So cute! READ MORE...

Plus, five more under-$3 finds to grab this month. READ MORE...

Jelly Roll faced the music against Logan Paul at WWE SummerSlam on Saturday night (Aug. 2.) Continue reading…

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said about 1,500 truck drivers who do not speak English are off the roads in the first 30 days of a law that Obama ordered ignored. It was a safety issue. The 1,500 drivers were taken off the roads within the first 30 days of the rules once more being enforced, […] The post No English, No Truck: 1500 Non-English Speaking Drivers Gone appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

'We will work together to clean up DC'

Americans like licenses. People think they make us safer. We license drivers. We license dogs. But most government licensing is useless. Or harmful. It limits competition, raises costs, leaves consumers with fewer choices, and blocks opportunity for people who want to work. Michelle Freenor, a tour guide in Savannah, Georgia, gets good reviews from customers. But her business almost didn’t get off the ground because local politicians said, “No one can be a tour guide without first getting a government license!” Bill Durrence, a Savannah alderman at the time, told me why it’s important. “I hear a lot of tour guides saying things that make me cringe. The licensing and testing I thought was a good idea just to make sure people had the accurate information.” While they were at it, the politicians added other requirements. Anyone who wanted to give tours had to get a criminal-background check, which included urine and blood samples, take a physical fitness test, pay fees to the city, and pass a difficult history test. “A college level history exam with tons of obscure, gotcha questions,” Freenor told me, “It could be three to five months of studying and studying. It was 120 pages!” Ironically, the test asked no questions about subjects covered by the most popular Savannah tours—ghost tours and “Forrest Gump” tours (the movie’s bench scenes were filmed in Savannah). Freenor complained to a city official: “There’s no ghost questions on this test!” His response: “Ghosts aren’t real.” Why would a city pass rules that block people merely from speaking? “The city was making a nice amount of money for people failing this,” said Freenor. When I confronted Alderman Durrence about this, he admitted, “There were a couple of points that maybe went a little too far in the licensing process. Having to have the physical exam periodically. Maybe the cost of the test.” But he’s a big fan of regulation. “Little by little,” he said, “we’ve managed to get control of some things, but we still don’t have control over a lot.” What? They control much too much! With the help of the libertarian law firm the Institute for Justice, Freenor sued Savannah and won. Now Savannah has no licensing rule. Washington, D.C., killed its rule after IJ sued, too. IJ also won in Philadelphia and Charleston, where a court ruled that the rules were unconstitutional because, as IJ attorney Robert McNamara put it, “The First Amendment protects your right to speak for a living, whether you’re a journalist, a comedian, or a tour guide.” Good point. My point is we don’t need most of these complex consumer protection laws. Competition alone protects customers. Freenor says it well: “The free market is taking care of itself. Bad tour companies don’t last.” Exactly. A competitive market helps consumers much more than licensing laws ever will. If such laws were once needed (they weren’t), they definitely aren’t needed now that the internet exists, because it’s so easy for consumers to learn about what’s good and what’s not. But politicians always want more control over us. Eight years have passed since the Institute for Justice fought Freenor’s case. Despite their victories in court, cities like New Orleans and my home New York City still have tour guide licensing rules. New York guides are told to pass a 150-question exam. Many tour guides ignore the rules, knowing bureaucrats are not likely to enforce them. That expands the “illegal” underground economy, inviting actual harm. Government’s rules almost always have nasty unintended consequences. Licensing bureaucrats should regulate much less. We’re supposedly free people. It should be up to us how we spend our money. COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Tortured by Bureaucrats appeared first on The Daily Signal.

