Conservative Blogger
Monday, February 9, 2026
Trump Predicts 100K Dow by End of Presidency
President Donald Trump hailed his first year of his second term in office, predicting the stock market will double in less than two years after the Dow Jones closed Friday over 50,000 for the first time in history. "Record Stock Market, and National Security, driven by our Great TARIFFS," Trump wrote on Truth Social during the Super Bowl on Sunday night.
"I am predicting 100,000 on the DOW by the end of my Term. "REMEMBER, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING! I hope the United States Supreme Court is watching." That latter remark was a signal to the Supreme Court to not step on his tariffs policy. Trump has hailed his tariffs in rebalancing global trade, helping bring peace around the world and prosperity to America through revenue from overseas. Also, Trump has seen a Gross Domestic Product boom of an estimated 5.4% in the past quarter, despite the Democrat-forced government shutdown which set a record for the longest in history. The government was shut down by Democrats under the guise of healthcare reform, which never even came, which conservatives say is proof it was just a political weapon to tarnish Trump. The Senate Democrats forced another shutdown at the end of last month, and now might force another on Department of Homeland Security funding by the Feb. 13 deadline coming at the end of this week. |
White House Drops Epic 'Unapologetically American' Smackdown Video to Counter Bad Bunny
 |
The White House preempted Bad Bunny's "middle finger to America" Super Bowl halftime performance with a video explaining why the administration—and most people in this great nation—are "unapologetically American." The video was posted to X roughly 20 minutes before Mr. Bunny's
performance. It begins with the declaration that "We don't do subtle,"
and immediately delivers on that premise. What follows is a rapid-fire montage of fighter jets, Trump rallies, executive order signings, and patriotic bravado featuring appearances from Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The initial frame shows two fans of the Seattle Seahawks and New England Patriots in the stadium being distracted by Air Force One flying overhead. The President's plane then cuts to a new location. "We choose bold," the narrator states before a pilot reports, "for the first time in history, flying over the Gulf of America." READ MORE: HOT TAKES — Bad Bunny's Super Bowl Halftime Show Performance Was a Middle Finger to America New Poll Crushes Dem, Media Narrative: Americans Demand Mass Deportations, Back ICE Overwhelmingly The White House video does not let up in any way. "We don't limit our ambition, never have," the narrator continues. "We build big. We move fast. We bet on ourselves. We don't apologize for winning. We say what we mean and stand by it." Rubio chimes in by informing viewers, “If you don’t know, now you know.” “We are fully, proudly, and unapologetically American,” the narrator concludes. Bunny followed that up with a performance that was almost entirely in Spanish (President Trump in March signed an executive order designating English as the official language of the United States) and somehow declared mostly Latin American countries as, "Together, we are America." Which is geographically and patriotically incorrect. But most definitely a declaration in support of open borders. The video counter from the White House essentially responds with: Eat it, Benito. Benito Antonio MartÃnez Ocasio stirred up controversy before his Super Bowl show by saying he would not tour in the United States due to fears that his fans might get deported if they are found to be criminal illegal aliens. A reasonable person would be thrilled if criminals were ushered away from their show. “There was the issue of — like, (expletive) ICE could be outside my concert,” he instead whined in an interview with Variety. “It was something we were very concerned about.” He also refused to stand for “God Bless America” during a Yankees game in October. So naturally, the National Football League decided to bring him in to "unite" the people. The NFL offered someone who blatantly gave America the middle finger. Fortunately, Turning Point USA gave us artists who sang about the greatness of our nation and urged people to dust off their Bibles. It was ... unapologetically American. |
Wonder Why the WaPo Is Failing? Leftist Rag's Pick for 'Most Relevant' NFL Player Tells You All
 |
As we’ve reported, the Washington Post has laid off hundreds of staff as their years of gaslighting, serving as a mouthpiece for the Democrat party, and acting as an outlet for progressive fanaticism have finally caught up to them and bitten them in the tuchus. Lying, performative theatrics, and endless virtue signaling have a
way of coming back at you in the modern age, especially when you have
platforms like RedState and X bringing you the truth. As if to prove their point that they are anti-American propagandists, the outlet penned a love letter for a familiar figure as they feted his toxic past efforts to infuse the National Football League with social justice dogma. His name is Colin Kaepernick, and he's the most “relevant player,” the shameless outlet wrote, despite the fact that he isn’t a player and hasn’t been for years. They wrote:
