“Better to dwell in a corner of a housetop, Than in a house shared with a contentious woman.” Proverbs 21:9.

As a pastor, I have encountered many men whose lives are made to be a form of living hell because of their wives. These men usually handle it in different ways.

Some become absolute shells of men, who, though they would get some measure of respect in their profession, anyone who sees them around their wife immediately recognises who rules the roost, and they can see the visible signs of it in the man’s hunched shoulders.

Think Richard, in Keeping Up Appearances.

Some men react badly to a badly behaving wife and seek to tyrannise their wives. These men can become abusive in direct response to years of sexual, emotional and relational coercion, and something snaps inside of them.

Some men adjust their understanding of masculinity. They rationalise it by concluding that their wife is an “alpha” and they are just happy to be married, and they give off a modicum of being content in the situation. These women write their husbands emails of complaint, and make the decisions for him, and he is content to let it happen. His wife, or more often he, will generally tell people that he is the head, but she is the neck. Every now and then you will see a shadow in this man’s eye of pain at the level of disrespect he experiences on a daily basis.

Another subset of this previous group is men who are so lazy, emotionally, relationally, and in various other ways, that they actually do genuinely enjoy that their wife is the leader. It is easier. They have less conflict, because he simply concedes, “Yes, dear.” He probably even believes that men who say he should lead are at best closet misogynists, and he will avidly advocate his situation to anyone who asks. “We are a team,” he says, knowing full well that his wife is the Captain and the Referee.

To summarise, I have encountered more men who are dominated by their wives than men who are abusive. And I expect the numbers are far more weighted in that direction than we realise, because women are far more likely to talk about their situations than men are, and there is very little, if any, stigma for a woman to share about an abusive husband. Even in our claimed egalitarian age, it is still quite shameful for a man to admit to not being the man of his house. So many men suffer in silence and are often shut up when they try to speak.

What I want to do in this piece is address how to avoid falling into such a situation. I want to give some practical advice to men about how to stop their wife from becoming a difficult woman. It is my contention that in the right context, most women can become a difficult woman. But it is not my contention that this is necessarily the man’s fault. Women have agency, and this is often ignored by people who discuss these issues. However, that does not mean there are not things that a man can do to change that likelihood, and balance things in favour of a submissive and comparatively godly wife.

As for men whose wives have already completely subjected them? Well, perhaps they can implement some of this as well. But their job is harder, much harder. Lifelong relational patterns are hard to break out of; they do not develop overnight, nor come out of nowhere. Not every man is a leader, and not every man has the ability to change his environment. A leopard cannot change its spots, right? But God can do miracles. We live in light of these two realities. Just recognise that men in both of these situations are going to have to prepare themselves for conflict. Both, because it will happen, and secondly, because you don’t want to go too far. There are plenty of men who have gone too far in seeking to rein in a domineering woman, and they have suffered the loss of any moral authority as a result. So, be wise, gentlemen.

I want to begin with something Paul says in Titus. He gives this advice to the younger church leader,

“But as for you, speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine: 2 that the older men be sober, reverent, temperate, sound in faith, in love, in patience; 3 the older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things— 4 that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed. 6 Likewise, exhort the young men to be sober-minded,…” (Titus 2:1-6).

This is advice for a church leader on what he is to teach about the character of various groups within society. There are some great principles for us to draw from here in beginning this discussion.

Firstly, men, if you want to avoid your wife becoming the difficult woman, you need to recognise how much almost every woman in this society has been robbed of the kind of environment they needed to become the kind of wives that Paul envisions in this passage. For one, whether they were raised in the Church or not, they have almost certainly been raised to either not know what this passage says, or, in the case of many Christians, to actively reject it, and call some of its elements outdated and sexist. Hence, from a very early age, the vast majority of women have been raised, either explicitly or implicitly, to rebel against being the submissive woman.

The vitriol I have heard in the mouths of some women about that term “submission” is incredible. I can bring to mind various examples, but I was once sitting at a conference lunch table just listening to the conversation around me, and the way one of the women just spat out how much she hated teaching that women should submit to husbands was quite telling. Especially considering it had nothing to do with any of the conference talks. I had no idea how the topic came up. She is only one example. I have seen this countless times.

Men, look at this: “3 the older women likewise, that they be reverent in behaviour, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things…” You need to recognise that most older women who surrounded your potential wife or wife as they developed into a woman did not fall into any of these categories. Women like Paul describes do exist. I know plenty, but you have to look for them. In fact, our culture kind of likes to brag about women not being reverent. It rewards women who slander either their competition or even the men in their life, for at least sympathy from their friends, or worse, to gain his possessions. The wine-bibbing older woman is a staple represented in film and media. And “teachers of good things…” What have the vast majority of women been given over to teaching, since feminism became the dominant ideology, not just of our women, but of society in general?

So, you need to start from this basis: the woman in your life, who you want to marry, or are married to, has been terribly robbed by a culture that had no intention of teaching her how to be a good wife. In fact, the term “the good wife” has become a derogatory term in our modern culture.

