Tag: donald-trump

Who Are the Real Insurrectionists?(posted 10/14/25)

There is a lame tradition – at graduations, in some pedestrian columns (not mine, shut up you haters!) – of giving a dictionary definition of a well-known term as an introduction. “Webster’s defines ‘graduation’ as a ‘ceremony marking the end of a period of study,’ but it is actually the beginning of a whole new journey into a new phase of life…”

Well, I’m going to risk following that lame tradition to make an argument about a contentious political term that the left has been using as a weapon in recent years. The same way they’ve used “Nobody is above the law!” – but are now running from that claim, now that it turns out that all Democrat bad actors would very much like to remain above the law, thank you very much.

That term is “insurrection.” And here – brace for the lameness – is the definition, from the American Heritage dictionary:

“1.The act or an instance of open revolt against civil authority or a constituted government.

2. A rising against civil or political authority, or the established government; open and active opposition to the execution of law in a city or state.

3. A rising in mass to oppose an enemy.”

The Democrats have been calling January 6th an insurrection every day for years, and using it as a cudgel with which to beat all conservatives. They held sham congressional hearings over it – with no GOP members chosen by the GOP, which has been the accepted practice in such hearings, for obvious reasons – and repeated it endlessly, everywhere.

During a four-year period in which they had zero accomplishments and plenty of disasters – the Cadaver and the Cackler at the top of government, the humiliating and incompetent withdrawal from Afghanistan, 9% inflation and trillions of extra debt, a wide-open border, mentally disordered males in every women’s room, etc. – the Dems have turned the “worse-than-9/11 insurrection of January 6th” into the sole reason to vote for them.

Of course, all conservatives have acknowledged that to the extent a minority of those involved in January 6th were destructive, and got violent with the police, they should be condemned, and charged and punished according to the law. And we don’t condone the bad actions that day.

At the same time, the left’s wild exaggerations and lies about January 6th required rebuttal, which we’ve done, if for no other reason than to shoot down the ridiculously exaggerated comparisons to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor.

To wit: the whole thing only lasted a few hours; of the roughly 1500-2000 people who were there, only around 10-15% did anything violent at all; the majority of the protestors were middle-aged or senior citizens with clean records, who walked around inside the capitol taking selfies for a half hour or less and then departed peacefully. Even the ones who fought with cops brought no weapons, and they killed or seriously injured zero people.

(I’m not 100% sure about the “serious injury” part. But considering that the MSM wildly exaggerated every single aspect of that day – including breathlessly reporting that the MAGA-nauts brutally murdered 5 cops, when the actual number, again, was zero – I’d bet my house that no cops were seriously injured that day. Because if they had been, they’d be the most famous cops in history, and we’d all know their names the way we know George Floyd or Trayvon Martin.)

I guess if you really stretched the formal definition hard, you could say that the minority of January 6ers who fought with cops engaged in some insurrectionist – I would say insurrectionist-adjacent – behavior. I don’t think you can call a very short-lived, unarmed struggle with a small number of cops “an open revolt against civil authority” to be taken deadly seriously.

I suppose you could call it “a rising…[in] active opposition to the execution of the law,” in the sense that the ostensible goal was to prevent Biden from taking office, as far-fetched and delusional as that aim was.

But as to the third part of the definition, I don’t see how you can call a few hundred unarmed people – out of a nation of 330 million – brawling like drunken, idiotic frat boys for several hours a “rising in mass to oppose an enemy.”

Now compare that to the gigantic, repeated, months-long, nationwide orgy of violence and destruction of property committed during the BLM and Antifa protests/riots/vandalizing loot-fests of 2020, and the sustained and violent anti-ICE protests and attacks this year.

Not one nationally prominent Democrat (with the possible exception of Fetterman?) or MSM talking-head propagandist that I’m aware of has called ANY of those mob attacks acts of “insurrection.”

But let’s go back to our tripartite definition. Could these events be reasonably called “act[s] of open revolt against civil authority or constituted government?”

Obviously! The insurrectionists are openly defying our immigration laws and multiple federal agencies (ICE, Border Patrol, DHS), and opposing the well-precedented legal use of the National Guard to protect and safeguard federal property and agents.

Could they also be called “open and active opposition to the execution of law in a city or state?”

Same answer. And it’s not just happening in “A” city or state, it’s happening in MANY cities and states all across the country. And it’s happening with the open support of governmental officials on the local, state and national levels.

In my late, great home state of Illinois, Brain-dead Brandon (mayor of Chicago) and Governor Goodyear, (D)irigible, are both defying federal authority as we speak. And Mayor Brandon has declared areas of the city “ICE-free” zones.

On the one hand, that is likely to be as successful as declaring Chicago a “gun-free zone.” (How’s that working for you, Brandon? What’s that? I couldn’t hear your reply over the incessant chatter of small arms fire and bodies hitting the ground.) But on the other hand, trying to ban federal agents enforcing federal law clearly violates the supremacy clause, among other constitutional strictures.

Finally, and obviously, they clearly represent groups “rising in mass to oppose an enemy.” It’s hard to know precisely how many different people have participated in this years-long insurrection, because many of them are serial offenders, participating in dozens or even hundreds of separate riots in separate cities and states. But the numbers of perpetrators are obviously well into the hundreds of thousands, and likely into the low millions.

(Put your shoes back on and take my word for it, AOC: that’s a lot more than the several hundred bad actors on January 6th.)

But let’s get beyond the letter of the law in the definition above. Everybody can easily tell the difference between seriously threatening insurrections and momentary tantrums by tiny groups of marginalized people with no chance of overthrowing the government.

Consequential insurrections with even a tiny chance of success always involve armed perpetrators, recognized leaders among the rebels, serious organization, a plan for an end game, and strategic, coordination actions to get there (ex: taking control of armories, communication facilities, or other significant government facilities; arresting or taking hostage key government figures, etc.).

Does any of that sound like what happened on January 6th? None of those boneheads were armed. The closest thing they had to a leader was a bi-polar weirdo in a horn-hat whom nobody knew. (The logical leader for a real insurrection would have been the president who stood to retain power… but Trump never coordinated or communicated with the J6ers, and in fact explicitly told them only to protest, and to do that peacefully!) (Which would make him the Worst. Insurrection leader. Ever!)

They had no organization, no plans for an end game, and no strategic plans to gain control over any location or assets more consequential than Imhotep Pelosi’s ceremonial gavel.

But the leftist insurrectionists pass all of the tests required to be considered a serious threat. They are obviously armed with everything from slingshots, clubs and various deadly throwable objects (cans of soup, pavement, frozen water bottles) to cars (used to ram agents and their vehicles) to fireworks, handguns and long guns. They’ve murdered at least 27 people, and have badly injured literally thousands of others.

They have recognized leaders, and an organizational structure composed of associated national networks and coordinated local cells, like the 10-creature team who lured ICE agents out of a facility in TX with fireworks, and then ambushed and shot at law enforcement, striking one in the neck.

They obviously coordinate, with some supporters providing housing near ICE facilities, some providing political cover, some gathering and disseminating intelligence (including doxxing individual ICE agents and broadcasting the locations and movements of law enforcement who are carrying out their legal and constitutional roles). Others provide them with funding, and also with legal support. (One such idiot was the Vice President, who used the power of her office to solicit funds to bail out violent insurrectionists who had been arrested!)

They were also determined enough to cost literally billions of dollars of damage in just the second half of 2020: $2 billion in insured damage, and likely that much more in uninsured . And that’s not counting the costs of paying for what is likely millions of man-hours of LEO time and overtime, not to mention the costs of trying, convicting and housing those who end up in jail. Or the clean-up costs of public buildings, highways, court-houses or other government facilities and private businesses.

And they have won victories. They forced kangaroo trials that failed in many places (against Kyle Rittenhouse in WI, for example) but succeeded in others (against Derek Chauvin in MN). They set up temporary lawless zones like CHOP, even though those ended in disaster. (UNEXPECTEDLY!) More importantly, they have cowed state and local officials in many insurrectionist cities and states.

What is a “sanctuary city” if not a place where insurrectionists defeated law-abiding citizens and seized control over their public infrastructure and government, in open rebellion against our democratically established democratic republic?

I always like to apply the double-standards test to all political issues, and something tells me that the lefties who love designating “sanctuary cities” when it comes to our immigration laws would not be so happy with conservatives declaring their cities and states as sanctuary areas.

For example, I for one would love to declare my hometown a sanctuary tax-law city. If Dem mayors can declare LA, Chicago and NYC to be ICE-free zones, how about we declare half the country IRS-free zones? We demand that the IRS stay out, and we won’t obey any tax laws within our state or city borders. Starting tomorrow our gas stations will stop collecting gas taxes (gas is now $1.50 per gallon!), our grocery stores will stop collecting taxes on food, snacks, beer, cigarettes, and sombreros for use in comic videos mocking Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer.

Also, we could create and distribute an app to allow citizens to track IRS agents or other tax collectors who come into our cities. We will also form mobs – and if we can’t get there, we will lionize such mobs – to surround, obstruct, attack and possibly shoot at such agents. Because everyone knows that people who enforce tax laws are Nazis and fascists.

That’s absurd of course, because we’re the ones who obey laws and pay more than our fair share, and we are disgusted by the idea of murdering people who disagree with us.

I hope the violent left has enjoyed their victories, because now we’re turning the tables on them, and helping them to reap that which they so eagerly sowed. They lectured us about how “no one is above the law,” and now we’re proving them right. (Ask Letitia, and Fani, and Comey, and Pencil-Neck, etc. how they feel about that.)

And since they screamed that insurrectionists deserve the harshest of punishments?

Coming right up, comrades!

Hamas and Trantifa delenda est!

Illnesses Aren’t Usually Funny… But TDS Is (posted 8/25/25)

When you think of illnesses, you don’t usually think “humorous,” because most diseases are obviously the farthest thing from funny.  That being said, it’s a very human thing to find humor – usually dark humor – in all contexts, including those involving sickness and even death.

There are holocaust jokes, and ebola jokes.  The late great Sam Kinison brought the house down with a bit about a crime wave carried out by gay necrophiliac rapists.  (That one’s not for the squeamish.)  Two of the Monty Python guys’ funniest bits were about amputation (the knight who loses one limb after another, but is undaunted, calling each horrific wound “just a scratch”) and death (the sketch about the parrot that John Cleese smacks against the pet store counter, pointing out that it’s “gone to join the choir invisible”). 

