I heard this song on the way to work this morning, the 80's channel on my Sirius/XM was playing the top 40 from February 10, 1981. It was an interesting time for 80's music, there still was disco on the chart, a lot of what is called "Yacht Rock", Think Christopher Cross for example. I couldn't get a whole lot of stuff on this video or the song. That happens with older songs, before MTV became popular, a lot of groups didn't make music video's or explain what the song was about leaving people to make up their own reasons for the song....Well This is my opinion what prompted the song.
"Change my Mind..."
"Ah! Leah!" is a song by Mark Avsec and American rock musician Donnie Iris from his 1980 album Back on the Streets. The song was released as a single in late 1980 and reached number 29 on the US Billboard Hot 100, 22 on the Cash Box Top 100, and 19 on the US BillboardTop Tracks chart. The song is widely considered to be Iris' signature songand was most popular in Canada, where it became a Top 10 hit.
A full complement of eight musicians appeared in the early live performances of the song, including lead singer Iris, a drummer, three guitar players, one keyboardist and at least two backing vocalists, one female and one male. The title of the song has been referenced in the form of puns on a few of Iris's later albums—the 2009 live albumAh! Live! and the 2010 Christmas albumAh! Leluiah!.
Europe is having a lot of problems right now and an identity crisis is part of it, they don't know who they are any more. I believe that several countries will be Islamic caliphates within 20 years.
Europe fell faster than most people realize.
Not over years.
Not even over months.
In some cases—hours.
The last time a serious threat came from the east, Europe didn’t slowly crumble.
It collapsed at lightning speed.
And it didn’t happen because Europeans were weak.
It happened because they were hesitant, divided, and unprepared to respond with force when force was required.
Let’s remember what actually happened.
When Nazi Germany moved, it didn’t wait for consensus.
It didn’t care about public opinion.
It didn’t pause for moral debates.
It moved fast, hard, and with coordination Europe wasn’t ready for.
Here’s how quickly countries fell:
• Denmark – 6 hours
• Luxembourg – 1 day
• Netherlands – 5 days
• Belgium – 18 days
• France – 6 weeks
• Norway – Weeks
• Poland – Overrun in ~1 month
• Yugoslavia – 11 days
• Greece – About 1 month
These were modern societies.
Educated populations.
Established governments and standing armies.
They didn’t fall because they lacked culture or intelligence.
They fell because they underestimated the threat and hesitated to respond decisively.
Modern wars are often lost before the public realizes they’ve begun.
The uncomfortable parallel today
Much of modern Europe has embraced ideologies that prioritize comfort over strength, consensus over decisiveness, and moral signaling over hard power.
Policies shaped by woke, hyper-liberal frameworks often struggle with:
• The idea of national borders worth defending
• The moral legitimacy of force
• Rapid, unified military action
• A population mentally prepared for sacrifice
These ideologies don’t just influence culture they influence policy, military readiness, and public will.
And history is clear on one point:
Hesitation is an invitation.
Civilian disarmament matters more than people admit
Another hard lesson from history and from modern conflict zones:
When the state is the only entity with force, and that state hesitates or collapses, the population is left exposed.
Across much of Europe:
• Civilian firearm ownership is heavily restricted
• Self-defense laws are narrow or discouraged
• The idea of armed citizens is viewed as dangerous or outdated
But WWII, Eastern Europe, and modern resistance movements all show the same reality:
An armed population complicates occupation.
An unarmed population depends entirely on the state and the state can fail.
This isn’t about encouraging violence.
It’s about deterrence, resilience, and psychological resistance.
Occupation thrives where resistance is impossible.
Europe learned the hard way that standing alone doesn’t work.
That’s why NATO exists.
Not as a symbolic alliance.
Not as a diplomatic club.
But as a collective survival agreement.
And the part many people avoid saying out loud:
The United States is the backbone of NATO.
• Largest military force
• Global logistics and supply chains
• Intelligence dominance
• Nuclear deterrence
• Industrial capacity to sustain prolonged war
Without the U.S., NATO is dramatically weaker—not because Europe is incapable, but because modern war is about scale, speed, and sustained pressure.
The warning history gives us
If Russia or any aggressive expansionist power were to move west without strong, immediate U.S. backing, history suggests something uncomfortable:
Not that Europe would fall overnight.
But that things could unravel far faster than people expect.
Just like before.
Not because Europeans are weak
But because division, ideological paralysis, and underestimating intent are deadly flaws.
WWII didn’t start with tanks in Paris.
It started with:
• Political hesitation
• Moral confusion
• Belief that “it won’t happen here”
• Faith that diplomacy alone would restrain ambition
By the time clarity arrived, many countries were already lost.
This isn’t about fear.
It’s about memory.
History doesn’t repeat itself exactly, but it rhymes.
And the price of forgetting is always higher than the cost of preparedness.
Europe survived last time because the Allies stood together.
And at the center of that alliance was the United States.
That wasn’t accidental.
It was decisive.
Ignoring that lesson would be the most dangerous mistake of all.
Google says it's rolling out a new feature called 'AI Inbox,' which summarizes all your emails, but the company promises it won't train its models on your emails.
On Thursday, Google announced a new era of Gmail where Gemini will be taking over your default inbox screen.
Google argues that email has changed since 2004, as users are now bombarded with hundreds of emails every week, and volume keeps rising.
With AI Overviews in Gmail, Google says it can address the high-volume problem and allow you to ask anything about your inbox.
For example, when you find the right emails, you might be staring at a list of messages, as emails can be long conversations, especially in corporate environments, and you are forced to dig through the long list.