So successful has been the Luciferian-inspired feminist movement that even many Christians think of the biblical wife as a lesser thing. You need to start from this basis. Just assume that, to some degree, your wife’s social context, her education, likely her family environment, and more, are antagonistic in some way towards her being the kind of wife you might have expected.

What Paul advises is that the older women need to be “reverent” and “teachers of good things…” He is not contradicting his teaching in other letters where he says that men should direct the teaching in the church, because he goes on to explain what he means: “4 that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children,…” In other words, Paul is saying that the older women need to be respectfully focused on teaching the younger women to fulfil their role. How the church needs this today, in increasing measure.

Hence, men, now that you have recognised that your wife has been robbed of the kind of encouragement and upbringing that most women of previous generations got, you need to find a church environment where she is going to be surrounded by older women who will teach her these things. If, and these women do exist, she learnt this from her mother and her mother is still a part of her life, then that is a boon to you. That is something to celebrate. Feminism has not achieved full acceptance in every household; hence there are oases in this cultural desert. But still, you need to be intentional about this.

You need to recognise that the divorce rate in the churches being roughly similar to the divorce rate in the culture is not an accident. It comes about in large part because most Christians simply do not have a Christian worldview. I cannot get this across to you strongly enough; you need to know this: the men I know who are going through either the destruction of their marriage or their marriage turning into a sexless wasteland all have something in common: they usually stopped going to church, meaning that their wife’s social context got shrunk down to her co-workers and other secular contexts. And many of them were part of churches where the women were dominant over the men, and hence their church context was not very different to secular contexts anyway.

A lot of men think they don’t need church. And, there are probably a small minority of Christian couples out there who are in this situation who can keep a relatively good marriage, while living an unbalanced Christian lifestyle; for it is impossible to be a healthy Christian and ignore the one-another passages in the Bible, that assume we are living in the context of the fellowship of believers. But the overwhelming observational evidence points to the opposite effect. Men, you might not feel the need for church. Your desire for interaction with other people, with whom you disagree on a host of things, will likely go down as you age. But if your wife is disconnected from an environment where other women are going to teach her how to better love and respect you, then you will suffer for it. Many men overlook this, and they suffer as a result.

Similarly, if you are in a church environment which encourages your wife to live like the world, it will have a similar effect. I have lost count of the number of men who have told me that their wife’s divorced friends have ruined their own marriage. This is a well-known phenomenon. The reason that divorce statistics are as high in the church as outside is simply that many Christians ignore what the Bible says about marriage and think that flying a Jesus bumper sticker on their car will make all the difference. But it won’t. Christianity is not the religion of lucky charms. As much as this kind of thinking often seeps back in. Exceptional men might be able to make up the difference themselves; the average Christian man needs this environment for his wife to aid him and his wife in their marriage.

You need to be intentional about spending serious amounts of time with other families who take what Paul says to Titus seriously. And, if the pastor’s wife, or elder’s wives, scorn what the scriptures say here, then you can be certain that your chances of facing a world of hurt in marriage will increase. Hence, to avoid having a difficult wife, find a church gathering where the older women “admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children,…” It is more important than cool music. It is more important than a cool youth program. It is more important than many of the surface things people look for in the church. And those surface things can exist within a church that does this well, but they do not necessarily go together.

You might find it strange that Titus has to “teach or admonish” the older women to love their husbands. But just consider how many women will kill their children in the womb given the chance? Now consider how many women will kick out the father of their children if given the chance? Here are just two indications that Paul, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, understood that loving her children and husband is something that a lot of women need coaching and teaching in. Just as many men need to be trained to love their wives. Paul also shows us that it is older women who will be the primary teachers in this role, not their husbands. It is natural for women to seek the counsel of other, wiser, older women. If your wife is surrounded by bad women, then you will suffer. You will both suffer.

This goes just as much for her being chaste and discreet. There is a bit of a misunderstanding in our culture that men are more obsessed with sex than women. Two things show this is not the case: (1) Go to the beach and look at how most women will dress if social pressure or character does not restrain them, and (2) Look at how women’s soft, and not so soft, porn dominates that reading market. Women and men are both created to be and are sexual creatures. If your wife does not have good influences in this regard, there is a strong possibility she will put herself on display for other men. This culture has trained her to do it.

If a husband has an attractive and desirable wife, which all men want, other men will be interested in her. There is nothing you can do about that. But you can challenge her for flirting with them. But even better if she has responsible, attractive and reverent older women to challenge her in this regard for you.

A lot of women want to be good wives, but as women are highly social creatures that are very impressionable by their environment, they can come under terrible influences from their friends. Be thoughtful about this. Her flirtatious, vivacious personality might have drawn you to her, but if this is not properly turned into discretion in your marriage, you might find yourself in for real trouble. There are countless men who do not give two hoots that she is your wife. She needs direction from wiser women on this as well.

