Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for the ‘Opinion’ Category

Ann Coulter Op-ed: How Not To Be President

May 24, 2023 by Ann Coulter


How Not To Be President

     Now that we know Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is running for president (along with several others whose names I can’t remember), I have a helpful primer on what NOT to do as president.

     I base this advice on the conduct of the most inconsequential president in U.S. history, Donald Trump. With the exception of the judiciary — something neither he nor Jared saw a way of monetizing, thank God — Trump’s entire presidency can be summarized as: obnoxious tweets, followed by immediate and complete capitulation.

     The problem with the Trump diehards is that they’d read the bad-ass tweets, pump their fists, but then wander off, never bothering to find out what happened next. Here’s what happened: Trump surrendered. Over and over and over again.

     There were so many surrenders that The New York Times had to keep coming up with new synonyms for “loser”: “Trump Gives Ground,” “Trump Backs Off,” “Trump Drops,” “Trump Accommodates Democrats,” “Trump Seethes,” “Trump Signals Defeat,” “Trump’s Surprise Retreat,” “Trump Confronted by a Loss,” “The Biggest Surrender of His Presidency,” and so on.

     In his first two years in office, Trump had a Republican House and a Republican Senate — he could have done anything! Let’s see how he fulfilled his signature promise to build a wall, as told in tweets and headlines.


     “… (if) the wall is not built, which it will be, the drug situation will NEVER be fixed the way it should be! #BuildTheWall” — Trump tweet, April 24, 2017

     “Don’t let the fake media tell you that I have changed my position on the WALL. It will get built and help stop drugs, human trafficking etc.” — Trump tweet, April 25, 2017

     New York Times Headline, April 26, 2017: “Wall ‘Will Get Built,’ Trump Insists, as He Drops Funding Demand”


     “If we have to close down our government, we’re building that wall … One way or the other, we’re going to get that wall.” — Trump at Phoenix rally, Aug. 22, 2017

     “I think everybody knows this president isn’t somebody who backs down.” — White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, Aug. 23, 2017

     Months of negotiations and studly tweets (Jan. 4, 2018: “We must BUILD THE WALL, stop illegal immigration,” etc. etc.) led to this:

     New York Times headline, March 22, 2018: “Spending Plan Passed by Congress Is a Rebuke to Trump.”

     “Rebuke” is putting it mildly: The bill expressly prohibited Trump from building a wall and, for good measure, also blocked the hiring of thousands of new Border Patrol agents.

     But Trump bounced back with more masterful tweeting!

     “I am considering a VETO of the Omnibus Spending Bill (because) … the BORDER WALL, which is desperately needed for our National Defense, is not fully funded.” — Trump tweet, March 23, 2018

     Then, the very next day …

     New York Times headline, March 24, 2018: “Trump Seethes, but Signs Bipartisan Spending Plan”

     True, Trump had given away the store, but look at what he said while signing the Don’t Even Think About Building a Wall bill:

     “I looked very seriously at the veto. I was thinking about doing the veto.”

     Not only that, but he vowed, “I will never sign another bill like this again — I’m not going to do it again.”

     You’ll never guess what he did again.


     “I want to know, where is the money for Border Security and the WALL in this ridiculous Spending Bill, and where will it come from after the Midterms? Dems are obstructing Law Enforcement and Border Security. REPUBLICANS MUST FINALLY GET TOUGH!” — Trump tweet, Sept. 20, 2018

     Months of negotiations finally ended with …

     “Trump Signs Bill Reopening Government for 3 Weeks in Surprise Retreat From Wall” — The New York Times, Jan. 25, 2019

     Surprise! By then, 41 newly-elected House Democrats had been sworn in and there was no hope of getting a wall or anything else through Congress.

     How does a Republican president get buffaloed like this by a Republican Congress? Reagan enacted his entire radical agenda (and won the Cold War) without ever, not once, having a Republican House and Senate.

     It wasn’t only Trump’s wall that followed the obnoxious tweet/face plant trajectory. It was everything. Tweeting “LAW & ORDER!” as the country went up in flames; retweeting #FireFauci while never daring to remove King Anthony from his throne; spending months tweeting about “Rocket Man,” then staging a theatrical meeting with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un — to accomplish what exactly?

     I’ll need another column to even begin to capture the horror of this wasted presidency.

     Gov. DeSantis, I’m pretty sure I don’t need to tell you this, but please don’t do any of that.



Gregg Jarrett Op-ed: Durham reports shows Biden and Obama knew truth of Trump collusion hoax but kept silent

Gregg Jarrett

 Gregg Jarrett | Fox News | Published May 22, 2023 4:00am EDT


A silence kept in order to hide the truth is a lie.  

By that maxim, there are plenty of liars among prominent Democrats who knew that the damning Trump-Russia collusion narrative was all a hoax. But they chose to remain mum, preferring instead to watch contentedly as an American president was vilified nonstop by a media-driven orgy of lies. It consumed the nation for years and inflicted untold harm. None of them had the decency to volunteer the truth.

This is one of the key findings in the 306-page Durham report that the special counsel filled to the brim with documented acts of deviousness, dishonesty and malice by high officials in government whom we are supposed to trust but should not.
Obama and Biden selfie
Barack Obama and Joe Biden (Joe Biden/Instagram)

In July 2016, CIA Director John Brennan rushed to the White House to brief then-President Barack Obama and Joe Biden, our current president, about alarming new evidence uncovered by American intelligence. The agency had obtained reliable information that “Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians” (page 81 of the report).    


It was an outrageous and wholly invented accusation unsupported by anything except Hillary’s craven imagination. Her shrewd goal was to frame her opponent for unidentified crimes that he never committed and, thereby, damage or sink his candidacy.  

As Durham noted, the despicable smear had the dual benefit of distracting from her own nagging email scandal that was dragging down her poll numbers. Given its potency, the Clinton canard ranks as the dirtiest trick ever perpetrated in American politics.


Obama and Biden knew all about Hillary’s treachery and so did others in their orbit who were secretly briefed, including Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and FBI Director James Comey. This is corroborated by Brennan’s handwritten notes. For the next three years all of them remained silent about the CIA’s findings.  

Collectively, they concealed the truth of Trump’s innocence as he was hounded by the constant condemnation of conspiring with Moscow, even though he did no such thing. On almost a daily basis, the media pronounced him guilty in the court of public opinion. Brennan and Clapper took to the airwaves and dishonestly denounced Trump as a Russian asset, hiding what they knew.     

At the outset of the hoax, Hillary’s devoted coterie of disciples plotted to spread the lie. They secretly paid a sleazy ex-foreign spy, Christopher Steele, to obtain Russian disinformation about Trump and compose a phony “dossier.” They leaked it to journalists who promptly insisted that it was true without ever bothering to verify or corroborate its contents. News organizations even published the full collection of lies that was covertly bankrolled by Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
Andrew McCabe at hearing
The FBI’s Andrew McCabe testifies during a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing on May 11, 2017, in Washington, D.C. (Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post via Getty Images)


The shameless media was emboldened by the unscrupulous maneuvers of Comey and his confederates. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and senior counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok launched a dogged investigation of Trump. It commenced literally days after the FBI director learned of Hillary’s fraudulent machinations.  

The bureau had no basis whatsoever to open the probe because agents lacked “any actual evidence of collusion” and traduced their own strict guidelines, according to Durham. Those in charge broke every rule in the book. In a brazen reversal of standards, they willingly exploited the Clinton lie as a pretext to persecute Trump with salacious and specious slurs. Their lawless actions were inflamed by their “prejudice against him” and their “pronounced hostile feelings,” the report explained.

The vainglorious James Comey, who refused to cooperate with the Durham investigation, now publicly claims to be suffering near total amnesia. It is a curious affliction since the special counsel’s report reveals that he demanded and received “daily briefings.” Whenever agents working the case had the temerity to complain that there was no real evidence implicating Trump in any wrongdoing, Comey stuck wads of cotton in his ears. He pushed a relentless witch hunt in a maniacal quest to destroy the man he loathed so obsessively. 

James Comey
James Comey speaks to members of the media after testifying before the House Judiciary and House Oversight and Government Reform Committees joint investigation in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 7, 2018. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The same FBI bias that worked against Trump worked in favor of Clinton. Comey commandeered authority he did not have to absolve her of the crimes she clearly committed in mishandling classified emails and destroying evidence under subpoena. He refused to pursue investigations of Hillary despite compelling evidence that she misused her charitable foundation for self-enrichment in ways eerily similar to the notorious Biden family influence peddling schemes. 

Tens of millions of Russian dollars landed in Clinton’s nonprofit, which she treated as her personal piggy bank. With Comey at the helm, four ongoing probes into likely “criminal activity” magically vanished. Trump didn’t collude with Russia, but it appears his opponent did – and got away with it. 

Durham minced no words in describing the FBI’s double standard and the “dual system of justice” it produced. Hillary received the courtesy of a defensive briefing about corrupt foreign actors but Trump did not. The FBI rejected a surveillance warrant on Clinton from the secret FISA court while seeking four successive spy warrants involving Trump’s campaign. To secure the intrusions, exculpatory evidence was withheld and supporting documents altered. 

Donald Trump Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton and former President Donald Trump (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images | Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Comey deceived the judges by vouching for the credibility of the bogus dossier that his agency had already debunked. He represented that Steele was a reliable source when he knew that the shady spook was not. Indeed, Steele was fired by the FBI as a paid confidential informant because he repeatedly lied. This vital fact was deliberately concealed from the court.     

The irony embedded in the great collusion con is fully exposed in the Durham report. Instead of conspiring with Putin in the bowels of the Kremlin, Trump became the victim of Clinton-induced Russian disinformation that helped fuel the fabricated dossier. Hillary’s cronies supplied much of the deceit in Steele’s work of fiction, but so did Moscow. 

From the moment he took the oath of office, the Republican president was saddled with multiple investigations by the FBI, Congress and a special counsel. Demands for his indictment and impeachment reverberated through the halls of Capitol Hill, in newsrooms across America, on television airwaves, and on social media websites everywhere. All the while, those who knew the truth remained conspicuously quiet.


The special counsel’s well-documented report lifts the veil on the cesspool of corruption that has infected the FBI for far too long. Beyond Clinton, there are many villains in this sordid story but none so contemptible as Obama, Biden, Brennan, Clapper and Comey. They knew it was all a cunning lie but kept silent to hide the truth. They watched as a spasm of false allegations tore the nation apart.  

Such silence speaks volumes about their absence of character and integrity. They were more than willing to fan the flames of political divisiveness in America. That is not leadership. It is cowardice.


Gregg Jarrett is a Fox News legal analyst and commentator, and formerly worked as a defense attorney and adjunct law professor. His upcoming book, “The Trial of the Century,” about the famous “Scopes Monkey Trial” will be released on May 30, 2023.  It is available now for pre-order online at the Simon & Schuster website.  Gregg is the author of the No. 1 New York Times best-selling book “The Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump.” His follow-up book was also a New York Times bestseller, “Witch Hunt: The Story of the Greatest Mass Delusion in American Political History.” Jarrett’s book, “The Constitution of the United States and Other Patriotic Documents,” will be published by Broadside Books, a division of HarperCollins on September 19, 2023.

Jason Chaffetz Op-ed: Durham report revealed corruption that could mean this stunner for Trump in 2024

Jason Chaffetz

By Jason Chaffetz | Fox News | Published May 19, 2023 4:00am EDT


Who is going to trust the Department of Justice now? In the wake of Special Counsel John Durham’s long-awaited report, Americans now know there was widespread political collusion and deliberate deception from the very top of the Obama administration, the Clinton campaign, the corporate media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), all in favor of the Democrats.  Not only did they abuse their power and lie to the public, they seem to be proud of it. 

With these facts now added to the long list of formerly crazy conspiracy theories come true, former president Donald Trump is essentially inoculated from any future prosecution by virtue of the public mistrust in an obviously weaponized federal government. Even if prosecutors somehow manage to get a partisan jury to convict, the public will see it as a political witch hunt predicated primarily on partisan politics.  

The more they try to “get ’m” the stronger they make him. 

John Durham
Special Counsel John Durham has created a firestorm of controversy with his just-released report on government collusion that targeted Donald Trump. (Ron Sachs/Consolidated News Pictures/Getty Images)

For this reason, both Democrats and Republicans should fear what could come next if they don’t clip the wings of this rogue federal agency and institute serious systemic changes. If they can do it to Trump, and they did, then they can do it again to anyone. 

One thing has become crystal clear: the Justice Department cannot and will not police itself. DOJ is unwilling and unprepared to discipline let alone prosecute its own. That’s one reason the work of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government is so vital. 

To restore its position as a coequal branch of government, Congress must lose its reluctance to wield the heavy tools available in the law and the Constitution. It can and must develop an independent means of enforcing congressional subpoenas.  

The threat of impeachment of Senate-confirmed bureaucrats must become more feared. The House of Representatives must unite to implement what is perhaps the most powerful tool – the power of the purse. And Congress should reconsider and expand the role of independent offices of inspectors general (OIG) to ensure the Justice Department can no longer ride above the law.  


Republicans have been bafflingly reluctant to wield impeachment power. Getting support to impeach IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in 2015 was a heavy lift. It shouldn’t be. If Congress doesn’t hold administration officials accountable, who will? Under the advice-and-consent clause of the Constitution, the Senate was given a co-equal voice to confirm a bureaucrat and remove them, but they do not. 

Likewise, Congress has failed to secure its own subpoena power. For too long, the body has been content to rely on the DOJ to enforce congressional subpoenas. But now that we clearly see the DOJ applying a political litmus test to such requests, the American people need a new solution. For Democrats, subpoenas are enforced in record time with guns drawn. For Republicans, the DOJ will only enforce “legitimate” subpoenas based on their own whims after months of review. 

Congress can also leverage the power of the purse to play hardball by denying agency funding until the government produces requested documents and witnesses. But they don’t. 

While all of those options are on the table, perhaps the most effective solution could come from empowering the government’s independent inspectors general. Most everyone in government is currently subject to review by an office of Inspector General (OIG).  

One thing has become crystal clear: the Justice Department cannot and will not police itself. DOJ is unwilling and unprepared to discipline let alone prosecute its own. That’s one reason the work of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government is so vital. 

The ability of these investigators to subpoena documents, interview witnesses and expose wrongdoing has yielded important evidence and numerous criminal referrals. But they don’t have authority to make any prosecutorial decisions – and they probably should. 

To the shock of most people, the IGs are prohibited from investigating wrongdoing by attorneys at the DOJ. Nor can they compel testimony once someone leaves federal service, and both of these need to change. 

Before the Durham report, there were two IG reports on the Russia collusion hoax that combined for more than 1,000 pages. They included discipline and criminal referrals that DOJ ignored. Consequences for wrongdoing by federal law enforcement have been minimal.  

Even ex-FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith, who pleaded guilty to making a false statement after altering a document in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, received only probation and community service for his crime. He forged documents to effect an election and he didn’t even lose his law license! 

Sadly, the American people have lost trust in some of the most important institutions, the Centers for Disease Control and the Department of Justice. And this may very well propel Trump back into the White House. 


Jason Chaffetz is a FOX News (FNC) contributor and the host of the Jason In The House podcast on FOX News Radio. He joined the network in 2017.

John K. Amanchukwu, Sr. Op-ed: We must save our schools to save our children from crime epidemic

Pastor John K. Amanchukwu, Sr.

 By Pastor John K. Amanchukwu, Sr. | Fox News | Published May 12, 2023 8:00am EDT


Last month, in a shocking display of mob violence, hundreds of teenagers took to the streets in Chicago, smashing car windows, firing guns, and even assaulting innocent bystanders. It’s a scene that has become all too familiar throughout the country in recent months amid a youth crime wave that has devastated families and communities and revealed a stunning lack of moral foundation in our youngest generation. 

While many Americans are rightfully demanding that political leaders do more to end the lawlessness and punish offenders – including ending the war on police – city halls and state legislatures can only put a Band-Aid on a much deeper problem. When it comes to youth crime, if we want to end the violence in our streets, we must start raising the standards in our schools. 

There is no denying that the American education system is failing students – especially students in low-income, urban areas. In Chicago, 18 schools had zero students who rated as proficient in either math or reading in 2022. In Baltimore City Public Schools, 90% of students are not proficient in math, and 80% of elementary students are not proficient in English. The graduation rate is just 69%. 


Some districts have given up entirely on improving learning outcomes. In the Los Angeles Unified School District, teachers are simply handing out higher grades even as fewer and fewer students meet state testing standards. 

Frederick Douglas High School in Baltimore. Nearly half of the high school students in Baltimore City Public Schools earned below a 1.0 GPA during the first three quarters of the school year.
Frederick Douglas High School in Baltimore. Nearly half of the high school students in Baltimore City Public Schools earned below a 1.0 GPA during the first three quarters of the 2020-2021 school year.  (Baltimore City Public Schools)

Politicians, especially on the left, have been quick to blame pandemic for these alarming figures. But the hard truth is our schools were failing long before COVID-19. In 2019, prior to the lockdowns, just 37% and 32% of students rated as proficient in reading and math, respectively, across all of Illinois. In 2018, 140 New York City schools had at least one grade where more than 90% of students failed state competency tests. 

It’s not a question of funding, either. Baltimore City Public Schools ranks fourth nationally in funding on a per-student basis. The New York City education budget was 89% above the national average last year – $37,000 per student. In total, the federal government distributed $190 billion to schools in COVID-19 relief funds. 

So why is student achievement continuing to slip, going hand-in-hand with a precipitous rise in violence both in and out of classrooms? 

One big reason is that schools have stopped teaching hard skills like reading and math and are instead peddling left-wing grievance politics like critical race theory and radical gender theory. CRT teaches kids – especially Black kids – that racial minorities are marginalized in this country, and that lashing out in acts of violence and looting are ways of “leveling the playing field.” 


The so-called “equity” agenda is a particularly sinister aspect of this worldview. In schools, “equity” means lowering the bar for all students in order to manufacture the same outcome for everyone, destroying merit and any incentive for high achievement along the way.  

CRT and “equity” training teach kids the lie that concepts like rationality and hard work, rather than forming the bedrock of a happy and prosperous life, are “racist” and don’t matter anyway because success or failure is pre-determined by skin color, gender, and sexual orientation. 

This lie is especially harmful for Black and low-income kids, who are the primary targets of the far left’s classroom indoctrination campaign. 

Many such students often lack a stable family life, and in particular a father in the home – another major driver of poor academic performance and lawless children. Without the solid moral grounding that strong families provide, kids in the school system are at the complete mercy of evil and twisted ideologies that encourage division and violence along racial and class lines. 

One big reason is that schools have stopped teaching hard skills like reading and math and are instead peddling left-wing grievance politics like critical race theory and radical gender theory. 

This has predictably led to the complete erosion of any form of discipline in our schools, and by extension our streets. If Black students believe that they are doomed to be victims of an irredeemably racist and corrupt society, is it any surprise that they have no interest in school and are prone to acts of destruction and violence? 

Meanwhile, school staff and even law enforcement officials have been effectively neutered by liberal politicians who view punishment for wrongdoing as just another relic of a “systemically racist” society. 

The results of this moral corruption of an entire generation of kids are truly tragic – even more so because they were avoidable. Last year, nine kids under 17 were killed between 2 and 5 p.m. on school days in Chicago. In New York City, 124 kids under 18 committed shootings in 2022. Other crimes like carjackings are also on the rise among young people, while violence inside of schools is at an all-time high. 

Addressing these problems starts first and foremost in the home. We desperately need to change the culture of fatherlessness in this country, particularly in the Black community, and return faith to a central place in our lives.  


We also need to purge our schools of the divisive ideologies that are seeding resentment and self-loathing in our young people. Groups like 1776 Action, which I am proud to work alongside, are doing heroic work to achieve this goal, and their Parent Power Pledge is helping voters know which politicians will fight for change once elected. 

As I have seen in my own ministry and outreach, there is hope for the future. With the right approach, we can still save many young people from destroying themselves and their communities. But it’s going to take bold leadership, accountability for failing officials, and a commitment to education, not indoctrination, in our schools.  

Pastor John K. Amanchukwu Sr. is an influential preacher, author and activist who spreads God’s truth zealously and without fear. He is a senior fellow at 1776 Action and author. See www.ERACEDBOOK.COM.

Senator Tim Scott Op-ed: Biden abandons Title 42, so here are 3 ways to solve our border crisis

Published May 11, 2023 12:00pm EDT |

Sen. Tim Scott

 By Sen. Tim Scott | Fox News

President Joe Biden is fueling the raging fentanyl epidemic, a true national public health emergency warranting immediate action. As a new wave of the Biden border crisis is boiling over with the end of Title 42, this administration has shown little interest in actually solving it. One thing is clear: America needs new leadership.

Across this great country, I hear time and time again the pain of families who have lost a loved one to fentanyl. Every community has felt the impact of the grueling epidemic, and it’s something that has hit close to home for me. A friend of mine, Alan Shao, buried his 27-year-old son and namesake who died from fentanyl earlier this year. Alan’s painful story serves as a stern reminder there is no family in this nation that is immune to this tragedy. 

The epidemic does not discriminate. In Biden’s America, every town is a border town and anyone at any time can fall victim. President Biden’s failure to secure our border is directly responsible for the escalating number of deaths the American people are facing due to fentanyl.

This problem will only be magnified as the Biden administration allows Title 42 to expire, something even Secretary Mayorkas admitted in 2022 will only cause the number of migrants showing up along our southern border to surge. The administration’s inaction will not only result in more fentanyl being flooded into our communities, but it will also put more felons, human traffickers, drug dealers, and known terrorists on the streets and among our families’ neighborhoods – a tragic story we’ve witnessed before on President Biden’s watch.



The reality is bleak under his leadership, but we have an opportunity to change course right in our own hands. It’s time for us to take bold and decisive action. It starts with securing our border and dismantling the criminal cartels trafficking fentanyl into our country. Here’s how we do it:

First, let’s pass my legislation – the Alan T. Shao II Fentanyl Public Health Emergency and Overdose Prevention Act – to utilize powers similar to those under Title 42 and apply them in response to the new public health emergency: the fentanyl epidemic. Today, more Americans between the ages of 18 and 45 die from fentanyl than from COVID-19, car accidents, cancer and suicide combined, making fentanyl the leading cause of death among adults. To treat this with any less rigor than our COVID-19 response would be an injustice to grieving families and loved ones. 


Next, let’s pass my Securing Our Border Act. This important piece of legislation redirects $15 billion the Biden administration previously designated to hire an army of 87,000 IRS agents and instead funds critical border security initiatives. These funds would give our border agents the tools and incentives they need to do their job effectively, finish construction of the southern border wall, and end the Biden administration’s disastrous catch-and-release policy.

Migrants Venezuela border security
March 29, 2023: Border Patrol agents encounter over 1,000 migrants in El Paso, Texas (Customs and Border Protection)

Finally, Congress must pass the FEND Off Fentanyl Act to curb the flow of money powering these cartels by tapping into the economic security tools at our disposal and empowering law enforcement to do their job. It would enact the toughest sanctions regime on criminal cartels in American history, freeze the cartels’ collective and individual assets, and curb their ability to conduct their dealings in the United States and abroad.

Together, my three bills form a three-pronged approach to address and finally solve our border crisis and fentanyl epidemic.

The solutions are right there in front of us. It’s time for a president to implement them. With new leadership, guided by an optimistic vision of what America can be, I know we get the job done to keep our streets safe, secure our southern border, and put this country on a path towards a better and brighter future.


Republican Tim Scott represents South Carolina in the United States Senate. He is author of the new book, “America, a Redemption Story: Choosing Hope, Creating Unity” (Thomas Nelson, August 9, 2022).

Ann Coulter Op-ed: No Biggie, Just the End of Civilization

 May 10, 2023 | by Ann Coulter


No Biggie, Just the End of Civilization

   Whatever you had planned to do for the rest of the day, please drop it and read this right now: Heather Mac Donald’s new book, “When Race Trumps Merit: How the Pursuit of Equity Sacrifices Excellence, Destroys Beauty, and Threatens Lives.”

     It seems that in the hysteria that followed George Floyd’s death in 2020, we agreed to destroy all of Western civilization — law, music, art, education, policing, science and medicine — to make up for black people not doing well on standardized tests.

Mac Donald cites not hundreds but thousands of institutions that have flung aside standards in order to more fully dedicate themselves to the sole, driving purpose of our nation: boosting black people’s self-esteem.

To consider just one arena, I don’t think you’re going to like the medical care you’ll be getting under the new regime. Just like in the wildly successful Soviet Union, science must be subordinated to politics, specifically “racial justice.”

The American Medical Association, the American Association of Medical Colleges and the American Association of Pediatrics (AAP) have all agreed that medicine is racist.

The New England Journal of Medicine “presents a nonstop stream of articles on such topics as the ‘Pathology of Racism,’ ‘Toward Antiracist Allyship in Medicine,’ and ‘How Structural Racism Works — Racist Policies as a Root Cause of U.S. Racial Health Inequities,’” Mac Donald writes.

And “Scientific American produced a ‘special collector’s edition’ on ‘The Science of Overcoming Racism.’”

(It’s fantastic that scientific organizations are finally dedicating themselves to something important like racism, and not something boring, like cancer or Alzheimer’s disease — Unpack your privilege!)

The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) aired a podcast in 2021 in which the deputy editor, Edward Livingston, suggested that inequities in medical care be addressed without accusing doctors of “racism.” Both he and JAMA’s editor in chief were promptly denounced and fired, the editor replaced with a black woman.

Black leaders now head the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, the Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Center, the University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer Center, the University of Pittsburgh Division of Medical Hematology/Oncology, the Wake Forest School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University’s School of Pharmacy, the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, the Massey Cancer Center at VCU, the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and the Department of Medicine at UCLA’s medical school.

What could go wrong? Most of America’s largest cities have black mayors, and everything is fine.

But at least your doctor will be able to diagnose your disease correctly and you won’t die on the operating table, right? … RIGHT? (Anybody else remember the affirmative action doctor who took Allan Bakke’s place at the University of California Medical School at Davis and ended up killing his patients?)

In 2021, Mac Donald writes, “the average score for white applicants on the Medical College Admission Test was in the 71st percentile … The average score for black applicants was in the 35th percentile — a full standard deviation below the average white score.”

