June 2026 – Martin Simpson

The Left’s Argument Against Colonizers: We Agree, But They’re Not Going to Like It (posted 6/19/26)

Recently I’ve come across the same politically tendentious topic – colonization – raised in two different and interesting ways, and both involved pushing back against the dominant, mostly leftist narrative on the subject.

Everyone knows that narrative: Colonizers are bad. They’re powerful. They’re aggressive. They’re outsiders and bullies who come into someone else’s land and wreak havoc, victimizing the locals and taking over, and then exploiting the natives and their resources for their own benefit.

Of course there is a lot of truth in that narrative. Much of history is taken up by stories of more powerful and technologically advanced peoples – sometimes just more violent ones – expanding into foreign territories and colonizing them. Some empires are less brutal than others, and some cultural exchanges are more one-sided than others, but there seems to be a central template for the practice.

Today there is a general sympathy for the colonized and hostility toward colonizers, in ways that often transcend politics and cross political lines. Especially in a culture with a Judeo-Christian DNA and heritage – even though that heritage has been receding for the last century or more – our Ur-texts demonstrate empathy for and see virtue in the downtrodden. (Blessed are the meek; the last shall be first, and the first shall be last, etc.) We tend to naturally sympathize with the little guy, and the underdog. (We are on Team David, vs Team Goliath.)

But that has not always been the case. Warrior cultures by definition valorized combat and conquest. Self-confident cultures often saw aggressive expansion as bringing the benefits of their superior culture to their neighbors; that was always self-serving and arrogant, and in some cases it was complete BS. (I’m looking at you, jihadist Islam.)

But not always. The Greeks and the Romans brought many benefits to the peoples controlled by their empires, as did the British, and some of the other European powers. Along with the coercion and subjugation, colonies got more functional political systems, and more advanced scientific and medical innovations. Trade often benefited both sides, even if not equally so.

But while colonization was often seen as a complicated or nuanced process, today it has been totally subsumed in leftist politics, and thus turned into a Manichaean, caricatured moral soap opera of black-and-white categories. Marxist economics casts the rich as evil oppressors and the poor as the noble oppressed. Leftist identity politics sees gender and race through a lense of good and evil: females are enlightened and cooperative, males are toxic and competitive; “people of color” are innocent victims, whites are guilty victimizers.

So it follows that colonizers are always and everywhere the rich, white, male exploiters (i.e. the worst bad guys) and the indigenous/colonized are the poor, non-white, female-coded exploited (i.e. the best good guys).

Of course that conception is so over-simplified as to be ridiculous to all but the wokest of the lefty wokesters, and I know I’m not telling you anything that you didn’t already know. But an article in American Greatness – I highly recommend that site – by Spyridon (Don) Andrews called, “Indigenous Nonsense: History Doesn’t Care Who Got Here First” really lays the case out perfectly.

A month ago I wrote about “clock setting,” which is the idea that you can win an argument if you are able to decide where to start the story. In the context of colonizing, clock setting arises when one side claims to have “gotten here first,” which Andrews rightly takes apart.

Mexicans partial to arguments of groups like La Raza say that much of the southwestern US is rightly Mexican, because they were here first, before American colonizers pushed them out by winning the Mexican-American War in 1848. But Spaniards would say that they were in modern Mexico first, before Mexicans defeated them in the Mexican War of Independence in 1821. But Aztecs would say that before the Spanish showed up around 1500, they’d run the place for two centuries.

And many small tribes would say that THEY were indigenous to that area before the Aztecs showed up around 1300 and started cutting thousands of beating hearts out of chests every other Tuesday.

So everybody is a clock setter. Or a sun-dial setter, or whatever.

Andrews points out that there is nothing necessarily morally elevated about being an indigenous group, or morally debased about being a colonist, and that “I was here first” might carry weight on a playground, but not in a serious, historical or political argument. (I’m paraphrasing him.)

Andrews criticizes the kind of leftist multiculturalism that claims no culture is superior to another, while at the same time assigning an inherent moral superiority to “indigenous” cultures. Which, you may notice, is self-contradictory, and stupid.

He cites the examples of various African countries. Inconveniently for a modern lefty, all of those countries’ histories were characterized by one tribe after another colonizing the place, and then being colonized in turn, long before the first European whitey ever showed up.

Though he doesn’t put it this way, would you rather live in Rhodesia under the colonizing Brits, or newly re-christened Zimbabwe under incompetent, indigenous thug Mugabe? Would you rather live in Uganda under the colonizing Brits, or when it was run by indigenous monster (and cannibal!) Idi Amin?

Annndddd…AOC and the Squad got both answers wrong.

Andrews ends his article eloquently: “In the end, legitimacy is not inherited. It is earned. It does not arise from ancestry, mythology, chronology, or blood. It arises from competence, justice, liberty, opportunity, and the rule of law. The question is not who was here first. The question has always been, and will always be, who governs well.”

Coincidentally, not long before I came across Andrews’ article, I heard The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh discussing the murder of Englishman Henry Nowak by Sikh British citizen Vickrum Digwa, and Walsh’s word choices startled me.

He referred to Nowak as “an indigenous Briton” and Digwa as a “colonizing foreigner.”

It’s a provocative reversal of our usual expectations, of course, and at first blush it came across as a sarcastic jibe. But upon reflection, I think Walsh is right to point out that leftist-driven anti-white racism has completely inverted power politics in today’s England, and it got Henry Nowak killed.

