'Who's going to end up footing the bill'

'Screw you'

I had a human moment of reflection

The Royal Meteorological Society has announced the winners of this year’s Weather Photographer of the Year Competition. Sponsored by the financial services and banking firm Standard Chartered, the competition is now in its 10th year. Chosen from over 4,000 images received from both amateur and professional photographers from 84 countries—the judges’ winners were chosen by […] The post Winner of Weather Photographer of the Year Contest Shows There’s No End to a Rainbow (LOOK) appeared first on Good News Network.

New York City will choose its next mayor on Tuesday in a three-way race expected to send Democrat New York State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, a self-identified socialist, to Gracie Mansion. The leading candidates on the ticket are Mamdani as the Democrat nominee; former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is running as an independent after losing the Democrat primary; and the leader of the Guardian Angels, Republican Curtis Sliwa. The winner will succeed incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, who recently dropped out of the race after running as an independent. “I looked at the polls, and [it] looks like we’re going to have a communist as the mayor of New York,” President Donald Trump recently told The Daily Signal. Polls indicate the Queens-born president would be correct: A poll from Beacon Research/Shaw & Company Research shows Mamdani leading the race by far with 47% support, with Cuomo at a distant second with 31% support. Sliwa is in third place with 15% support. “It’ll be very interesting,” Trump said of a socialist running America’s largest city. “But here’s the good news: He’s got to go through the White House. Everything goes through the White House, at least [with] this White House, it does.” Mamdani’s Message Centers on Government-Created Affordability How Mamdani has managed to build and maintain a lead has also been interesting, strategists told The Daily Signal. “The Democratic message has been … ‘I will manage the decline better than anybody else.’ Nobody has been talking about reversing the decline,” Ryan James Gidursky, a veteran of New York City politics who now leads the 1776 Project PAC, told The Daily Signal. But Mamdani has bucked the messaging of other national Democrats and gone on offense. During a time of low approval ratings and a lack of institutional power in the Democratic Party, Mamdani’s rapid ascendance has been a rare example of Democrat enthusiasm after their crushing defeat in the 2024 presidential elections. Affordability has been the bedrock message of the Mamdani campaign, and he has repeatedly promised significant government intervention to address the city’s high cost of food, rent, and transportation. “It was a tangible message. ‘Freeze the rent’ is a tangible message … It’s a very easy to understand tangible thing that he hit over and over and over and over again,” Gidursky continued. “I think it’s more of a condemnation of the way New York has run than the way the country has run, because he may have stomped his feet about ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] or something here or there, but a lot of what he hit on was local.” Mamdani has found success through a simple promise of, “I’m going to protect you,” Gidursky argued. Chapin Fay, a political and media strategist and CEO of Lighthouse Public Affairs, told The Daily Signal, “I think the Democratic Party led by places like New York City, and America is headed to where Zohran Mamdani is.” The core of Mamdani’s pitch is government-created affordability. Mamdani, Fay said, “is talking about something that has long been an issue in New York City—probably everywhere in the country more acutely recently—affordability.” “There is no more middle class, really, in New York City. It is people who can afford to live here and people who can’t afford to leave,” Fay continued. “You’re not raising your kids in the city anymore, really, unless you’re a billionaire, right, and you have the means to make it safe, pleasant, and educational for them, [otherwise,] you’re not staying here.” Fay’s analysis may help explain why Mamdani has made inroads with the city’s young voters, whose turnout propelled him to victory in the Democrat primary. “Mamdani is talking about affordability and things that matter with this demographic,” Fay explained. “You can just see the generational impact play out in real time,” Fay said of New York City’s current political landscape. “You see Zohran everywhere, speaking very well everywhere he goes, talking about his politics. That’s something on the Left that young people talk about. You don’t hear Andrew Cuomo talking about his personal politics,” Fay added. “[Cuomo is] talking much more old school.” The cohort of younger voters propping up Mamdani, however, are causing the very problems that they want Mamdani to solve, says Ellie Cohanim, a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum and former U.S. deputy special envoy to combat antisemitism. “Mamdani’s base consists of mostly wealthy, white, highly educateds who have moved into NYC post college and are gentrifying so many neighborhoods in New York, often pushing out the moderate voters from the Greek, Italian, Hispanic, and black communities,” Cohanim told The Daily Signal. The coalition that delivered victory for Mamdani on primary might not be durable enough to win a general election. “I believe that Mamdani won the Democrat primary due to voter apathy, but the record early voting numbers [for the general election Tuesday] are telling a different story,” Cohanim said, predicting a shocking win for Cuomo on Tuesday night. Radical Policies, Radical Rhetoric Mamdani, 34, would be the first ever Muslim mayor of the largest city in America, as well as its youngest in over a century. (Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images) The Democrat nominee has passed on opportunities to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada;” has defended Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil; and has called for city-run grocery stores, free buses, and a freeze on rents as ways to address the city’s high cost of living.  