The US Should Exit the UN

 Wendy McElroy argues that the United States should withdraw from the United Nations (UN) due to its ineffectiveness and the problems it presents, particularly concerning its failure to address issues like human rights violations by member states such as Iran. She suggests that the UN's current operations contradict its original mission regarding equality and human rights.

1. Criticism of the UN: The UN is described as an ineffective bureaucracy that increasingly promotes political agendas rather than pursuing equality and human rights. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has criticized the UN for not effectively uniting member countries against human rights abuses, questioning the organization's utility.

2. Historical Context: The UN was founded on principles aimed at promoting human rights and equality, as stated in its Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, McElroy argues that it has strayed from these founding ideals.

3. Current Policies and Ideologies: McElroy claims that the UN now embodies “woke” ideologies, focusing on social justice and equity rather than true equality. This shift is seen as leading to increasing inequities and divisions among member states and populations. For example, UN initiatives focus heavily on women’s rights without comparable support for men's issues.

4. Gender Focus of the UN: The UN Women commission emphasizes a gender-focused agenda, promoting women's rights while neglecting similar frameworks for men, despite both genders facing unique challenges. This is viewed as a clear indication of the UN’s bias, as men are generally not represented in UN discussions about gender equality.

5. Financial Issues: McElroy notes that the UN relies significantly on funding from its member states, particularly the US, which contributes about a quarter of the budget. Financial struggles within the UN have been emphasized, with suggestions that a failure to secure funding could lead to a diminished status for the organization.

6. Future Leadership Concerns: The potential appointment of Michelle Bachelet as the next UN Secretary-General raises concerns, as she is characterized as aggressively promoting woke policies. McElroy argues that this could exacerbate existing issues within the UN.

McElroy calls for the United States to exit the UN altogether, warning that if the current trends continue, the organization will become increasingly unaligned with its founding values. She highlights that funding challenges could weaken the UN's influence, suggesting that a dissolution or collapse of the UN might ultimately be beneficial.

The article encourages discussions related to the effectiveness and direction of international organizations like the UN and presents a view that advocates for significant changes in how global governance operates, particularly in its commitment to equality and human rights. 

https://brownstone.org/articles/the-us-should-exit-the-un/

SCOTUS Delivers Another Set of Back-to-Back Defeats for the All Powerful D.C. Court System

 Recent rulings from the U. S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) have once again limited the powers of the D. C. district courts, reinforcing presidential authority, particularly regarding immigration and executive decisions. This summary outlines key cases and decisions, showcasing the ongoing tension between the judiciary and executive branches.

1. Fischer v. U. S. Ruling:

● The Supreme Court criticized the D. C. district courts for their handling of cases involving January 6 protesters. The majority of judges were found to have improperly applied a corporate fraud statute, which led to severe penalties for over 300 individuals. This ruling disrupted ongoing prosecutions and required reevaluation of prior convictions.

2. Presidential Immunity Established:

● Another ruling affirmed broad presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, pushing back against D. C. judges who dismissed President Trump's immunity claims related to a Special Counsel investigation. Chief Justice Roberts remarked on the expedited and questionable processes of the local courts.

3. Refugee Status Case:

● In a recent case, the Supreme Court overturned a D. C. judge’s ruling that temporarily halted the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitian refugees. Judge Ana Reyes’ decision claimed it was racially motivated; however, the Supreme Court found that the lower courts overstepped their bounds and confirmed that such executive decisions are generally not subject to judicial review.

4. Executive Authority Reinforced:

● Another significant decision involved the firing of an FTC commissioner by President Biden. The high court ruled against a lower court that supported the commissioner’s claim to remain in her position, reasserting that the president has the authority to remove appointees without needing to justify inefficiency or misconduct. This decision overruled precedent set by the 1935 Humphrey’s Executor case.

5. Ongoing Judicial Challenges:

● The outcomes show a clear pattern of the Supreme Court striving to maintain a balance of power, particularly regarding the judicial overreach observed in Washington D. C. Courts have challenged administration policies on immigration and executive appointments, causing significant delays and obstacles in the president's initiatives.

The recent Supreme Court decisions exemplify a firm pushback against judicial overreach, particularly by the D. C. courts. These rulings emphasize the necessity for courts to respect executive authority, highlighting the ongoing struggle between these two branches of government. The implications for future governance and judicial authority remain significant as both sides navigate these legal challenges. 

https://www.declassified.live/p/scotus-delivers-another-set-of-back

Land of the Free Because of the Brave

 The bravery and significance of the Continental Congress's decision to declare independence from Britain in 1776. It highlights the challenges faced by the early American revolutionaries and commemorates their legacy as the United States celebrates its 250th anniversary.