In the culturally dominant (lefty) narrative, Digwa would be the put-upon victim. A non-white minority in a white-majority nation, he practices a foreign, minority religion in a nominally Christian nation.

If his encounter with Nowak had been a racial parable told in a leftist cocktail party or faculty lounge instead of a real-life story, we’d expect it to go about like a black man’s confrontation with a white man in the South when it was run by Democrats and their Jim Crow laws. A black guy has a confrontation with a white guy and stabs him to death. The (white) police are called and yada, yada, yada…the black guy ends up in the electric chair or lynched.

But in real life, the story unfolded in exactly the opposite way. Digwa is actually a colonizer – a foreigner with cultural power that gives him the arrogant confidence to impose his will on the indigenous population. The indigenous Britons cannot carry weapons in public, but Sikhs have special privileges to carry ceremonial knives, because the native justice system submissively gives their foreign religion special accommodations.

Digwa is the aggressor, and he stabs Nowak several times, including in the back of his legs when he tries to flee for his life. Far from being worried about the police, the privileged Digwa knows that they will take his side against the indigenous nobody he has just stabbed. So he calls them and lies that Nowak was racist toward him, and attacked him. The cops show up, and just like good ol’ boy southern sheriffs, they accept his version, despite its variance from the facts right in front of them.

Digwa is unharmed, while Henry is curled up on the ground, bleeding and gasping for breath. So the cops ask Digwa if he’s been hurt, and then treat the dying Henry like a criminal, mocking him when he claims to have been stabbed (“I don’t think you have, mate,”) and then dragging him on the concrete and handcuffing him, despite the fact that he is obviously no threat to anyone.

When Henry dies without prompt medical care, the indigenous government kowtows to the powerful colonizer, treating him with kid gloves (he was reportedly not even handcuffed when he was arrested), and starting a PR campaign to cast the indigenous white victim as the racist aggressor, until overwhelming video and forensic evidence force them to reluctantly charge Digwa.

And even THEN, the government’s main official response has focused on warning the powerless racial minority of the indigenous public (white Britons now make up less than 37% of London residents, according to the UK Office for National Statistics) against saying anything negative about or responding angrily to the culturally dominant, colonizing foreigners of color who are politically favored in their country.

Like most white folks, I don’t enjoy talking about race. But the left’s anti-white racism – here and around the world – has gotten so common and so hateful that it can’t help but provoke some harsh reactions. In the UK, the murder of Nowak, the attempted beheading by a Sudanese colonizer in Ireland, and the systematic, mass rape of a quarter million indigenous British white girls by Muslim colonizers have produced outrage.

Until now, the Left has cowed most Europeans into submitting to waves of non-assimilating migrants from the Third World. They’ve also managed to get many Americans to passively tolerate millions of entitled foreigners illegally pouring into his country.

But that momentum seems to have been reversed. Americans elected a president to shut the border and deport illegals. The Irish and the British have been protesting in the streets at the cruel government that has ignored their pleas and forced a kind of secular, abusive dhimmitude on them.

Even the European Parliament, within the last 48 hours, passed a vote on the Return Directive, “the first measure to seriously restrict immigration at the European level.” After the vote, loud chants of “Send them back!” broke out. In the formerly castrati-ridden EU!

So I’ll end where I began. We’ve heard the elite left’s message about colonizers. They’re bad, and powerful and aggressive. They’re outsiders and bullies who come into someone else’s land and wreak havoc, victimizing the locals and taking over, and then exploiting the natives and their resources for their own benefit.

We’ve seen that a lot lately, in Somali Learing Centers and fraud rings in MN, and Mexican flag-waving riots in LA, and attacks on ICE and law enforcement in blue cities from coast to coast.

The citizens of Europe and America have heard the leftists’ rants, and their chants, and their righteous anger, and they’ve convinced us: Foreign invasions and colonizing are bad, and the indigenous population should resist them.

But something tells me that the left is not going to like it when they are on the receiving end of the argument they’ve been aiming at us.

Que Mala/Crockett, 2028!

0-0-0

If you enjoyed this column, please share it, and click Subscribe (on the bottom of your phone screen, or the right side of your computer screen) to receive a notice when new columns post.

A Happy Dead Guy Story, & a Sad Architecture Story (posted 6/15/26)

Let’s start this Monday on a happy note. Dack dook is dead!

I don’t know if I’ve got that pronunciation right. But I’ve got the facts right. Dack dook has been turned from a bad terrorist into a good terrorist. He’s assumed goat-barn temperature. His birth certificate has been revoked.

The IDF announced on Sunday that they took out Hezbollah senior commander Ali Mussa Daqduq. Details on the nature of the “strike” that brought the FO in response to Dack Dook’s many years of F(’ing)A were sparse, but I’m guessing that the cause of death was HVBS (“High Velocity Ballistic Suppository”) and that he’ll get a closed-casket funeral.

His resume is about what you’d expect from a jihadi creep – leader of the Golan Terrorist Network, killed lots of Jewish civilians and children, kidnapped and murdered 5 American soldiers, etc.

Good riddance to a bad goblin. (Also, I wish Trump would stop telling the IDF to quit retaliating when terrorists continue to fire missiles into Israel. As long as Dack Dook types are still messing with the shofar, they need to keep getting the horn, IMHO.)

