Yes, the Immaculate conception is hard for people who don’t consider Christ as God IN the womb (which is why Mary is the “mother of God” and yet was created by Him).

The thing is to start with looking at the gospel of Luke – Luke 1:28, the angel Gabriel greets Mary, saying, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you” (Greek: kecharitomene). The term kecharitomene is unique in Scripture, a perfect passive participle indicating that Mary has been filled with grace by God’s action, completed in the past, and enduring.

This is a singular, unmerited grace that God gave her, and why? Because she is the vessel that contained the might of God. No wonder the angel Gabriel was astounded.

For Mary to be “full of grace” implies she is free from sin, as sin and grace are opposed (Romans 6:14). If Mary were stained by original sin, she could not be described as perfectly graced. This grace, bestowed before her consent to bear Jesus, points to her conception, as God prepared her from the outset for her unique role.

If God chose Mary to bear His sinless Son, wouldn’t He ensure her purity from the start?

As the New Eve, Mary’s obedience undoes Eve’s fall —> If Eve was created sinless, wouldn’t God create the New Eve (Mary) similarly sinless to cooperate perfectly in redemption?

Jesus, being sinless (Hebrews 4:15), required a pure vessel to enter the world. Mary, as His mother, was chosen and prepared by God to be free from original sin, ensuring no taint of sin touched the Incarnation. The “overshadowing” of the Holy Spirit suggests God’s sanctifying action on Mary, extending to her conception to fit her for this role. Her unique election “in the fullness of time” implies a singular grace, distinct from others born under the law’s curse (Romans 3:23).

Consider the biblical evidence: Mary is “full of grace” (Luke 1:28), set in total enmity with Satan (Genesis 3:15), and chosen as the pure vessel for Christ (Luke 1:35). Scripture doesn’t say “Mary was conceived without sin,” but it paints a picture of her holiness that fits God’s redemptive plan. Just as you accept the Trinity or the canon of Scripture through biblical implications, consider Mary’s Immaculate Conception as a truth God reveals through His Word. Let’s honor Mary not as divine but as the sinless handmaid whose purity magnifies Christ’s glory.

Charlie Kirk

The deal will allow the United States to gain increased market access in the United Kingdom for billions of dollars worth of American exports.

President Donald Trump, joined by representatives from the United Kingdom in the Oval Office, announced on Thursday that the two countries will cut back on trade barriers in the first major trade deal for the president.

The agreement will allow the United States to gain increased market access in the United Kingdom — the sixth-largest economy in the world — for billions of dollars worth of American exports, according to Trump. U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who spoke to the president over the phone, told Trump he is “really pleased” with the deal between the two allies. The final details are still being worked out, but Trump will keep some tariffs in place on British imports. The president emphasized that the deal would boost both countries’ industrial bases and help protect steel.

“Both countries have agreed that economic security is national security and will be working together as allies to ensure that we have a strong industrial base and appropriate export controls and protections for key technologies and industries like steel,” Trump said. “Steel was a big factor. Both countries will become stronger with steel.”

Shortly after announcing the deal, President Trump posted a chart on social media, showing that Britain’s tariffs on U.S. goods will drop to 1.8% while “reciprocal tariffs” on the United Kingdom will remain at 10%. Trump said other nations should not view the 10% tariff on Britain as a template for how the administration will negotiate future deals.

Asked by Daily Wire White House Reporter Mary Margaret Olohan if the trade deal includes any assurances from Britain to protect free speech and freedom of religion, Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the agreement is solely focused on the economy.

Lutnick added that the deal will also allow the United Kingdom to export up to 100,000 vehicles to the United States for a 10% tariff. Lutnick said the agreement will enable the U.K. to maintain access to the U.S. market while also protecting American jobs. The United States will be able to gain more access to U.K. markets to sell agricultural products such as “ethanol, beef, [and] machinery,” according to Lutnick. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said the deal will “exponentially increase our beef exports” to the United Kingdom.

The United Kingdom will also be allowed to export Rolls-Royce engines and airplane parts to the United States tariff-free, and Britain will purchase $10 billion worth of Boeing airplanes from the United States, Lutnick added.

Starmer praised Trump and his trade team for working out the trade deal.

“Really important deal,” Starmer said. “This is going to boost trade between and across our countries. It’s not only going to protect jobs, but create jobs, opening market access.”

