The Exodus of Black Men From The Democrat Party

 American Free News Network

"They look at anything masculine as being something toxic or something dangerous. The one thing the left doesn’t realize is, that masculine men don’t really care so much about feelings, at least not as much as they care about the facts."

"There has been a lot of talk about Black men this election cycle. Black men are still the Democratic party’s second most loyal voting bloc, but the left’s hostility toward masculinity and embrace of the matriarchy is causing a lot of Black men to reconsider whom they are voting for. The primary vocation of Black men is “voter,” not father, husband, coach, or mentor for the left. Black men are noticing and are no longer putting up with the disrespect.

"Black people, particularly Black men, are more vocal than ever about their criticism of the Democrat Party and their support for Trump. If you haven’t heard it in person, all it takes is just a quick scroll on X (formerly Twitter), and you are likely to find more people than ever voicing their disgust with the current Democrat party and/or their support for former President Trump. The most interesting thing is, that these are everyday “Black people,” not your well-known Black conservative influencers with thousands of followers that we are used to seeing.

"I believe we are seeing a major political shift happening in real time. I’ve been saying for quite some time now (at least 5 or 6 years) that Black men’s vote (as a voting block) is up for grabs. It’s good that Republicans are finally starting to see. But the Democrats are too. The gender gap issue is real. If we had taken Black men as a voting block seriously, I doubt that this election would look as close as it does. Hence, this is why you see the Democrat party making these recent awkward pitches toward men to try and get their votes in the final weeks leading to the election. Here’s the thing, for the people that we see who are speaking out in opposition against the Democrat Party, there are probably four to five more people on the fence who are silent but feel somewhat the same way.

I want to make something very clear. These Black men aren’t walking away from the Democrat Party because they’re in their feelings. They’re not walking away from the Democrat Party because they’re somehow misinformed and they’re being fooled. The “everyday” Black man has been invisible to the Democrat Party for quite some time now. So what is happening is that Black working-class men simply are realizing that the politics of the so-called political left in the United States does not serve them and by extension does not serve their Black family or our Black communities.

"Today’s Democrat party would rather see and prioritize a Black man in a dress, so they can tokenize them and use them for their so-called social justice narratives than prioritize a hard-working Black man with a family. Black men see this and are getting fed up. Thus, they are making the logical decision to do what is best for them and their family." . . .  More...

What German Soldiers Found in American Supply Depots SHOCKED Them

Echoes from the Battlefield "December 19th, 1944. 0430 hours. Near Stoumont, Belgium. Oberleutnant Friedrich Hartmann stood in the pre-dawn darkness, staring at what his reconnaissance patrol had just discovered. Behind a hastily abandoned American defensive line lay something that would fundamentally challenge everything the Wehrmacht understood about warfare, logistics, and the industrial capacity of their enemy.

"What the German soldiers found wasn't just supplies. It was a revelation that would shatter their conception of how wars could be fought and won. The contents of these American depots would expose the terrifying truth about the conflict they were losing—not through lack of courage or tactical skill, but through an industrial disparity so vast it rendered German resistance mathematically futile."

"The German offensive that would become known as the Battle of the Bulge had begun five days earlier on December 16th, 1944. Operation Wacht am Rhein represented Adolf Hitler's desperate gamble to split Allied forces, capture the port of Antwerp, and force a negotiated peace in the West. The initial assault achieved tactical surprise, with three German armies comprising over 200,000 men crashing through thinly held American positions in the Ardennes Forest.

"Kampfgruppe Peiper, the spearhead formation of the 1st SS Panzer Division Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler, had penetrated deepest into American lines. Under the command of Obersturmbannführer Joachim Peiper, this battle group consisted of approximately 4,000 men, 600 vehicles, and 100 tanks. Their mission was simple in concept but brutal in execution: drive west at maximum speed, seize bridges across the Meuse River, and create chaos in the American rear.

"By December 18th, Kampfgruppe Peiper had advanced nearly 40 miles, leaving destruction in its wake. But the rapid advance had created a critical problem documented in German military records. Fuel consumption had exceeded planning estimates by 300%. The Panther and Tiger tanks, while formidable weapons, consumed gasoline at rates the Wehrmacht's collapsing logistics network could no longer sustain. Each Panther tank required 270 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers. Each Tiger II consumed even more, approximately 450 liters for the same distance."

