We Might Have Another Smoking Gun in the Biden Corruption Probe

 The Hunter Biden laptop is a sordid roadmap to the alleged felonious activities of the Biden family. The many shady deals offering government access for cash are well-documented. The Biden associates from China and Ukraine, the two nations from which the family received mountains of money for unscrupulous ends, also happen to be reported intelligence assets. It’s a Candy Land map of corruption and bribery with some pornography added here and there. And one cell phone number caught the eye of reporter John Solomon.

Peter Schweizer of the Government Accountability Institute also highlighted this, noting that Hunter paid for a global cell phone for Joe Biden, who was the “big guy” regarding all these arrangements. Hunter was the person in the meetings setting up these deals, but Joe signed off on them, some of which occurred while he was vice president, one example being the $5 million bribe he allegedly received from Burisma Holdings in 2015-16.

Twitchy first had the post on this cell phone number, where Solomon decided to call it: Joe Biden reportedly answered it.

    John Solomon is an American treasure.
    Busts Joe Biden on his secret global burner phone. pic.twitter.com/CfvFnq460t
    — Big Fish (@BigFish3000) June 28, 2023

    Full clip of @jsolomonReports telling story re: how law enforcement had docs re: Hunter Biden & one of the docs "got leaked" to John w/a phone number, which turns out to be the burner phone used by "Pops" when he was VP, paid for by Hunter's firm. John called the number in 2019 &… pic.twitter.com/lFJw29Dtpc
    — Lisa Mei (@TheNotoriousLMC) June 28, 2023

    @jsolomonReports called Joe Biden’s secret cell phone that Hunter Biden was paying for. “Boy was he shocked… He hung up pretty quickly.” 🤣 https://t.co/WjGonVDRxO
    — Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) June 28, 2023

    A competent investigator would subpoena the cell phone records for that number. https://t.co/E3mIWet1GF
    — Mark Rooney (@Piper336) June 28, 2023

We don’t know how long, but some noted that any investigator worth his or her salt would subpoena these records. It also confirms that the laptop is authentic and not Russian disinformation, which many of us initially knew (via RealClearPolitics):
Recommended
Gorsuch Issues Brutal Takedown of Dissenting Opinion in 303 Creative Case
Leah Barkoukis

    PETER SCHWEIZER: It's interesting, what is the line of communications between Hunter Biden and his business partners and Joe Biden when he's vice president of the United States? It's not the government phone, it's not Joe Biden's personal phone. We know from the laptop that Hunter Biden's business paid for a private phone line that Joe Biden used while he was vice president. It was from AT&T, it was $300 a month, it was a global phone where you could access somebody anywhere around the world.

    We shared that phone number and that account information with people in the House Oversight Committee. My hope is that they if they haven't already, they will subpoena those records because I think it will give an indication on how tight the communication was.

    And that may be the phone, for example, that the Ukrainian, the Burisma executive might have used in this allegation that the he talked to Joe Biden in recorded conversations.

    I would just say one other thing, Maria, as it relates to that sort of shakedown phone call with Henry Zhao that we alluded to, Henry Zhao in 2015 had already sent $5 million to the Bidens. He was the head of a Harvest Investment firm. And what's interesting is in the correspondence there, Hunter Biden again talks to Zhao in the context of "this is a deal that's important to my family" involving his father.

House Republicans have a mandate to go hard and fast in their investigation of the Biden corruption allegations. We have the FBI’s FD-1023 report on the Burisma bribery operation, where a confidential source details recordings of the calls from the co-founder of Burisma Holdings and a ledger of the payments. The tax evasion investigation into Hunter Biden, spearheaded by an IRS task force, was met with heavy resistance from the Justice Department, which swore they weren’t intervening. Attorney General Merrick Garland might land himself an impeachment hearing since he claimed that the investigation was unimpeded by the Justice Department, despite Delaware US Attorney David Weiss, who was also investigating Hunter, being blocked from pursuing charges against the crack cocaine addict multiple times.

And now, a secret cell number, and Biden reportedly picked it up? What else is being hidden from us?

Fetterman's Approval Rating Reaches Biden-Level Lows

 Sen. John Fetterman (D-Penn.) has struggled big time since day one of holding office as a senator due to the aftermath of his stroke.

Since then, the Democrat's approval rating has been drowning and slowly getting deeper underwater. According to a new Quinnipiac poll, Fetterman is falling to President Joe Biden's unpopularity level in their home state of Pennsylvania.

A whopping 50 percent of Keystone State voters disapprove of Fetterman's job performance, while just 39 percent approve. Biden has a worse approval rating in the state, with 57 percent of Pennsylvanians disapproving of his job as president, while only 39 percent support it.

The Democrat has often been accused of being incoherent and mentally unfit to hold a senator position. Comparing him to Biden, Fetterman makes the 80-year-old president seem sensible.

According to Fox News Digital, Fetterman's office has quietly altered the senator's transcribed comments several times to make him sound more cognitively fit.

A Washington Post journalist also admitted to reporting a misleading, "inaccurate" quote provided by Fetterman's office "without checking."

    Yesterday I tweeted this quote, provided to me by the Senator’s office, without checking it against the video. That was my fault. Though it captured his meaning, I deleted the tweet since some of the words in the quote were inaccurate pic.twitter.com/jkDYYr2EU2
    — Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) May 17, 2023

Recommended
Gorsuch Issues Brutal Takedown of Dissenting Opinion in 303 Creative Case
Leah Barkoukis

This month, Fetterman faced backlash after struggling to get through a speech while being dressed like a bum, donning his trademark attire of baggy workout shorts and a Carhartt sweatshirt.

He struggled to pronounce words such as "delegation" and "infrastructure" as he made a muddled one-minute statement.

However, Fetterman's office continues to deny claims the senator is mentally unwell and often criticizes critics who bring attention to the Democrat's ongoing issues outside of his auditory processing problems.

June vs. December

 America loves awesome matchups and rivalries. We have seen NFL-Dallas vs. Green Bay, NBA-Lakers vs. Celtics, boxing-Ali vs. Frazier, NCAA College football-Alabama vs. Auburn and Ohio State vs. Michigan, NCAA basketball Kentucky vs. Duke, and NHL-Rangers vs. Islanders. Heck, you even have Alien vs. Predator and Superman vs. Batman. We Americans love rivalries, wearing our team jerseys or colors, and declaring loyalty and allegiance in those hard-fought contests.

In that same light, there is a new rivalry, a new contest, that has grown before our eyes in America. Perhaps some of you recognize it, others may be in the Matrix world and do not . . . but we are now fully engulfed in a culture war in America, and the stakes are far higher than any sporting event, or movie.

The new rivalry can be broken down by analyzing two months in our nation that are six months apart, June and December.

We are now entering the final week of a month that has become a period of high emphasis on individual sexual behavior openly displayed in utter deviancy and hedonistic debauchery. Now there are those putting their hands up, in surrender, and covering their faces, and saying, “Colonel, we should not speak of such things.” There are those who believe that I should be intimidated into silence and acquiescence. I will not be, and it appears there are many others now rising up in dissent, even middle schoolers in Massachusetts. What adults do is their choice, but I will not be brow-beaten into some suggestion that I must accept it. Last time I checked, I also have free will and freedom of speech, expression, and religion in this Constitutional Republic.

In doing an assessment of what June has become, you must ask why Christians are told to shut up and be silent in December? December is the month when we celebrate and remember Christmas. “Christ-mas” which translates in Spanish to “Christ more.” In the month of June, we see the LGBTQIA+ alphabet soup mafia flag all over the place. Kinda interesting that the radical gay lobby has usurped the Biblical symbol of the rainbow as their colors. It is nice to know that there is a Christian organization fighting to reclaim the rainbow and reiterate its true meaning.

The rainbow flag has been flying at US Embassies all over the world. It was displayed on the White House in apparent violation of the US Flag code. It is being proliferated by our military, corporations, and retail stores. The flag has been flying at State and local government buildings, airports, and basically everywhere. How interesting that in the month of December, if you try to put up a nativity scene in celebration of the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, leftists go apoplectic, falling out in rage. They begin to decry the absurdity of Separation of Church and State and religious establishment clause concerns . . . all over a nativity scene. Well, the intent of Jefferson in his letter to the Danbury Baptist Convention of Connecticut was to emphasize that America should never have a head of State, government, or nation, who also professed to be Head of Church over a state-established church. In actuality, Jefferson wanted to protect religious freedoms and liberties which is why people fled England to escape King Henry VIIIth’s declaration which led to persecution and prosecution of those who rejected his Church of England.

In this new culture war in America, the progressive socialist left has established its religion. Mind you that religion is man-made dogma and ritual . . . Christianity is a faith. Yes, there are many religions in Christianity, and they possess their respective dogma and practices. The radical gay lobby and the leftists have concocted a dogma that they believe we must subjugate ourselves to, to not is to be a punishable offense. This is why we see leftist states telling parents that they will lose custody of their children if they do not go along with the left’s religion of gender dysphoria.

Imagine what would happen if there was a decree that asserted that if parents did not support their children being Christian, they would lose custody?

The leftists tell us we must submit our children to “Drag Queen Story Hour” and have them sit before performances of scantily clad men, dressed as women, displaying their genitals. But, if you are a Christian and want to share Biblical story time with children, such as in the case of Kirk Cameron, you are denied, disparaged, demeaned, and denigrated.

In the month of June, if you do not bow down, genuflect, and face towards Washington, DC, and repeat the word “Pride” several times a day you are a bigot, a hater. Yet in the month of December, you are told not to say “Merry Christmas!” Ya know, that offends people. I like to do it anyway and watch the contorted face on some responses such as “Happy Holidays” or “Seasons Greetings” . . . some even respond with “Happy Winter Solstice.” Maybe the day will come when you are found not reciting the pride refrain in June or get caught saying “Merry Christmas” in the public square, you will be punished. Such is the new culture war of June vs. December.