They waxed poetic: “The most relevant figure to Super Bowl LX is absent from it.“ No, WaPo, he is not the most relevant figure; in fact, he’s nothing but an afterthought to most fans. An unfortunate one, at that. JUST GO AWAY: Angry Leftists Have No One to Blame for The Washington Post's Firings but Themselves The Lie-Able Sources Podcast: WaPo Eviscerates Its Staff, As CNN Urges Kids to Play With ICE 'Nazis' Although there are numerous WaPo writers whining on social media that they’ve lost their jobs, they only have themselves to blame: Look in the mirror, people: Let’s be honest: Colin Kaepernick is not, and was never, a unifying figure. Although he showed flashes of greatness early in his 49er career, he quickly overshadowed that with his bizarre hair antics and his anti-American diatribes. I hope for a great game this Sunday, but I am not at all sad that he will not be a part of it. Meanwhile, WaPo stalwarts, start applying to MS NOW — they are probably the only people left who will put up with your endless efforts to undermine the country. |
Men Are Going to Strike Back
 |
There’s a clip going around where some obnoxious woman decides that a guy walking out of a Quik-i-Mart is a nice guy and she takes it upon herself, being the heroine and the main character of the epic saga that is her life, to knock his cup of coffee from his hands. He’s a fairly big guy, fit, and he doesn’t lay her out across the parking lot with a right cross. It’s not that she doesn’t deserve it – she does. It’s that he is still defaulting to the male role in a chivalry system that no longer exists. This dumb woman is relying on the very guardrails she has bulldozed; she’s going to try it again, and this time she’s going to lose a bunch of teeth. Oh well. It’s no surprise to anybody who is paying attention that the complex system that governed the relationship of men and women throughout the ages has been disrupted in the last 50 years. Two Helens have recently made a splash talking about this. Helen Andrews gave a powerful speech at last year’s Nat Con that got a lot of attention about the feminization of culture. More recently, Helen Smith, a.k.a. Mrs. @Instapundit, just published her important new book His Side, which commits the revolutionary act of asking men what they think about the current war on the unfair sex. We people with penises are not supposed to talk about any of this stuff. We’re not supposed to talk about how society has changed, for the worse, by the domination of feminine values over our institutions, institutions that were built to greatness through masculine values. If you don’t know the difference between masculine and feminine values, I can’t really help you. You’ve bought into the gender-same lie. But when you see our institutions failing, having taken themselves off-mission and instead refocused on emotionality and the prioritization of feelings, that’s a big part of the cause of their downfall. And it’s no surprise that women have veered sharply to the left, the left’s priorities being the opposite of masculinity. Most of us remember that Simpsons episode where Lisa escapes a girl’s math class after the teacher (who comes off as one of those harridans shrieking at ICE heroes) asked the girls how the numbers make her feel; that’s pretty much all of society now. This isn’t to say that women and femininity are bad. They aren’t. They are a part of humanity. But so are men and masculinity; the problem is the dedicated campaign to stamp out the male part. The sexes combine to create a functional society of human beings, the yin and yang, if you will. You need both, in proper proportion. Disrupt that balance and you get, well, this current mess. Somewhere along the way, some women decided masculinity is bad, and some men played along with this nonsense. Today, if you’re tough, aggressive, and don’t take guff from half-wits, or if you are aggressively heterosexual, you are toxically masculine. It’s possible to be a jerk in a distinctly male way; again, the problem is too much, or a perverted practice of the thing. Again, you need both sexes, properly understood. This is why you have a man and a woman, the two parts of humanity that come together and create a functioning society. But we stopped doing that. As Helen Andrews observed, our society has gone way too far in the feminine direction, which is a problem because hostile societies have maintained their traditional, masculine focus when it comes to the areas of business and conflict. When you get a bunch of soft men, and they come up against hard men, the hard men win. This is why the most popular birth name in Europe is “Mohammed.” See, we have to help, so out rolls the welcome mat to people who hate us. It feels so good to be so nurturing, right? Resist? That’s mean. The impotent euro-eunuchs, whose great-grandfathers once conquered the world, cannot be bothered to either breed or defend their inheritance from people who do nothing but breed and take other people‘s inheritance. Masculinity is about creation and destruction. Men build, and men destroy. Both things are important, including destruction. This needs to be explained to those who are soft and don’t understand, or are