Huhtow

- Flee the city. - Buy a house and little land in a small town. - Put down roots, and learn to garden. - Go to church often. - Get married and have a lot of kids. - Homeschool. That's all I've got so far.

@conroy_david @ThomasSowell youtu.be/VArXfQU--LA?si…

@ThomasSowell I would love to see that tape because I never once heard them say you wouldn't get COVID they did say you were less likely to get COVID and that if you did it would be less of a problem but they did not say you wouldn't get COVID

Howie Mandel: "I never heard you won't get COVID." RFK Jr.: "I saw a tape of Biden, Fauci, Gates, Bourla, all of them saying if you take the vaccine… you can't get COVID… Can I play it for you?" Howie: "Wait, wait, wait, it doesn't matter."

@Muchos_livos @davidrkadler This video is not about facial recognition. These drones are being directed to an area, and then target any person there.

@davidrkadler Yup, they recognize you with Google's or Apple's facial recognition data scraped from your phone and hone in on you automatically once they perfect self driving cars and Amazon's delivery algorithm

Does no one else see in these videos the most terrifying premonition for all of human civilization?

I have two stacks on my desk. The left stack is financial disclosure forms from members of Congress. The right stack is waivers for members who filed their financial disclosures late. The right stack is always taller. On Wednesday morning, I watched a soldier get arrested on CNN. I am a Disclosure Analyst for the House Ethics Committee. I have held this position for eleven years. My job is to receive the forms, verify their completeness, and file them. I do not investigate. I do not flag. I do not refer. I file. I have a lanyard. The lanyard says ETHICS. The soldier's name is Gannon Ken Van Dyke. He is thirty-eight years old. He was stationed at Fort Bragg. He was Special Forces. In December, he created an account on a prediction market called Polymarket. On January 2nd, he bet $32,500 that the president of Venezuela would be removed from power. On January 3rd, he helped remove the president of Venezuela from power. He collected $409,881. He has been charged with five federal crimes. Commodities fraud. Wire fraud. Unlawful use of confidential government information. Theft of nonpublic government information. Unlawful monetary transaction. The Department of Justice called it "the first-ever insider trading prosecution on event contracts." I watched this on the television in our break room. Then I walked back to my desk and processed a late financial disclosure from a member of the House Financial Services Committee who purchased $250,000 in bank stocks eleven days before his subcommittee held a closed-door hearing on proposed capital reserve changes. The filing was forty-seven days late. The STOCK Act requires disclosure within forty-five days. The penalty for late filing is $200. I waived it. I waive most of them. In 2021, fifty-four members of Congress and senior staff violated the reporting rules. The fines were minimal. Most were waived. I have a form for the waiver. The form has a box that says "Reason." I write "administrative delay." In ethics, "administrative delay" means the member's office forgot and then remembered when a reporter called. My approval rate is one hundred percent. In any other field, that number would trigger an audit. In mine, it is called thoroughness. Let me show you what I processed this year. January. A senator on the Armed Services Committee sold defense contractor shares worth $1.2 million. Three days later, his committee received a classified briefing that the Iran campaign had exceeded its projected cost by 340%. The stock dropped 8%. He filed the disclosure sixty-one days late. I calculated the fine. $200. His chief of staff asked if it could be waived. He did not ask what the senator traded on. Nobody asks that. The form does not have a field for it. I waived the fine. The senator's portfolio returned 23.4% in 2025. The S&P 500 returned 16.8%. February. A representative on the Energy and Commerce Committee bought pharmaceutical stocks worth $400,000. Two weeks later, her committee advanced a bill that would extend patent exclusivity for the exact drug class she purchased. The stocks rose 14%. She filed on time. There was no fine. There was no investigation. There was nothing to investigate because buying stocks in companies regulated by your own committee is not illegal. It is legal. The STOCK Act made it legal by making it disclosed. In Congress, disclosed means legal. In my office, legal means filed. March. A member whose spouse manages a portfolio worth $9.2 million reported forty-three separate transactions in a single quarter. Twelve of them were in sectors directly affected by legislation the member co-sponsored. The timing on eight of those twelve was within a two-week window of committee action. I logged all forty-three. None were flagged. We do not flag. We file. I asked my supervisor once what would happen if I flagged a filing. She said we do not have a form for that. I never asked again. In 2020, I processed 847 disclosures. In 2023, 1,211. In 2025, 1,614. The number of enforcement actions in each of those years was zero. The numerator changes. The denominator does not. I want to tell you about the soldier again. He made $409,881. He tried to delete his Polymarket account by calling customer service and saying he lost access to his email. He moved