He has also released a policy proposal to budget $65 million for “gender-affirming care” for “both transgender youth and adults.” “My greatest concern is that the safety and security of New Yorkers will suffer under a Mayor Mamdani,” Cohanim told The Daily Signal. “Whether it’s his belief that the NYPD is ‘racist;’ or his vow to disband NYPD’s special-ops group—the very group that has responded to the violent pro-Hamas mobs that have targeted Jews since 10/7, as an example—I am concerned for the safety of Jewish New Yorkers in particular and all New Yorkers as we try to go about our daily lives in the city.” Mamdani, born in Uganda to ethnically Indian parents, has found ways to appeal to immigrant communities with advertisements in Spanish and Arabic. There were “lots of Asians that voted for him [in the primary] and a smattering of other ethnics like, you know, he didn’t win the Puerto Rican vote, but he did very well with the Central American Hispanic voter in places like Queens. He won the Asian vote overwhelmingly [and] Muslim voters,” Gidursky told The Daily Signal. “So it’s a smattering of recent immigrants, woke whites. He didn’t do super well with blacks, but he did fine.” National Democrats Rally Around Mamdani’s Momentum Early on, Mamdani picked up support from fellow democratic socialists Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. He has also received endorsements from other prominent Democrats, among them New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, and former Vice President Kamala Harris. Recently, he was endorsed by U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. The lack of an endorsement from Jeffries for months suggests national Democrat leaders have been hesitant to support him. New York Democrat Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand have yet to endorse Mamdani. Van Hollen has accused New York Democrats of “spineless politics” for not backing Mamdani. Republicans Look to Make Mamdani the New Face of the Democratic Party Republicans in Washington have seized on the ascendance of Mamdani as a way to tie his urban policy proposals to the national Democratic Party. Recently, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., alleged a radical wing of the Democratic Party—exemplified by Mamdani—has put pressure on Democrat congressional leaders to keep the government shut down. “The new power center of the Democrat Party is one that should frighten every commonsense American,” said Johnson. “Exhibit A is Zohran Mamdani. New York City, America’s largest city, the cradle of capitalism … they’ve got a 34-year-old, unproven, untested socialist who looks to be the next mayor.” “Mamdani is a big issue here in the halls of Congress. Why? Because the second-highest ranked Democrat in the country, leader Jeffries, endorsed him,” said Johnson. “They’re making Mamdani a mainstream Democrat now. This party has left the people.” Johnson’s efforts to make Democrats suffer politically for their association with Mamdani are much like the broader Republican strategy going into the 2026 House midterm elections. Last week, the National Republican Congressional Committee released a memo detailing a “Battle Plan to Weaponize Mayor Mamdani in Battleground Districts.” “The NRCC will ensure every voter knows Zohran Mamdani is synonymous with the Democratic Party nationwide,” the memo reads. Can Mamdani Deliver for New York? As the Big Apple anticipates a likely four-year experiment with socialist policy, a question has emerged—will Mamdani have the power to implement all of his policies? Mamdani’s opponents have consistently accused him of making promises that cannot be translated into effective policies. ?SLIWA: ‘Zohran, Stop Dealing With Fantasy and Start Dealing With Reality’@CurtisSliwa called Zohran Mamdani out after he discussed his proposal to make the minimum wage $30 in New York City by 2030.“Zohran Mamdani deals with fantasy, not reality. Look at all the Uber… pic.twitter.com/hOykwRsKQp— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) October 23, 2025 “Zohran Mamdani deals with fantasy, not reality,” Sliwa said in the final debate regarding Mamdani’s proposal to raise the minimum wage to $30.  Cuomo said of Mamdani’s rent-freezing promises: “It’s all B.S. because the mayor doesn’t have the power to do it anyway. The rent guidelines board does, and he doesn’t control the rent guidelines board.” “Nothing is going to happen … It’s just more political blather,” Cuomo said. ? @ZohranKMamdani: ?‘If You Want a Candidate for Mayor Who Tells You Everything That He Cannot Do, Then Andrew Cuomo Should Be Your Choice’https://t.co/X6mooWOHmv pic.twitter.com/s7GlQ7kyvU— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) October 22, 2025 Mamdani handled this accusation by saying, “If you want a candidate for mayor who tells you everything that he cannot do, then Andrew Cuomo should be your choice. If you want a candidate for mayor who will use every tool at their disposal, including the nine appointees at the rent guidelines board—all of whom are appointed by the mayor—then I am the candidate for you.” Mamdani has made alleged failures of his opponents a focus of his campaign, accusing the sitting mayor, Adams, of corruption and cozying up to the Trump administration; and highlighting Cuomo’s mismanagement of COVID-19 as well as sexual harassment allegations. Mamdani vs. Trump? It remains to be seen how Trump and Mamdani would work together, but the prospects do not look great. Mamdani has pledged to fight the administration’s deportation policies, saying, “What I would be doing is reminding New Yorkers of their rights, making it clear that this is not something that we stand for, being proud of our sanctuary city policies and utilizing the courts.” (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images) Nevertheless, Mamdani has also said he “will continue to be open to speaking with Donald Trump, to meeting with Donald Trump, all of it on the premise of actually supporting New Yorkers.” Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell contributed to this report. The post New York City Braces for Mamdani’s Likely Victory appeared first on The Daily Signal.