Naturally, therefore, medical schools responded by dropping the MCAT for black and Hispanic students, offering them admission on the basis of their “strong appreciation of human rights and social justice,” as the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai puts it.

Things don’t get better at medical school, where black students again score a full standard deviation below white and Asian students on Step One of the United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE). This is the test given after the second year of medical school to evaluate students’ knowledge of anatomy, biochemistry, pharmacology, physiology and so on. It is multiple-choice and graded by computer.

Conclusion: The computer is racist. In January 2022, the USMLE dropped grades for Step One altogether and converted it to pass/fail.

On one hand, no one will get a bad grade. On the other hand, there will be no way to distinguish one medical student from another, whether black, white or Asian. Research laboratories, residencies, hospitals and medical centers, like the Mayo Clinic, will just have to roll the dice. (Playing hide-and-seek with the most promising scientific minds should turbo-charge medical discoveries!)

Luckily, learning to identify and treat disease isn’t such a big deal at today’s medical schools, anyway. Instead, the faculty are charged with teaching about “systems of power, privilege and oppression.” More than half of the top 50 medical schools now require students to take courses in systemic racism, Mac Donald notes. I’m sure that will be a huge relief when doctors miss your brain tumor.

In 2021, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute announced that it would spend $2 billion … to find a cure for brain cancer? Parkinson’s disease? Heart disease? NO!!! The $2 billion would go to promoting “diversity and inclusion in science.”

In 2022, the National Cancer Institute, funded by you, taxpayer, decided to change its mission from conquering cancer — and really, who cares about that? FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS! — to guess what? Yes!!! Promoting diversity! Instead of Outstanding Investigator Awards being granted solely on the basis of merit, the gender and race of the researchers would have to be considered.

All this has done wonders for the morale of doctors. Mac Donald quotes one cancer researcher: “It’s the end of the road for me as a Jewish male doctor.” A UCLA doctor told her that the smartest undergraduates in science labs are saying, “Now that I see what is happening in medicine, I will do something else.”

In response to this dystopic future, Mac Donald asked an oncologist, “When would white and Asian male scientists fight back? How much longer would they continue to allow their hard work and accomplishments to be disparaged and sidelined?”

He emailed back: “We value our jobs. We need our jobs. Our peers will turn on us. Speak out, lose job forever, be quickly forgotten and abandoned.”

That’s why, Mac Donald says, it falls to the rest of us to never shut up about the tearing down of standards, to put forth “unapologetic defense(s) of color-blind standards,” and to “relentlessly provide the data that explain the lack of racial proportionality in meritocratic institutions.”

To paraphrase Orwell: If there is hope, it must lie in the uncancelable.


Jason Whitlock: America’s broken family structure killed Jordan Neely and might destroy a former Marine

JASON WHITLOCK | May 04, 2023


New York Daily News / Contributor, Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Jordan Neely’s dad abandoned him in childhood. Neely’s stepfather strangled and disposed of his mother when Neely was just 14 years old. According to people who knew Neely, the murder of his mother and the abandonment by his father caused Jordan Neely to fall into depression and mental illness. With his family support erased, in recent years Neely became a schizophrenic, homeless nuisance terrorizing the streets and subways of New York.

Neely’s life ended in inevitable tragedy Monday afternoon. He menaced the wrong group of New York subway riders. A former Marine wrestled Neely to the ground from behind and applied a choke hold to restrain him, and at least one other passenger helped subdue Neely. The 30-year-old vagrant lost consciousness and died.

On Wednesday, the medical examiner’s office ruled Neely’s death a homicide, stating neck compression as the cause of death.

Political opportunists and corporate and social media appear ready to turn Neely into the next George Floyd, a heroic martyr and symbol of American unfairness, an excuse to riot and loot.

Say his name! Jordan Neely.

According to social media pundits, the Marine and the black man who helped subdue Neely maimed and lynched innocent Jordan Neely, a Michael Jackson impersonator, a young man with a bright future, had white supremacy not reared its ugly head.

After hours of careful Twitter deliberation, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez posted her verdict. “Jordan Neely was murdered,” she wrote. “But [because] Jordan was houseless and crying for food in a time when the city is raising rents and stripping services to militarize itself while many in power demonize the poor, the murderer gets protected [with] passive headlines + no charges. It’s disgusting.”

AOC is a lawmaker, sworn to uphold the constitution and our agreed-upon laws. She does not believe in our “innocent until proven guilty” standard of law. What she sees on Twitter is more than enough to prove murder.

For the record, homicide and murder are two different things. There is justifiable and legal homicide. Murder can’t be justified. Murder is always a crime. Homicide is not.

We’ve murdered truth and nuance.

Jordan Neely is not the second coming of Emmett Till. He’s a victim of the widespread destruction of family. Not just his family, but the destruction of the American family.

New York is a lawless hellhole captured by the demons created by the breakdown of family and attack on authority. Unparented children and adults control the Big Apple’s streets and subways. Neely’s untreated mental illness made him a ticking time bomb in a city where law enforcement has retreated and chaos and disorder have escalated.

Vigilante justice is a natural outgrowth when law enforcement retreats to safety. Untrained, frustrated citizens will make mistakes. Opportunists will capitalize on those mistakes.

More than likely, the white Marine will be sacrificed so that politicians, corporate media, activists, clergy, and Neely’s own family do not have to deal with their role in his tragic life and death. We all played a role in cultivating the toxic, anti-family culture that killed Jordan Neely. The people most passionately seeking to punish the Marine are the most guilty.

AOC participated in the defund-the-police insanity. She helped loose the criminal lunacy torturing NYC. Black Lives Matter conspired with New York’s Democratic politicians and prosecutors to prioritize the welfare of criminals above law-abiding citizens. The black church centered racial justice and government assistance over preservation and promotion of the family. Corporate media rewards and revels in racial controversy.

Jordan Neely’s father unleashed the first deadly strike to Jordan’s soul when he abandoned his son. Neely’s stepfather fired the fatal shot when he killed Neely’s mother. Jordan Neely’s been in a coma for 16 years. The white Marine pulled the plug.

Had the former Marine been black, all the people feigning outrage would treat Jordan’s death as a merciful abortion. No one would care. And I mean no one.

Black gang members will kill men no different from Jordan Neely across America today. None of it will make national news. There will be no protests. No calls for justice. Most of the murders will go unsolved. No-snitch culture will protect the killers.

No one has truly cared about Jordan Neely since his mother died 16 years ago. No one cares today. People care about the color of the former Marine who choked Jordan Neely.

Black life does not matter. White perpetrators of black death are what really matter. They’re scarce and valuable. Political opportunists and social media clout chasers pounce on these situations regardless of circumstance. It’s political gold.

Lawyers chase ambulances. Liberals chase coroners, hoping to find a dead black body killed by whites. They bribe the coroner investigating the death and hire a media mortician who can make the body look as angelic as possible. Al Sharpton performs the eulogy, and Ben Crump passes the collection plate.

The opportunists have no interest in a solution. Solutions would undermine their ability to profit from the deaths of black men killed by white men.

Charging the white Marine with murder won’t solve or improve anything. It will make the wannabe hero just another victim of America’s broken family structure. Restoring the family is the only hope for America.

Jason Whitlock Op-ed: Bill Maher’s Elon Musk interview reveals the comedian’s role in the woke pandemic

JASON WHITLOCK | May 02, 2023


PATRICK PLEUL / Contributor, Astrid Stawiarz / Stringer | Getty Images

Bill Maher is the Dr. Fauci of the “woke mind virus.”

For more than two decades, Maher’s HBO laboratory, “Real Time,” sponsored the gain-of-function research that led to the nationwide outbreak of the woke mindset and its primary variant, critical race theory.

While building a brand as the most virtuous, Barack Obama-supporting white liberal in America, Maher hosted panel discussions featuring all the properly credentialed racial, climate, and feminist scientists elite academia produced.

Maher’s lab thumbed its nose at the working class, preferring multimillionaire Michael Moore’s perspective on people living check to check. When Donald Trump rose to power speaking directly to and for the very people Maher and elites ignored, the liberal comedian told his audience to wear a MAGA-canceling mask and watch MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes as a vaccine and booster.

Maher created the religion of woke. It’s disconcerting watching him disavow and distance himself from the virus his lab leaked with countless batsh*t conversations.

This past Friday, Maher interviewed billionaire serial entrepreneur Elon Musk on “Real Time.” The gist of their exchange dealt with the now-obvious danger of the woke mind virus. Maher, the creator of it, has spent much of the last two years positioning himself as a woke whistleblower. He relentlessly attacks the woke without ever addressing his lab’s role in spreading the virus.

Maher’s Friday show highlighted a level of cognitive dissonance that is well beneath his intellect. It’s quite similar to the cognitive dissonance displayed by Fauci and others when they continue to promote Big Pharma’s experimental medical trials, aka vaccines.

Let me be clear. I like Bill Maher. I’ve watched his HBO show for years. I appreciate that he criticizes the woke. I’m just disappointed he won’t discuss the root cause of wokeness. Elon Musk gave Maher every opportunity to address the root cause when, at the behest of Maher, Musk defined the woke mind virus.

“I think we have to be very cautious about anything that is anti-meritocratic and anything that results in the suppression of free speech,” Musk said. “Those are two aspects of the woke mind virus that I think are very dangerous.”

Musk, the new owner of Twitter, explained that Americans must be vigilant in their protection of free speech, especially speech we do not like.

What is Donald Trump’s primary sin? Publicly stating things people find inappropriate or do not want to hear. Trump’s oral and written behavior justified banning him from all social media platforms. That’s a woke mindset. The woke desperately try to control what people think and say. They’re quicker to forgive violent criminal behavior than a thought crime.

Maher’s Trump derangement made him an ally and supporter of the enemies of the First Amendment.

A little later in the interview, Musk told a story about a friend’s high school daughter who knew next to nothing about the accomplishments of George Washington. All she knew about the first president was that he owned slaves.

“The amount of indoctrination that’s happening in schools and universities is far beyond what parents realize,” Musk complained. “I came to realize this somewhat late. The experience we had in high school and college is not the experience that kids today are having, and it hasn’t been for 10 years, maybe 20 years.”

Those same indoctrination tactics are played out across corporate media. Donald Trump has been reduced to his irreverent and inappropriate tweets. Like George Washington, Trump has been reduced to his bad behavior. There’s virtually no discussion of his policies and what they produced or intended to produce.

I like Trump because of his America First agenda, a pledge and a set of policies designed to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. My parents were check-to-check union factory workers. When I hear the slogan “Make America Great Again,” that’s what I think of and desire.

President Joe Biden – at least publicly – is relatively well behaved. He doesn’t say or tweet mean things. That’s nice. But I’m frustrated with what his policies and agenda produce.

Biden’s obsession with racial, gender, and sexual identity produces an attack on free speech and a merit-based work culture. Democrats are the leaders promoting censorship and limiting free speech. Democrats are the leaders naming vice presidents, press secretaries, supreme court justices, secretaries of transportation, and assistant secretaries of health based on race, sexual orientation, and gender ideology.

Kamala Harris, Karine Jean-Pierre, Kentanji Brown Jackson, Pete Buttigieg, and Rachel Levine didn’t earn their positions. They were installed to make a statement about how virtuous Biden and Democrats are.

It’s a level of narcissism that far exceeds Trump’s. The American agenda takes a back seat to Biden’s reputation and the Democratic Party brand.

The woke mind is narcissistic. It prioritizes itself above country. Maher can see it in Trump. Maher can’t see it in himself or apparently any leftist.

Maher should watch his Friday show. In his opening monologue, he cracked a joke about Joe Biden’s intention to run for president again in 2024.

“Elections are all about getting your base excited,” Maher said. “[Biden] made the announcement in drag, wearing a mask, and drinking a Bud Light.”

According to Maher, Biden’s base is drag queens, wimps afraid of COVID, and transgenders such as Dylan Mulvaney, the 26-year-old trans actor Biden and Bud Light have been promoting.

Biden’s agenda and policies are catering to his base. And you wonder why the MAGA movement won’t go away?

MAGA is the woke vaccine. Bill Maher and the rest of the elite establishment – Democrats and Republicans – are the real anti-vaxxers. They’re uniparty. They hate the working class or anyone willing to challenge their authority.

Bill Donohue Op-ed: If Media Deems Tucker Too far Right, Who Is Too far Left?

closeup of tucker carlson
(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Bill Donohue By Bill Donohue | Wednesday, 26 April 2023


The terms “far left” and “far right” have historically been used by social scientists to refer to communists and fascists, respectively. Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler epitomize the labels. But in today’s polarized society, the mainstream media — which is left-of-center — is dubbing Tucker Carlson “far right.” Which means he allegedly has more in common with Nazis than conservatives.

This is a bastardization of the terms.

During the French Revolution, the National Assembly organized to write a new constitution. Those who wanted the king to hold power sat to the right of the president of the assembly; those who wanted a revolution sat to the left. Hence, the terms right and left refer to traditionalists and radicals.

Today, these terms have lost their meaning. The lead story in today’s New York Times is: “Fox News Ousts Carlson, a Voice Of the Far Right.” What did Carlson do to merit this invidious tag? The news story says he took “far-right positions on issues like border policy and race relations.”

Carlson believes that people who break the law by crashing our border and entering the country illegally should be prosecuted. The surveys show so do most Americans.

Carlson also believes that critical race theory, which teaches that every white person is a racist, is irresponsible. The surveys show most Americans agree with him. In other words, according to the New York Times, most Americans are Nazi-like creatures.

Most fair-minded observers would say that Carlson is to the right of center the way Don Lemon is to the left of center. Accordingly, if The New York Times were fair, it would brand Lemon “far left.” But that is not what they called him recently: He is called a “fiery political commentator.”

This could also be said of Carlson, but that is not what they say about him. He is an extremist.

The New York Times is not alone in its biased reporting.

We did a study earlier this week about how the media are responding to the ousters of Carlson and Lemon. We found over 200 examples of Carlson being called “far right,” but only a few instances of Lemon being called “far left.” PBS, NBC and MSNBC referred to Carlson as “far right” but none referred to Lemon as “far left.”

No media outlet we checked was more unprofessional than The New York Times. It recently had a news story on Dong Yuyu, the “longtime writer and editor at a top Chinese Communist Party newspaper.” If anyone merits being called “far left” it would be him. But, no, he is said to have written “liberal-leaning commentaries.”

In other words, Communist Party leaders are not even “liberals,” never mind “left-wingers” — and they most certainly are not “far-left wingers.” They just “lean” to the liberal side.

To top things off, The New York Times issued an obituary on Harry Belafonte; the entertainer died at age 96. In a lengthy account, the only reference to his politics was that as a noble civil rights crusader. The paper lied.

Belafonte loved Stalin. According to Ronald Radosh, who spent his academic life writing about communists, Belafonte was an “unreconstructed Stalinist.” Mr. “Calypso” was very upset with whites who discriminated against Blacks in the United States, yet he never had anything bad to say about Fidel Castro’s oppressive communist regime.

Worse, Belafonte went to the wall defending, Mengistu Haile Mariam, in Ethiopia, the communist who instituted the “Red Terror.”

None of this was reported by The New York Times. According to “the newspaper of record,” Belafonte, like Dong, was a liberal, not a communist. But Tucker is akin to the Nazis. Got that?

Dr. Bill Donohue is president and CEO of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. A former Heritage Foundation Bradley Resident Scholar, he has authored 10 books on civil liberties, social issues and religion. He holds a Ph.D. in sociology from New York University. Read Bill Donohue’s Reports — More Here.

Posts by Bill Donohue

Newsmax Blogs:

© 2023 Newsmax. All rights reserved.


 April 26, 2023 by Ann Coulter



Extremists have got to learn to take half a loaf. Just like the cheap labor-demanding GOP donors, pro-lifers need to be told: You can’t get everything you want. If Republicans give you this, they’ll lose their jobs, and the people who’ll replace them want you dead.

     Unlike a lot of people complaining about the anti-abortion zealots, I am an anti-abortion zealot. That’s why I’m begging them to stop pushing wildly unpopular ideas. These fanatics are going to get millions more babies killed when Democrats win supermajorities in both houses of Congress and immediately pass a federal law making abortion-on-demand the law of the land.

They’re also going to get a lot more adults killed when those same Democratic supermajorities pass laws taking our guns, defunding the police and packing the court, among other great Democratic ideas.

We’ve been rolling our eyes at pro-choicers forever, telling them to calm down, that overturning Roe would just return the issue to the states. Blue states would make abortion legal until the kid turns 14. A few states, like Louisiana, would impose tough restrictions, but most states would come out in the middle — allowing abortions in the first trimester, plus parental notification laws, and exceptions for rape and incest.

Instead, the moment Dobbs was released, pro-life nuts rushed to the mics, saying, This is gonna be great! We’re going to ban abortion from the moment of conception and prosecute the mothers for murder!

The Democratic Party has been using abortion to scare suburban women in every election cycle for 50 years. Now, Republicans are finally giving them something to be scared about.

In Michigan, the Republican gubernatorial nominee, Tudor Dixon, said she opposed abortion for 14-year-old girls who’d been raped because giving birth to her rapist’s baby could be “healing.”

Does the name Todd Akin mean anything to you? Anything at all? Richard Mourdock?

Dixon lost by 11 points.

Pennsylvania responded, Watch this! Doug Mastriano, Republican candidate for governor, called abortion the “number one” issue of his campaign and said he looked forward to signing a six-week abortion ban. In 2019, he’d called for criminally prosecuting women who got abortions and doctors who performed them.

Mastriano lost by 15 points, taking the Republican Senate candidate down with him.

If we don’t bind and gag these pro-life militants, in about two more election cycles, we’ll have no Republicans in office anywhere. Good luck saving babies then!

Of course, it’s possible that there were other things voters didn’t like about Dixon and Mastriano.

Ah, but we also have pure test cases. Since Dobbs, there have been a total of six statewide ballot initiatives exclusively about abortion. The pro-life side lost every single time. They lost in blue states, in purple states and in red states. They were not outspent. These were direct-to-the-people votes. The tiniest restriction on abortion failed — even wholly theoretical restrictions! Every expansion of abortion rights won.

Army of Todd Akins: I don’t care! They’re wrong! They’re evil! What about the babies??? [Please give me a standing ovation now.]

In Montana, a proposal merely to require doctors to give life-saving treatment to babies born alive after a botched abortion lost 53% to 47%. Trump won Montana by 20 points in 2016 and 15 points in 2020.

In Kansas, pro-lifers wrote a ballot initiative that would have amended the constitution to clarify that it said nothing at all about abortion. The initiative placed no new restrictions on abortion, but simply moved the issue from the courts to the legislature.

It failed by 18 points, 59-41, losing in every congressional district in the state. Trump won Kansas by 20 points in 2016 and 15 points in 2020.

Kentucky voted on a similar initiative, proposing to amend the state constitution to say: “… nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion.”

That initiative lost 52-48. In 2016, Trump won Kentucky by a whopping 30 points, and in 2020 by 25 points.

In three other states, Michigan, Vermont and California, voters put a right to abortion in their state constitutions.

Six ballot initiatives expressly on abortion, and the pro-life side lost ’em all.

We’ve been waiting half a century to get Roe overruled so Americans could finally vote on the issue. Well, guess what? They’ve voted! In the privacy of the voting booth, the people have spoken, and what they’ve said is: We don’t want the stupid and incompetent having any more babies.

The fanatics cite three Republican governors who won reelection after signing six-week abortion bans as proof that a certain miracle governor in Florida hasn’t just nuked his own presidential chances by approving such a law. All three governors signed their six-week bans when Roe was still the law of the land. All three bans were tied up in litigation on Election Day.

But more important, in the entire country, only one incumbent governor lost in 2022 — pro-life, pro-choice, it didn’t matter. Thirty-six governors up for reelection; 35 won.

The only flipped governorship was in Nevada, where the winning Republican, Joe Lombardo, said he opposed a national abortion ban.  Luckily, abortion was a complete nonissue because state law already allows abortion up to 24 weeks and can only be changed by a vote of the people. (Lombardo also said there was no fraud in the 2020 election, for any Republicans who care about winning.)

But even in the face of a brutal 6-0 losing record, there are still pro-lifers who will say, I’m proud and I’d do it again! (Did you see my write-up in Catholic Insights magazine?)

This is our “DEFUND THE POLICE” faction — people whose ideological zealotry outruns their rationality.

Fine, be a showoff. Just understand, you’re going to get a lot more babies killed. I hope that’s worth your moral preening.


Delano Squires Op-ed: If America descends into the fire of open racial conflict, the corporate media will have stoked it

DELANO SQUIRES | April 21, 2023


Getty Images

If American society ever descends into open racial conflict, the corporate press will have played a large part in getting us there. President Trump was right: The media are the enemy of the people.

Journalists often leave the public less informed about important stories, especially when race is involved. One example is how the trial and acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse were so poorly reported that many public figures spoke as if he shot three black people.

The nation experienced something similar this week with several high-profile shooting incidents across the country that involved homeowners.

The first involved Ralph Yarl, a 16-year-old in Kansas City, Missouri, who was shot after going to the wrong home to pick up his sibling. The shooter was Andrew Lester, an 84-year-old homeowner. Yarl, who survived the shooting, is black and Lester is white, so it goes without saying that the media immediately made this a case about racial bias and the ubiquitous, unrelenting threats to black life in this country. The Yarl family attorney, Lee Merritt, made that point crystal clear when he claimed, “Ralph Yarl was shot because he was armed with nothing but other than his Black skin.”

The media’s ability to claim incidents like this only occur because of race didn’t last long.

A 20-year-old woman named Kaylin Gillis was shot and killed while she sat in the passenger side of a car that turned into the wrong driveway in upstate New York. The homeowner, 65-year-old Kevin Monahan, was arrested and charged with second-degree murder. The case received coverage from the New York Times, but the racial dynamics – both the suspect and victim are white – were not a part of the reporting.

The race-crime dynamic really got complicated after reports emerged that a six-year-old and her parents in North Carolina were shot after her basketball rolled into the yard of a neighbor. Everyone survived, but the suspect – Robert Louis Singletary – was apprehended two days later in Florida. The media’s reporting on this case has been noteworthy considering the racial angle. The victims are white, and the suspect is black, but race has not been included in any of the headlines. In fact, a search of the shooter’s name on CNN returns one story.

“Suspect who allegedly shot 6-year-old neighbor and her parents in North Carolina has been apprehended in Florida.”

Compare that to how CNN has covered Ralph Yarl’s shooting:

  • “White homeowner accused of shooting Black teen who went to the wrong house in Kansas City will face 2 felony charges, officials announce”
  • “Recovery of Black teen allegedly shot by White homeowner after ringing wrong doorbell is a miracle, attorney says”
  • “The White homeowner accused of shooting a Black teen who rang his doorbell turns himself in and is released on bail”

The message here is crystal clear: Race only matters to the corporate press when it supports a certain color-coded worldview. For CNN, that typically translates into using racial descriptors when a suspect is white and his victims are not. But even people who claim to abhor race politics can find themselves entranced by the siren song of tribalism.

One of Tucker Carlson’s monologues earlier this week included a rebuke of the left’s assumption that Yarl’s shooting was racially motivated. The tendency to jump to conclusions about motive without evidence is common on CNN, on MSNBC, and at the New York Times. Then Carlson proceeded to do the exact same thing he criticized when he imputed racist intent to the violent assault of a white woman in Chicago over the past weekend. The woman appeared on a different Fox News show along with her boyfriend – who was there at the time – and stated the attack was random and not a targeted act of racial violence.

This is why journalists, politicians, and pundits need to resist the impulse to ascribe motive to violent crime based solely on the fact that the criminal and perpetrator have different skin tones. Acts of violence should be universally condemned, regardless of the color combinations of victim and suspect that are involved. But media crime reporting is always done through race-colored lenses.

Incidents in which both the suspects and victims are black expose the media’s dirty little secret. The progressive press – including “pro-black” platforms – only care about black lives when they are threatened by white people. That explains why the recent mass shooting in Alabama that ended with 20 people shot and four dead has not generated nearly as much coverage or outrage as what happened to Ralph Yarl.

When they do choose to cover these stories, what’s absent is any mention of “root causes” other than guns. Stories involving white shooters give them an opportunity to criticize “white supremacy” and racism. But incidents involving black shooters don’t come with the same type of analysis. There is no mention of racial self-hatred, fatherlessness and family structure, media and hip-hop culture, or any other factor that would speak to motive.

America is a nation of more than 330 million people spread across 3.5 million square miles. In other words, this is a big country with a large and diverse population that exists in a fallen world. If you can think of it, there is a good chance someone in this country has done it in the past, is doing it now, or will do it in the future. For example, a woman was recently arrested on allegations of bestiality. I did a Google search for “bestiality arrest” to find details and was shocked by how many different cases came back, including ones involving menwomen, and couples.

The media can’t possibly cover every crime story. But what it can do is provide facts in an objective fashion on a consistent basis regardless of the identities involved. This doesn’t mean intent can’t be part of crime stories. It just means the media should resist the temptation to assign motives based on skin color, especially when they see the world through the lens of white “oppressors” and “oppressed” minorities. Outlets like the Root that cater to a black audience should be leading the charge to turn down the racial rhetoric. A small minority group whose leaders advocate killing its future soldiers and disarming its current ones should be the last people stoking racial conflict.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Who Really Cares About Dead Kids?

April 19, 2023 by Ann Coulter


Who Really Cares About Dead Kids?

We’ve heard a lot lately about how Republicans don’t care about dead kids — just keep your hands off their guns! The bullhorn insurrection staged by Tennessee legislators, for example, was justified on the grounds that they were JUST TRYING TO SAVE CHILDREN’S LIVES!!!

      As MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell put it, the bullhorn episode showed “who is trying to protect the children of Tennessee and who isn’t.”

The amazing statistic that’s supposed to make us give up our guns PRONTO is that since 2020, gun violence has become the leading cause of death for American children.

You’re supposed to be thinking of the little kids killed in school shootings, like in Uvalde or the Christian school in Nashville. In fact, the odds that a child will be killed in a mass school shooting are 1 in 10 million.

The trick is that “children” includes 16-to-19-year-old gang members.   Exclude 16-to-19-year-olds, and the number of kids killed by guns every year plummets from 2,811 to a few hundred.

