The Battle of Chippawa occurred 211 years ago, at the end of the War of 1812, near the shores of Lake Ontario. The Canadian Encyclopedia tells us this battle was "an American victory over British forces in the War of 1812." They go on to say the battle lasted 30 minutes and was over by about 6:30pm:
For the first time in the war, American regulars had defeated an equally sized British force in an open battle. British casualties included 148 dead, 321 wounded and 46 missing, while the Americans suffered 58 killed, 241 wounded and 19 missing.
American Battlefield Trust explains that during the War of 1812, the majority of experienced British military war veterans were busy fighting Napoleon in Portugal and Spain, leaving the less experienced British in North America. However, as that war was coming to an end by 1814, the US feared that the British would send those experienced troops across the sea to join their comrades in the US. Camps of Instruction were started in northern New York where the militia was retrained to become a professional fighting force. It was at this point that officers began to be appointed based on merit rather than wealth or political connections.
It is, in this case for sure, true that when you allow your enemy to underestimate your size, skill, and resources, you can thoroughly trounce them as happened at Chippawa. The British believed the US soldiers to be "militiamen" who were considered "backward and incapable of properly fighting" since they had not the prestige of the British. The US soldiers were expected to flee with the surprise attack. Fortunately, the training in NY held as the US soldiers were able to advance and force the British to flee, giving the US a decisive victory.
That day, the American Army decisively defeated the enemy, protected the American homeland, and inspired a new wave of unity, patriotism, and urgently-needed military morale in our war-weary nation. Americas resounding victory at Chippawa will forever be remembered as the moment that the United States Army took its place among the great armies of the world, and showed itself to be capable of defeating any threat to the safety and security of the great American nation.
As we commemorate this epic battle, we honor the memory of the valiant warriors who fought and died to defend the sovereignty of our young Republic. To this day, the proud legacy of the Battle of Chippawa endures in every Soldier who proudly wears the uniform of the United States of America.
How many times have we been told the Democrats totally abhor the OBBB because it is detrimental to the American Public? How many times have we been told millions of people will die if this bill is passed? Now that the bill is LAW and the final version is posted, I am surprised at the lack of "journalists, reporters, news media pundits" who have tackled the text of the OBBB to prove their fearmongering points. Seems to me it would be an easy thing to do, yet they have not. Is it perhaps because if they did so, the public would find the OBBB isn't going to do what the loony left has been trying to tell us it will do? In my July 5, 2025 ANP article, I found the final version of the OBBB at the Congress website and linked to each of the 10 Titles within the bill listing the topics included in each Title.Let's take a tour of the OBBB and see if we can find that which is objectionable to the point that EVERY Democrat voted against this bill.
Since the bill is over 900 pages and there's no way to condense that into a short article, I will work on presenting the bill one Title (and perhaps, under some Titles one section) at a time. Today, we start with evaluatingTITLE I Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
a man and a woman ages 20 through 50, a child ages 6 through 8, and a child ages 9 through 11
But these guidelines have not yet been modified to meet the newly developing MAHA standards. So I suspect there will be some additional revision to this section of the OBBB once RFKJr gets the new standards developed.
This is the meal plan our government uses to calculate how much groceries cost for a family of 4 (notice this is without teenagers as they do not account for the increase in food required by said teens). Then, they go on to compute the cost for households of 1 person (30% of the family of 4 rate) to households of 9 or more - 180% for the first 8 then 22% for each additional person not to exceed 200%? If you can't increase more than 200%, why not just say households of 9 or more are at 200% of the 4 personal family rate? After all 180 + 22 = 202 and you can't exceed 200% no matter how many more people you have in a family. Of course, Hawaii and Alaska have additional cost adjustments due to the higher costs of foods in these areas.
So what's the big deal about this? It directly impacts how much in food stamps (aka SNAP benefits) for which a family of any size can qualify. I suspect that in the future this section will be used to determine WHAT those SNAP benefits can purchase since we still have RFKJr's MAHA plan coming up. And states are being given the opportunity to "Opt-In" (or is it "Opt-Out") to removing the ability to purchase junk food from the SNAP program.
I think this next section is where the Democrats are fear mongering: Section 10108 addresses Alien SNAP eligibility in that recipients must now be residents of the US and either
(A) a citizen or national of the United States;
(B) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence as an immigrant as defined by sections 101(a)(15) and 101(a)(20) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, excluding, among others, alien visitors, tourists, diplomats, and students who enter the United States temporarily with no intention of abandoning their residence in a foreign country;
(C) an alien who has been granted the status of Cuban and Haitian entrant, as defined in section 501(e) of the Refugee Education Assistance Act of 1980 (Public Law 96–422); or
(D) an individual who lawfully resides in the United States in accordance with a Compact of Free Association referred to in section 402(b)(2)(G) of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.
So Section 10108 is where the "you are going to starve people" rhetoric is coming from in the OBBB as far as Democrats are concerned. For the rest of us? We are grateful this is included as ILLEGAL ALIENS will no longer qualify to receive benefits paid for by OUR tax dollars!
