Steve McKee

Wise words from the wise @DrJayRichards dailysignal.com/2026/05/03/ai-…

@Virginia_Allen5 @ACFHHS Congrats!

I am honored to join the @ACFHHS team as we seek to achieve the A Home for Every Child Initiative!

@Katy_Faust @conservmillen Spot on.

A rare miss from Shrier. Here’s the advice she should have given: Dear Chase, You write movingly about your mother. She showed up. She invested. She loved you in ways that were personal, attentive, and irreplaceable. You don’t speak about her as interchangeable with your father or anyone else. You speak about her as your mother—someone whose presence shaped you in a way no one else could. That matters more than you seem to realize. Because in the same letter, you position yourself as the one being denied: She wants grandchildren—but not from me. As if her hesitation is a rejection of you. But that isn’t what you’ve described. You’ve described a woman who loves her son, both as a child and as an adult, but who cannot celebrate a plan that would make her grandchild begin life without a mother. Those are not the same thing. Your mother is not withholding love from you. She is refusing to affirm what she knows would cost a child something you yourself clearly understand to be precious. You didn’t write me about your “parent” in general terms. You asked about your "mother" specifically, and then recounted glowingly how you benefited from her presence, her attention, and her affection in your life. And yet, you are asking her to bless a path that would intentionally deny that same relationship to her grandchild. This is the inconsistency at the center of your letter—one you seem unwilling to confront. You are defending, even fighting for, your relationship with your mother—while planning to create a child who will never have one. That contradiction is the central moral tension you are trying to resolve by reframing yourself as the one being hurt. But your mother is not confused about what is at stake. She understands that what you experienced as a gift—a mother’s daily, embodied, relational presence—is exactly what your child would be cut off from intentionally. You emphasize what you can offer: stability, commitment, love. Those are real goods. But your mother is focused on something different—not what you can give, but what the child will lose. And she is taking that loss seriously enough that she won’t pretend it doesn’t matter. That isn’t a rejection of you. It is a recognition that your relationship status cannot do what opposite-sex relationships can—unite a child with both of the people who made them. It is also a recognition that love, however sincere, does not erase loss. A second father does not become a mother simply because he is devoted. Some roles are not interchangeable, and some relationships cannot be replicated, no matter how much goodwill surrounds them. And here is the part you need to face directly: your sexuality does not make you the victim in this scenario. No one is depriving you of your mother. You had one. You know what that relationship is worth—so much so that you are appealing to it now, trying to preserve it, protect it, and secure its approval. And yet you are prepared to deny that same relationship to your own child—not by tragedy, but by design. Your choices make you the victimizer in this scenario. You are not the one being deprived. You are the one building deprivation into your child’s life from the start. 1/2

@marissastreit @prageru @Freedom250 @WhiteHouse Love it. Well done, Marissa.

In celebration of the 250th birthday of our great nation, @PragerU is proud to partner with @Freedom250 and the @WhiteHouse to bring the freedom truck mobile museums to communities across America.

The beginning of a long family thread about how awful @SouthwestAir has become to its longstanding, loyal, and profitable A-Listers. They just keep adding insult to injury.

@Verbit_ Need an assist if you can DM

@Katy_Faust 40 years. The most contented person I know. Chose to put her husband and children first and is about to welcome grandchild #8 to the world.

February 7-14 is National Marriage Week! Married folks, drop a comment/QT with a pic, how long you’ve been married, and one positive attribute about your spouse. Married 27 years My husband is supremely faithful. Never in our 32 years together have I had even one moment of doubt of his devotion to me or our children.

You have just commoditized any differentiation you had (and you did have it) away. For what? A fistful of short term change.

Where is that profit falling “straight to the bottom line” coming from, @SouthwestAir ? The pockets of your best, most loyal customers. How could you think that wouldn’t damage your brand, which will have long term repercussions? 3/

The extra revenue derived from seat-selection fees “falls straight to the bottom line,” according to Andrew Watterson, Southwest’s chief operating officer. 1/ Southwest Now Charges for Seats. Next Stop: Quadrupling Profit wsj.com/business/airli…

Re-upping this since today is the first day I’m flying under the new setup. My wife is as well, to a different destination. So far, about as expected. Disappointing, disrespectful, nickel-and-diming. You should see our family text thread @SouthwestAir

Conservatives have always recognized that utopia (from the Greek, meaning “no place”) does not—and cannot, exist—and its pursuit always leads to tyranny. Now is not the time to fool ourselves into thinking our version of it might work. dailysignal.com/2025/12/22/sli…

@AndrewTWalker “turns” indeed. Nice.