Turning to a less happy story, Obama’s monstrosity of a “Presidential Center” is finally going to open to the public this Friday, so be sure to pick up your over-priced tickets and prepare to start camping out in lines around the block right now.

I’ve written a little about this before — I mentioned that you’ll know it’s open once the ominous, gigantic Eye of Sauron bursts into hellish flame atop it – but the telling details continue to roll out on a daily basis. It has become the physical embodiment of Democrat ideology, manifesting as it does the leftist trinity of ugliness, incompetence and financial corruption.

The ugliness strikes you immediately. This is the architectural equivalent of a typical un-eff-able AWFL you might see at an anti-ICE riot: a lumpy body, holding up a sneering, multiply-pierced face, topped by purple hair, and carrying a clearly obscene and yet obviously misspelled sign.

If this building were a person, you know it would hate its dad, and shout its abortions.

The land it desecrates – er, sits upon – was a National Register-listed park-scape designed by Frederic Law Olmsted, the master who gave us Central Park, the Biltmore Estate, and the Stanford campus, among many others. But what does he know, compared to Mr. “If you like your doctor, you can keep your Doctor?”

The monstrosity that Obama plunked down onto that space evokes the work of another well-known architect, Albert Speer, who designed the glowering flak towers in Berlin after the tide had turned against the Nazis in World War Eleven. (Don’t look now, but that reference has Graham “Maine Kampf” Platner as aroused as if he were flouncing through a field of porta-potties.)

It’s nearly windowless – one suspects because otherwise the poor souls who find themselves trapped inside it might hurl themselves out into the grim embrace of death. And it has words from one of Obama’s speeches silhouetted in gigantic letters that wrap around two sides of the building.

Fittingly, they are very hard to read. But this might be a case of form following function, since Obama’s speeches often made no sense, but when they did, they were hard to stomach.

All across the spectrum, the reviews are in, and they are not good. It’s been described as, “a fortified sci-fi prison,” a “stocky, truncated obelisk,” a “Klingon prison,” a “lecture in stone,” a “grim, repellent violation of all that is good and holy,” and “what would happen if Stalinist brutalism and Hitlerian self-mocking gigantism had a baby.”

Okay, those last two were mine. But I stand by them completely.

But it’s not just the ugliness, it’s the incompetence. Just like Newsom’s phantom bullet train in California, Mamdani’s “free” grocery stores in NYC, and Obamacare before it, the budget projections for Obama’s eyesore were a cruel joke. The building was originally projected to cost $300 million. That had crept up to $500 million by 2017, and then to $700 million by 2021, and is now coming in at around $850 million!

Which means that if an honest audit were ever done on its real cost – don’t hold your breath – the final tab will likely be an even billion or more.

And for that we get what one illustrious architecture critic has called, “an enormous granite bowel-movement defacing Chicago’s south side.”

Okay, that one was me again. And I still stand by it.

But those obscene, bloated budgets are where incompetence shades into financial fraud. The Obama Foundation was given a sweetheart 99-year deal on the land – over the heated objections of many little-guy area residents – for a payment of just $10.

And even after burning through a ginormous pile of cash, the Barack brain-trust has still managed to stiff a wide array of contractors, many of them black! The president of the African American Contractors Association said that at least seven black-owned subs have asked him for help over missing payments, some of which are in the seven figures.

It’s hard to untangle all of the lawsuits going on to try to get the elite leftists in charge to keep their word and pay their bills. (Good luck! And again, don’t hold your breath!) But the largest single lawsuit – against the structural engineering firm Thornton Tomasetti on behalf of a black-owned sub – is for $40 million, and the amounts various contractors have been promised but not paid appear to easily involve at least tens of millions more.

Hilariously enough, the black-owned sub is suing Thornton for having blamed delays and cost overruns on underperformance by minority-owned subs, and for having allegedly claimed that “firms that were not minority-owned could have completed the work without problems.”

To paraphrase Jay-Z – I know, if I’m not quoting Shakespeare or the King James Bible, I’m constantly quoting Jay-Z – it sounds like this project had 99 problems, and DEI was definitely one!

But don’t worry. Even if the ugly Obama-drome project screwed a bunch a bunch of working guys, you can rest easy knowing that his cronies in the Democrat elite were all greased with obscenely high salaries. Obama made his old Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett the CEO, and last year she was paid $740,000! The executive VP of the project got over $600K, and the group’s “chief legal and people officer” (whatever that is) got $425K.

Did I mention that the Obama Center has put out a call for unpaid volunteers to work in his hideous monument? I’m not making that up. Val Jarrett is hammering checks for three-quarters of a mil per year, but Obama needs gullible peons to work for free.

If you still haven’t thrown up in the back of your mouth, consider that the Obama Foundation had promised that they would build the thing entirely with private donations from fat-cats and billionaires (who I’ve been reliably informed are really evil…unless they are nepo-babies or leftists, I guess?) They also assured Chicagoans – when they got that sweetheart price of $10 to buy the land – that they’d create an endowment of $470 million “as basically an insurance policy so the taxpayers wouldn’t get stuck with the bill.”

As a show of good faith, they started that fund by setting aside $1 million for that purpose at the ground-breaking in 2021.

Annnndddd…it’s still at $1 million, 5 years later.

Unexpectedly!

So to re-cap, we’ve got an ugly, wildly over-budget structure, built on graft, broken promises and the betrayal of the working class for the benefit of the rich and connected.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Democrat party in architectural form.

