Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

How would people react if, on the third time their broken-down car was towed to the same repair shop for the same problem, the swaggering mechanic told them: “Sure — the engine doesn’t work today but — follow me on this — next year, you will drive from coast to coast, and get 90 miles to the gallon!”

Yet if a politician promises to fix the world, people applaud and follow him regardless of previous crashes.

Woodrow Wilson revolutionized the political exploitation of idealism. In his 1917 speech to Congress calling for war against Germany, Wilson proclaimed that “the world must be made safe for democracy.” He described the U.S. government as “one of the champions of the rights of mankind” and stated the goal of the war was to “bring peace and safety to all nations and make the world itself at last free.”

Wilson endlessly invoked the ideal of liberty as he seized nearly absolute power over Americans, including the power to conscript millions of Americans to fight wherever he chose (including Siberia) and to commandeer entire industries.

While Wilson is today hailed as a visionary, in his own time, he became loathed as a demagogue. The more people embraced the ideals he proclaimed, the easier it became to defraud them. Americans’ idealism was fanned by ruthless censorship of any criticism of the government’s war effort.

The 1919 Paris peace talks shredded Wilson’s pretensions and made a mockery of the cause for which he sent more than a hundred thousand Americans to their death. One of Wilson’s top aides, Henry White, later commented: “We had such high hopes of this adventure; we believed God called us and now we are doing hell’s dirtiest work.” Historian Thomas Fleming, the author of The Illusion of Victory, noted, “The British and French exploited the war to forcibly expand their empires and place millions more people under their thumbs.” Fleming concluded that one lesson of World War I is that “idealism is not synonymous with sainthood or virtue. It only sounds that way.”

The 1920 presidential election was a referendum on Wilson-style idealism. As H. L. Mencken wrote on the eve of the vote, Americans were tired “of a steady diet of white protestations and black acts; they are weary of hearing highfalutin and meaningless words; they sicken of an idealism that is oblique, confusing, dishonest, and ferocious.” Mencken explained why a typical voter would support Warren Harding: “Tired to death of intellectual charlatanry, he turns despairingly to honesty imbecility.”

Herbert Hoover’s subjugation idealism

Herbert Hoover, who campaigned as the Mastermind of the Age when he was elected president in 1928, invoked idealism to perpetuate subjugating foreigners to U.S. rule. When Congress enacted a bill to provide for the independence of the Philippine Islands, Hoover vetoed it in early 1933 because “We have a responsibility to the world … to develop and perfect freedom for these people.” Hoover rejected Congress’s bill because “it does not fulfill the idealism with which this task in human liberation was undertaken.” As long as the United States had not given Filipinos “perfect freedom,” it was entitled
to keep them under its thumb. Hoover’s assertion that idealism spurred the U.S. policy is difficult to reconcile with the killings of scores of thousands of Filipinos who resisted the U.S. takeover of their islands in the early 1900s. Hoover’s veto ensured that the United States remained mired in the Philippines until the Bataan death march and beyond.

FDR’s practical idealism

President Franklin Roosevelt was hailed as an idealist because he urged people to have faith in government to solve the nation’s problems. FDR assured the Young Democratic Clubs of America in 1940 that “you need practical idealism to make the present machinery function better.” “Practical idealism” signified FDR’s boundless faith in his own economic manipulations, such as setting the price of gold on a whim, reversing policies at the flip of a coin, and whipsawing anyone who counted on his promises. During World War II, FDR idealized American allies, touting the Soviet Union as one of the “freedom-loving nations.” Roosevelt’s glorification of the Soviets helped beget the infamous Yalta agreement that effectively consigned 100 million plus Germans, Czechs, Poles, and Hungarians to serfdom under Stalin. By deluding Americans, FDR’s idealism set the stage for a backlash that propelled the Cold War.

JFK’s service idealism

John F. Kennedy exploited idealistic appeals to capture the presidency in 1960. JFK talked as if the U.S. government could practically solve all problems, from ending tyranny (intervening everywhere against Communism) to ending worldwide poverty (with Peace Corps volunteers magically lifting foreign nations simply by their mere presence). Kennedy’s glorification of public service was simply an updating of the 1920s cult of service. But since he appealed for people to join the government instead of the Kiwanis, he was considered a visionary.