Lastly, we have all been introduced to the rather disturbing group called the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence,” and their quite blasphemous behaviors. The left fully accepts this organization, and even the LA Dodgers baseball organization recognized them . . . being an Atlanta Braves fan that’s a real rivalry. Perhaps you remember the Little Sisters of the Poor, back during the Obama administration, these real nuns had to go before the US Supreme Court to fight against a government mandate . . . the real violation of the Separation of Church and State.

There is a quote that is attributed to yours truly, “When tolerance becomes a one-way street, it leads to cultural suicide.” That is the path we are on with his cultural rivalry between June and December. It will be interesting to see how many Christian flags are flown during December, or nativity scenes at US Embassies worldwide. The lesson of this missive is that we cannot Live Free if we are held under the totalitarian tyranny of the left’s declared religion. While at the same time our true Judeo-Christian faith heritage is under assault.

I am all in for the triumph of the principles and values of December, over the debauchery of June . . . are you?

Steadfast and Loyal!

The Really Big Guy Behind The Big Guy

 ith the back and forth over Trump versus Biden, we have lost sight of the really “Big Guy,” the former president who was implicated in the Hillary email scandal and was running the Russia hoax. His name: our first openly Marxist president, Barack Hussein Obama.

In order to accomplish the destruction of Trump personally, the evidence shows that it was Obama, not Hillary or Biden, who launched the Russia-gate probe of Donald J. Trump. Obama was the real security risk and still is.

To make matters worse, in the indictment of Trump, we find that Special Counsel Jack Smith has a wife, Katy Chevingy, listed as a producer for Michelle Obama’s 2020 Netflix documentary “Becoming.”

This is important since Joel Gilbert has published a book and produced a film about a Michelle Obama run for the presidency in 2024. The film, “MichelleObama2024,” has many interesting revelations, including that Michelle worked closely with Weather Underground terrorist Bernardine Dohrn at the law firm Sidley & Austin.

This is very significant.

Before YouTube terminated my channel, eliminating 500 videos from public view, I had analyzed the issue of then-judge Merrick Garland’s involvement in a court case brought by the Obama Administration to drop terrorism charges against a communist by the name of Elizabeth Anna Duke. She was a member of a Weather Underground spin-off that specialized in terrorism, including bombing the U.S. Capitol in 1983, and fake IDs. Then-Judge Merrick Garland found no problem with a magistrate who arbitrarily dropped the charges against her, at the request of Obama’s Justice Department. ​

Garland, of course, was nominated to the Supreme Court by Obama and when that failed, Biden made him Attorney General.

We are living through Obama’s third term. Which means we have to understand who and what Obama really is.  

​Joel Gilbert’s previous book and film, “Dreams from My Real Father,” explored in detail the intimate relationship that Obama had with Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party member suspected by the FBI to be a Soviet agent. Obama covered up the true identity of Frank Marshall Davis in his book, Dreams From My Father.

As part of the effort to destroy the opposition to Obama, a Justice Department official under Obama, Jack Smith, communicated with the Obama IRS in an effort to target conservative tea party groups for increasing auditing and criminal prosecutions.

Even in the Hillary email scandal, Obama surfaces as a key player.

Senator Lindsey Graham notes that President Trump is being treated unfairly and asks, “Did the Department of Justice charge Hillary Clinton for the private server she had in her home?” Good question. But the real issue is why Obama had used a pseudonym in his communications, to protect his own identity, and sent over Hillary’s private unsecured email server.

What was Obama trying to hide?

In terms of the Russia hoax, we learned from the oversight investigations and the hearings that emails between FBI officials revealed that “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing” and “the White House is running this.”

POTUS is Obama.

But where was the investigation of Obama?

Rep. Elise Stefanik was correct when she said, “This criminal abuse of power went all the way up to the Oval Office where President Obama and then Vice-President Joe Biden were in on it from the very beginning. This was an unlawful attempt by the politicized FBI and DOJ to meddle in our elections.” But it goes deeper than that.

When she says, “The entire false smear was manufactured and paid for by political opponents of Donald Trump,” she is missing one key element – the ultimate source of the disinformation was Russia itself.

As I noted in my column, “The Russians in Russia-gate,” the observations made by Special Counsel John Durham and his staff indicate the FBI’s corruption goes far beyond political bias against former President Trump.  The Russians originated the idea that Trump was a Russian agent and provided the “disinformation” in the Steele dossier which drove the FBI investigation of former President Trump and his associates.

But Durham did not draw the logical conclusion that the FBI has been infiltrated by Russian agents and that the agency cannot be reformed until they are exposed and rooted out.

In this context, remember it was National Security Advisor (NSA) Susan Rice’s email, which Rice sent to herself on January 20, 2017, claiming there was a January 5 meeting with Obama, then-Vice President Biden, FBI Director James Comey, and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates regarding the attempt to frame Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn as a Russian agent.

“President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the intelligence and law enforcement communities ‘by the book,’” Rice wrote to herself, referring to the Flynn case.

“The president stressed that he is not asking about, initiating, or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.”

Rice also wrote that Obama “wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”

Commenting on the significance of this unusual email, investigative writer Jack Cashill told me, “Obama reminds me of one of those killer husbands on Dateline NBC. He scrubs the crime scene down so thoroughly that the giveaway is the excess scrubbing, the overwhelming scent of Clorox in the air. The moment he had Susan Rice tell us the Russia investigation was done ‘by the book,’ we knew it wasn’t.”

When I interviewed Cashill about his book, Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency, it was deleted by YouTube and, eventually, my entire channel of 500 anti-communist videos was taken down.

Cashill’s book accurately describes Obama’s mentor and father figure Frank Marshall Davis as “a bisexual Stalinist pornographer with a taste for underage sex partners.” The question is whether Davis was Obama’s “real father,” as Joel Gilbert maintains and whether their “playdates” amounted to child abuse. Such abuse could help explain Obama’s anti-American presidency and promise to mount a “Permanent Revolution,” a Marxist term that describes his agenda of “fundamental transformation” of America.

I attempted to put the pieces of the puzzle together in two books, Comrade Obama Unmasked, and Red Star Rising. They tell the story of how Obama came to power and was protected in office by communist operatives in the U.S. intelligence community who were then enlisted in a campaign against President Donald J. Trump.

These books document the logical and inevitable conclusion that the most deeply embedded and covert Russian agent of all in the U.S. Government was not FBI counterintelligence agent Robert Hanssen, who spied for the Soviet Union and then Russia for over 20 years, but Obama himself.

The Political Left Is Simply Gross

 

Social media hasn’t been around for very long, but the truth of what is have revealed about so many people has been transformative and leads to the basic, but important, question: Did social media inspire people to become awful trolls, or did it just give a megaphone to expose so many people truly horrible?

It’s the chicken and the egg and, like that question, the answer doesn’t really matter, the end result is what we have to deal with no matter what. But you do have to feel badly for our species sometimes, and a little disgusted that some members of it are capable of being something so gross, such sickening examples of humanity that you have to wonder if it’s worth it.

The latest example of this is sad story of the sub crushed by the immense pressure down by the Titanic. People died, people you’ve never heard of and wouldn’t have had they not died tragically. Yet, for reasons known only to them, some human beings (a term I use loosely) have decided the world needs to know they’re awful people who deserve being ostracized; a shunning – and deserve any and every bad thing that comes their way.

How do you know families are grieving and things, “What were the political donations of these people?” to determine whether or not you’re willing to be a decent human being about it?

That happened over at The New Republic this week. The left-wing birdcage liner is typical of the left, basing their concern for other humans on their political beliefs. Some murder victims don’t matter if they can’t be used to advance their agenda, for example. Not a lot of interest on the left for the thousands of young black men murdered in Chicago, but all the chips are pushed to the center of the table when a police officer kills someone fighting to get the cop’s gun while high as a kite, provided the skin colors of those involved lines up with the progressive food pyramid of victimhood usefulness.

Imagine your boss tells you to look into the political donations of people being impacted by a tragedy; would you do it? Or would you tell your boss you don’t see the relevance of this as families are suffering?

Someone called Daniel Strauss didn’t stand up for common decency when given that chance this week, or he cooked up the concept himself. How it came to be doesn’t really matter as much as an article entitled, “OceanGate CEO Missing in Titanic Sub Had History of Donating to GOP Candidates,” was written by him and published by TNR.

No one knew if they people on the sub were dead or alive, but leftists based their interest and concern for the story on irrelevant sideshows like this and the fact that the passengers were rich, since it cost about a quarter million dollars each to go there.

Questioning the rationale of going to the bottom of the ocean to look at a rotting shell of an old ship is one thing, implying to an audience that it’s ok that these people suffer because their politics is disagreeable to you is something else. There’s a time for that, if that’s something you’re compelled to do, later. Those political records will exist long after the families of those lost deal with their pain, there’s no need to add to if for clicks. I’d rather drink hemlock than write a piece dancing on an open grave while people are suffering.

But this is what the left does constantly. When there’s a mass shooting, the vultures assume motive, skin color and sexuality of the killer, tweeting and prognosticating their fetishized agenda demands before there’s an accurate body count. Then, when the story comes out of how the killer isn’t white or isn’t straight, the interest wanes quickly and it’s like it never happened. Is there a left-wing news organization pushing for the release of the trans-killer in Nashville’s manifesto, for example?