By the way, I have two tickets for the Obama Memorial Flak Tower grand opening this Friday, and I am looking to exchange them for two tickets to the first game of the Indiana Bears in 2027. Any takers, please DM me.

Enjoy, Chicago!

Que Mala/Crockett, 2028!

0-0-0

If you enjoyed this column, please share it, and click Subscribe (on the bottom of your phone screen, or the right side of your computer screen) to receive a notice when new columns post.

Causes for Optimism, Plus My Own Personal Brush with Voter Fraud (posted 6/12/26)

To start with some good news, I was glad to see that even in these contentious times, a Texas jury was able to resist the racial arsonists supporting Karmelo Anthony and render a true verdict on his murder of Austin Metcalf. Especially considering the firehose of nonsense and racial hatred coming from Anthony’s supporters.

One angry black woman went viral as she screamed some of the dumbest rhetorical questions you’ve ever heard: “What do you want us to do?! I’ve got 5 boys. I ain’t got nothin’ to tell ‘em no mo! You can’t walk away no mo.”

Who’s going to tell her that walking away is exactly what Karmelo did NOT do, but should have done? If he had, Metcalf wouldn’t be dead, and he wouldn’t be going to prison!

And what should you tell your boys? Really?

[start Kinison filter] That’s quite a puzzle you’ve got there, ma’am. What should you tell your boys? Gee, I don’t know…how about you tell them… DON’T MURDER PEOPLE! DON’T STAB THEM IN THE HEART AND CREATE AN UNSURVIVABLE WOUND!! OH! OHHHHH!!! [end Kinison filter]

And as so often has been the case in the last several years, the most idiotic comments of the day came from pseudo-hood-rat Jasmine Crockett. In a fact-free rant on her execrable podcast, she described the murder weapon – a 4-inch blade with serrations at the base – as some kind of tiny thing (she held her fingers about an inch apart), and concluded that, “I would have argued that with the size of it alone, you wouldn’t even think it was a deadly weapon.”

Brilliant! How could anybody think that knife was a deadly weapon?

I mean, other than the fact that Karmelo killed a guy with it.

Speaking of Crockett, one cause for optimism is that she is just one of many jackass politicians and media figures who are on their way out this year, from both sides of the aisle. A partial list would include leftists like Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel and Scott Pelley, and Katie Porter, Al “the wolfman” Green, Frederica Wilson and Imhotep Pelosi, plus RINOs like Tillis (NC), Cassidy (LA), Cornyn (TX) Marjorie Taylor Green (GA), Massie (KY) and Cocaine Mitch McConnell (Forest Lawn Memorial Gardens).

On the other hand, I’m also grateful for a few who are staying. The leader of that list has to be Que Mala Harris, who is currently at the top of the polls of Democrat contenders for 2028. I don’t think there’s any way she will get the nomination, but it will be hilarious to watch her flounder through an attempt!

Just behind her is… drumroll please… Joe Biden! You may have seen his sad appearance at Jill Biden’s book event with Whoopi Goldberg last week, during which he wandered up to ask a question, and then yammered away without a microphone, while Jill pretended that she was glad to see him.

The great part that most people didn’t notice at the end – because Joe was once again babbling without a microphone – was when he said, “I’ve got a book coming out in September, so make sure you buy it!”

Man, I wish I could have seen the faces of the elite Democrat power brokers when they heard that! The thought of the worst president ever popping up again – shortly before the midterms! –to remind voters of how terrible he and his party were when they last had power?

That is chef’s kiss (of death) perfect!

On a more serious note, in my last column I complained about the blatant voter fraud in California, and by now we’re all sick of that story. Mostly because the recent shamelessness in the late great Golden State is just the latest iteration of a very familiar pattern of leftists hijacking elections.

From the systematic corruption of Tammany Hall in 19^th century NYC, to Huey Long’s Louisiana Democrat kleptocracy in the 1920s and ‘30s, to the old jokes I heard when I was in college in a Chicago suburb in the 1980s about “whoever wins the cemeteries will win the election,” the tradition has continued. Slimy Democrat machines have been rigging elections for the better part of two centuries.

In the last several decades, Democrats all over the country have added a few new wrinkles to their grift, pushing a raft of voting laws that are transparently intended to invite voter fraud. They’ve outlawed even checking voters’ IDs, and have pushed same-day voter registration as well as motor-voter schemes that automatically register everyone to vote when they get a driver’s license. (This at a time when blue states are giving licenses to hundreds of thousands of foreigners, knowing that whether they are here legally or illegally, they are NOT legally entitled to vote.)

Wide-spread mail-in balloting, with little to no oversight or checks. Extending voting day to voting weeks or months. Using unmonitored ballot drop boxes. (Watch Dinesh D’Souza’s recent documentary about that.) Not to mention ballot harvesting, which might be the most corrupt of all.

I know: you’ve heard it all before. But I actually had a personal experience with creepy Democrat voter fraud, during my own callow youth.

The year was 1982. Michael Jackson’s Thriller was at the top of the charts, MTV was just a year old, and I was a college sophomore. Which was perfect, because I was extremely sophomoric. (My wife would tell you that I’ve never grown out of that phase.)

That fall I took an abnormal psych class that included an internship component, which consisted of going to a local mental health facility once a week for three hours. We were allowed to interview the staff who worked there, observe the patients when they were in common areas, and write reports and a final paper about the experience.