● Historical Perspective: The outcomes of historical events, like battles, seem clear in hindsight, but during their occurrence, the results were uncertain. The early American victory against Britain seemed improbable in 1775.

● Roots of Independence: The desire for independence arose from increasing tyranny imposed by the British government, including taxes and a standing army in the Colonies. The Declaration of Independence listed these grievances.

● Continental Congress: In 1775, the Second Continental Congress met, forming a de facto government. They created an army, appointed George Washington as commander, and established a naval and military presence.

● Common Sense: Thomas Paine’s pamphlet, published in January 1776, advocated for independence and significantly influenced public sentiment among the delegates and Colonists.

● Risks of Declaration: Signing the Declaration symbolized a commitment to rebellion against the Crown, placing the signers at great risk. They pledged their lives, fortunes, and honor.

● Challenges Faced: The path to independence was arduous, with significant sacrifices made by Continental soldiers, who faced harsh conditions and superior British forces.

● Consequences for Signers: Many of the 56 signers suffered severe repercussions, including death, imprisonment, and loss of their homes and businesses during the war.

The courage displayed by the signers of the Declaration of Independence and their willingness to risk everything for freedom is a critical part of American history. Their actions laid the foundation for future generations, and it is now the responsibility of all Americans to uphold and cherish the freedoms they secured. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/06/land-of-the-free-because-of-the-brave/

TPS Has Always Been A Giant Scam

 

The Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program for Haitians in the U. S., highlighting a recent interview with Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin. This interview has raised questions about the legitimacy of the TPS program and the status of many Haitians currently living in the U. S.

1. Background of TPS for Haitians: TPS was first granted to Haitians in 2010 after a devastating earthquake. The program allows individuals from countries facing unsafe conditions to stay in the U. S. without deportation.

2. Controversy Over TPS: In June 2024, the Biden administration expanded TPS, making 300,000 additional Haitians eligible. This move has raised concerns about the program's intent, as many beneficiaries allegedly entered the U. S. illegally from Mexico.

3. Homeland Security Secretary's Defense: Mullin stated that Haitians under TPS can apply for permanent residence if they go through the proper legal channels, which contradicts the notion that they all entered lawfully.

4. Illegal Immigration Patterns: The article suggests many Haitians did not flee directly from Haiti but left stable lives in South America to seek better economic opportunities in the U. S. The influx occurred after Biden took office, as many believed they would not face deportation.

5. Claims of Asylum: To gain TPS, many individuals discarded their legal documents from South American countries, which would indicate their legal status there and undermine their asylum claims in the U. S.

6. Criticism of TPS as Temporary: The article argues that TPS has been used as a tool for indefinite residency rather than for its intended purpose. This has led to inconsistencies and prolonged residency for individuals who should have returned to their home countries once conditions improved.

7. Supreme Court Ruling: A recent Supreme Court decision allows the Trump administration's efforts to revoke TPS for Haitians, which is met with opposition from some who argue that Haiti remains unsafe.

8. Conclusion on TPS: Critics of TPS claim it has become a loophole for illegal immigrants rather than a genuine asylum program. The debate continues over the status of Haitians in the U. S. and the future of TPS as a program.

The article articulates a critical perspective on the TPS program for Haitians, highlighting its misuse as a pathway for some to gain permanent residency in the U. S., while raising important questions about immigration policy and the enforcement of federal immigration laws. This situation reflects the broader, ongoing debate surrounding immigration in the U. S. 

https://thefederalist.com/2026/06/30/tps-has-always-been-a-giant-scam/

Nation's Report Card shows further decline in literacy, GOP Rep Owens says system 'failing' students

 Recent data from the Nation’s Report Card indicates that student achievement is declining across the United States, especially in reading, writing, and comprehension skills. There is a notable disparity in performance, with Black and Hispanic students scoring lower than their White and Asian peers, despite higher graduation rates.

● Many educators are concerned about the "equitable grading" practices that may inflate scores for historically disadvantaged students, creating a false sense of achievement.

● Surveys reveal that about half of teachers in urban school districts apply such grading practices, including policies that allow unlimited retakes and no penalties for late submissions.

● Utah GOP Rep. Burgess Owens argues that these ideologies harm the very students they aim to help and suggests that the education system itself is failing these students.

● Owens advocates for more "school choice," allowing parents to choose better educational environments for their children regardless of their socioeconomic status.

● Despite rising graduation rates for Black and Hispanic students, experts warn that these numbers do not reflect true preparedness, but rather a practice of social promotion.

● Noteworthy districts like Chicago and Atlanta show high graduation rates alongside low literacy proficiency, indicating a disconnect between graduation metrics and actual educational success.