unwilling to accept, the occasional necessity of it. And when I say “creation,” I mean building things – bridges, pipelines, aircraft carriers, rockets to the moon. That’s the domain of men. I do not mean some teenage girl scribbling away breathlessly about her feelings in her pink dream journal. That’s the domain of women. The fact is that men and women are different, something there’s been a concerted effort to not merely ignore but to overthrow by informal social coercion and the force of law. Oddly, it’s the feminine side that propels this campaign. If you track back the roots of the worst cultural trends of the last century, they all originate in a perversion of the feminine. For example, the greatest advocates of bizarre transsexual deviance are not men, though a significant number of men go along either passively or actively – they probably think they’re going to score if they show their tolerance bona fides. It’s women who are driving this big rig, the only kind of big rig women drive as a rule. It’s the women who decide that young Billy is really Susie and schlep over to the local butcher in her minivan. The invertebrate dad just sort of nods along. It’s the women pushing for men in women’s locker rooms, ironically. Imagine it getting traction if men had been at the forefront of the “Let us leer at you in the shower” movement. It would have never started, and if women right now said, “No,” this would end overnight. But for some reason that real men can’t fathom – maybe it’s the Chardonnay, maybe it’s the SSRIs, maybe it’s the dissatisfaction that comes with having leftist partners who can’t satisfy them –women as a whole refuse to reject this nonsense. And so it persists. Orwell was right when he pointed out that women are the most eager to enforce the left’s ideologies. They’re the ones taking the lead to keep illegal alien criminals here – someone else can explore the deeply psycho-sexual underpinnings of the total dedication of affluent white ladies to keeping brutal Third World rapists here among them. Regardless, it is largely (and, often, large) women screaming obscenities at the heroes of ICE who are tossing out the Third World perverts that these women drool over. Sadly, the same broken creatures have hijacked the institutions. Take the schools, please. It’s women who run the education system and turn campuses into conformity factories. Gone are the male role models that those of us from Gen X had. My old PE teacher, Stan Bingham – whose head was so riddled with skin cancer we called him “The Lizard” – probably fought it out at Pork Chop Hill, judging from the way he treated us. And we dug him. As Helen Smith shows, men are undervalued, under-appreciated, and under fire. They are the worst, they are told, and when they react as rational beings to the incentives they face, the calumny only increases. Take the Great Opt-Out. Where are all the good men? Well, a lot of men who would’ve been good men are sitting at home on their couches, playing video games, smoking weed, and making wild, passionate love to their internet browsers. It’s gross, but what does it say about women that so many men have decided that kind of pathetic existence is preferable to being with girls? There are a lot of good, conservative women out there and good, conservative men who have their heads on straight and who are out there building lives and families. But there are a lot of casualties from the gender wars. Many of these misguided women expect men to fulfill the role men used to play in the system that used to exist, but those women don’t want to fulfill the role they used to play in the system that used to exist. They want a man like their old-school dad, but they don’t want to act like their old-school mom. Systems only function if all the parts work as designed. You can’t refuse to do your part in a system and expect it to keep functioning. When you change your input, you alter the output. Which brings us back to the Quik-i-Mart parking lot. Part of the system of chivalry that kept men from using their superior physical strength – yes, men are overwhelmingly physically stronger than women – against women is that women did not initiate physical threats against men. When a conflict arises, a normal man is not going to beat the hell out of you if you are a woman because he’ll probably hurt you out of proportion to your ability to hurt him, but your part of the bargain is not to make that conflict physical. Yet, what that dumb woman did with the guy’s coffee cup breached that unspoken agreement. She changed the rules. And she’s lucky that he defaulted to the system that used to exist. But if women keep pushing it, that’s going to stop. And it’s not going to work out well for the women. |
Canadian PM Carney Just Announced a Plan to Make Canadian Inflation Worse
 |
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney was elected because Canadian Boomers wanted to "deal with Trump" more than they wanted to make their country better. And it shows. A short while after his election, Carney was saying that Muslim values are Canadian values, and it's only gotten worse from there. Now he's bragging about making inflation worse by increasing the
"Canada Groceries and Essentials Benefit" for some 12 million Canadians.
