News   Mar 27, 2026
 354     0 
News   Mar 27, 2026
 953     3 
News   Mar 27, 2026
 450     0 

President Donald Trump's United States of America

The U.S. provides nearly $4 billion per year in non-repayable aid to Israel, almost entirely in weapons. Imagine if that went to education or healthcare in the U.S.

The difference between what Canada the US spend on healthcare (as a percentage of GDP) is the size of their military and intelligence budgets. They're not lacking for health and education spending. Indeed, universal healthcare would end or substantially reduce their deficit and possibly increase military spending. Obama regularly tried to explain this to Americans.

It's nonsensical that a small nation of about 10 million people (of which 75% are Jewish), located nearly 10,000 km away gets some much leverage over US domestic and foreign policy.

That has more to do with Evangelicals and their twisted beliefs about Israel in their mythology.
 
More grammatically speaking though...

 

CBS News lays off 6% of staff, kickstarting a Bari Weiss-led overhaul​

From https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/20/media/cbs-news-layoffs-bari-weiss-paramount

CBS News is laying off about 6% of its workforce, with executives explaining the cuts as a difficult but necessary reallocation of newsroom resources.

The news division currently has about 1,100 employees, so dozens will be departing as a result of Friday’s cutbacks.

This is the second round of layoffs at CBS News since David Ellison took control of Paramount last summer.

“These are very hard choices and today is a difficult day,” CBS News editor-in-chief Bari Weiss and president and executive editor Tom Cibrowski wrote in a memo to staff.

The previous cuts in October, which hit almost every corner of the organization, from streaming to radio, largely predated the arrival of Weiss, whom Ellison personally installed at the top. But this round is more specifically a reflection of her vision.

In their Friday morning memo, Weiss and Cibrowski framed the cuts this way: “It’s no secret that the news business is changing radically, and that we need to change along with it. New audiences are burgeoning in new places, and we are pressing forward with ambitious plans to grow and invest so that we can be there for them.”

“That means some parts of our newsroom must get smaller to make room for the things we must build to remain competitive,” they wrote.

One hour later, in a second memo, the executives told staff that CBS News Radio will sign off the air on May 22. “While this was a necessary decision, it was not an easy one,” they wrote. “A shift in radio station programming strategies, coupled with challenging economic realities, has made it impossible to continue the service.”

Friday’s cutbacks are a familiar story — but one punctuated by what many view as a sharp editorial and ideological shift for the news division under Weiss’ leadership.
After she arrived at CBS last October, Weiss was taken aback by both the obsolete nature of some operations and the depleted morale of some staffers, according to people who have spoken with her.

Weiss also perceived a stark resistance to change in some quarters of CBS. The staff overhaul stems, in part, from those observations.

“Employees who are affected will be notified by the end of the day,” Weiss and Cibrowski’s memo said. The note said “we’ll treat them all with care and respect” and acknowledged the “exceptionally intense” news cycle: “This organization is working its heart out to deliver for our audience. We’re so grateful to all of you, and we thank you for handling this difficult news with compassion.”

The second memo, specifically about radio, noted that “the coming weeks will be difficult for the team members” since they’ll be keeping the radio network on the air until May while knowing their jobs are ending.

Weiss tried to figure out a way to save the radio network, according to a source familiar with the cuts, but “the financials made it impossible,” with barely any revenue coming in.

Further changes at CBS News are expected in the coming months, especially as talent contracts expire.
 
Sound like a good way to encourage your allies... https://www.bbc.com/news/live/ce84073mr06t


Trump calls Nato allies 'cowards', saying it would be 'easy' for them to help open strait​

published at 10:00​

10:00Breaking​


We've just heard from US President Donald Trump, who has called Nato allies "cowards" and said it would be "easy" for them to allow ships to safely pass through the Strait of Hormuz.

Here's his post on Truth Social in full:

"Without the U.S.A., NATO IS A PAPER TIGER! They didn’t want to join the fight to stop a Nuclear Powered Iran.

"Now that fight is Militarily WON, with very little danger for them, they complain about the high oil prices they are forced to pay, but don’t want to help open the Strait of Hormuz, a simple military maneuver that is the single reason for the high oil prices.

"So easy for them to do, with so little risk. COWARDS, and we will REMEMBER!"
 
Sound like a good way to encourage your allies... https://www.bbc.com/news/live/ce84073mr06t


Trump calls Nato allies 'cowards', saying it would be 'easy' for them to help open strait​

published at 10:00​

10:00Breaking​


We've just heard from US President Donald Trump, who has called Nato allies "cowards" and said it would be "easy" for them to allow ships to safely pass through the Strait of Hormuz.

Here's his post on Truth Social in full:

"Without the U.S.A., NATO IS A PAPER TIGER! They didn’t want to join the fight to stop a Nuclear Powered Iran.

"Now that fight is Militarily WON, with very little danger for them, they complain about the high oil prices they are forced to pay, but don’t want to help open the Strait of Hormuz, a simple military maneuver that is the single reason for the high oil prices.