The deal is a significant step for the Trump administration as it seeks to negotiate new trade agreements with dozens of countries worldwide following the president’s “Liberation Day” tariffs rollout last month.

Zach Jewell, Daily Wire

James Woods on X:

How do Republicans hold all the power yet can’t bring criminals to justice, but Democrats push all these hoaxes through and hold hearings nonstop? Is there one single Republican with balls besides Trump? Just one?

My fears exactly. We cannot let Trump do all the heavy lifting. He won’t be around forever. Our opponents are radical, hateful, sociopaths. Unless we make them so afraid that they become nostalgic for the good old days of Trump, they will destroy us and America.

Will there ever be accountability for anything? Ever? If not, the criminals will rise again — worse than ever before.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

A new piece of legislation introduced in Delaware aims to offer expanded protections for people experiencing homelessness, focusing on their right to engage in life-sustaining activities such as resting and sleeping in public spaces. [TV Delmarva]

More sad news from tiny, beautiful but leftist-run Delaware: This is how they deliberately destroy nice areas. And the gullible people who vote for it think they’re being virtuous. I bet it will pass.

Delaware is a one-party state like California. Toxic ideas have consequences: toxic policies that ruin human life. Somehow, we’re supposed to believe that it’s actually beneficial for the homeless to spread the tragedy of their mental illness or substance abuse onto the property or into the mental space of others. Leftists put their own self-conscious need to appear morally superior above the well-being of those they claim to love. It’s a vicious con game.

The leftists who applaud this insanity are one of two types: Very rich, meaning none of this will affect or touch them; or extraordinarily naive and ignorant, meaning they have little to lose by ruining the material and spiritual integrity of society.

Follow Dr. Hurd on Facebook. Search under “Michael Hurd” (Charleston SC). Get up-to-the-minute postings, recommended articles and links, and engage in back-and-forth discussion with Dr. Hurd on topics of interest. Also follow Dr. Hurd on X at @MichaelJHurd1, drmichaelhurd on Instagram, @DrHurd on TruthSocial. Dr. Hurd is also now a Newsmax Insider!

I love Ayn Rand’s ideas (she labeled them Objectivism) and they have been instrumental in my life, including my career in psychology. The people calling themselves spokespersons for Objectivism (primarily at the Ayn Rand Institute) today are sycophantic fraudsters, mostly obsessed, it now seems, with discrediting President Trump and advancing the openly Communist and fascist agenda of America’s Democratic Party. In that context, the following article by Sherwin Newman (along with his remarkable, uplifting photographic representation) is refreshing indeed.

Newman’s article follows:

Why Objectivists Should Support Donald Trump Despite Philosophical Imperfections

Ayn Rand’s Objectivism champions reason, individualism, and laissez-faire capitalism as the foundations of a free society. Yet, in the turbulent political landscape of 2025, some Objectivists hesitate to support Donald Trump, the 47th President of the United States, because his agenda doesn’t perfectly align with Rand’s principles. His nationalism, tariffs, and pragmatic approach clash with Objectivism’s universal ideals. However, I argue that Objectivists should back Trump—not because he’s a flawless embodiment of their philosophy, but because the consequences of his opponents’ victory would empower global ultra-collectivist organizations, threatening the very freedoms that allow Objectivism to thrive. These freedoms include free speech, deregulation, a pro-business ethic, reduced government waste, and skepticism toward institutions like the World Health Organization (WHO), World Economic Forum (WEF), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and European Union (EU). Failing to recognize this reality reflects a disintegration of Objectivist thinking, marked by deductive rigidity rather than Rand’s inductive, reality-based approach. Trump’s revocation of restrictive AI regulations, for instance, has preserved technological freedoms that Objectivists rely on, as evidenced by my ability to use tools like Grok 3. This pragmatic alignment, recognized by venture capitalists like Marc Andreessen, underscores why Objectivists must act in their rational self-interest and support Trump.

The Stakes: Global Collectivism vs. American Liberty

Objectivism holds that the supremacy of reason is primary, and any system subordinating it to collective goals is immoral. The WEF, WHO, IMF, World Bank, and EU embody an altruist-collectivist agenda that prioritizes global welfare over individual autonomy, threatening America’s pursuit of life and liberty.

Consider their actions in 2025:

– World Economic Forum (WEF): The WEF’s “stakeholder capitalism” and ESG criteria urge businesses to sacrifice profits for climate and social goals, undermining free markets. Its 2025 Davos meeting pushed “Global Cooperation,” subordinating national interests to collective agendas like digital governance.