It turns out, black teenagers are using guns to kill a lot of other black teenagers.

This will come as a surprise to most people because black-on-black violence is not considered newsworthy. (By contrast, any white-on-black violence, even the sort of thing that wouldn’t make local news if the perp were black, will get front-page coverage at The New York Times, international headlines and a call from the president.)

Based on arrests reported in the local news, here are a few recent examples of “children” being killed by gun violence. You will notice that none of these suspected homicides would have been prevented even if Republicans gave up all their guns.

And consider that, in most urban areas, the huge majority of murders never result in any arrests at all. For example, the “clearance” rate for murder — which is much higher than the “arrest” rate — is only 22% in Chicago, 43% in Baltimore and 37% in Philadelphia.

According to police arrests:

  • — On March 29, 2023, 16-year-old Vincent Lee Bradley III and 17-year-old Devonte J. Pool fired at least 33 shots, gunning down a 16-year-old high school student, Larry Marshall III, in Tacoma, Washington.
  • — A few days earlier, 16-year-old Lorenzo A. Brooks and 19-year-old Aaron Randolph Carter allegedly shot and killed 18-year-old Jasiah Smith in a Fredericksburg, Virginia, parking lot.
  • — A week before that, 19-year-old Adrian Daeshawn Granville and 24-year-old Teonjenique Elizabeth Lashay Hudson Howard were shot and killed at the Embassy Suites hotel in Portland, Oregon, by an unknown suspect — the same hotel where 15-year-old Deandrae Barber fatally shot 18-year-old Parnell Badon Jr. on Nov. 19, 2022. (Can’t wait to read the Yelp reviews.)
  • — On March 7, 2023, two brothers, Jacob Tobias Bryant, 18, and John Aalen Bryant Jr., 20, along with an unnamed 16-year-old juvenile, fatally shot a 17-year-old in Georgetown, South Carolina.
  • — On Feb. 23, 2023, Keith Melvin Moses, 19, shot and killed a 9-year-old girl, T’yonna Major, and her mother in a shooting spree in Orlando, Florida, that left several others wounded or dead.
  • — On Jan. 23, 2023, 18-year-old Preston Walls removed his ankle bracelet before gunning down rival gang members, 18-year-old Gionni Dameron and 16-year-old Rashad Carr, at a violence reduction program in Des Moines, Iowa.
  • — On Jan. 4, 2023, 18-year-old Jakari Harps fatally shot 17-year-old Breck Gerard Williams Jr. and 14-year-old Adrian Daniels in west Fort Worth, Texas.
  • — Right before Christmas last year, 17-year-old Lavon Semaj Longstreet and 18-year-old TaeShawn Adams-Wright killed 19-year-old Johntae Raymon Hudson at the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota, standing over Hudson’s body and firing “multiple rounds into his body.”
  • — Earlier in December, 17-year-old Tejuan Johnson and 18-year-old Jaylan Dubose shot and killed 15-year-old Nonaisha Jones and 19-year-old Logan Lawson in the Roselawn neighborhood of Cincinnati, Ohio.

All these incidents of “children” dying by gun violence consisted of black teenagers killing other black teenagers — and a 9-year-old.

More than half of all black teenagers who died of any cause in 2020 were killed by guns. Black males 15- to 34-years-old were more than 20 times more likely to die by gun homicide than white males that age.

Unfortunately, there is probably no story of less interest to our media (or the president) than the epidemic of black teenagers killing one another. In Jill Leovy’s acclaimed book, “Ghettoside: A True Story of Murder in America,” there’s a full page of racist quotes explaining why, historically, “black-on-black killing drew so little notice.” This one is from a white Tennessean during Reconstruction: “[N-word] life’s cheap now.”

Or, as Cook County (Illinois) State’s Attorney Kim Foxx put it in declining to prosecute a gang shootout, it’s “mutual combat.”

Far from highlighting the crisis of black teenagers shooting one another and declaring a national emergency, the media, corporate America and Democrats mightily egged on black violence after the death of George Floyd. It’s fun for them. They get to watch riot porn from the safety of their lily-white neighborhoods.

The only people who actually give a damn about black people getting killed are the police. And who have the bien-pensants declared war on? You guessed right.

Propose anything that would actually reduce the plague of black-on-black crime, such as arresting, prosecuting and imprisoning criminals, and liberals scream, STOP PUTTING BLACK BODIES IN PRISON!

Needless to say, Justin Jones and Justin Pearson, the Tennessee representatives who attacked democracy because they were JUST TRYING TO SAVE CHILDREN’S LIIIIIVES, are huge BLM supporters. They prattle about “ending police violence,” blacks being “lynched by police officers,” and accuse the police of running a “system of white supremacy.”

Jones told Teen Vogue that “more policing does not lead to community safety.” (The thousands of black men who are still alive thanks to Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s more policing policy would disagree.) Instead, Jones proposed “more funding to social workers, public education [and] ending poverty.” (Why didn’t anybody else think of that?)

On NPR, Pearson blamed “white supremacy” for the death of Tyre Nichols. (“White supremacy” is such an awesome force, it even infected the five black Memphis police officers charged with Nichols’ death.)

You want to know who doesn’t care about “our children’s lives,” MSNBC? You, the rest of the media, George Soros-supported prosecutors and the entire Democratic Party. Their motto: “[N-word] life’s cheap now.”


BLAZETV STAFF Op-ed: Steve Deace explains the new religion behind Bud Light and Dylan Mulvaney



Why do brands like Bud Light make marketing decisions — like promoting transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney — that will lose customers and money?

While it may seem like a mystery, Steve Deace has some answers.

He says people “still believe there’s this neutral mechanism in our culture called ‘the marketplace’ where eventually these things get sifted and filtered, right? And the people decide if they want this or they want that or they don’t want that and they do want this, right?”

He continues, “I don’t think that’s true anymore.”

As worship of God wanes, a new religion has begun to take its place. Deace believes that this is why brands like Bud Light are completely ignoring the desires of their target demographics.

He says, “The idea that it will just be a religionless society — oh no, it will not. There will be another religion. Another religion will emerge to take the place of the one that vacated said space. Nature abhors a vacuum. Something will emerge to take that place.”

They don’t want you to see this … Big Tech does its best to limit what news you see. Make sure you see our stories daily — directly to your inbox.

And according to Deace, the left’s new religion of wokeness is a tight-knit one.

“They have built a fellowship. May I say a church? They have each other’s backs. They go to the end. This is where the real religious commitment and conviction exists in America.”

“America is not devoid of real religious commitment and conviction. It is replete with the wrong religious commitment and conviction.”

Want more from Steve Deace?

To enjoy more of Steve’s take on national politics, Christian worldview and principled conservatism with a snarky twist, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: Talk or action? 7 actions Trump supporters should promote to stop politically targeted prosecutions

DANIEL HOROWITZ | March 31, 2023


Win McNamee/Getty Images

Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox.SIGN UP

Justice is indiscriminately due to all, without regard to numbers, wealth, or rank.” ~John Jay, in Georgia v. Brailsford, 1794

The die is cast. The political persecutions have been happening against average conservative citizens for several years, but it took the indictment of Trump to finally get people’s attention. We no longer have equality under the law. It’s quite evident that a conservative living in a blue state or being prosecuted by the feds in D.C. will never get a fair shake from the prosecutor, judge, or jury. Nothing will change that. The question is whether red states will make their states sanctuaries for liberty and as unhospitable to their political enemies as blue states are to our people.

It wasn’t always this way. We’ve been an extremely divided and polarized nation for quite some time. Sure, in the realm of court decisions or the legal process affecting broad political issues, the political bias of the judges was always quite apparent. But when it came to an individual criminal case, it was always the law that governed. As recently as 2016, a unanimous Supreme Court vacated the conviction of former Republican Governor Bob McDonnell for bribery because they all clearly understood that the governor’s hosting of a company he benefited from, while reeking of sleaze, is endemic of both sides of the political divide and clearly did not meet the definition of bribery under the Hobbs Act.

We no longer live in a world of equal justice under the law. We’ve witnessed how in the same capitol city where violent criminals are released or not prosecutedArmy veterans with clean records were held pretrial and denied due process up and down the legal system on what was, at most, non-violent misdemeanors, and at worst government provocation and entrapment. All of this is taking place while the worst Antifa rioters can take over city streets for weeks with brutal violence. Aside from Elizabeth Warren’s isolated moment of intellectual honesty decrying solitary confinement for J6 defendants, we’ve seen no such outcry for equal treatment. Those perpetrating this believe we are subhuman and not afforded equal protection under the law.

Some countries are open and anarchic like places in the Third World; others are very authoritarian like Singapore, where everyone is punished pretty severely for relatively minor infractions. But what we have here is a two-tiered justice system that is tantamount to targeted and systemic persecution. This is how we wind up with D.C. U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves refusing to prosecute 67% of all arrests, including 52% of all felonies, but announcing 1,200 new prosecutions of J6 protesters, many of individuals who didn’t even violate minor trespassing laws. This is how you have endless Antifa and BLM riots where the most violent people who beat, maimed, looted, and burned police stations to the ground got less punishment than the most innocuous J6 suspects.

We cannot share a country with people who don’t fundamentally believe in equality under the law. This was self-evident before the Trump indictment, and frankly, it’s shameful that so many conservative voices didn’t respond emphatically to this emergency until it affected their man. Nonetheless, if this is what it takes to unite behind a forward-looking agenda, we’ll be better for it. Thus, the only answer is to militarize the legal system of red states just as emphatically as blue states. To that end, red state governors and legislatures should do the following:

1) Fund legal defense of persecuted individuals: The first step is defense. Obviously, Trump has a war chest, but most of his supporters being persecuted or pro-life activists being targeted for praying outside abortion clinics don’t have money. It’s also extremely hard to even get a lawyer willing to fight the system. I personally had trouble finding people lawyers when fighting January 6 charges or businessmen being prosecuted for the “crime” of opening their stores during COVID. Red states should set up a legal defense fund to contribute to the legal defense of those the state AG determines are being targeted with unequal treatment based on political, religious, or social beliefs. The AG’s office can also marshal pro bono lawyers willing to help who know that they will get moral support from the state rather than being targeted as pariahs in their profession for representing such clients.

2) Refuse to extradite: Gov. DeSantis just set a precedent that Florida will not assist with extradition of those politically targeted. Other red-state governors should refuse to extradite people being accused of non-violent crimes when there is compelling evidence that other people accused of similar actions are not targeted with the same level prosecution. In the case of Trump, because he is protected by the Secret Service, there was never a chance that the NYPD would somehow be able to nab him in Florida. But for ordinary citizens, it’s important for red states to make the statement that they will serve as constitutional sanctuaries for equality under the law. This will be harder to pull off in the face of a federal prosecution, but the time has clearly come to tell the blue states to shove it. Every red-state legislature should empower its state AG to block extradition if he determines it is for political reasons.

3) Slash the ABA monopoly: Connected to the previous point, it’s time for state legislatures to require their state judiciaries to recognize alternatives to the American Bar Association, which has unlawfully claimed a monopoly on the entire legal profession to the point where people cannot obtain legal representation over the ABA’s veto. The ABA is sanctioning people like Rudy Giuliani and Professor John Eastman for simply offering their view on constitutional questions.

4) Refuse cooperation with rogue federal agencies: Red states need to pull out of all joint training, sharing of information, and help with logistics or intel to any federal law enforcement agency that continues to target people for their political beliefs.

5) Prosecute the left more zealously: It’s time to fight fire with fire. Just this week, there was a left-wing insurrection at the Tennessee Capitol. We’re not asking red-state prosecutors to take minor misdemeanors and hold people pretrial for two years as the left has done with J6 defendants. However, they should more aggressively use catch-all felony statutes to throw the book at people who legitimately act violent or Democrat politicians and outside groups that legitimately violate laws.

Even though they don’t control the federal government, Republicans control half the states and can easily make these changes today. That’s why the primary focus should be interposing on behalf of the people’s liberties at the state level. However, given the federal tyranny, there is a need to at least push for legal reforms against political targeting with legislation in the House.

6) Pass the “Political Targeting Prosecution Act”: Defendants can theoretically assert an Equal Protection Clause violation; however, practically, the courts have made it almost impossible to succeed in a claim of a selective prosecution defense under the Equal Protection Clause. As such, Congress should pass the Political Targeting Prosecution Act, which would accord defendants the opportunity to present evidence of political targeting based on animus for the individual’s religious or political beliefs. For example, if defendants could show how no BLM rioter who was much more violent was charged with obstructing law enforcement during a public disturbance (18 USC 231(a)(3)), it would trigger a motion to dismiss based on unequal treatment.

7) Fair jury pools: With a country more divided than during the Civil War, it’s self-evident that conservatives cannot get a fair trial in liberal jurisdictions. This has rendered the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee to a trial by a jury of one’s peers irrelevant. In order to restore the spirit of that right in this era, Congress must demand that a conservative defendant charged in D.C. can move the trial to the federal jurisdiction where the defendant resides. There should also be a federal right to request an expanded jury pool 20-30 miles outside a major city to obtain a more “equitable” share of like-minded people composing the jury in criminal cases. So for example, whenever Democrats control the Justice Department, by definition, any political opponent will be charged in D.C. with a 95% Democrat jury pool. The new law would prescribe that the individual is tried either in his home state or, if he resides in D.C., he could request a jury pool to rope in parts of Maryland, Virginia, and the West Virginia panhandle to achieve more balance.Trump fans are absolutely correct in asserting that this is about much more than Trump. Indeed, the political persecutions have been going on for quite some time before this indictment. So let’s make our response about more than Trump and more than just promoting talking points. It’s time for action. Let’s systemically combat the weaponization of the justice system against those who have no voice, money, or legal help.

Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: They knew: FOIA document shows government anticipated mass vaccine injuries, then observed them from day one

Daniel Horowitz | March 22, 2023


Nobody disagrees at this point that there is a plethora of excess deaths and a dearth of births, a trend that should be the number-one alarming public policy issue. Yet when any of us suggest that the gene therapy ubiquitously given to the world right around the time of the jump in these numbers might be responsible, people look at us like we are from Mars. However, it turns out, based on newly released FOIA documents from the CDC, that our government knew about and even anticipated massive reports of injuries from these shots from day one.

Throughout the past two years, the government and media have concocted a conspiracy theory that somehow the CDC’s own VAERS reporting is scammed with fraud by people who have nothing better to do with their lives but spend hours filling out fraudulent vaccine injury reports. They pretend it’s a sort of ex post facto anomaly that nobody expected and that has no credibility in their eyes. Except, as Hebrew University Professor Josh Guetzkow reveals, not only did the CDC know about the vaccine injuries blowing up VAERS at record levels (even before the general public had access to them), the agency contracted with defense contractor General Dynamics to handle the database in anticipation of record use. Then, when the vaccines were released, the CDC had to up the contract to account for even more entries, yet showed no moral qualms about continuing with the campaign without disclosing these revelations to the public.

Guetzkow, who has secured numerous FOIA’ed documents both in the U.S. and Israel throughout COVID, posted 69 pages of FOIA’ed documents and contracts from General Dynamics Information Technology to the CDC’s immunization safety office. Thanks to his work, we already know from the previous FOIA’ed documents that the CDC’s $9.45 million contract with General Dynamics in August 2020 stated that officials anticipated 1,000 adverse event reports a day, with 40% of them being serious. Yet, like a cold serial killer soullessly counting his casualty list, the CDC was completely fine with going through with this campaign, as if it were the price that had to be paid to worship the spirit of the age – the modern-day Moloch. However, this document shows that as early as Jan. 15 – when most people still could have avoided these shots – the CDC was aware of record-setting reports that crushed even the agency’s initial cold-hearted, morbid expectations.

As you can see from page 8 of the pdf, General Dynamics warned the CDC that VAERS had blown through the expected 1,000 cases per day and even reached a level above 4,500 – to the point that GD couldn’t process the data. Mind you, they were never concerned with the human toll, just the logistics of the contract labor. They predicted a need for “reforecasting of staffing needs” to process all these reports.

Already in December 2020, when the shots were only available for select people like doctors, there were over 19,000 reports and close to 344,000 website visits. It’s hard to see how this wasn’t organic from people genuinely in pain because there was no organized campaign in the United States to inform people of VAERS at the time. I myself (who obsessively focused on this) hadn’t heard of it until two months later.

By Feb. 15, General Dynamics reported a continued record-setting pace of reports and website visits, to the point that workers had to expand their VAERS ID reports to allow for seven digits instead of six. In April, officials reported that they had to hire an additional 200 staffers to deal with the backlog and continue to process 25,000 reports per week, well beyond the threshold they originally contracted for. As eligibility for the shots expanded for all age groups, they continued to process over 30,000 injury reports a week, yet the CDC never said a word about it. Not only did officials not take the products off the market, they began mandating them over late summer 2021, with some mandates that remain in place to this very day.

It’s nearly impossible to astroturf these sorts of injury reports. Clearly, our government saw how organic they were and how they coincided perfectly with the uptake of the vaccine. Indeed, the FDA had access to the infamous Pfizer document in Feb. 2021 – before almost any younger adult was vaccinated – showing that the shot killed over 1,200 people and was associated with over 1,400 categories of serious maladies that were chronicled in a list eight pages long.

Now, keep in mind that after the government observed all these adverse events, and after officials knew about the 7.7% clinical injury rate from the CDC’s own V-SAFE program, perfectly corroborating the VAERS data, they accelerated the approval of these shots for children and then the mandates for everyone. Emails released via FOIA show that in July 2021, when the shots should have been canceled, Peter Marks, head of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, pressured Marion Gruber, then head of the office of vaccines research and review, to truncate the already accelerated timeline to fully approve the Comirnaty shot (which is still not commercially available 2.5 years later).

A copy of the July 19 email response from Marion Gruber is below:

A week after the infamous Aug. 23 approval, which triggered the mandates, Gruber resigned from the agency in protest. But notice how even Gruber couched her reticence to approve this thing in terms of not undermining “confidence in the vaccine,” rather than expressing actual concern this was already killing and maiming people in droves.

We’re at the point where at a minimum, the government doesn’t care how many people die from this experimentation. Dr. Tom Merritt, who was part of the Oxford University team who developed the AstraZeneca vaccine, best summed up the sentiment of the biomedical state toward the people when he admitted that those injured by the gene therapy were “collateral damage to the bigger scheme.” He added: “Some tragically died, a number had their lives changed forever. They believed in vaccines; now they don’t.”It’s all a matter of what the bigger scheme really is.

Ann Coulter Op-Ed: Heavy D Don’t Tweet, He Acts

 March 22, 2023 by Ann Coulter


Heavy D Don’t Tweet, He Acts

  Isn’t it great to have the media complaining about what a Republican is doing, instead of what he’s tweeting?

     The New York Times recently did a major investigation into Gov. Ron DeSantis’ suspension last August of a Florida prosecutor for the flimsy reason that he’d publicly announced that he would not enforce state law on abortion.

The Florida legislature had just spent nearly two months banging out a compromise bill that allowed abortions up to 15 weeks — more liberal than most European countries — and included an exception for life of the mother. An abortionist would literally have to turn himself in to get prosecuted under this law.

What kind of showboating clown would sign a public “pledge” not to prosecute a case that had about a 1 in 10 billion chance of ever landing in his office?

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Florida state attorney Andrew H. Warren.

This wasn’t Warren’s first publicity stunt. Even a fawning profile on Warren in the Tampa Bay Times noted his penchant for going “out of his way to draw attention to himself,” setting him “apart from other elected prosecutors.”

During the pandemic, Warren held a press conference to announce that he was prosecuting a church pastor for violating the county’s stay-at-home order by holding services — a misdemeanor offense.

Days later, Gov. DeSantis issued an order expressly overriding the county’s shutdown rules — and Warren held a press conference to denounce the governor’s order. People will DIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!

He held a press conference a few months later, after dismissing criminal charges against 67 BLM protesters arrested by the police for unlawful assembly. (Luckily, congregating to worship George Floyd poses none of the health risks of congregating to worship Jesus.)

So when Warren held another press conference to announce his pledge not to prosecute abortion cases, DeSantis removed him from office. (Florida constitution: “the governor may suspend from office … any county officer, for malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty …”)

You wanted to be a hero, Andy? OK, you’re a hero! My conscience demands I sign this pledge. Here I stand. I can do no other. … HEY, WAIT! YOU CAN’T FIRE ME!

An accurate headline on this story would be something like, “Governor suspends public servant for refusing to do his job.” But The New York Times’ headline was: “Inside Ron DeSantis’s Politicized Removal of an Elected Prosecutor.” (My headline: “Inside The New York Times’ Politicized Report on a Republican Governor.”)

The reporters, junior psychologists, decided to go beyond the facts and reveal DeSantis’ secret motive. It seems that the real reason DeSantis fired an insolent prosecutor was because: He thought it would be popular with voters.

I know, disgusting, right?

Hey, New York Times, how about asking why firing this preening fruitcake might be well-received by voters?

[Frantically waving my hand.]

People are sick of taxpayer-supported government officials who expect standing ovations for not doing their jobs. It’s become something of a lifestyle choice for Democrats to run for office, then refuse to enforce any laws they disagree with.

President Obama announced that he would not enforce immigration laws against so-called “Dreamers,” despite passing an amnesty being Congress’ job. Obama even gave the illegals work permits, in open defiance of federal law.

Then Trump became president, and Democrats around the country announced that they, too, would refuse to abide by federal immigration laws, declaring themselves “sanctuary cities.”

In the last few years, we got a slew of George Soros-backed, BLM-supporting progressive prosecutors showily refusing to prosecute. Cook County (Illinois) State’s Attorney Kim Foxx, for example, said her goal in office was to fight “mass incarceration,” which is pretty much the exact opposite of her job description. She gave a free pass to most shoplifters, about half of drug traffickers, and gang members engaging in Wild West shootouts — which she described as “mutual combat.”

Instead of “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time,” how about: “Don’t run for the job if you have no intention of doing it”? (I’m still working on the rhyming part.) It would be like firemen and policemen who refused to respond to calls.

That’s why, yes, New York Times, DeSantis’ firing of Warren is probably going to be a hit with voters. He’s the first guy to take these comic book heroes at their word and remove them from the offices they openly disdain. Hiring DeSantis is a lot easier than having to keep organizing massive recall campaigns — as the residents of San Francisco recently did to get rid of their anti-prosecution prosecutor Chesa Boudin.

But isn’t it great to have the Times mad at a Republican for actually scoring a win — and not for posting obnoxious tweets? If it were Trump, they’d be criticizing him for tweeting something untoward about Andrew Warren’s face.

Everyone’s worried DeSantis won’t be as “exciting” as Trump on the campaign trail. After all-talk-no-action Trump, who cares about talk? This time, we want action.


Buddy Brown

March 21, 2023

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Burning Questions, Even Hotter Answers

 March 15, 2023 by Ann Coulter


Burning Questions, Even Hotter Answers

   From time to time, my readers email me asking for my take on issues of the day. (This has happened twice.)

     I feel more obliged than usual to respond, now that we know that the rest of the media cannot state an opinion on anything until they figure out which side Trump is on.

MSNBC: Trump is against men in women’s sports? … Children will DIE if men cannot compete in women’s sports!

Fox News: Trump says he built the wall? … Go Trump! He’s built 0.2% of the wall! ONLY 1,305 MILES TO GO! 

I may be cruel, brusque or impatient, but I don’t lie. When I say something, it’s because I think it’s true, not because I’m angling to get a show on MSNBC or a call from President Trump.

So here are my answers to readers’ fictional questions.

QUESTION: Are books like David Cole’s “Republican Party Animal,” Ryan Anderson’s “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment,” and Jared Taylor’s “A Race Against Time,” “White Identity,” “Face to Face With Race” and “If We Do Nothing” still banned from Amazon?

Why yes they are! But please tell me more about how Gov. Ron DeSantis is Hitler for removing pornography from Florida schools.

Liberal brainteaser: What’s the difference between a book in a public school and a book that is simply available for purchase on Amazon? Think hard. You only have three hours.

BREAKING NEWS! Jean Raspail’s “Camp of the Saints” is now available from Amazon on Kindle!!!

Other News In Book Banning: Barnes & Noble — unlike Amazon — sells “When Harry Became Sally,” “Camp of the Saints” — albeit in French only — and all of Taylor’s books,


1) Maybe Jeff Bezos should spend less time on his rockets and more time overseeing Amazon’s censorship department.

2) “Republican Party Animal” is the hottest book on Earth.

QUESTION: What was the best use of “In Other Words” this week?

Thank you for asking. For the uninformed, the “In Other Words” technique is how liberals insert crackpot words in a conservative’s mouth, by saying or implying, in other words …

This week’s winner is MSNBC’s Joy-Ann Reid for describing Republicans’ response to Donald Trump in 2016 as: “Shit, I wanna grab ’em by the pussy, too.”

It’s like she can read our minds!

QUESTION: What did you think of Scott Adams’ Dilbert cartoon being dropped from newspapers for his “racist rant”?

To refresh your recollection, Adams misread a meaningless, click-bait poll, claiming it showed that a majority of black people disagreed with the statement “It’s okay to be white.” (In fact, the poll showed the opposite.) He then concluded that blacks hate whites, so whites should — here’s the part that got played on a loop — “get the hell away from black people.”

At that point, everyone on TV expressed utter shock at his advice. (For a day or two, Adams’s remarks even pushed aside Jan. 6 coverage!)

I happened to notice something about the indignant.

— MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough: “It’s just flat-out racism. … This would have been racist in 1955! If somebody had gone on ‘The Steve Allen Show’ and said, ‘My best advice would be to stay away from black people,’ that person in 1955 would have been in trouble.”

Scarborough lives in New Canaan, Connecticut, which is 0.7% black.

— CNN’s Alisyn Camerota: “Scott Adams went on a racist rant in which he said — and I’m quoting — ‘the advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from black people.’”

Camerota lives in Westport, Connecticut, 1% black.

— CNN’s Jake Tapper: “Blatant racist remarks. A fairly racist statement, as blatant as it gets.”

Tapper lives in a $3.7 million dollar home in Northwest Washington, D.C., an overwhelmingly white area of a city that is majority black.

Shall I go on? I think not.