And, of course, this last one is rejected by most Christians: “good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.” I could tell you stories of even pastors’ wives who scorn this one. I could tell you accounts of older men and women who think this is too limiting for their grand-daughters or daughters. But I don’t have to. You know this one is under attack from society and the church. Some consider it sexist, out-of-date advice; others consider it an unachievable goal that pastors should be embarrassed to hold to, because it is out of reach to most working people today. Others just don’t care what the Bible says, whether Christian or not, and still others would like to follow this command but don’t know how.

If your wife is in an environment where the women scorn this verse, remind yourself that she and her friends were robbed of the culture that trained women to do this well, and acknowledge how she and you are being robbed, at the present moment, by our culture. Titus would not have to tell older women to teach this to younger women if it just came by nature. It doesn’t, at least not all of it. Humans have some level of inborn instinct, but most of what we learn has to be taught, and it can be untaught between the generations.

The culture of women being culture-bearers in the home has been effectively cut off. Even many women who would like to do this find themselves struggling to find other women to partner in doing it with them, because all their friends work during the day. Many of them are having to learn the skills of being productive in the home from scratch.

Even simple things like nutritious, affordable meals are a skill many women are re-learning. If you just ask your wife to be a homemaker, which is her role and you both believe it is, but you leave her to figure out all this on her own, then you might find her getting frustrated and restless in the home, and this has caused many problems for families and husbands. Even the desire to do things God’s way can go wrong without good discipleship.

I find it interesting how many women who do homeschooling, for instance, want to join co-ops of other women to help their kids learn in community. I thought it was supposed to be about schooling in the home? Often, these groups fracture because you have highly independent-minded people seeking to come together for a joint effort, a bit like Baptist church plants.

But the reason they do this is because of the strong desire for the women’s village that most women grew up in, throughout history. Our society has stripped that away from most women, and so doing things God’s way can be a lot harder. Just like it is harder for a man to keep a pure mind when half the women around him dress like they are selling themselves…which in many ways they are.

You need to actively make sure you are reinforcing these standards in your home, but that you are in an environment where others will reinforce them for you. And, by the grace of God, your wife will develop into the kind of woman who can help train other women in this. Which is why it is important to note that Paul says this to young men, “6 Likewise, exhort the young men to be sober-minded…” It is a very brief statement, compared to what he says for the young women. But consider what he is saying.

Many young men do not approach life in a serious way. In fact, many men take some time to develop into their masculine role of providers and guardians of their home. This is why car insurance is more expensive for young men, well into their 20’s. But the sooner you learn to approach these things seriously and diligently, the better off you will be.

But this also helps a man with his wife. Because his wife is much more likely to take him seriously if he takes himself seriously. She is also much more likely to take him seriously if other men, and other women, take him seriously. Men who cut their family and their wives off from a good church often get themselves in trouble in this area. Women like to see their men flourish amongst other men.

A lot of men think all they need to do is their job and centre their life around their wife. But these men show they have no understanding of feminine nature. Women want to see their husband measure up well against other men. If he doesn’t, this diminishes her view of him, and he is more likely to find he has a difficult wife. This one happens so often. Sure, there are exceptions; they can be found in the comments sections of discussions like this across the world. But don’t think you are so special as to be among the exceptions; you likely won’t be.

Take yourself seriously, take your faith seriously, take your wife’s social environment seriously. Many men think more of the social environment of their kids than their wife, and that is their biggest mistake. They often don’t even realise it is a mistake until their kids are out of the home and the wife has gone off to discover herself, because her reading club or co-workers convinced her to, that it is her right.

A lot more could be said about this issue. Men, you have been failed by our culture too, in many ways. Especially in the area of learning how to steward a wife. Most people are never taught this, and the most they learn is from their home environment, which can be hit and miss. And in a culture of broken homes is much more miss than hit.

I just want to briefly mention one more area before I conclude: sex.

Solomon says this,

“Drink water from your own cistern, And running water from your own well. 16 Should your fountains be dispersed abroad, Streams of water in the streets? 17 Let them be only your own, And not for strangers with you. 18 Let your fountain be blessed, And rejoice with the wife of your youth. 19 As a loving deer and a graceful doe, Let her breasts satisfy you at all times; And always be enraptured with her love. 20 For why should you, my son, be enraptured by an immoral woman, And be embraced in the arms of a seductress?” (Prov. 5:15-20).

Many men think that the key to pleasing their wife is being subservient to her. But it is not. I believe women are partially hardwired to joyfully follow a good man if she is trained by other women to do this well. I say partially because the fall has corrupted men and women. I think if a man follows the principles in this article that come from Scripture, his wife is more likely to want to follow him, and they are more likely to forge together well.

But don’t neglect sex in this equation, either. God has conditioned us to desire sex, enjoy sex and even regularly crave sex, both men and women – unless, of course, something has gone terribly wrong, which can happen in this world. If you build a healthy physical craving for each other, by stewarding this well early in your marriage, it will help bond you both together. Some men ruin this with porn, or he or his wife puts on weight, or the wife’s desire is ruined by antidepressants, or some other issues can get in the way. But if you are diligent in being “enraptured” in each other’s love, you will likely still have conflict, but you will come back together as one.

