The following remarks were delivered by Dr. Matthew Spalding at the Freedom 250 Mobile Museum kickoff event in Summerfield, North Carolina, on Jan. 21. It is great to be with you on this wonderful occasion.  But I must point out that we wouldn’t be here today, were it not for those remarkable Americans who gave us a country to celebrate.  Unlike other countries, America’s ends are to be found in its beginnings.  In 1776, when it announced itself to the world, America was little more than thirteen small colonies on a barren continent, thousands of miles from their ancestral homeland, surrounded by hostile powers.  Ours is the story of a band of patriots who united together to declare independence from—and declare war against—the most powerful nation in the world.  Courtesy of Hillsdale College At its birth, our Founders justified independence and nationhood by asserting self-evident truths. Working from the great principle of human equality, they claimed political legitimacy based on the consent of the governed.  Appointed Commander in Chief of a bunch of untrained militia, General George Washington led a continental army to the unlikely military victory that began this noble experiment in popular government.  This is that story.  Built to Last Through a carefully written constitution, our Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law.  They sought to establish religious liberty, provide for economic opportunity, secure national independence, and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government—all in the name of a simple but radical idea of human liberty.  This is that story.  What is truly revolutionary about America is that, for the first time in human history, universal ideas about man became the foundation for a particular nation and a particular system of government and its political culture. It was because of these principles, not despite them, that, rather than ending in tyranny, the American Revolution culminated in a constitutional government that has long endured.  Well over two centuries later—having won its independence from the British Empire, established its sovereign nationhood, completed its continental expansion and brought unprecedented prosperity to its citizens, survived a devastating Civil War that threatened its very life, abolished slavery and raised up the emancipated to be citizens equal to their one-time masters, and triumphed in two world wars fought on foreign soil and a decades-long struggle against worldwide communism—the United States has become the freest, wealthiest, and most powerful nation in the world.  This is our story.  Principles That Define and Inspire To this day, so many years after the American Revolution, the principles proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence and promulgated by the United States Constitution still define us as a nation and inspire us as a people. They are responsible for a prosperous and just nation unlike any in the world. They are the highest achievements of our tradition, serving not only as a powerful beacon to those throughout the world who strive for freedom but also a warning to tyrants and despots everywhere. It is because of these principles, not despite them, that America has achieved its greatness.  Dr. Matthew Spalding (Courtesy of Hillsdale College) America is a good country, a great country, perhaps the greatest, not because it is perfect—it is made up of imperfect human beings—but because it is dedicated to, and constantly aspires to uphold, permanent principles about human liberty that are true.  Through its noble efforts to achieve its highest ends, this country has done more to advance those principles than any other.  America is beautiful not only for its spacious skies and amber waves of grain, as the patriotic hymn goes, but also for its “glory-tale of liberating strife.”  This is what unites us.  This is what makes America exceptional.  I vividly remember America’s bicentennial celebration in 1976. I was in Middle School, and remember the fireworks, and the Tall Ships, and the Freedom Train. All that deepened my love of country and sparked my love of history. Today I write books and teach about America to my students at Hillsdale College.  Rediscover America Given the opportunity to help create the Freedom Trucks all these years later, I jumped at the chance to tell America’s story, one that would capture the heart, spark the imagination, and instruct the mind of my fellow Americans.  I want to thank our friends at PragerU and Spevco for bringing that story to life in the Freedom Trucks, and Freedom 250 for taking the story, the story of the American people, on the road.  Courtesy of Hillsdale College We are now in the 250th year of our country’s life.  I invite all Americans to take this unique opportunity to learn—or perhaps relearn—our history, to discover anew the truths to which it is dedicated, and to fall in love with America again, or perhaps for the first time. The post Why America’s Founding Principles Still Matter 250 Years Later appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Recent polling suggests a notable shift in how younger Americans view abortion, with signs that the pro-life movement is gaining ground among adults ages 18 to 29. Multiple surveys show an increase in the share of young adults identifying as “pro-life,” while support for unrestricted abortion access has declined in recent years. According to data from Gallup and others, the percentage of young adults calling themselves pro-life climbed to about 37% in 2025, an increase of about 8 to 11 percentage points compared to polls from 2022 and 2023. Over the same period, the percentage of young adults who say abortion