Mention Ronald Reagan to a committed leftist and they’ll fly off, as if possessed, on a Tourette’s tirade about a man who’s been dead for more than 20 years and out office for more than 30. They are angry he existed; they are angry anyone who disagrees with them exists and any level of contempt or disgusting behavior is justified when dealing with people who stand in their way; who won’t conform. There is no equivalent on the right – when Jimmy Carter dies, aside from anonymous troll accounts being shocking for its own sake, there will not be grave dancing. National Review will not run a piece on just how horrible he was as President, or as a man, when he passes. They will eventually run pieces on how bad he was, but not in the wake of his death the way the left works.

Maybe we on the right should, but it’s just not who we are. We see suffering and seek to help it pass, where the left sees it and wonders how they can use it. When you view tragedy as opportunity you lose your humanity over time. I don’t know if it eventually comes back, but I do know that it’s gone for activist left and there’s nothing about them or how they act that indicates they give a damn about it.
Rate this:

When a German Lutheran Pastor Preaches that ‘God Is Queer’

 “Now is the time to say . . . ‘God is queer.’” Who spoke these blasphemous words, and what was the context of the statement?

The words were spoken by Quinton Caesar, a Lutheran pastor in Germany, at the conclusion of the annual gathering of the nation’s Protestant (meaning Lutheran) pastors.

The conference theme was “Now it the time,” and this was the immediate context of Casear’s words (who himself is black, originally from South Africa): “Now is the time to say: ‘Black lives always matter.’ Now is the time to say: ‘God is queer.’Now is the time to say: ‘We leave no one to die.’ Now is the time to say we send a ship and much more and we welcome people at safe harbors, safer spaces for all.”

And how did the crowd of church leaders respond? With sustained applause and shouts of approval, especially for his statement that “God is queer.” (Watch the video here.)

Talk about a picture of an apostate church. Talk about a vivid illustration of blasphemy and spiritual blindness. Talk about shouting to the nation, “We are the blind leading the blind! Come follow us into the ditch!”

And how did the Church Assembly respond to his message? The Assembly said, “Quinton Ceasar gave a very personal and emotionally stirring sermon in the service… He denounced racism and made it clear that many people do not feel safe in the church.”

Ah yes! It was a “very personal and emotionally stirring sermon”! Preach it, brother!

And how did the Assembly respond to the “hateful” comments that Caesar received in response to his message? (I don’t doubt that some of the comments were, indeed, hateful.)

The leadership said, “Nobody has to agree with the statements of the sermons or the elements of the closing services. Exchange and even productive arguments about it are even desired – also among us. But attacks on those who justifiably denounce racism and discrimination in the church lack any form of decency and a culture of debate, they are deeply unchristian. We resolutely oppose this hatred.”

So, the problem was not that an ordained, state-salaried pastor in clerical robes declared that “God is queer.” No, the problem is that people responded with hatred. That’s what must be “resolutely opposed.” That’s what lacks “any form of decency.” That’s what is “deeply unchristian.”

Oh my!

Talk about calling evil good and good evil. Talk about trying to take the speck out of your brother’s eye while you have a plank in your own (see Matthew 7:1-5). Talk about deep self-deception.

And do these leaders really think that the main problem most people had with Caesar’s message was his denouncing of racism? Hardly. It was the blasphemous pronouncement that provoked most of the ire.

Caesar had also stated that, “God is always on the side of those on the margins, who are unseen or unnamed. And if God is there, then there is our place. Love has never been a mass movement. But I’m an optimist.”

So, since God sides with those on the margins, He Himself must be queer. But of course!

Based on this kind of logic, Jesus, who hung out with prostitutes and corrupt tax collectors must Himself have been a whoremonger – and a financially corrupt one at that. That would be an equally sick deduction to make.

Even Germany’s far-right party, the AfD, which is far more political than it is Christian, tweeted that “the Evangelical [= Lutheran] Church has completely distanced itself from the Christian faith.”

This, of course, is completely true, but there is nothing new here. The State Church, as a whole, has been apostate for many years now. It’s just a bit more obvious than before.

No wonder hundreds of thousands of people are leaving these churches every year. No wonder hundreds of church doors are closing and countless church buildings are being sold.

When clergy do not believe that the Bible is really the Word of God, when they no longer preach the gospel, when they themselves do not know God and therefore cannot bring others into His presence, there is no compelling reason for people to attend their services.

What true hope can they offer? What type of life transformation can they promise?

Already in 2018 it was reported that, “Last year saw 660,228 fewer members in Germany’s Protestant and Catholic churches . . . .” (A major reason that the Roman Catholic Church of Germany is also bleeding members is because of the many sex scandals that have plagued it.)

The real gospel will nourish the hungry and the thirsty and challenge the faithful and committed. Human variations of the gospel are no gospel at all. They promise little and deliver even less. They are devoid of the power of God.

Little wonder, then, that church attendance among free evangelicals – meaning, Protestant Christians who are not part of the State Church – is “much higher.”

True Christians want to hear the Word of God. They want to worship Jesus. They want to encounter God.

Consequently, where the Word is being preached (as God’sWord, not as some ancient religious document that is similar toother ancient religious texts), when Jesus is being exalted, when people are meeting with God, true Christians, along with non-believing seekers, will come.

In contrast, if they wanted more of this world’s philosophy, they would simply stay home.

The truth be told, if this annual State Church conference wanted to be accurate with their theme, with one voice they should have shouted out, “Now is the time to proclaim what has been obvious for decades. We are an apostate church!”

May God give courage to the believing remnant. May He pour out a massive spirit of repentance on this very influential (and very lost) country. May the true church of Germany, in all its varied forms and expressions, arise.

Hey, Leftists, Leave Them Kids Alone

 

“Give us the child for eight years, and it will be a Bolshevik forever.” — Vladimir Lenin

Perhaps y’all recognize the title of this missive from the Pink Floyd song, “Another Brick in the Wall.” The word they used in the song was “teacher,” but I prefer to use a very appropriate reference for today, “leftists.” We all know that the teachers’ unions here in the United States, NEA/AFT, are truly indicative of the leftist moniker, with AFT headed by the notorious Randi Weingarten. The aforementioned quote is from a leading leftist, socialist/Marxist figure, Vladimir Lenin, and is also reflective of the mentality of leftists in America today. Consider the crusade of the left to begin their systemic cultural Marxist indoctrination of our children as early as kindergarten.

We have recently been entertained by the triumvirate of incompetence, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Karine Jean-Pierre, who informed us that our children are not our children while explicitly stating that they belong to, well, “all of us.” It was the seemingly unscrupulous Terry McAuliffe who openly asserted, during the Virginia gubernatorial debate, that parents have no right to decide what their children are being taught. Just recently, the leftist Southern Poverty Legal Center (SPLC) decreed that a number of parental rights groups be designated as hate groups. We all know that leftist Attorney General, Merrick Garland, designated parents as “domestic terrorists.”

Adolf Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, and Fidel Castro — all the well-known leftist maniacs we have known and continue to witness — have always made targeting our children one of their objectives, mantra, and priorities. As the wise King Solomon of Israel once stated in Ecclesiastes, “There is nothing new under the sun.” So, here we are today, in America of all places, and the leftists are targeting our children, not just for socialist indoctrination, but for the most perverse, deranged, and insidious reasons: sexual exploitation.

Though this emanates from the Democrats, there are those in the Republican Party who are all in for the sexualization of our children and who believe that we should not speak of nor engage in this “culture war.” To those members of the “Republican Party,” I call you cowards and enablers and ask that you just stay out of the way as we fight for our children. It appears that the modern-day acolytes of the Baal god Moloch are busy with the intended goal of killing our children in the womb, up to birth, and even after birth and now focused on leading them to mutilate their little bodies and prescribing them dangerous physiological altering drugs, hormonal therapies, and puberty blockers.

As well, leftists, and other enablers, are offering up our children to sick, deranged perversions such as men dressed as women openly displaying their genitals. Those parents who submit their children to these acts are the ones who should lose custody, not parents protecting their children from leftist sexual abuse and exploitation, as a recent law in the state of Washington does or proposed legislation in California. I am aware of two parents who have allowed their 15-year-old daughter to rename herself and express that she is now a boy. Not just that, these parents have allowed this 15-year-old daughter to travel alone to Europe with a 21-year-old lesbian, supposedly their daughter’s girlfriend. Last time I checked, that was a felony crime for an adult to engage in sexual activity with a minor.

Then again, the leftists no longer refer to such people as pedophiles; they are now MAPS (minor-attracted persons).

But what happens when it is not just the responsible and accountable parents who are fighting back? What happens when it is the children who push back against the leftists?

The story of Marshall Simonds Middle School in Burlington, Massachusetts, is just encouraging, actually phenomenal. It appears that the school wanted the students to honor pride month on June 2nd by wearing rainbow clothing. It seems that there were some kids who didn’t conform and instead wore patriotic colors and chanted, “My pronouns are USA,” and destroyed pride flags. Boom!

When I was a little boy, my grandpa nicknamed me “Mule” because I was stubborn. Thank God we still have righteously stubborn kids in America. There is no better place for the birth of new Sons and Daughters of Liberty than in Massachusetts.

This pushback did not endear these brave students to the leftists who demanded subjugation, subservience, and surrender. Some parents, teachers, and school administrators went apoplectic. How dare these little ones disallow their progressive socialist leftist indoctrination! Nancy Bonaserra (which means “good evening” in Italian) is the co-chair of the Burlington Equity Coalition. Her coalition is calling for consequences for these students and urging for more emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Parents of LGBTQ kids want a “teachable moment,” in other words, forced indoctrination. One school board member, Michael Espejo, said that “a bad light has been cast over our town.”