This area is overlooked as a powerful remedy to conflict. A woman who sexually desires her husband is much more willing to want to follow him. She might get things wrong. You might get things wrong. But work, intentionally, to stir up this desire. It will help you more than you know.

If this tap has run dry in your marriage, you will already know how it draws a chasm between both of you. This means you will have to work harder to get back to where you should be. But I think these principles can set you on the right track to getting back to a good place.

Of course, you can seek to do the right things, and your marriage can still fail. We live on the wrong side of paradise, so things can still go wrong. I do not believe that because a woman turns bad it is guaranteed to be her husband’s fault. It can be. But it could also be that you married a bad one. They exist too. But generally speaking, there are good and wise things a man can do to help his marriage have a better chance of success, and telling him to be more of a domesticated and neutered servant, based on a demented understanding of “laying down his life”, is the wrong advice.

Palestinian and Arab minority parties in Israel are gearing up for "the mother of all elections" this fall, as they try to oust a right-wing government they say is racist and a threat to their safety. Their biggest challenge may be divisions amongst themselves, however.

Jared Kushner, President Trump's son-in-law, held a rare meeting with Hamas leadership Sunday in Egypt, in a new diplomatic effort to make progress in the stalled Gaza ceasefire.

(Image credit: Alex Brandon)

TheNewAmerican.com

John and Nisha Whitehead | The Rutherford Institute | Rutherford.org

The National Guard was just the beginning.

One year after President Trump deployed military troops to the nation’s capital, we find ourselves navigating a posse comitatus presidency in which the visual trappings of martial law are the norm, not the exception.

When Trump declared a supposed “crime emergency” in Washington, D.C., called in the National Guard, unleashed federal law enforcement throughout the city and temporarily seized control of the Metropolitan Police Department, we warned that the police state had found a new playbook: martial law, one city at a time.

The emergency is long over.

The troops never left.

Now the Pentagon says the National Guard deployment can remain in Washington until January 20, 2029 — the final day of Trump’s presidency — unless Trump himself decides to terminate it sooner.

That is not an emergency response.

That is a standing military presence.

The government expects American taxpayers to spend another $1.4 billion maintaining it.

What began in August 2025 as an extraordinary response to a supposedly “extraordinary” crime crisis has become part of the architecture of everyday government.

Thousands of military personnel have remained deployed in the capital. Armed Guard members patrol streets, Metro stations, parks and tourist attractions. They have supported arrest operations. They have responded to medical calls. They have shoveled snow. They have removed trash and weeds and participated in “beautification” projects.

During the nation’s 250th anniversary celebrations, their numbers swelled to roughly 5,000.

Now the Trump administration is making plans to build “apartment-style lodging units” for the troops stationed in DC at a cost of $292 million to the taxpayer.

That is in addition to the $1 billion Trump wants for White House security upgrades, including a new ballroom topped by a proposed “droneport” that he has envisioned as a rooftop staging ground for military trucks, personnel and battlefield weaponry.

The symbolism is hard to miss.

This is how emergency power grabs become entrenched and permanent.

We do not have to speculate about where this leads.

We have already begun to see it.

When Trump federalized California National Guard troops and deployed Marines to Los Angeles during protests against immigration raids in 2025, a federal judge subsequently ruled that the administration had violated the Posse Comitatus Act by using military personnel to carry out civilian law-enforcement functions.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer warned that the administration appeared intent on creating something the Constitution was never meant to tolerate: a national police force with the president effectively serving as its chief.

That description increasingly fits the Trump presidency.

Trump is not merely claiming authority as commander-in-chief over America’s military. He is increasingly behaving as though being commander-in-chief makes him commander-in-chief of the American people.

It is a profound, constitutional difference.

A president governs citizens. A commander commands troops. A police chief directs law enforcement. A king commands subjects.

The danger begins when one man starts behaving as though all four offices belong to him.

Trump has increasingly embraced his own digital version of that authoritarian theater.

Just days ago, he circulated an AI-generated image depicting himself in an elaborate military uniform alongside Generals George S. Patton and Douglas MacArthur, laden with decorations and medals he never earned for military service he never performed.

It would be tempting to dismiss such images as narcissistic internet trolling.

That would be a mistake.

This is how Trump sees presidential power: as authoritarian power backed by military force.

The National Guard deployment in Washington is the physical embodiment of that worldview.

Armed soldiers are stationed around the monuments. They guard the perimeter of the Reflecting Pool. They patrol the National Mall. They appear at Metro stations, tourist sites and public parks.

Their presence is no longer presented as extraordinary. That is precisely the problem.

A free people should never become accustomed to soldiers policing their streets. Once that sight becomes ordinary, the constitutional barrier separating military power from civilian government has already begun to collapse.

And Washington is the ideal laboratory as a testing ground.

What can be normalized in the capital today can be demanded elsewhere tomorrow.

Indeed, we have already seen repeated attempts to expand the model beyond Washington: federalized National Guard troops in Los Angeles, attempted Guard deployments elsewhere, federal agents sent into cities, immigration enforcement increasingly carried out with military equipment and rhetoric, and presidential threats to “liberate” jurisdictions whose elected leaders resist federal policy.