LBJ’s Vietnam idealism

In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson proclaimed, “For 188 years, the strongest fiber of America has been that thread of idealism which weaves through all our effort and all our aspiration.” Three years later, amidst rising antiwar protests, LBJ warned, “Idealism without commitment is like a bright light burning in a vacuum. Commitment without idealism can easily become frenzied and destructive.” At a 1968 presidential prayer breakfast, Johnson combined God and idealism to try to redeem his biggest muddle: “Belief in a divine providence is … a compelling challenge to men to attain the ideals of liberty, justice, peace, and compassion. It is often — as it is today in Vietnam — a call for very great sacrifice.” Johnson’s comment came the day after the start of the Viet Cong’s Tet Offensive, which stunned Americans who had swallowed LBJ’s boasting about how the enemy was nearly vanquished.

Nixon’s corrupt idealism

The backlash from LBJ’s “credibility gap” helped elect Richard Nixon, a politician renowned for dirty pool since his first red-baiting congressional victory in 1946. After his defeat in the 1960 presidential race, Nixon rebuilt his political fortunes as a born-again idealist. Bromides permeated his first presidential term: “Idealism without pragmatism is impotent…. The key to effective leadership is pragmatic idealism.” Alternatively, “Idealism without realism is impotent. Realism without idealism is immoral.” Nixon declared in 1971 at the University of Nebraska: “I believe one of America’s most priceless assets is the idealism which motivates the young people of America.”

Nixon’s invocations on idealism did not dissuade him from lying and lawbreaking across the board. Nor did gushing over youthful idealism deter him from perpetuating the Vietnam War and sending 20,000 potential American idealists to their deaths.

Reagan’s hypocritical idealism

In 1981, President Ronald Reagan told the Conservative Political Action Committee: “There is, in America, a greatness and a tremendous heritage of idealism which is a reservoir of strength and goodness. It is ours if we will but tap it.”

Reagan was deified by conservatives for preaching that “government is the problem, not the solution.” The Reagan presidency illustrates how idealizing a politician allows him to do as he pleases. The trust and support Reagan garnered enabled him to dictate a national drinking age (18), rev up the drug war, create new handouts for business and farmers, and bankroll guerrilla conflicts and repression abroad. But because Reagan constantly praised liberty, his power grabs were asterisks instead of outrages.

Clinton’s bombing idealism

Bill Clinton captured the presidency in 1992 in part thanks to idealistic-sounding  appeals for reviving faith in government. In his first term, his idealism was personified by AmeriCorps — the paid “volunteer” program that provided cheering squads when Clinton arrived at airport tarmacs around the nation. Throughout his second term, Clinton continually assured audiences: “I’m more idealistic today than I was the day that I took the Oath of Office” — as if his idealism was proof of his virtue. Clinton portrayed the  U.S. bombing of Serbia in 1999 as American idealism at its best: “Because we believe every human being has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness … we are proud to stand with our Allies in defense of these ideals in Kosovo.” But the U.S. bombing merely reversed the roles, permitting the Kosovo Liberation Army to terrorize Serb civilians as the Serb Army had previously abused ethnic Albanians.

Bush’s military idealism

President George W. Bush portrayed his invasion of Iraq as American idealism at its best. In his May 1, 2003, “Mission Accomplished” speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, Bush hailed “the character of our military through history” for showing “the decency and idealism that turned enemies into allies.” Speaking three weeks later at a Republican fundraiser, he bragged, “The world has seen the strength and the idealism of the United States military.” Washington Post columnist David Ignatius declared in late 2003 that “this may be the most idealistic war fought in modern times.” Bush’s ideals did nothing to resurrect the American soldiers or Iraqi civilians killed after his perpetual brazen false claims paved the way to the U.S. attack on Iraq.

Obama’s assassination idealism

Barack Obama probably did more damage to idealism than any president since Woodrow Wilson. In his first inaugural address, Obama declared that America’s “ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience sake.” But one of Obama’s most shocking legacies was his claim of a prerogative to kill U.S. citizens labeled as terrorist suspects without trial, without notice, and without any chance for the marked individuals to legally object. Obama’s lawyers even refused to disclose the standards used for designating Americans for death. Drone strikes increased tenfold under Obama, and he personally chose who would be killed at weekly “Terror Tuesday” White House meetings that featured PowerPoint parades of potential targets.

