The post “Three letter word – J-O-B-S.” appeared first on The Funny Conservative.

The post Texas caves appeared first on The Funny Conservative.

The post Dumber than an idiot‚ more incoherent than a vomiting drunk! It’s a moron‚ it’s a dunce‚ it’s STUPIDMAN! appeared first on The Funny Conservative.

Eritrean soldiers‚ via Eritrea Madote   On May 24‚ 1993‚ world maps had to be updated again as national borders shifted and a new nation was officially established. It was the culmination of a war that ended two years prior and established Eritrea as an entity separate from Ethiopia.   This development‚ however‚ was not brought about through diplomacy and peace. It was brought about by a war that lasted three decades and claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.   The Eritrean War of Independence was a long and bloody struggle.   A Long Prelude to the Eritrean War of Independence A painting of the Battle of Adwa in 1896 which secured Ethiopian independence from the ambitions of colonial Italy‚ via the British Museum‚ London   From 1882 to 1941‚ Eritrea was an Italian colony. Its neighbor to the south‚ Ethiopia/Abyssinia‚ retained its independence‚ one of only two African nations to be able to do so (the other country being Liberia in West Africa).   In 1889‚ the borders of Eritrea were officially defined by the Treaty of Wuchale‚ and the following year saw the official founding of the Italian Colony of Eritrea. This came after a two-year-long‚ low-conflict war between Italy and Ethiopia over the borders. This peace would not last.   In January 1895‚ the First/Second Italo-Ethiopian War* broke out. Italy claimed dominion over all of Ethiopia as a colony‚ but this assertion was naturally rejected by the government of Ethiopia under the rule of Emperor Menelik II. After almost two years and the loss of around 30‚000 people‚ the war drew to a close with Ethiopia victorious‚ securing its independence from colonial ambitions.   * Some historians refer to the Second Italo-Ethiopian War as the First Italo-Ethiopian War‚ combining it with the conflict between the two countries from 1887 to 1889‚ which was undeclared and amounted to no more than a series of skirmishes.    The Italian rule over Eritrea was marked by industrial expansion and the immigration of Italians to the colony. A railway was built along with a cableway that was the longest in the world at the time. Medical and sanitary conditions were improved dramatically‚ and although racial laws existed‚ the native Eritreans were granted access to amenities‚ and Italian rule was largely peaceful.   Map showing the regions of Italian East Africa from 1938 to 1941‚ via the University of Central Arkansas   The rise of Fascism in Italy‚ however‚ took the colony in a different direction‚ and things began to change dramatically. In 1935‚ Eritrea was used as the staging point for the Italian invasion of Ethiopia. After a year of fighting‚ Italy was victorious‚ and Ethiopia was incorporated into the Italian Empire. The end of the war brought about the 1936 merger of Eritrea‚ Italian Somaliland‚ and the newly conquered Ethiopia into a single entity called Italian East Africa. Italian control ended in November 1941 when a British-led campaign saw the defeat of the Italians. Ethiopia was liberated‚ and the rest of the Italian possessions remained under British control until the end of the war. Italian Somaliland then was returned to Italy but as a United Nations Protectorate and not a colony. In 1960‚ it was merged with British Somalia to form the independent country of Somalia.   Figuring out what to do with Eritrea was a more difficult task. From the end of the war in 1945 to 1951‚ Eritrea was a British Protectorate. In 1952‚ the United Nations federated Eritrea and Ethiopia. This was done to appease the Ethiopians‚ who claimed sovereignty over Eritrea‚ and the Eritreans‚ who wanted autonomy. This arrangement lasted until 1962‚ when the Ethiopians‚ under Emperor Haile Selassie‚ took full control of Eritrea by abandoning the federal arrangement and annexing it. This move further encouraged a rebellion that flared into the Eritrean War of Independence.   The Fighting Begins ELF fighters who took part in the Battle of Togoruba‚ via Hedgait   The banner of rebellion was first taken up by the Eritrean Liberation Front (ELF)‚ which caused divisions within Eritrea‚ as the ELF was predominantly Muslim and saw the struggle against Ethiopia as not just a struggle for independence‚ but as a religious struggle against the predominantly Christian Ethiopians. The Ethiopian occupation provided an additional factional aspect‚ however‚ and this was along ethnic lines. Christian Eritreans‚ thus‚ felt compelled to join the ELF‚ but the result was not full integration. The Christians were under a separate fifth command‚ adding to the four established commands‚ which were exclusively Muslim.   The first few years of the war were characterized by small raids and commando-style operations while roving bands of ELF soldiers harassed the Ethiopian force in the barren lowlands and the coastal areas. The heaviest battle in the 1960s was the Battle of Togoruba which claimed the lives of 19 ELF soldiers and 84 Imperial Ethiopian soldiers. There was a very loose chain of command due to the sporadic contact leaders had with their own troops. The ELF did enjoy significant support from neighboring Muslim countries‚ which supplied the ELF with arms.   