– World Health Organization (WHO): The WHO’s $6.8 billion budget funds global health mandates, such as the 2025 Pandemic Treaty, which pressures nations to align with centralized protocols, eroding sovereignty.

– International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank: These institutions provide loans ($72.8 billion from the World Bank in 2024, $650 billion in IMF Special Drawing Rights) with conditions enforcing global economic alignment, limiting national autonomy.

– European Union (EU): The EU’s regulatory frameworks, including its artificial intelligence regulations, impose collectivist standards that stifle innovation and free speech, as seen in its push for “algorithmic equity.”

These organizations promote altruism—sacrificing individual or national interests for a nebulous “global good”—and collectivism, demanding conformity to shared goals. If Trump’s opponents, aligned with these institutions, had prevailed, their policies would have strengthened this agenda, dismantling the freedoms Objectivists depend on:

– Free Speech: Collectivist organizations often support censorship under guises like “combating misinformation.” The EU’s AI regulations mandate content moderation, threatening open discourse. A Biden-led administration would likely have mirrored these restrictions, stifling Objectivist advocacy.

– Deregulation and Pro-Business Ethic: Global institutions impose regulations (e.g., WEF’s ESG, IMF’s fiscal conditions) that hinder entrepreneurship. A collectivist U.S. government would amplify these, crushing the pro-business environment Objectivism requires.

– Reduced Government Waste: The Biden administration’s massive deficit spending fueled inflation and bloated bureaucracies, diverting resources from productive individuals. Global organizations like the UN encourage such spending through development programs, which a collectivist regime would expand.

– Skepticism of Global Institutions: A collectivist administration would embrace the WHO, WEF, and EU, ceding sovereignty to their agendas, unlike Trump’s critical stance.

These consequences aren’t hypothetical. The Biden administration’s 2023 AI Executive Order, which mandated “equity” and “safety” standards, restricted innovation and empowered regulatory overreach, threatening tools like Grok 3. Had Biden’s policies persisted, Objectivists might lack the technological freedom to engage in rational discourse today.

Trump’s Opposition: A Bulwark Against Collectivism

Trump’s 2025 actions demonstrate a practical resistance to global collectivism, aligning with Objectivist interests despite philosophical divergences:

– Withdrawal from WHO: Trump announced a one-year notice to cut U.S. funding (roughly 18% of WHO’s budget), rejecting its global health mandates as contrary to U.S. interests.

– Review of IMF and World Bank: Trump ordered a 180-day review of U.S. contributions, questioning their benefits amid claims they favor foreign nations, signaling skepticism of collectivist financial systems.

– WEF Engagement with Nationalist Rhetoric: At Davos 2025, Trump promoted “America First” policies—tax cuts, deregulation, and tariffs—prioritizing U.S. sovereignty over WEF’s global cooperation.

– EU Tariff Threats: Trump’s threats of tariffs on EU exports challenge its regulatory overreach, including AI regulations that stifle free speech and innovation.

– AI Deregulation: Trump revoked Biden’s AI Executive Order, freeing companies like xAI to innovate without restrictive mandates, preserving tools like Grok 3. Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, a Trump supporter, cited this as critical for technological freedom.

These moves counter the collectivist tide. Trump’s deregulation and tax cuts foster a pro-business environment, aligning with Objectivism’s capitalist ethos.

His skepticism of global institutions echoes Rand’s rejection of any authority subordinating individual rights.

The Disintegration of Objectivist Thinking

Some Objectivists, particularly new leaders, fail to support Trump, burying their heads in the sand and neglecting their rational self-interest. This stems from a disintegration of Objectivism, shifting from Rand’s inductive, reality-based reasoning to deductive rigidity. Rand’s epistemology (Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, Chapter 2: Concept Formation) emphasizes forming concepts by integrating sensory data with reason, adapting to new contexts. Trump’s opposition to collectivism is a concrete reality, yet some Objectivists cling to frozen abstractions, dismissing him for analytic deviations like tariffs.

This deductive approach—judging Trump solely by theoretical alignment—ignores the existential threat of global collectivism. If Biden’s administration had continued, its alignment with WEF, WHO, and EU policies would have eroded free speech, innovation, and economic freedom, stifling Objectivism’s ability to flourish. For example, Biden’s AI order empowered regulators to curb platforms like X, limiting Objectivist discourse. Trump’s revocation, conversely, ensures these platforms thrive, as Andreessen recognized in backing Trump for existential reasons.