Let’s imagine a different scenario: what if the school had wanted students to participate in a Flag Day ceremony honoring America and wanted them to wear patriotic clothing? Now, what if some students had come to school and wore rainbow flags, chanted “Down with the USA,” and tore down American flags? Yeah, they would be hailed on every doggone leftist media outlet as heroic and probably invited to the White House as well as being given keys to the city.

Hey, leftists, leave the kids alone; I find it unconscionable that the left believes that we are just supposed to lie down and take their absurdities and perversions with no opposition. Then again, the leftists want no opposition. This is the reason they are doing everything possible to make Donald Trump an example to us all.

Americans, real Americans, want to Live Free, and we will not surrender our children and their freedom, their right to freedom of speech and expression.

No one will ever say it better than President Ronald Reagan:

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States, where men were free.”

I will never relent and always fight for freedom for my two daughters, Aubrey and Austen, and for my grandson, Jaxton Bernard, and my future grandchildren. I will never tell them what America was once like. I will tell them of the great culture war when we told the leftists to leave the kids alone and kicked them in the ass! I hope you will enjoy telling the same story to your grandkids.

Steadfast and Loyal

Fox Fires Producer Who Approved Calling Biden a 'Wannabe Marxist-Leninist Dictator'

 Fox News parts ways with the producer responsible for using an on-air headline to refer to President Joe Biden as a “wannabe dictator.”

Long-time producer Alexander McCaskil confirmed his exit from the network via a social media post, saying it was the best place he has ever worked.

“It’s been a wild ten years…. the best place I’ve ever worked,” but “the time has come,” McCaskill wrote, adding that he asked Fox “to let me go, and they finally did.”

The Instagram post showed the former producer standing outside of Fox News New York City headquarters carrying a box of belongings. “To all my friends there: I will miss you forever,” he added.

The producer reportedly offered to resign with two weeks’ notice but was told to clean out his desk and leave immediately.

    Former Fox News producer Alexander McCaskill, who parted ways with the network for airing the "wannabe dictator" chyron, posted this photo of him leaving Fox offices on his Instagram.

    McCaskill was also a longtime producer/editor for Tucker Carlson.https://t.co/MvJqRMiBOR pic.twitter.com/4ebvPhadsy
    — Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) June 16, 2023

McCaskill previously worked as ex-Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s managing editor. On his latest “Tucker on Twitter” video series, the former host, without naming McCaskill, claimed that after the chyron ran, “the women who run the network panicked.”

“First, they scolded the producer who put the banner on the screen,” Carlson said. “Less than 24 hours after that, he resigned. He had been at Fox for more than a decade. He was considered one of the most capable people in the building.”

Carlson stood by the producer’s decision to label Biden as a dictator following the political prosecution of indicting Former President Trump.

    Ep. 4 Wannabe Dictator pic.twitter.com/MDcs5g0gxB
    — Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) June 15, 2023

Earlier this year, McCaskill was named in a lawsuit by former Fox News producer Abby Grossberg, claiming he “belittled female employees.” According to her, Grossberg said the former producer said a separate room where breastfeeding mothers can go to nurse is a “waste of space.”

However, Fox has denied allegations in Grossberg’s lawsuit.

Armed IRS Agents Shut Down Montana Gun Store in a 'Soviet-style Intimidation' Raid

 

You’re not imagining this, folks. Armed federal agents are being weaponized to go after the Democrats’ political enemies, including industries they find disreputable. The liberal media’s echo chamber will work overtime to drown out these stories. They attempted to gaslight us on gas stoves. However, that pales compared to the Russian collusion hoax and how the Department of Justice has become the Democratic National Committee’s Stasi force. 

The FBI is out of control, engaging in censorship schemes with social media companies, procuring illegal wiretap warrants, and seems hell-bent on protecting the Biden family even after their sources have compiled incriminating evidence of corruption. So, it’s not far-fetched to hear federal agents raided a Montana gun store, shut it down, and seized sensitive documents about private citizens (via The Blaze):

Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) is demanding answers after he says a group of armed IRS agents raided and temporarily closed a Montana gun shop in Great Falls Wednesday. 

"This event is another example of President Biden weaponizing federal agencies to target and harass hardworking Americans for exercising their constitutional rights," Rosendale said in a letter to leaders of the Internal Revenue Service and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. 

Twenty heavily armed federal agents pulled in behind Highwood Creek Outfitters' owner Tom Van Hoose as he arrived at his shop Wednesday morning, KRTV reported. 

IRS agents confiscated background check forms from the store that contained sensitive personal information about all customers who ever purchased a gun at the shop. The forms do not include financial information, Rosendale said, calling the act an "egregious breach of privacy" that "showed no regard for federal law." 

"There is no circumstance in which 4473s would be necessary in an investigation spearheaded by the IRS," Rosendale said in a letter addressed to ATF Director Steven Dettelbach and IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel. 

Congressman Rosendale described the incident as an example of “Soviet-style intimidation raids” by the Biden administration to curb Second Amendment rights. And these events come as the IRS plans to hire 87,000 more agents. Meeting that goal might not be smooth, as House Republicans are trying to cut its funding, but that won’t stop this administration from trying to shore up this agency. The fact that some of these agents will be armed is also disconcerting. The media has also worked hard to neutralize the narrative that this army of new IRS agents won’t be used to target the middle class through audits.

They’re coming for us.

Which Way AI?

The cynic can be forgiven his pessimism because, despite excuses from some left-leaning news outlets (but more on that in a minute), there is a very real concern that AI – promising as it does a growth comparable to the rise of the internet in the mid-90s -- could easily become systemically biased against conservatives themselves.

Recognizing this, and no doubt eager not to underestimate AI’s potential, Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley announced the No Section 230 Immunity for AI Act (if the name doesn’t speak volumes, you need to do a little reading) on June 14. Essentially, the legislation would do what it suggests: make companies found complicit in harm as the result of generative AI liable for damages.

It’s an important move (although certainly not the only legislation floating out there seeking to control the next big thing), primarily because that sneering Vice article linked above attempts to debunk reports of bias in AI in a way that strains credulity (emphasis mine).

    National Review staff writer Nate Hochman wrote the piece after attempting to get OpenAI’s chatbot to tell him stories about Biden’s corruption or the horrors of drag queens. Conservatives on Twitter then attempted various inputs into ChatGPT to prove just how “woke” the chatbot is. According to these users, ChatGPT would tell people a joke about a man but not a woman, flagged content related to gender, and refused to answer questions about Mohammed. To them, this was proof that AI has gone “woke,” and is biased against right-wingers.

    Rather, this is all the end result of years of research trying to mitigate bias against minority groups that’s already baked into machine learning systems that are trained on, largely, people’s conversations online.

Recommended
Son of Far-Left MN Democrat Accused of Killing Five in Deadly Crash
Julio Rosas

It appears Vice’s explanation for apparent bias is that the internet doesn’t have enough hateful material from which to pull answers that would satisfy conservative requests. Even if one chooses to ignore the implied insult, the suggestion that the internet is somehow lacking in non-progressive content is simply absurd.

And let’s talk about OpenAI, the former nonprofit famously co-founded by Elon Musk that developed the ChatGPT chatbot. Is it possible to determine if conservatives' “panic” over AI bias is overwrought?

OpenAI, originally a nonprofit, was started by a batch of tech entrepreneurs including Sam Altman, Reid Hoffman, Greg Brockman, Jessica Livingston, Peter Thiel, and Elon Musk. The initial investment was hyped to be about $1 billion; but it was later revealed the organization took in just over $100 million in donations from its inception in 2015 through 2021.

It has since transitioned, with much fanfare, to a for-profit, leaving Musk at least questioning – in seriously hilarious fashion by using the organization’s own chatbot -- if that transition was legal and ethical.

    Elon Musk tweeted Saturday a ChatGPT conversation that speculated about the 2019 transition of its creator, OpenAI, from a nonprofit to a for-profit organization. The AI chatbot concluded that, if the for-profit business had used the nonprofit’s resources for the change, it would have been “highly unethical and illegal.”

While the media was focusing on the for-profit transition, they failed to take much interest in what TechCrunch acknowledges: the tax filings of the nonprofit entity and the behavior of now-CEO Sam Altman tell a revealing story about the way AI programming could be headed.

TechCrunch had this to say in justifying OpenAI’s transition to a for-profit company: “Tax filings seen by TechCrunch indicate the original OpenAI nonprofit retained control over all of its financial assets, totaling tens of millions of dollars, meaning none of its money was used to spin out the organization’s commercial enterprises. The interesting part is where that money ended up: financing Universal Basic Income pilots aiming to fix the very problems OpenAI’s technologies seem to be creating.”

Altman is a big fan of a UBI and has been funding a nonprofit called UBI Charitable, which carries a mission “to research and deploy Universal Basic Income (UBI) programs — the no-strings-attached payouts scheme that futurists like Altman and Musk believe will be necessary when advances in robotics and AI, similar to those being developed by the two technologists, render many human occupations unprofitable.”

Perhaps it goes without saying, but UBI is not a popular policy among conservatives.

There’s also the fact that the 2020 list of funding from OpenAI reads like a leftist wish-list of activist organizations. The ACLU, SPLC, Equal Justice Initiative, and The Tides Foundation, among others, all make appearances on the 2020 tax filings.

For his part, Altman likes to donate to Democrats, giving $250K in 2020 to a Biden-supporting Super PAC. He’s also become quite the world traveler, as this very approving piece in a Chinese tech media outlet makes clear.

    Altman is truly humble.

    According to incomplete statistics from PingWest, Altman has had meeting with a long and sumptuous list of policymakers. This includes European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, UK Prime Minister Sajid Javid, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, Israeli President Isaac Herzog, and UAE Prime Minister Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, among others.