Frankly, we're surprised they aren't offering them MAiD instead.
Carney was dragged for it, too. Yes, yes he is.
He was not.
He will do none of those things.
That's what these handouts are.
The point is Carney gets to say he's doing something, and then blame someone else for increases in inflation when they inevitably happen. We wonder if Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will blast Carney for this in the same way he rightly blasted Carney for cutting a deal with China. President Trump also called out Carney at Davos, warning him to be more grateful for the support Americans give Canada. |
Vance vs. Obama: The Divide Between Elite Fears and American Pride
 |
Megyn Kelly’s recent segment drawing a straight line between Vice President J.D. Vance and former First Lady Michelle Obama captured something millions of Americans already feel: two very different visions of the country and of gratitude. One side talks about standing up for American interests and expecting respect in return; the other frets about political outcomes from a place of elite comfort. Michelle Obama has been vocal about being “terrified” of
what another term in the wrong hands could mean for the country, warning
that Americans must not take our democracy for granted. That rhetoric —
coming from a family whose wealth and celebrity rest on the American
experiment — reads to many like anxiety from the top rather than
solidarity with working people who built this nation. J.D. Vance, by contrast, tells a story rooted in gratitude for opportunity and a fierce pride in American institutions, recounting the humbling moment when he was offered the vice presidential slot and reminding voters that gratitude and accountability matter. Vance’s pitch resonates with conservatives because it speaks to ordinary Americans who know the country’s promise was earned through hard work, not handed out by elites. That posture of demanding respect and appreciation played out dramatically in the Oval Office when Vance confronted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and bluntly asked whether he had said “thank you” during the meeting, forcing a debate about reciprocity and America’s standing. Critics pounced that Zelenskyy has publicly thanked the United States many times, but the moment crystallized a larger point Vance and his allies keep making: American generosity does not obligate passivity from our leaders or foreign partners. Americans should be allowed to admire and defend their country without being lectured by comfortable members of the elite class who seem to live by different rules. When elites fret and scold from their estates and podcasts, while rising leaders like Vance speak plainly to the country’s needs and expectations, voters notice the contrast and choose loyalty to the nation over fashionable alarmism. Hardworking patriots deserve leaders who demand respect for American sacrifice and sovereignty, not perpetual hand-wringing from a distant, pampered class. If conservatives want to win hearts and policy, they should double down on the message Vance represents: gratitude for opportunity, firmness in defense, and a refusal to cede the moral high ground to those who treat America like a problem to be managed rather than a blessing to be treasured. |
Athletes Cash In at Olympics: Is National Loyalty for Sale?
 |
Forbes’ rundown of the wealthiest athletes at the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics makes one thing plain: in today’s world, the biggest winners aren’t always the ones who win medals on the snow. Leading the pack is Eileen Gu, whose estimated $23 million in earnings over the past 12 months puts her at the top of the Olympic pay chart — a glaring reminder that branding and media savvy now matter as much as athleticism. That reality gets complicated when the brightest
corporate spotlight falls on an American-born athlete who now skates
under a different flag. Forbes notes that much of Gu’s income flows from
endorsements with Chinese and global brands, a fact that should make
patriotic Americans ask whether our companies and media are rewarding
global clout at the expense of national loyalty. Meanwhile, the professional marketplace still rewards raw talent and spectacle, and NHL men returning to the Olympic ice are prime examples of capitalism at work. Auston Matthews, a Team USA forward, checks in near the top with an estimated $20 million between salary and endorsements, showing that American pro sports still produce massive rewards for excellence. It’s worth remembering how the NHL’s return to the Games reshaped the financial picture: roughly 146 NHL players are in Milan-Cortina, and the league’s minimum salary and contract structures mean many Olympians are already millionaires before they lace up. That practical reality underlines a simple conservative truth — merit, markets, and private contracts drive opportunity far more effectively than athletes waiting on bureaucrats. On the alpine side, veterans like Lindsey Vonn remind us that grit, legacy and name recognition still carry real economic weight; Forbes pegs Vonn’s recent earnings at about $8 million even as she battles injuries to chase one more Olympic run. That kind of resilience deserves respect — and it’s the kind of story that should make Americans proud rather than bowing to a culture that always puts controversy ahead of character. Younger American stars are