Rand was an inductive thinker, observing reality to form principles. She supported imperfect allies (e.g., Barry Goldwater) when they advanced freedom against greater threats. Today’s Objectivist leaders, by contrast, risk irrelevance by failing to grapple with reality rationally, prioritizing frozen abstractions over practical consequences.

Consequences of Inaction

Objectivists who oppose or ignore Trump risk catastrophic outcomes. A collectivist victory would empower global institutions to:

– Censor Speech: EU-style AI regulations, embraced by Biden, would restrict platforms, silencing Objectivist voices.

– Stifle Innovation: WEF and IMF policies would burden businesses with regulations, crushing the entrepreneurial spirit Rand celebrated.

– Expand Government Waste: UN and World Bank programs would justify bloated spending, diverting resources from individuals.

– Erode Sovereignty: WHO and EU mandates would undermine U.S. autonomy, weakening the constitutional protections Objectivism relies on.

These outcomes would dismantle the conditions—free speech, deregulation, pro-business policies—that allow Objectivism to exist. My use of Grok 3, for instance, depends on Trump’s AI deregulation; under Biden, such tools might be restricted by “equity” mandates. Objectivists who fail to act in their self-interest are complicit in this erosion, contradicting Rand’s virtue of selfishness.

Conclusion

Objectivists should support Donald Trump because his opposition to global ultra-collectivist organizations like the WEF, WHO, IMF, World Bank, and EU protects the freedoms essential for Objectivism to thrive. His deregulation, pro-business policies, and skepticism of globalist agendas preserve free speech, innovation, and economic liberty, as seen in his AI policy reversals that enable tools like Grok 3. The alternative—allowing collectivist opponents to prevail—would empower institutions that threaten America’s liberty, stifling Objectivism’s voice. Some Objectivists’ refusal to support Trump reflects a deductive disintegration, ignoring Rand’s inductive, reality-based approach. As venture capitalists like Marc Andreessen recognize, existential threats demand pragmatic alliances. Objectivists must act in their rational self-interest, backing Trump to safeguard the conditions for a free, capitalist society where reason and individualism can flourish.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

I had two experiences over the last weekend that highlight how generational change is going to help make America great again. Driving through Manhattan Beach, a Los Angeles suburb where people have more money than common sense, we passed a crew of elderly boomers standing at a busy corner waving signs about the incipient fascism of Donald Trump. These Gramsci school geriatrics no doubt thought they were fighting the power because there’s no one more oppressed than retirees from Manhattan Beach. I greeted them with a middle finger, and Irina – who escaped the kind of communism these Boomer Bolsheviks would impose upon us – greeted them with a word that began with the letter “F,” and it was not “friend.”

My other experience was much more uplifting and took place at the wedding of Townhall’s own Larry O’Connor’s daughter in beautiful Orange County. She is a Naval Academy graduate, as is her husband, so the place was packed with Navy ensigns and Marine second lieutenants. These kids were enough to restore some of your faith in humanity. No wokeness. No wussiness. They were smart, confident, and proud to be serving our country. Several had already started families, and most of them were extremely devout. I trained a lot of O-1s in my career, and I know the difference between warriors and half-steppers. These young patriots made me feel proud, and also old. I realized that being a Desert Storm veteran to them today would’ve been like me back when I got my commission talking to a Korean War vet. I appreciated that they were very polite and didn’t rub in this retired colonel’s total irrelevance to today’s military.

Obviously, these were exceptional young people, but young people in general are waking up. They are based, and not just in the sense of being stationed at Camp Pendleton. If you look at the poll numbers, to the extent they can be trusted, it’s young people here in the United States – as well as overseas – who are voting for change. They are the ones embracing Donald Trump. They are the ones embracing the popular parties in Canada and Germany. And the boomers, crusty degenerates in many cases – are resisting change. It’s old voters who want to maintain the status quo. They enjoy their mediocrity. Most are retired and just want to ensure those checks keep coming from the people who work for a living. Yeah, I know they paid into Social Security. They also had a half-century to fix the system and didn’t do it.

The Boomers have been the worst generation in American history, and one of their worst qualities is that they just won’t go away. Why do you think Congress is full of old people? It’s boomers who won’t quit. There’s a time to pass the torch, but these selfish seniors just keep passing rhetorical gas.