his profits into a foreign cryptocurrency vault and then into a new brokerage account. He used his real identity. He placed thirteen bets. Every single one was connected to an operation he personally participated in. In my eleven years, I have processed disclosures from members of Congress who traded on: Pending FDA approvals they learned about in committee. Defense appropriations they voted on. Trade policy they negotiated. Pandemic response measures they drafted. Interest rate decisions they were briefed on before the public. None of them have been charged. None of them have been investigated by the Department of Justice. None of them have been referred to the SEC. The STOCK Act has produced zero prosecutions since it was signed on April 4th, 2012. Fourteen years. Five hundred and thirty-five members. $635 million in trades last year alone. Zero cases. My daughter asked me once what happens when someone breaks the rules. I told her we write it down. She asked what happens after that. I said it depends. She was nine. She is twenty now. It does not depend. Nothing happens after that. The soldier made $409,881 and faces decades in prison. Nancy Pelosi entered Congress in 1987 with a portfolio worth approximately $785,000. It is now worth $133.7 million. That is a return of 16,930%. The Dow Jones returned 2,300% over the same period. Professional fund managers who beat the market for three consecutive years are considered exceptional. She has beaten it for thirty-seven. If a hedge fund produced those returns, the SEC would subpoena the records on a Thursday. She produced them from a building with a chapel and a gift shop. She announced her retirement last year. No investigation was opened. No disclosure was flagged. Her filings were on time. In my office, on time means compliant. Compliant means closed. I want to tell you about the fine. $200. That is the maximum penalty for violating the STOCK Act's disclosure requirements. $200 for a member of Congress whose portfolio gained $4.7 million in a single quarter. I calculated what $200 represents as a percentage of $4.7 million. It is 0.004%. I could not find a comparison that made it meaningful. It is less than the price of the parking pass in the Rayburn garage. It is less than lunch at the members' dining room if you order the crab cakes, which I am told are excellent though I eat at my desk. Since 2012, thirty-one bills have been introduced to restrict congressional trading. I keep a list. The list is longer than the STOCK Act itself. On March 5th, 2026, a representative from Michigan introduced the thirty-second. He called it the "No Getting Rich in Congress Act." The bill would prohibit the President, Vice President, members of Congress, and their spouses from trading individual stocks, cryptocurrency, futures, and commodities while in office. The bill was referred to committee. The committee has not scheduled a hearing. The committee is chaired by a member whose spouse executed $2.1 million in trades last year. The bill will be reviewed. In my office, reviewed means read. Read means acknowledged. Acknowledged means a status has been assigned. A status is the absence of an action that has been given a name so it looks like one. The soldier used classified information to make $409,881 on a prediction market. He has been charged with five federal crimes. The Department of Justice announced the case on the same day I processed three disclosures from members who traded on committee knowledge worth a combined $3.8 million. The difference between the soldier and the members is not what they did. It is the building they did it in. He did it from Fort Bragg. They did it from the Capitol. He used a prediction market. They used the New York Stock Exchange. He bet on a military operation. They bet on the legislation they write. He did not write the law. They did. They wrote the STOCK Act. Then they funded its enforcement at zero dollars. Then they set its maximum penalty at $200. Then they gave my office the authority to waive it. Then they traded $635 million. The soldier flew to Caracas. He breached a compound. He put his body between a mission and a bullet. The people who ordered the operation were in a building with a credenza and sparkling water. They did not go to Caracas. They went to their brokerage accounts. The soldier made $409,881 and is now in federal custody. The people who knew what he was going to do before he did it made more and filed less. His prosecution is not a failure of the system. It is the system. One conviction per decade, at the lowest level, so the briefing slides can say enforcement exists. The $409,881 is not the crime. It is the cost of making $635 million look supervised. In my field, we call this self-regulation. The soldier's Polymarket account has been frozen. His military career is over. He will spend years in federal prison. My office will process every congressional disclosure filed this year. Every trade logged. Every $200 fine calculated and waived. The system is immaculate. Fourteen years. Zero prosecutions. $635 million a year. A 16,930% return. I have not leaked a document. I have not filed a complaint. I have not deviated from the process one single time. The process was written by the people whose forms I process. As long as the disclosures go up and the cases don't, my performance review says I am meeting expectations. My lanyard still says ETHICS. In eleven years, nobody has asked me to define the word.