So call me adorable but warped if you must – and I’ll be perfectly happy if I had you at just “adorable” – but I find a few illnesses inherently funny.     

One of them is Tourette’s.  Don’t get me wrong, I know that must be an agonizing condition to have, and God bless all of those who do. 

But from the outside, it can be pretty funny, and so odd.  I know that it is largely characterized by tics and nonsense sounds, but when it involves swearing or insulting comments shouted out randomly?   That would be a young boy’s dream condition, and I’m surprised that more of them don’t try to get phony diagnoses, just so they can snap at their teachers or peers.  “Bite me!  Friend off! Schiff for brains!” 

Tourette’s must not have been widely publicized in the 1970s, because if it had been, one of my friends or I would definitely have been the first diagnosed case in central Illinois, and junior high legends in our own time!      

And what about the odd perversity that in a condition that involves shouting out a rapid string of words, why are those never positive, uplifting words?  No sufferer ever snaps, “Have-a-nice-day!” or “God-bless-us-everyone!”  It’s always, “Suck-it-Trebek!” or words to that effect.

There’s an even more rare condition in which someone who suffers a head injury suddenly begins to speak with a foreign accent.  I’m not making that up.  Some British lady gets hit by a cricket bat and suddenly sounds like Ghandi.  Or maybe Grandma Squanto Warren falls over that desk during a congressional vote and pops up speaking fluent Apache.  #Nda’íí’ nídéé’ nitsí’í’ nídéé’.

(Which is Apache for, “#Youmustneverstopmockingme”) (Because: research!)

Better yet, a Simpson-adjacent hillbilly in Appalachia takes a fastball to the noggin and starts speaking in a BBC/King’s English accent.  Which would be hilarious, I don’t care who you are.  Picture Henry Higgins doing Richard Burton as Hamlet saying something like, “Y’all’re fixin’ to get your butts whipped if I have to stop this car!”     

But by far the most entertaining mental condition in America today is Trump Derangement Syndrome.  

Sure, it’s a national irritant, and has brought a lot of heat and absolutely no light into our body politic.  But Man oh Manischewitz, has it brought some top-shelf comedy onto the national stage!

When Trump was inaugurated in 2017, thousands of red-faced, blue-haired women in female genitalia hats screamed like a chorus of tone-deaf banshees throughout the ceremony, and they’ve been on the TDS Crazy Train ever since.  Some have gone on a “sex strike,” vowing not to share their bodily charms with anyone who won’t denounce Trump and all his works.

(By the way, I think I can speak for all of the straight males in Christendom when I say, “Please accept the thanks of a grateful nation, ladies.”)

And the “males” – I use the word loosely – have been as bad as the females.  A bunch of D-list celebrity Dem guys came out as “White Dudes for Kamala,” thus unleashing an epidemic of beta-male-induced feminine dryness that troubled gynecologists from coast to coast.

More recently, one sad fellow dressed like a non-binary golfer pictured himself as a brave non-conformist standing in front of a Chicom tank in Tiananmen Square…but he was just a doofus throwing his footlong sandwich at a federal agent. 

And the “assault with a deli weapon” jokes wrote themselves.  (Apparently the TDS-afflicted sandwich chucker was unaware that all law enforcement officers are equipped with hoagy-proof vests for just such an occasion.) 

(Rumors that J(um)-B(o) Pritzker tried to enlist in ICE when he found out that officers routinely have sandwiches tossed at them have not been confirmed.)  

When Trump engineered half a dozen cease fires and peace treaties, and tried to stop the war in Ukraine, a bunch of fossilized hippie peaceniks hit the streets behind walkers adorned with such pacifistic sentiments as, “We demand more Ukrainians be fed into the Russian meatgrinder!” and “Give war a chance!” while their tin-eared compatriots warbled, “War! (huh), what is it good for?  Absolutely many things! (Say it again.)”  

When Trump eliminated taxes on tips, TDS-suffering advocates for blue-collar wage slaves tweeted, “Tax the Working Class!”  and “Pay Your Fair Share, Hourly Workers!” 

When Trump took out the nuclear facilities of the homophobic weird-beards running Iran, gay leftist activist groups marched around the White House with signs reading, “We support the Mullahs!” and “Throw us off of Roofs!” while wearing t-shirts proclaiming, “Queers for Stoning Gays in Palestine!”

When Trump’s crackdown on crime in DC resulted in the confiscation of dozens of illegal guns, leftist gun-control fanatics marched on the capitol, chanting through bullhorns, “You can have our criminals’ guns when you can pry them from their cold, dead hands!” and “Charlton Heston is our president!”

If Trump gets interest rates down to 2%, they’ll cry, “Savers devastated by low returns on CDs!”

If he cures cancer, they’ll form the NAACT (National Association for the Advancement of Cancer Tumors), and trademark the chant, “What do we want?  Metastasis!  When do we want it? NOW!”

These people can’t be reasoned with.  But they can be opposed.  And they can sure as hell be laughed at.

Speaking of being laughed at, I thought that maybe Joy Reid – the most whitey-hating racist east of the Pecos – had disappeared from the earth after even MSNBC said she was too nutty for them.  But no.  She turned up on the podcast of somebody named Wajahat Ali, just to remind us how nice it is when she’s not here.

(If you’re wondering what Wajahat Ali is known for, other than having a first name that sounds like the cough of a dying man, your guess is as good as mine.)     

Reid launched into another of her classic racist rants, this time covering topics such as how white folks “made this country into a slave hell,” and how they “can’t originally invent anything, more than they were ever able to invent good music.  We black folks gave y’all country music, hip hop, R&B, jazz, rock and roll, they couldn’t even invent that.”

It’s tough to tell whether those thoughts are more stupid, or more evil.

They are definitely stupid.  Because Reid spewed that garbage about whites not inventing anything into a microphone and a camera, and it was viewed on the internet…all 3 of which were invented by whitey.  And because all significant social developments – whether bad or good – are inevitably the product of interactions among many ethnic groups and cultures. 

Slavery, for example, originated when human society originated, and it was omnipresent in every powerful civilization in Asia, Europe, the Americas and Africa.  The slave trade in the modern era involved Africans enslaving other Africans, and selling some of them to Europeans who took them mostly to the Americas, and more of them to Arabs who took them mostly to the Middle East.

It’s true that most slave owners in America – they were called “Democrats” – were white.  But at the outbreak of the Civil War, 10,000 black slaves were owned by black masters, a fact that would curl the culturally-appropriated blonde hair on Joy Reid’s empty head, if she were to learn it.  (Ironically for a person named “Reid,” she doesn’t seem to read a lot.)

The same cultural mixing is present in positive cultural phenomena, such as Reid’s example of music, especially when she talks about country music.  Yes, the banjo was an African instrument, but the guitar was invented in Spain, the violin in Italy, the harmonica in China, the accordion in Germany.  The yodel came from Alpine regions of Europe, and most early country music originated in folk songs in England, Scotland and Ireland, transplanted here by Scots-Irish hillbillies.

But in addition to the lying stupidity of Reid’s argument, her racial cheerleading is evil right down to the bone.  Because every group obviously has good and bad in them.  If white people want to take racial pride in Shakespeare, Adam Smith, and Ronald Reagan, they also have to be saddled with Hitler, Ted Bundy and Jim Acosta. 

Smart black people don’t want to claim Idi Amin or Al Sharpton, but they want to claim Thomas Sowell and Clarence Thomas.  Dumb black people want to claim Sharpton and Obama, but don’t want to claim Sowell or Thomas.

And NOBODY wants to claim Jussie Smollett, Whoopi Goldberg or Joy Reid. 

But if I were going to play the ethno-centric cheerleading game – which, again, is stupid – I’d point to something that the Joy-less one somehow forgot in her illiterate screed about music: classical. 

Classical is as white as hip hop is black, for example.  (It’s not as white as Liz Warren, but almost.  #neverstop) So if we were forced to pick teams in a racialist music draft, we’d happily take Beethoven, Mozart and Bach, and Joy could have Megan Thee Stallion, Cardi B and Lizzo.         

Sure, “Baby Got Back” is fun, and “WAP” is a timeless treasure. 

But if I’m betting on what’s going to stand the test of time, I’ll take “Jesu Joy of Man’s Desiring” and “Ode to Joy,” and give her the points. 

After all, nobody has ever written – or will ever write – an “Ode to Joy Reid.”

Hamas delenda est!

Red and Blue See Crime & Punishment Very Differently (posted 8/18/25)

In recent decades, attitudes toward crime from the right and the left have diverged, not because the GOP has moved a lot, but because the Dems have raced to their extreme left.

Conservatives have always been enthusiastic about law and order, and prone to more vigorous law enforcement, and it’s no coincidence that red states are the ones who allow the death penalty.  The attitude of many conservatives has been parodied as, “If you kill someone in a red state, we’ll kill you back.”

And most of us don’t mind that jibe one bit.

While old-school Dems also wanted to live in crime-free communities, their approach to the justice system was heavy on the rehabilitation and light on the punishment.  They had some good points, and for prisoners who were willing to make changes in their lives and rehabilitate themselves, some good came out of that approach.  But nobody can say the results weren’t mixed, at best.

However, conservatives’ attitudes toward law enforcement have also been complicated, due to our instinctive skepticism about the encroachments of the power-hungry State.  Tensions were brought to the fore during covid, when conservatives in blue states had repeated and increasingly contentious run-ins with states who quickly instituted draconian restrictions, and then held onto them like grim Pelosi.

Sorry, that’s “grim death.”

Most blue states imposed mandatory lock-downs, mandatory school and business closings, mandatory masking, and Rube Goldberg rules about everything.  You had to wear a mask on a plane, but the airline served snacks…which you could eat by lowering your mask…but only for long enough to stuff some snacks into your mouth.   After which you should yank your mask back up, so you could aspirate a mouthful of peanuts and choke your way to a covid-less death.  Hooray for science!

You had to stay 6 feet apart, and could only occupy some buildings at 25% capacity – two numbers that were plucked out of thin air, and meant nothing.

California filled skate parks with sand…because young kids who were at no risk from the virus needed to be prevented from getting fresh air and exercise, lest they be slain by the virus that was no threat to them in the first place. 