In 2011, Obama draped his decision to bomb Libya by invoking “democratic values,” and the “ideals” that he asserted were, he said, “the true measure of American leadership.” Obama was so convinced of the righteousness of targeting dictator Muammar Qadaffi that his appointees signaled that federal law (such as the War Powers Act) could not constrain his salvation mission.  At that point, the terrorist groups fighting Qaddafi were already slaughtering civilians.  In the chaos that subsequently engulfed Libya, ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed during an attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. When their corpses arrived back in the U.S., Obama hailed the victims for embodying “the courage, the hope, and yes, the idealism, that fundamental American belief that we can leave this world a little better than before.” Obama’s soothing rhetoric failed to deter the proliferation of slave markets where black migrants were openly sold in Libya.

Idealism and tyranny

Nowadays, idealism is often positive thinking about growing servitude. Idealism encourages citizens to view politics as a faith-based activity, transforming politicians from hucksters to saviors. The issue is not what government did in the past — the issue is how we must do better in the future. Politicians’ pious piffle is supposed to radically reduce the risk of subsequent perfidy.

Idealistic appeals permit politicians to stack the deck in listeners’ minds. To believe an idealistic speech is to “do good” — akin to displaying a “Support our Troops” decal on one’s automobile. Idealism is the most dangerous species of political lie. The idealistic draping confers an obligation to believe, or at least to defer. The moral bonus a politician receives for invoking ideals usually exceeds any demerits for lying. Thus, lying about ideals is a guaranteed win for politicians.

Self-government cannot survive people idealizing their rulers. Telling citizens to glorify contemporary politicians is like urging battered wives to idealize their husbands. Why should we expect political idealism to be more honest than politics? It is time to cease being idealistic about idealism.

Reprinted with permission from Future of Freedom Foundation.

The Deep State is not going away. It’s just being replaced.

As we stand on the brink of a new technological order, the machinery of power is quietly shifting into the hands of algorithms.

Under Donald Trump’s watch, that shift is being locked in for at least a generation.

Trump’s latest legislative initiative—a 10-year ban on AI regulation buried within the “One Big Beautiful Bill”—strips state and local governments of the ability to impose any guardrails on artificial intelligence (AI) until 2035.

Despite bipartisan warnings from 40 state attorneys general, the bill passed the House and awaits Senate approval. It is nothing less than a federal green light for AI to operate without oversight in every sphere of life, from law enforcement and employment to healthcare, education, and digital surveillance.

This is not innovation.

This is institutionalized automation of tyranny.

This is how, within a state of algorithmic governance, code quickly replaces constitutional law as the mechanism for control.

We are rapidly moving from a society ruled by laws and due process to one ruled by software.

Algorithmic governance refers to the use of machine learning and automated decision-making systems to carry out functions once reserved for human beings: policing, welfare eligibility, immigration vetting, job recruitment, credit scoring, and judicial risk assessments.

In this regime, the law is no longer interpreted. It is executed. Automatically. Mechanically. Without room for appeal, discretion, or human mercy.

These AI systems rely on historical data—data riddled with systemic bias and human error—to make predictions and trigger decisions. Predictive policing algorithms tell officers where to patrol and whom to stop. Facial recognition technology flags “suspects” based on photos scraped from social media. Risk assessment software assigns threat scores to citizens with no explanation, no oversight, and no redress.

These algorithms operate in black boxes, shielded by trade secrets and protected by national security exemptions. The public cannot inspect them. Courts cannot challenge them. Citizens cannot escape them.

The result? A population sorted, scored, and surveilled by machinery.

This is the practical result of the Trump administration’s deregulation agenda: AI systems given carte blanche to surveil, categorize, and criminalize the public without transparency or recourse.

And these aren’t theoretical dangers—they’re already happening.

Yet the Trump administration’s approach to AI regulation reveals a deeper plan to deregulate democracy itself.

Rather than curbing abuses, the Trump administration is accelerating them.

An executive order titled “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence,” signed by President Trump in early 2025, revoked prior AI safeguards, eliminated bias audits, and instructed agencies to prioritize “innovation” over ethics. The order encourages every federal agency to adopt AI quickly, especially in areas like policing and surveillance.

Under the guise of “efficiency,” constitutional protections are being erased.

Trump’s 10-year moratorium on AI regulation is the logical next step. It dismantles the last line of defense—state-level resistance—and ensures a uniform national policy of algorithmic dominance.