"German planning documents captured after the war revealed the offensive's fundamental flaw. Operations planners had calculated that fuel supplies would be sufficient for the first 48 hours only. After that, German forces were expected to capture American fuel depots and use enemy supplies to continue the advance. The entire operation hinged on seizing American logistics infrastructure intact."

Science Has Finally Come For Transgenderism

 American Spectator 

"While the recent opposition of atheist scientists to transgenderism is welcome, their championing a Godless world enabled the insanity."

British evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins has declared that “trans women are men,” and that transgender ideology is part of a movement to undermine biological truth.

"At the launch of his new book, The War on Science, leading atheist and emeritus fellow of New College, Oxford, Dawkins decried the infiltration of postmodernism and transgenderism into the halls of academia.

" 'Both politics and personal feelings don’t impinge scientific truths and that needs to be clearly understood. I feel very strongly about the subversion of scientific truth,” he told The Telegraph.

" 'I think part of what’s happened is the move of academia towards postmodernism, which is pernicious, and probably does account for the current vogue for the nonsense lie that sex is a spectrum.”

"And Dawkins is not alone in his “Eureka” moment. Late last year, three of the world’s most prominent atheists abruptly resigned their honorary board positions with the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), an American non-profit organization founded in 1978 to advocate for atheists and agnostics, championing “separation of church and state.” Dawkins was among those stepping down along with evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne and Harvard cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker — all citing the ideological capture of the organization by the transgender movement.

"Jerry Coyne, a professor emeritus with the University of Chicago, was first. On December 26th, Coyne responded to a column by Kat Grant titled “What is a Woman?” in which Grant concluded, with no small degree of circular reasoning: “A woman is whoever she says she is.” In a response titled “Biology is not bigotry” on FRF’s Freethought Now!, Coyne asserted that contrary to Grant’s claims, “the biological definition of ‘woman’ [is] based on gamete type.”

"Trans activists “came” for FFRF with a vengeance, and Coyne’s column was pulled the following day, accompanied by what could only be called a craven an apology titled “Freedom From Religion Foundation supports LGBTQIA-plus rights.” . . . 

Coyne, Pinker, and Dawkins are to be commended (that may be too affirming) for their defense of biology against the transgender assault on scientific truth. But let’s be clear, this trio have long championed a post-Christian society that has made the transgender movement not just possible, but perhaps even inevitable. Before we become too sanguine over the “conscience” of these “defenders of truth,” we should recognize that this atheist set and their “ethics” are every bit as unpalatable as those they now assail.

Is Being Insanely Stupid Actually a Cunning Democrat Strategy?

 Kurt Schlichter 

 . . . "Only till you realize that other people aren’t required to go along with your nonsense. That’s how it was for the left. They thought they had free run of society. They thought there would never be any accountability. But now there is, and they don’t know what to do. They can’t change." . . .

. . . "And they did it with not just straight faces, but with those sour, super-serious faces you might see on MSNBC – is it still even called that? – during their daily announcement that “Today, once, again, Trump has finally crossed over the line into Third Reich territory with his shameless doing of things that he promised to do before winning the last election. Oh, well, I never!” No wonder normal people look at the Dems and wonder if they say insane things intentionally, or if it’s some strategy that we lesser beings cannot comprehend that involves the use of incomprehensibly stupid assertions to crowbar open the Overton Window.

"You’ve got to wonder if they actually believe this stuff, or if they are simply saying the things that might keep their sociopathic left wing mutant allies from murdering them, too. In fact, some of those consultant-driven mini-videos that they’re all tweeting now – why do they all hold the lapel mic in their hand in front of their face, as if it were a demitasse cup of espresso from some continental café? – look more like hostage videos. “Why yes, we need to have a lumbering yeti with its member and its two buddies swinging from the yardarm in the teenage girls’ locker room because Rosa Parks would’ve wanted it that way!” they assert, eyes darting off camera to the frowning blue-haired 23-year-old gender studies major who is supervising them with a ring through her nose, looking like Ferdinand the Bull except significantly less hot.