Not every deployment has survived judicial scrutiny.

That is encouraging, but the real danger is larger than whether any particular deployment is eventually blocked by a court. The danger is that the country is being conditioned to accept the premise behind all of them: that whenever the president declares a city dangerous, disorderly, disobedient or insufficiently cooperative, military force is an appropriate instrument of domestic government.

That premise should frighten conservatives and liberals alike.

This is not fundamentally a question of whether you trust Donald Trump. It is whether you trust any president with a standing military force at his disposal for domestic political purposes.

The Constitution was not written on the assumption that good people would always hold power. It was written because power attracts abuse.

Every authority surrendered to Trump becomes an authority available to his successors. Every emergency power normalized now becomes part of the presidential toolbox later. Every constitutional boundary ignored because the “right” president is violating it becomes one less boundary available when the “wrong” president takes office.

This is how republics lose their safeguards: One deployment. One emergency. One executive order. One city. One exception at a time.

As we have warned repeatedly in Battlefield America: The War on the American People and its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, that is how constitutional lines disappear — not because someone formally erases them, but because enough people stop noticing when they are crossed.

The Founders feared standing armies because they understood that military power and political liberty exist in constant tension.

The Posse Comitatus Act reflects that same hard-earned wisdom.

Soldiers defend the country. Police enforce the law. Presidents execute the laws within constitutional limits.

Citizens are not troops. Cities are not battlefields. Political opponents are not enemy combatants. And the president is not the American people’s commander-in-chief. He is commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

That distinction may be one of the few things standing between a constitutional republic and a police state presidency.

We had better remember it before the exception becomes the rule — and the troops never go home.

Source: https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/the_posse_comitatus_presidency_trumps_standing_army_on_american_streets

Image: Source

Original Article: https://thenewamerican.com/opinion/the-posse-comitatus-presidency-trumps-standing-army-on-american-streets/

Hugh Hefner made multiple calls to the FBI about Jeffrey Epstein back in 2005, a lawsuit reveals. However, the FBI killed the investigation to protect his “powerful friends.” According to the New York Post, model Audra Lynn Christiansen was living at [...]

The post Hugh Hefner Reported Jeffrey Epstein in 2005—FBI KILLED the Investigation to Protect Elite Pedophile Ring appeared first on The People's Voice.

Thousands of demonstrators clashed with police outside Argentina’s Congress on Thursday as lawmakers debated a controversial private property bill designed to grant huge swathes of land to Israel. Argentina’s Jewish President Javier Melei has officially [...]

The post Thousands of Argentinians Rise Up Against Israel’s Zionist Land Grab: ‘They Are Stealing Our Land’ appeared first on The People's Voice.

Lady Gaga has admitted the meat dress she wore at the 2010 VMAs was not flank steak. At least—it wasn’t beef. It was the sacrificed and preserved flesh of dead Hollywood child stars, and she was [...]

The post Lady Gaga Confesses Meat Dress Was ‘100% Child Flesh’: ‘They Made Me Wear It to Stay in Illuminati’ appeared first on The People's Voice.

President Trump said the USS Abraham Lincoln deployment is "not nearly long enough." A family member of a sailor on board that ship said those comments are shameful.

(Image credit: Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

Stormy times at sea, as U.S. ships endure months-long, record-setting deployments for a war nobody wanted that still has no clear objective, reason for being or end in sight and their thousands of hapless burned-out sailors endure bad food, water, plumbing and morale so low some are leaping overboard, or trying to, to end it all. Blame oblivious messianic Nazi clown Kegseth and fellow zealots who lured the faithful and gullible in and then abandoned them - a sordid regime hallmark.

On land, of course, things aren't much better these days. In short inept order, Trump has trashed the economy, deporting or terrorizing away over a million brown-skinned workers for the latest dismal jobs report; ordered toxic, nonsensical changes to longtime vaccine policies based on debunked theories, what "some people say," and the fever dream of a lethal "vaccination thing" the size of a soda bottle poured into "a little child's body"; spent over $900 million of our money on vanity construction projects in D.C nobody authorized or asked for; and invested $20 million on gloves for already abusive ICE thugs to give painful electric shocks to "non-compliant" victims in "a recipe for harm to the public" and what could possibly go wrong.

Meanwhile, the Iran debacle lurches on. The Pentagon is frantically shifting money from equipment, training and missile defense funds to pay for it, oil reserves and munitions stockpiles have shrunk to record lows, our 122% debt-to-Gross-Domestic-Product ratio means U.S. debt is now greater than the value of everything we produce in a year, "including The Odyssey," and Pete Kegsbreath shrugs it off with an inane, "It takes money to kill bad guys." He's so desperate to get his obscene $1.5 trillion, $3.18 billion a day - the biggest defense budget increase since World War II - he hijacked a ceremony renaming Joint Base Charleston to Joint Base Lindsey Graham by urging Congress give it to him 'cause there'd be "no greater tribute" to the guy who never met a war he didn't like.