should be legal in all circumstances has declined sharply, falling by roughly 10 to 14 percentage points, according to Gallup data. Generational Divide These findings come amid broader national polling showing a persistent generational divide on abortion policy. A separate Pew Research Center survey from 2024 found that adults under 30 are more likely than older Americans to say abortion should be legal “in all or most cases,” but that support has fallen from earlier years. One of the most striking shifts comes from young men. In summer 2025, an IPSOS poll in Great Britain found that 46% of men ages 16 to 34support the legal abortion— a rate 25 points lower than the average population. Why Are Views Shifting? Abortion today is more accessible due to the proliferation of prescription drugs Mifepristone and Misoprostol. Since the 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, abortions have steadily increased in the United States. So what’s causing young people to back away? Analysts and movement leaders attribute the shift among young people to a variety of factors, including pro-life campaigning on college campuses, increased engagement with religious communities, and sustained debate over abortion policy since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision. Younger men’s views in particular have become more favorable to pro-life messaging, contributing to the overall change in self-identification among Millennials and Gen Z. Some observers point to cultural and technological changes as key drivers of the shift. Advances in ultrasound and fetal imaging—widely shared on social media platforms popular with Gen Z—have made prenatal development more visible to young people than ever before. Short-form videos and graphics showing infant growth shape younger Americans’ views of pregnancy and human development in ways that to earlier generations didn’t experience. Changing Landscape Another factor is the changing political and social landscape following the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision. With abortion policy now largely determined at the state level, younger Americans are encountering the issue in more concrete and local terms—through ballot initiatives, campus activism, and legislation—rather than as an abstract national debate. This has fueled increased engagement from both sides, including more visible and organized pro-life outreach aimed at young voters. Together, these trends indicate that the evolving views of young Americans are being shaped less by traditional party affiliation and more by cultural exposure, digital media, and localized political experiences—factors that may continue to influence how the abortion debate unfolds in the years to come. While abortion remains a deeply contested and polarized issue nationally, the emerging data on young adults suggests that the pro-life movement is resonating with a notable portion of the next generation of voters—potentially reshaping the long-term trajectory of this debate. The post Pro-Life Movement Gains Traction With Young Adults, Polls Show appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. A Republican attempt to cut off federal funding tied to vehicle “kill switch” enforcement failed in the House this week, leaving intact a law directing the Department of Transportation to develop mandatory impaired-driving prevention systems in new vehicles. The proposal, led by Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, sought to bar the government from spending money to advance or enforce the measure, formally known as Section 24220 of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The amendment was added to a broader spending bill, H.R. 7148, but was defeated 268 to 164. According to the House Clerk’s official roll call, 160 Republicans supported it, joined by four Democrats, while 57 Republicans and 211 Democrats voted against it. Massie’s measure would have “prohibit[ed] the use of funds made available by this Act to implement section 24220 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, including any requirements enabling or supporting vehicle ‘kill switch’ technology.” His goal was to block any federal action that could force automakers to install technology capable of monitoring driver behavior and intervening when impairment is detected. Following the vote, Massie wrote on X: “Unfortunately, the amendment I offered to defund the federally mandated automobile kill switch did not pass. 57 Republicans joined 211 Democrats to defeat it.” The Kentucky lawmaker has led several efforts on this issue, including the “No Kill Switches in Cars Act” introduced in early 2025, which would “repeal a requirement for the Secretary of Transportation to issue certain regulations with respect to advanced impaired driving technology.” Although the technology has not yet been required in any vehicle, the 2021 infrastructure law compels the Department of Transportation to develop regulations mandating its use. The legislative text refers broadly to systems that can “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation” if impairment is detected, but it leaves the technical design and privacy boundaries to regulators. Four Democrats, Representatives J. Luis Correa of California, Val Hoyle of Oregon, Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, joined most Republicans in supporting Massie’s amendment. The final tally recorded 164 in favor, 268 against, none present, and four not voting. Those opposing the amendment argue that the technology could prevent thousands of deaths caused by drunk driving. Representative Debbie Dingell of Michigan, a Democrat, stated in a release distributed by Mothers Against Drunk