I don’t begrudge anyone for living in a “low crime” neighborhood with “good schools,” but it’s striking how the very people loudest in their condemnation of Adams seem to have arranged their own lives in strict accordance with his “racist” advice.

Maybe sit this one out.

QUESTION: I like Gov. Ron DeSantis for keeping Florida open, opposing pointless wars, sending illegals to Martha’s Vineyard and a million other things. But isn’t he going to be another Scott Walker, a widely admired governor who fizzled the moment he announced for president?

Highly unlikely. I couldn’t remember why I dumped Walker mere seconds after watching his presidential announcement speech, so I looked it up.

Walker began, “As kids, my brother David and I enjoyed going over to the home of a neighbor by the name of Claire Congdon.”

We then heard a lot about the Congdons: Mr. Congdon’s manning the concession stand at baseball games, his work with the Boy Scouts, his help in getting Walker into “Badger Boys State” as well as “a program called Boys Nation.” It was, Walker told the surely rivetted audience, “my honor to be chosen to represent Wisconsin” at Boys Nation.

At one point, Walker spent a solid minute describing how he buys shirts at Kohl’s department store. (Interested? He goes to the sale rack, uses coupons from the Sunday paper as well as the flyer giving him 15 or 20% off — “or even 30% if we are really lucky” — and presents the cashier with “Kohl’s cash.”)

Apparently, this was supposed to be a metaphor for supply side economics, but it seemed more like an ad for Kohl’s, using ordinary people instead of actors.

Anyway, Walker went on to win the student council election that year, and the rest is history.


Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: With the impending bank bailout and stagflation trap, it’s time to clip the wings of the Federal Reserve

DANIEL HOROWITZ | March 13, 2023


Robert Alexander/Getty Images

Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox. SIGN UP

We have no free market and never will have one so long as the Federal Reserve exists in its current form. It is the unelected judge, jury, and executioner of the economy that can pick winners and losers by manipulating credit and monetary policy to artificially inflate certain investments and investors at the expense of others. Years of unnaturally low interest rates have enriched well-connected woke elites at the expense of consumers and savers. Now that their Ponzi scheme is coming due, with the collapse of one of the wokest banks and the vicious cycle of stagflation and reliance on loose money, it’s time for conservatives and GOP presidential candidates to revisit the idea of either abolishing or severely limiting the role of the Fed.

For the past several generations, the Democrat Party thrived on class warfare. Democrats claimed that conservatives elevated the wealthy at the expense of the working class simply because they didn’t support free stuff and redistribution of wealth through an extremely progressive income tax on legitimately earned wealth. But it turns out that their policies have actually artificially enriched the wealthy and harmed middle-income consumers and savers, but unlike with our policies, the wealthy never earned these tendentious favors, nor are they constitutional.

In many respects, the Federal Reserve has more power than all three branches of government put together, yet the members never stand for reelection. For years, the Federal Reserve has created endless inflation and loose credit with near-zero interest rates and by buying up trillions of dollars of securities and treasuries. It distorted the market, allowed woke banks like Silicon Valley Bank to overextend themselves, and even become the primary lender for solar financing in America, based on Monopoly money.

Now that the Fed inevitably was forced to hike interest rates to curb some of the historic inflation it helped create, Silicon Valley Bank, along with Signature Bank in New York (the bank Barney Frank joined when he left Congress), collapsed and was taken over by the FDIC. But just like a frustrated teen losing a video game, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department are pulling the plug on the game so that their buddies don’t lose. Remember, until Friday, SVB’s CEO, Gregory Becker, was on the board of directors at the San Francisco Fed. It’s one big game of, by, and for the politically connected venture socialists.

Less than 10 hours after Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen promised there would be no new bank bailout, the Federal Reserve issued a statement Sunday evening announcing a spectacular bailout of every penny of deposits both at SVB and at Signature Bank. Except this one, unlike in 2008, won’t even require a vote in Congress, because the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department have the backhanded tools to print money, even though we have reached the statutory debt limit.

The financing will be made available through the creation of a new Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP), offering loans of up to one year in length to banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other eligible depository institutions pledging U.S. Treasuries, agency debt and mortgage-backed securities, and other qualifying assets as collateral,” wrote the Fed. “These assets will be valued at par. The BTFP will be an additional source of liquidity against high-quality securities, eliminating an institution’s need to quickly sell those securities in times of stress.

In other words, they are back to printing money. The Fed has already grown its balance sheet by $4.7 trillion during the frenetic COVID money-pumping scheme (in addition to Congress’ $5.5 trillion fiscal stimulus), and has only off-loaded roughly $600 billion over the past year.

This was after many preceding years of ultra-loose monetary policy. Finally, as inflation reached record highs last year, the Fed began to ease up on those policies. Not any more! The Fed is promising to buy the assets “at par,” not at market value, which will have the effect of loosening bank credit beyond belief.

Additionally, along with the Treasury Department, the Fed will make $25 billion available as a backstop to this quantitative easing scam. The debt limit is a complete mockery, because evidently the Treasury Department can come up with vast sums of money on the fly, and this is likely the tip of the iceberg. Once the initial shock of this policy sets in, the debate will merely be over how many hundreds of billions are offered to stem the panic from other banks.

The immediate effect of this bailout will be to halt all interest rate hikes. As of this morning, the yield on the two-year Treasury note was down more than 80 basis points since last week, in anticipation of the return to loose credit. So the government will crush consumers with record inflation to bail out the well-connected woke (ESG-supporting) elites who took advantage of the unnatural and manipulated easy credit. John Edwards was indeed correct that there are two Americas, except it’s not because of a lack of government involvement. It’s because of too much big government, and particularly an unelected fourth branch of government that should be abolished.

If it’s impractical to immediately abolish the Federal Reserve, we should at a minimum remove its power to serve as both the arsonist and the firefighter. Congress must repeal the Humphrey-Hawkins bill from 1978, which empowers the Fed with a “dual mandate” to achieve maximum sustainable employment and keep prices stable. The Fed should be forced to focus solely on price stability. This would take “the game” out of the Fed. If it has no ability to create stimulus and provide monetary morphine, Wall Street can’t anticipate it and build an artificial economy based on its nourishment.

Market-distorting monetary manipulations are no different from market-distorting fiscal policy from the government. This is how the statists have successfully dissuaded us from ever limiting government. “You really plan to pull the rug out from under such-and-such industry?” the forces of special interests groan, be it health care or the financial sector. The same applies to monetary policy. There is no reason why we should allow the Fed to use monetary stimulus in such an officious manner that the entire market would collapse without the monetary morphine, even during robust economic growth.

The Fed should also be banned from buying up other securities and bonds, such as mortgage-backed securities from Freddie and Fannie. We must stop distorting the markets by encouraging investments on the basis of how much capital is available instead of real growth in a specific industry. It’s time to go back to the days of real economic growth built on the fiscal equivalent of protein and healthy fats, not sugar and carbs for the well-connected elites involved in regulatory capture.

We have enough lawless, unelected branches of government. It’s time to stop creating asset bubbles and misallocation of resources and return to a true organic equities market that reflects the economic realities of America. That will not happen until the Fed is brought under the checks and balances of the republic. As Andrew Jackson warned of a central bank, “The bold effort the present (central) bank had made to control the government … [is] but premonitions of the fate that awaits the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it.”

Ann Coulter Op-ed: My Draft DeSantis Presidential Announcement Speech

 March 8, 2023 by Ann Coulter



My Draft DeSantis Presidential Announcement Speech

     With Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis busy running the third-largest state, enacting a magnificently conservative agenda, promoting a new book, and having to respond to endless demands that he run for president (not to mention banning the words “gay” and “slavery” — the man’s a whirlwind of activity!), I thought I’d jot down a few ideas for his presidential announcement speech.

     Here are some of the main points I think he should hit.

— “We are never going back to the party of Paul Ryan!” (Donald Trump, 2023 CPAC)

During his first two years in office, Trump had a Republican House and a Republican Senate. He’d just won a stunning upset victory that should have scared the bejesus out of every Republican in Washington. The people had spoken! They wanted a wall, not more tax cuts.

But Ryan wanted to cut taxes, so Trump forgot all about the wall and gave them tax cuts. (In fairness to Trump, challenging Ryan and pushing for wall funding would have required making a phone call.)

HEADLINE: “Ryan gets big — and much-needed — win on tax cuts” — Politico, Nov. 16, 2017

From the article:

“Loathed by the Breitbart wing of the Republican Party — which sees Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as Trump’s biggest obstacle to making America great again — the Wisconsin Republican scored a major victory in Thursday’s 227-205 vote to pass a massive tax-cut package that dramatically alters the U.S. tax code … [T]he biggest legislative win so far for Trump is an issue that Ryan has been working on for virtually his entire career.”

— “Now we have complete chaos [at the border], fentanyl is pouring in and families are being destroyed. There is death everywhere caused by incompetence.” (Trump, 2023 CPAC)

In fact, drug overdose deaths in America skyrocketed during the No-Wall/Open-Borders policy of the Trump administration, going from an average of about 50,000 a year in Obama’s second term to more than 90,000 in Trump’s last year in office.

Even in his CPAC speech, full of preposterous, fantastical claims about all the great things he did, Trump couldn’t stay focused on the (now) 100,000 Americans who die of drug overdoses every year — something that is 100% attributable to not having a border wall. After briefly mentioning fentanyl, he got right back to something much more important — Syria and Iraq!

Trump said — no ellipses, this is exactly what he said — “Fentanyl is a big problem. In fact with the ISIS caliphate, a certain general said, it can only be done in three years, it probably cannot be done it all, sir. And I did it in three weeks. I went over to Iraq. Met a great general. ‘Sir, I can do it in three weeks.’ You heard that story.”

What on Earth? The man makes Biden look razor sharp.

— “I stood firm against the forces of anarchy and decay. I arrested the Marxists who toppled statues of our great heroes in Washington, D.C. I arrested them. They were knocking down the most beautiful artwork, the most beautiful statues of great heroes. They didn’t even know who they were, they just wanted anarchy.” (Trump, 2023 CPAC)

Under President Trump, hundreds of national treasures were destroyed, mangled, defaced, thrown into lakes, chopped up, melted down, hidden away or renamed. It was the greatest desecration of our country’s inheritance since the British set fire to the White House during the War of 1812.

Among the casualties were memorials not only to anyone who ever had anything to do with the Confederacy (on the plus side, black SAT scores immediately improved!), but also statues of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ulysses S. Grant, Francis Scott Key and Christopher Columbus. Also, a statue of an elk in Portland, Oregon.

In DeSantis’ Florida, no monuments or statues were toppled or defaced — not even the Confederate ones. About a dozen park names were changed and statues moved to other locations, but 75 Confederate memorials still stand in the Sunshine State, including an obelisk at Florida’s state capitol.

Wouldn’t it be nice to have a president who gave a damn about our country’s heritage and beautiful artwork?

— “Republicans must compete using every lawful means to win. That means swamping the left with mail-in votes, early votes and Election Day votes.” (Trump, 2023 CPAC)

Before the absolutely vital Senate runoff election in Georgia in January 2021, Trump did everything he could to discourage Republicans from voting.

HEADLINE: “Turnout dip among Georgia Republicans flipped U.S. Senate” — Atlanta Journal Constitution, Feb. 2, 2021

The AJC reported: “Trump’s message that the election was stolen discouraged voters such as Craig Roland, a 61-year-old Rome resident. Roland said he didn’t believe his vote would count. ‘What good would it have done to vote? They have votes that got changed,’ Roland said. ‘I don’t know if I’ll ever vote again.’”

— “We will keep men out of women’s sports.” (Trump, 2023 CPAC)

It was during Trump’s first year in office that biological men competing in women’s events destroyed women’s soccer and track and field in Connecticut, an absurdity that quickly spread to the rest of the country. Trump did nothing about it, unless you count a strongly worded tweet. (Heard of Title IX?)

Gov. DeSantis signed a bill prohibiting biological males (according to their birth certificates) from competing in women’s sports in any interscholastic, intercollegiate, intramural or club athletic teams or sports that are sponsored by a public secondary school, high school, public college or university institution in the state of Florida.

— “I will revoke every Biden policy promoting the chemical castration and sexual mutilation of our youth and ask Congress to send me a bill prohibiting child sexual mutilation in all 50 states.” (Trump, 2023 CPAC)

The entire transgender craze kicked off during the Trump administration, and it continued unabated throughout the Trump administration.

By contrast, acting at the behest of Gov. DeSantis, Florida medical boards have issued rules prohibiting the poisoning and mutilation of youth under 18 years old, one of the first such policies in the nation.

— “[Fox News host] Sean Hannity should get a [Pulitzer] prize … Tucker should get a prize.” (Trump, 2023 CPAC)

Hmmm. After the election, Hannity was “privately disgusted by Trump … but was scared to lose viewers,” according to Rupert Murdoch. In texts, Tucker Carlson called Trump “a demonic force” and “a destroyer.”

I don’t know if having a tenuous grasp of the obvious warrants a Pulitzer Prize, but if those are Trump’s biggest boosters, he may want to go back to Kanye West and Nick Fuentes.


Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: Major German paper reveals Pfizer fabricated clinical trials to cover up deaths

Daniel Horowitz | February 22, 2023


Matt Hunt/Getty Images

According to new provisional data from the Scottish government, there were 7,314 deaths registered in January 2023, an increase of 17.7% compared to the average of 6,212. For the second week of January, there were more deaths in Scotland than ever before, including during the peak of the pandemic. Concurrently, there were 4,159 births registered in January 2023, a decrease of 6.8% compared to the average of 4,463. In other words, between a dearth of births and a plethora of deaths, there were roughly 1,400 fewer souls, the equivalent of roughly 86,000 in the United States. This is long after COVID. Why is there zero concern?

What on earth will it take to pull these death shots from the market?

Die Welt, a paper based in the home country of Pfizer partner BioNTech, revealed last week in a long expose what many of us have long known. All those sudden deaths, heart attacks, and strokes we’ve been witnessing over the past two years were indeed observed during the Pfizer clinical trial that supposedly showed the shots to be 100% safe and effective. The company simply covered up the severe adverse events by kicking those participants out of the trial and/or suggesting without evidence that the deaths had nothing to do with the experiment.

Remember, the CDC announced a few weeks ago that it had finally study a potential association between the COVID shots and strokes. Well, it turns out the agency had the opportunity to study it already in 2020 before a single human being outside the trial was injected. “Patient no. 11621327” was more than a mere number. He was a human being found dead from a stroke in his apartment just three days after the second dose. Typically, with a novel product in trial, any death – even one not so sudden – makes the product suspect until it is proven innocent. Yet in this case, Pfizer simply dismissed the death as not related to the vaccine, just as the company did with Patient #11521497, who died 20 days later from cardiac arrest.

The article also provides more details on the Buenos Aires trial site, the largest one in the world, in which attorney Augusto Roux was severely injured with pericarditis and liver damage. Instead of being recorded as a severe adverse event, he was marked as having had COVID (even though he tested negative) and was summarily removed from the trial. Roux was on my podcast last July and told me Pfizer refused to help treat his injury because officials felt it had nothing to do with the vaccine, and insurance also refused to pay for treatment because the insurance company blamed it on him willingly joining the trial.

Die Welt reports that on Aug. 31, 2020, 53 of those in the trial in Buenos Aires were unblinded and removed from the trial against the protocol, which calls for this only “in emergencies” (unless this was indeed an emergency!). By the end of the second dose, a further 200 individuals were removed from the trial, meaning that overall, more than 250 of the original 1231 participants were terminated, thereby making the entirety of the data from the largest trial site irrelevant to use in the final trial results.

Overall, 21 participants in Pfizer’s phase 3 trial died, as compared to 17 in the control group before they were unblinded, which should have been a red flag before the shot ever took off. Pfizer claimed there was no evidence anyone died from the vaccine, but after it’s been revealed that a number of people in the trial suffered heart ailments and strokes, the company’s defense holds no water. Yet here we are, over two years later, and the shots are still on the market, promoted like manna from heaven, and even mandated in most hospitals and universities, including in red states. How is this not the top public policy issue of our day?

Consider the following from a public policy standpoint. Pfizer gets the government to pony up billions in taxpayer dollars for the shots, several billion more to promote, advertise, distribute, and mandate them on every human being alive – all while absolving Pfizer of liability. So how do we know the shots are safe? Who gets to monitor the clinical trial? The very manufacturer that was absolved of liability by the government! The Die Welt article even mentions that Pfizer pushed through a liability waiver on its contract not just for negligence, but also for “fraud or bad faith on the part of Pfizer itself.”

Pfizer responded to the Die Welt reporter by asserting that, “Regulatory authorities around the world have approved our Covid-19 vaccine. These approvals are based on a robust and independent assessment of the scientific data on quality, safety, and efficacy, including the phase 3 clinical trial.” Sure, authorities guaranteed the company endless funding, marketing, mandates, and indemnity so that Pfizer would have no incentive to even release the true results of its trial, much less make the product better.

How can this continue to go on after all we know?

Yet in all honesty, this year’s legislative sessions in red states have been an utter disgrace – with medical freedom not even being on the back burner of policy issues. The few brave legislators who seek to impose some sort of accountability on the state departments of health for promoting and mandating these shots are summarily shouted down. Florida is the only state where officials are holding Pfizer accountable with the convening of a grand jury. Just last week, the Florida Department of Health sent an alert to doctors warning them to inform anyone inquiring about the COVID shots about the adverse events reported to the CDC’s VAERS. Where are the other red states? Why is Ron DeSantis the only governor who values the Nuremberg Code?

What is it going to take to give this issue the prominence it deserves so that the policies and laws reflect the human toll these odious policies have taken on humanity? How many more people need to die for a lie? Remember, a study from Thailand showed that 29% of young males in the study sample suffered some form of subclinical heart damage whether they experienced symptoms or not. We have potentially hundreds of millions of people in the world who are ticking time bombs and in need of the best research, diagnostics, and treatment.

Amid all the existential threats to our security, civilization, culture, and economy – and there are certainly many – can you think of anything that matches the severity of this issue? From died suddenly to plummeting birth rates, how is the vaccine issue not the top concern of all public policy, given that it was injected in 5.5 billion people and officials are on the cusp of approving more mRNAs? So we’re now supposed to believe Moderna’s own published phase 3 trial results of its RSV shot that it’s 84% effective and absolutely no serious adverse events occurred? Within months, if we don’t stop it, this shot will be in the arms of every senior and then, eventually, in the arms of every newborn baby.

After Pfizer purposely fabricated its clinical trial, the company must now be on the hook for a different sort of trial – one Steve Deace and I lay out in “Rise of the Fourth Reich.” Unless we begin holding pharma companies accountable and erecting legal firewalls to protect the people from their endless experimentation, they will do this again and again.

DAVID HARSANYI Op-ed: We Don’t Need A ‘National Divorce,’ We Need More Federalism



Caning of Charles Sumner
Get real.

Author David Harsanyi profile




Marjorie Taylor Greene says the country needs a national divorce. “We need to separate by red states and blue states and shrink the federal government,” she tweeted. “Everyone I talk to says this. From the sick and disgusting woke culture issues shoved down our throats to the Democrat’s traitorous America Last policies, we are done.”

Generally speaking, I’m sympathetic to the idea that the political left is unable to accept a truly diverse nation. Virtually every legislative policy proposal from modern Democrats — and every policy issued by edict — strengthens federal power and economic control over states. Modern Democrats are champions of direct democracy, an effort to undercut the choices of local communities and individuals. When they don’t get their way, the D.C. bureaucracy steps in to circumvent the will of states. And when courts stop them, Democrats work to delegitimize and weaken the judiciary. Just this week, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., argued states should simply disregard the Supreme Court when they don’t agree with a decision. Ignoring the division of power is far more likely to cause a national schism than any Greene tweet.

None of that means a “national divorce” — really succession, since other states are unlikely to concede to a split — isn’t a reckless thing for someone who took a vow to defend the Constitution to advocate. Even if we took a moment to seriously contemplate the idea, how would it be achieved? We aren’t separated ideologically into large geographic regions or even states, but rather urban, suburban, and rural areas. Conservatives like to share that map showing virtually the entire country painted in electoral red — and it matters more than Democrats like to admit. But we can’t discount that density also matters. A “national divorce” would create even smaller minorities and divisions, but little difference in the way of policy.  (How are the Greenes going to shrink the government when they won’t even reform entitlements?)

For that matter, where will Greene’s Georgia, which Joe Biden won in 2020 and now has two left-wing senators, end up in this split? How about purple states like Virginia or New Hampshire? Will we have 50 separate referendums? Will there be population exchanges like the one India and Pakistan undertook in 1947? If history is any indication, it’s the kind of situation that leads to political violence and economic ruin.

And, you know, you already have the freedom to move about the nation and find a place that suits your lifestyle and politics. That’s one of the reasons we’re a place that has room for a progressive vegan, the evangelical conservative farmer, the suburban moderate, and everyone in between.

During the past 42 years, the federal government has been divided for 30 of them. Over the past three presidencies, the president’s party lost at least one house after only two years. The instinct of the American public is to split power. The organic state of a divided nation is glorious gridlock — which is why the 10th Amendment exists. Now, it’s also true that leftists struggle with the notion of letting people in red states think, speak, and live in ways they dislike. There is a national political and cultural effort to homogenize us. And when Republicans appropriate the existing local power Democrats have used for decades to implement their own choices — as Ron DeSantis has done in Florida — leftists act as if we’re on the precipice of a dictatorship. But they have no power to stop him. Only Florida voters do. This is why federalism exists. It is why some states thrive and others don’t. And federalism is not only a more desirable solution than breaking the country into two, but also far more feasible.

It’s also worth noting that political divisions aren’t static. People can be persuaded. Events change perceptions. It is very likely that our kids and grandkids are going to face a different set of problems and divisions. Are we going to split into four in 50 years?

None of this is to argue there aren’t serious problems facing the nation, but Big Tech’s relentless highlighting of every decisive moment, every rabid voice, and every radical position clouds our view of reality. The nastier and crazier you pretend to be, the more misleading your tweets, and the more partisan you act, the more followers you can expect. The incentive of social media success is corrosive. Most of it just exacerbates political divisions.

In the real world, you probably live in proximity to plenty of people with different religious, cultural, and ideological values, yet, despite what you’ve heard, we’re a nation with negligible political violence. In many ways, despite the mess politicians have made, our lives are better than ever. Let’s keep it that way.

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist, a nationally syndicated columnist, a Happy Warrior columnist at National Review, and author of five books—the most recent, Eurotrash: Why America Must Reject the Failed Ideas of a Dying Continent. He has appeared on Fox News, C-SPAN, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, ABC World News Tonight, NBC Nightly News and radio talk shows across the country. Follow him on Twitter, @davidharsanyi.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Magical Thinking at The New York Times

February 16, 2023 by Ann Coulter


Magical Thinking at The New York Times

     Ancient primitives — or as we now call them, “Indigenous people whose land we stole” — believed in talismans, voodoo, rain dances and other versions of “A preceded B, so A caused B.” Today, we consider such reasoning classic fallacy. Except at The New York Times.

     First, you need to understand that the Times is no longer a newspaper, but more of a shaman. The paper used to report news. Anyone reading it for information these days might as well pull into a gas station and expect the nice man in a crisp white shirt to dash out and pump his gas.

     Much like a Starfish tuna factory, the news comes in, then has to be cleaned, chopped up, soaked in oil and tightly packed into a tin can. If you peered into the Times’ back room, you’d find hundreds of woke scriveners repacking the news to fit the narrative.

     Second, an urgent cleanup operation was needed to explain the paroxysm of violence that followed 2020’s anti-cop mania pushed at places like the Times. It simply could not stand to have people imagine that revering criminals while anathematizing the police would have any effect on the crime rate.

     No, that wouldn’t do. The facts had to be retrofitted into an alternative narrative. What was the best backup explanation? The pandemic!

     Attributing the massive crime wave to the pandemic solved two problems that would have arisen had the Times simply reported the facts: the upsurge in black crime, and the Times’ active encouragement of such.

     Unfortunately, doing a rain dance to bring rain is quantum mechanics compared to the Times’ cause-and-effect theory about “The Pandemic” inciting the post-George Floyd violence.

     Here are the facts.

     During the first few months of the pandemic, violent crime plummeted everywhere. You couldn’t have missed it. The Washington Post, PoliticoVoice of America, Cambridge University, and on and on and on — even the Times itself! — reported that violent crime had virtually disappeared in cities around the world due to the COVID shutdowns.

     And then on May 25, a fentanyl addict with a bad ticker died in police custody in Minneapolis, whereupon the de-policing demands of Black Lives Matter swept the nation with the active encouragement of all organs of elite liberal opinion, especially the Times.

     Cops, the only people who seem to really believe “black lives matter,” risking their lives to bring safety to dangerous neighborhoods, were viciously slandered and kneecapped at every turn. Again, especially by the Times.

     You’ll never guess what happened next.

     After going into free fall during the first 10 weeks of the pandemic, homicides and aggravated assaults in the U.S. rose by about 35% from Floyd’s death to the end of June. Burglaries, mostly commercial, shot up by an eye-popping 190% the last week of May — the height of looting during the “mostly peaceful protests.”

     Other countries, also affected by the pandemic, saw no such rise in violent crime.

     During the Summer of Floyd, murders increased by 42% in the 21 largest U.S. cities. By the end of 2020, the national murder rate had increased by 30%. That’s double the next largest hike on record, in 1968, the heyday of the country’s last experiment with liberal crime policies, when the murder rate rose by a comparatively paltry 12.7%.

     Rarely has data on any change in human behavior been so clearly demarcated as it is in the crime rate pre- and post-George Floyd’s death.

     Blacks — you know, the people whose lives allegedly “matter” — bore the brunt of this orgy of violence. The CDC reports, for example, that firearm murders of black people surged by nearly 40% in 2020, the greatest increase of any demographic group.

     It’s understandable that the very same news outlets fanning the flames of anti-police hysteria in the wake of Floyd’s martyrdom — directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of black people — would want to shift blame to “The Pandemic.” But witch doctors have more empirical evidence for their diagnoses than the Times does for its repeated pronouncements that the pandemic caused violent crime.

     At least voodoo practitioners probably believed their magical thinking. The Times’ Tourette-like hectoring about the pandemic proves the paper is lying and knows it’s lying. Nothing true needs to be endlessly repeated with such tenacity. (See also: “Climate Change.”)