We spend a lot of our time reading and analyzing judicial decisions from all over the country. But we don’t decide winners and losers based on whether or not we like the particular result. Instead, we look at whether the judge did what he was supposed to and impartially applied the law to the facts. Lately, though, we’ve seen more and more decisions by what can only be termed rogue judges, who defy the law by rejecting the statutory and constitutional limits on their authority. We’re going to highlight some of the offenders with a dishonorable conduct award. The first one goes to federal Judge Edward Chen, an Obama appointee who presides in the Northern District of California. In the ongoing lawfare campaign against President Donald Trump, Chen twice enjoined Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s decision to end temporary protected status for 600,000 Venezuelans. We’re also giving a dishonorable mention to Judges Kim McLane Wardlaw, Salvador Mendoza Jr., and Anthony D. Johnstone (also Democrat appointees) of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,  who affirmed that lawless decision. Under a federal statute, 8 U.S.C. §1254a, the secretary of Homeland Security has authority to provide temporary protected status to aliens who cannot safely return to their native country for specific reasons such as an ongoing conflict, natural or environmental disaster, or other “extraordinary and temporary conditions” unless allowing them to remain in this country would be “contrary to the national interest.” Biden’s DHS Secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, first granted that status to Venezuelans in 2021. He renewed it in 2023 and then again in January 2025 as he left office. But once Trump took office, Noem ended the latest extension, which would have lasted until October 2026. Predictably, the Left sued. Chen issued a temporary restraining order, claiming that Noem’s decision was “predicated on negative stereotypes” about Venezuelans. The Supreme Court stayed that order and sent the case back. Refusing to take no for an answer—even when that “no” came from the Supreme Court—Chen subsequently issued a permanent injunction against the termination of temporary protected status. This time, he claimed Noem’s decision was “arbitrary and capricious” and “exceeded the Secretary’s statutory authority.”  The Ninth Circuit upheld the injunction, but the Supreme Court again stayed the attempt. These judges acted dishonorably for a simple and glaringly obvious reason. The temporary protected status statute specifically says that there can be “no judicial review of any determination of the [Secretary] with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state.”   There are many federal statutes with a lot of confusing or ambiguous language, but this is not one of them. “No judicial review” means, well, “no judicial review. Congress gave authority to issue or revoke temporary protected status solely to the secretary of Homeland Security and deprived judges of all jurisdiction to review, question, examine, or reconsider the secretary’s decision to grant or terminate protected status. Again, “no” means “no.” Chen, therefore, had no authority to issue a restraining order—let alone a permanent injunction—much less hear the case at all. Undeterred by the plain letter of the law, though, Chen jumped to evaluate Noem’s decision under the Administrative Procedure Act, or APA, which governs agency actions. But—to state the painfully obvious—a court can examine whether an agency action meets the APA’s standard only if it has jurisdiction to do so in the first place! The Ninth Circuit affirmed Chen’s injunction, saying that it was reviewing the “extent of statutory authority granted to the Secretary” to make such a TPS determination. “No judicial review,” however, means that the court has no authority to examine the extent of the secretary’s authority at all. Seriously, what part of “no judicial review” do these judges not understand? Thankfully, the federal judicial system has three levels, not two, and the Supreme Court had no problem reading the statute that seemed so vague and fuzzy to the lower court judges. Even then, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, wanting to continue pretending that Congress did not say what everyone knows it said. Jackson, for example, acting as if she were the secretary of Homeland Security, deplored the possible consequences of revoking temporary protected status for Venezuelans, who might be “left vulnerable to job loss, family separation, and deportation.” While Noem might consider such factors, judges may not. Why? Because… wait for it… they have no authority to review the secretary’s decision. Period. This isn’t a case where well-meaning judges focused on a statute’s language but read it differently. No, these judges simply ignored the statutory language altogether and attempted to exercise authority that Congress has denied them. That literally makes their decisions in this case lawless—and makes them easy winners of our “October Dishonorable Conduct Award.” We’re sure they’ll frame it and hang it on the walls of their chambers. The post The Dishonorable Conduct Award: Judges Who Threw out the Statute with the Bathwater appeared first on The Daily Signal.