California also arrested a guy who was paddle boarding.  Alone.  In the ocean.

So normally pro-law-enforcement conservatives became scofflaws during Covid.  Most of them will explain the contrast by drawing a distinction between laws – which we support pretty enthusiastically – and regulations – some of which are reasonable…but not many.

Traditional Democrats/leftists have usually been much more fond of regulations in general – they love to tell you what kinds of toilets or light bulbs or cars you may buy, and (recently) that you ladies must allow a creepy dude to watch you shower, while he levitates a towel in front of him without the use of his hands.

And you are legally required to call him “Crystal.” 

What has changed lately is that what had been the extreme fringe of the left has wrested away control of the Democrat party.  They have not just energetically piled into the lefty clown car, they’re now driving it!  

Consider the dramatic changes in just the last several decades.  In the early 1990s, Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously coined the phrase “defining deviancy down,” by which he meant permissively normalizing bad behaviors.  Some of those were social – removing the stigma from out-of-wedlock births, allowing “social promotion” of under-performing students in schools – but many involved the greater acceptance of criminal behavior.

Think about that.  Not that long ago – not in Pilgrim America, or Victorian England, but when Kurt Cobain was still alive! – one of the most influential Dems could write an essay calling for more stringent enforcement of traditional social and legal norms, and get a respectful hearing and a lot of support from elected and influential lefties all over the country.

Today, that world seems as dead and gone as Julius Caesar, or Joe Biden.

The dominant far-left – the group who cheers on the murder of a CEO by a trust-fund coward, who will elect Commie Mamdani in NYC, and who has stage-four TDS – has lost its ethical moorings when it comes to crime.  They’ll ignore and deny that crime is happening, and dare you to disagree.

Baltimore and New York City are as safe as Pennsylvania Dutch country during Amish-Fest.  Publicly defecating meth-enthusiasts in San Francisco are “outdoorsmen.”  Shambling armies of mentally ill addicts living in filthy tents all over LA and Seattle and Portland are “urban campers.”  Brother’s-widow-jumping addict Hunter Biden is “the smartest person I know.”    

Nearly a century ago, four gunmen killed seven rival gangsters in Chicago in the still-infamous “St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.”  Today, seven Chicagoans are killed every other weekend, and it barely makes the papers.  And if you do notice it, Mayor Brandon will call you a racist.

Even worse, lefty pols and media actively excuse the most brutal acts if they’re perpetrated by one of their pet victim groups.  The half-dozen black criminals who beat and stomped three defenseless middle-aged white folks in Cincinnati were defended by a black elected official on racial solidarity grounds, and by a black police official because the video you watched “lacked context.”

There is a silver lining in this mess, though, because the legacy media’s ridiculous crime coverage is giving them even more opportunities to discredit themselves.  They’ve already greatly decreased their ability to harm their enemies and help their friends.  Accusations of racism used to end careers; now they elicit mostly eye rolls.  Reports that some leftist project is succeeding or some rightist action is bringing about the apocalypse are both greeted with instinctive skepticism or outright disbelief.

And the Left’s doubling down on crime is putting them even more behind the 8-ball.  Trump’s move into DC has maneuvered them into insisting that DC is super safe, and the residents there resent law enforcement coming in and ham-handedly arresting all of the violent criminals who weren’t really there, and confiscating all the illegally-owned guns that don’t exist.  Or something. 

The infamous covid-era “mostly peaceful protests” (spoken by a leftist reporter in front of a block full of burning buildings) has now got two new contenders in dishonest cluelessness.  The first was CNN empty head Erin Burnett’s idiotic description of the whacko who killed three people in NYC a couple of weeks ago: “male, mustache, sunglasses, possibly white.”

Burnett immediately became a laughingstock, because viewers could see a picture in real time of the killer walking into the building while carrying a rifle.  Burnett was referencing that picture, and she got the male, facial hair, and sunglasses parts right.  

But that guy was as white as Liz Warren is Cherokee.  (#wemustneverstopmockingher) 

The sunglasses hid his eyes – which in subsequently released pics had an Asian look to them – but he was clearly black, and it wasn’t a close call.  He had a short Afro, and he looked like if John Shaft and Billy Dee Williams had had a baby. 

By the way, this just in from Cincinnati: Seven people have been arrested in the beatings, and they include a Montianez, a Jermaine, a Dekyra, a Dominique, and an Aisha. 

Or, as Erin Burnett would put it, “they’re all possibly white.” 

The second contender in the leftist cover-up sweepstakes comes to us from New Jersey, courtesy of a “journalist” named Dana DiFilippo.  Dana was covering the story of an illegal alien named Raul Luna-Perez, who was picked up for DWI three times in four months.  The third time, he caused a wreck that killed a woman and her daughter.

So Perez is an illegal who could have been detained and deported just for that.  And he should have been arrested, detained, convicted and eventually deported for either of his first two DWIs.  But it’s a blue state, so he was able to go for the drunk driving hat-trick, and kill two innocent people.  But at least he was jailed and held for trial and eventual deportation then, right?

Have you not been paying attention?  Blue state.  Leftist judge. 

So he was released pending his trial. (Fortunately, Biden and Que Mala lost last November, so he was quickly picked up by ICE, and is no longer on our streets.)

So how did Dana cover this story?  First, she called Perez an “undocumented immigrant.” Because of course she did. 

Then she said that he was “at the center of an immigration fight between Trump and NJ’s Governor.”  Nice use of the passive voice there.  He’s not an illegal immigrant serial drunk-driving killer.  He’s just caught up in a fight between Bad Orange Man and NJ governor of indeterminate political persuasion.

But the part of her one-paragraph post that caused Dana to quickly delete her entire X account and flee into the night came next, when she claimed that Perez “had a largely clean driving record, despite prior DUI arrests.” 

Let that sink in.

Wouldn’t Dana make a great defense lawyer? 

“Your Honor, members of the jury, my client Mr. Bundy has met literally THOUSANDS of women in his lifetime, and he’s accused of murdering no more than a few dozen of them, tops.  I’d call that a largely clean dating record. I rest my case.”

Ugh.  We don’t hate the media enough, people.

But we’re getting there.            

Hamas delenda est!

The Hypocrisy of Mamdani, and the Flight of the Texas Democrats (posted 8/13/25)

You may have noticed that the Democrats have recently upped their game when it comes to hypocrisy.  You could say that they’re here to drink kale smoothies and be hypocrites, and they’re all out of kale smoothies.

Let’s start in New York City, where the logic-challenged voting base of Manhattan masochists continues to rush headlong into the electoral nightmare of a Commie Mamdani administration.  In addition to being a rabid Jew-hater, Mamdani is the kind of economic ignoramus who thinks that grocery stores – which have about the skinniest profit margins of any business – are “gouging” New Yorkers, and the solution is to have the city government run them.  

Get ready for the grand opening of dozens of city-run outlets of the “Empty-Shelves-R-Us”  franchise!

Like most high-profile, power-hungry socialists, Mamdani is a spoiled rich kid cosplaying as a working-class hero.  Which is pretty tough to pull off when you’ve never had a real job in your life. 

You probably heard about Zohran’s lavish wedding in a luxury compound in Ghana, where he was surrounded by extensive security, including devices to jam cell signals during the ceremony.  I’m no expert on the Ghanian telecommunications system, but I’m pretty sure that Gha Bell (Ghana’s version of Ma Bell, duh!) consists mostly of hollowed-out coconut halves connected with strings.

So using high-tech cell-signal-jammers seems like over-kill, doesn’t it?

Though Zohran is totally lacking in real-world and governing experience, he’s already hit for a leftist hypocrisy hat trick: 

1. After years of calling for defunding the police, he recently laid out $34K (of mommy and daddy’s money, I’m guessing) on AS&I.  No, not “Arseholery, Smugness and Incompetence,” though that was a great guess, and a fine Democrat slogan for the ’26 mid-term elections.  It’s “Advanced Security and Investigations,” a private security firm that will give him the kind of protection that New Yorkers will most definitely NOT be getting from the former NYPD cops who are now all down in Florida protecting Mar-A-Lago and CO’s equally lavish world HQ.

2. Despite his unearned wealth, Zohran lives in a rent-controlled apartment, an archetypal, chef’s-kiss-perfect betrayal of all the New Yorkers struggling to find affordable housing.  Because if there’s one thing a trust-fund kid who’s about to decimate the NYC housing market needs, it’s a subsidy from the saps who vote for him.

3. When Zohran was applying to college, he had to identify his ethnicity on paperwork.  His mom is Indian, and his dad is Indian.  (Not F-Troop Indians like Grandma Squanto Warren – #mustweeverstopmockingher? #Ithinknot – but India Indian.) So the only sane and honest answer was “Indian.”

But the DEI religion looks down on Indians, because they are generally successful.  And we can’t have that.  So Zero/Zohran checked the box for “Black or African American.”  Because he was born in an African country, and lived there for a few years as an infant.

You know, the same way that if you had been born in Australia, you’d check the box indicating that you identify as “koala or arboreal marsupial” on your Columbia application.

Boy, New York voters will have no excuse if they vote for this jerk in November.  Because he is an open book. 

And that book is a mash-up of “The Communist Manifesto” and “Mein Kampf.”   

Speaking of the Albino Apache Liz Warren (#neverstop), she naturally endorsed Mamdani, giving him a tip of the headdress, from one phony to another.  The NY Post had the perfect headline when Warren and Mamdani talked before the endorsement: “African American Meets Native American.”

Because I am basically a grown 8th grader, I also enjoyed when she was hanging around in the House chambers and leaned back on a desk, which then fell over, dumping her dishonest butt to the floor. 

She tried to cover up the gaffe, but nobody believed her excuse that she was just putting her ear to the ground to see if she could detect any nearby buffalo herds that might be stampeding. 

But my favorite example of Democrat hypocrisy lately has been their kabuki theatre outrage about the evils of gerrymandering.  

A few weeks ago, Ron DeSantis (peace be upon him) won a three-year court battle when the state Supreme Court upheld his 2022 redistricting map that cemented the redness of this red state after years of GOP gains.  Several other red states – Missouri and Indiana among them – are considering redistricting too, following in the footsteps of Texas, where Governor Gregg Abbott is pushing a new map that could give the GOP 5 more House seats.