     In an article this week on the skyrocketing crime on New York City subways, Times reporter Ana Ley blamed the pandemic nearly a dozen times for the explosion of violence — violence that inexplicably began 10 weeks into the pandemic, but immediately after May 25, 2020.


     “… an uptick in subway crime during the pandemic …”

     “… safety concerns, which climbed among passengers during the pandemic …”

     “… safety on public transit had gotten worse since the pandemic began …”

     “… she has stopped riding the subway past 6 p.m. during the pandemic.”

     It’s as if the Times has a typewriter key “during the pandemic” that must be inserted into any sentence mentioning “crime.”

     It’s hard to make yourself stupid enough to come up with a similar post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy, but how about right-wingers start attributing mass shootings to “the Clinton presidency”?

     … an uptick in mass shootings that began during the Clinton presidency …

     … mass shootings, which climbed during the Clinton presidency …

     … mass shootings have become more common since the Clinton presidency…

     … dance studio says it will reopen after 67th Clinton-era mass shooting …

     … as mass shootings continue, Hillary Clinton struggles to talk about other issues …

     At the Times, the pandemic is a sorcerer’s hex, the cause of violent crime. For unfathomable reasons, it just takes a few months to kick in. The COVID god works in mysterious ways.


Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: As FDA prepares to roll out RSV, flu shots, Fauci concedes they’re not ready for prime time

Daniel Horowitz | February 13, 2023


Imagine not only having injected 5.5 billion people with multiple doses of the failed COVID shots, but destroying lives and denying humane treatment on account of them. Now imagine knowing everything we know about the efficacy and safety of these novel therapies and still forging ahead with more doses and now RSV and flu shots built upon the same platform. Bad enough, right? Well, it gets even worse. Fauci now concedes that all respiratory viral vaccines are garbage, including those for flu, coronavirus, and RSV. Yet the policies never match the new admissions, as they race to accelerate the new flu and RSV shots within months.

In probably the most impactful story ignored by the media in recent weeks, Fauci co-authored an academic paper in Cell last month, along with the senior scientific adviser of NIAID, absolutely dumping on not just coronavirus vaccines, but all respiratory vaccines. It was a paper that could have been written by censored doctors like Ryan Cole, Peter McCullough, and Pierre Kory, and it reveals that Fauci indeed had a deep knowledge all along of the shortcomings of suboptimal antibody responses generated by this genre of vaccine.

First, the authors concede that flu vaccines are often only 14% effective and have never improved over the years. “After more than 60 years of experience with influenza vaccines, very little improvement in vaccine prevention of infection has been noted.”

Then they go on to admit that the vaunted COVID shots are in the same boat. “Deficiencies in these vaccines reminiscent of influenza vaccines have become apparent. The vaccines for these two very different viruses have common characteristics: they elicit incomplete and short-lived protection.”

Remember, to this very day, we still have children being kicked out of day-cares, people being denied organ transplants, and hospital workers losing their jobs on account of a premise that Fauci quite blatantly admits was false all along.

Fauci and company demonstrate the common thread between the failures of coronavirus, flu, and RSV vaccines in that respiratory viruses do not lend themselves to a blood-based antibody response, as so many of the doctors on my podcast have been saying for two years.

In stark contrast, the non-systemic respiratory viruses such as influenza viruses, SARS-CoV-2, and RSV tend to have significantly shorter incubation periods and rapid courses of viral replication. They replicate predominantly in local mucosal tissue, without causing viremia, and do not significantly encounter the systemic immune system or the full force of adaptive immune responses, which take at least 5–7 days to mature, usually well after the peak of viral replication and onward transmission to others. … As a result, the non-systemically replicating respiratory viruses, apparently including SARS-CoV-2, tend to repeatedly re-infect people over their lifetimes without ever eliciting complete and durable protection.

Fauci et al. ask the question: “If natural mucosal respiratory virus infections do not elicit complete and long-term protective immunity against reinfection, how can we expect vaccines, especially systemically administered non-replicating vaccines, to do so?”

Say what?!!! This got me banned from Twitter for six months! Fauci is acknowledging that this genre of vaccine – before we even explore the dangers with spike protein, mRNA, and lipid nano particles – simply does not target the virus in the respiratory tract and in fact never achieves immunity! You can keep getting the virus again and again, as we now see. But nothing that he is positing is new. This is not some new revelation. From reading the piece, it’s clear Fauci understood this principle of immunology all along. Yet to this day, there are still COVID shot (and even flu shot) mandates looming over the military, medical settings, schools, and other important places.

It’s not just a lack of efficacy on transmission. As we’ve been warning for two years based on doctors who got this right from day one, whenever you have a leaky, waning vaccine built upon suboptimal antibodies with a rapidly mutating virus, it creates immune tolerance and imprinting so that the misfiring of the immune response actually generates negative efficacy. While this paper does not officially acknowledge negative efficacy, it does acknowledge the concern of “disease tolerance” and “immune tolerance,” which stem from “immune defense mechanisms that allow hosts to ‘accept’ infection and other antigenic stimuli to optimize survival.”

Given that we now see endless negative efficacy associated with the COVID shots and numerous studies showing a misfiring of antibody classes, why is there no concern that this shot and other respiratory viral shots are causing immune tolerance leading to negative efficacy? Numerous flu shot studies warn about the shots tamping down T cell responses and making people more vulnerable to infection. Moderna’s clinical trial of COVID shots for babies seemed to be associated with a dramatic increase in RSV cases, which seemed to play out globally during the off-season surge of RSV in the summer of 2021 and the early fall of 2022.

So this is not just about failure to stop transmission, but also about clinical outcomes as well as negative efficacy. A Canadian study of vaccine efficacy during the 2018-2019 flu season found negative efficacy for some age groups because “vaccine mismatch [a form of original antigenic sin] may have negatively interacted with imprinted immunity.”

Despite all the fanfare around the flu shot, a 2005 study published in JAMA soberingly found that there was no correlation between “increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group.” The only mortality decline researchers discovered was against H3N2 in those born before the 1968 pandemic because of natural immunity, not the vaccines.

Despite everything we now know (and people like Fauci clearly knew for years), you can’t go into a pharmacy for half the year without being harassed to get a flu shot, and many schools and places of work strongly encourage if not mandate it. But do any of these fake medical practitioners even understand the issues with suboptimal antibodies, negative efficacy of the flu shots, and immune suppression of T cells?

Fauci and company conclude the paper with a shocking concession about these long-standing respiratory vaccines and the ones currently being studied, including RSV vaccines:

Challenges to developing next-generation respiratory vaccines are many and complex (Table 2). We must better understand why multiple sequential mucosal infections with the same circulating respiratory viruses, spread out over decades of life, fail to elicit natural protective immunity, especially with viruses that lack significant antigenic drift (e.g., RSV and parainfluenzaviruses), if we are to rationally develop vaccines that prevent them. We must think outside the box to make next-generation vaccines that elicit immune protection against viruses that survive in human populations because of their ability to remain significantly outside of the full protective reach of human innate and adaptive immunity.

Any sane person reading these statements does not get the impression that Fauci believes we are just weeks away from cracking the code on RSV shots. He believes the challenges are “many and complex,” are prone to mutation with “antigenic drift,” and require “outside the box” thinking to “make next-generation vaccines.”

With remarks like this from the undisputed champion of the vaccine movement, how are we to accept an RSV and flu shot – not just on the traditional platform but on the dangerous mRNA platform – being forced upon us within months through expedited review? How do we not have legal safeguards in place to subject Moderna, essentially created and funded originally by DARPA, to liability and to prevent all mandates, coercion, and pressure to take it? How do we not have a better pharmacovigilance system in place? How do we not fix what went wrong with the trials for COVID? Then again, the FDA plans to keep producing and administering the same COVID shots that are for variants that don’t exist, which Fauci acknowledges in this piece is a function of the problematic antigenic drift.

Do facts no longer matter? Do human lives no longer matter? And for what? For the flu and RSV that we’ve lived with for decades?

Despite everything we are seeing about respiratory viral vaccines failing and mRNA not staying in the shoulder muscle, the FDA has granted Moderna “breakthrough therapy” designation for its RSV mRNA shot. This is a status usually granted for targeted treatment for deadly ailments that allows the FDA to speed up approval process, yet it is now being used for a virus that’s been around for decades and with a biological platform that everyone agrees has just failed. Pfizer and GSK also have RSV shots in the pipeline, and both Moderna and Pfizer have mRNA flu shots likely to be released later this year.It’s quite evident at this point that all of the safety nets protecting the public from Joseph Mengele-like experimentation have been breached. Our will to fight back is all we have left.

Jason Whitlock Op-ed: ‘Don’t Stop Believin’’ bogus Super Bowl ending was ‘Made in America’

JASON WHITLOCK | February 13, 2023


Jason Allen/ISI Photos / Contributor, Nick Cammett / Stringer, Cooper Neill / Contributor, Tim Nwachukwu / Staff, Mitchell Leff / Contributor, Cooper Neill / Contributor | Getty Images

Let’s call it “The Sopranos Bowl.”

Super Bowl LVII, Kansas City’s 38-35 victory, unseated “Made in America,” the finale of the iconic HBO mob series, as the worst ending in television history.

With a little less than two minutes to play and the score tied at 35-35, a would-be Super Bowl classic cut to black, leaving more than 100 million fans pondering what could have been.

Would Philly capo Jalen Hurts rally the Eagles from a three-point deficit and win the game or force overtime? Or did Kansas City underboss Patrick Mahomes and button man Harrison Butker whack the Eagles?

We’ll never know because a referee flagged Philly corner James Bradberry for defensive holding on third and eight at the Philadelphia 15-yard line. The penalty gave the Chiefs a first down, allowed them to drain the clock, and set up a game-ending 27-yard field goal with eight seconds to play.

The unnecessary and unjustified call ruined the Super Bowl.

I don’t care that Bradberry defended the ref.

“It was holding,” Bradberry told reporters. “I tugged his jersey. I was hoping they would let it slide.”

No dice. No way.

It was a horrible call. I’ve watched the replays a dozen times. Chiefs wide receiver JuJu Smith-Schuster never broke stride. Bradberry’s contact never impeded Smith-Schuster from getting into his route. The refs stayed out of the game for 58 minutes. There were no mystery holding calls in the secondary or along the line of scrimmage. It was a clean game. It was a great game. Until the bogus holding penalty on Bradberry.

I’m not a bitter Eagles fan. I’m a happy Chiefs fan. I lived and worked in Kansas City for 16 years. My mother moved to Kansas City in 1984. I moved there in 1994. The Chiefs are my favorite football team. I bet money on Kansas City winning Sunday’s game. I’m thrilled with the outcome.

It’s the same way I feel about “The Sopranos.” It’s one of my two or three favorite shows in the history of television. It’s right there with “The Wire” and “The Shield.”

But more than anything else, “The Sopranos” is remembered for its trash ending. The screen cut to black. Sopranos fans have spent years arguing whether a hit man in a Members Only jacket clipped Tony Soprano as he ate dinner with Carmela, Meadow, and A.J. as “Don’t Stop Believin’” played on the jukebox.

Endings are important. They can taint the memory of an otherwise perfect story. “The Sopranos” might be the undisputed king of television if not for its blown final episode.

A perfect ending can elevate a TV show. “The Shield” pulled off the greatest finale in history. “Family Meeting,” “The Shield’s” final 72-minute episode, is flawless. Dirty cop Shane Vendrell poisons his wife and kid and then blows his own head off. Dirty cop Ronnie Gardocki is dragged off to jail seconds after finding out his trusted leader, Vic Mackey, snitched to save himself. Mackey forfeits his kids and career, is exposed as a cop killer, and is trapped at a desk job surrounded by federal agents who hate him.

The ending enriched all seven seasons and the 87 preceding episodes of “The Shield.”

Sunday’s Super Bowl was a bitter reminder of what’s wrong with the NFL. Referees have too much influence over the outcomes. They have too many judgment calls to make. The officiating is uneven and inconsistent. Sometimes the games feel manipulated. Calls of pass interference and roughing the passer determine outcomes more than the players.

I don’t believe the NFL is rigged. Nor do I believe former NFL running back Arian Foster’s outrageous suggestion that the games follow a script.

What was scripted was the reaction to Sunday’s game-deciding penalty.

I believe the NFL persuaded Bradberry and the Eagles not to whine about the costly penalty. I believe the league persuaded its television partners to downplay the penalty on Sunday. I don’t blame the NFL for this. It’s smart business. The league’s showcase event botched the ending. Roger Goodell wants fans talking about the magnificent performances of Patrick Mahomes, Jalen Hurts, and Nick Bolton, the Kansas City linebacker. It’s better to discuss the coaching brilliance of Andy Reid than the fact that NFL referees are in an impossible position.

Remember the Saints-Rams pass-interference no-call that sent Los Angeles to the 2019 Super Bowl?

The refs swallowed their whistles and let the players decide the game. The refs were ripped. Saints coach Sean Payton whined for months. He wore a Roger Goodell clown T-shirt. A New Orleans fan filed a lawsuit against the NFL (and later dropped it).

The “Nola No Call” in the NFC Championship is more memorable than the Patriots’ 13-3 Super Bowl victory.

Whelp, this time a ref didn’t swallow his flag. He threw it. He directly influenced the end of the game.

The NFL is a television show. Its goal is to create television stars. Its biggest star, Tom Brady, just retired. Patrick Mahomes is the next man up. The NFL is determined to stop a bogus penalty from tainting Mahomes’ second Super Bowl title.

The final episode of “The Sopranos” aired in June 2007, well before the social media matrix distorted truth with controlled narrative. Sixteen years ago, we were all free to rip “Made in America.” Now algorithms and partnerships determine criticism and dissent.

They want us to “fuhgeddaboudit.” That’s Sopranos slang for “forget about it.”


Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: Study shows electric vehicles are a scam propped up by government

DANIEL HOROWITZ | February 02, 2023


SimonSkafar/Getty Images

Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox. SIGN UP

With the exception of the COVID shots, there is perhaps nothing in the economy that has gotten more tailwind in terms of government support than electric vehicles. Whether it’s the subsidies, the mandates, the inflation of the cost of gasoline, or the construction of cumbersome electric charging infrastructure, the government has done everything it can to turn a product that is inherently costly and impractical into something accessible to the public. Yet despite it all, a new study shows fueling these cars is more expensive than most gas-powered cars, even with record high gasoline prices, which were induced by policies from the same green energy. Now is the time to end all subsidies and mandates on behalf of this pathetic industry.

It’s truly hard to quantify the degree to which government has propped up green energy and products that never would have gotten off the ground in the free market. Between making gasoline so expensive and making gas cars more expensive with fuel efficiency mandates on the one hand and subsidizing electric vehicles and all their required infrastructure on the other hand, electric cars have every reason to succeed. Heck, all blue states are even signaling the end of gas-powered cars altogether, and some are even mandating it. The subsidies reached a tipping point with the “Inflation Reduction Act,” which offers a subsidy of $7,500 per electric vehicle. But a new study shows that it still costs more to fuel an EV after spending so much more for the original purchase.

“Typical mid-priced ICE car drivers paid about $11.29 to fuel their vehicles for 100 miles of driving,” concluded a study from consulting firm Anderson Economic Group. “That cost was around $0.31 cheaper than the amount paid by mid-priced EV drivers charging mostly at home, and over $3 less than the cost borne by comparable EV drivers charging commercially.”

Oh, and let’s not forget that time is money. You have to spend an average of $18 per charge and spend 15 minutes per 100 miles traveled. Good luck on your family road trip this summer with the baby screaming in the car who was woken up after finally taking a nap, thanks to the incessant need to stop.

The only benefit the Michigan-based consulting firm found to fueling EVs over traditional cars was, of course, among the high-end luxury cars used by the elites promoting these products.

This is astounding given the record-high gas prices this past year, especially for winter months. This means that even after spending more money for the purchase of an EV, you are saddling yourself with a boondoggle to maintain. The problem for the parasitic, venture socialist industry is that the very regressive green policies that are harming the oil and car industries are doing even more damage to the electric grid. Thanks to the war on coal, oil refineries, and pipelines and the stagnation of nuclear energy by the same radical eco groups, electricity prices are skyrocketing even more than gasoline. All that “investment” in solar and wind is not there for us during our time of need. Now we face the prospect of electric grid failures more acutely than even oil and gas shortages.

Just consider what would happen during these heat waves if we only had electric vehicles. California grid operators warned people during last summer’s heat wave to ease off charging their cars. Now imagine if they had their way and 100% of cars were electric and 100% of the electricity was generated from wind and solar. Well, you’d be stuck at home … which is exactly how they want it.

Biden’s signature legislation last year handed out over $50 billion to the electric vehicle industry, including $7.7 billion for EV charging stations and $10.3 billion in grid and battery subsidies. But just like money can’t buy you love, it also can’t buy you efficacy, efficiency, or safety. Despite all of the corporate welfare for green energy, it’s still natural fuels from the earth that are holding up Texas’s grid during this cold spell and ice storm in the northern part of the state.

What was powering northern Texas during the ice storm? As the Energy Information Administration data shows, natural gas was the star player while wind collapsed, despite Texas throwing tens of billions of dollars at it.

As for efficiency, a 2021 study shows that even if EVs were more economical post-purchase in terms of fueling per mile, there are fewer miles to monetize those returns. According to the paper from the Bureau of Economic Research, the average family EV only racked up 5,300 miles per year, less than half the 13,476 miles per year driven by normal privately owned cars. Thus, the savings in operating these cars was always a mirage because they are just driven less. They could never possibly replace internal combustion vehicles, just like wind and solar cannot replace oil, gas, and coal for electricity and fuel. Yet the government has mandated automobile manufacturers to quadruple the market share of EVs in their fleets.

Then, of course, there is the issue of safety. Recently, it was found that during Hurricane Ian, electric vehicles caught in the storm surge in southwest Florida were suddenly exploding. DeWalt’s new no-turn electric mower also seems to have problems, as one model caught fire on the opening day of Equip Expo 2022. These are the sorts of issues that are worked out when a product has to rise or fall in the free market without a permanent guarantee of income. But with endless subsidies, we can only imagine the economic and societal problems from an EV-only road show.

Moreover, what this all demonstrates is that EVs were never meant to replace traditional cars to fulfill our needs and standard of living. They are serving as a Trojan horse to break our standard of living so that we will “own nothing and be happy,” as the WEF officials like to say. They want us to pay a fortune for cars and then barely be able to drive them because of the cost of electricity that they are concomitantly and artificially increasing thanks to other global warming regulations and market distortions.

Oh, and of course, no action taken against our prosperity, liberty, and mobility is complete unless it helps China. We all know China controls 76% of global EV battery production, and the nickel, cobalt, and lithium used to produce these batteries are all produced abroad. So now we are subsidizing China and other bad actors to make the rope that hangs our economy, which is pretty much in line with every other government policy. All they need now is to absolve these companies of product liability, and they will be just like the COVID shots. So why do Republican governors continue to service the electric vehicle scam? Why do they continue to place the boot of government on the scale toward these loser vehicles? The time has come for red states to completely divest from the green energy scam.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Hey! Where’d All the “Browns” Go?

February 1, 2023 by Ann Coulter


Hey! Where’d All the “Browns” Go?

“Yet again, we’re seeing evidence of what happens to Black and brown people from simple traffic stops.” — Ben Crump, attorney for Tyre Nichols’ family

“It is yet another painful reminder of the profound fear and trauma, the pain, and the exhaustion that Black and brown Americans experience every single day.” — President Joe Biden

“[V]iolence like what happened to [Tyre Nichols] is about how some bad cops use their power over Black and brown victims.” — CNN’s Van Jones

Hey! Where’d all the “browns” go?

George Floyd, Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, Breonna Taylor, Daunte Wright, and on and on and on — all black people, generally “justice-involved,” who resisted the police and ended up dead. Name a civilian killed by cops of any other race that led to international protests, billboards, renamed streets, hashtags, memorials, NBA jerseys, murals, busts, tribute songs or O magazine covers.

Only black people reflexively defend their own criminals. The “blacks and browns” scam is an attempt to rope Hispanics into the black community’s dysfunction.

Hispanics don’t champion their criminals! (Asians don’t even champion their A-minus students.) When 13-year-old Adam Toledo was shot by a cop in Chicago, “activists” did their best to incite worldwide protests, but Hispanics weren’t interested. Why are we going to take off work?

To the contrary, the residents of Toledo’s overwhelmingly Hispanic neighborhood blamed his mother, complained about gangs and demanded more policing. Journalists hoping for anti-police rage instead got quotes like these:

“We are tired of gang violence; it’s sad what happened with the young boy, but he had a gun with him and his friend had been shooting, so the officer responded to the threat.”

“We can’t even go out safely because there are random shootings everywhere and you never know if a stray bullet might hit you.”

“The only reason people are talking about (killings) now is that it was a police officer who shot and killed the kid.”

Meanwhile, normal black people are made to feel like race traitors if they ever say something like, I don’t know, the guy was kind of a scumbag.

No matter how much the activists push, Hispanics simply will not rush out on the streets to protest whenever a Latino is killed by a cop. (In places like Los Angeles, Hispanics are the cops.) Journalists are beside themselves that the “browns” refuse to be more like black people.

NBC News: “Police killings of Latinos lack attention, say activists”

Los Angeles Times: “What will make people care about police shootings of Latinos?”

The Washington Post: “Latinos are disproportionately killed by police but often left out of the debate about brutality, some advocates say”

And, no, black people are not killed by the police at a “disproportionate” rate. Every single study claiming otherwise is comparing the percentage of blacks killed by police to the black percentage in the population. This, obviously, is absurd. Lots of people never have any contact with the police. (Obey the law — you’ll see!)

It would be like accusing grizzly bears of systemic racism against Alaskans because 29% of all grizzly attacks are against Alaskans — a mere 0.2% of the population — whereas grizzlies kill zero Texans, and they make up 9% of the population! (There are no grizzlies in Texas at last count.)

Police don’t stop people at random. They stop people whom they believe to be breaking the law. Judging by the pantheon of black martyrs, they’re often right.

George Floyd was a fentanyl addict (which, of course, contributed in no way to his death) who’d just passed a counterfeit $20 bill — not to mention the armed home invasion robbery he’d committed back in Texas; Michael Brown had just knocked over a convenience store and gratuitously roughed up the small Asian owner on his way out; Freddie Gray was a heroin dealer in possession of an illegal switchblade; Breonna Taylor was the bag woman for a fentanyl dealer; Daunte Wright was driving with an expired registration and had a warrant for his arrest stemming from his choking a woman during an attempted armed robbery.

For any meaningful comparison of civilians killed by cops, the denominator needs to be “percentage of contacts with the police.” Maybe officers are searching out black people to harass for no reason whatsoever, but another explanation for the high number of police encounters is that, compared to other groups, a relatively large cohort of black people are violent criminals.

Although only 13% of the population, black people commit more than 50% of all murders, more than 50% of all robberies and more than 30% of all aggravated assaults. And yet blacks remain about one-quarter of the thousand civilians shot by police every year, the vast majority of them armed.

Instead of unveiling more George Floyd murals, how about some refresher courses on “The Talk”? (Which apparently makes much more sense in Spanish.) All these black luminaries would be alive today if they’d done one simple thing: Obey the police. It’s not that hard.

Guys, we want to help! But you’ve got to abandon this impulse to turn any member of your group who fights a cop into a beatified saint.


By Dr. Alveda King Op-ed: This Black History Month let’s shine a spotlight on fatherlessness and saving Black babies

 By Dr. Alveda KingJack Brewer | Fox News | Published February 1, 2023 11:00am EST


Fox Nation host Alveda King reflects on her uncle, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s, life and legacy and urges others to love and forgive.

Black History Month begins this week, just two weeks after tens of thousands of Americans gathered in Washington, D.C., for the 50th annual March for Life. This month and the March for Life collectively present an important

opportunity to highlight two of the most pressing issues facing America’s Black community today: abortion and fatherlessness. 

Ultimately, the reason these issues are widely accepted in the Black community is our country’s decline in church attendance and its move away from Jesus. Yet the sad reality of our times is that these issues receive little to no attention from the mainstream media or the far left today. Instead of focusing on these issues and working to develop solutions for them, the left and the media continue to promote ideas about “systemic racism” and critical race theory while calling for ever-expanding forms of “racial equity.” Rather than responding to these distractions, we want to use this Black History Month to raise awareness about fatherlessness and abortion and the devastating effect both are having on America’s Black community. 

Our Nation is home to approximately 24 million fatherless children, or about 1 in 3 of all American children. Approximately 80% of these homes are led by single mothers, and the rate of children living in single-parent households is the highest of any country in the world. Our Nation’s fatherlessness epidemic has particularly ravaged the Black community. Nearly 70% of all Black babies in America today are born to unmarried mothers, and 64% of all Black children grow up in a single-parent home. 


Tragically, fatherlessness strongly correlates with negative outcomes in nearly every aspect of a child’s life. Fatherless families are 25% more likely to raise a child in poverty, and 90% of all homeless and runaway children do not have a father. Additionally, 85% of children and teens with behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. Fatherless children also account for 71% of child substance abuse cases, and approximately 70% of all youths in state-operated institutions are fatherless. 

This Black History Month, we want to draw attention away from the noise and back to the issues that matter. The rampant fatherlessness and shocking rates of abortion in the Black community should be stunning to all Americans of good faith.

The issues of abortion and fatherlessness are closely linked, as one of every three pregnancies in a fatherlessness home end in abortion. America’s epidemic of fatherless children largely correlates with abortion rates, and women raised in fatherless homes account for approximately 70% of all teen pregnancies.


Equally tragic is the vastly disproportionate impact abortion has on the Black community. Of the roughly 930,000 abortions performed in 2020, about 39% were performed on Black women, for a rate of 24.4 abortions per 1,000 Black women. This means that over the course of a year, more than 350,000 Black babies, or almost 1,000 per day, are aborted. As a result, approximately 1 million Black babies are killed in the womb every three years. 

Deep down, Americans understand that fatherhood is essential to society. According to a poll by Scott Rasmussen, 84% of Americans believe a strong family is foundational to a strong America. 