The result is a system in which government no longer governs. It processes.

The federal government’s AI expansion is building a surveillance state that no human authority can restrain.

Welcome to Surveillance State 2.0, the Immortal Machine.

Over 1700 uses of AI have already been reported across federal agencies, with hundreds directly impacting safety and rights. Many agencies, including the Departments of Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, and Health and Human Services, are deploying AI for decision-making without public input or oversight.

This is what the technocrats call an “algocracy”—rule by algorithm.

In an algocracy, unelected developers and corporate contractors hold more power over your life than elected officials.

Your health, freedom, mobility, and privacy are subject to automated scoring systems you can’t see and can’t appeal.

And unlike even the most entrenched human dictators, these systems do not die. They do not forget. They are not swayed by mercy or reason. They do not stand for re-election.

They persist.

When AI governs by prediction, due process disappears in a haze of machine logic.

The most chilling effect of this digital regime is the death of due process.

What court can you appeal to when an algorithm has labeled you a danger? What lawyer can cross-examine a predictive model? What jury can weigh the reasoning of a neural net trained on flawed data?

You are guilty because the machine says so. And the machine is never wrong.

When due process dissolves into data processing, the burden of proof flips. The presumption of innocence evaporates. Citizens are forced to prove they are not threats, not risks, not enemies.

And most of the time, they don’t even know they’ve been flagged.

This erosion of due process is not just a legal failure—it is a philosophical one, reducing individuals to data points in systems that no longer recognize their humanity.

Writer and visionary Rod Serling warned of this very outcome more than half a century ago: a world where technology, masquerading as progress under the guise of order and logic, becomes the instrument of tyranny.

That future is no longer fiction. What Serling imagined is now reality.

The time to resist is now, before freedom becomes obsolete and we become Romney Wordsworth, the condemned man in Serling’s Twilight Zone episode “The Obsolete Man.”

“The Obsolete Man,” a story arc about the erasure of individual worth by a mechanized state, underscores the danger of rendering humans irrelevant in a system of cold automation and speaks to the dangers of a government that views people as expendable once they have outgrown their usefulness to the State. Yet—and here’s the kicker—this is where the government through its monstrous inhumanity also becomes obsolete.

As Serling noted in his original script for “The Obsolete Man,” “Any state, any entity, any ideology which fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man…that state is obsolete.”

We now face a fork in the road: resist the rise of the immortal dictator or submit to the reign of the machine.

This is not a battle against technology, but a battle against the unchecked, unregulated, and undemocratic use of technology to control people.

We must demand algorithmic transparency, data ownership rights, and legal recourse against automated decisions. Otherwise, AI becomes the ultimate enforcer of a surveillance state from which there is no escape.

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the time to fight back is now—before the code becomes law, and freedom becomes a memory.

Reprinted with permission from The Rutherford Institute.

While the Presbyterian Church (USA) faced declines in membership, congregations, and funding in 2024 — according to statistics the Presbyterian Church (USA) released this week — the more conservative Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) experienced growth during the same period.

Juicy Ecumenism reported that the PC(USA) lost 48,885 members — roughly a 4.5% decline — last year, continuing the mostly consistent annual loss rate the church has seen for the past decade. If its decline continues, the PC(USA) is reportedly on track to dip for the first time below 1 million members in 2025.

CatholicVote previously reported that several other Protestant denominations have experienced declines in finances and membership, which an AP News report suggested is linked to progressive theology.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

The PC(USA) reported it lost 140 churches and established only four. According to Juicy Ecumenism, the previous average for the establishment of new churches between 1995 and 2005 had been nearly 30 churches per year.

The congregations of the remaining 8,432 churches are becoming smaller and smaller, the data shows, as only 367 churches have more than 800 members. Almost 70% of the churches have fewer than 100 members, and nearly a quarter of the churches have no more than 25 members.

According to Juicy Ecumenism, however, the more conservative PCA reported 7,223 new members and 22 new churches in 2024, including a 16.56% increase in adult baptisms and a 2.4% increase in infant baptisms.

The outlet noted that while most members of the PC(USA) are above 50 years old, and over one-third are 71 or older, deaths in the church do not account for the decline in membership. The data report 20,420 members’ deaths, which is not even half of the total membership drop. The PC(USA) also reported that 181 members who identify as “nonbinary” or “genderqueer” joined in 2024.