following similar paths: Chloe Kim remains a commercial draw despite injuries, and Ilia Malinin’s rise in figure skating shows how homegrown talent can build lucrative sponsorships without changing countries. These athletes demonstrate that determination and American branding can translate into real prosperity without selling out core principles. There’s also a lesson in how the Games are funded and rewarded: a $100 million private donation to the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee will funnel about $200,000 to each American athlete, proving once again that private generosity, not taxpayer-funded mandates, uplifts competitors. Conservatives should celebrate that model — it channels voluntary support to those who earn it and avoids expanding government control over sport. At the end of the day, Milan-Cortina’s financial
leaderboard offers a sober prompt for patriotic reflection. Support Team
USA and the athletes who choose to compete for this country; demand
that corporations think twice before funneling prize money and prestige
to those who abandon American teams; and above all, remember that free
markets, individual grit, and national pride — not virtue-signaling or
globalist applause — build lasting greatness. |
Washington’s Politicians Fear Transparency: The Case for Congressional Cameras
 |
Watching the swamp squirm at the mention of a simple camera tells you everything you need to know about modern Washington. For decades, politicians have lectured the country about accountability while shielding their own actions behind closed doors, committees, and leaking staffers; asking them to wear the same kind of cameras we trust on police would expose whether they truly serve the public or their own interests. Hardworking Americans deserve representatives whose conduct can be seen and judged by the voters who pay their salaries. The
United States Capitol Police has already taken a modest, commonsense
step toward transparency by launching a body-worn camera pilot program
in March 2024 to record public interactions and protect officers on the
Capitol grounds. If the people who guard Congress can be recorded to
protect the institution, the same logic applies a hundredfold to the
lawmakers who run it. Congress has also been wrestling publicly with the logistics of outfitting federal law-enforcement officers with cameras, as multiple bills in the 119th Congress would expand bodycam use and funding for federal and immigration enforcement agencies. Those legislative moves show the technology, funding mechanisms, and legal frameworks are already being debated in plain sight, which undercuts any claim that camera programs for public servants are impractical or unprecedented. Even the Department of Homeland Security has moved to put body cameras on federal agents in hotspots like Minneapolis, a decision driven by real-world failures and public pressure after fatal encounters left too many unanswered questions. If the executive branch can deploy cameras to clarify contested incidents in the field, there is no rational national-security or privacy argument that should shield lawmakers from similar scrutiny while they conduct the public’s business. Skeptics will point to footage being withheld, devices being turned off, or footage being locked away by bureaucracy, and those complaints are real—policies governing when cameras can be muted and how footage is retained have been controversial and uneven across jurisdictions. That is not a reason to abandon transparency; it is the reason to demand strict, enforceable rules that apply equally to everyone in power and to criminalize deliberate tampering or suppression of official recordings. Congress refusing to submit to the same standards it imposes on others is corruption by definition. Imagine a Washington where votes, private meetings with lobbyists, and late-night bill deals were subject to the same kind of unblinking record that bodycams and court cameras provide in law enforcement and judicial settings. It would be messy, embarrassing, and glorious—messy because the truth rarely flatters the powerful, embarrassing because career politicians would be caught lying to their constituents, and glorious because finally, the people’s business would be conducted in light, not in the dark. With existing pilot programs and legislation already addressing technical and legal hurdles, the case for congressional cameras is not fantasy; it is the next logical step toward accountability. Patriots who believe in limited government and
honest leadership should not fear cameras; they should welcome them as
the most efficient antiseptic for political rot. If Members of Congress
refused a simple measure that makes them accountable to voters, that
refusal would reveal far more about their priorities than any campaign
speech ever could. The camera is a patriot’s tool—one that forces
elected officials to choose between serving their constituents openly or
hiding behind process and privilege. |
Sunday, February 8, 2026
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
-
How many times do we need to say this? If you’re here illegally and get caught, you’re going back. It’s the la...
-
The problem with the courts is the same as the problem with many of our other institutions. Called the Skins...
-
CNN’s Scott Jennings once again took liberals to the cleaners on the Abrego Garcia case, the ‘Maryland man...