Most Americans also understand the relationship between absent fathers and abortion. Sixty-nine percent of Americans think a man becomes a father at the moment of conception, and 78% think the father’s financial responsibility begins at the start of a pregnancy. The book of Malachi reflects this wisdom and reminds us that God “will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers.”

This Black History Month, we want to draw attention away from the noise and back to the issues that matter. The rampant fatherlessness and shocking rates of abortion in the Black community should be stunning to all Americans of good faith, and we genuinely believe these two related issues are among the biggest civil rights battles of our time. 

Fixing anything begins with first identifying the problem. The simple truth is that Black Americans will continue to struggle and fall behind if the fatherlessness crisis is not addressed. 

At the same time, the effects of abortion on significant parts of the Black community will keep robbing our country of untold ingenuity and talent. 

By highlighting fatherlessness and abortion this Black History Month, we can help the American people learn more about the biggest issues Black America faces. Then, and only then, can Americans of all stripes unite to solve them. 

Jack Brewer serves as Chair, Center for Opportunity Now and Vice-Chair, Center for 1776 for the America First Policy Institute (AFPI).

Evangelist Alveda King is Chairman of the Center for the American Dream at the America First Policy Institute. A niece of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., she is the author of several books, including “King Rules” and “How Can the Dream Survive if We Murder the Children.” 

Jonathan Turley Op-ed: DOJ is at Biden’s Delaware beach home. So why ignore the treasure trove of documents down the road?

 By Jonathan Turley | Fox News | Published February 1, 2023 1:15pm EST


The FBI search of President Joe Biden’s vacation home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, on Wednesday, continues the search for classified material in various homes and work spaces used by the president and his family in the past decade. What is surprising about Wednesday’s search is not the fact that a sitting president has now been subject to two FBI searches of his residences, but the fact that this search has come roughly three months after the first discovery of documents in a closet in Washington.

Despite that rather lackadaisical record, Biden’s personal counsel Bob Bauer still stated on Wednesday, with no sense of irony, that this has been a “timely DOJ process.”  It is “timely” if you use glacial measurements. 


If this is how the FBI moves with dispatch, it is chilling to think of the schedule for lower-priority matters. The FBI waited to conduct their search until both counsel and the president went to the house. They will now see if they can find anything. 


The search of the president’s small Delaware beach house is also telling in that it sits roughly 80 miles from a massive trove of Biden documents that neither counsel nor the FBI has shown much interest in. The University of Delaware is currently holding a colossal collection of Biden documents from the time before his presidency. The Bidens have effectively converted the university into a type of political safe deposit box, barring media from reviewing documents going back to Biden’s time in Congress.


Universities are usually dedicated to facilitating access to knowledge and information. However, the University of Delaware has spent public funds in resisting media requests for access to look at the documents for material linked to sexual harassment allegations and other controversies. Since some of the material reportedly included classified documents removed by Biden as senator, there is obviously the chance that the university files could also contain classified material. 


The sheer size of the documents magnifies those concerns. Biden parked 33 pallets holding 1,875 boxes and 415 gigabytes of electronic records at the university. He then barred the public and the public from looking at the collection. The university has continued to run interference for the president in arguing technical exclusions from public access rules and by claiming to be organizing the material. This has gone on for over a decade. 

Since the FBI is already in the state, they might want to consider a trip to the university. However, for the moment, no one seems to want to discuss the collection. It seems that this is all an intractable game of “Delawhere?”

At some point, the Delaware faculty need to object to the use of their institution as a political lock box. While the university’s motto is “knowledge is the light of the mind,” neither the university nor the president appear eager to shed light, let along knowledge, on what these papers contain. 


Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and a practicing criminal defense attorney. He is a Fox News contributor.

Jason Whitlock Op-ed: Yes, baby-mama culture explains the Tyre Nichols Tragedy

OP-ED | JASON WHITLOCK | January 30, 2023


Getty Images

Sorry, I refuse to follow the script. The script for black influencers demanded that the Tyre Nichols tragedy be laid at the feet of so-called white supremacy.

Five black cops beat a 150-pound black man to death, and the script called for more mass shaming of white people and insinuations that policing should be outlawed.

Had I followed the script, I wouldn’t be embroiled in controversy, public enemy number one of black Twitter, Ciara, and all the other blue-check virtue-signalers.

In fact, had I dishonestly blamed systemic, institutionalized racism for Nichols’ death, I would be the toast of Twitter, drowning in retweets, likes, and applause. I would be high as a kite on dopamine and swimming in interview requests.

But that’s not what I did when I appeared on Tucker Carlson’s cable news show Friday night. I didn’t lie. I didn’t concoct some fantasy narrative where five black cops shouted, “This is MAGA country!” before attacking Tyre Nichols.

They don’t want you to see this … Big Tech does its best to limit what news you see. Make sure you see our stories daily — directly to your inbox.

I blamed the five cops for their criminal behavior and predicted that a predominantly black jury will find them guilty of second-degree murder. I then criticized CNN and other media outlets for hyping the release of the bodycam footage like it was Al Capone’s secret vault and using the video to distract from America’s escalating involvement in the Ukraine-Russia conflict.

And, when surprisingly given an opportunity to provide an additional thought, I argued that the five police officers mimicked gang behavior and that the whole sad event is a byproduct of communities overrun with matriarchal values and controlled by single black mothers. I said that the conversation we should be having in reaction to Tyre Nichols centers on the cost of destroying the black family.

That’s my written paraphrase of what I tried to convey in the final 60 seconds of an unscripted, four-minute TV segment. Watch my comments in full here. YouTube has somehow classified my remarks as “inappropriate and offensive.”

It’s impossible to analyze a situation as complex as the Tyre Nichols tragedy in four minutes. What you try to do is spark a deeper conversation by saying something that will cut through all the garbage being spewed on social media and/or promoted on ratings-hungry television networks.

My first comment was said to establish that a black police chief, black police officers, and black citizens would be in charge of providing justice for Tyre Nichols’ family. What happened to Nichols isn’t about white supremacy. And what will happen to his alleged killers won’t have anything to do with white supremacy either.

My second comment was stated to point out that the media is intentionally overemphasizing the importance of the Nichols tragedy. Our politicians are pushing us toward nuclear conflict with Russia. Millions of lives are at stake. I’m not trying to diminish the value of Tyre’s life. But in comparison to nuclear conflict, his life pales in comparison.

Tyre Nichols is a local story, not a national one. It’s being used to provide cover for more important international tragedies, such as Big Pharma’s COVID malfeasance. The TV networks dependent on the advertising dollars of pharmaceutical companies prefer Don Lemon talking about lawless cops rather than lawless and exploitative international corporations.

Finally, my third comment, the one my critics have seized upon, is an attempt to spark a conversation about the real ramifications of America’s growing preference for female authority and alternative family structures. The matriarchy doesn’t work.

We need to talk about that.

Black urban areas are dominated by matriarchal rulership. It’s an utter failure and disaster. These areas all operate similar to Memphis. Crime is astronomical. Young men settle their differences with deadly violence. Academic performance hovers at record lows. Illegitimacy rates skyrocket.

Tyre Nichols was 29. The five police officers who participated in beating him to death range in age from 24 to 32. The behavior we witnessed from the officers resembles what happens when a group of Vice Lords catch a Gangster Disciple on their turf. The Disciple will flee. The Vice Lords will chase. Violence ensues.

My point is what we saw Friday night does not appear to be an outgrowth of bad policing. I’ve yet to see video evidence that depicts what caused the traffic stop and why Nichols had to be snatched from his car. It doesn’t feel like we’ve been shown the complete story. Something about the encounter feels far more personal than anything born of the frustration created by a resistant suspect. The use of pepper spray makes zero sense.

It feels like the outgrowth of a rotten culture, a culture where black men are canonized and celebrated for handling petty beefs and disrespect with lethal violence. That type of emotional violence is commonplace within zip codes dominated by the matriarchy.

Tyre Nichols cried out for his mama for a reason. I’m not saying that to belittle Nichols. I’m saying it’s a reflection of modern black culture, a culture that inappropriately places women at the top of the food chain. Mama is the ultimate authority and savior.

That’s not what God intended. He is our Savior. He authorized man to exercise dominion over the earth. He prescribed family (man, woman, and child) as the foundation of order, obedience, and His will. No racial group in America is more out of line with God’s natural order than black people. Seventy percent of our kids are born to unwed mothers. We don’t view family as a necessity for success. It’s just one of many options. It’s prioritized well below allegiance to racial idolatry, the Democrat political party, and hip-hop culture.

Those allegiances have made us hostile to a biblical worldview, indifferent toward marriage, and convinced there’s little value in male leadership. Scripture is the kryptonite that weakens us rather than the cape we wrap ourselves in to unleash superpowers.

We’re out of order.

Ephesians 5:22-24: “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.”

So what happens in communities without a culture of marriage and nuclear family?

In his book, Kingdom Politics, the great Christian minister Tony Evans says: “The saga of a nation is the saga of its families written large. Whoever owns the family owns the future. When family structure breaks down, all manner of calamity and chaos enter into society. When family breaks down, crime goes up, poverty goes up, abuse goes up. When the family breaks down, gender confusion and role confusion go up.”

Calamity. Chaos. Confusion.

You don’t need to be a Christian minister to recognize what’s going on in black communities with no consistent family structure. Here’s a video of the rapper Jay Z in 2019 explaining the connection between police brutality and single motherhood. And here’s a link to a story capturing the criticism Jay Z received for publicly discussing the obvious connection.

The social media matrix and corporate media are rigged to stop people from discussing the negative outcomes from the annihilation of the black family. The matrix blames “white supremacy” for everything bad that happens to black people, even when white people are uninvolved.

The culture we’ve adopted is designed to produce bad outcomes. The matriarchy doesn’t work.

My critics say my criticism is off base because Tyre Nichols has a mother and stepfather and the city’s female police chief, Cerelyn Davis, is married and a mother. My critics ignore the obvious. No one survives a rotten culture unscathed. A nutritionist will lose his way or suffer collateral damage if he’s forced to set up business inside a fast-food restaurant.

The pervasiveness of baby-mama culture harms everyone, including the non-participants forced to operate within it. The chaos and dysfunction negatively impact everyone.

Why did Cerelyn Davis and the Memphis Police Department implement a SCORPION (Street Crimes Operation to Restore Peace in Our Neighborhoods) unit, the special task force the five officers worked in? They started it in November 2021 to combat the violent behavior of largely unparented young black men terrorizing Memphis. These types of units are common in high-crime, single-parent neighborhoods across America.

Police start gangs to combat gang violence. Young men without fathers in the home are attracted to gangs.

Baby-mama culture celebrates gang involvement. That’s why Snoop Dogg, a proud Crip, is such a beloved cultural figure. That’s why so many black boys and girls from two-parent households and good neighborhoods think their racial identity is tied to behaving in a ghetto or criminal fashion.

Baby-mama culture rules black America in the ‘hood and the ‘burbs. So does matriarchal culture. Black men see black women as our leaders, our saviors.

I don’t. I never will. And I was raised primarily by my divorced mother. My mother was awesome. Spectacular. She took me and my brother to church every Sunday. She took a second job and moved us out of the ghetto and into a working-class neighborhood.

But I am who I am – good and bad – because of my father. I feared and revered him. He taught me the importance of self-sufficiency and never accepting a handout. He had no tolerance for excuses. And luckily I grew up in an era when there was far less pressure to conform to a criminal black stereotype. Rappers weren’t portrayed as heroes and role models. It wasn’t cool to have a baby mama. I was raised to see myself as a leader, a protector, and a provider.

The left frames men like me, regardless of color, as misogynist oppressors. Popular culture promotes the “Woman King,” especially to black people. They ignore the failing results of matriarchal rulership and send women like Cerelyn Davis to fix problems only strong, bold male leadership can solve.

It’s going to take male leadership in the home, in the church, and in law enforcement to fix the rotting culture that took Tyre Nichols’ life. That same leadership is required throughout American society. Baby-mama, matriarchal culture is being pushed within all facets of American society. Illegitimacy rates are rising among all racial demographics.

Christian male leadership has been demonized to placate the feelings and promote the values of the BLM-LGBTQ Alphabet Mafia. Your children’s neighborhoods will have more in common with Memphis than Mayberry.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: George Santos Embraces ‘Storytelling’

 January 26, 2023 by Ann Coulter


George Santos Embraces ‘Storytelling’

Lots of politicians have been caught burnishing their resumes, but recently, one of our elected representatives has come under fire for telling some real whoppers. And no, I’m not talking about George Santos.

     In a space of three days last fall, President Joe Biden claimed to be Puerto Rican, practice Judaism and to have lost his house in a natural disaster.

Celebrating the Jewish New Year at the White House on Sept. 30, he told Jewish leaders, “I probably went to shul more than many of you did. You all think I’m kidding.” No, he said, “I’d go to services on Saturday and on Sunday,” adding, “You all think I’m kidding. I’m not.”

Visiting hurricane-ravaged Puerto Rico the following week, he said, “I was sort of raised in the Puerto Rican community at home.”

Days later, speaking to Floridians who’d lost everything to Hurricane Ian, Biden talked about a catastrophic fire that nearly destroyed his house after lightning struck. “We didn’t lose our whole home,” he said, “but an awful lot of it.” He’d mentioned this blaze before, claiming that he “had a house burn down with my wife in it.”

Fact-checkers determined he was referring a small kitchen fire, “under control in 20 minutes,” according to contemporaneous news reports.

In a video speech to the Tree of Life Congregation in Pittsburgh three years after the October 2018 massacre there, Biden said, “I remember spending time at the … Tree of Life Synagogue.”

The synagogue said he had never visited.

Just before the 2020 South Carolina primary, Biden claimed — as he has many, many, many times — “I had the great honor of being arrested … on the streets of Soweto trying to get to see [Nelson] Mandela.” So significant was this incident, Biden said, that when Mandela came to Washington, he “threw his arms around me and said, ‘I want to say thank you. … You got arrested trying to see me.’”

Biden was never arrested in South Africa for trying to see Mandela. There’s no evidence the hug ever happened, either.

Sadly, as soon as Biden clinched the presidential nomination in 2020, Democrats locked him in the basement until Election Day. Who knows how many of Biden’s lies were lost to history that year!

But he couldn’t avoid speaking in 2019.

Campaigning in New Hampshire, he told a gripping story about flying to Afghanistan as vice president to pin a Silver Star on a Navy captain who’d rappelled down a ravine to retrieve his fallen compatriot, but who didn’t want a medal because the guy had died. “This is the God’s truth,” he said. “My word as a Biden.”

Biden did manage to fight the irresistible urge to claim he was that soldier.

However, it was President Barack Obama who’d honored an Army specialist for retrieving a soldier from a ravine — and he presented him with a Congressional Medal of Honor, not a Silver Star, in a White House ceremony, not in Afghanistan. As The Washington Post put it, “In the space of three minutes, Biden got the time period, the location, the heroic act, the type of medal, the military branch and the rank of the recipient wrong, as well as his own role in the ceremony.”

In a primary debate, he said: “I come out of a Black community” and had “more people supporting me in the Black community” than his rivals.

Kamala Harris: “No, that’s not true.”

Cory Booker: “That’s not true.”

In a nationally televised climate town hall on CNN, Biden said, “I just want to be very clear to everyone here: I am committed to not raising money from fossil fuel executives, and I am not doing that.”

The next day, Biden attended a high-dollar fundraiser held by the co-founder of a natural gas company.

At a CNN/YouTube Democratic debate in June 2007, Biden said, “Let’s start telling the truth,” then revealed that he’d been “shot at” in Iraq’s Green Zone.

Turns out, a mortar round landed a few hundred yards — i.e., a few football fields — from a building Biden was in.

At a 2012 campaign stop, Biden told African Americans that Republicans are “gonna put you all back in chains.” (At least his lies are harmless exaggerations without any potential to sow discord in our society.)

Before getting to George Santos’ apparently unprecedented and unforgivable mendacity, let’s review a few more of Biden’s Greatest Hits.

Throughout his life, Biden has alleged that he “participated in sit-ins to desegregate restaurants and movie houses,” saying, “and my stomach turned upon hearing the voices of Faubus and Barnett, and my soul raged on seeing the dogs of Bull Connor.”

None of this ever happened, according to his own aides, as well as the Democratic Party’s Praetorian Guard at The New York Times.

Most famously, he bragged about being an award-winning student, leaving college with three degrees, going to law school on a “full academic scholarship,” and graduating in the top half of his class.

Back on Earth: He graduated college with one degree and was nearly expelled from law school for plagiarizing five straight pages of a published article, coming in 76th out of a class of 85.

Most bizarrely, Biden stole British Labor leader Neil Kinnock’s speech — and his autobiography. Plagiarizing Kinnock nearly word for word, Biden claimed to have been “the first in his family ever to go to a university,” then bemoaned a system that had excluded his “ancestors, who worked in the coal mines of Northeast Pennsylvania.”

Biden’s ancestors did not work in coal mines. They went to college.

The whole point of Kinnock’s speech was to denounce the British class structure — something we don’t have. (Heard of the American Revolution? Probably not: It has nothing to do with Emmett Till.)

According to Biden’s actual life story — that is, the story based on what we know to be facts — his grandfather was an executive with the American Oil Co., and his father was to the manor born. Why on Earth was Biden clenching his fist, decrying a society where he didn’t have “a platform upon which to stand”? The executive suite at American Oil isn’t a platform?

All in all, Biden gives George Santos a pretty good run for his money.

The main difference between Biden and Santos is that one is the president of the United States, whereas the other is part of a legislative body with 435 members, including some who are certifiably insane.

But while the top story on MSNBC every night is: When is Santos resigning?, Biden’s lies are lovingly indulged by the media as the “search for a connection” by “a glad-handing pol” (The Washington Post), who has “embraced storytelling” with “the factual edges shaved off to make them more powerful for audiences” (The New York Times).

Speaking of the media’s double standards, where’s the “thank you” for the GOP’s diversity outreach? Santos is a gay Latino — and that he can prove! I swear, what do we have to do to please these people?


Daniel Horowitz Op=ed: 12 new safety signals showing devastating dangers from COVID shots

Daniel Horowitz | January 23, 2023


“During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill, and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.” ~Nuremberg Code #10

We’ve reached a critical mass of data points and safety signals on the COVID shots from a full two years of it circulating in 5.5 billion people. One must be worse than a conspiracy theorist to ignore them. One now has to be a “coincidence theorist” to chalk up this degree of human suffering that is in immediate need of redress to mere coincidence.

It’s time for Republicans in state legislatures and on the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic to pay attention to the daily barrage of shocking data points and safety signals. Here is just a sampling of 12 points from the past few weeks, out of many more. Each one alone should have been enough to suspend the shots, terminate the technology in the pipeline, and investigate the actors behind it. Time is of the essence:

1) 17% of children experienced some cardiac symptom after the Pfizer shot: Just how large is the universe of those roped into some risk of cardiac damage? A new peer-reviewed study from Taiwan published in the European Journal of Pediatrics found that 17% of high school children, mainly boys, experienced at least heart palpitations or chest pain from the second dose of Pfizer. These numbers work perfectly with many other surveys showing a significant number of people experiencing arrythmias, tightness in the chest, or shortness of breath. They are also particularly concerning given that a Swiss study and a Thai study showed the proportion of people afflicted with subclinical myocarditis (a ticking time bomb) was much larger than those diagnosed with myocarditis.

2) 20% spike in excess deaths in England and Wales:According to the latest figures from the U.K.’s Office for National Statistics, deaths for the final two weeks of 2022 in England and Wales were 20% above the five-year average. That is greater than the pandemic itself. It makes no sense why there would be more deaths, long after the vaccines supposedly quelled COVID, than in 2020 and early 2021, at the peak of the pandemic. The U.K. Timesreports that “50,000 more people died last year than normal.” That is the equivalent of 250,000 excess deaths in the U.S. This cannot be COVID; it must be something else. (The data for those weeks: Data from week ending Dec 23, 2022data from week ending Dec 30, 2022).

3) 0 of 1,1779 COVID hospitalizations in New South Wales were unvaccinated:According to NSW Health, which breaks down COVID hospitalizations and deaths by cohorts of various levels of vaccination, for the two weeks ending Dec. 31, 2022, not a single COVID hospitalization (or ICU admission) was among the fully unvaccinated.

The overwhelming majority were among the boosted. Although 84% of people in Australia have gotten at least one dose of the shot, it’s not 100%, so there is clearly a degree of negative efficacy, which is in itself a safety signal. And although 6% of the deaths were among the unvaccinated (still below their share of the population), it is suspicious how they all seemed to die at home, which makes you wonder if they are placing some of the “unknown” category into the unvaxxed pile by automatically assuming they didn’t get the shots. Dr. Syed has presented evidence in the past that makes it likely NSW Health has been doing that all along.

4) FDA admits massive elevated risk for heart attacks, blood clots, and pulmonary emboli: FDA researchers published the results of a massive observational study of 30.7 million Medicare patients in 2021 and found that people who took the shot found that the shots increase risk of pulmonary embolism by 54%, acute myocardial infarction by 42%, blood clotting by 91%, and platelet disorder by 44%. The claim this is only an early warning signal and downplay the results, but they harmonize with many other surveys, studies, reporting, and an understanding of the shot’s mechanism of action.

5) COVID vax was associated with 22%-74% greater all-cause mortality vs. being unvaccinated in U.K.: Prior to May 2022, the U.K. Health Security Agency published COVID case and death rates, age-stratified, by vaccination status. They terminated these weekly reports after we began using them against the system. El Gato Malo revisited the numbers and calculated somewhere between a 22% and 74% elevated risk of all-cause mortality associated with the vaccinated from September 2021 through April 2022.

As you can see, this portends either negative efficacy or risk outweighing reward even for seniors over 80 who are constantly bombarded with endless boosters. This should not come as a surprise given that Pfizer’s own all-cause mortality analysis in its six-month follow-up of its trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine showed 21 deaths in the trial group and 17 in the placebo group. The company failed to follow through the rest of 2021 and 2022, but it’s reasonable to presume based on what we know now that the negative efficacy became worse with other variants. It’s also likely that the long-term injuries of the vaccine, which were never followed because of the unblinding of trial participants, came home to roost increasingly over time.

6) New bivalent booster even worse: Remember the boosters that were approved with nothing but antibody tests and 8 blind mice? Well, now there are results of clinical trials for the bivalent booster approved last September, and members of the FDA advisory committee are expressing anger at not seeing this data. It turns out that 1.9% of the study participants who received the original booster became infected, while 3.2% of those with the new bivalent shot got COVID. This in itself demonstrates that not only does the detection of more antibodies not necessarily mean better clinical outcomes, but more antibodies of the wrong type can facilitate infection.

7) Two studies show mRNA shots create wrong antibody class: In yet another possible indication that the shots actually make you more vulnerable to coronavirus, a second study has been published showing the shots create a class switch from IgG1-3 neutralizing antibodies to IgG4 “tolerating” antibodies, which can make someone keep getting the virus and not fight it off. Last month, German researchers, in a groundbreaking study published in Science Immunology, found that some people reinfected with the virus after having had boosters had over 40% of their antibodies composed of IgG4. Now a second peer-reviewed German paper, this time published in Frontiers in Immunology, found this phenomenon even after the original two doses. The shocking thing is that a Pfizer scientist served as the study’s editor and one of Fauci’s staffers at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases served as a peer reviewer

8) New bivalent shot caused reactions in large minority of children: Not only do the boosters not work, but according to the CDC’s own V-SAFE adverse reporting app, 49% of the 5- to 11-year-old children who took the bivalent booster shot experienced systemic reactions. These symptoms include fatigue, chills, nausea, abdominal pain, vomiting, joint pain, and diarrhea. In 22% of the children, they could not go to school or perform their daily functions after getting the shot. In other words, these children experienced upfront the upper bounds of what the virus would have done to them. And keep in mind that V-SAFE did not monitor lurking serious long-term side effects – all for a shot that doesn’t work.

9) 51% of Democrats believe vaccines behind sudden deaths: Whether the government and media are willing to acknowledge the extent of injuries, the dam is clearly breaking with the general public. Numerous surveys have been showing for months that most people know friends or family killed by the shots. But earlier this month, Rasmussen published a survey broken down by party affiliation. It found that 51% of Democrats nationally believe it is likely the vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths, and 33% believe someone they know personally died from the shot. That is more than the 26% of Republicans and Independents who said the same thing. The reason this is significant is because more Democrats than Republicans received the shot, so these results likely reflect reality.

Furthermore, 31% of Democrats attest to experiencing side effects, and 6% believe they experienced major side effects. This tracks closely with the 7.7% according to the CDC’s V-SAFE who had to seek medical attention (and 33% experienced at least minor side effects). And this is among Democrats who are naturally inclined to defend the shots, which means this is not some right-wing conspiracy but a reflection of widespread reality.

10) VAERS analysis shows 500 injuries with greater safety signals than myocarditis: By now, anyone not under a rock knows that the vaccines could cause myocarditis. But according to a FOIA document obtained by the Epoch Times, in turns out that the CDC conducted its own analysis of VAERS from December 2020 through July 2022 and found that there were over 500 categories of injuries with louder safety signals than even myocarditis. Specifically, as Hebrew University Professor Josh Guetzkow explains, there are 503 AEs with proportional reporting ratios larger than myocarditis and 552 with PRRs larger than pericarditis. Overall, in just a year and a half of Moderna’s and Pfizer’s COVID jabs, the safety signals were 5.5 times larger than all serious reports for vaccines given to adults in the US since 2009.

11) The CDC anticipated over 1,000 VAERS reports per dayThe agency didn’t make a mistake. Bureaucrats knew from August 2020 that they expected major problems with the vaccine. Prof. Guetzkow, the prolific FOIA sleuth, posted details of documents showing that the CDC contracted with General Dynamics in August 2020 to run the VAERS database. The $9.45 million contract stated that officials expected 1,000 adverse event reports a day, with 40% of them being serious. Again in March 2021, they amended the contract to expand the capacity by another 25,000 a day and to clear a backlog of 115,000 reports just for the first ten or so weeks of the vaccination drive.

12) Disability numbers skyrocket in U.S. and U.K. coinciding perfectly with vaccine take-up: The U.K.’s Institute for Fiscal Studies published a report last month showing that the number of people on disability claims doubled in the U.K. from the summer of 2021 to July 2022.