Yeah, I get that it’s hard to let go, but it isn’t the Summer of ’69 anymore, folks. Woodstock was over a half-century ago. You’ve had your turn. I know it’s hard to sit on the sidelines, but that’s where you belong. And I don’t have a lot of pity for them, although, technically, by one week, I am one of them. But I identify as Gen X, so please respect my identity and use my pronouns: Crockett/Tubbs.

They really screwed things up for the young generation. Imagine you’re a young person who was born around 9/11, which these young sailors and Marines were. In your country, you’ve seen America’s economy hollowed out. You’ve seen Wall Street crash. You’ve watched the government fail at everything. Culturally, every institution has gone off course from its original purpose and become focused on nonsense like CRT and pure grifting. In school, you were taught that men are bad, and America is too, and that straight American men are the worst of all. You’ve seen race relations deteriorate. You’ve seen our elite intentionally import tens of millions of Third World peasants to take our jobs while robbing, raping, and murdering our citizens. And you’ve been told you’re a bad person for noticing this.

You were forced to pretend men could become women, and if you were a girl, you were forced to have some dude with the whole sausage factory hanging out lurking in your locker room. You’ve been addicted to screens and poisonous social media. Your chance of happiness has been disrupted because normal teen mating rituals like dating and such have been completely ruined by sick Boomer feminism crap that makes boys shrug their shoulders and turn to online filth instead of trying to meet girls. You’ve seen the entertainment industry turn to trash. Hell, the music these kids listen to is absolutely terrible. Taylor Swift is an auto-tuned harpy.

Our country hasn’t won a war unequivocally since they’ve been alive. The elite of their country has abandoned basic concepts like color blindness, free speech, and even democracy. Oh, the boomers cry about democracy, but apparently, democracy now means framing opposition leaders – we’ve seen that from here to France and beyond. It means banning political parties – look at what the Germans are doing to the AfD, which is – wait for it – primarily a vehicle for younger German voters. In the ’60s, politically active young people tended to be leftists, but those leftists eventually got power, and now they don’t want to give it up. They don’t care what it takes to hold onto it. That’s why you see people getting arrested for tweeting things in England. That’s why you saw “misinformation” used as an excuse for the government making social media companies silence American citizens.

And, of course, there was COVID, and I don’t think we can fully appreciate the effect of it on those kids. COVID was the result of our elite’s idiocy in funding virus mutation research. It got out of hand and killed millions. And then, of course, they lied about it. And not just a little. They lied to our faces again and again and again. They lied about where it came from. They lied about how deadly it was. They lied about the vaccine. They said the magic vaxx would prevent COVID, and when it became obvious it wasn’t, they just changed their lies. Of course, the vaccine injured a bunch of people and they lied about that. The kids’ high school years were supposed to be a fun time. These kids spent them in masks. They had virtual proms. And it was all because of the gross incompetence and corruption of the same people whose supporters are now standing on street corners waving signs about how Trump is a literal Nazi.

Young people, particularly young men, have had enough. They’re not going to be shamed. They’re not going to be intimidated. They’re not going to be suppressed. And there’s another thing they’re not going to be. They’re not going to be dead in the next 20 years like most of these Boomers are. Time marches on, and the people who ruined this country are marching to the cemetery. Thankfully, we have a follow-on generation that may just save America and the West.

Kurt Schlichter, Townhall

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum warned on Fox Business Tuesday about America’s deepening energy shortfall and said that misguided climate policies could give China the upper hand in both the global energy race and artificial intelligence development.

House lawmakers voted 246-164, with support from 35 Democrats, to overturn a Biden-era EPA rule that lets California enforce a de facto national ban on gas-powered cars by 2035. During an appearance on “Kudlow,” Burgum said that U.S. energy shortfalls could allow China to outpace America in artificial intelligence and other power-hungry technologies.

“The real energy emergency that we have right now is that we don’t have enough energy in this country. We’re losing the AI arms race to China, and we’ve got to have more energy and more power right now in the country. And so that’s one of the things that we’re focused on right now,” Burgum told host Larry Kudlow.

Burgum blasted California’s aggressive emissions standards, which he said have effectively become national policy.

