Gary Cooper never played obnoxious, overbearing characters. He played men who weighed their words and meant them. In a trade of display, he mastered stillness. His screen presence was immense, but acting was only one part of his story — a story that led, in the end, to God.

Born Frank James Cooper in 1901, he was shaped by Montana ranch life and the reserve of English boarding schools. Before studios dressed him in costumes, life dressed him in discipline. He could ride, shoot, and stand his ground. These weren’t skills for the screen so much as habits of character.

‘I am not afraid,’ he said — and meant it. Of all the famous lines he spoke on screen, none carried the force of those four words.

His rise came just as Hollywood grew fond of show and swagger. The 1930s and 1940s rewarded fast talkers and flashing smiles. Actors like James Cagney, who barked and lunged through gangster films, or Errol Flynn, who fenced, flirted, and filled the frame with movement. Even romantic leads like Clark Gable leaned on charm and chatter. Movies prized motion. Dialogue came in bursts.

Quiet authority

Cooper worked the other way. In “High Noon,” while other Western heroes would ride out guns blazing, his marshal waits. He listens. He walks the town. He watches the situation unfold before choosing when to act.

In “Sergeant York,” his courage comes with doubt, which is why it feels believable. Alvin York begins as a hard-drinking farm boy with a taste for trouble. Faith interrupts his life, forcing him to wrestle with Scripture and conscience at the same time. When war comes, he goes only after weighing the cost. He fights to protect others and to return home to build a life.

Where others faced the camera with frantic talk and expansive gestures, Cooper stripped things down to presence and timing — long pauses; spare looks. His characters hesitated when others hurried.

Today, that strong, quiet type survives mostly as a memory. Clint Eastwood is still with us. But age has pushed him to the margins, and Hollywood no longer revolves around figures like him. The figure Cooper made famous is now more likely to be mocked than admired. His characters would be called rigid or out of date, even emotionally vacant.

Ease and appetite

That judgment says more about the present than it does about him. Cooper showed that a man proves himself not by how loudly he speaks, but by what he is willing to carry. He also learned that responsibility, without something higher to live for and answer to, becomes empty and isolating.

Although Cooper was raised Episcopalian, faith didn’t shape his early adult life. Religion was part of the scenery, not the script. Hollywood rewarded ease and appetite, and Cooper followed the flow. He drank too much. He leaned into a long pattern of adultery. Fame made temptation easy, and he rarely refused it.

His wife, Veronica “Rocky” Balfe, was a committed Catholic, as was their daughter, Maria. Their marriage entered rough water, and Cooper knew exactly why. Guilt was no longer abstract. In 1953, during a trip to Rome, he met Pope Pius XII at the Vatican. The meeting didn’t convert him on the spot, but it unsettled him. Faith stopped being a background habit and became a serious concern. He began to ask whether the life he had built could support the way he was living. The answer was no.

Back in America, Cooper grew close to Father Harold Ford, a priest the family called “Father Tough Stuff.” The nickname fit. Ford was unimpressed by movie stardom. He spoke of duty, devotion, and sacrifice, setting aside the celebrity and addressing the soul.

RELATED: Malcolm Muggeridge: Fashionable idealist turned sage against the machine

Washington Post/Getty Images

The strength of surrender

Cooper listened. What began as a conversation became routine. He started to pray. He returned to confession. He accepted limits where he had lived by impulse. In 1959, he formally entered the Catholic Church. There was no announcement tour. Faith entered his days quietly, through prayer and self-control.

When cancer arrived, belief stopped being optional and became essential. As illness closed in, the habits he had learned rose to the surface. He spoke of God’s will without panic and of the future without fear. There was no display in it, only resolve — the kind of courage that comes from faith in something higher. “I am not afraid,” he said — and meant it. Of all the famous lines he spoke on screen, none carried the force of those four words.

Cooper died on May 13, 1961, at the age of 60. He was buried in a Catholic cemetery in Southampton, New York, beneath a plain stone marker. His path wasn’t easy, but it reached a clear end. What began in excess finished in order.

For Christians, Cooper leaves behind a simple lesson. Faith shows itself in what a person does. You keep your word. You stay when leaving would be easier. Belief appears in conduct long before it appears in language.