In the past, the left made the term “gerrymandering” a feared accusation, at least among RINOs and other political invertebrates so spineless that they wouldn’t even take their own side in an argument.  But one happy result of last November – among many – was that Trump’s victory gave many in the GOP a spine, and then instilled some steel in it.   Hence Abbott’s plan.

Hilariously, the strategy of Texas elected Democrats was to take arms against a sea of troubles by…running away to Illinois, to deny a quorum that would allow the Texas legislature to pass their redrawn congressional map.     

On the one hand, the decision by several dozen Texan Dems’ to flee to Illinois was a smart one.  Because if the FBI came looking for them, they could all escape detection by hiding behind J.B. Pritzker (D-irigible).

On the other hand, it was incredibly stupid, since Illinois is arguably the most corruptly gerrymandered state in the union, and only highlighted their hypocrisy.  In fact, many of the bluest states – IL, CA, NY, NJ, MA, etc. – have already been so heavily gerrymandered that even after Texas’ new map passes, it will STILL be less lopsided than the Dems’ current maps.

And that reality made national Dems even more of a laughingstock when they threatened to re-draw their own districts to cancel out Texas’ efforts.  Because the briefest glance at their maps showed how much they’ve already used the tactic that they’re now pretending to be so offended by.

For example, Trump got 44% of the vote in Illinois, but the GOP only holds 18% of the House seats there.  He got 40% in CA, where the GOP holds only 21% of House seats.  And in MA, where Trump won 36% of the vote, the GOP holds zero House seats!  Those numbers attest to how aggressively the Dems have worked to thwart democratically representative state maps, all the while stroking themselves over how they are righteous fighters to “save our democracy!”

And now the GOP is beginning to fight fire with fire.  (And you know how much that terrifies Imhotep Pelosi, since her burial wrappings are so flammable that she’ll go up like a desiccated Roman candle.  Or Egyptian candle, I guess.)  

The irony and schadenfreude are delicious!  The very fact that Republicans have played the game more “fairly” in the past is what gives them the chance to gain so many seats now.  Ben Shapiro gave some raw numbers yesterday:  there are 67 Democrat House representatives from red states, vs only 39 GOP reps from blue states.  Those 39 GOP congressmen are likely the bare minimum number that can be produced given how many GOP voters there are in the country – what are MA Dems going to do, reduce their GOP members from zero to a negative number?! – while a decent amount of those 67 Democrat red-state congress-weasels can likely be gerrymandered right out of their seats.

Additionally, Trump’s idea of re-doing the 2020 census now is a great example of the way he’s been leaning forward, and winning battles that past GOP presidents have been too squeamish to fight.  The Census Bureau has admitted that it under-counted many red state populations in the 2020 census, and the numbers show that red states would have at least 5 more electoral votes right now if that count had been accurate. 

Knowing that, why should we have to wait 10 years – which would span 5 congressional and 2 presidential elections – to correct that error? 

Yes, sure, the census is traditionally only done once per decade.  But have I mentioned what hypocrites the Democrats are?

Because you know what else also used to be traditional?   Just off the top of my head…

Requiring a filibuster-proof majority to approve federal judges…which Harry Reid and the Dems did away with in 2013. 

And not jailing opposition party members when they defied a congressional subpoena…as the GOP declined to do when Eric “Steadman” Holder and Lois Lerner both defied legitimate subpoenas during Trump’s first term.  The Dems returned the favor by jailing both Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro based on much less serious subpoenas just a few years later.

And not having their own partisan local judges launch a flurry of illegitimate rulings to thwart the opposition’s president.

And not using the legal system with some bogus lawfare attacks on your political opponent.

I could go on and on.  But this taste of bile in my throat is quite unpleasant.

This just in: as I was writing this, I saw the headline that the Texas Dems have announced that they are returning to Texas.  But they want us to know that their tails between their legs are not a sign that they lost.  They are declaring victory, because “they accomplished their mission by raising national awareness about the mid-decade redistricting effort.”

Yes.  You made fools of yourselves, thus raising awareness of how foolish you all are.

So what have we learned today?  Only what we already knew: the Democrats have completed the FA portion of their national partisan gamesmanship, and they’ve now entered the FO phase. 

The political landscape is littered with the Dems’ petards, and it’s time to start hoisting them. 

Or, as Uncle Bob would say, “The barn is smoking and the tractor tires are on fire.  Let’s go!”

Hamas delenda est!

Three Tales, About Three Stooges (posted 7/18/25)

I missed a WAPO op-ed last week. 

Actually, I think I’ve missed every WA-PO op-ed since late May of 1972.  Because that’s when I turned 10, and officially became too wise and world-weary to trust anything I read in the WAPO. 

But I saw this opinion piece, one week late, because it made its way into my news feed as a great example of MSM imbecility.  You may have seen it too.  It’s the one titled, “I’m a clown.  Donald Trump is not one of us.”

It appeared over the picture of a guy in a bowler hat and a red nose, and my first thoughts were: “I thought Ted Kennedy was dead,” and, “Where’d he get that bowler hat?”

But no, the piece wasn’t written by the late drunken weather balloon from Massachusetts.  Its author is an actual clown named Tim Cunningham, and the op-ed is one long, unfunny joke to the effect that we shouldn’t call Trump a clown, because being a clown is a noble profession, and should be taken way more seriously than a fascist like Trump. 

I’ll bet that Jeff Bezos is just thrilled with his management team’s efforts to restore the Washington Post’s credibility. 

But I’ve got news for Mr. Cunningham.  Trump is not a fascist, and clowns are mostly not funny. 

How un-funny are clowns?

Three of the most famous clowns in the world were John Wayne Gacy, Jerry Lewis in that Holocaust movie (look it up), and that super-creepy guy who lived in a sewer and had a disturbing affinity for frightening children.

No, not Joe Biden (RIP).  Although if you’ve seen any of those photos of him sniffing the hair of traumatized kids, that’s an image that will stay with you.  Also, he did that one trick where he pulled a bowel movement out of his hat.

The Pope was expecting a rabbit, and was not pleased.

Also, rumors that Biden once tried to make a very simple balloon animal, and the secret service had to intervene because he nearly strangled himself have not been confirmed.  

I’d love to have been a fly on the wall at the WAPO editorial meeting when they came up with the idea of asking a leftist clown – of all people! – what he thinks about politics.  Because who needs a Marxist Abbott and Costello when we already have the comic stylings of Crockett and the Booty in congress? 

(Yes, I know: that would be a great name for a wacky FM “Morning Zoo” DJ team.  And in a sane world, that would be the most prestigious job that Jasmine and AOC could aspire to.)  

Speaking of beclowning oneself, did you catch Grandma Squanto’s attempt to dunk on Trump on Wednesday?  She tried to play the corruption card against Trump.  (By the way, have you ever seen a Democrat pack of cards?  All four queens are scowling gender feminists, so naturally, all four kings are suicide kings.  And the Jacks can all turn into Jills, somehow.  And there are still four suits, but diamonds are “corruption,” hearts are “weird sex stuff,” clubs are “sexism,” and “racism” is….  I’m not saying.)    

You could say that Lizzie’s attempt at a card trick blew up in her own face, as if someone had rigged her peace pipe with an exploding charge, like a Dakota (Sioux) Daffy Duck.  (#wemustneverstopmockingher)

In an X post, she presented a chart listing six entities and how much they donated to the Trump library.  Above the chart she wrote, “Government should work for the people, not whichever giant company or foreign government can dump the most money into the president’s future library.”

Never mind that most of the billionaires who donated in 2020 gave to the Democrats, or that Cackling Que Mala was given $2 billion to blow (phrasing) in a few months. 

Just look at Lizzie’s six categories.

She doesn’t even bother to try in the last one; the “Who” is “other special interests” and the amount listed is “unknown millions.”  Which is brilliant!  “I accuse you of taking…some money, from…somebody.” 

But the other five are hilarious.  See if you can spot the pattern:

Paramount/CBS News gave $16 million.  Meta gave $22 million. Disney/ABC News gave $15 million. X gave $10 million.  And Qatar gave $400 million (Jet)

The Qatari jet was not given to Trump, but to the United States, and if the gift ever does happen, the jet will act as Air Force One, and then go to his library.  He will never have any private use of it at all. 

(I still don’t think that he should accept the jet, but it is not personally enriching corruption like – oh, I don’t know – [begin Kinison filter] HAVING YOUR HOOKER-BANGING ADDICT SON COLLECT BAGS OF CASH FROM THE CHI-COMS!  OHH!  OHHHHH!  [end Kinison filter])

The remaining four examples were not bribes, happily given by fat cats wanting to buy Trump’s favor.  They were ALL lawsuit settlements, grudgingly handed over to their hated nemesis by corrupt MSM power players who had slandered him so blatantly that they stood to lose many millions more if they had gone to court, where Trump would have beaten them like Cuddly Kilmar beat his wife. 

If I thought Elizabeth Warren was capable of feeling shame, I might say, “Boy, is her face red!”  (#wemustneverstop)  But I’ll just leave it at, “Nice forked tongue, Lizzie.  (#mockingher)

Finally, Scott Jennings continues to be the only reason to ever watch CNN, and as of Tuesday, he has run his record to 147-0 in his battles against hapless leftist panelists.  The latest contender was Democrat Strategerist Julie Roginsky, with an attempted assist from host Abby Phillip. 

The on-screen chyron defined the topic this way: “The Debate: US Inflation Rises as Trump’s Tariffs Push Up Prices.”  That subject should offer Ragin’ Roginsky a chance to score at least a few minor points.  I mean sure, when Biden took Trump’s 1.5% inflation rate up to 9% in 14 months, CNN probably called that “a barely noticeable bump,” whereas an increase of .2% from May to June under Trump gets WWIII-level headlines.

So how does Roginsky kick aside a chance for a tiny victory and grab hold of defeat with both bony hands?  When Jennings suggests that the current small increase is no reason for panic, she says, “When we were promised on August 15th last year that the price of eggs, the price of bacon, of apples—”

Obviously at this point she was going to say, “would be down.”  But once he heard “eggs,” Jennings jumped in, as one does when an opponent makes a mistake.  Because of all the things she could cite, she chose the one grocery item that was hyped in the news before the election and inauguration, and that everyone knows has dropped in price. 

So Jennings says, “The price of eggs are down.”