Section 10201 returns unobligated money away from Forestry. It seems to be part of the "use it or lose it" mentality. Government agencies, departments, bureaus, etc., wait until the last minute to spend funds and then attempt to spend every single cent allocated because if they don't the next year they will receive less funding.
Section 10301 sets new commodity pricing beginning with the crop year 2025:
(i) For wheat, $6.35 per bushel.
(ii) For corn, $4.10 per bushel.
(iii) For grain sorghum, $4.40 per bushel.
(iv) For barley, $5.45 per bushel.
(v) For oats, $2.65 per bushel.
(vi) For long grain rice, $16.90 per hundredweight.
(vii) For medium grain rice, $16.90 per hundredweight.
(viii) For soybeans, $10.00 per bushel.
(ix) For other oilseeds, $23.75 per hundredweight.
(x) For peanuts, $630.00 per ton.
(xi) For dry peas, $13.10 per hundredweight.
(xii) For lentils, $23.75 per hundredweight.
(xiii) For small chickpeas, $22.65 per hundredweight.
(xiv) For large chickpeas, $25.65 per hundredweight.
(xv) For seed cotton, $0.42 per pound.
Then, beginning in 2031, these reference prices shall be calculated by taking the price in the previous crop year and multiplying it by 1.0005. However, no reference price is to exceed 113% of the above reference prices.
Section 10302 allocates not more than and additional 30,000,000 base acres to eligible farmers. To start to comprehend this section, I had to look up the definition of "base acres" to find:
A farms crop-specific acreage of wheat, feed grains, rice, oilseeds, pulse crops, or peanuts eligible used for FSA program purposes. Base acres do not necessarily align with current plantings. Upland cotton base acres on the farm are renamed generic base acres.
Section 10401 covers disaster assistance programs for farmers/ranchers who lose livestock (including bees). Sec. 10501 covers crop insurance. Sec. 10507 covers poultry insurance. Suffice it to say that if you are a farmer, you want to investigate this section of the OBBB.
Sec. 10604 covers funding research for urban, indoor, and other emerging agriculture. Sec. 10607 covers miscellaneous items such as animal disease and prevention providing funding for Section 10409A(d)(1) of the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8308a(d)(1)). It is this act that allows them to inject livestock with whatever they deem "necessary."
So, Title I Section 10108 is where the Democrat's rhetoric of "starve millions" comes from while Section 10604 is where they authorize injecting substances into livestock.
11 SCOTUS stays or motions to vacate of lower court orders
1 SCOTUS affirmation of lower court order
18 suits where judges granted summary judgement or a permanent injunction
There has been no update to any of the current lawsuits since June 27, 2025. I suspect this is because of the SCOTUS ruling that these courts cannot issue world-wide edicts (although some are still trying).
The White House has begun posting a series of short (around 2 minutes) videos of American Patriots throughout our history. With this being the 250th Anniversary of the signing of our Declaration of Independence as well as President Trump's Year of Celebration he's calling America250, I though I might highlight one of them in each of my White House Chronicles articles.
Since we are all probably familiar with the saying "put your John Hancock here" I thought I'd start with John Hancock who wasborn on January 23, 1737, in Braintree, Massachusetts and died October 8, 1793 in Massachusetts.
He attended Boston Latin School in 1750 (for info about the school see my March 13, 2025 ANP article) then went to Harvard College graduating with a Bachelor's degree in 1754. He lived in England from 1760-1761 building his business. He became a Mason in 1762.
When Hancock was accused of smuggling wine, John Adams defended him. When the charges were dropped 5 months after the trial began (with no explanation), Hancock & Adams went their separate ways. Hancock did not join Adams in 1772 on the Boston Committee of Correspondence but did get together in 1773 to release the private letters of Governor Hutchinson. Also in 1773 Hancock was elected as moderator for the town meeting that resolved "anyone who supported the Tea Act was an 'Enemy to America'" and attempted to prevent tea being unloaded.
Hancock politically straddled the fence as he did not attend the Boston Tea Party yet approved the action while being careful to not praise the destruction of private property. Shortly after, Hancock was diagnosed with gout which kept him from traveling.
In 1774, Hancock was elected to the 2nd Continental Congress. The Provincial Congress re-elected him as President in 1775. By May, 1775, he was also elected President of the Continental Congress.
Hancock married Dorothy Quincy August 28, 1775 in Fairfield, Connecticut. While the couple had two children, neither survived childhood.
Hancock was nominated for US President in 1789 although he was in poor health. He knew Washington would be elected and made no effort to 'run' for the office. John Adams received the 2nd highest number of votes becoming VP.
The second video below is the 1938 Oscar Winning Short (18 minute) Film The Declaration of Independence.
ANP Fundraiser:
Dangerous, Derogatory, Harmful, Unreliable!
Those are some of the exact words used by Googles censors, aka 'Orwelliancontent police,' in describing many of our controversial stories.Stories later proven to be truthful and light years ahead of the mainstream media. But because we reported those 'inconvenient truths' they're trying to bankrupt ANP.