The PC(USA) also has experienced funding issues due to its decline in members, according to the report. The Presbyterian Mission Agency was forced to drastically cut its annual giving to missionaries, and the agency was finally eliminated in early 2025, becoming part of a new entity. The funding shortage also resulted in layoffs of dozens of mission workers in February.

LifeNews Note: Hannah Hiester writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.

The post Presbyterian Church Losing Members and Churches After Years of Supporting Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.

A coalition of nine prominent pro-life organizations is calling on interim US Attorney Jeanine Pirro to investigate the suspected infanticide of five late-term aborted babies discovered at a Washington, D.C., abortion facility.

In a letter sent Tuesday, the coalition — led by Advancing American Freedom and co-signed by CatholicVote — said that “the Biden Administration worked to sweep the allegations under the rug and silence the individuals involved by prosecuting them.”

The deceased babies, known as the “D.C. Five,” were recovered in 2022 by members of Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (PAAU) from a D.C. facility operated by late-term abortionist Cesare Santangelo. The pro-life groups allege that the babies’ deaths violated both the Partial-Birth Abortion Act and the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act.

Instead of launching a federal investigation, the Biden administration targeted the pro-life activists, sentencing some to up to 11 years in prison under the controversial Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

PAAU Director of Activism Lauren Handy, a Catholic, was sentenced to 57 months in federal prison last May, while nine other pro-life advocates faced similar sentences.

The letter also adds that “President Biden’s Department of Justice allegedly ordered the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department to incinerate the evidence,” citing a Daily Signal exclusive.

“Thankfully, Members of Congress took shrewd steps to protect the evidence through preservation of evidence requests,” the coalition continued.

At the start of his second term, President Donald Trump pardoned Handy and 22 other pro-life activists, framing the move as a correction of the Biden administration’s unfair prosecution of pro-lifers.

“They should not have been prosecuted,” Trump said several times during the signing. “Many of them are elderly… This is a great honor to sign.”

CatholicVote Director of Government Affairs Tom McClusky praised the decision Wednesday, saying, “Of all the great things President Trump has done since being re-elected, freeing the pro-lifers who were wrongfully persecuted and challenged is at the top.”

As one of the cosigners of the May 27 letter, McClusky added, “What happened in DC was atrocious; a group of pro-lifers exposed the illegal activities of a DC abortion facility, and the DC government instead protected the criminals and attacked the pro-lifers. It is well past time that the abortion facility is investigated for its crimes and that they are brought to justice.”

The letter builds upon a request made by Reps. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., last month, pressing the FBI to investigate.

“[W]e remain concerned about the Biden-Harris Administration’s refusal to investigate the circumstances of the case of five aborted children, also known as the D.C. Five, whose remains were allegedly discovered at the Washington Surgi-Clinic in March 2022 by a pro-life advocacy group,” the legislators’ said in a letter to the FBI.

Concluding their letter, the pro-life groups called on Pirro to act decisively: “As the Interim United States Attorney for Washington, D.C., it is your responsibility to follow the facts where they may lead and enforce federal law to protect those most vulnerable in our nation’s capital: the unborn.”

The letter was also co-signed by Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, Students for Life of America, Family Research Council, Live Action, Concerned Women for America, Human Coalition, and the American Family Association.

LifeNews Note: Elise DeGeeter writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.

The post Pro-Life Group Wants Abortionist Investigated Who Killed 5 Full-Term Babies in Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The Problem is the Weaponization of the Dollar, not the US National Debt

Paul Craig Roberts

Elon Musk expressed his disappointment in the Trump administrations bill, passed by the House, that avoided an automatic tax increase that would have occurred at the conclusion of 2025 by making permeant the 2017 tax reductions and which increased spending on defense and US border security.  Musk mistakenly thinks that this bill undermines his and DOGE’s effort to reduce the federal deficit.

Musk should see his and DOGE’s success not in terms of deficit reduction, but in terms of eliminating waste, fraud, and grift from the federal budget.  According to reports, Musk and DOGE have stopped the theft of $175 billion from American taxpayers who have desperate needs for their own money.  Instead, the money has gone to fake companies set up by Democrats to enrich themselves and their political allies via government contracts at the expense of the American people.