A partisan hack, he's failed at...everything. He sabotaged his own agenda by blowing off half the Senate, locking Dems out of classified briefings on defense spending in a move even GOPers decried. He kowtowed to Grifters 'R Us by appointing to a tech advisory body handling billions in defense contracts two bros with ties to Don Jr.'s venture capital gig, various wingnuts and others "here to raid the cupboards." Required to give Congress 2025 (pre-Iran) data on civilian harm after gutting programs to mitigate or even track it, he declared no civilian casualties in boat strikes that killed over 220 "narcoterrorists" and Yemen actions that killed hundreds more, in a report officials called "sickening," "a fucking joke," and "a total whitewash."

Wildly out of his Planet-Fox-depth, he "helped" craft a military, political and moral fiasco in Iran that has left an equally clueless Private Bonespurs reportedly on the brink of "giving up" on a war that's yielded no nuclear deal and left an ever-more powerful Iran in charge of the vital Hormuz Strait, planning to charge tolls, and demanding $300 billion in reconstruction funds. Heckuva job, or what Dan Rather calls "one of the most catastrophic failures by a president in American history." Plus, Iran hardliners are saying they won't negotiate with the U.S. again until the current moron is gone. And he's so scared he just snuck out of Turkey hiding in a catering truck, prompting a barrage of brutal memes and toons. Sure, Donnie, nobody's laughing at America anymore.

Still, because an all-time low number of young Americans are inexplicably showing interest in military service, Christofascist Pete has turned to Jesus for more bodies, arguing the war in Iran is actually "part of God’s divine plan." (Also, so are Coke bottles that read ""Jesus is Lord," or they did until the Muslims took over.) Queasily merging Trump's botched "excursion" with a messianic Christian battle to bring the return of Jesus Christ, Pentagon social media accounts are running multiple, melodramatic ads featuring "warfighters" doing gallant warfighting things alongside the message "SEND ME." Hastily cribbed from Isaiah 6:8, it's when God asks the prophet Isaiah, “Whom shall I send?” and Isaiah replies, “Here am I. Send me.”

In many Christian traditions, the passage means willingly accepting God’s call to serve as one sees fit. In evangelical culture, says one historian, it's often a standalone text" used to render that mission divine. What they skip: the following description of a judgment on cities "without inhabitant" and a land "utterly desolate," the devastation falling on "the nation doing the sending." Asked to clarify the message here, a Pentagon spokesperson demurred: "Nothing to offer you on this." Never mind the inevitable uproar if a Muslim cleric cited the Quran before killing 170 schoolgirls and threatening nuclear annihilation, or the fact "blatant Bible-thumping" implying a religious war confirms longtime Iranian agit-prop the U.S., aka "Great Satan," is waging war on Islam.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation was already “inundated” by calls from soldiers complaining about zealot commanders invoking the rhetoric of Christian Zionist messianism; one declared Trump "anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark His return to Earth." The calls, says MRFF president and veteran Mikey Weinstein, "have one damn thing in freaking common - the unrestricted euphoria of commanders (who see) Biblically-sanctioned war as an undeniable sign (of) Christian End Times." Now it's gotten worse: The messaging is more hysterical, and thousands of sailors, stuck on record-long deployments, are more desperate to escape what have become "their floating nightmares."

This week, reports surfaced of a growing but unknown number of sailors jumping overboard in apparent suicide attempts after months of isolation, rotten food, broken plumbing, no mail, a dubious mission and morale, writes Jonathan Larson, "lower than Trump’s approval ratings" thanks to the longest, most ill-planned deployment in history. "Deployments have been extended repeatedly under the command of Hegseth and Trump," he notes, "who, in their defense, are to running history’s largest military as a water buffalo is to knitting." Since Nov. 21, 2025, he adds, 5,000 sailors have been on the USS Abraham Lincoln ship, "supporting U.S. operations against Iran, whatever those might be at the moment for whatever reason we’re going with today."

He goes on, "Deployment, was supposed to end in May, much like the war was supposed to end in weeks. That can happen when you're fighting a war your commander in chief says isn’t a war, for reasons that shift like the tides, that he already won, and that made pretty much everything worse for the entire world." The USS Lincoln sailors have been at sea for almost nine months, including 250 record-setting days without touching land. There've been two stops: Guam where most had to stay aboard, and Oman where those allowed off had to stay inside a compound. Most deployments run 6 to 7 months, "roughly how long human beings can operate in a floating industrial city working (on) a flight deck actively trying to kill them before they start to come apart."

It's not the first ship stranded by "leaders" endlessly extending a deployment because they didn't bother planning to rotate in a relief ship like a real military. Earlier, the USS Gerald R. Ford spent 326 days at sea, Venezuela to iran, famously suffering plumbing breakdowns - once, 205 over four days - from sewage overwhelming pipes. In April, food complaints also began surfacing, with sailors or their relatives posting images of half-empty meal trays, gross slabs of gray "meat," and "meals" of two tortillas and a half-cup of rice. Hegseth, with time only for lethality, called them fake news. Others called bullshit: "Half a cup of rice and 2 tortillas on a $13 million warship while $600 million in gold trim goes up where the East Wing used to be. Tally the score, America."

