1/2 The Vance proposal is being sold as a correction for stay-at-home parents. That is not the real fight. The real fight is whether the right will convert family policy from a fiscally conservative project—stop punishing marriage, children, work, and parental choice—into a new federal cash program for private household arrangements. Once that conversion happens, the welfare state grows, the older pro-family agenda is crowded out, and the left inherits the principle. Start with what the draft actually does. It does not replace daycare subsidies with a clean, zero-sum payment to mothers at home. Most families never qualify for CCDF now. The program already fails to serve most of the people who are eligible. The draft does not repeal the existing daycare track. It adds a new claimant class—married households with one parent at home—onto a rationed pot. (Parenthetic comments from Grok: CCDF is the existing ~$12–14 billion work-support program that pays about $9,000 per child on average, serves roughly 15% of eligible children, and sends about 80% of current aid to single working parents. The draft creates “parent-based child care” for a married parent at home if the spouse works 35-plus hours, subject to the income cap. Unmarried couples and non-working single parents stay out of the new category. Daycare subsidies remain.) That is not neutrality. That is an expansion of who can receive a federal check for family life, plus the casework required to decide who qualifies. (States already run CCDF eligibility; the new category still requires verifying marriage, the spouse’s hours, that the at-home parent fits the box, and how to pay a parent as their own “provider.” Eligibility determination is already carved out of the 5% administrative cap, so the paperwork can grow without looking like a new department.) There is no serious enumerated-powers case for this. Paying parents to raise their own children is not among Congress’s listed powers. Neither is CCDF, but CCDF already exists, and repealing it is not the present debate. The present debate is whether to take a program justified as help so poor parents can work and turn it into compensation for staying home. (Under current Spending Clause doctrine a court would likely allow it; under a Madisonian reading both the old program and the new use fail, and the new use fails more cleanly because it drops the work nexus.) The natalist rationale makes the fiscal problem worse, not better. If the point is to encourage family growth, success means more children and more monthly payouts. Failure means the next demand is a bigger check. A per-child design is an escalator either way. (First-year cost is mostly take-up by married one-earner families who already exist and fall under the income line. $9,000 is not a replacement wage. If births do rise, outlays rise with them. If they do not, the political answer becomes “we didn’t spend enough.”) Hungary already ran the serious version of this experiment. Orbán spent at a scale Washington is not even proposing, conditioned benefits on marriage, and treated fertility as a government output. Births rose for a time and then fell back. The family did not recover. The transfer state did. That is the proof that the proper role of government does not include fixing the underlying moral problem of family collapse. Cash cannot restore marriage norms, delayed adulthood, or a culture that treats children as optional. Using the federal government as a stand-in for those missing norms fails on its own terms and trains the public to treat family formation as a state product. (Hungarian TFR went from about 1.23 in 2011 to about 1.61 around 2021, then to about 1.31 in 2025. Live births ended lower than when the project began. The mid-period bump looks like timing—earlier births—more than permanently larger families. Baby loans then produced couples who took the money and faced penalties when the promised children did not arrive.)

I have supported Israel for a long time. After thinking about my position for a while, I have come to a clear conclusion: I still support Israel and probably always will. My reasons are many, including: 1. I have been to Israel twice and have met numerous Israelis. The people of Israel are the most wonderful, kindest, most joyful people I have encountered. 2. I have extensively talked to both Israelis and Palestinians. Israelis want nothing more than peace. The other side not so much. 3. Israel is the safest and best place for Christians in the Middle East. Christians are thriving and the majority of them are happy with life. Being against the one nation were Christians are safe would be very stupid. Israel treats minorities exceptionally well. 4. Israel was brutally attacked by terrorists many times, despite their repeated (and in my opinion excessive) attempts to make peace by giving hostile countries and populations land to live on and many more compromises. The final attack on October 7 crossed all lines and taught Israel the lesson that you can never placate Islamic terrorists. I have seen more footage from October 7 than most Israelis have and I will never forget the gruesome acts of vile barbarism inflicted on innocent people, with the approval and celebration of most of the Palestinian population. I would support any nation fighting back until the end after such atrocities that are incomprehensible to sensible human beings. 5. Israel is fighting my enemy and your enemy if you are not an Islamist. Israel is fighting Islamists whose goal it is to dominate the Middle East and restart the caliphate. Islamists want to subjugate most of us and outright kill many of us including me. Israel is therefore a natural ally and I am happy to support them against the great evil in this world. 6. I have actually deeply studied the history of Israel, especially the 19th and 20th centuries. Only one side has consistently tried to build a peaceful future for all and that is Israel. "Palestine" is a late invention to fight and eradicate Israel. It should never be allowed. Had the Palestinian Arabs agreed to peace in the 1920s, 1940s, 1960s, 1980s, 1990s, or even possibly in the 2000s, we wouldn't be in this situation. 7. While I strongly disagree with Judaism and Jews may strongly disagree with my beliefs, I also value Judaism and Jewish beliefs and values which are mostly in line with Christian beliefs and values. The Apostle Paul had a very special love for his fellow Jewish people, even if they rejected his belief in Christ. He also told us that God loves them for their patriarchs and never revokes his gifts and callling. (Romans 11:28-32) 8. Israel built a beautiful nation that is unlike any other in the region. 9. The struggle and resilience of the Jewish people and their regathering and revival of their culture is unlike anything seen in human history, and I appreciate and love it. 10. I just want to. I don't care how many people jumped on the anti-Israel trend.