The Ethiopian army was not very effective at fighting this kind of war and resorted to punishing civilians by burning down villages and killing livestock. The Israeli-trained Commando Police did a better job‚ but they were too few in number to be effective.   Factional &; Leadership Changes The President of Ethiopia‚ Mengistu Haile Mariam‚ via The Economist   The early 1970s brought a change in dynamics in Eritrea‚ as ELF infighting fractured the rebel group. Several groups broke away from the ELF‚ notably those who were Christians‚ those with regional concerns‚ and radical Marxists. These groups eventually joined together as the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF). War broke out between the EPLF and the ELF‚ which lasted for two years and claimed the lives of 3‚000 fighters – more than had been killed by the Ethiopian forces. After the Battle of Woki left 600 dead‚ the civilian call for peace was heeded‚ and the two groups reconciled in 1975‚ agreeing to fight the Ethiopians together.   This era also brought changes in Ethiopia. In 1974‚ Haile Selassie was ousted in a coup and replaced by a Marxist military junta called the Derg and was controlled by Mengistu Haile Mariam. The next few years saw the Derg concentrating on internal affairs‚ trying to consolidate power within their own country rather than attending to Eritrean independence movements. As Marxists‚ the new Ethiopian government also began to ally itself with the Soviet Union.   The EPLF Era Eritrean fighters in front of destroyed Ethiopian vehicles‚ via Eritrea Ministry of Information   By 1977 in Eritrea‚ the EPLF became the more popular movement‚ eclipsing the ELF. While the Ethiopian tactics in Eritrea descended into brutality to instill fear‚ the EPLF began to rise in power and came to outnumber their oppressors. They managed to liberate much of Eritrea‚ but the Ethiopians still controlled several vital urban areas.   With Ethiopia embroiled in a war with Somalia‚ the EPLF seized its chance and went on the offensive to completely drive the Ethiopians out of Eritrea. With Cuban and Soviet help‚ however‚ the Ethiopians achieved victory against the Somalians in what became known as the Ogaden War. With the momentum of victory‚ Ethiopia moved north to concentrate its mobilized forces on Eritrea. The EPLF offensive failed dramatically as the Ethiopians launched a series of intensive campaigns against the rebels. This included saturation bombing that targeted EPLF and ELF areas‚ but also urban areas‚ killing and wounding many civilians. Several ground offensives were launched. The ELF was completely defeated in the field‚ while the EPLF retreated to the mountainous regions.   Sure of victory‚ the Ethiopians launched a final offensive to wipe out the remaining rebels but suffered a surprise defeat when the EPLF managed to counterattack and cause a complete rout of the government forces at the Battle of Nakfa.   The Ethiopians‚ near victory‚ had failed‚ and the Eritrean War of Independence would carry on for another decade. Indiscriminate reprisals‚ including bombings and raids by the Ethiopians‚ ensured a steady supply of recruits for the EPLF‚ and the Eritrean forces became stronger with each passing year.   The Final Era of the Eritrean War of Independence An Ethiopian soldier surrendering to an EPLF fighter‚ via Freedom United   In the early 1980s‚ the differences between the ELF and the EPLF were once again evident‚ and the alliance between the two factions broke down. With the support of the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF)‚ the EPLF was much larger and more powerful than the ELF‚ and the ELF was pushed into Sudan‚ where they were disarmed by the Sudanese.   The Ethiopians spent 1980 and 1981 building up their forces‚ and in 1982 they launched a massive campaign known as Operation Red Star‚ which saw the deployment of 120‚000 Ethiopian troops to crush the Eritrean resistance once and for all. Mengistu Haile Mariam traveled to the Eritrean capital of Asmara to oversee the campaign personally. The plan was to crush the EPLF through superior numbers‚ but after several months of fighting‚ the Ethiopians failed to make any significant gains and even left themselves open to a counterattack. The offensive was quietly abandoned‚ and a new‚ more low-key offensive was launched in 1983. This offensive achieved some success but failed to completely break the EPLF‚ who just retreated to new defensive positions.   An Eritrean soldier with the flag of the EPLF‚ via Talking Humanities   The following year saw the EPLF go on the offensive‚ but they also failed to make significant gains on the Ethiopians and were forced to retreat back to their own defensive lines. Another offensive by the EPLF in 1985 was costly for both sides‚ and the town of Barentu was captured by the rebels but retaken by Ethiopian forces soon after.   In 1986‚ the Ethiopian government launched another offensive with the objective of capturing Nafka‚ and despite significant aerial support‚ it failed. To add to their woes‚ insurgencies in Eritrea’s Wollo and Tigray provinces became a huge issue‚ and the Ethiopian government was forced to concentrate its efforts on multiple fronts.   On March 17–20‚ 1988‚ The Battle of Afabet took place. The EPLF claimed victory in this major battle‚ which saw 15‚000 EPLF soldiers engage with the Ethiopian army of over 20‚000. With many thousands of casualties‚ the battle was of major significance‚ resulting in the EPLF taking full control of the western and northern parts of Eritrea. The Ethiopians were forced to withdraw their garrisons from several cities‚ and the EPLF surrounded the city of Keren‚ which was‚ and still is‚ the second-largest city in Eritrea.   