Reducing the grift by $175 billion is no small achievement. It could be much larger, but corrupt Democrat judges and media are at work blocking DOGE and shutting down Elon Musk.

What Musk should emphasize is the contrast between Trump being the peace president and Trump’s increase in military spending.

America has dangerous internal enemies, but its foreign ones are manufactured by the CIA, which needs enemies for its budget and power, by the Israel Lobby, which hopes to continue using the US against Arabs and to convince Washington to attack Iran, and by the Zionist neoconservative closely allied with Netanyahu who assert US hegemony as defined by the Wolfowitz Doctrine. 

I am now going to make a statement that Musk, financial journalists, American conservatives, and Republicans will dismiss as nonsense:

The US deficit is not a problem as long as the US dollar is the world reserve currency.

The national debt of the country that is the world reserve currency comprises the reserves of the central banks of the world.  As long as the US dollar is the means of settling international balances, an increase in the issue of US Treasuries means an increase in the reserves of the central banks in the world.  The foreign central banks and their governments are happy.  With more reserves (US debt held in US Treasuries), central banks can expand their country’s money supply and the country can grow.

The world would be unhappy if the US debt ceased to grow as it would mean the central bank reserves of all other countries would stagnate, thus limiting growth.

Those who worry that the US cannot pay off the bonds representing its national debt do not understand that the US debt is denominated in US dollars and can be easily paid by the Federal Reserve creating dollars to redeem the bonds.

It seems forever that I have been trying to teach economists, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, the financial journalists, the Republicans, and conservatives that as long as the dollar is the reserve currency America’s national debt will be held in the form of US Treasuries as reserves in the world’s central banks. As US debt rises, so does the reserves of the world’s central  banks, and everyone is happy.

The danger to US national debt is not its size.  The danger is the weaponization of the dollar which threatens the continued acceptance of the dollar as reserve currency.  Sanctions on countries and the seizure of the Russian central  bank’s dollar reserves introduce real risk into holding reserves in US dollars.

What is threatening America’s ability to finance its debt are the US sanctions that have caused the rise of BRICS and the search for alternative payment methods to the US dollar.

Why this simple fact is too complicated for economists, financial journalists, politicians, conservatives, and Elon Musk to understand is beyond me. The US dollar has been the reserve currency for about 80 years.  For most of this time conservatives and David Stockman have predicted America’s imminent death by debt.

Losing the role of world currency is deadly.  When Great Britain lost the role to the US after World War II, the British transitioned from riches to rags.

Pope Leo XIV just reminded us who our neighbor is, drawing from the parable of the good Samaritan. See

Against this, we often encounter a sort of Pharisaism in the Church and across society. This Pharisaism is  often associated with a strong emphasis on religious rules and rituals, where outward adherence to religious practices overshadows inner faith and genuine spiritual connection. This can manifest as a self-righteous and judgmental attitude, where individuals focus on upholding religious standards while neglecting compassion and empathy.

Note how in His parable, Jesus has the priestly class walk right by the man in need without demonstrating any concern for his well being whatsoever. 

Do we not see this attitude today? There are those who attend Mass regularly (some even daily) who wouldn't (please excuse my informal language) piss on a man who is on fire to put out the flames. 

Such people exhibit a religiosity devoid of compassion and empathy.  And Our Lord reminds us that such people are much more deserving...of Hell.

As Pope Leo XIV explains,"..the practice of worship does not automatically lead to being compassionate. Indeed, before being a religious matter, compassion is a question of humanity! Before being believers, we are called to be human."

The Ever-Widening War

Did Washington Try to Shoot Down Putin’s Helicopter ?

Ukraine needed Western help to target Putin’s helicopter.

https://www.rt.com/news/618302-putin-helicopter-ukraine-ritter/ 

Meanwhile the delusional Kremlin continues to humiliate Russia in Putin’s fruitless pursuit of peace negotiations.

The Conference Board’s consumer confidence index surged from 85.7 to 98.0. Such was the largest one-month increase since 2009! Clearly, progress on trade deals and the delay in implementing tariffs spurred the increase. Moreover, the recovering stock market also boosted consumer confidence. However, bear in mind that the index is coming off its lowest level since May 2020. The present situation index rose slightly, as shown below, but the expectations index jumped from 55.4 to 72.8. It appears consumers are starting to gain confidence about the future. The following line from the report points to the potential for more robust personal consumption.

