Our Latest
985 - Time out—for a timely discussion about time travel
In the wake of newly released documents from the White House and the federal government describing defense intelligence about "transversable worm holes, star gates and negative energies," the question arises:
Are governments really employing some kind of secret time travel technology? Or is this just another conspiracy theory? Questions aside, various 'whistleblowers' have come forth with claims that they have personally witnessed the use of time travel technology at American military bases.
Whatever one's take on this issue is, what makes the most recent accounts notable is that their explanations of this technology have emphasized an abandonment of a 'time-line' representation of the passage of time in favor of a 'time-loop' representation that resolves the so-called 'butterfly effect.'
Long believed to make time travel a metaphysical impossibility, the 'butterfly effect' is described by the Encyclopedia Britannica as a term "coined by meteorologist Edward Lorenz in the 1960s while studying chaos theory, illustrating how small changes in initial conditions can lead to vastly different outcomes in complex systems, such as weather patterns. Lorenz used the metaphor of a butterfly flapping its wings to suggest that such a minor event could ultimately cause significant changes, like a tornado forming elsewhere."
Whether fact or fiction, what makes this 'time-loop' metaphor of particular interest (aside from its potential contemplation value) is that it allows us to create a visual representation of existence consistent with what has long been restricted to philosophy.
As described by philosopher Leonard Piekoff: "The universe is eternal in the literal sense, non-temporal, out of time. Time is a measurement of motion that applies only within the universe." Or in other words, being eternal, the universe might be depicted as a 'loop' with no beginning and no end.
We can't pretend to offer a definitive description of the nature of space-time or the universe, but these 'time travel' claims make for some fascinating introspection. Insofar as any conclusions or meaning can be drawn from all of this, we can only rely on our own individual discernment.
The challenge is not about resolving the seeming contradictions and paradoxes surrounding space-time, but with how we represent the universe for the purposes of understanding it in a way that is closer to being Just Right.
984 - U.N.CONSCIONABLE—the post-national agenda
Critical presentations made at the 2026 United Nations General Assembly targeted the organization itself, calling into question its very purpose and effectiveness.
"The alleged defenders of human rights have sheltered blood thirsty dictatorships while remaining silent in the face of Islamic terrorism and the genocide of Christians in Africa," proclaimed Argentina's Javier Milei, as he condemned the U.N.'s "Orwellian controls and impositions on liberal democracies that abide by the rules."
"The U.N. must stop imposing the far Left agenda of globalist bureaucrats that nobody elected," chimed in U.S. President Donald Trump. And after citing the child exploitation encouraged under U.N. policy and the Biden administration, Trump declared that "any system that results in the mass trafficking of children is inherently evil."
Indeed, as Ayn Rand herself described the United Nations over a half-century ago: "An institution allegedly formed for the purpose of using the united might of the world to stop an aggressor, has become the means of using the united might of the world to force the surrender of one helpless country after another into the aggressor's power."
Given its history and the glaring gap between its foundational theory and its actions in practice, for an organization with the word 'Nations' in its name, the U.N. is ironically among the most anti-national organizations on the political face of the planet.
Thankfully, at long last we are hearing from more voices in authority expressing their 'U.N.derstanding' of this globalist institution in a way that is Just Right.
983 - The naked truth—about the Left and Right
It's not often that we are given an opportunity to contrast the Left and Right on esthetic grounds - the fifth branch of philosophy. As with the other four branches (metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, politics), the pattern of Leftist irrationality remains consistent.
For the second time in a little over a year, Sydney Sweeney has exposed the sinister truth about the Left. In 2025, she enraged Leftists for wearing her "great jeans" proudly and now in 2026 she has ironically enraged them once again by stripping off her great jeans entirely.
Makes you wonder what's Left.
After appearing nude for the sports betting company Novig in which she has an ownership stake, the same voices that last time round accused her of "promoting fascist propaganda, Christian nationalism and white supremacy," this time accused her of "sexualizing women's sports."
While Leftist reactions to Sweeney can make for great political comedy, the sad reality is that at the base of these reactions lies a deeply sinister and concerning ideological threat to Western culture, along with a few uncomfortable truths about human behavior and sexuality.
As U.K. blogger Jake Munro humorously summarized it, "My one wish would be to make these Leftist women attractive and get rid of their crippling low IQ. I wish all Leftists were hot. They'd become Right wing over night."
One thing is certain. When it came to achieving her goal of maximizing the distribution and exposure of her Novig ad by capitalizing on the predictable reactions of the Left, Sydney Sweeney obviously did everything Just Right.
982 - Women wronged—by women's rights
Feeling sorry for triple child murderer Lindsay Clancy is an irrational emotional indulgence, one that disguises a disregard and hatred for for the real victims of her crime: her children and husband.
