Print 
PDF
Newsweek says, "Support for abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has surged following the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an ICE agent in Minnesota last week, according to a new poll."
Newsweek continues, "ICE has faced criticism and increased scrutiny following the shooting of Good, a 37-year-old mother, in Minneapolis last week. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has said that Good sought to weaponize her vehicle against the officer and that he feared for his life. But critics have disputed that characterization, arguing that video footage of the shooting shows she was attempting to drive away at the time and that the shooting was unnecessary."
Be informed, not misled.
Newsweek says, "Progressive Democrats have been calling for the dismantling of ICE for years, arguing it has gone rogue and that immigration enforcement operations can be handled by other agencies. But proposals to abolish the agency have not gained traction among more centrist Democrats who have argued such a move would alienate voters."
Now, Newsweek apparently believes the "Abolish ICE" movement is gaining traction politically.
Some Democrats have renewed their calls for ICE to be abolished following the killing of Good. Democrats, including Representative Rashida Tlaib and Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner, have voiced support for dismantling the agency in the wake of the shooting.
Independents, a key voting bloc that will be central to 2026 midterm strategies, also backed abolishing the agency by a 12-point margin, with 47 percent being in support of such a move and 35 percent opposing it, according to the survey. Among those who supported President Donald Trump in 2024, just 15 percent said they support abolishing ICE.
The article is long and covers how the political thinking has changed since the shooting of Renee Nicole Good. It has, Newsweek opines, changed the political landscape, particularly regarding how it will affect the upcoming 2026 elections.
I understand politics is politics, but at the expense of morality and Truth? And the future of our country?
The left has no grasp on reality. It's all make-believe.
In her much-discussed essay a few months ago, Helen Andrews argued that American institutions have been feminized. Talking about tendencies and averages — “feminine patterns of behavior” — rather than all men and all women, Andrews argued that a transition from masculine control to feminine control produces radical changes in our shared culture.
Andrews continued with this:
Everything you think of as wokeness involves prioritizing the feminine over the masculine: empathy over rationality, safety over risk, cohesion over competition….
Female group dynamics favor consensus and cooperation. Men order each other around, but women can only suggest and persuade. Any criticism or negative sentiment, if it absolutely must be expressed, needs to be buried in layers of compliments. The outcome of a discussion is less important than the fact that a discussion was held and everyone participated in it. The most important sex difference in group dynamics is attitude to conflict. In short, men wage conflict openly while women covertly undermine or ostracize their enemies.
That last part is quite interesting, today, as we look at video from the Renee Good shooting that shows the immediate aftermath and the loud reaction of Good’s Justin Bieber-lookalike signal-wife, [Rebecca Good] who she wasn’t married to, she asked this unguarded question out loud: “Why did you have real bullets?”
"Why did you do a real thing?"
Anguished at the ICE agents, Rebecca screamed, "Why did you do a real thing?" In an unusually unguarded moment of shock and horror, she said something unplanned, unpracticed, and unfiltered: Why physical reality? Why did the props department not equip you properly for this scene?
They were performing, quite consciously, doing a bit for the cameras. “Drive, baby, drive!” and “I’m not mad at you” (hits gas pedal). Remember: “Any criticism or negative sentiment, if it absolutely must be expressed, needs to be buried in layers of compliments.” I’m not mad at you, but I’m hitting you with my car. It’s the apotheosis of passive-aggressive nicespeak. They were theatrically establishing a narrative by which they could undermine or ostracize their enemies, until their accidental scene partner in the improv workshop waged conflict openly, apparently not understanding that he was only being performance hit by the car.
Future of conservatism hinges on question: Is truth too much trouble?
Jenna Ellis published an article on Friday, saying, "When truth is treated as malleable or subordinate to political ends, liberty becomes conditional."
Jenna served as the senior legal adviser and personal counsel to the 45th president of the United States---President Trump. She hosts "Jenna Ellis in the Morning" weekday mornings on American Family Radio, as well as the podcast "On Demand with Jenna Ellis."
This article was written by Jenna Ellis:
American conservatism stands at a crossroads—not merely political, but moral and spiritual. The growing divide on the Right is not simply about tactics or personalities; it is about purpose. Is conservatism ordered toward truth and the preservation of liberty under God, or is it merely a vehicle for winning power in an increasingly hostile culture?
This question is not new. But in 2026 it is unavoidable, because the moral consensus that once restrained power has largely collapsed. When truth is abandoned, power rushes in to take its place. Scripture warns us that this exchange never ends well.
First: truth exists
Scripture is unequivocal on this point. “Your word is truth” (John 17:17). Truth is not created by human will, nor defined by political success. It exists independently of us and judges us. The American founding reflected this biblical reality by recognizing rights as pre-political—derived not from government, but from nature and nature’s God. Liberty could only exist because truth was assumed to be objective.
When truth is treated as malleable or subordinate to political ends, liberty becomes conditional. A movement that no longer believes in objective truth will eventually justify any means necessary to retain power. Scripture cautions against this temptation: “What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:36). The same is true of movements.
Second: human nature is fallen
The Bible offers no illusions about human perfectibility. “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick” (Jeremiah 17:9).
The Founders understood this not because they were pessimists, but because they were realists. As James Madison observed, government is necessary precisely because men are not angels—and therefore must be restrained.
Conservatism aligned naturally with this biblical anthropology. It rejected utopian schemes that assume the right leaders, once empowered, will wield authority virtuously. When conservatives forget this truth, they begin excusing concentrated power in their own hands, trusting outcomes instead of character. Scripture offers a sober warning: “Put not your trust in princes” (Psalm 146:3).
Third: liberty requires virtue
Freedom is not self-sustaining. Scripture teaches that self-government begins with self-control. Ordered liberty depends on a moral people capable of governing themselves before governing others.
This is why conservatism has historically emphasized family, church, and civil society over centralized authority. When virtue erodes, freedom degenerates into license—and license invites coercion. Government power expands not because it is good, but because moral restraint has failed.
Fourth: power must be restrained
Scripture consistently warns against the corrupting pull of unchecked authority. When Satan offered Christ the kingdoms of the world in exchange for allegiance, Jesus refused. Power divorced from truth was not a shortcut—it was a snare.
This principle is where modern conservatism faces its greatest temptation. In an era of aggressive progressivism and cultural decay, it is easy to conclude that the solution is simply to seize power and wield it more effectively than the Left. But power detached from truth does not become righteous. It becomes indistinguishable from the very statism conservatism once opposed.
Conservatism was never meant to be a will-to-power ideology. It was meant to conserve something real: truth, virtue, liberty, and the moral order that makes freedom possible. These are not merely political commitments; they are biblical ones.
The question before the movement is not whether it wants to win elections. It is whether it wants to remain faithful to reality, to liberty, and to the moral law that precedes all earthly authority.
Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Faithful. Be Truthful. Be Prayerful.