A map showing the borders of Eritrea today‚ via Encyclopaedia Britannica   With a major blow struck to the Ethiopians‚ further offensive operations were significantly curtailed. Unhappy with their government‚ the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) was founded and launched military actions to take control of Ethiopia. Mengistu Haile Mariam’s government was encountering major challenges. In 1990 the Soviet Union announced it would be withdrawing military aid to Ethiopia‚ and the EPLF launched its next offensive‚ capturing the Eritrean port city of Massawa.   When the EPDRF marched on the Ethiopian capital of Addis Ababa‚ Mengistu Haile Mariam fled the country‚ and in May 1991‚ the city fell. The last fighting between the Eritreans and the Ethiopians occurred on May 25‚ 1991‚ when the EPLF defeated the last Ethiopian loyalist forces in the port city of Assab in the far southeast of Eritrea.   Soon afterward‚ peace talks were held‚ and in 1993‚ a referendum was held in Eritrea. The result was 99.83% in favor of independence. On May 28‚ 1993‚ the referendum results were recognized internationally‚ and Eritrea was admitted as a member state of the United Nations.   Eritrean soldiers‚ via Eritrea Madote   From small skirmishes to large battles‚ the long and bloody conflict that was the Eritrean War of Independence took a huge toll on human life and loomed as a specter of death and destruction over the region for three decades.   Although the conflict had its roots in the short-sighted interference of European colonial ambitions‚ the war for independence ultimately was not one where the Eritreans were fighting against a European power but rather another African nation.   The length of the war also affected Eritrean unity. An entire generation of people had grown up during the war and‚ equally affected‚ was able to put their differences aside and stand together against Ethiopian oppression.

Transgender orthodoxy may soon become a litmus test for parenthood‚ according to the logic of a new policy working its way through the Department of Health and Human Services under President Joe Biden. A new rule in HHS’ Administration for Children and Families would apply the idea that any lack of “affirmation” constitutes a form of child abuse to foster care placements. Once that idea takes root in foster care‚ child protective services agencies might start applying it more broadly. The rule would reinterpret the Social Security Act‚ which requires agencies to ensure that each child in foster care receives “safe and proper” care. The rule would lay out steps agencies must take to meet that requirement for “LGBTQI+ children‚” defined as kids who “identify as lesbian‚ gay‚ bisexual‚ transgender‚ queer or questioning‚ intersex‚ as well as children who are non-binary‚ or have non-conforming gender identity or expression.” Before agencies place a child with a foster parent‚ known as a “provider‚” that person must “establish an environment free of hostility‚ mistreatment‚ or abuse based on the child’s LGBTQI+ status;” receive training “to be prepared with the appropriate knowledge and skills to provide for the needs of the child related to the child’s self-identified sexual orientation‚ gender identity‚ and gender expression;” and must be able to “facilitate the child’s access to age-appropriate resources‚ services‚ and activities that support their health and well-being.” As the Federalist Society’s Rachel Morrison pointed out‚ the rule does not define “hostility‚” “mistreatment‚” or “abuse.” However‚ it does clarify that “a provider who attempted to undermine‚ suppress‚ or change the sexual orientation‚ gender identity‚ or gender expression of a child‚ including through the use of so-called ‘conversion therapy‚’ would not be a safe and appropriate placement.” The proposed rule cites medical associations such as the American Psychological Association to claim that efforts to “undermine‚ suppress‚ or change” sexual orientation‚ gender identity‚ or gender expression “are not supported by evidence and have been rejected as harmful.” The rule does not acknowledge that gender ideology has infiltrated these medical associations and that many doctors—including those who once embraced gender ideology—have warned against confusing children on their gender and putting them on a path to mutilating their own bodies. Dr. Stephen B. Levine‚ a psychiatrist and early proponent of transgender medical interventions‚ joined and briefly helped lead the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association‚ which later became the World Professional Association for Transgender Health‚ the central medical group that organizations such as the American Psychiatric Association rely upon. A member from 1974 to 2001‚ Levine served as chairman of the eight-member International Standards of Care Committee that issued the fifth version of the standards. He ultimately resigned his membership in 2002 upon concluding that the organization “had become dominated by politics and ideology‚ rather than by scientific progress.” In a document opposing the use of Medicaid funding for experimental transgender medical interventions for children‚ Levine explains that “there is no consensus or agreed ‘standard of care’ concerning therapeutic approaches to child or adolescent gender dysphoria.” He notes that gender identity “is not biologically based” and “empirically not fixed for many individuals.” Levine also warns that social transition “is a powerful psychotherapeutic intervention that radically changes outcomes” and makes it far less likely that young children will “desist” from a transgender identity. Contrary to the transgender activists’ claims‚ many doctors have raised serious concerns about the long-term effects of “gender-affirming care.” Cross-sex hormones can weaken children’s bones and make them more prone to heart disease. So-called puberty blockers‚ often billed as fully reversible‚ involve introducing a disease into a child’s body and make puberty harder to start again‚ should the child change his or her mind.  