He failed, corrected himself, and tried again. After running hard in the pursuit of pleasure, he stopped, knelt down, and looked upward. He defined himself by what he accepted and what he refused. Cooper is gone, but the example remains — a timely lesson from a timeless actor.

​Faith, Abide, Christianity, Lifestyle, Conversion, Converts, Gary cooper 

In my more cynical moments, I’ve suspected that Valentine’s Day owes its longevity less to romance than to a choreographed alliance between the greeting card, chocolate, and lingerie industries. The day has been thoroughly commercialized, and many men, myself included over the years, have approached it with well-intended but often ham-fisted earnestness.

Still beneath the marketing and the eye rolls, Valentine’s Day has come to serve as a pause for many couples. A moment, however imperfectly executed, to tend the fire of intimacy. Over time, lasting loves tend to look at it less as a performance and more as a reminder, a deliberate effort to say, “You matter to me,” even when the words come out crooked.

Common things are seldom viewed as precious. Only a deep bond leaves one person willing to shoulder what the other no longer can.

For family caregivers, however, Valentine’s Day carries a different weight altogether.

In my writing, I often focus on the broader applications of the lessons caregiving teaches. Sometimes though, it’s important to speak directly to a particular group. This is one of those times.

I’m talking about couples where one person is carrying more than their share of the relationship. Not because of indifference or neglect, but because the other, though still alive, is unable to do so. Dementia, disability, illness, injury, or unrelenting pain has shifted the balance. The love remains, but the weight cannot be borne evenly.

Holidays already do this to families. Christmas and Thanksgiving often force a reckoning with decline and loss. Valentine’s Day pierces a little deeper. It is intimate by design. And when one person must carry the relationship alone, the sadness can feel sharper, more personal, and harder to explain.

Caregiving requires reframing. Not denial or pretending. Not putting on a happy face. Reframing means stepping back far enough to see the relationship writ large, not merely through the narrow lens of present limitations. It means recognizing that the ache itself testifies to something rare.

Common things are seldom viewed as precious. Only an uncommon love produces this kind of sorrow. Only a deep bond leaves one person willing to shoulder what the other no longer can.

Over the years, I’ve offered a suggestion that sometimes catches people off guard. “It is OK for caregivers to buy their own Valentine’s Day card.”

Choose the one your husband or wife would have picked for you if they could. At this point in your life together, you already know the words. You’ve learned them through years of shared history, private humor, ordinary sacrifice, and quiet fidelity. Find the card that says what your spouse would have said, and mail it to yourself. Not as an exercise in self-pity, but as a tribute to the love you share.

I remember the first time I mentioned this on the air many years ago. When I finished, I glanced through the studio glass and saw tears filling my producer’s eyes. He was caught in a hard place, married to someone struggling with alcoholism. It is a chronic impairment, one that quietly turns a spouse into a caregiver, though few people think to call it that. He understood immediately what I meant. Not the card itself, but the recognition of love still present when reciprocity has gone missing.

Fix your spouse’s favorite meal, even if you have to help them eat it. Set the table, even if there is only one place setting that feels fully present. Play the song you once danced to or hummed together through the years.

Pining over what is no longer possible can undo a caregiver. But choosing instead to rest in the magnitude of a love that inspires such devotion can steady you. That choice does not eliminate the tears. Nothing in this life will, and that is not a bad thing.

Some things are heartbreaking because they are too beautiful for our hearts to contain this side of heaven. “Sadness” is too small a word for that kind of ache.

Near the end of “The Voyage of the Dawn Treader,” C.S. Lewis gives Lucy a moment of language-defying clarity when she catches a glimpse of Aslan’s country. Struggling to explain what she feels, all she can say is, “It would break your heart.” When someone asks whether she means that it is sad, Lucy answers, “No,” because what she has seen is not tragic at all. It is simply too glorious for her heart to hold.

PULL: The people carrying addiction’s weight rarely get seen

Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images

This is where scripture speaks with quiet authority. The Christian promise is not that God will make all new things, discarding what was. The promise is that He will make all things new. The love you lived, the faithfulness you showed, the care you gave, none of it is wasted.