Driving: “Rep. Massie’s statements that impaired driving technology would track driver location, monitor driver performance, or enable cars to shut themselves down in the middle of the road are blatantly false and an intentional mischaracterization of the law. Massie’s amendment is an insult to every American who has been hurt by or lost loved ones to drunk driving…We have the technology now to save lives, and we should not delay in implementing it.” Supporters of the amendment take a different view, warning that government-mandated vehicle monitoring threatens core civil liberties. Clyde Wayne Crews of the Competitive Enterprise Institute said: “The vehicle ‘kill-switch’ is precisely the kind of overreach that will empower regulatory agencies to manage behavior without votes by elected representatives in Congress or real accountability. We must oppose this erosion of civil liberties and not set this precedent for government monitoring of everyday Americans. Kill switch technology will not be confined to one narrow purpose, no matter what its proponents believe or claim.” What the Law Says and What It Leaves Open Representative Dingell is right that Section 24220 contains no explicit references to GPS tracking, remote data transmission, or real-time surveillance. The law also does not instruct automakers to design vehicles that shut down abruptly while in motion. Instead, it directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to establish a rule requiring technology that can “prevent or limit” operation when impairment is detected. However, the statute’s open wording gives regulators wide latitude. It neither specifies how impairment should be detected nor limits what data may be collected or stored. As a result, the door remains open to methods that rely on driver-facing cameras, behavioral monitoring, or biometric analysis, all systems that could create ongoing data streams about driver behavior. Nothing in the law restricts how long such data could be retained, how it could be shared, or whether processing must occur solely within the vehicle. Nor does it guarantee that a driver could override a false positive reading. From a privacy standpoint, those omissions represent the central point of contention. It’s a little similar to many of the online “age verification” bills. They don’t all say that platforms have to collect digital IDs or scan biometrics to access platforms, but there would be little other way of enforcing. While Thursday’s vote blocked Massie’s attempt to defund implementation, it did not settle those underlying concerns. The real decisions now shift to the Department of Transportation and NHTSA, which must decide to what extent the impaired-driving systems will reach into vehicle operation and driver data. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post House Vote Keeps Federal “Kill Switch” Vehicle Mandate Despite Privacy Concerns appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Irish police could soon be granted the legal authority to infiltrate phones and encrypted messaging services under new government legislation that would formally approve the use of spyware. The proposal, contained in the forthcoming Communications (Interception and Lawful Access) Bill, has provoked concern among civil rights groups who say the plan risks eroding basic digital privacy. Justice Minister Jim O’Callaghan has said the new powers are “long overdue,” arguing that they are necessary to deal with organised crime and national security threats that rely on encrypted communications. The plan would, for the first time, provide An Garda Síochána (the main law enforcement and security agency in the state) with a legal basis for using what the government calls “covert surveillance software” to monitor devices. This could include collecting information from phones or laptops, recording communications, or interfering with computer networks thought to be used for unlawful purposes. Officials have indicated that similar powers exist in other countries, though reports suggest the technology under consideration resembles Pegasus, the Israeli-made spyware that was unlawfully used by police to monitor citizens and foreign nationals. The Department of Justice has said any use of such spyware would be subject to strict judicial authorization. Under the Bill, investigators could access both the content of communications and the associated “metadata,” which records who contacted whom, when, and from where. Agencies would also have to declare whether any privileged material, such as communications involving journalists or lawyers, might be affected by their applications. Officials continue to present the legislation as a practical response to modern crime. Yet this framing ignores what is actually at stake: a quiet authorization for state hacking of private devices. For years, Ireland has criticized other nations for digital overreach, from the misuse of facial recognition abroad to the abuse of spyware uncovered in Europe. Now, its own government is preparing to legalize similar tools under the banner of security. The right to communicate privately is one of the last real protections citizens have from constant scrutiny. If this Bill passes in its current form, that protection could quietly disappear, not through scandal or crisis, but through a line in legislation that makes surveillance a normal feature of everyday life. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Ireland Moves to Legalize Spyware Use by Police appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Next time your cat refuses to eat a new brand of food, show them this.

For billions of years, particles from Earth have been accumulating on the Moon.

ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel and CBS’s host of The Late Show, Stephen Colbert, accused President Trump and FCC Chairman Brendan Carr of trying to “squash” and “silence” them on their Thursday shows after Carr announced that he believes the regulations that say broadcast networks must allow for equal time among candidates applies to their shows. After a history lesson, Kimmel retorted, “That's how every talk show has operated since then until this week when Trump's little ferret in the FCC, Brendan Carr, who as you know is doing everything he can to shut us up, 'the easy way or the hard way,' is trying to say we no longer qualify for the bona fide news exemption when it comes to interviewing candidates, which is a sneaky little way of keeping viewpoints that aren't his off air.”   Jimmy Kimmel also claims "Trump's little ferret in the FCC, Brendan Carr, who as you know is doing everything he can to shut us up, 'the easy way or the hard way” is trying to say we no longer qualify for the bona fide news exemption when it comes to interviewing candidates,… pic.twitter.com/YKRM1GFmUu — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) January 23, 2026   Kimmel insisted that times have changed and there is no need for Carr to insert himself into late night comedy, “It's his latest attack on free speech. And it's a joke, because this isn't the 50s anymore. Back then there were only three major networks. Now we've got cable, we’ve got streaming, we have satellite, podcasts, social media. There are thousands of outlet news now. Broadcast TV used to account for 100 percent of viewing. Now, it's like 20 percent. There are so many channels, some of them doing 24/7 Trump programming: Fox News, Newsmax, One America New, Real America's Voice. None of them are required to give equal time, but we are because we use the public airways. Equal time was designed to limit how much influence broadcasters have over public opinion.” Concluding with a sense of uncertainty, Kimmel added, “We'll find out. I guess whatever happens, I want to point it out, because it is another example of this administration trying to squash anyone who doesn't support them by following ‘the rules.’”  Over on CBS, Colbert sang a similar tune, “Today, I gotta watch what I say about Trump, because Johnny Law is once again coming after yours truly. Yesterday, there was a… new announcement from FCC Chair and disappointed testicle, Brendan Carr. The New York Times described the announcement this way: ‘FCC targets Colbert and Kimmel in a new crackdown on late night TV.’" Colbert then, almost certainly unintentionally, made a decent point, “What? What? A new crackdown on late night TV? That has enormous implications for me for four more months! Good luck, Jimmy! So—See ya! See ya, suckers!”   Stephen Colbert warns about potential new FCC actions, "This is clearly an attempt to silence me, Jimmy, Seth. And I've got to say one thing to say to the FCC. Hey, I'm flattered you think that appearing on my show has the power to affect politics in any way. Okay? I've been… pic.twitter.com/Ay2nL4Jsw9 — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) January 23, 2026   He also added, “So, let's talk about these new crackdown rules that my lawyer warned me not to talk about. The FCC is announcing plans to enforce long-dormant rules on appearances by political candidates on network talk shows. Oh, no. They've awakened the long-dormant rules, not seen since the mind-bending horrors of the pre-Euclidian variety show ‘Cthulhu Tonight!’ This is clearly an attempt to silence me, Jimmy, Seth.” The law in question says the equal time requirement takes effect 45 days prior to a primary and 60 days prior to a general election, so as he said, any FCC action on this front would not affect Colbert, at least when it comes to November’s general elections. Despite the freakouts, the prospect of state-run comedy is highly unlikely because the equal time regulation is not likely to have that much of an effect on Kimmel and Meyers. The law is about candidates, not politicians or even liberals generally. In the period from September 6 to November 5, 2024, Kimmel interviewed only two candidates: Rep. Eric Swalwell and VP nominee Tim Walz. Swalwell won his election in a dark blue district by over 35 points and appeared exactly 60 days out. Seth Meyers did not interview any candidates in the 60-day window. Kimmel and Colbert may object to the principle Carr is advocating for, but it is almost certain that the late night shows’ trend of not inviting Republicans on will continue. Here are transcripts of the January 22 shows: ABC Jimmy Kimmel Live! 1/22/2026 11:50 PM ET JIMMY KIMMEL: That's how every talk show has operated since then until this week when Trump's little ferret in the FCC, Brendan Carr, who as you know is doing everything he can to shut us up, “the easy way or the hard way,” is trying to say we no longer qualify for the bona fide news exemption when it comes to interviewing candidates, which is a sneaky little way of keeping viewpoints that aren't his off air. It's his latest attack on free speech. And it's a joke, because this isn't the 50s anymore. Back then there were only three major networks. Now we've got cable, we’ve got streaming, we have satellite, podcasts, social media. There are thousands of outlet news now. Broadcast TV used to account for 100 percent of viewing. Now, it's like 20 percent. There are so many channels, some of them doing 24/7 Trump programming: Fox News, Newsmax, One America New, Real America's Voice. None of them are required to give equal time, but we are because we use the public airways. Equal time was designed to limit how much influence broadcasters have over public opinion. But we're not the only thing on television anymore. We're a small fish now. We used to be the whole pond. Now we're a part of this enormous Las Vegas buffet of—we're the mashed potatoes on the buffet. And the FCC now wants to mash us even more. They're mashing our potatoes. And I have no idea what the outcome of this is going to be. We'll find out. I guess whatever happens, I want to point it out, because it is another example of this administration trying to squash anyone who doesn't support them by following “the rules.” *** CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 1/22/2026 11:55 PM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: Today, I gotta watch what I say about Trump, because Johnny Law is once again coming after yours truly. Yesterday, there was a— [Booing] Thank you for being pre-upset. Yesterday, there was a new announcement from FCC Chair and disappointed testicle, Brendan Carr. The New York Times described the announcement this way: "FCC targets Colbert and Kimmel in a new crackdown on late night TV." What? What? A new crackdown on late night TV? That has enormous implications for me for four more months! Good luck, Jimmy! So—See ya! See ya, suckers! So, let's talk about these new crackdown rules that my lawyer warned me not to talk about. The FCC is announcing plans to enforce long-dormant rules on appearances by political candidates on network talk shows. Oh, no. They've awakened the long-dormant rules, not seen since the mind-bending horrors of the pre-Euclidian variety show "Cthulhu Tonight!" This is clearly an attempt to silence me, Jimmy, Seth. And I've got to say one thing to say to the FCC. Hey, I'm flattered you think that appearing on my show has the power to affect politics in any way. Okay? I've been doing this job for 21 years and let me tell you something, buddy, if our government had turned out the way I had chosen, you would not have the power to make this announcement.