President Donald Trump said he would withhold Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits until Senate Democrats vote to reopen the government. “SNAP BENEFITS, which increased by Billions and Billions of Dollars (MANY FOLD!) during Crooked Joe Biden’s disastrous term in office (Due to the fact that they were haphazardly “handed” to anyone for the asking, as opposed to just those in need, which is the purpose of SNAP!), will be given only when the Radical Left Democrats open up government, which they can easily do, and not before!” he wrote on TruthSocial. The Trump administration had previously told a judge Monday that it would use contingency funds to partially fund the SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps, during the federal government shutdown. More than 40 million Americans use SNAP to pay for groceries. The Department of Agriculture had planned to freeze payments starting Nov. 1 because it said it could no longer keep funding the benefits due to the now 34-day shutdown. In response, Patrick Penn, the USDA official who oversees SNAP, told a Rhode Island judge that the Trump administration would use an emergency fund of $4.65 billion to cover about half the normal benefits for November. The full cost of SNAP benefits is $8 billion each month. According to Penn, the administration had said it intended “to deplete SNAP contingency funds completely and provide reduced SNAP benefits for November 2025.” The White House’s Office of Management and Budget did not immediately respond to The Daily Signal’s request for clarification on the president’s statement. The post One Day After Finding SNAP Funding During Shutdown, Trump Says He Will Withhold Benefits appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. A new round of scrutiny has emerged on Capitol Hill following former White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre’s testimony about how the Biden administration handled videos that showed President Joe Biden appearing confused or frail and the pressure to have these videos removed online. During her September 12, 2025, appearance before the House Oversight Committee, Jean-Pierre defended the administration’s use of the term “cheap fakes” to describe the clips, language critics now say was part of a wider censorship effort to discredit and suppress unflattering footage of the president. The exchange, of which the transcript has recently been made available, shed new light on a communications strategy that began while Jean-Pierre was still in the White House. We obtained a copy of the transcript for you here. In 2024, she and other officials routinely dismissed viral clips showing Biden wandering off during events or appearing momentarily disoriented as “cheap fakes” or “deepfakes.” The videos, many of which came from official public recordings, caused widespread discussion about the president’s health. At the time, the Biden administration insisted the footage was manipulated, maliciously edited. “We’re seeing these deepfakes, these manipulated videos, and it is, again, done in bad faith,” Jean-Pierre said from the White House podium in response to reporters’ questions about Biden’s behavior at the G7 summit in Italy and a Juneteenth celebration in Washington. The administration’s position was reinforced by a newly formed campaign task force tasked with pressuring social media companies to remove or flag the videos. Campaign spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg said the effort was intended to ensure voters were “well-informed and not misled.” But Jean-Pierre’s testimony revealed uncertainty over how the “cheap fakes” narrative was created. She told investigators that the phrase appeared in her official briefing binder, though she could not recall who added it. She said the term originated with the media and that the White House was simply “elevating…what the media was saying.” When asked whether any of the videos showing Biden freezing or appearing confused were real, Jean-Pierre said she did “not recall any that were real.” The Oversight Committee, led by Chairman James Comer, is now probing whether the administration’s messaging crossed into coordinated suppression of legitimate political speech. Lawmakers argue the “cheap fakes” campaign echoed the same tactics under review in Murthy v. Missouri, the Supreme Court case that challenges alleged government pressure on social media platforms to censor disfavored viewpoints. During the Biden years, the push to label clips of the president as misleading aligned with the broader federal effort to combat so-called “disinformation.” The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) had already been urging platforms to apply mandatory labels to AI-generated media, but the White House went further, demanding action against videos that were not proven to be manipulated. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Biden “Cheap Fakes” Defense Under Fire After Hill Testimony appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Guys Who Work for a Living Think Dems are 'Weak,' 'Woke' and Unfocused

The comet survived a close encounter with the Sun to start shining gold.