While none of this information proves AI is absolutely headed toward programming bias, it does start to reveal a pattern. A majority of AI researchers are financed by Big Tech, and Big Tech tends to give almost all of its political donations to Democrats. When you layer on top that AI is already being used in popular editing software like Grammerly – and appears to have a distinct point of view – and that some of tech’s biggest left-leaning funders like Dustin Moskovitz and Sam Bankman-Fried are huge fans of AI’s potential, it’s no wonder conservatives are worried and Republicans are already moving on legislation.
 

Why We Will Lose to China

Let’s suppose, for a minute, that DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) is coming to the NBA. What would it look like?Permit me to fantasize a bit to answer the question above. I’m a far left-wing, socialist kook, a multi-gazillionaire who got that way because of free market capitalism. But I believe everybody ought to be equal, except not equal to me, of course, so socialism is the answer for the world. Regardless, I am firmly committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion. That is my religion. I believe it, and since I’ve bought the most powerful government in the world, I’m going to make you believe it, too. If you don’t like it, go buy yourself your own government.But it does get a little bit boring being a puppet master to degenerate, demented, decadent octogenarian politicians, so I decided to branch out. I intend to buy an NBA team. I’m going to locate it in Thailand, and I will name my team the Thailand Ladyboys. DEI, you know. And, because I am totally committed to DEI, that is exactly what my team will be composed of (Ladyboys, etc.). So, since inclusiveness is essential, and I need 12 players on my team, here is who will be on it: two ladyboys, one CCP member, one transgender man (other than ladyboys), a black woman, a white woman, a Hispanic woman, a five-year-old mutilated child, one black man, a migrant (who is illegally in America, of course), an anti-Catholic drag queen nun from California, and a non-binary homeless person of indistinguishable composition. No white men, you say? Well, I’ve got that covered. I will hire Pete Buttigieg as my coach. He knows as much about basketball as he does about transportation. So, we will have the most diverse, equitable, inclusive roster in the NBA. The new Joe Biden dream team! America’s team!Now let me switch to something serious. My team obviously won’t win a game (that’s not the point). They might draw some customers for a while just to get a few laughs, but an 0-for team doesn’t usually make much money. They would, of course, get crushed by every legitimate NBA opponent. They might never even score a point.They will lose, and we all know why they will lose. They will lose because the team was not built to win. I did not choose my basketball players based on merit, ability, and basketball savvy. I chose my players in order to feel good. In order to pat me on the back. In order to show the world I believe in “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” my whole franchise goes to Hades in a handbasket because there doesn’t exist one qualified player on the entire team. Nobody would expect them to win. They can only be expected to lose. And lose big. Get slaughtered. And eventually, go bankrupt and fold. Despite my gazillions. But again, it isn’t about winning. It’s about “diversity.” And “equity.” And “inclusion.” That’s the new American religion.Now let me switch to serious. No NBA owner would ever do such a stupid, ridiculous thing as building his franchise on DEI. He knows exactly what would happen. He wouldn’t win a game. He would lose. Get slaughtered, etc. People would laugh at him and wonder what in the world the idiot was doing. Only Democrats would understand.It would never work in the NBA, and everybody knows it. But Joe Biden (apparently) expects it to win in world affairs and is running the United States government, and even more ominously, the United States military, on the buffoonery of DEI. And obviously, the situation is far more dangerous in government than it is in basketball. Basketball is a game. Government and realpolitik aren’t. Nor is war. There are some very evil people on this planet, some of whom have some very big planes, ships, guns, and bombs, and they would love to thrash and destroy the United States. Any semi-intelligent, halfway-competent leader would surround himself with the best people possible, based on their wisdom, knowledge, ability, and character, not on gender, skin color, or sexual preference. And he would strive to recruit the leanest, meanest fighting machine possible that no other country would DARE to threaten for fear of getting obliterated. That is what a capable, rational, non-demented leader would do. He would construct his “team” to win, not get massacred by barbarians.Folks, I guarantee you the Communist Chinese and Russians are not erecting their government and military on “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Xi Jinping doesn’t give one royal, rotten fig about climate change or transgenderism and rainbow flags. The only “brave” people he is interested in are those who will fight to the death for his country, not “brave” people who wave their genitals in the faces of children or show their fake breasts at White House receptions. Xi Jinping intends to win, and he is building the best “team” he can in order to do just that.And that is the reason why, someday soon, China is going to kick America’s butt. I’m not saying that because I want it to happen; far from it. I’m saying that because of Joe Biden and the Democratic Party. Most of us have enough sense to know what it takes to win against a mighty enemy who hates our guts and wants to destroy us. It won’t be easy to defeat a foe like that under ANY circumstances. Still, we sure aren’t going to do it if we hand our nation, government, and military over to a bunch of irresponsible, groveling pansies.Xi Jinping intends to win. Joe Biden couldn’t care less if his country gets slaughtered or not. That is evident by what he is doing. DEI instead of MAQ—merit, ability, and quality. 

If You’re White, Self-Defense is No Longer an Option

 Self-defense is the right to use reasonable force for the purpose of defending one’s own life or the lives of others. Most states allow deadly force in self-defense where the person defending himself reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or grievous bodily harm. As a general matter of law, self-defense is a universally accepted principle in American jurisprudence. Or at least it was until recently.

Several Democratic mayors and prosecutors are sacrificing the right of self-defense in favor of “social justice.” Soros-backed prosecutors are looking the other way when it comes to violent behavior but zealously going after anyone who tries to defend himself from assault. Some notable examples have been in the news.

Seventeen-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse killed one man and wounded another as they chased and assaulted him during a violent protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Videos filmed at the scene proved it was a case of self-defense. Rittenhouse wrote Leon Wolf in The Blaze, “someone who was in legitimate and reasonable fear for their life and trying to survive in a chaotic situation.” Nevertheless, Rittenhouse was arrested and charged with first-degree intentional homicide, which carries a life sentence in Wisconsin. He was ultimately vindicated.

In my new book, The War on Whites, I describe what happened in St. Louis when a white couple, Mark and Patricia McCloskey, attempted to defend their lives and their home against a Black Lives Matter mob that threatened to kill them. The McCloskeys pointed weapons at the mob, but no shots were fired. Police did not show up to protect the McCloskeys from threats of violence. In spite of a video taken at the scene, the McCloskeys were charged with unlawful use of a weapon, a felony carrying a possible four-year prison sentence. No charges were brought against members of the mob, either for trespassing, destruction of private property, or threatening physical harm.

When Jordan Neely, a large black man with a history of violence, terrorized a New York City subway car full of frightened passengers, he was taken down in a chokehold by Daniel Penny, a former Marine who happened to be white. Neely died as a result of the encounter. Penny was adamant that what he did was justifiable homicide by self-defense. Instead of Penny receiving a medal for heroism, he was arrested and indicted on a charge of manslaughter. This is an example of how the legal system supports black criminality.

The Soros-backed Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, has a record of releasing violent felons and charging citizens like Daniel Penny for lawful acts of self-defense. One of the worst cases involved a bodega owner who killed an armed robber when the robber assaulted him. Bragg charged the owner with second-degree murder before dropping the case. In another incident, a parking valet shot an armed car thief when the thief pulled a gun. Bragg charged the valet with attempted murder, but the charges were later dropped.

When white people are assaulted by blacks, the legal system bends over backward to coddle the black perpetrators. If there is a confrontation between a white person and a black person, said author Ben Shapiro, the Left decrees that the white person must be at fault. Referring to the case of Jordan Neely, Shapiro said, “Neely apparently had a right to threaten people on the subway.” Penny did not have the right to self-defense.

In San Bernardino, California, a 21-year-old black man assaulted a white police officer as she was trying to prevent a domestic violence crime. He wrestled the female officer to the ground, punched her in the face, and seized her firearm. He attempted to shoot her in the face but failed only because the gun jammed. The incident was caught on a neighbor’s cellphone.

In what should have been an open-and-shut case for the prosecution, the defense lawyer argued that his client was acting in self-defense. “The issue,” said the attorney, “was, was the initial detention legal? If it’s not, then he’s not guilty. He could punch her 100 times, and it wouldn’t matter.” The jury—incredibly—found the defendant not guilty of attempted murder and other charges. Had the defendant been white and the officer black, there is a reasonable expectation that the verdict would have been different. The self-defense argument was allowed for this black defendant even though a video proved he had attempted to kill a police officer.

Social justice is anything but justice when the right to self-defense is predicated on skin color. In our woke society, social justice is interfering with traditional notions of right and wrong. A white person can be denied the right of self-defense. A black felon can get away with it. Welcome to our brave new world.

The War on Fatherhood in Secular America

 There has never been a time in the history of these United States when there was a greater need for truly genuine Christian fathers than now. Study after study shows that children raised in two parent traditional families have not only a much better chance of success in life, but also see a significant reduction in mental health issues including reduced levels of suicide. The dark days in which we are living cry out for a solid cadre of real men who will stand up and be counted for truth and righteousness — steadfastly taking their rightful position in the family. Men living heroic lives must ultimately be the nuclear family’s protectors from the forces of evil who would destroy its foundations and that of our nation.

Perhaps, though, the saddest commentary on our national society is the absence of this rare subset of humanity. Some years ago, I was blessed to spend three days in the Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola. During that time, I asked the warden about any practical needs that the inmates might have. His initial response was not necessarily surprising for the springtime of the year as he told me that there was a huge demand for Mothers’ Day cards. What was astonishing, though, was his response to my follow up question about the need for Fathers’ Day cards when he simply said, “Our men have no need for that type of cards because they have no fathers to send them to.” So, in these days when our culture finds itself in such turmoil, it is not too difficult to follow the dots to one of the most serious failures in our American society.