If that segment had been a fencing competition, a little buzzer would have sounded, and a ref would have announced a strike.  Or a stab.  Or whatever they call it when one fencer skewers the other’s thorax.  (Perhaps I shouldn’t have used the fencing analogy, since I obviously don’t know much about it.) 

But apparently Roginsky’s thorax is as numb as her skull, because she offered a meaningless rebuttal.  “Year over year, eggs are up 27%.” 

Jennings shook his head as if he didn’t think she’d really said that, and replied, “Since he took office, they’re down.”

And Roginsky insisted, “Year over year!” 

Think about that.  Roginsky thought that she could score a point by saying that since last July 15th, egg prices have gone up.  But since Joe Biden was still the president for six more months – during which egg prices nearly doubled – she surely couldn’t be dumb enough to claim that Trump was responsible for the increase in egg prices when he had no ability to influence egg prices, could she?

Don’t call her Shirley.  But you can certainly call her dumb.  Because that IS what she was claiming.  And Jennings’ response was the only sane one: since Trump took office and had the chance to influence egg prices, they’ve gone down.  

This is the kind of dispute that could be solved in 5 seconds by looking up egg prices, which reporter Joe Concha did (but CNN didn’t).  And it turns out that the national average price of eggs (according to TradingEconomics) when Trump took office was around $6.60 a dozen.  Because Biden needlessly killed 4 million chickens in his last days in office – and because dead chickens lay surprisingly few eggs, for you city slickers out there – the price climbed to a little over $8 in the first week of March.  Since then, it has plunged to $2.89 this week. 

So Jennings was right.  But Abby Phillip – noticing that Roginsky had suffered a serious thorax poke – put that weird fencing strainer thing on her face and rushed in to help her slow-witted friend.

To wit, “Let’s not fight over statistics here.”  Oh good, maybe Abby knows a chicken’s hind-end from a hole in the ground—  “She’s right, year over year, they’re up significantly.”

Good lord! 

Since a good thorax-piercing apparently cuts off blood flow to the brain, Roginsky stepped on the same rake again, in this quote which I could not make up, no matter how much bourbon I drank:

“Let’s be clear.  He promised three things: the price of eggs, bacon and apples were going to go down.  I can quote him, it was on August 15th of last year…. All of them are up.  They’re up year over year, and that’s a fact.” 

Yes it is.  An utterly irrelevant fact. 

As she pushed on and doubled down on the year-over-year thing, Jennings was finally exasperated enough to say, “You are literally lying—”

And then the tide of imbecility rose up all around the table, with several people saying, “Whoa!” and Abby jumped in again, unknowingly taking another skinny fencing sword in the soup-strainer mask: 

Abby:  Before you accuse her of lying, I literally just went over this.  She is correct that year over year—

Scott (speaking slowly and emphatically): Since Donald Trump took office, what’s happened to the eggs?

Abby: Oh my god, do you not understand—   

After more insane crosstalk that lasted for the longest minute of your life, Abby accused Jennings of derailing the conversation, and ended it this way: “I think people have the ability to understand the difference between the price of eggs today and the price of eggs a year ago today. Versus what you would prefer to talk about, which is the price of eggs when Donald Trump was inaugurated.  You’re just talking about two different time horizons.”

YES!  He “would prefer to talk about” the relevant time horizon, rather than one that holds Trump responsible for what Biden did as president.

Whatever else you can say about that segment, it’s clear that Jennings foiled them again.  (Boom!  Late, game-saving proper fencing reference.  Because I looked it up, and a fencing stick is called a “foil.”) 

Whatever CNN is paying Scott Jennings, it’s not enough.

And whatever they’re paying Julie Roginsky and Abby Phillip, it’s way too much.

So… 

Roginsky/Phillip, 2028!

Also,

Hamas delenda est!

Florida vs. Blue States — It’s a Rout!(posted 7/16/25)

Today’s hump-day column will be a Florida-centric one, starting with a little gushing over the founder of the CO Nation feast himself, the great and powerful CO, who has been doing an excellent job curating and commenting on an interesting variety of stories lately.

As I’ve started writing more columns, I’ve taken less time to comment on the stories and columns – and the comments – here, but everybody has been hitting the ball hard lately!  The COSIE’s offerings have been great – and not just because of the awesome Aussie pics – and Christopher Silber keeps breaking down economics and Chinese history in columns that make me feel smarter after reading each one.  The Correspondent for Thinly Researched Conspiracy Theories doesn’t write often enough for my taste, but each posting is a gem. 

In an online world that sometimes seems to consist mainly of Temu ads, porn, and fighting characterized by the bad manners born of keyboard courage, this site continues to be a refuge, with the comforting ambience of a virtual corner pub.  I’m very grateful for the opportunity to hang out here and crack wise!

I have one more request of CO, and that is for him to post a review of the Elvis Costello concert he went to a few days ago.  I’ve been a huge fan of Elvis since the “My Aim is True” days, but have never seen him live.  So please assuage my jealousy, and allow me to live vicariously through your account of the evening.

Okay, since I’m a “count your blessings” kind of optimist, CO’s recent post about the amazing roll that Florida is on lately got me thinking. 

You remember the bullet points: The #1 economy for the third consecutive year; #1 in new business formation; fewest state workers, lowest per capita debt, second-lowest per capita spending, law-and-order policies; lowest in-state tuition; no state income tax, etc. 

Fortunately for us, we don’t take all of this for granted, because televisions and computers exist.  And each day we can use them to check on how things are going in the blue cities and states in this great nation.  And… yikes!

Comparing Florida to blue states is enlightening, and allows for some healthy, Nelson Muntzian “Ha-Ha!” gloating, with a side of soul-restoring in-your-face-y “I told you so!”

For example, I lived in my beloved home state of Illinois for my first 24 years, and have been in Florida for the last 39.  Florida’s financial success and growth is the mirror opposite of what’s been going on in Illinois.  They’ve got a state income tax and higher property taxes, but their infrastructure is deteriorating.  They’ve got a greedy D-irigible for governor, and we’ve got a lean, mean D-Santis.

They’ve welcomed in hordes of illegals, and they’ve spent $2.5 billion – with a “b” as in “bonehead” – on them in the last three years, and their state debt is amongst the worst in the nation.  Chicago public schools just announced that they’re staring at a shortall of $750 million (with an “m” as in “moron”), and will have to make deep cuts to their already atrocious system. 

Florida grabs our illegals and flies them to Martha’s Vineyard.  And then we laugh and laugh at the rich white liberals panicking and giving the noble brown folks the bum’s rush right off of their precious island.

The most obvious counterpart to Florida is California, and there too, the big picture is obvious.  Florida is economically health and vibrant, while California is stagnant and covered in feces and the bodies of homeless people, some of whom may have actually been dead since February.

Florida cops fight crime; California cops fight for their lives.   Florida is building; California watches their buildings burn down.  

Florida’s main immigrant group is plucky Cubans who came legally, and will punch you in the face if you say something nice about communism.  California’s main immigrant group is (mostly) entitled Mexicans who came illegally, and will punch you in the face if you say something nice about America.

We prepare for hurricanes, and when one knocks a bridge down, we rebuild it in 72 hours.

Californians drain their reservoirs and allow homeless addicts to make campfires among their native kindling plants, and when entire zip codes burn to the ground (unexpectedly!), they issue permits to rebuild…to the great-grandchildren of the owners, just in time for the tri-centennial celebrations in 2076.   

Both states have a Disney park.  When covid hit, Florida’s Disney World closed for less than 4 months, and re-opened to a blizzard of headlines along the lines of “Reckless Red State Re-opens ‘Disney Dachau’ Despite Raging Epidemic that Will Kill Us All!” 

Meanwhile, CA’s Disneyland was closed for over a year, while they watched people enjoying Florida’s Disney World, and waited for the pile of bodies stacked up like cordwood that never materialized.

Both states took on an ambitious high-speed train project.  Florida built the Brightline to connect Miami and Orlando (with a stop near the CO compound and world headquarters).  The project broke ground in mid-2014, with a few parts of the route opening in 2018 and the entire line being finished by September of 2023.  It was largely privately financed, and cost $6 billion.

California’s high-speed rail project was talked about since the 1990s, and was approved by voters in 2008, with the goal of linking San Francisco and Los Angeles by 2020 for an estimated cost of $33 billion.  But CA politicians all held their hands out, and CA environmental activists all stuck their feet out, and it was decided that Phase 1 would join the small inland towns of Bakersfield and Merced, neither of which most Californians had ever heard of, except for those who had heard the song “Streets of Bakersfield.” (Buck Owens and Dwight Yoakam did it best.) 

By the time Trump took office this year – five years after the line was supposed to have been completed – the estimated cost had ballooned to $128 billion, with an estimated completion sometime in the 2030s.  At this point, a grand total of zero feet of track has been laid, for the low, low price of… wait for it… $7 billion dollars!

So if you’re counting on your abacus at home, that sums up the difference between the prudent, conservative governance in Florida and the Marxist/Leninist Schiff-show that is Democrat rule in California:

The citizens of Florida got a high-tech train joining thriving population centers in 9 years and at the cost of $6 billion dollars.

Meanwhile, the likes of Haircut Newsom and Big Mouth Bass took 17 years and only one billion more dollars to provide Californians with no tracks laid between two towns that nobody wants to go to anyway.

Newsom/Mamdani, 2028!  

Also…

Hamas delenda est!

I See Some Bad Things on the Horizon for the Dems (posted 7/11/25)

Yes, faithful readers, your eyes are not deceiving you: you are reading my fifth consecutive daily column.

I know: a five-column week is an impressive achievement.  It’s like shooting under 60 in one round of a golf tournament, or throwing back-to-back no-hitters in the MLB.  Or the Bears drafting a quarterback who doesn’t rip the hearts out of Bears fans and stomp on them with inexplicably sharp cleats by the time Halloween rolls around and we’re eliminated from the playoffs.

Would I be able to do this if I weren’t semi-retired?  No. 

Would I be able to do it without your faithful readership, which I might even describe as verging on adoration, if my instinctive modesty didn’t restrain me?  No. 

Would I be able to do it if I didn’t have the strength of ten men, because my heart is pure?  No way.

Okay, enough of that.  It’s Friday, baby, so where my narwhals at?