So this coming Valentine’s Day, if you find yourself in a hospital room, an assisted-living facility, a nursing home, or at your own kitchen table with only one place setting that feels fully occupied, allow the tears to come. Read the card your spouse would have sent. Eat the meal you would have shared. Listen to the music that once marked your life together.

And set another card on the table, the one you would choose for the person who changed your life so profoundly that you now carry the love entrusted to you when he or she no longer can.

Remember this as well. There is one who loves you both more fiercely than our hearts can understand. He sees every tear. He keeps account of every sacrifice. And He will indeed make all things new.

As scripture reminds us, “A cord of three strands is not quickly broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12).

​Valentine’s day, Caretakers, Love, Caregiving, Holidays, Life together, Opinion & analysis, Caregivers, Faith, Endurance, Perseverance 

What millions of Americans are about to witness as they sit down for wings, football, and cold beers “might be the most political Super Bowl ever,” BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere warns on “Stu Does America.”

An article from the Associated Press explained that “the NFL is facing pressure ahead of Sunday’s game between the Seattle Seahawks and the New England Patriots to take a more explicit stance against the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement.”

“More than 184,000 people have signed a petition calling on the league to denounce the potential presence of Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Super Bowl, which is being held at Levi’s Stadium in the San Francisco Bay Area. The liberal group MoveOn plans to deliver the petition to the NFL’s New York City headquarters on Tuesday,” it continued.

“Anway, no plans for ICE immigration enforcement at the Super Bowl, sources say. So, once again, this is a totally manufactured controversy,” Stu comments.

And the Super Bowl’s half-time performer, Bad Bunny, has been very vocally anti-ICE — which Roger Goodell was questioned about in a recent press conference.

“Bad Bunny made a pretty clear anti-ICE statement at the Grammys last night. What are you expecting in terms of political statement, whether that’s from Bad Bunny or Green Day or any of the other performers?” a reporter asked Goodell.

“Listen, Bad Bunny is, and I think that was demonstrated last night, one of the great artists in the world. And that’s one of the reasons we chose him. But the other reason is, he understood the platform he was on and that this platform is used to unite people and to be able to bring people together with their creativity, with their talents, and to be able to use this moment to do that,” Goodell responded.

“I think Bad Bunny understands that, and I think he’ll have a great performance,” he added.

“It’s such a funny thing to watch theoretically serious people have a serious conversation about someone named Bad Bunny. It’s just such a strange world we live in,” Stu laughs, before pointing out that at the Grammys, Bad Bunny used the win to protest ICE.

“Before I say thanks to God, I’m gonna say: ICE out,” Bad Bunny said as he accepted the award for best musica urbana album.

The beloved alternative band Green Day is also performing at the Super Bowl — and Stu believes they’ll be political as well.

“Their opinions might be dumb, but they really think they’re important,” Stu says. “So, I will be shocked if at the very least we don’t have anti-ICE pins or something like that, but probably more than that from Green Day.”

Want more from Stu?

To enjoy more of Stu’s lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Video, Free, Sharing, Video phone, Camera phone, Upload, Youtube.com, Stu does america, Stu burguiere, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Super bowl 60, Super bowl political, Ice, Bad bunny, Green day, Bad bunny ice, Bad bunny grammys, Green day politics, American idiot 

General Motors’ fourth-quarter earnings were widely framed as a show of confidence in an electric future. The company absorbed billions in losses and reaffirmed its strategy, and analysts largely applauded its resolve.

Beneath the optimistic headlines, however, was a less reassuring reality: The all-electric transition is proving significantly more expensive, more fragile, and more politically exposed than automakers originally promised.

What stands out most is GM’s refusal to abandon the all-electric narrative, even after acknowledging the scale of the financial setback.

EV shock

In the report, released January 27, GM disclosed $7.1 billion in EV-related losses tied primarily to reshaping its electric-vehicle production plans. While much of the charge is non-cash, it represents real losses on capital GM invested in EV plans that are now being abandoned or restructured.

These figures are not a minor course correction. They are an acknowledgment that even the industry’s most experienced players misjudged the pace, cost, and risk of electrification.