A recent study was done by the nonprofit organization Communio, which suggested that a “collapse in marriage and resident fatherhood is fueling widespread loneliness.” Adding to the point, the researchers asserted that “what we are seeing is the net effect of all that is the crisis of loneliness; that the loneliest people walking around in our churches, in our communities, are actually not the elderly or widows. It’s men and women in their 30s.” This epidemic of loneliness is echoed by an advisory issued by Surgeon General Vivek Murthy on May 3 of this year proclaiming that this phenomena of isolation in the U. S. could be as deadly as smoking.

Their findings also indicated that “of all Sunday church attendees, 80% across all demographics were raised in a continuously married home with both biological parents.” If you connect this data with that of a report by Pew Research Center and the General Social Survey that was published in September showing a surge of adults leaving Christianity to become atheist, agnostic, or “nothing in particular,” the reality is even more startling. Clearly this phenomenon of the collapse of resident fathers in the home is at the very heart of the “unravelling of Christianity” in our nation. Even more frightening is the prediction that “the growth of the religious nones is unlikely to stabilize until 25-30 years after married fatherhood stops its decline.”

Perhaps the pertinent question should be asked: where have all the fathers gone? For the answer to this most important query, you need to look no further than to the so called “woke Marxist culture” which has declared all-out war on the traditional family because it stands in the way of their sordid concept of the physical world. What better way to create utter chaos in society than by destroying the family structure? What better way to destroy the family structure than by emaciating the familial role of men as fathers? Satan himself is standing gleefully by in the shadows as men are told that masculine Christian leadership in the family must be abolished. The result is that there is not only an increase in loneliness because the traditional roles of men and women have been demolished, but also our culture is being flooded with an unchecked wave of alcohol, illicit drugs, and pornography, along with cheap and often deviant sex. When there are so few real fathers standing in the gap for their families, impenetrable roadblocks are created that prevent real, committed, and loving relationships between men and women and their offspring. To add to this misery, this bill of goods is being sold to even our youngest and most impressionable children even in preschool curriculums and classrooms across America. Ask yourself why the radical left is so ardently pushing all this gobbledygook of deviant misinformation, and you may begin to understand the seriousness of the vicious scheme of destruction now unleashed in our country.

Here is the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Satan’s demonic minions are at this moment trying to load our children onto the train cars that will take them to their ultimate death camp destinations. Only this time, these concentration camps aren’t called by the names of Auschwitz, Dachau, Treblinka, Buchenwald, or Ravensbruck. No, these camps are known by other names like pornography, fentanyl, Marxism, sexual deviancies, sex trafficking and atheism. In some sense these destinations are even more deadly than those awful hellholes of Nazi Germany because these are not only designed to bring physical death but spiritual death as well.

Now is the time for all good and decent men to not only come to the aid of their country, but to also stand up and be counted for themselves and their families. Enough of this malaise wrought by the very demons of darkness. The urgency of this hour requires that the real faithful men of America, particularly those of us who call ourselves Christian, adhere to the admonition of the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 16:13 when he urges the males in the church in that great city to “Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.” Our nation, our children, and our families simply cannot wait 25-30 years for us to get our acts straight and begin to live heroically once again. God help the children and our nation if we do not.

Dan Crenshaw: Gender Affirming Care Is the ‘Hill We Will Die On’

 Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) tore into Yale School of Medicine assistant professor Meredithe McNamara— a pediatrician with expertise in gender-affirming care— over her support for disfiguring children.

During a House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Crenshaw addressed the “elephant in the room” by asking McNamara about his proposal to remove funding from hospitals that perform surgeries and provide puberty blockers and cross-sex hormone medication to transgender minors.

Crenshaw echoed Republican talking points, calling transgender treatments “barbaric” and the “issue of our time.”

On the contrary, McNamara argued that gender-affirming care for minors is essential for the well-being of their health.

Crenshaw argued against McNamara’s claims, saying that most studies lack evidence of any benefit of transgender procedures for minors.

McNamara then admitted that data is cherry-picked, adding that it is “unscientific and flawed to pick a single study or a single statistic and discuss it in isolation.”

“The British Journal of Medicine looked at 61 systematic reviews with the conclusion that, quote, ‘There is great uncertainty about the effects of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries in young people,'” Crenshaw said. “The Journal of the Endocrine Society came up with the same conclusion, even the American Academy of Pediatrics. They all cite the lack of evidence.”

The Republican continued to grill McNamara on the fact that no studies state strong evidence of the benefits of permanent physiological changes regarding gender-affirming care.

In response, the “doctor” refused to cite a study that proves her point.

“You’re not telling me any study, don’t say ‘standards of care,'” Crenshaw stated. “Tell me one.”

“So, um, the standards of care,” McNamara said.

“The standards of care,” Crenshaw questioned. “That’s not a journal; that’s not a study. That’s not an organization. That’s not an institution. You’re just saying words. Name one study.”

However, McNamara failed to name a specific study before Crenshaw’s time was up.

“It is indeed compassionate to stop kids from being permanently physically altered based on little to no evidence that it will improve their underlying mental condition,” Crenshaw concluded

Democrats Are Horrible People

 

I’ve had more jobs than most families. That may sound weird, but over the course of my life, I’ve held more than 77 jobs. Most for not very long and many at the same time. When you grow up without a lot of money, work isn’t an option; it's a necessity. In the near dozen or so retail jobs I held when I was younger, there were few things I disliked more than inventory day. The store would close early, and you’d have to stay late, scanning everything to see what they had (and what was stolen). It’s wildly essential information to the business. It’s also wildly important to take an inventory of other things in your life, like, for example, just how horrible Democrats are. If you don’t, like Ferris Bueller said, “you could miss it.”

Let’s start with Barack Obama. The former President likes to think of himself as a statesman but beware. Democrats always declare something they like as the opposite of what it really is. As an aside, a good rule of thumb in life is the louder someone declares themselves to be something, the less likely it is they actually are that thing. Intelligent people don’t need to tell everyone they’re smart; funny people don’t tell everyone how funny they are, honest, loyal, hard-working, etc. If you are something, we’ll pick up on it. 

Obama loves himself to the degree that no one can compete. He also leads a life where no one tells him no, at least no one who can make it stick. That, coupled with his general arrogance, empowered him to call South Carolina Senator Tim Scott an “Uncle Tom.” 

He didn’t do it directly – a skillful bigot has a thesaurus full of ways to convey their hatred with a wink and a nod, and that’s exactly what Barack did. “There’s a long history of African-American or other minority candidates within the Republican Party who will validate America and say, ‘Everything’s great, and we can make it.’” Obama told former campaign manager David Axelrod of Scott. “And so if a Republican, who may even be sincere in saying, ‘I want us all to live together,’ doesn’t have a plan for how do we address crippling generational poverty that is a consequence of hundreds of years of racism in this society — and we need to do something about that — if that candidate is not willing to acknowledge that, again and again, we’ve seen discrimination in everything from … getting a job to buying a house to how the criminal justice system operates. If somebody’s not proposing, both acknowledging and proposing, elements that say, ‘No, we can’t just ignore all that and pretend as if everything’s equal and fair. We actually have to walk the walk and not just talk the talk.’ If they’re not doing that, then I think people are rightly skeptical.”

The only people “skeptical” of Tim Scott’s sincerity are the leftists terrified by the prospect of a black conservative catching the attention of the American public. Scott, an actual descendant of slaves (unlike Obama), is the embodiment of the American Dream, as is Obama. The only difference between Scott and Obama is Obama believes he was exceptional in his ability to beat what he declares to be oppression of the “system.” Scott realizes anyone can do it because there is no such thing. The “system” doesn’t know anyone exists, nor does it care any more than the planet cares when you stomp your foot; it simply is. It’s left-wing politicians telling kids they can’t succeed who discourage the attempt and instill defeatism, not the “system.” 

As I said, an “inspirational figure” who is actually just a typical Democrat and a horrible person.

We also have to count the current occupant of the Oval Office among the worst. Joe Biden, known for being inappropriate and the touching and senile sniffing of women and young girls, got himself some side-boob this week from actress Eva Longoria. 

No female staffer wants to be alone with Joe in a secluded area that’s almost as dangerous as being between Chuck Schumer and a camera, as Tara Reade learned the hard way. But Joe doesn’t need to be in private to get his freak on, nor does his wife – whose ex-husband claims started her relationship with Joe while they were still married; happily, he thought (making it adultery) – have to be out of town or even distracted. She knows what she married, and several mansions and a stint in the White House is a small price to pay for a little public humiliation, especially when you know the traditional media won’t ever mention it.

At a White House event, Joe rubbed his hands along the side of the breasts of the actress in full view of the world. Longoria’s reaction said it all – she grabbed his hands and removed them as if it were choreographed, or like she’d had a long career in the town where “Me Too” was invented. 

Longoria, a vast Democrat fundraiser, and activist, will likely never address this and will undoubtedly campaign for Biden next year – agenda über alles. But it happened; it happened on camera and in front of Joe’s wife, and Eva felt violated by it, and not a single one of them will do or say anything about it. 

This brings us to the press, who witnessed it all and stayed silent. Who hears the allegations of corruption and refuses to investigate; who sees the evidence of how the Biden family got rich and can’t even be bothered to ask a follow-up question if only to disprove the story and make Republicans look bad? They don’t do it because, somewhere deep inside, they suspect it’s all true, they fear it’s all true, and they want to get as much of their agenda rammed through as possible before it all comes crashing down because they cannot longer cover it up. If that means some cities are ruined, or a generation of kids are lost, or just some actress gets violated so an old man can feel giddy inside, so be it.