Today I’m focusing on some escalating bad behavior from mainstream Dems in the congress and the MSM that is not going to end well for them.  I’m talking about their increasingly unhinged and violent rhetoric aimed at ICE agents who are just doing their jobs and enforcing our immigration laws.

The Dems are in such an impenetrable bubble that they really do seem to think that the public is on their side, and that the Cuddly Kilmar doll is going to be a big seller this Christmas.  (You pull a string on his back, and he says, “MS-13 forever, homes!” and “My old lady had that beating coming, your honor.”)  (Unregistered car filled with illegals he was caught trafficking sold separately.)

Many Democrats are in the throes of anger, and convinced that it’s the righteous kind.  Axios interviewed a dozen Democrat House members who anonymously reported that their voters are getting more and more heated.  One said that, “our own base is telling us that there needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public.” 

Another reported that his constituents are saying that “civility isn’t working” and to prepare for “violence…to fight to protect our democracy.”  A third said that “people online have sent me crazy sh*t, told me to storm the White House and stuff like that.” 

(Because insurrection is (D)ifferent when they do it.)  

Of course, this is the predictable result of Democrat elites ramping up hatred on their side in recent years.  By last November, their supporters didn’t think Trump could ever win, or that if he did, it would be through some illegitimate trickery.  So when he swept the swing states, won the popular vote, and beat Que Mala in the electoral college like Kilmar tuning up his wife because she looked at him wrong, they didn’t know what to do.  

The same boneheads telling them to “fight for democracy” – until democracy worked, and swept Trump into a second presidential term – have now gone back to the Extremist Handbook of Inflammatory Slogans and recycled “Conservatives are Nazis and ICE is the Gestapo!” 

They have no idea that they’re racing down F**k-Around Street with the pedal to the metal, and they’re fast approaching Find-Out Avenue.  And that intersection is strewn with spike strips and Jersey barriers, and both sides of the cross street are lined with empty prison buses.  The seat belts in those buses come with complementary handcuffs, and in front of each bus is a squad of Homan’s Heroes®.  And those guys are there to do calligraphy and jail rioters.

And they’re all out of fountain pens.

Okay, that got a little weird at the end.  Annnndddd…I’m pushing away the glass of Knob Creek 9 until I finish this column.

Anyway, the lefty activists have been asking for trouble, and now they’re starting to get it.  More and more stories are coming out about imbeciles interfering with ICE and getting arrested or worse.     

On Tuesday four morons were caught after they put out devices that spiked the tires of ICE vehicles.  Their mugshots send the clear, non-verbal message we’ve all come to expect in these situations: “My prospects for ever having sexual congress with a decent woman are slim and none, and slim has left the building.”

A day earlier, at a Border Patrol station in McAllen, TX, an idiot armed himself and dressed up in tactical gear and attacked border patrol agents and local police.  He managed to wound one of them before they shot him a lot, and he quickly took the pavement temperature challenge.  Because: Texas.

Or, as a Breitbart story put it, “Cops Neutralize Attacker.” 

I love the use of the term “neutralized” here.  You almost never hear it outside of thriller novels or movies, or IDF after-action reports, which regular readers know are my favorites.   “We neutralized that Hezbollah leader’s eyes and hands in our pager attack three weeks ago.  And we just neutralized the rest of him with a missile strike on a goat pen where he was having a conjugal visit.  Shalom, and thank you for your attention to this matter.”

Ten radical freaks ambushed an ICE facility on the Fourth of July, wounding one agent before escaping, frustratingly un-shot.  But they were soon arrested, and their chances of being home in time to find a Cuddly Kilmar under their Christmas tree are not good.

Just yesterday a Texas Constable arrested a 22-year-old Mensa member named Serio Olivares (tragically, an American citizen), whose dad owns a business where ICE agents arrested some illegals.  As the agents were about to leave, Serio arrived and confronted them, damaging one of their cars.  When they left, he pursued them, driving recklessly, until they stopped and arrested him. 

The local “liberal Democrat district attorney’s office” would not press any more serious charges than misdemeanor traffic violations, so the constable is contacting the Feds to bring more serious interference with federal agents charges. 

My favorite part of the story is that Serio is a serial offender.  Unexpectedly! 

Because last November, he was charged with interfering with an officer’s public duties – sound familiar? – but that charge was later dismissed, in a deal in which he pled to one felony charge.  In March he was given diversion after cocaine possession and unlawful carrying of a gun – C’mon, Texas!  You’re letting me down here – on the condition that he not commit another crime within one year.

Right now Serio is staring intently at a calendar, trying to do some basic calculations.  I’d love to be there when he figures out that from March to July is four months.  And I’d REALLY love to be there 10 minutes later, when he realizes that four months is less than one year.  

Which means that he can still serve two years on the earlier coke charge, in addition to whatever sentence the Feds are going to give him for his latest stunt.

To paraphrase the Captain in Cool Hand Luke, “What we’ve got here is a failure to cogitate.”    

If the Dems keep this up, one of their unstable foot-soldiers is eventually going to kill an ICE agent, and they are not going to enjoy what comes next.

In the meantime, I’m praying for our cops, border patrol and ICE agents, and bracing for more winning, and the lefty activist tantrums that come with it.

Hamas delenda est!

Reading the SCOTUS Case that Allows Trump to Act As President Again (posted 7/7/25)

I’ll be back with another column covering the ongoing foolishness in our politics tomorrow or Wednesday, but today I have to ask you to bear with me, because I’ve written an uncharacteristically serious column about the SCOTUS ruling in Trump v. Casa, Inc.  That’s the one dealing with the dozens of universal injunctions by district court judges who have been trying to stop Trump’s every move.  

The underlying case was about Trump’s EO ending birthright citizenship for the born-in-America children of illegals, which I’m afraid he might well lose, though he shouldn’t, IMHO.  But the ruling in Casa settled what should have been an obvious point: the US government can’t function with 677 de facto presidents, i.e. district court judges who can stop any executive decision for months or years at a time.

I’ve read the whole decision – written by Amy Coney-Barrett – including the concurrences by Thomas, Alito and Kavanaugh and the dissents by Sotomayor and Jackson, and I’d encourage anyone who is interested to read it, too.  As I discovered when I read the abortion and second amendment cases several summers ago, SCOTUS decisions are unexpectedly understandable, even for non-lawyers. 

I read this one over the Independence Day weekend, which seemed appropriate, given how grateful I am for our independence and for this ruling! 

I’ve found that I can just skip over the citations and look up only the legal terms that aren’t self-explanatory, and I was surprised at how much the justices’ writing reveals their intelligence, discipline and character.  The best writers and thinkers on our side are Thomas and Alito, IMHO.  On the other side, I think the general consensus is that Kagan is the smartest, Sotomayor is mediocre, and Jackson is embarrassingly bad.

After reading this case, I think Sotomayor did a little better than I expected, and Jackson was as bad as I expected.  And I thought Barrett wrote a much stronger originalist argument than I’d expected, and not just because she mercilessly took Jackson’s bizarre rambling apart.

Barrett starts the majority opinion – the initial summary of which is only around 2000 words –at the nation’s beginning, noting that “Universal injunctions are not sufficiently analogous to any relief available in the court of equity in England at the time of the founding.”  She then moves forward in time, claiming, “Nor did founding-era courts of equity in the United States chart a different course.  If anything, the approach traditionally taken by federal courts cuts against the existence of such a sweeping remedy.”

She addresses the counter-arguments, noting that “respondents claim that universal injunctions are the modern equivalent of the decree resulting from a ‘bill of peace,’” but then cites a bunch of precedents to show why that analogy does not hold.  She closes by summarizing the points on which the government must prevail, and demonstrating that they do so, while noting that this doesn’t mean that they will ultimately win on the underlying birthright citizenship question.  The key sentence in her conclusion, IMHO: “When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.”  

The full 6500-word opinion that follows traces the history of universal injunctions, pointing out that they “were not a feature of federal-court litigation until sometime in the 20th Century,” and that they have been exploding since W’s term, when over three-quarters of them have been issued.  (And we all know that the explosion of injunctions in the first four months of Trump II has drastically added to that statistical imbalance.) 

Her closing: “The universal injunction was conspicuously nonexistent for most of our nation’s history….  Had federal courts believed themselves to possess the tool, surely they would not have let it lay idle.” 

Thomas uses a citation-heavy 1200 words to emphasize the need for judicial restraint that this ruling supports.  Then Alito’s concurrence anticipates the activist left’s next counter-moves to try to get around this clear ruling.  He warns about an expanded view of third-party standing (plaintiffs who aren’t affected by an issue arguing on behalf of others) and class-action filings.

On the former, he says, “Left unchecked, the practice of reflexive state third-party standing will undermine today’s decision as a practical matter.”  On the latter,“Today’s decision will have very little value if district courts award relief to broadly defined classes without following Rule 23’s procedural protections for class certification.”  (Rule 23 forces plaintiffs to meet specific requirements to achieve a class-action suit, which activists hate, as you might imagine.)

Alito warns that lower courts “should not view today’s decision as an invitation to certify nationwide classes without scrupulous adherence to the rigors of Rule 23.”   “Lax enforcement of the requirements for third-party standing and class certification would create a potentially significant loophole to today’s decision.” 

Many on the left are already talking about trying both of these tactics, thus proving Alito’s point.  Hopefully his warning will rein in most lower courts from trying these end-around moves, though I imagine the most lawless of the activist judges will go for it anyway, being constrained by neither law nor ethics, as they obviously are.

Sotomayor actually lays out a pretty convincing argument that birthright citizenship is constitutional.  She relies mostly on the fact that it has been a long-standing precedent, which is ironic, since she and the other “living constitution” supporters only seem to value precedent when it leads to their favored political conclusions.  (They made a big deal about the 50-year precedent of Roe v. Wade being overturned, for example, but they had nothing to say about the nearly 200-year precedent of abortion not being in the constitution, until the Roe court “discovered” it in 1973. Not to mention the nearly 250-year precedent that the court shattered in Obergefell, when they “discovered” gay marriage hidden in the constitution.  Probably right next to the right to abortion, as well as the pre-emptive prohibition from ever electing Trump president.)