● Evidence from districts that prioritize rigorous academic standards and school choice, like New Orleans, shows improvement in student performance.

Overall, the report indicates that real education reform is necessary, focusing on high academic standards and true educational opportunities for all students to close the achievement gap effectively. 

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/education/ed-experts-lawmakers-say-school-choice-helps-black-and-hispanic-students

The New Socialists: Elite, Ungrateful, and Toxic as Ever

 The emerging influence of new socialists in America, highlighting their ideologies, tactics, and potential consequences for the Democratic Party and the nation. The author, Victor Davis Hanson, argues that the radicalism of these new socialists may ultimately alienate voters and provoke a pushback.

1. Emergence of New Socialists: The article describes how new radical socialists, often likened to Jacobins, believe they are taking over the Democratic Party. Their influence has created fear among traditional Democrats, leading to a struggle within the party.

2. Increased Radicalism: The new socialists have adopted extreme positions, including open borders, dismantling democratic structures, and supporting antisemitic sentiments. This is exemplified by Jewish American Democrats feeling threatened by the radical changes and ideologies pushed by their own party’s new members.

3. Class Division: There’s a notable divide between wealthy individuals who hope to escape harsh socialist policies and those who view these policies as beneficial. The author discusses a fear among the rich that proposed taxes and property seizures could target them.

4. Hidden Agendas: Many socialist policies lack popular support, yet the agenda includes expansive government control over various sectors like housing, health care, and education. Their true beliefs often surface through social media, revealing a radical intention beneath presented civility.

5. Cultural Shift: The new socialists engage in cultural campaigns to enforce progressive values, altering traditional societal norms. Their tactics include dismantling law enforcement and reshaping educational curricula to reflect their ideology.

6. Contradictory Views: The radical socialists express contempt toward the American middle class and the foundations of American society. This contradicts the generosity and opportunities that they, being beneficiaries of the system, have received.

7. Roots of Hatred: The article suggests that the hatred displayed by new socialists stems from envy of successful individuals and a broader disdain for the values represented by American capitalism.

8. Historical Context: The author connects the current socialist push to historical movements, likening them to past radical groups. He posits that these socialists wish to dismantle the American system and reshape it into something unrecognizable.

9. Counter-Revolutionary Forces: Mentioning Donald Trump, the author frames him as a counter-revolutionary figure who opposes the socialist agenda. Trump’s actions, according to Hanson, threaten the socialists' goals, further deepening the ideological battle.

10. Future Implications: There’s a concern about whether the Democratic Party can balance itself in light of its leftward shift while maintaining broader electoral support. The article questions whether the path the party is taking aligns with the desires of the average American.

The article critically examines the rise of new socialists in America, emphasizing their radical agendas and the implications for the future of the Democratic Party and American society. The author warns that the extreme beliefs of these factions may provoke significant counter-responses from the electorate, reshaping political dynamics in unforeseen ways.

https://amgreatness.com/2026/06/30/the-new-socialists-elite-ungrateful-and-toxic-as-ever/

When Has Negotiating With Islamic Terrorists Ever Worked?

 The historical and current challenges the United States faces when negotiating with Islamic states, particularly in dealing with terrorism and hostage situations. It explores the implications of such negotiations and the lessons learned from past experiences.

1. Historical Context: Nearly 250 years ago, early American leaders, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams, attempted to negotiate with Islamic pirate states to stop the capture of American ships. They discovered that these negotiations often led to broken agreements due to inherent religious justifications for war against non-Muslims.

2. Current Negotiations: The U. S. is once again negotiating with Iran regarding attacks on international shipping, despite previous failures. Critics argue that these negotiations could lead to smart diplomacy, while critics highlight that such strategies have historically resulted in increased terrorism.

3. Track Record of Negotiations: Past negotiations with Iran, as well as agreements made during different U. S. administrations, have failed, often resulting in more hostage-taking and terrorism. The publication details examples including the Algiers Accord and deals struck during the Obama and Trump administrations, which led to ongoing violations and violence.

4. Trust Issues: Historical relationships with countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia show a pattern of deception, with these nations harboring terrorists while professing to be allies. The U. S. continues to engage with these states despite their past actions.

5. Lessons Learned: The content emphasizes that the underlying hostility and lack of shared values make negotiations ineffective. It recalls the warnings from America's Founding Fathers, suggesting that the U. S. has repeatedly ignored these lessons.

Negotiating with Islamic terrorist states has not yielded positive results historically and is unlikely to do so in the future. Understanding the past is crucial to avoid repeating the same mistakes. 

https://www.frontpagemag.com/when-has-negotiating-with-islamic-terrorists-ever-worked/