Whether she's locked up in a prison or in a mental institution is mere nuance at this stage in the proceedings. What's at stake now is the broader explosive issue that has arisen following the hung jury in her trial.
With thousands of women publicly supporting Clancy and going so far as to fabricate fictional narratives blaming her husband for the murders - all in clear denial of known facts which include Clancy's confession - many observers have expressed being stunned, shocked, and outraged by what seems to be an overwhelming female phenomenon. Indeed, the very status of women as equal participants in society is being reconsidered.
As recently framed by Carl Benjamin, "If it is acceptable for a woman to be 'having a moment' and murder her children, then women can't be held accountable for anything. Women cannot be given responsibility and should never be put in positions of power or authority. This is the necessary corollary to the argument being made by (the women jurors)."
One thing has become abundantly clear. The legal defense of 'not guilty due to insanity' is indefensible. As applied, It has become an argument that merely defends irrationality itself. Ridding the justice system of this excuse for one's violent behavior is something that sounds Just Right to us.
981 - The Right divide—and the wrong alliances
Labels matter. And that's a big reason why the right 'wing' is splintering into what Michael Knowles recently described as "a billion different versions of conservatism."
Here is but a partial list of the terms being used by right wing bloggers and podcasters in attempting to describe their own identity crisis:
Business republicans, social conservatives, NeoCons, PaleoCon-Libertarians, classical liberals, traditionalists, populists, the on-line Right, the Christian Right, atheist conservatives, pro-Palestinian conservatives, ideological conservatives, the right 'wing,' secret progressives, college Republicans, authentic conservatives, the Right-Green alliance, the retarded right, the MAGA Right, RINOs, modern conservatives, social conservatives, progressive conservatives, pre-liberals, post-liberals, alt-right, far right, moderate right, and of course, the WOKE right.
What could sound more united than that? Right?
With all those adjectives and descriptors being used in an attempt to identify some presumed ideology of the right wing, it bears noting that most adjectives in this context mean 'not.' For example, alt-right, far right, moderate right and WOKE right all essentially mean 'not Right.'
So what's wrong with this picture? Sadly, not even a single label in the myriad of chosen right wing identities is Just Right.
980-Artificial Intelligence—and Real Stupidity
Once again humanity is being threatened by an artificial existential crisis, this one actually containing the word artificial in it - presented to us in the form of artificial intelligence (AI).
As AI safety researcher Roman Yampolskiy expressed it to Patrick Bet-David last week, there is "a 99.999% chance that humanity will be destroyed by AI" and that government should be called in to control it. In these claims he is not alone, and is supported by the likes of AI researcher and founder of the AI safety company Conjecture, Connor Leahy.
Their calls for government controls are highly suspicious in light of their insistence that AI cannot possibly be controlled. However, upon reviewing the AI industry's poor returns on investment, British tech critic Ed Zitron offers us an insight to the true nature of the latest crisis.
In light of the bigger picture, one cannot help but notice how these and other AI experts are promoting the same agenda as did all of the Covid experts during the last existential crisis. In both cases it appears that the crisis is not existential, but financial.
To distract us from the real fiscal nature of the crisis, they have anthropomorphized the concept of AI into a human foe, using terms that cannot possibly be applicable to computer programs, no matter how sophisticated.
These computer experts speak about "AI agents" as entities that "don't care" about humanity, that can "lie, cheat, and steal," and that have "minds" as yet not understood by the experts themselves. The experts claim that AI agents can "want" to do things and are capable of being "convinced" by their own conclusions.
And perhaps the real stupidity underlying all of these artificial attributes is the argument that AI is capable of possessing them "...because the only thing (AI agents) care about is the reward."
One can only imagine what a "reward" might mean to a mechanical device or process, let alone how it could possibly "care" about getting this reward. The very idea is an absurdity.
"Artificial" can refer to something man-made or to something that is not real. When it comes to artificial intelligence it means both: man made and not real.
Until both terms - artificial and intelligence - are defined in a proper relevant context, the term artificial intelligence (or AI) will continue to enable those with sinister intentions to terrorize the populace - while forcing taxpayers to subsidize their financial misadventures.
Remember, just as big pharma was suffering declining revenues and returns on investment, an existential crisis threatening all of humanity via a novel virus requiring vaccines was created. And who bought all of the "vaccines" that weren't even vaccines? Why, governments of course. And thus their financial crisis was averted.
It seems to us that the AI industry is attempting the same strategy. Calling for governments to put "external pressure" on them to control AI, what they are really after is an external subsidy of taxpayer money to save them from their own existential financial crisis.
While we would like to believe otherwise, it's looking more and more as if there is a 99.999% probability that we could be Just Right.
Looking for earlier programs?
Visit our Archive page for the complete collection,
or use the search boxes at the top of this page to find specific guests, topics, or keywords.