My son moved out of the house this spring. My daughter moves out in a couple of weeks, and my older kids are headed up north. Now, it’s just Tania and me — and it’s been quiet. Too quiet.As I sit here in a house full of space and silence, my mind has been meditating on the reality of being a dad — and what that really means.As a father, I’ve learned that sometimes the most important thing is simply showing up and doing the best I can — even when I’m not sure what that looks like.I didn’t grow up with the model of fatherhood that I now find myself trying to live out. My dad wasn’t present. He worked hard — harder than most people I’ve ever met — but he wasn’t there for me the way I needed him to be. My dad was passionate about his job, and that job was providing for the family. He taught me about hard work, but there wasn’t much emotional connection. We didn’t start developing any real relationship until I was 30.I’m not complaining. That was just the reality. But such memories inevitably materialize as I reflect on my own experience as a father and try to navigate this new chapter in my life.When my kids were little, it was clear that I wasn’t home enough. And looking back, I knew that my work — this job — was costing me time with them. But we all talked about it as a family. When the opportunity to make this career change came in 2006, we discussed it openly because we knew it would change everything, for better or for worse. We made the decision as a team.Now that they're moved out, I walk around in this big house filled with all this stuff, considering whether anything was worth it. In the end, it's just stuff. Everything in my home could be gone, and all I would miss are the kids.The reality of fatherhoodSomething I thought — and I think many others can relate — is that you think that your main job is to provide. You’re not needed in the same way mom is. You’re not the one the baby looks to in those early years. You watch your wife bond with the child, and you wonder where you fit in. It’s a strange feeling. But as I’ve come to learn, you are needed in more ways than just a provider. You just don’t always get the immediate connection that mothers do. A special season starts around age seven when dad becomes a little magical. You can feel it. The connection is there. It’s that sweet spot before the teenage years, when everything is awkward, when both dad and kid seem to be at odds. But in those years before, it’s golden.Then, it all changes.As kids hit the teen years, they start to pull away. The relationship with dad often becomes strained. They turn to mom when they need comfort, leaving dad in the background, unsure of where he stands. And that’s fine. That’s how it goes. But in this phase of life, as the kids start moving out and forging their own paths, I wish things were different.I feel that loss deeply. As a father who wasn’t home all the time, I worked to provide. But now, I’m left with this ache in my chest, wondering, “Did I do enough?” Releasing the outcomeThe hardest part of fatherhood is when you stop expecting a certain outcome. My wife often tells me, “It’s going to happen. It will all work out.” And I believe her. But honestly, it’s hard not to be caught in the endless loop of second-guessing. Did I make the right decisions? Did I do enough? How can I fix this?This struggle isn’t just about fatherhood. It’s about life. I’ve spent so much time looking ahead, planning, pointing to the horizon. I could always see the future and strive toward it. But in this season of life, I’m realizing that we also need to release our attachment to the outcome — whether it be over the injustices we see in the news cycle or the things we are wrestling with in our individual lives. RELATED: How strong fathers shatter a poisonous narrative about manhood — one child at a time Photo by Kelli McClintock via UnsplashIt doesn't mean we're not engaged. It just means we have to stop wanting a specific outcome. It’s a journey where the road is uncertain, and the destination might look different than what I expected.I’ve always been someone who could picture the future and work relentlessly toward it. But it’s not just about getting to the destination — it’s about being present in the moment, doing the next right thing, and giving the end result to God.Applying this to lifeWe live in a world obsessed with results, with winning, with reaching that end goal. But what if, just for a moment, we stopped obsessing over the outcome? What if we focused on doing the next right thing, one step at a time?I don’t have all the answers. I’m still figuring it out. But what I do know is that there’s beauty in the process. There’s meaning in the moments, even if they don’t lead to the perfect outcome. As a father, I’ve learned that sometimes the most important thing is simply showing up and doing the best I can — even when I’m not sure what that looks like.The house is quiet now, but the work isn’t over. There’s still plenty to do. And it’s time to focus on making each moment count.Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Unbeknownst to many, the New York Times has a podcast called “The Opinions,” which features columnists, staff writers, guest essayists, and editors diving into various issues and ideas.In the latest episode titled “Why the Right Is Obsessed with Thinness,” Times opinion editor Meher Ahmad and opinion writer Jessica Grose discussed how being thin and fit is an unhealthy right-wing obsession.BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales analyzes several audio clips from the interview. In the first clip, Ahmad opens the podcast with the following preamble: “There's been a resurgence in explicit ‘be thin’ messaging in culture. With the Ozempic boom, we see the body shaming of actresses like Sydney Sweeney and red carpets that were already filled with thin actresses becoming even thinner. On the right, there's been a focus on body size that's sort of been bundled up not just with health and wellness, but with religion, morals, and politics.”“Being skinny is related to Christianity, I guess,” scoffs Sara.In the second clip, Grose argues that conservatives are elevating thinness as a response to the body positivity movement.“I think it's a reaction to the body positivity movement, which I would say peaked about 10 years ago, and it was the idea that weight is not tied directly to health and that you can be healthy and not real thin. It was never predominant,” she says.“That's not what the body positivity movement has ever been,” Sara corrects.“The leaders of the body positivity movement said things like, ‘Fat is fit, BMI is not a measure of wellness, healthy at every size, body size does not indicate health.”’“We can have a debate on what people deem beautiful ... but you can't tell me that being morbidly obese is actually healthy, and yet, that is the lie that they tried to put on young women.”In the third clip, Grose argues that conservative influencers aim to be attractive and physically fit because those endeavors align with conservative values, especially traditional gender roles: “It's all traditional gender roles, right? I mean that litany of things ... like marriage, babies, fitness, protein — it's all one very narrow image, and anyone who is not conforming to that image is sort of outside the circle.”“We do see fewer female leaders across the board, I would say Democrats and Republicans, and so the idea that women should be physically smaller goes along with the idea that they are not going to be the ones out front taking up space,” she added.“It's just so funny listening to them talk about, oh, conservative women, they just want to be physically smaller so they can take a backseat to all the powerful men. OK, well, I don't know, I think that we're doing OK as a whole here,” scoffs Sara, displaying a collage of beautiful conservative women who have large platforms and a lot of influence, including Alex Clark, Riley Gaines, Candace Owens, Lara Trump, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), and Nicole Shanahan, among others.To hear more audio clips and more of Sara's analysis, watch the episode above.Want more from Sara Gonzales?To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Incurious George: Conway Thinks Dems Can Fix Their Abysmal Approval by Hating President Trump Even More