European countries‚ long considered more “progressive” than the U.S.‚ have found a lack of evidence for medical interventions on children and are recommending a “watchful waiting” approach for minors. Ultimately‚ gender ideology rests on the claim that a nebulous gender identity is more important than an individual’s biological sex. If a biological male claims to identify as female‚ society must consider him a woman and allow him to enter women’s restrooms‚ prisons‚ and sports teams‚ even though some men pose a threat to women in intimate situations and enjoy biological advantages in many sports. Similarly‚ this ideology encourages bodily alterations to make a male appear female and vice versa‚ despite the lack of evidence that such interventions actually improve well-being over the long haul. This idea is particularly harmful for children who are just learning what it means to be male or female. If a boy likes to play with Barbie dolls‚ that does not mean he is really a girl. If a girl likes to play with G.I. Joes‚ that does not mean she is really a boy. Yet the ideology behind transgender identity urges parents to abandon all sanity and declare that such kids are transgender. Before you object‚ think about how nebulous “gender identity” actually is. It doesn’t rely on a specific set of standards that may be verified objectively. Instead‚ it relies on an individual’s claim that he or she experiences painful and persistent dissonance between an “identity” and his or her biology. Any attempt to resolve this dissonance through mainstream talk therapy is ipso facto a form of “conversion therapy” to be condemned as “harmful.” Yet Levine argues that “affirming” a transgender identity is a “powerful psychotherapeutic intervention” that will set kids on the path to mutilation and sterilization—long before they have any concept about what their own fertility means. Under Biden’s proposed new rule‚ any potential foster parent who aims to protect a child from this confusion and damage may soon face expulsion from the program. That means the process will be designed to weed out guardians who actually would take good care of the kids and enable guardians who would assist in harming them. In this topsy-turvy world‚ biology takes a back seat to a child’s insistence that he or she is really the opposite sex‚ even if the child might just as well identify as Queen Elsa of Arendelle or a Tyrannosaurus rex. The rule justifies this by claiming that kids in the foster care system are more likely to identify as LGBTQI+‚ i.e. to face gender confusion. This means they are more vulnerable to the damage of gender ideology‚ not less. They need someone to protect them from “gender-affirming care‚” and Biden seems dead set on preventing that. Sadly‚ the HHS rule is not the first time Americans have faced this type of policy. In my home state of Virginia‚ state Del. Elizabeth Guzman‚ a Democrat‚ supports a bill to expand the definition of “child abuse” to include disagreement with gender ideology. California’s Democratic governor‚ Gavin Newsom‚ signed a bill turning California into a “sanctuary state” for “gender-affirming care‚” which the law defines as an absolute right. The law gives California courts the ability to award custody over a child if someone removes the child from his or her parents in another state in order to obtain such “care” for that child despite the parents’ disagreement. Ultimately‚ Americans cannot have it both ways. Either it is child abuse to deny a child’s transgender identity‚ or it is child abuse to encourage experimental medical alterations that will leave that child stunted‚ scarred‚ and infertile. Those on the Left seem hell-bent on forcing gender ideology in the name of safety‚ and Americans need to stand up and say‚ “No.” Thankfully‚ HHS’ Administration for Children and Families must read every single written comment that concerned Americans send in on the rule. Americans may make their voices heard by submitting comments at this link. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com ‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post New Biden Rule Reveals the Transgender Movement’s Endgame: No Dissenting Parents Allowed appeared first on The Daily Signal.

One buck almost turned a man into a doe -- a John Doe -- in one recent viral video. This belligerent Bambi rammed a tourist in the rib cage with his antlers as the unsuspecting shutterbug tried to snap a photo with the cloven clobberer. A Mexican tourist‚ Gian Carlo...

“It takes more than that to kill a bull moose‚” Teddy Roosevelt once quipped ... or maybe it doesn’t. The story of the two bull moose found dead with their antlers locked together in Fish Creek near Wilson‚ Wyoming‚ is a poignant reminder of the powerful and sometimes perilous interactions...