recent trends …’ On the target to cut emissions by 7-10% from peak levels, CREA said this also ‘falls far short’ of what would be required to align with the Paris Agreement of at least 30% from 2024 levels.” In other words, it seems more likely that China is just tossing the eco-fanatical apparatchiks in the U.N. a green bone just to shut everybody up and keep them looking the other way.  Did the Reuters reporters mention any of this? Nope. Perhaps Xi promised each of them a delicious fortune cookie if they both acted like good little propagandists and regurgitated their press-release language about leading the world.

America has been through a lot in the last decade. From the chill-inducing Russia collusion hoax following Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential victory to the media silencing of speech surrounding COVID-19-era policies, and from the coverup of the Biden family scandals to the Biden administration’s “whole of society approach” to speech suppression, the radical left has pushed the Overton window further and further away from the Founders’ vision of liberty. Through it all, the left has owned censorship. Yet, these last couple weeks, centering on the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, have pushed even the political right to the limit on what speech is constitutionally-protected.  Story continues on MRCFreeSpeechAmerica.org.

Ivanpah Solar Power Facility — which at one time was the largest solar plant in the world — is set to be shut down after it lasted only a third of its expected life span and reportedly killed tens of thousands of birds. The Ivanpah Solar Power Facility is located in San Bernardino County, California, and spans "approximately 3,471 acres of [Bureau of Land Management]-managed public land and incorporates three 459-foot tall power towers and 173,500 heliostat mirrors," according to the U.S. Department of the Interior.'Ivanpah is yet another failed green energy boondoggle, much like Solyndra.'The New York Post reported on Tuesday that the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility is "set to close in 2026 after failing to efficiently generate solar energy."NRG Energy, the Texas-based company that was an Ivanpah partner and the largest investor, said in a statement that the solar plant "has been surpassed by solar photovoltaics (PV) due to much lower capital and operating costs in producing clean energy."NRG Energy estimated that the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility "will begin the process of closing its units in early 2026" after regulatory approval from the California Public Utility Commission.NRG Energy stated, "Once deactivated, the units will be decommissioned, providing an opportunity for the site to potentially be repurposed for renewable PV energy production."In January 2025, PG&E announced it would terminate the power purchase agreements with Ivanpah. PG&E determined that "ending the agreements at this time will save customers money compared to the cost of keeping them through 2039."In 2011, the U.S. Department of Energy under President Barack Obama issued $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees for the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility. When the $2.2 billion Ivanpah Solar Power Facility began operating in 2014, it was the world’s largest solar plant and had an expected life span of 30 years.Jenny Chase, a solar analyst at BloombergNEF, told Climate Depot that Ivanpah never produced more than 75% of its planned annual electricity output.The Sierra Daily News reported, "Despite federal support and initial optimism about solar thermal technology’s potential for baseload power, Ivanpah never exceeded 75% of its planned electricity output and continues to depend on natural gas to operate."Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, told Fox News, "Ivanpah is yet another failed green energy boondoggle, much like Solyndra. Despite receiving $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees, it never lived up to its promises, producing less electricity than expected while still relying on natural gas to stay operational."Steven Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environmental Legal Institute and former Trump EPA transition team member, warned about climate alarmism. "Soon we will be looking at failures of larger magnitude than Green New Deal spending. No green project relying on taxpayer subsidies has ever made any economic or environmental sense," Milloy told Fox News. "It’s important that President Trump stop the taxpayer bleeding by ending what he accurately calls the Green New Scam."RELATED: Liberals' Darling $2.2 Billion Solar Plant Suddenly Needs More of the One Thing You Would Never Expect The U.S. Department of Energy explained how the solar power plant operates, “Ivanpah uses power tower solar thermal technology to generate power by creating high-temperature steam to drive a conventional steam turbine. Mirrors are used to concentrate sunlight and create steam, which is then converted to electricity.”The Ivanpah Solar Power Facility incinerated tens of thousands of birds with the concentrated sunlight, the Association of Avian Veterinarians stated. The solar power plant is "believed to be responsible for at least 6,000 bird deaths each year, as the birds can suffer severe burns or become incinerated if they fly too close to the 40-foot towers that concentrate sunlight from five square miles of solar panels."The Association of Avian Veterinarians stated, "These numbers are likely an underestimation, as the sight of birds and insects rapidly immolated as they soar too close to the towers, which can reach temperatures of 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, is so common that staff at the plant have a name for them — 'streamers.'"The U.S. Department of the Interior stated that the "Ivanpah Project has resulted in avian mortality, and, consistent with approved plans, the BLM is actively working with the proponent, [the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service], and state agencies to address those impacts." However, the DOI did not provide an exact number of bird deaths. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!