“Let’s start with California, Larry. That would be a great idea, because there’s 14 other states that followed California. So basically we’re stuck right now. Automakers feel like they’ve got to build two kinds of cars in America, one for California standards and one for the rest of the country,” Burgum said. “Of course, we know that the California standards are based on a bunch of falsehoods around emissions, because if we want zero carbon fuels, it’s much cheaper.”

Burgum took particular aim at electric vehicle subsidies, calling them a boondoggle built on climate ideology. He also called electric vehicle subsidies economically reckless since the cost of avoiding a single ton of carbon dioxide exceeds $900

…

“It’s 10 to 15 times cheaper to have zero carbon liquid fuels than it is to subsidize EVs. The EV subsidies, where the real bank was, the thing that was really breaking the bank, over $900 for an avoided tonus of CO2, and all of that built around climate ideology,” Burgum said.

Republican Pennsylvania Rep. John Joyce introduced a resolution under the Congressional Review Act to stop California’s zero-emission vehicle mandate, which several other states have adopted. If the Senate doesn’t act, the Environmental Protection Agency would face a lengthy rulemaking process to reverse the policy that will allow California’s stricter standards to remain in effect for years.

The states that have opted in to California’s auto rules include Colorado, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

Mariane Angela, Daily Caller

I might be in the minority of car owners, but I actually enjoy changing my oil. My local big box store has bargain prices for jugs of long-lasting full-synthetic oil and carries OEM filters, so I can usually get out the door for less than $40 in materials for a DIY full-synthetic oil change. Saving money is definitely nice, but so is peace of mind. I’m forever scarred by the time my wife took her SUV to a rapid oil change place that didn’t fully tighten the drain plug. Fortunately, we caught the growing oil slick in our driveway before serious engine damage was done.

However, one of the more challenging aspects of the home oil change is removing said drain plug. First, you’ll need to remember what size wrench or socket to grab from the toolbox. Then, there’s the juggling act of maintaining inward pressure on the plug with your fingers while unscrewing to prevent oil from dribbling out. And finally, you pull the liberated drain plug away at lightning speed while still somehow getting hot oil on your hands and the floor.

It was for these reasons that the quick drain oil plug was invented. Quick drain oil plugs allow you to empty the contents of your engine’s oil pan by merely twisting a small valve. Many of these gadgets also have a fitting to attach a flexible hose to more precisely direct the outflow. The concept almost seems too good to be true, so why aren’t all vehicles equipped with this engineering marvel?

It’s more vulnerable than a regular drain plug

It’s been speculated that the reasons auto manufacturers don’t use drain valves as original equipment is because of their higher cost, and though that may be true, there are other considerations. A quick browse of some automotive message boards shows that drivers are concerned that the quick drain oil valves are considerably taller than a conventional low-profile drain plug. The logic is that it might be damaged or accidentally opened from striking an object, like an SUV-defeating rock.

That’s particularly concerning to owners of four-wheel drive vehicles who frequently travel off-road and are exposed to obstacles. Certain products have backup mechanisms like a steel cap to prevent spills in case the valve accidentally gets bumped open. Still, there’s no denying that an oil drain valve hangs down lower than a regular thread-in drain plug.

Another concern over quick drain oil plugs is that the drain opening is smaller than a conventional plug. That means that it’s going to take longer for all of your used oil to drain from the pan. In fact, some users level the accusation that the oil never drains 100% completely because the tip of the quick drain plug remains protruded into the oil pan while a regular screw-in plug opens the drain hole completely. 

But there’s plenty of positives, too

Like with so many products, there’s going to be pros and cons to buying a quick drain oil plug. So far, we’ve been pretty pessimistic, but now it’s time for the positives, and that’s in addition to the basic premise of making oil changes neater and easier. Consider that you won’t be repeatedly screwing and unscrewing a threaded drain plug into the oil pan, which can lead to repairing stripped threads if done improperly. And let’s be honest, how many shadetree mechanics really use a torque wrench on their drain plugs? That drain plug could regularly be under or over-tightened whereas the quick drain valve is one and done.

Similarly, the rubber gaskets or metal crush washers that seal a traditional oil drain plug need to be replaced periodically. Opinions vary on how many oil changes can be performed in between replacing a drain plug’s seal, but the seal that’s built into the quick drain plug won’t need to be replaced because the valve remains permanently installed.