"They are already in failure stasis. Look, when you go Nazi, you have a rhetorical problem. You can’t go further. You can’t do worse. You’re at max epithet – or, as celebrated wine woman heartthrob and capering lib court jester Ta-Nehisi Coates says, max “epitaph.” You’re not going to out-Hitler Hitler." . . . More

Kurt Schlichter (Twitter: @KurtSchlichter) was personally recruited to write conservative commentary by Andrew Breitbart. He was a Los Angeles trial lawyer, is a retired Army Infantry colonel with a masters in Strategic Studies from the United States Army War College, and is a former stand-up comic. . .

Trump Peace Plan: Netanyahu Says Hostage Release to be Finalized ‘in Coming Days’; UPDATED

 Legal Insurrection  

“ 'After negotiations, Israel has agreed to the initial withdrawal line, which we have shown to, and shared with, Hamas. When Hamas confirms, the Ceasefire will be IMMEDIATELY effective, the Hostages and Prisoner Exchange will begin…” – President Donald J. Trump"

"With President Donald Trump putting pressure on Hamas to deliver on his Gaza Peace Plan, Prime Minister Netanyahu, on Saturday night, told Israelis that the remaining hostages could return home soon.

"In a televised address, Prime Minister Netanyahu said that he hopes to announce the release of 48 remaining hostages, of which 20 are thought to be alive — “in the coming days.”

"Despite Hamas’s ongoing attempts to water down and sabotage the 20-point Gaza plan, the return of the hostages could be finalized during the weeklong Sukkot festivities that start on Monday. “It is not yet final; we are working on it diligently, and I hope, with G-d’s help, that in the coming days, during the Sukkot holiday, I will be able to inform you about the return of all our hostages, both living and deceased, in one phase, while the IDF remains deep within the Strip and in the controlling areas within it,” he assured.

Netanyahu: "We are on the brink of a very great achievement" as hostage deal nears completion⁠https://t.co/tmtEDwLDJG pic.twitter.com/M2GwuGnU59

— The Jerusalem Post (@Jerusalem_Post) October 4, 2025

"Israeli negotiators were heading to the Egyptian capital, Cairo, to finalize the hostage deal, the prime minister disclosed. “I have instructed the negotiating team, headed by [Minister of Strategic Affairs, Ron] Dermer, to go to Egypt to close the technical details of the release of our hostages,” Netanyahu said. “Our intention and that of our American friends is to limit this negotiation to a few days." . . . More... 

Trump's credibility at stake over Hamas destruction threat   "President Donald J. Trump risks discrediting himself as a master of bluster whose threats can be safely ignored when the stakes are high. The implications extend far beyond the Middle East: Antifa, Democrats, China, North Korea, Iran, Mexico, Venezuela, Russia, and even U.S. allies like Taiwan and Israel are watching closely as the president retreats in the face of Hamas calling his bluff.

"Writing in Israel National News, Dr. Avi Perry characterizes Hamas's “yes, but" response as a thinly disguised “No."

"Dr. Perry's analysis identifies Hamas response resting on “three pillars of refusal”:

1. Hamas refuses to disarm.
2. Hamas refuses to release all hostages within 72 hours.
3. Hamas refuses to leave Gaza.

"As Dr. Perry notes: “The message is unmistakable — Hamas intends to continue ruling Gaza, not as administrators of civilian life, but as the self-appointed vanguard of permanent war.” . . .

UPDATE: These graphic videos and images document the horrors of that day.

A Boycott of My Own: Film Stars and Their ‘Nazi Salutes’

"How many celebrity pro-Palestine signatories and self-appointed orators have majored in Middle Eastern studies or the history of religion?"

Phyllis Chesler  

"We, the people, should really think hard about who our celebrities are and what virtues we most admire. Knowledge or ignorance? Cowardice or courage? Independent thinking or tribal thinking?"

Do they even know what a Nazi is? A fascist?

"Although I oppose boycotts in principle, I’ve nevertheless been driven to consider launching one of my own.

"I will no longer rent a film that stars an actor or an actress who has signed a petition or delivered an unexpected shout-out at their award ceremony that condemned Israel for committing an alleged “genocide.” Quite frankly, I hereby denounce all Hollywood stars who have lip-synched a version of “Heil Hitler” by extemporaneously calling out: “Free Palestine.”