💯

After Darryl Cooper’s “chief villain” comment on Tucker Carlson, I cringed but tried to give the benefit of the doubt to Tucker. I reasoned it may have been a poorly deployed attempt to take Pat Buchanan’s position, which is basically that the British March 1939 guarantee was a blunder Britain could not honor, that it helped push Hitler into the Molotov-Ribbentrop deal, and that Poland was not saved. He still treated Hitler as the aggressor and Nazism as something to oppose. There are weaknesses with that analysis, but Buchanan also made all the necessary qualifications about opposing Nazism and saw Hitler as the villain. It was an argument against security agreements more than it was about winning WWII once started. Tucker, on the other hand, sows confusion. Recently, in his Rees-Mogg interviews he said: “I’m certainly not here defending Hitler” before arguing that Hitler’s case on the Polish corridor was “true.” He keeps implying that somehow losing WWII led to the demise of Great Britain as if the current conditions are the direct result of winning that war and not the centuries long embrace of liberalism as an ism before and after the war and illustrated much more indictable by other periods and events. If anything, Chamberlain’s “peace in our time” is more illustrative of the liberal spirit than Churchill’s bullishness. With Piers Morgan in November 2025 he pressed why winning “destroy[ed] Britain” and pointed at London: “it was ninety-nine percent [white] in nineteen forty-five” and is now on track, in his telling, to a white minority. With Rees-Mogg he said the UK “destroyed their empire and their country fighting this war that they still pretend was a good idea, but it wasn’t.” He asked: “Has the UK benefited from it?” and “Is it a better country than it was?” Simultaneously, he also has defended Pakistani immigration and implied it’s not a threat to Great Britain. In that same Morgan interview from 2025 he said “I’m not hating on the Muslims at all,” “I like the Bangladeshis better than I like the liberal whites in your country a lot more. They’ve never yelled at me,” and “I have more in common with the sincerely religious Pakistani cab driver than I do with anyone who works at the Times of London” or “the average Guardian staffer.” He called “hate the Muslim” “an op,” while still saying England is “pretty filthy” and that the things that made it England “are going away because there are different people living here.” I can only conclude that I gave Tucker a benefit of the doubt he did not deserve. At this point he’s just being historically inept with his simplistic cause and effect, applying it haphazardly, blaming Churchill for Great Britain’s current demise, while simultaneously encouraging part of that very demise himself.

Who’s ready for another 20% inflation?!

This is what we should be talking about that gutted our great American middle-class and gave rise to China as the greatest threat to American hegemony.

This is civilizational suicidal empathy. @GadSaad

💯

You do not despise these Jihadis enough.

Bakker made no royalties from this book and his repentance was genuine and lasting. We’ll see him in heaven one day, and only the Lord can judge his ultimate fruitfulness in ministry. I believe his life can nonetheless give us all some hope and confidence to press on the know the Lord despite our failures.

When I left Islam, I committed apostasy. I was dehumanized and tortured for it. I couldn’t believe the evil my own people were capable of. @liamtuffs1 asked a Muslim on his podcast: “so if someone left Islam, you’d kill em?” His response confirms what happened to me.

This is it. Finally. No, for reals. I think. I thought I said goodbye filming my last day on-camera in the @thechosentv. Days later, I thought I said farewell again, as we wrapped the entire series itself on our sound stage, despite knowing that marketing days were still ahead. But this Sunday, it was evident in my bones that not only had I spoken my last speech… not only had we filmed our last shot… but this would be my final day on the hallowed ground that connected me to the television series that changed my life, for what may be the rest of my life (but only God really knows). This moment I share with you here is part of the culmination of not only the last eight years playing the Savior of the world, but the last twelve years playing Him as part of my creative collaboration with the show’s visionary creator, Dallas Jenkins. To have the divine blessing of working on a show for eight years, and then to be gifted this cherry on top — walking onto set as Christ, to be captured on film by one of the great masters of the photographic arts, Annie Leibovitz, while listening to John Debney’s haunting score fill the spaces of the set — was at once transcendent and otherworldly. I was, for a moment, completely speechless. Seems to be a theme for me this past month. I cannot stress to you the profound beauty and brilliance of the compositions that Annie, her team, and our cast and team have had the opportunity to create together. A divine collaboration, if ever there was one. And I cannot wait for you to see the fruit of our intense labor, beginning with Season 6 (on @primevideo Nov 15) and continuing through the release of the final images from these shoots. Our week creating these stills was a reality that my castmates and I could scarcely wrap our minds around. God, in His goodness, is profoundly mysterious and deliberately sweet. The thank-you’s He’s given us in these final moments of the most important series of our lives are beyond anything any of us could have even imagined. I do hope you’ll join us this season as we enter into the end of this story… which ultimately is the beginning of another. I will write more as I am able. I just need a moment in between the chaos to catch my breath. Love and Blessings, - JR 🙏🏽♥️✝️

Don’t be a part of any church that tells you to ignore or endure abuse. This is why people aren’t trusting the church nowadays.

🤮🤮🤮

This is one of the dumbest conspiracies out there regarding the @Chiefs …

🔥

Three years ago, the world was introduced to Gazan society. Here are Gaza civilians displaying their culture. These videos were proudly recorded and posted by Gaza civilians on Palestinian social media.

This is absolutely sickening. Coffeyeh, a coffee shop in Cedar Park, Texas, just outside Austin, is giving free lattes on October 7th to anyone who comes in wearing a keffiyeh and can tell them "what day it is." October 7th is the day Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups stormed southern Israel, killed ~1,200 people, and dragged 251 hostages into Gaza. It was the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust. Turning the anniversary of a massacre into a coffee promo is sick. The Islamification of Texas continues.

You know who I've never seen doing things like this in any country to which they've immigrated? Jews.

By popular demand, here’s the full #LadderGate2026 sermon illustration. Week 7 of series through 2 Timothy, right after a few hundred people surrendered to Christ and are deciding whether to be obedient in baptism next week. Would do this again a thousand times for those ppl (if I weren’t getting too old for stuff like this!)