“There is a choice. Mine is that the order of the universe, the arching of the human spirit, the enduring mysteries of love and the unique serenity of faith, are the result of Central Planning, which took seven days, not seven seconds, to make a world exciting enough to doubt Him. That is the flirtatious side of God, to reach for a terrestrial metaphor. We should laugh at its presumption, as, after trying it out several times, I can laugh at the black nihilistic teases of Hewlett and Packard. I am programmed to love God and to seek, however vainly, to obey him, and to trust that the course he laid out for me in the grandest voyage, through time and space, and uncertainty, to infinity and transfiguration, and resolution, is as certainly charted as the toyland course that will lead me from Miami to the Rock of Gibraltar. I shall follow the star of Bethlehem, waywardly; and if I fail to reach it, save that I ever doubted it was there.” — William F. Buckley, Jr., who turns 100 today.

@alisa_childers Just did the same. It came alive for me in new ways. Appreciate you.

I forgot to add to this post that I am now reading it through slowly.

Want a break from all the X fighting? Here's a nerdy post on Job (If you don't want to read the whole setup, just skip to the takeaway): Every time I've read the book of Job, it's been as a part of a "Bible in a year" schedule, which caused me to fly through it. This makes understanding it difficult because there are so many players and a lot of dialogue, much of which contains bad advice. Setting: Job is a righteous man who fears Yahweh. He is wealthy and has a big family that seems to be hardworking and happy. He offers continual sacrifices for each of his children and is specifically concerned that they might "curse God in their hearts." This tells me he wasn't just a man of outward righteousness. He was a man of true faith --> in his heart. Round one: Satan appears before God, and God shows him Job. Satan's like, "Well OF COURSE he is a good boy. You protect him and give him wealth! Take all that away, and he'll curse you!" Then God is like, "Ok. Do it. But don't touch him." In one fell swoop, all of Job's property, animals, and even his 10 children are destroyed. Job falls the ground and worships. Round two: Satan's like, "Well OF COURSE he still worships you because I wasn't allowed to touch him personally." God is like, "Ok. Do it. But don't kill him." Then come the sores and boils. **TAKEAWAY** In chapter three, Job gives one of the most breathtaking and gut-wrenching speeches ever recorded. These are words that could only be uttered by someone who has suffered beyond imagination. They climax with "Why wasn't I born dead!?" It's a good question. I keep thinking about that question. It's the heart cry of every person who has truly suffered and asks the Father to make sense of it. The truth is that Job didn't know the answer either, but through indescribable anguish and gritted-teeth, he trusted God. Remember...that trust was not just outward expression. It went deep to his heart. Thousands of years later, many of us have a good idea how to answer Job's question (at least as it relates to Job.) We have a harder time answering it as it relates to our own situation. The truth is, yes, God is working his purposes and bringing meaning to all of it. But there's a bigger picture. On this side of the cross, we don't just have to guess the answer to Job's question, we have a definitive answer. Jesus, the serpent-crusher, evil-ender, and death-defeater. Jesus Christ the righteous. Our substitute. Our Savior. Our advocate. Man of sorrows, acquainted with grief. Jesus doesn't just answer Job's question. Through the incarnation, he BECOMES the answer. He's the answer to our question, too. Yes we suffer. Some more than others. I don't know why some people are born dead and others have to live long lives of misery, grief, and torment. But I know this. No one suffered more than Jesus. No one. Not Job. Not you. Not me. God made Jesus to "be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Cor. ) God will end all evil. I'm thankful he is staying his hand to give people time to repent and trust in him with their whole hearts, like Job. But one day he will end it for good. For those who love him and have trusted in Christ, he will wipe away every tear from our eyes. "Death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away." (Rev. 21:4)

@EthicalSkeptic Has God said? Follow your heart. I deserve it.

"Now you know" (Krystal tagline 2023)

Culpability conveys the idea of being blameworthy or deserving of censure. While it can be employed in a legal context, it is far more often used to imply moral responsibility. We seem to have forgotten the value of its role in society. dailysignal.com/2025/09/16/cul…

@ScottWRasmussen @NapolitanNews That’s a dangerous 15%. The fact that a United States Senator is one of them is chilling.

🚨78% of voters say people have “natural rights” that cannot legitimately be taken away by any government. ✅Just 15% disagree and say Individual rights and freedoms come from the government @NapolitanNews survey of 1,000 RV conducted by @ScottWRasmussen June 17-18, 2024

Watching Cracker Barrel go over the falls this week made me wince. It seems clear that the management team didn’t respect the currents. Which in this case means the past. dailysignal.com/2025/08/27/a-c…

@jeffhunt @FreeStateColor1 You are 100% correct. It’s ruining NM as well, and we started from a much lower baseline.

I say commercialized marijuana ruined Colorado, @FreeStateColor1 says I'm wrong. We debate tomorrow live. 6am. Jeff and Bill Show.