The grandfather of the oil drain valve is the Japanese company Fumoto, which invented the device in 1976 and began shipping it to the United States in 1984. Since then, others have mimicked the design or developed what they consider to be improved versions. Clearly, there are many fans of the quick drain oil plug concept, while other gearheads don’t trust it to stay closed or drain every drop of old oil. Which camp do you fall into?

Richard Sachekmay

It’s just too much winning to handle. Trump’s been so effective already, it’s made our heads spin.

In his first hundred days, Trump has racked up an impressive list of accomplishments. The White House has given The Babylon Bee exclusive access to Trump’s official to-do list for the next 100 days.

Here’s what to expect:

• Survive 3rd impeachment: Charges pending.
• Replace the entire cabinet with Marco Rubio: He’s a jack of all trades.
• Order the National Science Foundation to determine if 100 men can really defeat a gorilla: The nation deserves to know.
• Delay Epstein list again: It should be released sometime around Trump’s third term.
• Direct Elon to build a migrant detention facility on Mars: Quickly, before a judge overturns it.
• Attend Joe Biden’s funeral: Should be any day now.
• Find out what the giant red button in the Oval Office supply closet does: Probably nothing good.
• Build a wall on the Canadian border: It’s time we kept all those dirty Canucks out of our country.
• Launch an inquiry to find out what the heck Congress has been doing this whole time: Do they do anything?
• Put Lindsay Graham in charge of Pride Month: There’s no one in the nation more qualified.
• Sell New Jersey to Mexico: It will potentially reduce the deficit by dozens of dollars.
• Authorize the creation of a grand Clone Army of the Republic: Rumor has it that the soldiers will be clones of Elon Musk.
• Marry wife number 5: Rumor has it he’s talking with Sydney Sweeney.
• 300% Tariff on German Shepherds: It’s time to support American shepherds.
• End democracy: The Dems have been saying he’s going to do it for so long now that it’s a boy-who-cried-wolf situation, and he can really do it now, and no one will believe it.

It should be an eventful few months. Who knows what else Trump’s got up his sleeve?

The Babylon Bee

Nobody should trust Joe Scarborough when it comes to measuring someone’s ideology. He called Liz Cheney a “real conservative” when she endorsed Kamala for President. 

Actual Trump supporters he called “MAGA freaks,” and he even claimed: “These people are, if I can quote Aristotle, here, crazy as a sh–house rat.”

This same Scarborough announced on today’s Morning Joe that far-left Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez represents “meritocracy,” and yes, she’s “more progressive,” but she’s fabulous: 

• “One of the most articulate, exciting people in the Democratic field.” 
• “Democrats don’t need people past retirement age being their voice. They need somebody young like AOC.” 
• “She can carry the message forward for a Democratic Party that really needs to reach out to younger Americans . . . What a great message to have.” 
• “Democrats need her more than she needs the Democrats.”

Just record a campaign advertisement and be done with it! 

Scarborough claimed socialist firebrand AOC “can carry the message forward for a Democratic party . . . What a great message to have.”

And just what is Ocasio-Cortez’s message? Turning to the Issues page on her campaign website, we find that AOC, among other radical positions, wants to:

• Abolish ICE.
• Consider illegal immigrants “full members” of the US, entitled to all major welfare benefits.
• End cash bail. 
• Ban law enforcement’s use of tear gas and rubber bullets.

Interestingly, Mika Brzezinski was considerably less keen on Ocasio-Cortez. While acknowledging that AOC is very talented, Mika said that there’s room to look at “a lot of other people,” and that young people, AOC’s base, are not the most dependable voters. When Scarborough continued to express his AOC excitement, Mika’s facial expressions made her doubts about AOC unmistakably clear. See the last part of the video clip.

Many observers feel that the Trump campaign’s ad exposing Kamala Harris support for taxpayer-funded sex change operations for inmates, including illegal immigrants, was devastating to her campaign. AOC gave an impassioned speech on the House floor proclaiming that “trans girls are girls.” And she criticized the Biden administration for suggesting that there could be any limitations on the right of biological males to participate in women’s sports.

That Scarborough apparently thinks those are winning messages for the Democrats reveals just how much he has transitioned from his days as a conservative Republican congressman from the Florida Panhandle.

PS: Self-described simple country lawyer Scarborough once again exposed what Freud—whose birthday is today—might have diagnosed as Ivy-envy, repeatedly railing against the “Ivy League boys” in the Trump administration.

Here’s the transcript.

MSNBC
Morning Joe
5/6/25
6:12 am EDT