@Drumhailer @churchtalkative The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us when we walk by Spirit. By faith we establish and keep the law. The law is not required for associating with Gentiles. Abraham was made righteous by faith. Yet the law shouldn't be made useless by our faith.

@Huhtow @churchtalkative Leviticus 26:46 “These are the statutes and judgments… between the LORD and the children of Israel.” Because the covenant was always only for the jew and now it is for all not by law but by faith good luck read your bible

Eating pork is not a sin.

@BronX_General @churchtalkative The vision was about associating with Gentiles. Peter explicitly says this in verse 28. Jewish religious leaders had added to the law. They called all Gentiles common or unclean. God had made some clean. Not keeping the commandments of God comes out of the heart.

@Huhtow @churchtalkative In Acts 10:9–16....Peter had a vision of a sheet containing all kinds of animals, including "unclean" ones. "Do not call anything impure that God has made..." Still, whatever enters your heart can be worse than what enters the mouth. Eat it...or not, it doesnt matter....

@5Kurian @churchtalkative Right. Why do folks break the commandments of God for the sake of their tradition?

@Huhtow @churchtalkative biblestudytools.com/nkjv/matthew/1…

@Freckled_Smudge @churchtalkative Peter was Christian. Peter was a follower of Christ.

@Huhtow @churchtalkative Peter was Jewish.

@NeoPaxAmericana @churchtalkative Not sure why that would be confusing. As far as I can tell, God never explicitly calls out cars or anything like that There is a prohibition against kings accumulating horses, but think that is a metaphor for preparing for war.

@Huhtow @churchtalkative Jesus didn't drive a car, how do you transport yourself?

@BronX_General @churchtalkative Pork isn't food according to the Bible. Context for the conversation was about unwashed hands making food "common". Food like bread (pork was never on the menu for these observant Jewish people) cannot be made common through unwashed hands. This was a man-made tradition.

@Huhtow @churchtalkative Jesus actually argued that food eaten does not make a person spiritually unclean because it enters the stomach, not the heart.... plus he declared all foods clean.

@larrizy @churchtalkative He didn't sin. That informs us about things he didn't eat.

@Huhtow @churchtalkative List the things he ate.

@Freckled_Smudge @churchtalkative Yep. Peter never ate anything unclean. Verse 28 explains the vision. "Ye know how it is unlawful for a man, a Jew, to keep company with, or to come unto, one of another race, but to me God did shew to call no man common or unclean."

Acts 10:11–13: "He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, 'Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.'" Acts 10:14–15: "‘Surely not, Lord!’ Peter replied. ‘I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.’ The voice spoke to him a second time, ‘Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.’"

@FinDataByLig @Timcast With one less guest.

@Timcast Do this on IRL, cut the stream for a second. Then come back like nothing happened.

Prompt: "podcast where the hosts says "I have information that will lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton" then someone sneaks behind him and puts a black bag over his head and drags him away" Result:

Respectfully, I think this is the purview of the family, and not the teacher. It is primarily the responsibility of the family to nurture an appreciation of the opportunity to learn. Of course there is an overlap, and some teachers can help when this is lacking at home. As the homeschooling parent in our house, that connection you're talking about is rooted in our faith tradition. Our approach to learning is downstream of our values. At the same time, people (especially children) need to develop good habits. Motivation is fickle. I recently saw a study where focusing on behaviors rather than outcomes produces far better results. You may have a poor view of your earlier education, but did it not play a part in your ability to learn? Personally, I want my children to be able to teach themselves. I want them to know how to learn independently. My 9yo is currently a grade ahead in math, and does the vast majority of the work himself. He reads the lesson and does the problems himself. Does he love it? No. But when he's older and wants to dig deeper into other subjects, he'll have the ability and confidence to be able to engage at a very technical level. Lastly, you say the logic of the original post falls apart because who cares what happened in the past. He's addressing their habits, not their motivation. P.S. Are you familiar with the Sumerian poem "School days"?