As I said, Democrats are horrible people. And this ongoing inventory reiterates what else we know: that they’re gross on top of it.

Rep. Andy Biggs Says Mayorkas Is Intentionally Destroying the U.S. Border

 

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz) has vowed to hold the Biden Administration’s Department of Homeland Security accountable for the ongoing border crisis wreaking havoc on the U.S. 

This week, Biggs questioned former acting homeland security secretary Chad Wolf during a House subcommittee hearing on the DHS’ handling of the southern border. 

“The U.S. Constitution requires the administration to ‘take care that the immigration and border security laws be faithfully executed.’ It is clear to me and millions of Americans that the Biden Administration has failed to do so,” Wolf said. 

Wolf continued to criticize President Joe Biden for deliberately destroying the nation’s border, adding that it is the first administration—of either political party— to diminish the border’s security knowingly. 

Biggs asked Wolf if Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas had violated the law. In response, Wolf said that “new leadership is needed.” 

“In all candor, the Biden administration is the first administration, of either political party, to deliberately take steps to diminish the security along our southern border.” - @ChadFWolf pic.twitter.com/juQFIjSv64

— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) June 7, 2023

The Republican also questioned Steven Bradbury from The Heritage Foundation if Mayorkas, appointed by Biden, has failed the country as he continues to release tens of thousands of illegal aliens into the U.S. through mass parole. 

Citing the Immigration and Nationality Act, Bradbury said, “Yes.” 

.@RepAndyBiggsAZ questions @Heritage Distinguished Fellow Steven Bradbury on whether DHS Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas has violated the law. pic.twitter.com/1ofxdpFMDO

— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) June 7, 2023

Biggs then asked Wolf if the Biden Administration, including Mayorkas, was intentionally violating the law, which he said: “They know exactly what they are doing [in DHS].”  

Joseph Edlow, former acting director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, also agreed with Wolf, saying that he doesn’t believe Mayorkas is incompetent in doing his job, rather than his actions are intentional. 

Biggs ended his testimony by calling for Mayorkas to be impeached. 

“I think it's long past time for him to be impeached," @RepAndyBiggsAZ says of DHS Sec. Mayorkas. pic.twitter.com/c9qIhAZdhQ

— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) June 7, 2023

Biden Admin Confirms China Has Been Spying On the U.S. Through Cuba

 The Biden Administration confirmed that China has been spying on the United States from a base in Cuba, calling it an "ongoing issue."

On Saturday, the Biden White House said the Chinese spy base had already been established, adding that the issue was inherited before President Joe Biden took office.

"This is an ongoing issue and not a new development, and the arrangement as characterized in the reporting does not comport with our understanding," an administration official said. "When this administration took office in January 2021, we were briefed on a number of sensitive PRC efforts around the world to expand its overseas logistics, basing, and collection infrastructure globally to allow the [military] to project and sustain military power at a greater distance."

"This effort included the presence of PRC intelligence collection facilities in Cuba," the official continued. "In fact, the PRC conducted an upgrade of its intelligence collection facilities in Cuba in 2019. This is well-documented in the intelligence record."

On Thursday, several outlets reported that China and Cuba reached a secret agreement for China to establish an electronic eavesdropping facility, which would allow Chinese intelligence services to "scoop up electronic communications throughout the southeastern U.S., where many military bases are located, and monitor U.S. ship traffic."

The reports claimed that China had agreed to pay Cuba billions of dollars to build the underground station, with U.S. officials describing the intelligence on the plans as "convincing."

However, White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby told reporters that the reports were "inaccurate."

Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), chair of the House Intelligence Committee, criticized Biden for allowing China to walk all over the U.S.

"President Biden needs to stop ignoring the threat from China," he said in a statement. "In less than 48 hours, officials from the Biden administration have contradicted themselves multiple times about whether or not the Chinese Communist Party is spying on the United States. This is unacceptable."

Is Russia’s War on Ukraine a Global War?

 Russia’s war against Ukraine is a regional war with global implications. In the struggle for global opinion “the West” is failing in many among the diverse set of nations labeled the “Global South.” Even in many countries that voted in favor of Ukraine at the UN General Assembly, the narratives on the war Russia and its sidekick China are peddling find a sympathetic ear.

This should not come as a surprise given these countries are united by one thing: the view that “the West” and especially the United States and NATO have little credibility. In each case it is a different mixed bag of ideology, economic interests, dependencies, geopolitical concerns, and general rejection of sanctions as an instrument that leads them to not criticize or even side with Russia.

Moral indignation is not a very effective response. Rather, Europeans need to invest more in dealing with the global economic fallout of Russia’s war and in better countering Russian and Chinese propaganda. Rather than framing the war as struggle of democracy versus autocracy, they should make defending sovereignty and territorial integrity and going against Russian imperialism and colonialism the priority. If Europeans are self-critical of their own track record on these, they will be more convincing.
Jędrzej CzerepHead of the Middle East and Africa programme at the Polish Institute of International Affairs (PISM)

A simple cartoon scene is being reproduced all over Burkina Faso’s social media. Two tables are being displayed: a long line of donors queue to the first one, with a Ukrainian flag and a banner reading “6 months of war”; the second table, with a Burkinabe flag and “6 years of terrorism” banner doesn’t attract anyone.

In Congo you can see the same cartoon but with a Congolese flag instead of a Burkinabe flag, and so on.

It tells us something.

Before expecting people from Africa or the Arab World to take up Ukraine’s case as theirs, we must ask ourselves if we are ready to apply the same decisiveness in defense of human life and standards everywhere. If we fail the most lively and resilient pro-democracy movement in the world today—the Sudanese one—by imposing a Minsk-like settlement that only rewards the aggressor (the junta in Sudan’s case), its activists won’t be eager to express solidarity with Ukraine anymore.

Here is the key to explain Ukraine’s and the West’s inability to win outright support in the Global South. Russian arguments, as misleading as they might be, fall on fertile ground when they refer to a critique of the unipolar world or Western double standards. To challenge pro-Russian voices, one would risk being seen as going against some of the legitimate and prevalent local concerns. That keeps potential sympathizers silent. Like it or not, looking from Yemen to Mozambique, the Ukraine war doesn’t seem that unique and transformative as it does looking from the West.
Marta DassùSenior advisor for Europe at The Aspen Institute

No, this is not a global war: many of so-called neutral countries, including India and South Africa, do not see it as their “own” war—but rather as a war between Russia and the West being waged in Ukraine.

And yet, some of its repercussions are indeed global: food and energy security, the future of the rules-based international order. What could still turn the Russian invasion of Ukraine into a global war is the China variable: if Beijing were to intervene with arms deliveries to Russia, then the current conflict would morph into a test of strength between Western democracies and today’s major autocracies. For now, this is not happening and remains unlikely, given the importance China attaches to its relations with the Western economies.

An additional factor limits the spillover potential of this war: most members of the “Global South” simply do not view Russia as important and powerful enough to justify classical forms of “balancing”—which is instead the more immediate concern for the Europeans on a regional scale, being tackled largely by NATO.

In short, the war in Ukraine is not World War III, and there are enough reasons to think it will not evolve into that.
Mamane Bello Garba HimaResearcher at the Laboratory of Studies and Research on Economic Emergence at the University of Abdou Moumouni, Niger

It looks like everything the world experienced at the global level is not a good thing. Indeed, while in February 2022, the world was getting over COVID-19, Russia imposed an unjustified war to the world by unilaterally invading Ukraine.

This is a global war because as with every geopolitical bad decision, the world bears the burden: food insecurity, energy crisis, and so on. Unfortunately, for now, third parties—the EU, the United States, and China, for example—are divided on how the war should end: winners versus losers or those looking for peace?

In the Sahel, there is a perception that Europe’s current position on this war amounts to a double standard. Indeed, when the United States invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, war tanks or funds were provided not to those countries’ victims but to the invader.

For their own future world leadership, European governments should build their policies and positions on a genuine base—not necessarily one of a U.S. vision. Regarding this war in Ukraine, the EU should make a clear distinction between the votes at the UN General Assembly from its allies in the Sahel, and the public perception in the Sahel.
Nicholas KaridesDirector of the Institute for Mass Media at the Universitas Foundation, Cyprus

Yes. Not just in terms of the growing engagement of parties external to the conflict, or the scope and repercussions of the war itself, but for a key factor that both weaponizes and torments parts of the globe often without their knowledge: the global information war.

The war is being fought on the ground, where people are dying and being displaced. But it is also being fought relentlessly in our media. Long before boots had landed on the ground, long before Crimea was annexed, Russia with customary military ruthlessness confused, unsettled, and divided public opinion worldwide. It infiltrated with soldierly precision the tech platforms owned by the West. Its troll mercenaries captured key outposts from where they surveyed and targeted the globe’s information intake, stifling and gunning down any resistance on the planet’s public information squares with propaganda and noise. The platforms proved incapable and were often unwilling to intercept the Kremlin’s distortionary attacks.

Well before Ukraine was calling for tanks on the battlefields, scholars and experts had been calling for fact-checkers on the big tech vistas. It is a global war because Russia’s proxy views are now embedded worldwide, booby-trapping our entire information sphere.
Andrei KolesnikovSenior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

What is happening is a global conflict. This is not simply because Putin himself declared the invasion of Ukraine a defensive war against the collective West. But because Putin’s war destroyed the world order, the rules that had been polished for decades and demolished the achievements of Russia itself in entering the concert of civilized countries. Everything that had been built for years collapsed in one day.