"This happened the other night at the Emmy Awards ceremony. Hannah Einbinder of the HBO comedy series “Hacks” ended her acceptance speech for outstanding supporting actress by slamming Israel, stating it was her “obligation” to do so. She wasn’t the only one, but she clearly used her bully pulpit to do so.

"I hope others consider joining this pitiful token action of mine. Imagine how much more time we might all have for reading, writing, cooking and gardening; time to engage in dinner conversations and, dare I write it, more time for helping others.

"Before I “name names,” let me ask: How many of these celebrity, pro-Palestine, anti-Israel signatories and self-appointed orators have majored in Middle Eastern studies, Israel studies, Arab studies, Judaism, Islam, Christianity, the history of religion or world history? How many film stars have gotten advanced degrees—a master’s or doctorate—in any of these areas?

"The answer: Not one that I can find so far.

"According to a 2025 Times Higher Education report, apparently most Oscar- and Emmy-winning celebrity actors and actresses have mainly studied theater arts, the history of art, fine arts, English literature, the English and French languages, music, photography, etc.

"Many Oscar winners dropped out midway through college (the amazing actresses Olivia Colman, Cate Blanchett, Julia Roberts, Helen Hunt, for example).

"Some male actors and actresses whose work I’ve admired did not attend college at all: (Joaquin Phoenix, Robert Benigni or Emma Stone).

"All have condemned Israel and called for the “freeing” of “Palestine.”

"Only some film stars have attended elite universities, such as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, the University of Cambridge and Columbia University. Just as well. They would probably have been even more heavily brainwashed. Many such celebrities attended a branch of the University of California or a California community college.

"One conclusion: These audience-anointed Olympians are not at all educated in the very areas they publicly proclaim as their principled positions. We cheer them on essentially for displaying their profound ignorance, groupthink, herd behavior and all-around ignorance."...   More

Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D, is an Emerita Professor of Psychology at City University of New York. She is a best-selling author, a legendary feminist leader, and a retired psychotherapist. She has lectured and organized political, legal, religious, and human rights campaigns in the United States, Canada, Europe, Israel, Central Asia, and the Far East.

The Poor Became Poorer Under Biden

 Issues & Insights 

"For the sake of argument, let’s say that Biden was able to get his billionaire tax passed into law – would his record on poverty have been better? No. Because even if every dollar owned by America’s billionaires was confiscated by Washington, it wouldn’t amount to much."

"Never trust a politician who promises to help the poor by taking from the rich. It never works. Joe Biden proved this point.

"While still in the White House, Biden promised that if reelected, he would levy a billionaire tax on the wealthiest Americans. It wasn’t the first time. During his 2023 State of the Union address, he railed that “the tax system is not fair, it’s not fair.” A year earlier, he proposed a “billionaire minimum income tax.”

"Even before he was president, Biden was fond of demanding that the rich pay their “fair share,” which makes a snappy sound bite but leaves open exactly what a “fair share” is and who gets to decide what rates are “fair.”

"Fortunately, Biden never got his billionaire tax.

"But he did succeed in making life more difficult for the poor. Both the overall and child poverty rates swelled while he was in office. The overall poverty rate grew by 40.2% from 2020 to 2024. The child poverty rate spiked by 38.1% over that same period.

" 'If you choose 2019 as your point of comparison, the increase in poverty under Biden is bad. If you choose 2020, it’s catastrophic,” says Jacobin magazine, which considers itself “a leading voice of the American left” that offers a “socialist perspective.”

"As it happens, 2019 was the year Biden told “rich donors at a ritzy New York fundraiser” that poverty was “the one thing that can bring this country down.” Salon said he “listed several new programs to help the poor that he would fund if elected.”

" 'We have all the money we need to do it,” he said.

"This is typical of Democrats. They have promised for the better part of a century that they will pull the poor out of poverty if they can just get their hands on more of other people’s money. Yet it never works that way. Biden and others can whine that poverty soared during his miserable presidency because they couldn’t raise taxes on the wealthy, but soaking the rich does nothing for the poor but hurt them.

"Our history clearly shows that when tax rates are cut, economic growth follows, and everyone, yes, even the poor, benefits. Economist Art Laffer, who drew that famous curve that “showed the relationship between tax rates and tax revenues” and helped shape Ronald Reagan’s growth-boosting economic policies, has made a career of explaining why this is." . . .