On the Lincoln, sailors and families say conditions are akin to ICE detention: Broken toilets, contaminated drinking water, long periods without hot water for (moldy) showers, no fresh produce 'cause it can't survive the trip, no milk in months, some frozen meat that's still often rotten, basic supplies like soap and toothpaste running out, mail so disrupted care packages get lost in transit for months (if relatives can afford gas to go to the post office). Now come reports of at least six sailors, possibly more, going over the rail "just for relief." Parents say they worry their kids will "die on that ship," that they and their shipmates "think constantly about going over the side"; one woman's husband wrote he hopes "he doesn't wake up tomorrow."

Last week, after enough reports of friends pulling friends back from the edge the ship's loudspeaker began asking people to stop trying to jump, about 200 relatives organized two town halls in San Diego to ask Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao and other officials, Are you going to bring our people home before or after somebody dies? The meetings were tense and tearful. The wife of a sailor who jumped, and spent an hour in the water before being put on medical leave, said the Navy didn't tell her for four days: "It was handled very poorly - they’re just trying to cover this up." A woman whose husband, a 13-year veteran who tried to jump, said now he's scared he'll get a dishonorable discharge, ruining his career, from the people who put him there, and, "That is not fair."

A high school senior whose mom is there wondered if she'd be home for the year’s milestones; she said it’s been hard to connect the past few months and when they do, “She’s definitely down. It sucks.” A father whose son is aboard said he always sounds exhausted. “I don’t want to worry this deployment will get the best of my son," he said. “That would be an unbearable burden on my heart.” Many said it's getting harder to feel proud of the service of relatives afraid they're killing innocent civilians; the first person to admit that drew applause from the crowd. Asked about the meetings, Hegseth, who's crowed about "death and destruction from the sky all day long,” dismissed those and other concerns: "We make sure that every ship, every crew, every captain has everything we can provide them at every single moment."

Joining Cao at the town hall was Vice Admiral Joseph Cahill, who reportedly told relatives of the long-suffering sailors, “I cannot even tell you how proud we are of them." He also said counselors and chaplains were available to help meet their loved ones' "spiritual needs," though one observer noted Hegseth has largely replaced them with "Christofascist proselytizers and ravenous, bloodthirsty, unthinking, religious berserkers whose approach appeared to be controversial among people at (the) meeting currently married to some of Hegseth's aspirational berserkers." Families were told USS Theodore Roosevelt would soon relieve the Lincoln; new reports say USS George Washington will, but no of course the Pentagon isn't confused, why do you ask?

Sen. Richard Blumenthal wrote a letter to Hegseth and Cao expressing his "serious concerns" about conditions and demanding "a formal accounting," including answers to multiple questions, by August 27. He reflects a broad consensus the Pentagon is "burning through people like they’re disposable" as morale at sea is "cratering." "This is what the abuse of active-duty personnel looks like when it’s policy instead of scandal," writes Dean Blundell. "Mission planning is supposed to include the humans executing the mission. When your operational tempo requires denying reality in April, ignoring the warnings in July, and managing suicide attempts by loudspeaker in August, you don’t have a strategy. You have a slow-motion command failure."

Still Hegseth, who "treats every question about his conduct as an enemy operation," keeps pushing back on bad food and self-harm reports that have “completely misrepresented” things. His latest retort came during a manic, jittery Panama visit - "The Internet Wants Him to Take a Drug Test" - where he welcomed Colombia’s new right-wing president to a new "Counter-Cartel Coalition" that rebrands the drug economy as a terrorist enterprise. Its very statesman-like motto: "We do bad things to bad people." Now, he brags, he's "putting cartels on notice like ISIS" to "execute ruthlessly" blah blah and if you think boat strikes are war crimes just withdraw from the ICC, "the institutional equivalent of unscrewing the smoke detector because it keeps going off." What an asshole.

In a Friday speech in New York, meanwhile, Private Bonespurs blathered "after we finish defeating Iran, pretty soon I'll be declaring the Hormuz Strait a territory of the United States." (Iran disagreed.) He also said it's ok to be paying more for gas because "we're doing a great service to the world." Earlier, he randomly ordered the Navy to replace, for old time's sake, the electromagnetic systems carriers use to launch fighter jets with 50's-era steam-powered catapults he always liked,. Mark Kelly: He "should stick to ballrooms, bankruptcy, and bullshit.” Then he was asked if he agreed the burned-out sailors' deployment on the USS Lincoln was too long. "No, no, no," said Mr. Empathy. "Not nearly long enough." In response, many people reportedly flocked to him, saying 'thank you, sir,' with tears in their eyes. Then he went back to sticking gold gimcracks on "his" house.