"So easy for them to do, with so little risk. COWARDS, and we will REMEMBER!"

He really should have thought about this before bombing Iran.

This is not NATOs war, this was not something that they chose to proceed with nor was it something the UN agreed was necessary. Trump started this war thinking it would be over quickly and that the US would overwhelm Iran.

Unfortunately, it is not going to plan and he is losing control over it. This is not our mess to clean up, it's his. Let Trump deal with the fallout, let him send ships there to defend the strait.
 
He really should have thought about this before bombing Iran.

This is not NATOs war, this was not something that they chose to proceed with nor was it something the UN agreed was necessary. Trump started this war thinking it would be over quickly and that the US would overwhelm Iran.

Unfortunately, it is not going to plan and he is losing control over it. This is not our mess to clean up, it's his. Let Trump deal with the fallout, let him send ships there to defend the strait.
Obviously the "allies", including Canada, think otherwise: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/canada-joint-statement-strait-hormuz-9.7135150
 
Sound like a good way to encourage your allies... https://www.bbc.com/news/live/ce84073mr06t


Trump calls Nato allies 'cowards', saying it would be 'easy' for them to help open strait​

published at 10:00​

10:00Breaking​


We've just heard from US President Donald Trump, who has called Nato allies "cowards" and said it would be "easy" for them to allow ships to safely pass through the Strait of Hormuz.

Here's his post on Truth Social in full:

"Without the U.S.A., NATO IS A PAPER TIGER! They didn’t want to join the fight to stop a Nuclear Powered Iran.

"Now that fight is Militarily WON, with very little danger for them, they complain about the high oil prices they are forced to pay, but don’t want to help open the Strait of Hormuz, a simple military maneuver that is the single reason for the high oil prices.

"So easy for them to do, with so little risk. COWARDS, and we will REMEMBER!"
If it's that easy, the US can do it while it's there. Ya know, the most powerful and bestest military in the history of the world that doesn't need help from nobody.
 
B
If it's that easy, the US can do it while it's there. Ya know, the most powerful and bestest military in the history of the world that doesn't need help from nobody.
But fascism doesn’t work if the state isn’t simultaneously al the epitome of strength and as fragile as a newborn.
 
It's incredible how one guy can fuck up the world so badly in just 1 year—not just his country who was dumb enough to elect him (TWICE!), but the entire world is watching this one guy fuck it all up for the rest of us. The World Economy is far too dependent on the United States and too intertwined with the price of oil.

If resource poor Cuba can replace 20% of their entire energy requirements with solar in just 12 months, then so can the richest nations on Earth. This moment can become an inflection point for a rapid move away from oil, if world leaders play their cards right. The longer that Strait remains closed, the faster every nation should be installing renewable energy. World leaders: spend your trillions on decentralizing energy from single points of failure instead of spending it on wars over oil.
 
It seems The War is not occupying him sufficiently, so he is ordering the FCC to restrict college football from competing for air time with the Army-Navy game.

He shows SO many signs of dementia and his supporters seem to know about them as they certainly picked up on those (far less destructive) exhibited by Biden. Of course, Vance would probably be worse!!!
 
Of course, Vance would probably be worse!!!

I disagree. No doubt Vance's policies would be just as conservative but they would be rational. Trump's are emotional and impulsive. He's hurting the US economy and his popularity with his own base by making enemies of America's allies and out of spite attacking their economies — which the US is dependent on.

Vance would be more deliberate to retain support of his party and its voter base. He would be far less capable of rounding up support within government and outside of it. He's not the leader of a cult and MAGA hasn't accepted him as Trump's heir apparent. I could see the Republican Party turning on him in factions because unlike Trump, he's not crazy and therefore wouldn't generate the kind of fear the GOP has show about Trump turning on them.

Marco Rubio is more likely to get the nomination in 2028, not Vance.
 
I disagree. No doubt Vance's policies would be just as conservative but they would be rational. Trump's are emotional and impulsive. He's hurting the US economy and his popularity with his own base by making enemies of America's allies and hurting they economies which the US is dependent on.

Vance would be more deliberate to retain support of his party and its voter base. Vance would be far less capable of rounding up support within government and outside of it. He's not the leader of a cult and MAGA hasn't accepted him as Trump's heir apparent. I could see the Republican Party turning on him in factions because unlike Trump, he's not crazy and therefore wouldn't generate the kind of fear the GOP has demonstrated about Trump turning on them.

Marco Rubio is more likely to get the nomination in 2028, not Vance.
If Vance replaces Trump because Trump dies or is declared incapable, it will be hard to dislodge him - though maybe easier to beat him in 2028.
 
If Vance replaces Trump because Trump dies or is declared incapable, it will be hard to dislodge him -

Depends on who he picks as VP. If he's dumb enough to appoint Rubio as his VP in an attempt to pacify him for 2028, I could see the GOP using Vance as a scapegoat for the mess that happened in Trump/Vance's term and chucking him at the earliest opportunity.
 
1000022036.jpg
1000022035.jpg
Screenshot_20260321_145822_Chrome.jpg
 
Last edited:

Back
Top