 The most striking characteristics of Sotomayor’s argument are her nakedly partisan tone and how consistently she calls for more power for her court.  She claims that the English equity courts “unlike this court” “constantly declined to lay down any rule that shall limit their power and discretion.”  She says that those older courts “[kept] injunctive relief flexible,” as opposed to the originalists on this court, who want to “freeze in amber” the precedents that they cite.  She takes a final shot at the conservatives, saying that unlike the equity courts she claims “delight[ed] to do justice, and not by halves,” this court only wants to do justice “by piecemeal,” which results in “strip[ping] federal courts of authority” and causing a “diminution of judicial power.”    

But while Sotomayor makes typical “living constitution” arguments that tend toward giving courts the power to “legislate from the bench,” Ketanji Jean-Pierre goes flying right past Sotomayor in her truly awful dissent.  I would warn anyone not to read Jackson immediately before the sober clarity of Thomas or Alito, because doing so could give you the bends.

If Sotomayor sounds like a partisan guest on PBS, Jackson sounds like an unhinged MSNBC host and a high school sophomore had a baby, and that baby was elevated to SCOTUS purely for DEI reasons.  Because: yikes!

She comes out of the gate hot – hot, and stupid! – by slandering the conservative majority, saying “The Court’s decision to permit the Executive to violate the Constitution…is an existential threat to the rule of law.” 

That’s three partisan MSM talking points in one sentence, and things don’t get any better from there.  She constantly begs the question by assuming that Trump’s EO is obviously unconstitutional throughout, even though SCOTUS has agreed to take that contention up in the fall term.  Her tone is by turns emotional (she talks about her disillusionment, fear and frustration), heavy on the kind of lefty talking points she started with (describing the court as endorsing “a rule-of-kings governing system”) and light on relevant citations and concrete argument.

In fact, she disdains the originalists’ analysis of whether universal injunctions have analogous precedents in the English courts and the Founders’ Judiciary Act of 1789 as “a mind-numbing technical query.”  (Many sane lawyers would call it “establishing foundations.”) She also calls it “legalese” and “a smokescreen!” 

She uses inappropriate phrases such as “…(wait for it)…” as if she were me, writing my juvenile mockeries of self-important leftists, rather than a SCOTUS justice!  She also seems to not understand the roles of lower courts and SCOTUS any more than she understands what a woman is, because she chides the originalist SCOTUS members for their “dismissive treatment of the solemn duties and responsibilities of the lower courts.” 

First, if the partisan lower courts had been taking their duties and responsibilities seriously, we wouldn’t be in this mess!  Second, they’re LOWER courts, you dunce!   The job of the higher court is to evaluate and often reverse the lower courts.  How does someone who went to law school not know that?   

By the end – and despite her rejection of English law and our early court decisions which originated from it – she approvingly cites Hypothetical Interplanetary Law.  To wit, “A Martian arriving here from another planet would see these circumstances and surely wonder: ‘What good is the constitution, then?’”

Good lord.  I guess if an imaginary ET doesn’t like our constitution, we should just dissolve it and then re-establish ourselves as Ketanji-land?

Barrett’s backhanding of Jackson’s ridiculous blathering is unusually scathing, and yet still not nearly scathing enough.  She calls Jackson’s argument a “startling line of attack that is tethered neither to these sources nor, frankly, to any doctrine whatsoever,” and points out that it “[waves] away attention to the limits on judicial power as a “mind-numbingly technical query.” 

And she finally does the judicial equivalent of coming off the top rope to slam a metal folding chair over Jackson’s 10-cent head in what has to be one of the most brutal dismissals in SCOTUS history:  “We will not dwell on Justice Jackson’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.”

So that leaves us with the smartest of the 3 liberal justices, Elena Kagan, who didn’t write in this case.  And her silence is deafening.

Because in a talk she gave in 2022, Kagan forcefully pointed out the danger of district court judges issuing universal injunctions, saying, “It just can’t be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and leave it stopped for years that it takes to go through a legal process.” 

In fact, she specifically condemned the practice of “judge shopping” to get those injunctions   She mentioned that when Trump was president, lefty plaintiffs went to the liberal northern district of California, and when Biden was president, righties went to a conservative district in Texas.

She was obviously right about that, since out of the 95 US court districts, 5 leftist districts have issued something like 35 of the most important 40 universal injunctions against Trump.  So Kagan is vindicated, and her clear stance against universal injunctions stands as a brave example of a justice not being swayed by her own personal political partisanship.

Oh no, wait.  In Trump v. Casa, Inc she voted against the position she had taken just three years ago, and by not writing a dissent, she gave no reason for the change.

I’d like to say, “I wonder why,” but we all know, don’t we?  When universal injunctions are hampering a Democrat president, they are very bad.  But when they are hampering a Republican president, they magically become extra super-constitutional and good.

Because on the high court – just as in Congress, and governors’ offices, and mayors’ offices – it’s (D)ifferent when they do it. 

Hamas delenda est!

Celebrating Independence, & Contemplating the Left-Right Pride in America Gap (posted 7/4/25)

Well, this is my fourth column of the week, and I’ve still managed to fall behind somehow on all of the (mostly good) news that’s happening.  And I’m half-way through the process of reading the entire SCOTUS ruling from last week on nationwide injunctions. 

So my plan is to have a column on Monday with my thoughts on that great SCOTUS ruling. (Will I also be mocking Ketanji Jean-Pierre?  Damn straight.)  And I foresee another 4 column-week (at least) coming next week, if I’m going to have any chance of keeping my head above water during the deluge of winning that’s happening right now.

But I’ve buried the lede, because it’s Independence Day, and I hope you all have a great one.  

It’s hard to talk about this day without going through a bunch of cliches that are so familiar that we’re now too close to see them.  But this really is an amazing country, founded by geniuses, and with a history we should be proud of.  And while we often take it for granted, I’ve been encouraged by a feeling that there seems to be a recent uptick in appreciation for the country. 

However, that appreciation might not be as widespread as it feels to me, a fact brought home by a Gallup poll I read a few days ago, which is fascinating for three reasons: 1. It ties into a discussion I’ve been having with one of my lefty buddies recently.   2. The reporting on it was a textbook example of MSM media bias. (And no, we don’t hate them enough.)  3. It clearly illustrates a profound difference between the left and right in America.

I wrote a few months ago about several lefties who are good, old friends of mine, and in one of my recent email exchanges with one of them, I commented on those leftists who really dislike America.  In his response, he said that he hoped I didn’t think he was among them, and I assured him that I didn’t.  He’s a good man and he loves the country; I wouldn’t be able to maintain a friendship with somebody who hates my country. 

But I think it’s pretty obvious that there is a disturbingly large segment of the left who disdains America, and it includes too many of the party’s leaders, including their last living president.   Obama famously expressed his desire to “fundamentally transform” America because he thought it communicated the ambition of his policy agenda.  But many of us realized the clear inference of that statement: if you love something or someone, you don’t want to “fundamentally transform” them. 

When they look at American history, many leftists focus almost exclusively on the sins that we share with all other nations throughout history – slavery, violent clashes with earlier inhabitants, bigotry – rather than the breathtaking achievements that set us apart.  And they judge us for the former more harshly than they ever would judge other nations, while they downplay, deny or elide our accomplishments.

They don’t just view us as no better than other nations, but as much worse.  Ilhan Omar says that Somalia is better than America (though she seems frustratingly unwilling to go back there), illegal thugs from Mexico wave their flag and burn ours, and Nikole Hannah-Jones’s influential leftist screed blames America for 1619 (which we shouldn’t have to point out was a century and a half before America existed) and denigrates 1776.

Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan was well calculated to enrage the left, and boy did it!   Their primary response was summarized by creepy Andrew Cuomo, then governor of one of our largest states: “America was never that great.”

On this Fourth of July, let the left have that pinched and sour lie. I’ll stick with the idea in one of my favorite poems, this one from Sir Walter Scott.  It starts with these lines:

“Breathes there a man, with soul so dead/Who never to himself hath said,/This is my own, my native land!/Whose heart hath ne’er within him burn’d,/ As home his footsteps he hath turn’d,/ From wandering on a foreign strand!”

(I wish the complainers on the left would spend a little more time wandering on a foreign strand, instead of staying here and b*tching.) 

The end of the verse switches to contemplating the rightful end such a person will come to:

“The wretch, concentred all in self/Living, shall forfeit fair renown,/ And, doubly dying, shall go down/ To the vile dust, from which he sprung,/ Unwept, unhonour’d, and unsung.”

Walter knew what he was talking about. 

So here’s the reporting on the Gallup poll’s results.  In 13 left-leaning publications – HuffPo, Daily Kos, Axios, Newseek, etc. – the headlines are a variation on a theme:  American pride falls to record low.  (Remember: this isn’t talking about pride in your sexual tastes or fetishes.  That was last month.) 

Several publications are a little more dramatic (“Americans have never hated being Americans more,” says the New Republic), or identify the real cause of the problem: “American pride plunges to new low under Trump,” says Alternet; “National Pride in American takes dramatic nosedive under Trump,” sneers the Daily Beast.     

So the message is clear: more Americans than ever think that America sucks, and it’s all Trump’s fault.  Unexpectedly!      

But you won’t be shocked to find that the feckless media bottom-dwellers skewed their headlines.  Because the poll itself breaks the results down by political groups, and it finds that Republicans are pretty consistently proud to be American, while pride among Independents has been slowly slipping over the last 10 years, but is still a majority position.

But the vast majority of diminished pride has happened among the Democrats, 62% of whom were proud to be American last year, while only 36% feel that way now.

So the accurate headline isn’t “Americans’ pride plunges under Trump.”  It’s “GOP consistently proud, most Independents proud, Democrats throw a tantrum like whiny little beeyotches when they don’t get their Cadaver in Chief.” 

Which leads me to my final point concerning the dramatic differences between the parties.  It’s natural for your pride to ebb and flow a little bit, depending on whether your guy is president or not. 

Even I (an optimistic, America-loving patriot) – when watching Joe Biden fall up staircases and over sandbags, and scream at the clouds like Grandpa Simpson, and poop on the Pope – had to fight the urge to wear dark glasses and a baseball cap low over my forehead in the hopes that people would mistake me for a miserable Canadian. 

But the surprising thing is that pride in our country is not only highest among Republicans, it’s much more consistent.  The Gallup poll has tracked national pride since 2001, and in the wake of 9/11, GOP pride was at 90%; for the next 24 years, it averaged right around where it is now, at 92%.  It only dipped into the 80s during the 4 years of Biden, and at its low point was still at 84%.  