Please don’t misunderstand. I’m not criticizing encouragement or a teacher sincerely wanting students to grow. I’m criticizing the manipulation of motivation, even when done by people who mean well. The original post was about education, but notice how its logic works. It does not justify homework on its own terms. It says, in effect: people in the past suffered terribly, therefore you are obliged to comply now. The whole force of the argument depends on the past being bad. Remove that linchpin and the structure immediately becomes silly: “people before you had it easier, therefore your burden is unfair and you have an excuse.” That shows the historical suffering is doing the work, not any real argument about whether the present demand is good, proportionate, or educational. That is why I keep coming back to a simpler question: what’s the problem? Why doesn’t the student want to do it? Is the task confusing? badly timed? detached from meaning? rote? deadening? Is the student’s refusal merely avoidance, or is it revealing something true about the way the material is being presented? My deeper concern is that much in “education” substitutes aggregate memorization for understanding. A student is often asked to take in facts, figures, procedures, and prose with very little felt connection to meaning, discovery, application, or genuine curiosity. That is why it so often feels boring. Not because the mind is inert, but because rote learning without understanding is psychologically deadening for a great many people. I think that has long-term consequences. It does not just make school unpleasant in the short run. It can train a person to associate learning itself with pressure, compliance, reward, punishment, and external prodding. In other words, it can produce the opposite of what education should produce. Instead of setting a person on a path toward lifelong learning, it can leave behind a subtle resentment toward learning, where the person only moves when pushed. To me, that boredom matters. It is not nothing. It is often the sign that a student’s own mind is still alive enough to reject what feels empty, forced, or disconnected from real understanding. That self-direction should not be treated as a defect to be overpowered. It should be read as information. My own experience is part of why I see it this way. I did poorly in school math. But later I worked intensely on hard mathematical material when there was a real aim behind it, something I cared about enough to pursue. The difficulty itself was not the real obstacle. The obstacle was meaning. Once the thing connected to a live purpose, I could endure difficulty just fine. That makes me think many people are not resisting effort as such. They are resisting emptiness. So my objection is not to difficulty. People can do very hard things when those things are alive to them. My objection is to mistaking coercive motivation for education, and then treating a student’s lack of interest as though it were simply a character defect. Very often the disengagement is telling the truth long before the adults in the room are willing to hear it. To me, a better teacher response is not: “others had it worse, so you have no excuse.” It is: “what is blocking understanding here, and how do I bring this student into real contact with the subject?” That begins by taking the student’s mind seriously rather than trying to overpower it with guilt.

On day 1 of my high school history class, our professor got up and said You are 15 or 16 years old. 200 years ago people your age were married, planted crops, had children, and built a cabin by winter. You can do your homework. The bar set for you historically is embarrassingly low. You are not dealing with regional famine or plague. You do not have to save your family from marauders or go into battle to destroy your enemies. You have to sit down and learn from someone who cares about you in a safe, air-conditioned room. You have no excuses.

@rowell_ron @Seth_Andretti @BrysonGray Colossians 2:16-17 Let no one, then, judge you in eating or in drinking, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths, which are a shadow of the coming things, but the body of Christ.

@Huhtow @Seth_Andretti @BrysonGray Where in the new testament does it quote keeping the sabbath

You don’t get salvation without repentance (2 Corinthians 7:10, Luke 13:3). Repentance means to turn from willfully sinning(Ezekiel 18:30, Matthew 3:-18) Sin is lawlessness (1 John 3:4). The law is the one that God gave to Moses to give to everyone else. The law isn’t hard to keep (Deuteronomy 30:11-14)

@Seth_Andretti @BrysonGray Now answer my questions, if you would be so kind.

@Huhtow @BrysonGray answer my question. Book,Chapter, & Verse.

@Seth_Andretti @BrysonGray It doesn't directly say not to eat pork in the NT. But we know Peter still wasn't eating pork even after Jesus died and was resurrected.

@Seth_Andretti @BrysonGray "show me in the NT" Do you know how many times the OT is quoted in the the NT? Why do you break the commandments of God for the sake of your tradition?

@BrysonGray show me in the NT where Jesus directly states that his followers are to avoid pork?

@KirstinSeverino @alphaman_111 High school kids shouldn't be "compelled" by way of motivational self-help type of lectures? No kids of your own, I take it?

@Huhtow @alphaman_111 No dispute that they could do it. Should they feel compelled to do it? I say no. The person, their autonomy and dignity are more important than scholastic performance.

Another: "Students in the classes of high expectation teachers, however, make large academic progress and improve their self-beliefs. Conversely, students with low expectation teachers make very little academic progress over one year and their self-beliefs decline." pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11…

@KirstinSeverino @alphaman_111 They can do it. They have the capacity and capability to do challenging things--including things they don't like to do or don't want to do. But the bigger issue is that you're missing the psychological underpinnings of having higher expectations. sciencedirect.com/science/articl…