While this alone doesn’t prove causation, in conjunction with the millions of reported debilitating injuries, the timing of this rise makes the shots the number-one suspect relative to any other possible factor. It is possible that lockdowns are a part of the problem, because the disabilities were heavily weighted toward mental health problems among younger people. However, the doubling of claims across all age groups, with physical ailments being the key cause among the middle-aged, makes it hard to pin this trend exclusively on lockdowns. They also note that this trend of doubling of disability payments “is consistent with the rise being driven by a general worsening of health across the population,” which in itself coincides perfectly with the “significant rise in the number of (non-COVID) working-age deaths from late 2021 through 2022, compared to pre-pandemic years.”

It should be noted that a similar trend is evident in the United States. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, those in the labor force identifying as having a disability skyrocketed by more than 30% right after the vaccines were introduced to the public. This is unprecedented and did not begin in 2020 with COVID and the lockdowns.

The goal of the CDC and FDA at this point is to create a limited hangout in which they let the pressure mounting against the shots out of the balloon and channel it into a limited concession. For example, the CDC conceded some sort of safety signal for myocarditis, then briefly conceded a safety signal for strokes in seniors on the Friday afternoon headed into the MLK holiday weekend before concluding in a comprehensive study that took all of a few hours that it’s really not a problem.

In reality, there are over 14,000 categories of injuries reported to VAERS affecting every organ system and every inch of the body. If you just take the 1,400+ SERIOUS adverse events noted by Pfizer in its confidential document just 90 days into the vaccination campaign, it would take 10 minutes (reading at the rapid rate of 200 words per minute) to disclose them in a TV commercial. Yet Pfizer is exempt from such disclosures.

Consider the fact that in 1999, Dr. Fauci explained to Congress that you can have a vaccine that is totally fine at first, but then as late as 12 years later, “all hell breaks loose.”

Well, what do the next 12 years portend for a vaccine with which all hell broke loose immediately?

Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: States must place a five-year moratorium on mRNA vaccines

Daniel Horowitz | January 20, 2023


There is nobody alive at this point who could possibly ignore the dangers of the mRNA COVID shots. Rather than taking them off the market and immediately investigating who knew what and when, the same companies are now filing with the FDA to immediately introduce more mRNA shots into the market. They will immediately be championed by every county and state health department and promoted by every pediatrician until they’re in the arms of every newborn baby. The mRNA flu and RSV shots are just around the corner, and if states do not place legal barriers to their release, they could possibly do even more damage than the COVID shots, if that is even possible.

Moderna is so brazen and shameless that even as millions are suffering from their first mRNA shot, the company is announcing that its new RSV mRNA shots are … you guessed it … 84% effective. Well, judging by the COVID shot that they said was 94% effective from day one but in fact is now suffering from a bout with negative efficacy, we can only imagine how “safe and effective” a jab that is advertised as “only” 84% effective might be. Pfizer’s Albert Bourla also announced the company will have an mRNA flu shot out in June or July and then another combo coronavirus/flu shot based on an mRNA platform sometime later in the year.

After Moderna leaked the top-line results of its own in-house study (no third-party studies needed, of course), Stephane Bancel, the company’s CEO, told CNBC at Davos that the company was able to complete all three phases of the RSV vaccine clinical trial in just one year (instead of six to eight years) and will now file for expedited approval with the FDA so that it’s on the market for this coming fall. A nice follow-up to his revelation that the company already worked on the COVID vaccine before the virus had a name!

Consider the fact that RSV was the poster child for a failed vaccine in the 1960s and the pharmaceutical industry has been unable to produce an effective shot for 55 years. Yet we are to believe that the company was somehow able to magically crack the code, and of course, it won’t replicate any of the problems the COVID shot induced. Has anyone ever wondered how a company that failed to bring a single product to market for eight years could abruptly become the star player in the biggest pandemic ever and then suddenly have more than a dozen mRNA products ready to go?

Well, after we solve the question of how Moderna seemed to have patented the sequence for the COVID virus in a cancer drug the company was developing in 2016, perhaps we can discover the secret to its success.

Incidentally, 11 months after Maria Bartiromo asked Bancel about Moderna having patented the sequence, he still has not gotten back to us about the reason behind the great coincidence. What we do know is that a company that seems to ascertain the future more than a Biblical prophet is now asserting that there will be more pandemics and is making it clear it now has mRNA production in every continent.

Even before discussing the RNA platform, we must realize that RSV is the worst candidate even for a traditional vaccine. One of the things we should all have observed from the COVID shots is that rapidly evolving RNA viruses are prone to mutation, and the antibody responses stimulated by shots don’t seem to be a good match for respiratory viruses. This is why even the CDC admits the flu shot was only 16% effective last year, which makes us wonder if the real number is in negative territory. Suboptimal antibodies or a mismatch of classes of antibodies can create immune imprinting and allow the body to either tolerate the virus more or serve as a Trojan horse to enhance the virus, which is what happened with the old failed RSV shot.

The RSV vaccine of 1967 was an utter disaster, resulting in the hospitalization of 80% of the infants and toddlers in the clinical trial. Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, on its website, explains that the RSV shot was a textbook example of misfiring antibodies creating antibody-dependent disease enhancement, whereby the “antibodies act as a ‘Trojan horse,’ allowing the pathogen to get into cells and exacerbate the immune response.”

“In clinical trials, children who were given the vaccine were more likely to develop or die from pneumonia after infection with RSV,” states the website of the prominent children’s hospital. “As a result of this finding, the vaccine trials stopped, and the vaccine was never submitted for approval or released to the public.”

Are we really to believe that Moderna suddenly cracked the code on preventing ADE after its COVID shot likely caused some form of viral enhancement?

Now let’s get to the mRNA platform. While it’s true that many of the problems with the COVID shots stem from the spike protein, which is why every version of the shot out on the market is problematic, the mRNA itself is also dangerous. What should be self-evident to anyone at this point based on literature that was published pretty early on is that there is no shutoff or modulator of the mRNA coding your body. So even if it doesn’t code your body to produce something as harmful as a pathogenic spike, there is no ability to ensure the mRNA doesn’t go throughout your entire body producing that protein, tissue, or code for an unlimited period of time and in unknown quantities. Almost nothing is purely good in unlimited quantities and unlimited locations in your body for an unlimited period of time.

This is before we even focus on questions of the pro-inflammatory nature of the lipid nano particles delivering the mRNA, the polyethylene glycolcasing around it causing autoimmune and allergic reactions, and numerous other materials that have never been properly studied. Then of course there are a number of studies that indicate a substantial risk of the mRNA reverse transcribing into DNA:

Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line | HTML

The SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein induces long-term transcriptional perturbations of mitochondrial metabolic genes, causes cardiac fibrosis, and reduces myocardial contractile in obese mice | bioRxiv

(2010 Liver Study) Chromosomal integration of adenoviral vector DNA in vivo – PubMed

Adenoviral Vector DNA- and SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-Based Covid-19 Vaccines: Possible Integration into the Human Genome – Are Adenoviral Genes Expressed in Vector-based Vaccines? – PMC

SARS-CoV-2 RNA reverse-transcribed and integrated into the human genome | bioRxiv

Reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA can integrate into the genome of cultured human cells and can be expressed in patient-derived tissues | PNAS

Shouldn’t we conclusively rule out the concerns of DNA transcription raised in these papers before truncating the next mRNA development from eight years to one year?

Thus, aside from targeted therapies for terminally ill patients, clearly mRNA is not ready for prime time and must be banned, because clearly the system will not self-regulate. Vaccination has become a cult with no qualification, circumspection, modulation, or balanced rational thought. As Mike Ryan, an Irish doctor who serves as executive director of the World Health Organization’s Health Emergencies Programme, recently said, “Vaccination is about protecting yourself, but it’s also an inherently altruistic act — you’re vaccinating yourself in order to be part of an immune group that will then protect those who can’t be vaccinated.” It’s therefore quite obvious they will target the RSV shots to children with even more cultish devotion than the COVID shots.

Everyone knows that babies are more vulnerable to RSV and the flu than to COVID. The companies will engage in full-court press to get this shot in the arms of every baby. Blocking mandates is not good enough. We have more than enough information to demonstrate that these shots are dangerous and are not ready for prime time. Every state must ban its own health department from purchasing, promoting, recommending, or marketing these shots. Furthermore, every state needs a commission of diverse voices to shadowbox the FDA and make its own recommendations, similar to what Governor Ron DeSantis established under the guidance of Dr. Joe Ladapo.

Most Republicans are willing to fight intrepidly against abortion, even when it’s politically unpopular. Yet mRNA shots are like a forced abortion because the minute they are permitted, even if they are not mandated, there is no enlightened consent. Unsuspecting parents, pregnant women, and seniors will be pressured into getting them. We still don’t know the extent to which they might shed on other people. Also, there is a robust effort from a $26 billion industry to inject them into the beef supply.

Most of all, while states create a backstop against federal-pharma experimentation, it’s incumbent upon Republicans in the House to repeal pharma’s legal immunity to liability. That is the best way to ensure that vaccines are safe and we can discover any malfeasance in court. Absent these reforms, they will continue to experiment upon our children. And what do they care if countless lives are lost or injured? They’ll just produce the mRNA to “fix it,” like they are planning with their much-anticipated mRNA cure for heart attacks!

There’s a 0.00002% Chance You’ve Got the Wrong Man

 January 18, 2023 by Ann Coulter


There’s a 0.00002% Chance You’ve Got the Wrong Man

The use of DNA to arrest Bryan Kohberger for the murder of four college students in Idaho reminds me that it’s time to bring the death penalty back in a big way.

Notwithstanding the absence of a single example, the possibility of executing the “wrong man” has been the left’s main line against the death penalty for decades. It’s the only argument that has ever lessened Americans’ support for capital punishment.

Well, guess what? Thanks to the miracle of DNA, now there’s no risk! The murderer can usually be identified with greater than 99.99% accuracy.

Good news, right? Nope! As we now know (also with 99.99% accuracy), liberals never cared about executing the innocent. They just want to spring killers.

Until fairly recently, DNA was a one-way ratchet, used to free criminals, but rarely to catch and convict them.

Recall that DNA fingerprinting was only invented in 1984. The first time DNA was ever used as evidence in a U.S. court was in 1987. Courts weren’t sure what to make of this “novel” technology, and of course, it was treated like witchcraft by the O.J. jury in 1995.

Back then, genetic evidence was used primarily to overturn jury verdicts from the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s by poking holes in the prosecution’s theory of the crime.

The media whooped about every overturned conviction, falsely claiming the prisoner had been PROVED INNOCENT.


Suppose a child molester/murderer was convicted in 1998 based on the following evidence:

— Witnesses saw him abduct the child;

— Tire tracks by the body matched those on the defendant’s truck;

— His knife blade corresponded to the victim’s wounds;

— The child’s teddy bear was found in the defendant’s truck bed;

— When arrested, the accused had a written suicide note in his pocket, confessing to the crime;

— A strand of hair found on the defendant’s shoe was “consistent with” the victim’s hair.

If DNA testing later proved that the hair was not, in fact, the child’s, the conviction could be overturned. Who knows? The jury might have put a lot of stock in that strand of hair! Throw in allegations of “prosecutorial misconduct” or “ineffective assistance of counsel,” and stand back for the celebrities and nuns holding candlelight vigils!

The DNA didn’t prove “innocence”: It proved a strand of hair “consistent with” the victim’s did not belong to the victim after all. An overturned conviction may be “legal innocence” — like a Bronx jury refusing to convict — but it’s not “factual innocence.” Least of all did it warrant the words “proved innocent.”

The party ended when DNA began being used against criminals.

In 2018, investigators finally caught the Golden State Killer, who’d terrorized women across California in the 1970s and ’80s, murdering at least 13 people and raping dozens of women. Law enforcement ID’ed him by putting his DNA into two genealogy databases, GEDmatch and FamilyTreeDNA. It turned out to be Joseph James DeAngelo Jr., a former cop.

Normal people: Hurray! We got him!


Wait a second! Weren’t you the ones worrying yourselves sick about the possibility of executing the innocent?

Until very recently, The New York Times op-ed page fairly bristled with columns insisting — in defiance of the evidence — that there were innocents on death row.

GUESS WHAT, NEW YORK TIMES? You can relax! There’s no danger of an innocent person being “strapped into an electric chair, or walked into a gas chamber, or injected with poison,” as Bob Herbert put it in 1994.

Forget human fallibility: We’ve got scientific infallibility. Trust the science, liberals!

Of course, as soon as DNA started being used to catch criminals rather than release them, the ACLU threw a fit, demanding that genealogy websites like cease cooperating with law enforcement. No fair locking up killers!

As the Times explained: “Privacy advocates … have been worried about genetic genealogy since 2018.” Since 2018 … hmmm, why … oh, I see. That’s the year DNA was used to catch the Golden State Killer. Yeah, that sucked.

Google and Facebook know when we’re menstruating, we’re forced to undergo proctological exams at the airport, self-driving cars are careening onto sidewalks and killing pedestrians, but WE MUST PROTECT THE SERIAL KILLER’S PRIVACY!

This is the left’s specialty: Coming up with new ways to make life worse without enriching it. So now law enforcement has to face another pointless hurdle to solve heinous murders.

What possible explanation is there for this mentality other than that liberals want murderers on the streets? (Just not their streets.)

Genealogical websites merely allow forensic scientists to identify distant relatives of the person who left DNA at a crime scene — such as on the knife sheath lying next to one of the four murdered students in Idaho — in order to put some people in the ballpark and take others out. There’s no danger of getting the wrong man. To the contrary, DNA steers investigators away from the wrong man.

True, it will make life much harder for rapists, child molesters and murderers. It will put an end to “serial killers,” who will now get caught after their first kill. I’m trying to fathom who else would have a problem with it.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Democratic Party.


Ann Coulter Op-ed: Dead End for Serial Killers

 January 11, 2023 by Ann Coulter


Dead End for Serial Killers

   DNA evidence has now shown with greater than 99.9998% probability that Bryan Kohberger was the man who murdered four University of Idaho students in the early morning of Nov. 13, 2022, beautifully illustrating why there will be no more serial killers. As the world gets worse in so many ways, here’s one way it’s better. (Unless the ACLU gets its way.)

      Between the ubiquity of surveillance cameras and DNA, any budding Ted Bundy can commit one hideous murder, but then he’ll get caught. No more victims cut down in the prime of their lives, destroyed families or terrified communities. Monsters like Kohberger get one shocking crime, not a series.

      It’s nearly impossible not to leave your DNA on something, particularly in the middle of a frenzied attack. It seems that Kohberger, a Ph.D. student in criminology, left his DNA on the button of a knife sheath, found next to one of the dead bodies. By following Kohberger and examining his trash, forensic scientists were able to establish that his father was 99.9998% likely to be the father of the person who committed the murders.

      Good luck poking a hole in that, ACLU!

      There were loads of other clues, but those would have gone unnoticed without the DNA pointing to Kohberger in the first place. Moreover, the other evidence might be enough to convince any non-O.J. juror, but would have led to decades of law professors, nuns, chubby coeds, New York Times reporters and other murder activists howling that Kohberger was “innocent.”


      — Kohberger’s white Hyundai Elantra was seen on camera speeding away from the crime scene on a quiet residential street shortly after 4:20 a.m. on the night of the murders.

      Thousands of people in Idaho drive white Hyundai Elantras!

      — Cellphone data showed Kohberger going past the murder house a dozen times in the three months before the crime and, most suspiciously, again at 9 a.m. the next morning, before the police had even arrived.

      So? He’s a driving enthusiast.

      — Kohberger started wearing surgical gloves after the murders.

      Duh! Heard of the pandemic? He’s just a dutiful citizen.

      — Police observed him fanatically cleaning his car after the murders — he didn’t “miss an inch.”

      He’s tidy. 

      — He put his family’s garbage in the neighbor’s bin.

      Anyone could get confused about garbage bins late at night. That doesn’t make him a murderer.

      But with science proving beyond doubt that Kohberger’s DNA was on the knife sheaf found next to the corpses, the fantastical excuses of the murder lobby are so much hot air.

      So why aren’t the police and FBI bragging their heads off about the forensic genealogy that got them to focus on Kohberger?

      Sure, they were looking for a guy with a white Hyundai Elantra, but there are 22,000 white Hyundai Elantras registered in Idaho alone — and Kohberger’s wasn’t one of them. He lived 10 miles away, across state lines in Washington. Why were the police looking at his cellphone data, his behavior and his trash, and not that of the other 22,000 Elantra owners?

      As Heather Tal Murphy writes in Slate: “Though multiple news outlets, including CNN and ABC News, reported that forensic genealogy helped with the case, none have explained exactly how it was used or why it did not appear in the affidavit.” (Emphasis mine.)

      I think I know why they haven’t explained! Law enforcement doesn’t want to sic the murder lobby on whichever genealogy service helped catch an infamous murderer.

      In a sane world, these genealogists would be taking a bow, accepting the eternal gratitude of the victims’ parents and everyone living in Moscow, Idaho, as well as the dozens of future victims this butcher will never be able to kill now.

      Instead, they’re about to have the murderer lobby screaming at them for violating a psycho killer’s “privacy.” The pro-murder crowd has already intimidated the largest DNA database, (owned by Blackstone Group), into refusing to help law enforcement solve murders. 23andMe also refuses to cooperate with murder investigations.

      All this so that some jackass on a law faculty can say, Hey, congratulate me! I just hamstrung the police in their ability to catch the provably guilty!

      Just know that, while you are sleeping peacefully tonight, secure in the knowledge that a thrill killer has been taken off the streets, liberals are hard at work to make sure the next one gets away.


Delano Squires Op-ed: The left respects black drug dealers, pimps, and murderers more than black conservatives

DELANO SQUIRES | January 06, 2023


Getty Images

In one week, Cori Bush proved she is more supportive of trans murderers than of black conservatives. The congresswoman from Missouri joined fellow Democrat Emanuel Cleaver in an attempt to stop the execution of Amber McLaughlin – formerly Scott McLaughlin – who was convicted of rape and murder in 2006.

Their efforts failed.

Bush’s tweet lamenting that McLaughlin’s execution – the first involving a transgender inmate – was much different in tone from the one she sent regarding a very different historic event.

Bush called Rep. Byron Donalds, a black Republican from Florida, a “prop” and supporter of “white supremacy” in a recent tweet criticizing his bid to become speaker of the House. Donalds would be the first black person to hold that position – the type of milestone that the left openly celebrates. Leftists certainly have celebrated for Hakeem Jeffries, the black Democrat and noted election denier, who will lead his party in the new session of Congress.

Don’t miss out on content from Dave Rubin free of big tech censorship. Listen to The Rubin Report now.

Byron Donalds is different. He describes himself as a “Trump-supporting, gun-owning, liberty-loving, pro-life, politically incorrect Black man.” His entire political persona is in complete opposition to that of Cori Bush and the members of the Congressional Black Caucus. This fact should be welcome news to black voters. Our political system is all about debating worldviews, priorities, and policy ideas. The black community would benefit from elected officials from opposite sides of the political spectrum debating the merits of charter schools or education savings accounts.

But instead of engaging ideas, Bush went straight to attacks on what she believes black people value most: our racial identity. Bush is just like President Biden and prominent liberals in media and politics who think they are the gatekeepers of racial authenticity. They think anyone who doesn’t follow the left’s script “ain’t black.” But as is often the case in life, the foot soldiers of “Biden blackness” are engaging in projection.

Cori Bush is an abortion absolutist who thinks black babies are better off being killed in the womb than being born to poor black mothers. She also supports Black Lives Matter, the organization that wants to dismantle the nuclear family and believes black children are better off being raised in “villages” full of women where the only “dad” is the government.

Bush is most infamous for her support of the “defund the police” movement. A woman who represents one of the most violent cities in the country thinks that police are the ones making her city dangerous. She is a more zealous advocate for rapists and murderers on death row than for the law-abiding citizens in her district.

There is an important lesson to learn here. People who see themselves as oppressed, marginalized slaves will do anything — even kill themselves and their offspring — if they can be convinced that murder is a form of liberation.

The worst part about Bush’s comments is how normal they have become in our political discourse. The left has directed the vitriol it used to reserve for Justice Clarence Thomas to any black person who is right of center.

Winsome Sears, the lieutenant governor of Virginia, was accused of being a “black mouth” justifying white supremacist ideas by Michael Eric Dyson on MSNBC. Larry Elder was called the “black face of white supremacy” in a Los Angeles Times column during his bid to unseat Gavin Newsom as governor. Condoleezza Rice was called a “foot soldier for white supremacy” by culture critic Touré for her rejection of CRT in American classrooms.

This is the new norm in our political and racial discourse. Black children are told they can be anything they desire – as long as they are not out-of-the-closet conservatives.

Black drug dealers, pimps, and shooters are all treated with more respect than black Republicans. Rappers can degrade black women and glorify violence against black men without any fear of having their BET Awards invitation revoked. But if a black politician or artist says he is glad Roe is dead, he can expect to watch the show at home.

When you reward degeneracy and punish unapproved political thoughts, you shouldn’t be surprised when you get more of the former and less of the latter.

This is why one of the most needed developments in American politics today is to break the notion that fealty to the Democratic Party is a litmus test for maintaining good standing in the black community. All black voters should feel free to support candidates based on policy positions that reflect their values.

This is the sad state of race in America today. Liberals like Robin DiAngelo who tell white people they are the key to black social progress are hailed as heroes. Black politicians like Cori Bush who spend more time championing the rights of “pregnant men” than the benefits of the natural family are treated like bold revolutionaries. But black conservatives like Byron Donalds are treated like race traitors online, by corporate media, and in Hollywood. Their motto for social control is simple, yet effective: “When in doubt, pull the race card out.” The problem is that too many black people see the death and destruction being promoted by the left’s agenda and won’t be silenced.

Michael Brown Op-ed: Major scientific study confirms what we all knew about male, female

By Michael Brown, CP Op-Ed Contributor | Thursday, January 05, 2023


Unsplash/Tim Mossholder

Every so often, a moment of sanity prevails in our culture, quite unintentionally. At such times, reality hits home, and most people don’t even notice it. But that’s exactly what happened with the announcement of the findings of a major scientific study. For a split second, reality overtook ideology, as left-leaning journalists shared the results of this study without thinking through the implications.

I’m referring to the news, first reported widely on that, “Women are more empathetic than men, study of hundreds of thousands of people finds — at any age and in any country in the world.

In response I tweeted sarcastically, “A major new study has revealed that ‘women are more empathetic than men.’ This leads to two startling revelations: 1. there is such a thing as women and men.  2. there are real differences between women and men. What do you know!”

Yes, presupposed in this major international study, which involved 300,000 participants, is the fact that there is such a thing as males and females. They really exist, and their existence can be defined, despite efforts to make “woman” (and, by extension) “man” undefinable. (Think of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s now infamous answer to the “What is a woman?” question and see Matt Walsh’s “What Is a Woman?” documentary.)

Without this presupposition, namely, that there is such a thing as women and men, the study would have no meaning. In fact, it would be impossible even to conduct the study. Otherwise, all we would have is the difference between humans and humans. That’s it!

We could not report on differences between women and men, since sex and gender are merely what we perceive them to be. Instead, we would have differences between humans, and the results would be, “On average, certain humans are more empathetic than other humans.”

It would be like doing a major survey comparing the health of taller people (let’s say people 6 feet tall or more) to shorter people (here, under 6 feet tall). The only way it could work would be if height was definable and tangible. But if my height was whatever I perceived it to be, so much for the study. I would have no meaning or purpose at all.

It’s the same with differences between the sexes. If sex (and, consequently, gender) is whatever I perceive it to be, then scientific studies like this are worthless. After all, if I’m a biological male who identifies as a female, then I have undermined the whole premise of the study.

How, then, did the makers of this health study craft their questions so as to get tangible, substantive answers?

When you click on the test itself, conducted under the auspices of the University of Cambridge, you are asked a series of background questions, beginning with, “What is your age?” This reminds us that “age” is not a matter of perception, even if we feel younger or older than our actual years. Our age is identifiable, going back to the year we were born. That is a fact.

The second question is: “What was your biological sex assigned at birth?” What do you know! Despite the use of radicalized leftist language, as if your sex was arbitrarily assigned to you at birth by the doctors and nurses, the survey must ask for biological reality. Otherwise, to repeat, the survey has no meaning at all.

Quite tellingly, in today’s upside down culture, you can’t simply ask, “What is your sex?” Instead, you need to ask what was written on your birth certificate when you were born. Your actual, biological sex matters!

Even so, the survey listed the options of: “Male; Female; Intersex; I prefer not to say; I do not know.” (Are we really supposed to believe that some people do not know if they were born male or female? We’re not talking here about the very real biological category of Intersex, where there is potential ambiguity.)

Not surprisingly, given the madness of our woke society, the next question asks, “What is your gender?”

Here the choices are more expansive (but of course!): “Female; Male; Transfemale; Transmale; Non-binary; Other; I prefer not to say; I do not know.” (Enough said. I don’t need to make any commentary here.)

What is remarkable, though, is the test results page (I took the test to see how I scored).

Under, “Your Empathy score (EQ)” we are told that, “Most females score 6 to 16” and “Most males score 4 to 15.”

What happened to all the other categories? What happened to the transfemales and transmales and non-binary people? Those categories no longer exist, displaced by differences between “females” and “males,” and that information was gleaned in question 2: When you were born, what was your biological sex? That’s what really matters.

Later, the test results page explains that, “On average, more men than women have a Type S brain type and more women than men have a Type E brain type. It is suggested that these brain types are caused by genetic and prenatal hormonal levels (2,3), as well as by environmental factors.”

Accordingly, the article reported that, “Females, on average, score significantly higher in cognitive empathy scores than males regardless of nationality, language spoken, and age, a massive new study published on Monday in the journal PNAS found.” And the 250-word abstract of the study references “females” 8 times — without qualification or equivocation.

Accordingly, David Greenberg, a psychologist and social neuroscientist at Israel’s Bar-Ilan University and lead author on the study, commented, “Our results provide some of the first evidence that the well-known phenomenon — that females are on average more empathic than males — is present in a wide range of countries across the globe. It’s only by using very large data sets that we can say this with confidence.”