Similar to Google Search, AI Overviews summarizes your email and provides a short overview, so you don't have to read all previous emails in the thread
AI Overview conversation summaries are rolling out today for everyone at no cost.
AI Inbox
AI Inbox is a new section that appears above the traditional Inbox on the left sidebar, and it's like your personalized briefing.
"AI Inbox is like having a personalized briefing, highlighting to-dos and catching you up on what matters," Google explained in a blog post.
"It helps you prioritize, identifying your VIPs based on signals like people you email frequently, those in your contacts list, and relationships it can infer from message content," the company added.
AI Inbox in Gmail is powered by Gemini, and it's rolling out to users with Google AI Pro and Ultra subscribers in the United States.
Google confirmed that you'll be able to turn off the AI features in Gmail, and it's promising that it won't train its AI models on your emails.
I do disagree with some assertions, The democrats have been calling every Republican administration "Illegitimate" since Bush II, Remember all the Hanging Chads from election 2000. I remember USA today"Commissioned a study" and President Bush by the criteria had won despite the interference by Al Gore and the lawyers that only sued in 4 heavily democratic counties in south Florida. Yes Pepperidge Farms Remembers. And since then, every republican election, the donks would scream "illegitimate" or illegal. it was like a broken record er a corrupted MP3 file with them. The author is correct, they are totally interested in pure power no matter the cost, and if this continues,
I don't want to live through "Spicy times" I know what it looks like and that is the problem with the clowns on the left, they think this is a LARP(Live action Role Play) and that they are the heroes battling the bad guys. Real life don't work that way.
This is what they are thinking and what the reality will be.
I got this off the NY Post.
With anti-ICE fury, Democrats are playing with fire
Jeffries accuses Trump of unauthorized military action
01:04
/
03:27
Democrats areplaying with fire, but it’s the whole country that’s likely to get burned.
For a democratic republic to function, you need certain key elements.
First, elections must be generally regarded as honest.
Democrats like Hakeem Jeffries are playing with fire when calling for prosecutions of President Trump and his staff, columnist Glenn H. Reynolds writes.Getty Images
Second, candidates and their supporters have to abide by the results of those elections when they occur.
Third, winners of elections must not behave in a way that makes losing the contest a matter of life and death (or lifetime imprisonment).
Democrats are undermining — or just outright wrecking — all three.
On the electoral trustworthiness front, Democrats are standing united against measures to ensure that only legitimate voterscan cast votes, and that the votes cast are counted honestly and transparently.
When it comes to abiding by elections, the Democrats have treated President Trump’s victories in both 2016 and 2024 as illegitimate. (In fairness, he did the same in 2020 — but accepted Joe Biden’s presidency after Inauguration Day.)
In Trump’s first term, Democrats formed a “resistance” movement — as if the administration of a duly elected president was analogous to a German occupation government in World War II — and pushed the patently false claim that his victory was a “hacked election” or the product of (nonexistent) “Russian collusion.”
Democratic governors and mayors in Minnesota, Oregon and Illinois have gone so far as to actively enable the chaos by withdrawing police protection.
Finally, winners of elections must not pose an existential threat to the losers; they can’t carry out, or even hint at, mass imprisonment or blanket prosecution.
Take a lesson from history: Julius Caesar led his army across the Rubicon to seize power in Rome because his political enemies were plotting to subject him to political prosecutions that could have led to his death or exile.
Caesar saved himself (for a while) — but his action, and the behavior of his opponents that triggered it, killed off the Roman Republic.
Historically in American politics, electoral losers have accepted the results, however grudgingly, and concentrated on winning the next election.
This new trend of treating Republican electoral victories as inherently illegitimate is a departure — and very dangerous.
It’s made more dangerous by widespread threats from important Democratic figures to prosecute not only Trump and his administration, but lower-level officials — and now, even federal law enforcement agents.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) has been raising this specter for months, and other prominent leftists are following his lead.
In September, Jeffries said Democrats would prosecute members of Trump’s Justice Department once they regain power: “Donald Trump and this toxic administration will be long gone, but there will still be accountability to be had.”
In December, he issued a message on X to “all these GOP extremists and [Trump] sycophants … the statute of limitations is 5 years! It will be well beyond the end of the Trump admin.”
We’ve heard similar statements from Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Democratic consultant James Carville and ex-CNN gadfly Jim Acosta.
This month, the drumbeat got louder amid stepped-up immigration enforcement operations in Minneapolis, Minn.
Leftist commentator Jennifer Welch recently used her podcast to push “relentless” prosecutions of Trump, Elon Musk, Stephen Miller and other Republicans if Democrats regain power, arguing it would be necessary for “true national reconciliation.”
And just last week Jeffries was back warning rank-and-file ICE officers to expect a Democratic administration to prosecute them for any crimes it could discover (or perhaps, given the history of efforts to prosecute Trump in the past, invent).
“Every single one of these people who we see brutalizing the American people, they’re gonna be held accountable,” Jeffries said of ICE agents.
As Caesar’s experience demonstrates, you can’t have a democratic republic if every election is an existential struggle in which the loser risks extinction.
People don’t want to be rendered extinct, and they can be expected to take steps to prevent it.
If Democrats keep up this thuggery, Republicans will be all but forced to respond in their own defense — and any action they may take could destabilize the nation even further.
The last time such a breach happened in the United States was in 1860, when pro-slavery Democrats seceded from the country rather than abide by the results of a presidential election.
That resulted in a civil war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans and devastated much of the nation — a war driven by Southern “fire-eater” rhetoric that’s not unlike what we’re hearing from some Democrats today.
It needs to stop, or the consequences might be much worse this time around.
Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a professor of law at the University of Tennessee and founder of the InstaPundit.com blog.