This conflict is so large-scale that it changes not only trade, economics, logistics, and politics, but also the psychology and anthropology of entire nations. The Ukrainians have acquired their own identity: a positive one, a European one, and a negative one, based on the aversion to everything Russian.

The Russians—not all of them, but many—who are returning in terms of political culture and amorality to archaic imperialism, have not found their identity, but have lost it. Russia is so significant that this process has global meaning and affects the whole world—its attitudes and behavior. And the conflict also shows who is for humanism, who is ready to profit from war or make compromises, because for some reason these countries need a good relationship with Putin.
Gilles Olakounle YabiPresident of WATHI, Senegal

The war has a large and still not fully determined impact on all the continents and so it can be considered a global war. Beyond the violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and blatant breach of international law, there are also many geopolitical dimensions that cannot be ignored: rivalry between Western powers/NATO and Russia, competition between the United States and China for global leadership in the future, the Western alliance versus BRICS.

It is clear that this is not only about defending Ukraine’s sovereignty, its borders, and its peoples. The diverse positions of the countries in Africa as in Asia and Latin America on the war do include consideration of their existing diplomatic relations and security cooperation with Russia, and of the global geopolitical and economic implications for their own security and economic interests.

So, the fact that the war is a global war does not mean that the reading of the war is the same from one place to another, and that the choice of each country to vote in one way or another, or to abstain from voting a UN resolution on the war, is not guided by a variety of considerations and the perception of their national interests, beyond respect for principles and values.
Martin PlautSenior research fellow at the University of London’s Institute of Commonwealth Studies

The Ukraine war is not a global war, but it clearly has global implications. For many—particularly in the global South—other issues, including climate change and their own conflicts, are far more important. It is for this reason that they resent being “asked to take sides” despite having signed up to the UN Charter which requires all members to defend the territorial integrity of all nations.

Beyond this, their response reflects the increasingly effective use of soft power by China and Russia, as well as hard power exerted by both states either via the Wagner group or territorial expansion, as seen in Taiwan. This is a complex question not easily responded to with a yes or no answer.
Kristi RaikDeputy director of the International Centre for Defence and Security, Tallinn

Russia’s war on Ukraine obviously has strong global implications. Nonetheless it is primarily a war over the European security order, with existential importance especially for European neighbors of Russia but also for the EU and NATO. It is perhaps unavoidable that there are countries in the Global South that see the war differently from the West and avoid taking sides.

Certainly it is not just a matter of communication, that is, Russia having been more effective in spreading its narratives than the West. The interests of, say, India or South Africa are different from Western interests.

The outcome of the war will influence the balance of power between the West and Russia, and the West and China. But even Ukraine’s victory won’t bring us back to the post-Cold War era of U.S. hegemony when the liberal rules-based order was at its strongest. What can be saved by Ukraine’s victory is a rules-based security order in Europe—an order that will exclude Russia for a long time to come and defend European states against the Russian threat.

The Western focus should stay on working toward Ukraine’s victory rather than trying to forge a global consensus on the war. The former is attainable, the latter most probably not.

Who Do the Dems Replace Biden With?

 

Since allegedly getting elected president, Joe Biden has gotten his ancient behind kicked by the Taliban, by Kevin McCarthy, and by a random USAF sandbag to name just a few of the groups, individuals, and inanimate objects that have bested the worst president since Jimmy Carter. This guy is not well. Some might call him senile. Some might call him dumb. Some might call him a corrupt pervert. And some might call that list a good start. 

He mumbles that he’s running, but it is not assured that Biden will be on the ballot in November 2024. There is precedent for a sitting president not being present at the end of the race. LBJ was running, but he got humiliated in the primaries early 1968 and dropped out. Now, Let’s Go Brandon is no Lyndon Baines Johnson. The Delaware Dipwad has less dignity than the guy who made his aides talk to him while he was on the crapper. As long as Bididdler is staggering along being Weekend At Bernie’s’d by his wife the doctor, and a bunch of real doctors, he will be the Democrats’ nominee. There’s not going to be a coup. There’s not going to be a rebellion, even if the GOP manage to nominate someone who is not a mortal lock on defeat. There is no council of wise men that will convene, realize that this whole charade is ridiculous and that this guy belongs in a home, and anoint some less feckless candidate – partially because there’s no consensus on who the replacement might be and partially because a council of wise men assumes their gender and is sexist and wisdom would probably be labeled “white supremacy” by the nincompoops of pallor who form the core of the Democrat Party. 

They will run Biden if they can. Sure, he’s a mental defective, but he’d fare no worse than Diane Feinstein or Ogre Fetterman in a round peg-square hole competition. The Democrats can live with an avatar-in-chief. And they will. The fact is that the Democrats will nominate Hunter’s Daddy in 2024 barring the machinations of fate. But fate may have other plans. He could break his hip. He could get sick. Let’s not be morbid, but when you’re with a guy his age you need to short his actuarial chances. The fact is that fate might take him out of the equation, and then what the hell do the Democrats do?

I hope they panic and tear themselves apart. 

So, who rides in as their White Knight, understanding that the “white” and “knight” parts are both terrible for a number of reasons? The most fearsome candidate is Michelle Obama, but she pretty clearly has no interest in doing this job. Or any job. Neither does Bernie Sanders – the communist will not be adding the White House to his long list of mansions. Maybe they would defrost Hillary Clinton, but the fact that we rarely see her anymore tells us that she’s not doing so great either. Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit would be 77 in 2024, and remember how seven years ago she had to be scooped up and loaded into an SUV after falling over from the strain of standing upright for a minute? At least we’ve dodged that nagging, bitter bullet – unlike Vince Foster.

I kid, I kid. No really, I kid. I have a lot to live for.

Who else might take Crusty’s place? 

Well, in a grievous oversight, the Founders did not impose an IQ test for the office of vice-president, so if Joe pops smoke then Kacklin’ Kamala inherits the job. She would insist that it is her right to keep it and assume the 2024 nomination, but – not to put too fine a point on it – everyone hates her and thinks she’s a borderline clinical idiot plus a total embarrassment. And that’s just her staff. 

Exactly who is going to get swooped up into the vortex of Kamalamania? Her weirdo husband? No one likes her. No one respects her. No one wants her. And again, that’s just her staff.

But we know that gross incompetence is no barrier to a successful Democrat candidacy, so she could still be in the running if she inspired fear in her competitors instead of loathing. They look at her and, instead of trembling at her wrath, they start thinking about how they would re-do the Oval Office. No one is afraid of her. She would have to go out and take the nomination, which means convincing the Democrat base to support her. She tried that once, before she ended up botching the vice-presidency – you almost have to try to dumb enough to screw up a job that requires literally nothing but perfect attendance and not forgetting to breathe. The Democrat primary voters gave her about 1% of the vote – she’s flirting with Asa Hutchinson territory. They were too kind.

No, her competitors will smell weakness and start circling her like wolves following the buffalo with a limp. 

Some kind of already are. Gavin Newsom (D-Contingency) has been running a shadow campaign for a year now just in case Faily McFailure falls out. He’s going all around the country telling other governors how they should run their states, and they are taking his advice, in a way. They see what Gov. Hairstyle has done in the Golden State and do the opposite. Gavin is good-looking and dumb, so he’s got that Kennedy thing going (the actual Kennedy in the race is a non-player – he’s too weird even for the Dems). Still, picking him sets up a race between himself and Trump – call that a wash – or DeSantis, a guy who is running a successful state. Gavin offers the country the chance to make all of America modern California, which is as appealing a prospect as taking a bite from some San Francisco hobo’s half-eaten hepatitis and crank burrito.

There is Pete Buttigieg, who is very impressive to Pete Buttigieg. His unspoken premise is that all the jobs he previously had and failed at – mayor, transportation secretary, Alfred E. Neuman doppelgänger – have prepared him to fail as president. That’s certainly correct, but it’s not a selling point. Moreover, he’s got this Teen Woke Scold vibe, and by 2024 the wokeness backlash might be in full effect. “Roads are racist” might once again be seen as being just as transcendently stupid a concept as it objectively is.

Who else? Well, there are some governors who might take a shot. Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania is popular and comes from a key battleground state. Him being the Democrat nominee might be awkward, considering that so many of his parties leading lights yearn for the annihilation of the world’s sole Jewish nation. He does have the advantage of having a reputation of not being a total incompetent, though PA is far from a finely-tuned machine. But he is still stuck with the albatross that is all the Democrat nonsense he has to genuflect to, stuff that normal Americans are increasingly rejecting. It's unclear whether he (or anyone) can pull of a Sista Soljah moment by speaking some Democrat pagan blasphemy like “Crime is bad” or “Maybe men dressed as women should not be twerking in front of kindergartners.”

That’s the challenge for the Dem “moderates.” There are no Dem moderates, not if they drink the commie Kool-Aid, and if you don’t take a big gulp the pinko caucus will destroy you. That’s why Governor Jarad Polis of Colorado is problematic.  His selling point is also that he’s not quite as left as the rest of the Dems, but he’s still pretty left. His state reeks of dope and is full of bums. America is getting sick of nonsense, and the problem for any Democrat is that the Democrat Party platform is all nonsense. There’s now a new name for moderate Democrats – squish Republicans. Every other Democrat is a damn commie.

That’s about the extent of the Democrat bench. The problem with keeping a gerontocracy in power for a couple decades past its sell-by date is that you don’t build a bench. They built a sick bed. A lot of potential candidates got tired of waiting for guys like Biden to take their final tumble and went off to mess up things in academia or the private sector. That’s why if something happens to Grandpa Badfinger, the Democrats will have to belly up to a smorgasbord of mediocrity and dig in.