That was a mid-term election year, and Chicago Democrats were already experienced in ballot harvesting. Right around election time a skeevy Dem ward heeler showed up at the mental hospital with a bunch of absentee ballots and many cartons of smokes, and after doing some glad-handing and distributing the cigarettes, he left with a big folder full of completed Democrat ballots.

Being a typical young male, I was primarily concerned with girls and sports, and was totally uninterested in politics, so I can’t remember all of the details. I know the employees got cigarettes, but nearly all of the patients got them, too. (The main motivational strategy to ensure good behavior from the patients at the time was using cigarettes as part of a token economy, and it seemed like all of them smoked, including one poor guy who had already lost part of his jaw to cancer.)

Even as apolitical as I was, it struck me as really sleazy that all of the guys we were observed – some of whom thought they were Napoleon or Christ, or that the government was listening to their thoughts – had all “cast votes” for Democrats. I remember some jaded laughter and world-weary head-shaking among the staff about it. But none of them seemed outraged at all, and I had the sense that that was the way things always ran in Chicagoland.

Having said all of that, I have two main thoughts on this subject. First, as I said in my last column, the GOP had better do everything they can to push nationwide voting reforms and anti-fraud legislation, starting with the SAVE Act.

Second, I never want to hear a self-righteous wokester sneering that a Republican presidential candidate has lost the popular vote ever again! That’s been a leftist talking point for years – until 2024, when Trump shocked them by winning the popular vote – and they’ve always used it as a way to argue that GOP election victories are illegitimate.

But from now on, we should throw that claim right back in their faces. Because as long as big blue states – and big blue cities in otherwise sane purple, red or light blue states – are as transparently corrupt as California has demonstrated itself to be in this election cycle, there is no way any honest person can cite popular vote totals with a straight face. (No offense, Jimmy Buttigieg-Talarico.)

In fact, there’s no way to even estimate within a margin of error of many millions of votes what a legitimate final vote count might be. And that’s on you, Democrats!

Am I saying that you should pepper-spray the next leftist who tells you that the late Joe Biden got 81 million votes in 2020, or that Nithya Raman got more votes than Spencer Pratt?

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

Que Mala/Crockett, 2028!

0-0-0

If you enjoyed this column, please share it, and click Subscribe (on the bottom of your phone screen, or the right side of your computer screen) to receive a notice when new columns post.

Leftist Cheating in California: One More Reason to Pass the SAVE Act! (posted 6/8/26)

I’m feeling pretty disgusted with the left’s most recent outrages though I’m hoping that some good can come out of it all.

As I’m writing this late on Sunday, it looks like the cheating creeps who control elections in deep blue and deeply corrupt – but I repeat myself – California are on the verge of having stolen Spencer Pratt’s second-place finish in the LA mayoral race, and have bumped Steve Hilton down into the second spot behind Xavier Becerra in the governor’s race.

I’m not normally somebody who throws around accusations about stolen elections. Partly because they are often untrue, and partly because even when they are true, complaining about them rarely helps.

I think politicians who lose in a close race never want to look in the mirror, and are sorely tempted to blame their loss on fraud. Hillary Clinton clearly lost in 2016, and Stacey “M-1” Abrams lost Georgia gubernatorial elections in 2018 and 2022, yet both women claimed for years afterward to have won, based on no evidence. Many Dems still believe – or pretend to believe – that Bush stole the 2000 election from Gore, and the 2004 election from Lurch Kerry.

There was plenty suspicious about 2020 – including Covid-enabling, fraud-friendly use of many millions of unvetted mail-in ballots, plus around 8-10 million phantom voters for Biden who had not shown up before or since. Trump was a constant in 2016, 2020 and 2024, and he was no less hated in 2020 than he was in ’16 or in ’24. Hillary got 65.8 million votes in ’16, and Que Mala got 75 million in ’24. Given population growth and other electoral trends, we would have expected the Dem candidate in 2020 to get around 70-72 million votes.

Yet Biden got 81.2 million (!), a wildly anomalous number for which no convincing innocent explanation has been offered. As is often the case, Occam and his famous razor indicate the most likely explanation: uniquely loose and fraud-enabling election rules allowed/enabled/produced around 10 million extra votes than would have been expected, given known demographic realities.

However, even though Trump had a better argument to make in 2020, there was no way to gather enough evidence in the short time before the election had to be certified. And since he couldn’t come close to proving that the election was stolen, it was a losing gambit with horrible optics to complain about the election being stolen. In that case, his best strategy was to stop the complaining (which is not a skill in his wheelhouse), and instead to use the obvious flaws in that election to help fuel his attempt to come back and whip the Dems beyond their ability to cheat in 2024.

Which, because God exists, and He loves us, Trump did.

But there’s a difference between stolen elections and corrupt ones, and California’s system is obviously corrupt, and should spur national outrage. There is no legitimate reason in a first-world country for vote counting to take weeks after either a city or a state election! Most US states – and all the red ones, as far as I know – have a decision within 24 hours, with very rare exceptions involving razor-thin margins. Most established nations in the world can do the same, too.

The only non-laughable explanation for why a state delays final vote counts for so long is so that they can cheat. And all legitimate voting rules are common sense ones. Everyone should be required to provide ID and proof of citizenship to vote, as every developed nation in the world requires! Mail-in ballots should be used by only a very few people, with very clear reasons to do so (e.g. serving in the military abroad, or being home-bound due to serious health problems), and those ballots should come with extra documentation and get extra scrutiny.