A big win for the Trump administration and, most importantly, for the country was just announced on Friday: “Last year will likely register the lowest national homicide rate in 125 years and the largest single-year drop on record, according to a new analysis of 2025 crime data.” This statement appeared on the front page of the print edition of Friday’s (January 23) New York Times (Jan. 22 online).  That’s right, the New York Times. This stupendous bit of news was so big that even the preeminent news organ of the left was compelled to run it on the front page. So there’s no possible way the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) broadcast networks could miss it.  So how much time did ABC,CBS and NBC spend (on their Friday morning shows) on the major news that America is a safer nation under President Donald Trump?  8 seconds.  That 8 seconds arrived not from a journalist, but only in a soundbite of Vice President JD Vance, in an exchange shown between NBC correspondent Maggie Vespa and Vance in a story about ICE arrests and protestors in Minneapolis, as aired on the January 23 edition NBC’s Today show:  MAGGIE VESPA TO JD VANCE: What do you say to people here in Minnesota who say it’s the overwhelming presence of ICE officers and federal officers and their tactics that are making them feel less safe?  JD VANCE: Well one thing I would say is, first of all, we saw in 2025 the biggest one year drop in murders in the history of the United States of America.  That was still 8 seconds more than what was aired on the Friday editions of ABC’s Good Morning America and CBS Mornings.  The New York Times reported the following:  Last year will likely register the lowest national homicide rate in 125 years and the largest single-year drop on record, according to a new analysis of 2025 crime data. Violence has been falling for several years. But last year for the first time, all seven categories of violent crime tracked by the analysis fell below prepandemic levels. The numbers provide further evidence that the surge in violence in the early 2020s was a departure during a time of massive social upheaval, not a new normal. The analysis of data from 40 cities, by the Council on Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan think tank, found across-the-board decreases in crime last year compared to 2019: 25 percent fewer homicides, 13 percent fewer shootings and 29 percent fewer carjackings. Between 2024 and 2025, only drug crimes went in the wrong direction, but they were still lower than in 2019. The broadcast networks are so invested in seeing the Trump administration fail that they have (almost) completely ignored this piece of good news for the country. 

When Justine Damond was shot by a Somalian police officer in Minneapolis, there were no riots or protests in her name.Damond, a white woman, had called the police for help, but when they showed up, she was shot instead. The Somalian officer who fired his weapon claimed to have been spooked.“For these people — for Black Lives Matter, for these left-wing agitators — it’s never about the victims. It’s not really about violence or injustice. It’s about the system. It’s about the belief that these activists have that America and its institutions are oppressive and unjust,” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey comments on “Relatable.”“And anyone who upholds these institutions, like the church — especially the Protestant church in America, who is still overwhelmingly conservative — is seen as an enemy,” she says, explaining that this was the entire reason former CNN anchor Don Lemon alongside Black Lives Matter activists stormed a church in protest of the ICE shooting of Renee Good.“This demonstration … was not about Renee Good, or even the Somalians, or even any of the illegal aliens there. These were just — the exposing of the Somalian fraud, the killing of Renee Good — they were the trigger incidents used by these activists to justify terrorizing Christians and conservatives and anyone who stands in their way,” Stuckey explains.“2020 wasn’t about George Floyd. 2026 is not about Renee Good. Understand this. It is about intentionally sowing chaos to ultimately weaken America and Western civilization. That is what George Soros and all of his funded initiatives and groups want to do,” she says.Stuckey points out that the protest at Cities Church was livestreamed by Black Lives Matter — a group that received $90 million from the Soros-backed Tides Foundation just a few years ago.And according to the New York Post, the Invisible Twin Cities group, which received $7.8 million from George Soros Open Society Foundations between 2018 and 2023, is behind the anti-ICE protests in Minneapolis.“They’re not good people,” Stuckey says. “So you have to think: Why would they fund anti-ICE protests? It’s because they hate America. America stands in the way of what they want to do.”Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.