Compared to April, purchasing plans for homes and cars and vacation intentions increased notably, with some significant gains after May 12. Plans to buy big-ticket items—including appliances and electronics—were also up. Likewise, consumers’ intentions to purchase more services in the months ahead, with almost all services categories rising. Dining out remained number one among spending intentions, followed by streaming services, while plans to spend on movies, theater, live entertainment, and sporting events increased the most over last month.

Also notable in the report is that the average expected 12-month inflation rate decreased from 7.0% to 6.5%. Although still high, it suggests that initial expectations for tariff-induced inflation may be abating. While one month doesn't make a trend, a potential reversal in consumer inflation expectations may provide some comfort to Fed members worried about inflation.

What To Watch Today

Earnings

Economy

Market Trading Update

As noted yesterday, the market was reaching more overbought levels on both a momentum and relative strength basis. While this is not a significant correction warning in itself, it does tend to suggest that the upside could be somewhat limited until a pullback or consolidation occurs. However, one indicator we watch closely is "money flows." As we discussed yesterday on X:

"On @cvpayne show, we were discussing the #BuyTheDip mentality of #retail #investors. The S&P 500’s average gain of 0.31%, following down days in 2025, marks the strongest “buy-the-dip” responses since 2020."

Of course, what is interesting about that is that the backdrop between today and 2020 is vastly different.

We can visualize those money flows on a technical basis. As shown, the strength of positive money flows is at levels usually seen near short-term market peaks. With the MACD indicator and money flows elevated, the risk of a consolidation or pullback in June is more probable. We will pay close attention to the flows over the next few weeks. If they begin to decline sharply, the market will likely follow.

With earnings season wrapping up and the share buyback window getting ready to close by mid-June, pay attention to your portfolio's risk profile. We are currently overweight cash and are looking for a more strategic opportunity to deploy that cash in the near future.

The Coming Disinflation Push In A Few Graphs

We have often discussed the outsized role that rent and implied rental prices, i.e., shelter prices, play in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) data. Given its importance, we share a few graphs to help you appreciate that CPI may be much lower in the coming months when lagging CPI shelter prices catch up to market prices and fundamentals. First, however, consider that excluding shelter prices, the CPI is running at 1.4%, exactly in line with its level in the few years preceding the pandemic. Furthermore, the shelter price index within CPI lags real-time shelter prices significantly.

• The first graph shows that the most recent Case-Shiller Home Price Index declined last month for the first time in two years.
• The CPI rent sub-index has been rising at an approximate 0.3% a month rate. But, according to Apartment List and other private sector rent indexes, apartment rent prices have been flat to declining for over a year. Moreover, the Cleveland Fed's New Tenant Rent Index, a measure of current rent prices, has declined over the last three quarters.
• The third graph shows that rental vacancies have been rising steadily and are now at their highest level since 2018. More supply of apartments provides leverage for renters to secure better rental rates.
• The last graph highlights that the construction of 5-unit or larger housing units is and has been running hot. Therefore, a continued heavy supply of apartments should help keep apartment rental prices constrained in the future.

Narratives vs. Fundamentals: Battle In The Bond Market

Looking beyond the day traders, narratives often determine the short to medium-term price trends. These narratives, which can last days, weeks, months, or longer, are stories or themes that shape how traders and investors interpret and react to changes in the financial markets. They simplify complex topics into easily digestible explanations. Sometimes, market narratives accurately explain why markets are moving in one direction or the other. However, other times they prove false. Whether grounded in hard data or not, market narratives can perpetuate market trends by shaping shorter-term investor behaviors. Furthermore, as narratives gain popularity, they are amplified by the media and, more recently, social media platforms.

READ MORE...

Tweet of the Day

“Want to achieve better long-term success in managing your portfolio? Here are our 15-trading rules for managing market risks.”

Please subscribe to the daily commentary to receive these updates every morning before the opening bell.

If you found this blog useful, please send it to someone else, share it on social media, or contact us to set up a meeting.

The post Consumers Are Not As Gloomy appeared first on RIA.

If this were day one in a course on the Theology of Christ, the first order of business would be to issue the following disclaimer, which is that not even the least glimpse into the mystery of Jesus is possible without first answering one very big question. Leave it out and the whole inquiry regarding who He was and the work He came into this world to do would simply implode on the launching pad.

Source