And they should be required to be received on the day before election day, so that they can be counted along with the day-of votes! There is no reason for people who don’t want to vote in person to be allowed to wait until election day to mail their ballot, thus requiring an extra week or more for everyone to wait in limbo for results. Especially since corrupt scumbags can use that time to figure out exactly how many votes they need to “create” to steal an election.

(If you want the extra convenience of mailing in your vote, the least you can do is to mail your ballot a week before election day. If that’s too much to ask of you, you can either vote in person on election day like the rest of us, or else GFY.)

Third-party ballot harvesting and unobserved ballot drop boxes are ridiculously corrupt on their face, and should never be allowed. The same goes for mailing ballots to every voter in the state, especially when blue-state voter lists are notoriously full of dead people, those who moved long ago, and fraudsters.

Having said all that, the shenanigans in CA right now are obviously working exactly as they are intended to. On election day, Spencer Pratt was a close second to Bass, with Nithya Rahman coming in a very distant third. Even with all of the supposedly legitimate votes still out to count, there is no reason to expect that Rahman could honestly make up so much ground from those outstanding votes. Even in far-left districts, the late vote should have split between the two far-left candidates in roughly the same ratios that the early and day-of votes had done. Yet Rahman’s totals were disproportionately increased, just enough to edge out Pratt.

Unexpectedly!

Even if the Dem machine had been smart enough not to cheat so blatantly, they still would likely have prevailed in November. Democrat numbers in LA and CA are lopsided enough that if the top two finishers had included a Dem and a non-Dem, the former would probably win, and California’s slide into a degraded, Third-World status would continue unabated.

But this is ridiculous! What I’m hoping for now is that every honest, productive citizen in California will follow in the footsteps of the millions who have already fled the state, so that all of the future victims of crime, financial predation and eroding quality of life will be the leftists who voted for exactly that. And may God have mercy on their souls.

More importantly, I’m hoping that this outrageous debacle might finally be the straw that breaks the RINO’s back. I hope every Republican in the country will flood John Thune’s office – and the offices of every other Republican in the Congress – to demand that they pass the SAVE Act.

If that means killing the filibuster, so be it. That’s not our first choice, and most of us would like to uphold that traditional check on power. If we had a principled opposition who would meet us halfway and play by the rules, we’d keep the filibuster, and pass the SAVE Act by the kind of wide, bipartisan margin that all polls show that the American people would support.

But we don’t have that kind of opposition. Look at California. And at New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Chicago, and at how the Democrats with a thin majority in Virginia acted.

Look at the Southern Policy Law Center’s soul-withering dishonesty, and how no congressional Democrats (except maybe Fetterman, and one or two others?) will even acknowledge that, let alone condemn it. The latest revelation is that the SPLC was able to nearly triple their revenue after they paid off the KKK to stage the Charlottesville rally, and then wildly exaggerate and lie about the “existential threat of white supremacy” ever since.

We may not be able to stop crooked blue states from holding crooked local and state elections. But we cannot allow California-style fraud and cheating to create crooked national elections.

And the voter ID and proof of citizenship requirements in the SAVE Act should be the LEAST that we can expect from even a RINO-influenced Republican congress.

So get on it, everybody!

Que Mala/Crockett, 2028!

0-0-0

If you enjoyed this column, please share it, and click Subscribe (on the bottom of your phone screen, or the right side of your computer screen) to receive a notice when new columns post.

The Media Dogs that Didn’t Bark (posted 6/5/26)

By now we’re all sick of stories about how biased the media are. But once in a while such a story provides a target so tempting that it’s hard to pass up.

The Sherlock Holmes story “Silver Blaze” has given us a famous phrase that always comes to mind when I think of our corrupt, partisan media: “the dog that didn’t bark.” The story is about the disappearance of a race horse and the murder of its trainer, and Holmes recognizes that there is evidence in something that did not happen. A dog was in the barn when the crime took place, and Holmes deduces that the dog knew the killer, since it didn’t bark as it would have if a stranger had shown up.

Fortunately, our MSM is much less clever than a criminal in an Arthur Conan Doyle story, and we don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to see through their predictable efforts to hide their partisan dishonesty.

For example, since the legacy media are always trying to insert racial narratives into every story, if you ever read any crime story that doesn’t mention the race of those involved, that lack of information is the dog that didn’t bark. And you know what that hound’s silence means.

When a mob of young people flood into a specific area and go on a sustained, violent rampage, and a 10-paragraph story on the mayhem calls the incident a “teen takeover” and makes no mention of race at all…you know that there was not a significant Scandinavian-American presence in that mob.

Conversely, when non-criminal white guy Daniel Penny stopped violent black recidivist Jordan Neely from hurting commuters on a subway train by restraining him in a hold that inadvertently killed him, a typical MSM headline said, “White Man Kills Black Michael Jackson Impersonator on Train.”

And the first few sentences of a typical story sounded like this: “When Daniel Penny, a white former Marine saw Jordan Neely, a Black MJ enthusiast on the subway, he thought Neely was a threat. Using training he’d learned from white drill instructors, Penny – who is white – put Neely — who was black – in a chokehold that is especially dangerous for people of color – which Neely was – and killed him.”