The Democrats started out at 87%, and briefly touched 90% once, in 2002.  Since then it’s been a steady decline, staying in the high 70s to low 80s until 2015, when it plunged down to 42% during Trump I.  It recovered when Biden began his reign of error, but even then it only reached a high of 62.

The Independents have generally been in between the two parties.  It’s a little troubling that Independents’ pride has also been sliding – if less extremely, and with less volatility than the Dems’ – from 76% ten years ago to 53% now.  But my instinct is that if you forced Independents to declare for one party or the other, the most patriotic among them would go to the GOP, and the less patriotic to the Dems, leaving both parties about where they are now.

We probably didn’t need this poll to tell us the two main take-aways from the data. 

First, Democrats are generally less patriotic than Republicans. Over the last 10 years, which were evenly split between Dem and GOP presidents, only a little over half of Democrats (55%) said they are proud to be American, while more than 90% of Republicans said that over the last 25 years. 

Second, Democrats’ patriotism is much less steadfast; it waxes and wanes depending on whether or not they control the White House.

On both of those points, I’d much rather be on our side than on theirs.  I’m glad that we can see America with all of its flaws – and yes, these are often expressed in the foolish choices manifested in badly chosen presidents – and still love it, and be proud to be American.

Watching so many on the other side cling to their bitterness and focus it on this amazing country is hard to take.  Their rejection of our founding and traditions leads to so much unhappiness, as we’ve seen in the degradation of the big blue cities, the hollowed-out universities, and the lost reputation of the compromised legacy media. 

But we can’t let that temper our own optimism.  We’re winning a lot of battles now, and the ship of state is slowly turning in the right direction.  Our successes and their failures are making the differences between our philosophies all the more stark, and more and more people are voting with their feet,  

We’re still facing a lot of challenges, and we’ve got a lot of obstacles to overcome.  Getting our budget under control, repairing the damage caused by an open border, and cleaning up our damaged institutions is going to be a long slog.  But every generation since the founding has had to fight to preserve the republic, so we know that it can be done.  

And we can see the road the Democrats are on – in California, Chicago, and now New York City – and we know how they’re going to end up.

Unwept, unhonour’d, and unsung.

Happy Independence Day, everybody!

Hamas delenda est!

The Left is Not Handling All of This Good News Well (posted 6/30/25)

I virtually “met” CO many years ago – that’s a story for another day, but I can tell you that it was reminiscent of the Three Wise Men finally making it to Bethlehem.  Although CO is not exactly the baby Jesus, and I was just one lone wise man.  More of a wise guy, really.  But as Bogey said at the end of Casablanca, it was the beginning of a beautiful friendship. 

I wrote my first column for CO’s site on December 9th, 2016.  You can find it, along with the rest of my archives here at Martinsimpsonwriting.com.  (And don’t miss the prescient “future conservative SCOTUS” joke in that first column, which was written before I’d acquired my conical purple wizard hat that allows me to see the future.)  

Since then I’ve written 683 columns – this one makes 684 – and I’ve had an acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize in Literature just gathering dust in my desk, tragically unused, for most of the last 8 years.  And yes, I wrote it in a comedic Donald Trump voice, which I’m sure would go over great with the Nobel crowd in Stockholm. 

Oh okay, if you insist, I’ll give you an excerpt from it, featuring the first few paragraphs and the last lines:

“I’d like to thank God, CO and every member of CO Nation, and I’d also like to thank the European elites who hand out these awards.  But I can’t, because many people say that you’ve turned these awards into the fake news of awards, giving them to every leftist lunatic who ever put pen to paper.  They’ve become totally fake.  Fake awards! 

But still, you’re doing a tremendous thing tonight, though frankly, it’s embarrassing that it’s taken you so long.  So embarrassing.  I mean, I get it.  I stand before you as a representative of the greatest country in the world, a man with a wit as sharp as my gaze is steely and my jawline is firm.  And you’re looking around at each other glumly.  Look at Hans over there!  So glum.    Your men are simpering and your women are ugly, and your nonbinary children are cowering in a corner, hoping that you won’t let Putin conquer your countries and enslave them.  Sad.”

[Jump cut to the end of the speech]   

“…like nobody’s ever seen before. 

Now please, go back and read through my body of work, and learn its lessons.  Otherwise, people are going to think that you just don’t know what the f**k you’re doing.  Thank you for your attention to this matter.”  

And, scene.

I say all that to say this: in the nearly 9 years I’ve been writing on this site, I don’t know that there has been a week packed with more good news (other than the weeks featuring the epic losses of Hillary and Que Mala) than this past one.  And now I’ve got such an embarrassment of riches to write about that I don’t know what to do.   I’ve been writing three columns a week, but I could write three columns a day this week, and still barely scratch the surface!

I see two broad categories of good-news stories: those involving big wins for our side, and those involving hilariously entertaining, schadenfreude-infused tales of various leftists melting down in theatrical glory.

So I’m just going to jump in and start celebrating and mocking, and see if I’ve got the gas in the tank for another 5-column week. 

I’ll start with a guy whose name I’d never heard before, possibly because he’s a columnist for USA Today.  Which is a paper that people fold over their heads and press tightly against their ears if they’re stuck in an airport where CNN is playing on every tv. 

His name is Rex Huppke.  After I saw the column I’m about to tell you about, I researched him a bit, and the first thing I came across was a column he wrote last weekend, right after Trump took out Iran’s nuke sites.  Instead of waiting a few days, lest intervening events make him look very stupid – a phenomenon that I’m guessing he experiences quite often – he opened up on our “dumb president.”

He predicted a coming “quagmire in the Middle East,” and after a few hundred words of dire warnings that have already been proven to be as smart as Jasmine Crocket with a concussion, he ended by saying that if the bombing proves successful “it’ll be dumb luck.  But if it leads to disaster, it’ll be exactly what anyone paying attention to these reckless hucksters predicted.”

Wow.  Nicely done, Huppster.  You tried for the old “heads I win, tails you lose” trick, and yet you still managed to lose.  How does it feel to have the dumbest guy around be proven smarter than you and all of your egghead co-religionists in the MSM? 

Unexpectedly!

But that’s not why I’m writing about Wretched Rex now.  Because after that disastrous column a week ago, Huppke took another swing at it…

One. Week. Layter.   

This time, he wrote about the SCOTUS ruling saying that public schools can no longer force grade school kids, against their parents’ consent, to learn all about how they can change their sex (in a textbook called, “Science, Schmience,” I’m guessing).   This ruling gave Rex what he thought was a very clever column idea. 

As we say in the South, “Bless his heart.”

In an op-ed titled, “Thanks SCOTUS!  It’s now my right to prevent my kid from learning about Trump,” Huppke argues that SCOTUS preventing kids from being indoctrinated in the LGBTQ+ religion is analogous to allowing kids to opt out of any school lessons discussing US presidents of whom Huppke doesn’t approve.

(Did I mention that Huppke’s email address is @bluesky?  Because of course it is.)

Seriously.  Because Trump has made boorish comments about genitalia grabbing and illegal immigrants, and was found liable for sexually assaulting a mentally unstable woman in a transparently bogus civil verdict that will definitely be overturned eventually, Huppke believes that his kids should be prevented from learning anything about Trump and his presidency.   

Think about that for a second.  If children were kept from learning about any US presidents whose behavior offended Rex’s tender sensibilities, our history textbooks would be as short as AOC’s attention span.   

(If I were delivering this next part as a speech, this is where I’d take a drink of water and a very long inhale before running down the following list…)

No Washington or Jefferson (who owned slaves), nor any other presidents before Lincoln, since they all at least tolerated slavery.  Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and said some unkind things about black folks.  Grant was a horrendous bully, since he gave the Democrats of his day wedgies and swirlies, and then took their slaves away and freed them.

TR hunted, Wilson was a racist, FDR undoubtedly called the people he put in camps “Japs.”  Ike killed a lot of people, and Truman dropped a couple of bombs that were even more offensively penetrative than the MOP (stop snickering).  JFK banged every female within arm’s reach, LBJ said the n-word more often than he said hello, and Richard Nixon was Richard Nixon.  Reagan whipped the Dems’ co-religionists in the USSR and Nicaragua, and Clinton repeated JFK’s sexual crimes, while adding perjury to the mix.  W was Bushitler, Obama deported 3 million angels in human form at our southern border, and Biden raised Hunter and used him as his bag-man/cut-out with the Chicoms.    

The only president who might possibly pass the Huppke Standard of Non-Offensiveness might be William Henry Harrison, who died in 1841 after serving only 30 days in office. (History Note: This was too long ago for that stunt to be called, “Pulling a Biden.”)   

On the other hand, I’m sure that once the leftist cancel squad has a chance to examine those fateful 30 days, they’ll find that Harrison allegedly told one of his cronies that women would let him “grab them by the bustle,” or else he called some of the Native Americans he fought against in Tecumseh’s War a “whiny bunch of Liz Warrens.”  

(Supplemental Historical Note: This was long before they had hashtags. But we have them now.  So #wemustneverstopmockingher )

Ironically, Huppke has probably out-smarted himself – thus creating this SCOTUS argument which future legal scholars will probably refer to as the case of “Half-wit v. Half-wit” – with his call to ban teaching anything about Trump’s presidency in K-12 public schools. 

Because ANYTHING taught about Trump in public schools run by leftist teachers’ union activists would be such hateful and farcically dishonest propaganda that Huppke is unintentionally doing those future schoolchildren a great favor.

Besides, they’ll be able to learn plenty about Trump’s accomplishments at the colossal Trump Presidential Library (which at this pace will be solely funded by billions of dollars won in defamation suits against various MSM propaganda outlets), as well as the plaques and carved speeches on thousands of Trump statues and monuments across the nation, and from the documentaries playing on whatever television networks replace the desiccated media husks that once were PBS and NPR.

(I exaggerate for comic effect.  And in the hopes that Rex Huppke will somehow see this column, causing the top of his head to blow off in a fit of narcissistic rage.)

See what I mean?  I just produced 1500 words of cathartic bliss, and I’ve barely even scratched the surface of all the great things that happened last week.  So assuming I have the time – I may be spending many hours in a doctor’s waiting room if this condition that has already lasted way more than 4 hours doesn’t subside – I’ll be back with another column tomorrow.

Hamas delenda est!