Update: It seems sailors' families are some pissed at the "frustrating, false and careless" responses of Trump/Kegsbreath to legit concerns about the well-being of loved ones stuck in never-ending deployments on the Lincoln. No wonder, given each detail that emerges paints a bleaker picture. They describe "emaciated" sailors losing 20-30 pounds - "If they're losing weight, that means you're starving them" - undrinkable water, and such poor mental health support the one "deployment resilience counselor" quit months ago, a visiting Navy official told them "we can simply exercise our brains to make ourselves happy,” and the only psychiatrist has a five-week wait "unless you do like three of our shipmates and jump off the ship or take 27 sleeping pills." One sailor: "Keep praying for us." His mom: "My son signed up to serve his country. But why isn’t his country serving him?"

Hundreds of U.S. diplomats remain in limbo, months after they were evacuated from the Middle East, as the war with Iran drags on.

Five years ago, Taliban militants retook the Afghan capital, Kabul. NPR's Eyder Peralta talks to former Afghan official Matin Bek about the consequences of the U.S. withdrawal from his country.

A 108-year-old woman was sexually assaulted and robbed in the French city of Lyon on Aug. 7, 2026, in the Villeurbanne suburb of the city.

Around 10:30 a.m., a home caregiver arrived at the 108-year-old woman’s apartment to provide care. The caregiver found the elderly woman partially naked, in a state of shock, and sitting on her sofa. The victim was unable to explain what had happened. Reports note that, given her age and condition, she was a priori not able to undress herself alone.

Emergency services were alerted about the woman’s condition. She was taken to the hospital for examination and medical analyses, according to French news outlet CNews.

Investigators determined that a burglary had taken place. Several individuals allegedly forced open a kitchen window to enter the apartment. Several rooms were searched and ransacked, and bottles of perfume were stolen.

The Lyon prosecutor’s office opened an investigation for burglary by breaking and entering and sexual assault. The sexual assault qualification was retained specifically “given her state of nudity at the time of discovery.” No other details were provided about the woman’s condition.

There have been no announced arrests or identifications of suspects, who remain on the run.

No specific descriptions of the perpetrators, additional stolen items, forensic results, or precise circumstances of the undressing beyond the initial findings have been made public. The investigation is ongoing.

A police union spokesperson, Benjamin Camboulives of Alternative Police (CFDT), commented publicly that “the delinquents no longer have any limits,” but this added no new factual information about the case itself.

The post France: 108-year-old woman sexually assaulted and robbed in Lyon appeared first on Remix News.

The latest poll shows that the current ruling coalition would lose power. The shape of the parliamentary majority would be decided by Grzegorz Braun, according to the latest poll from National Research Group.

“This is what it looks like here in August in the OGB study. So much has changed that almost nothing has changed. October 15 coalition without a majority, everything is decided by Braun. Support for Morawiecki’s party as in April, i.e. 5-6 percent. and all this is PiS voters,” pointed out the head of the polling firm, Łukasz Pawłowski.

The leader in the OGB ranking remains the Civic Coalition, which can count on 33.5 percent support, a decrease of as much as 5.4 percentage points. PiS is second in the poll with 22.3 percent, a decrease of 4.7 percentage points.

The right-wing Confederation can count on 15.8 percent. support, an increase of 4.1 percentage points. The party of Grzegorz Braun, Confederation of the Polish Crown, records 10.5 percent, an increase of 1.2 percentage points.

The New Left would also be included in the Sejm with support of 5.99 percent. (an increase of 0.8 percentage points) and Rozwój Plus. If former Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki had founded the party and run independently in the elections, he would have had a chance of winning 5.49 percent. support.

The Razem party (3.6 percent), PSL (1.7 percent) and Polska 2050 (0.9 percent) would fall below the electoral threshold.

Tak to wygląda u nas w sierpniu w badaniu @OGB_PL Tyle się zmieniło, by nie zmieniło się prawie nic. K15X bez większości, o wszystkim decyduje Braun. Poparcie dla partii Morawieckiego jak w kwietniu czyli 5-6% i to wszystko wyborcy PiS

Więcej:https://t.co/9TlfoRs5Id pic.twitter.com/n6KJhZ44k6

— Łukasz Pawłowski (@LukasPawlowski) August 14, 2026

Braun will decide the majority?

If the poll support were translated into seats in the Sejm, the Civic Coalition would obtain 185 seats, Law and Justice 126, Confederation 79, Confederation of the Polish Crown 49, New Left 13, and Rozwój Plus eight.

This means that the current ruling coalition would not maintain power. Donald Tusk’s KO party and New Left would have a total of only 198 seats. For the right wing to take power, an alliance between Law and Justice would be needed not only with the Confederation of Sławomir Mentzen and Krzysztof Bosak, but also with Grzegorz Braun’s group. Such a majority would have 254 votes, and together with Mateusz Morawiecki’s formation, it would jump to 262.

There have been some calls to ban Braun’s party, but such a move would face high legal hurdles. Given its polling numbers, such an outcome seems unlikely. However, PiS has indicated they would refuse an alliance with the party, raising questions about how sincere that promise would be should Braun’s party remain the only path to political power.

The OGB survey was conducted between Aug. 5 and 12 based on 1,000 respondents.

The post Poland: Two largest parties are losing, right-wing ‘Braun decides everything’ appeared first on Remix News.