The same QCS (Quiet Canine Syndrome) is constantly at play in political stories.

If a Republican politician gets caught cheating on his wife, the story will begin, “Republican Tad Wellington, R-Ohio, was caught betraying his wife – and his Republican voters, in his Republican congressional district – by using his patriarchal Republican privilege to seduce an age-inappropriate young woman. Republican-ly.”

The same story about a 10-term Democrat congressman caught in the same situation? “Local man caught up in mostly peaceful and totally consensual misunderstanding in local motel.”

When a story combines both politics AND crime, every dog in the MSM kennel develops intermittent laryngitis. Thus, when two transgenders killed Christian kids in school shootings in Tennessee and Minnesota, their manifestoes and social media were studiously overlooked, and stories took a, “we may never know what motivated the killer” approach.

Similarly, when Charlie Kirk was murdered by a creepy, violent leftist male who was banging a boy who thought he was a girl who thought she was a human-sized squirrel, MSM accounts wouldn’t include the words “leftist” or “furry.” Instead, their stories led with, “The son of conservative Republican parents allegedly killed fascist provocateur Charlie Kirk…”

By contrast, the media pack was in full, yapping fury when on May 27^th, somebody opened fire at a Muslim festival in Shakopee, MN, killing a 26-year-old Muslim man named Khalid Ibrahim Abdi.

FINALLY, thought the media pitbulls! After years and years of tiptoeing around hundreds of attacks on Jews and synagogues, and Christians and churches, we’ve finally got a story we can sink our teeth into! Bark! Muslims attacked, and a Muslim man dead? Woof! We don’t have any facts yet, but it’s probably a Jewish attacker. Or at least a Christian one. Where was Ben Shapiro when the shooting happened? Does Netanyahu have an alibi?!

AROOOOOOOOO!

Please let the killer be a Trump supporter named Itzhak Rubenstein, or Schlomo Hershberg. Or even Jebediah “Cotton” Mather!

Amy Klobuchar and Tim Walz put out immediate statements, hammering the “attacks on religious events are especially abhorrent” theme. Widely reported calls from the Muslim community demanded “accountability.”

But that was only a week ago, and I’ll bet you haven’t heard anything about the story since. In fact, a quick search shows that a total of zero stories on CNN, ABC or NBC newscasts reported the arrest of the killer on May 28^th, or his name. A local Minnesota CBS station mentioned the name, and MSN had a link to a local Fox channel who reported the killer’s name. Hmm.

Let me put on my Sherlockian Deerstalker hat and light my pipe. What could account for all of these media dogs quietly slinking back into their kennels?

It is, dare I say it, elementary.

Because the killer’s name is… wait for it… Mohamed Abdirizak Rage.

I’m not making that up. Mohamed Rage! (Rumors that “Abdirizak” is Arabic for “Death to the Infidels” have not been confirmed.)

Not since a Muslim named “Jihad al-Shamie” murdered two Jews in England last October has a “nomen est omen” situation been so on the nose.

So naturally, the legacy media immediately pivoted away from the story. Because they run in neutered packs, and the few alphas among them are the enforcers who make sure that they slavishly follow the party line, and tell only the ideologically approved narratives.

Am I saying that they’re a bunch of feckless little b*tches?

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

Have a good weekend, everybody!

Que Mala/Crockett, 2028!

0-0-0

If you enjoyed this column, please share it, and click Subscribe (on the bottom of your phone screen, or the right side of your computer screen) to receive a notice when new columns post.

Too Much “FA” and Not Enough “FO” (posted 6/1/26)

As a new month starts, I’m feeling a little frustrated over what I perceive as the Trump administration’s taking their foot off the pedal in a few areas. With the mid-terms only 5 months away, I’m hoping that they are not forgetting one of the basic principles of behavior modification: you get more of what you reward, and less of what you punish.

Here at home, I’d love to see us enforce some more consequences on anti-ICE rioters, and on sanctuary city politicians.

The “protestors” in New Jersey have had a federal facility under siege for more than a week now. What they’re doing is blatantly illegal, as everyone can see from countless hours of videos. The feds should have responded decisively the first or second night.

Broadcast several warnings that the mob action is illegal and anybody who stays there is subject to arrest immediately. Then respond with legal but overwhelming force: flood the area with officers and troops – from ICE, Border Patrol, the National Guard, etc. Use pepper spray, tasers, bean-bag shotgun loads and rubber bullets on the most violent among them, and start making mass arrests.

While that’s going on, bring in a fleet of busses capable of holding hundreds of rioters, and start carrying them immediately to the closest detention centers under the control of the federal government.

Since local leftist government won’t cooperate, don’t allow them any role. Take the lawbreakers to federal sites, charge them with federal crimes, and come down on them the way the left did on the non-violent protestors among the January 6ers: maximum charges, maximum bail, and make an example out of them.

That all sounds harsh to many people, I’m sure. But it would all be done following the letter of the law, and would be proportionate to the amount of widespread law breaking that has been going on for five years. And that kind of firm response would not have to be repeated over and over again, because once all but the dumbest of the rioters saw that they would face real consequences for their actions, they’d tuck tail and leave. Maybe some of them would even start devoting their time to something worthwhile.

Sure, there would still be a hard-core, violent leftist and anarchist remnant that would fight on for a while…until they were all behind bars together. As with most criminal behavior, a very small number of people commit most of the crimes, and those people belong in jail for a long time. And that’s where they’d be, in fairly short order.