The disclosure followed Ford’s admission that its EV push has resulted in roughly $20 billion in losses. The contrast between the two companies is not the size of the miscalculation but the response. Ford has slowed timelines and reset expectations. General Motors, under CEO Mary Barra, has chosen to absorb the hit and continue forward.

According to GM, roughly $6 billion stems from changes to its EV manufacturing strategy, including canceled supplier contracts and unused equipment originally intended for electric-vehicle production.

Another $1.1 billion reflects the restructuring of its China joint venture. Combined with an October 2025 filing tied to abandoned EV plans, GM has now recognized approximately $7.6 billion tied to its EV strategy in 2025 alone.

Full speed ahead?

Despite those numbers, coverage of GM’s earnings leaned positive. Reports emphasized the company’s balance-sheet strength, its ability to manage the charges, and its position as a leading EV seller in the United States. In that framing, the financial setback was treated as a painful but manageable step toward an inevitable electric future.

CEO Mary Barra reinforced that narrative, saying she has no regrets about GM’s EV strategy, which remains the automaker’s “north star.” She cited regulatory changes in 2025 as more disruptive than tariffs and argued that GM’s rapid production reorganization limited the damage.

That explanation is telling. It underscores how policy-driven the EV transition has become, with automakers increasingly responding to regulations, incentives, and geopolitical shifts rather than consumer demand alone.

Facing facts

While GM’s long-term direction may remain the same, what has changed is the implicit acknowledgment that the transition will take longer and cost more than originally forecast, particularly as incentives fade and infrastructure gaps remain unresolved.

That tension is visible in the sales data. GM’s fourth-quarter EV sales fell 43% year over year, totaling just 25,219 vehicles. That decline complicates claims that the financial hit reflects only temporary turbulence. It points instead to continued consumer hesitation driven by price, charging access, and concerns over long-term ownership costs.

The full-year picture is more mixed. GM’s EV sales for 2025 rose 48% to 169,887 vehicles, making it the second-largest EV seller in the U.S. behind Tesla. Those figures support claims of progress, but they also highlight how uneven adoption remains — often buoyed by incentives and fleet purchases rather than steady, organic demand.

China adds another layer of uncertainty. Once expected to anchor global EV growth, the market has become far less predictable due to regulatory shifts, fierce local competition, and rising geopolitical tension. GM’s decision to restructure its joint venture there reflects a broader reassessment of international exposure, not simply EV headwinds.

RELATED: Test drive: 2026 Dodge Charger Sixpack Plus

Stellantis

Stand by your plan

What stands out most is GM’s refusal to abandon the all-electric narrative, even after acknowledging the scale of the financial setback. Barra has argued that adoption will accelerate as charging infrastructure improves. That may prove true, but it assumes infrastructure expansion will continue without the level of government support that initially fueled growth — and that consumers will remain patient as prices stay high and technology continues to evolve.

From an industry standpoint, GM’s experience is less about failure than timing. Automakers were pushed — politically and culturally — to commit early and publicly to electrification. Those that hesitated were criticized. Now, the cost of being first is coming into focus. Retooling factories, securing battery supply chains, retraining workers, and complying with shifting regulations require enormous capital, and those investments do not disappear when demand softens.

There is also a credibility question. When executives express no regrets after multibillion-dollar setbacks, investors and consumers are justified in asking whether earlier forecasts were grounded in market realities — or shaped more by political alignment than consumer readiness.

Cautionary tale

GM’s experience should also serve as a cautionary tale for policymakers. Mandates and incentives can accelerate innovation, but they cannot force consumer acceptance on a fixed timetable. The EV transition will happen, but not on command and not without detours.

For General Motors, the challenge now is alignment. The company has the scale, engineering talent, and brand equity to compete in an electrified future. What it cannot afford is a prolonged mismatch between production plans and real-world demand. The $7 billion reckoning is more than an accounting event. It is a reminder that the road to an all-electric future is longer, bumpier, and far more expensive than advertised.

Consumers are watching closely. They are not rejecting electric vehicles outright — but they are demanding better value, better infrastructure, and more honest timelines. If those signals are ignored, this reckoning may be only the beginning.

​Auto industry, Lifestyle, Evs, Mary barra, General motors, Align cars