While that direct law enforcement action would be a great start, I don’t know why we also aren’t hammering sanctuary cities and states with every legal and financial lever at our disposal. The one consistent fact about pretty much all big blue cities is that they are mini-welfare states, completely unable to support themselves without a predictable, regular firehose of taxpayer cash to sustain their dysfunctional behaviors and programs.

So why not cut that cash flow to a minimum? Use the same principle the feds used to force compliance with the mostly unpopular 55 mph speed limit in the 1970s. In that case, the feds used the power of money to force the states to change their ways, even though the new rules weren’t laws, and had no constitutional or legislative force behind them. If a state didn’t agree to drop their speed limit, the feds cut off their federal transportation funds.

In this case, sanctuary cities are defying federal laws in a variety of ways. They forbid ICE or other federal law enforcement from using any city or state property as staging grounds for law enforcement action. They don’t honor ICE detainers for illegals who have committed additional and often violent crimes. They spend billions of taxpayer dollars giving illegals welfare payments (cash, SNAP, housing, etc.), and billions more on fraud that they pretend not to notice.

Many of those actions have got to be illegal; if they don’t constitute insurrection, I’m not sure how. So why not just cut off those funds? Tell the states whose welfare spending is suspiciously high – which would be the usual blue suspects – that if they are giving any Medicaid money or food stamps to illegals, we’re cutting off all Medicaid and SNAP funding to their state until they can show us the books and account for where that money is going.

Or we could be nicer at first, withholding only the proportion of funds that a state is lawlessly giving to illegals, or losing to fraud. If 25% of CA’s $100 billion yearly Medicaid spending goes to illegals and 10% to fraudulent “hospice care” store fronts and the like (the numbers are hypothetical, and rounded for clarity), then the feds could send $35 billion less to California.

Let Ken-Doll Newsom try to take those benefits away from American citizens and give them to illegals and fraudsters. I’m seriously doubting whether any reality can hit blue state voters enough to wake them up, but if anything can, it might be that.

In foreign policy, I’m similarly frustrated with the slow progress in Iran. Now I might be wildly wrong about this point, since I’ve never worn the uniform and have no military experience.

But I’ve followed the news well enough to recognize that we’ve got the best military in the world, and that Iran wasn’t close. And that was before we destroyed their air force, any conventional navy vessels bigger than a “fast boat” with a machine gun on it, and the vast majority of whatever missile capability they had.

So if the reporting is to be believed, they might have handful of shore-based missiles, and some small drones (which it seems everybody has now), along with the ability to lay a small number of mines in the gulf. I can’t believe that we couldn’t counter those pretty easily. Especially since it seems like the Iranians don’t have the ability to inflict many (if any?) casualties on us, given the imbalance in military power.

Why wouldn’t we just announce that starting tomorrow, we’re going to be escorting everybody but Iranian-aiding oil tankers and other traffic into and out of the Persian Gulf, and that any Iranian fast boats, drones or missiles will be met with overwhelming force, instantly. Get our own drones, surveillance planes and satellites in action, and dare the Iranians to try to come out and stop us.

Our drones, planes and shipboard fire should be able to take down their drones, and our air and naval forces should be able to spot any fast boats leaving Iranian bases and blow them to pieces immediately. The same should go for missiles, though I could be wrong, given the very short distances a missile would have to travel to hit a target in the Strait.

If the above assumptions are correct – and again, I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge – why not escort a heavily defended, small flotilla of oil tankers through the strait. The IRGC would have to make some effort to attack them or else lose all credibility, but we should be able to quickly destroy those, along with the locations from which they were launched.

The best-case scenario would be that the IRGC would hit only a few or no targets, at the cost of much of their dwindling remaining military personnel and resources. The worst-case would be that they hit or sink an oil tanker, or maybe two. With our ships in the area we could quickly rescue sailors from a sinking ship and likely prevent the loss of life. Considering the amount of money we’re already spending, we could probably insure and/or pay for the cost of a handful of lost tankers pretty easily.

If we were to escort a flotilla of ships through the strait each day for a week, the IRGC would lose more attackers that they can’t replace each day. (Meanwhile, between the Israelis and us, I’m assuming that we have a bunch of pre-selected IRGC targets all ready to go, and we’d be drone- and missile-striking those 24/7, as the opportunities arise.) Each day they’d be able to send fewer boats or drones, to less and less effect.

I can’t believe that it would take more than a week or two to re-open the Strait to 75% or more of what the pre-war traffic was, which would add to the pressure on the IRGC, and push down oil and gasoline prices precipitously.

Fast, decisive action like that would address all three of the most legitimate political criticisms Trump is facing: we’re spending a lot to maintain our forces in theatre; we’re ceding more leverage to the very weak IRGC because of our midterm calendar; and the stalemate has increased gas prices and thus inflation.

It seems like the only thing the IRGC has going for them is time, and they only have that if we allow them to slow-walk talks and string us along. And we don’t have to do that, right?

Both here and in Iran, we’ve been rewarding bad actors, so we’ve been getting more bad behavior. Why not focus on the “FO,” and see if that doesn’t greatly decrease the “FA?”

Que Mala/Crockett, 2028!

0-0-0

If you enjoyed this column, please share it, and click Subscribe (on the bottom of your phone screen, or the right side of your computer screen) to receive a notice when new columns post.