My wife, Nancy, saw this reported on CNN in the most matter-of-fact way, with both the CNN newscaster and the doctor brought in for commentary seeming to forget that is bigoted and transphobic to speak of differences between women and men. In the words of NARL (the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws), “We use gender-neutral language when talking about pregnancy, because it is not just cis-gender women who get pregnant.” But of course. And men can menstruate too. All clear!

As I wrote in 2017 (with reference to “menstruating men”), “There is an all-out war on sexual difference (often referred to as ‘gender’), and if it wins the day, it will lead to societal chaos.”

That chaos is already here, growing by the day. But for a moment this week, quite unintentionally, reality crept back in and sanity prevailed as news outlets reported the simple, verifiable (and, widely known) fact that women, on average, are more empathetic than men.

Men and women do exist, and there are differences between the two.

What do you know?

Dr. Michael Brown( is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program. His latest book is Revival Or We Die: A Great Awakening Is Our Only Hope. Connect with him on FacebookTwitter, or YouTube.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: 2023’s First List of Openly Gay Transgender Non-white Accomplishments!

 January 4, 2023 by Ann Coulter


2023’s First List of Openly Gay Transgender Non-white Accomplishments!

     This is the only “So Long, 2022!” column you need to read. I combed The New York Times’ archives for all the pivotal moments.

     It turns out that 2022 was a MAJOR year for firsts. True, other years had their noteworthy events — the first flight, the first man to walk on the moon, the first iPhone and so on. But step aside, 1903, 1969 and 2007! This past year was a goldmine of firsts. Below are just some of the epochal moments registered by the newspaper of broken record.

     January 5: “Adrienne Adams Makes History as First Black N.Y.C. Council Speaker.”

     Boise, Idaho, held a special parade to mark the occasion!

     February 13: Erin Jackson wins gold in the 500 meters, “becoming the first African American woman to win a medal” in speedskating.

     If this historic trend continues, could we one day see a black man in the NBA?

     February 27: Burna Boy “will be the first Nigerian musician to headline Madison Square Garden.”

     Just think of how much history we have to look forward to — the first Mauritian to headline MSG, the first Gambian to headline MSG. (There are unconfirmed rumors that a Djiboutian may have played cymbals at the Blue Note once, but apparently that moment was lost to history.)

     March 6: Memoirist Silvia Vasquez-Lavado is “the first openly gay woman to complete the Seven Summits and the first Peruvian woman to summit Everest.”

     She practiced by hiking up the remains of Peru’s mass child sacrifice — believed to the largest in the world!

     March 17: “[Lia] Thomas, who competes for the University of Pennsylvania, became the first openly transgender woman to win an NCAA swimming championship.”

     Now that Thomas has definitively proved that people born with vaginas cannot hold a candle to people born with penises in physical strength, please don’t tell me we’re going to have to rethink girl firemen?

     March 28: “State Representative Carlos Guillermo Smith, an Orlando Democrat and [Florida’s] first openly gay Latino lawmaker …”

     A sentence that CANNOT BE SPOKEN in Florida, thanks to Ron Death-Santis’ “Don’t Say ‘Gay’” law that never uses the word “gay.”

     April 20: [Announcing new editors, Marc Lacey and Carolyn Ryan]: “Ms. Ryan will be the first openly gay journalist to serve as managing editor of The Times. Mr. Lacey is the third Black journalist to serve in the role.”

     And thank God the Times has rid itself of those nonentities, Donald McNeil, Bari Weiss and James Bennet.

     April 29: “[Maye Quade] had been seeking to become the first Black woman and first openly gay woman elected to the State Senate in Minnesota.”

     The Times neglected to mention that Minnesota also boasts of the first member of Congress who married her own brother.

     May 5: “Ms. [Karine] Jean-Pierre, who will succeed Jen Psaki, will be the first Black woman and the first openly gay person to serve in the role.”

     Biden delighted his base with the first black lesbian press secretary. But in a bow to tradition, she IS a complete moron.

     May 9: “L Morgan Lee made theater history on Monday, becoming what production officials described as the first openly transgender performer to be nominated for a Tony Award for her performance as a featured actress.”

     In this one case, the Times returned to the anachronistic, misogynistic word “actress” in lieu of “actor.”

     June 8: “[G]ov. Gavin Newsom played up [Rob] Bonta’s status as the first Filipino American in the role [of California’s attorney general].”

     … between bites of succulent roasted pig and sips of a fine French wine with a piquant floral bouquet at the French Laundry restaurant.

     July 6: “San Jose Hires a Retired Player as the N.H.L.’s First Black General Manager.”

     And no one knows ice hockey like San Jose!

     July 8: “Black Woman Named President of Raiders In a First for the N.F.L.”

     Well, “black” under the one-drop rule, in view of her Korean mother.

     July 8: “[Brittney Griner] … the first openly gay athlete signed to an endorsement contract by Nike.”

     Also the first openly gay athlete to take precedence over a former U.S. Marine in a prisoner exchange with Russia!

     July 27: [New York Times Bonus Content!]: “[Kamala Harris] was a historic choice, becoming the first woman, the first African American and the first South Asian American to serve as vice president.”

     And she did it by being the only person in the country who met Biden’s three exacting requirements: 1) Must be black; 2) must be a woman and 3) That’s about it.

     August 28: “Serbia’s prime minister, Ana Brnabic … is the first woman and first openly gay person to hold that position in the country.”

     Yeah, they saw what happened when American gays turned against Russia.

     September 10: “[Ons Jabeur of Tunisia] could become the first African woman to win the U.S. Open.”

     Jabeur lost to Iga Swiatek from Poland (BO-ring!), who beat her in straight sets in the women’s final — but still.

     September 27: Lizzo, the Black rapper, was the first to play a “200-year-old crystal flute that a French craftsman and clockmaker had made for President James Madison in 1813.” Serendipitously, she had been handed the flute by Carla D. Hayden, “the first African American and first woman to lead the Library of Congress.”

     The moment was not sullied by anyone knowing who James Madison was because, luckily, all his busts and statues have been torn down.

     October 2: “’Bros,’ the first gay romantic comedy from a major studio …”

     For some reason, the Times minimized this achievement by headlining the piece: “‘Bros’ Fails at the Box Office …” — as if that matters to history!

     November 6: Jacob Caswell became “the first nonbinary winner to earn prize money from the [New York City Marathon].”

     Do any athletes who were born female bother competing in the “nonbinary” category? Can we get back to the question of girl cops and girl firemen now?

     November 20: Actor Kumail Nanjiani pointed out to the Times — as if it didn’t already know! — that he was “the first South Asian superhero [in a Marvel movie, ‘Eternals’].”

     In other 2022 news, “’Eternals’ Leaves Theaters With 2nd-Worst Domestic Performance in MCU History.”

     The November elections was a cornucopia of firsts for the Times! Take a deep breath —

     “The first Black governor of Maryland, the first woman elected to the Senate from Alabama and the first openly transgender state legislator in Montana …

     “The nation’s first openly lesbian governor …

     “The first openly gay immigrant elected to Congress. …

     “The first openly gay Black person elected to any statewide executive office. …

     “The first transgender man elected to a state legislature. …

     “The first woman and the first L.G.B.T.Q. person elected to Congress from Vermont …

     “The first woman elected governor of New York. …

     “The first Black woman elected to statewide executive office in Massachusetts …

     “The first transgender person elected to the Minnesota Legislature …

     “The first Hispanic woman elected to Congress from the state [of Illinois] …

     “The first Black woman elected to Congress from [Pennsylvania] …”

     Condi Rice still awaits the Times noticing that she was the nation’s first black female secretary of state.

     November 12: Biden’s Customs and Border Protection commissioner, Chris Magnus, “is the first openly gay commissioner of the agency.”

     On the other hand, he tried to enforce the border, so naturally Biden had no choice but to fire him.

     December 5: Emma Corrin was “the first nonbinary star to appear on the cover [of Vogue].”

     It’s outrageous that some people want to split hairs by arguing she’s actually a nonbinary nonstar.

     December 5: Swiss writer Kim de l’Horizon “was the first nonbinary writer to win the [German Book Prize].”

     I wonder if his nonbinary status cost the author of “Mein Kampf” that distinction.

     December 25: “Adrienne Adams is the first-ever Black [New York City] Council speaker, a majority of those serving are women and the Council has its first South Asian members.”

     Wait! Shouldn’t those South Asians be Marvel superheroes?


Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: Reconstituting the America we once loved in red states, part 1: Medical freedom

Daniel Horowitz | January 3, 2023


Medical freedom needs to become the new pro-life movement on the right. It quite literally affects even more human beings than abortion.

This week, all eyes in the political world will turn to Washington as the excitement builds over the transition of power in the House of Representatives. But what good is a narrow RINO majority in just one branch of the federal government when Republicans ceded the budget leverage they otherwise would have commanded this month? Why not focus on half the state governments where Republicans enjoy trifecta control, in most of them with supermajorities in the legislatures? Indeed, this year kicks off the most important legislative sessions of our lifetime. The intensity of grassroots pressure placed on these equivocating Republicans will determine whether red-state America is just a pro-gun, anti-abortion version of blue-state hell or whether we can fully reconstitute the America we once loved in portions of the country.

There’s no reason to focus on the presidential election and what might happen two years from now. We can’t wait two years for change, nor are we likely to actualize it on the federal level. The American Revolution was catalyzed by state legislatures organizing together. The reconstitution of that revolution will also have to unfold in the bodies of government closest to the people, at least in the states where a majority of the people haven’t already succumbed to the spirit of the age.

Throughout the next few weeks, I’ll be posting legislative goals for various issues, but for today, we will focus on the most important issue of our time: medical freedom. It is the ultimate pro-life issue of our time. There is no evidence that the genocide that has occurred over the past few years from COVID and COVID fascism is even being addressed at the federal level. Therefore, it is up to the red states to reconstitute the Nuremberg Code and learn the lessons from the travesty of Covidstan.

Here are the legislative ideas and objectives that must be pursued in red states this session. If not now, while the malfeasance of the government is fresh on the minds of the people, then it will never be accomplished. This is a checklist of ideas that activists should use to determine whether there is legislation in your respective states addressing the issue of our time – to ensure there are legal, structural, and political barriers in place so that what occurred the past few years is immediately halted and cannot happen again.

Permanently ban all COVID biomedical security mandates: 

Now is precisely the time not only to reverse the COVID policies, but to plow over the ground of tyranny and salt it with provisions permanently banning and even criminalizing its implementation. This means banning all public and “private” mask and vaccine mandates in any setting under any circumstance. This is no longer 2020 when we were merely playing defense. Now we have reams of data and studies showing these policies are not only ineffective but downright harmful.

Until now, some states agreed to a health care exemption from the prohibition on mandates, but that is precisely the setting where cancer patients, pain patients, and Alzheimer’s patients who are forced to use medical services regularly are still being coerced to cover their faces. This is unacceptable. Disability law mandates affirmative accommodations for people with health issues, yet somehow we are to believe hospitals can force patients to wear something hazardous? The bill must be backed by a stiff fine for any violator, and in the case of anyone caught forcing schoolchildren to wear a mask, there must be prison time.

Make health status a protected class under anti-discrimination law: 

One way of accomplishing the aforementioned goal is to codify health status into state anti-discrimination law, making it unlawful to discriminate in any way on account of opting against a particular medical intervention to one’s body. It might also be worthwhile codifying such rights into the state’s constitution along the lines of the following: “The right of a person to refuse any medical procedure, treatment, injection, device, vaccine, or prophylactic shall not be questioned or interfered with in any manner. Equality of rights under the law or in the realm of public accommodation shall not be denied or abridged to any person in this State because of the exercise of the right under this section.”

Preserving doctor-patient autonomy:

  • No doctor shall be penalized with loss of licensure or board certification on account of speaking out against vaccines and mask-wearing.
  • No doctor can be punished for using off-label FDA-approved drugs, and all pharmacists must fill such prescriptions absent a religious conscience concern. There should be a cause of action in court for patients to sue pharmacies that block valid prescriptions.
  • Also, any barriers to doctors themselves dispensing drugs they prescribe should be lifted. Some states allow doctors to dispense drugs in the office, but this power is generally limited and must be expanded.
  • Finally, the complaint process against doctors with the state’s medical board must be overhauled. Complaints can only be accepted from patients alleging injury, surviving family of injured patients who die, or from medical professionals with direct contact who allege patient harm. All complaints in absence of patient harm must be ignored.

Abolish the state’s immunization register: 

No good will come of the state holding onto a person’s vaccination status, and it will only be used to enforce the biomedical security state and should therefore be abolished. At a minimum, anyone administering a vaccine must obtain written consent from the patient prior to reporting the administration of a vaccine or immunization to the statewide immunization registry.

An immediate termination of mRNA vaccine promotion: 

We are long past the time when the shots should merely not be mandated. The jabs must be taken off the market. State legislatures must bar their respective departments of health from promoting or purchasing any mRNA vaccines, ban all marketing or advertising of the COVID shots, create a commission to study the effects of the COVID shots by researching all those who died within 30 days of vaccination, and force the departments of health to fund treatment and diagnostics for those injured by the shots. Also, depending on state law, legislatures should follow Florida’s lead and work to convene grand juries to investigate the willful misconduct of hospitals, the departments of health, and the pharma companies throughout the pandemic.

Suspend the childhood immunization schedule: 

All state indulgence and recognition of the CDC’s childhood vaccination schedule must be suspended pending the outcome of a commission to study the need, safety, and efficacy of every vaccine category and prototype on the market. Health departments could still support the other shots pending the commission’s recommendations, but all health care and school settings would be prohibited from discriminating against those who opt out of those shots.

Patient Bill of Rights for those in hospitals and senior care facilities: 

Some states have pursued a few of these ideas, but there must be strong criminal and civil penalties for violators. Every hospital or senior care facility must always:

  • allow one surrogate present in the hospital (or as a visitor in a nursing home);
  • permit patients to access FDA-approved drugs off label prescribed by a doctor at their own expense if they agree to assume liability;
  • accord every patient the right to refuse any hospital-prescribed treatment or the right to refuse to remain in the facility if they have the mental capacity to leave (a ban on medical kidnapping).

There must be a cause of action created to sue any hospital and possibly for the district attorney to bring criminal charges against hospitals that deny these rights. All hospitals violating the patient bill of rights should be on the hook to lose state tax-exempt status.

A complete ban on remdesivir: 

There is no sane doctor alive who can look you in the eye and declare remdesivir to be a safe and effective drug. Yet to this day, it remains the standard of care for inpatient COVID care. States must ban its use as they would any toxic and potentially lethal drug with zero benefit.

Ban on medical kidnapping via child protective services: 

There is a growing trend of hospitals or doctors working with the state’s child protective custody agency to steal children from parents who refuse to go along with their course of treatment or bio-medical goals. States must ban all investigations and agency decisions to suspend parental rights on account of a parent’s refusal of specific medical treatments, diagnostics, or devices unless there is proof that the parent acted with malicious intent. Idaho House Bill 821 is a good model. This includes refusal to engage in masking or vaccination of a child. Also, such actions, opinions, or beliefs shall not be used as a factor in family court in determining custody arrangements.

Hold pharma accountable: 

Although the federal government protects vaccine companies from liability, and this issue must be redressed at the federal level, states can still broaden their consumer protection and anti-fraud statutes to target pharma for blatant fraud. There is a wealth of material showing that the manufacturers knew the vaccines didn’t work and injured people, yet falsely marketed them. Also, state health departments, which assiduously pushed the vaccines in red states just as much as blue states, must use their remaining COVID funds to fund diagnostics, detection, and treatment of vaccine injury.

State legislatures should also form commissions to study the scope of injury through studies, death certificate and medical billing data, and investigating all deaths in the state within 30 days of taking the shots. Finally, they must create a state-based vaccine adverse events reporting system that is user-friendly and must use state resources to require and encourage medical professionals to report injuries to that system.

Ban endorsement of experimental shots: 

States must bar their respective health departments from endorsing or marketing any shot to the broad public that has not undergone a human clinical trial with a sustained and maintained placebo control group. That clinical trial must have some third party supporting its safety data, which is independent from the manufacturer. Any trial based on “immonobridging” – measuring antibody titers and comparing them to various study groups – does not qualify.

Criminalize gain-of-function research: 

There’s no need to wait for the feds to act. States should ban research institutions from engaging in gain-of-function research with a statute backed by criminal penalties. Individuals potentially harmed by such research should be granted a cause of action to sue those institutions.

Tax-credits for direct primary care: 

Some states are already doing this, but there is a need to even the tax playing field between “cartel” health care and direct primary care. The core problem we experienced during the pandemic was a lack of individual thinking among practitioners, much of which is connected to the fact that they are all controlled by systems, insurance companies, and networks. With so much tendentious governmental treatment for the current cartel, states need to find ways to even up the score to incentivize people to use more free market and free-thinking doctors. Offering direct primary care the same tax benefits – both on the employer side and individual side of the ledger – we offer to the insurance companies is a good start. How many of these ideas have already been adopted by your governor? How many are represented by a piece of legislation pending in your legislative body? Now is the time to get to work. If not us, who? And if not now, when?

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Happy Kwanzaa! The Holiday Brought to You by the FBI

 December 28, 2022 by Ann Coulter


Happy Kwanzaa! The Holiday Brought to You by the FBI

  It seems like all I hear these days is how liberals are red-hot for teaching history, while retrograde troglodytes on the right are demanding that we suppress the teaching of history by banning critical race theory (CRT). Haranguing students, day in day out, about their white privilege is just teaching history.

     On this beloved Kwanzaa week, here’s some history for you.

Celebrated exclusively by white liberals, Kwanzaa is a fake holiday invented in 1966 by black radical/FBI stooge Ron Karenga — aka Dr. Maulana Karenga, founder of United Slaves, the violent nationalist rival to the Black Panthers. Liberals have become so mesmerized by multicultural gibberish that they have forgotten the real history of Kwanzaa and Karenga’s United Slaves.

In what was ultimately a foolish gambit, during the madness of the ’60s, the FBI encouraged the most extreme black nationalist organizations in order to discredit and split the left. The more preposterous the group, the better. (It’s the same function Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez serves today.)

By that criterion, Karenga’s United Slaves was perfect.

Despite modern perceptions that blend all the black activists of the ’60s, the Black Panthers did not hate whites. Although some of their most high-profile leaders were drug dealers and murderers, they did not seek armed revolution.

No, those were the precepts of Karenga’s United Slaves. The United Slaves were proto-fascists, walking around in dashikis, gunning down Black Panthers and adopting invented “African” names. (I will not be shooting any Black Panthers this week because I am Kwanzaa-reform, and we are not that observant.)

It’s as if David Duke invented a holiday called “Anglika,” which he based on the philosophy of “Mein Kampf” — and clueless public schoolteachers began celebrating the made-up, racist holiday.

In the category of the-gentleman-doth-protest-too-much, back in the ’70s, Karenga was quick to criticize Nigerian newspapers that claimed that certain American black radicals were CIA operatives.

Now we know the truth: The FBI fueled the bloody rivalry between the Panthers and United Slaves. In the annals of the American ’60s, Karenga was the Father Gapon, stooge of the czarist police. Whether Karenga was a willing FBI dupe or just a dupe remains unclear.

In one barbarous outburst, Karenga’s United Slaves shot two Black Panthers to death on the UCLA campus: Al “Bunchy” Carter and John Huggins. Karenga himself served time, a useful stepping-stone for his current position as the chair of the Africana Studies Department at California State University at Long Beach.

The left has forgotten the FBI’s tacit encouragement of this murderous black nationalist cult founded by the father of Kwanzaa. The esteemed Cal State professor’s invented holiday is a nutty blend of schmaltzy ’60s rhetoric, black racism and Marxism. The seven principles of Kwanzaa are the very same seven principles of the Symbionese Liberation Army, another invention of The Worst Generation.

In 1974, Patty Hearst, kidnap victim-cum-SLA revolutionary, famously posed next to the banner of her alleged captors, a seven-headed cobra. Each snakehead stood for one of the SLA’s revolutionary principles: Umoja, Kujichagulia, Ujima, Ujamaa, Nia, Kuumba and Imani. These are the exact same seven “principles” of Kwanzaa.

When Karenga was asked to distinguish Kawaida, the philosophy underlying Kwanzaa, from “classical Marxism,” he essentially said that, under Kawaida, we also hate whites. (And here’s something interesting: Kawaida, Kwanzaa and Kuumba are also the only three Kardashian sisters not to have their own shows on the E! network.)

While taking the “best of early Chinese and Cuban socialism” (is that the mass murder or the seizure of private property?), Karenga said Kawaida practitioners believe one’s racial identity “determines life conditions, life chances and self-understanding.”

There’s an inclusive philosophy for you!

Sing to “Jingle Bells”:

Kwanzaa bells, dashikis sell

Whitey has to pay;

Burning, shooting, oh what fun

On this made-up holiday!

Kwanzaa emerged not from Africa, but from the FBI’s COINTELPRO. It is a holiday celebrated exclusively by idiot white liberals. Black Americans celebrate Christmas.


Ann Coulter Op-ed: All the Presidents’ Insurrections

 December 21, 2022 by Ann Coulter


All the Presidents’ Insurrections

     Well, the Jan. 6 committee has produced its long-awaited report. In a surprise move, the committee referred former President Donald Trump for criminal prosecution, accusing him of inciting insurrection, among other crimes.

     In fairness, Jan. 6, 2021, was the day that Trump announced he would open our southern border and allow nearly 5 million unvetted illegal immigrants into our country, whereupon they would be flown to various cities around the U.S. and given full access to all our welfare programs.

     Obviously, this constitutes insurrectionary behavior. The committee had no choice but to demand criminal charges.

     LATE BULLETIN: It was NOT the former president who did this, but the current president, Joe Biden. In another development, it turns out that engineering a foreign invasion of our country has been redefined as a “humanitarian mission.”

     When will this “humanitarian mission” end? Apparently, never — not until all 7 billion humans living in places less luxe than America have moved here, at which point America won’t be so hot anymore, so no one will want to come.

     Thus, The New York Times quoted Jennifer Quigley, of Human Rights First, saying of our intervention in Afghanistan: “We can’t claim mission accomplished. There are still too many vulnerable people abroad.”

     After spending billions of dollars trying to build a semblance of civil society in that stone-age culture, evidently now we’re supposed to open our doors to everyone who lives there. Even granting that absurd notion, I can’t help but notice that Quigley seamlessly shifted from “Afghanistan” to “people abroad.”

     So we have to take in every “vulnerable” person who doesn’t already live in the U.S.? Is there any other way to interpret her statement?

     CNN demands that we fly Afghans here directly, not content to wait for these future Nobel Prize-winners to take the air-land route from Afghanistan through Central America into our country — which they are also doing.

     For the last few weeks, CNN has aired a story almost every hour about how Afghans “risked their lives” to save Americans, so now we owe them permanent residency in our country. It’s unclear whom we were ever fighting, inasmuch as everyone in the country seems to have been a “translator.”

     CNN hosts triumphantly produced a letter by “retired diplomats,” warning that if the U.S. doesn’t “support its allies” [by allowing them to move here], “in the future our allies will be less likely to support the U.S. missions.” (And then who will teach third-worlders about feminismgays and George Floyd?)

     Former U.S. Marine Paul Whelan must be relieved to hear liberals admit that how we treat those who put their lives on the line for our country will determine how we are willing to do so in the future. Whelan, you’ll recall, is rotting in a Russian prison, because a lesbian, Women’s National Basketball Association star (but I repeat myself) took precedence over him in a prisoner trade. We’re looking for a few good men. Anybody? Anybody?

     We’ve already taken in 76,000 Afghans since Biden’s smooth withdrawal last year. (Please, God, tell me we rescued the Afghans who helped paint the George Floyd mural.)

     And look at what a blessing they’ve been!

     Mohammad Haroon Imaad was among the first batch of beloved Afghan “translators” brought to America last year. He was still living on the Fort McCoy military base in Wisconsin when he was charged with beating and choking his wife. She explained that he beat her all the time back in Afghanistan, once blinding her in both eyes.

     Obviously, the Imaad household is going to be a real boon to our country. Yeah, we’re gonna have to raise the Social Security retirement age and start means-testing, but on the bright side, we’ve provided housing to Mrs. Imaad and paid for her astronomically expensive eye operations.

     On the very same military base, another cherished Afghan ally, Bahrullah Noori, committed multiple forcible sexual assaults on children within weeks of arriving. Other Afghans flown to Fort McCoy showed up with child brides and multiple wives.

     Just weeks after the Afghan-of-the-Month competition at Fort McCoy, another Afghan on our “must-have” list, Zabihullah Mohmand, was accused of raping a woman in Missoula, Montana. How long had he been here? A week? But the good news is, Mohmand was fully vetted by our government, according to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas. If you can’t trust those guys …

     In response, the media promptly stopped reporting those stories. Perhaps a better idea would be for CNN to have a word with the 76,000 “translators” already deposited on our shores. Hey, guys! Remember, for the next few months, NO RAPING!

     Again, these were the most-favored Afghans, the ones who qualified for the first round of emergency admissions. And they just keep coming.

     Now, that’s what most people call an “insurrection.”



1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106; 816-581-7500

Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: The sudden decline in birth rates post-vaccination — and the shocking silence

Daniel Horowitz | December 27, 2022


In 2010, Bill Gates famously articulated a four-part equation to reducing the world’s carbon output. Seemingly bizarrely, his first component was reducing the population — through vaccination. “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion,” bemoaned Gates in his now infamous TED Talk. “Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10% or 15%.” Until recently, I thought this must have been a gaffe. After all, how could vaccines reduce the world’s population? Well, enter the COVID jabs – if you even want to call them vaccines – and we might have our answer.

Questions about fertility issues, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths began to be raised last winter when Scotland experienced a month of higher infant mortality than at any time over the past three decades. Then in the spring of 2022, roughly nine months after most young adults were jabbed with the COVID shots, COVID data analysists began noticing unusual drops in birth rates. The hope was that these numbers were just short-term aberrations due to some unknown transient cause. But months later, the evidence is growing too strong to ignore, suggesting a much longer-term problem, which bizarrely has garnered little concern from policymakers, governments, the medical establishment, or the media. It ranks alongside “died suddenly” both in terms of its magnitude to humanity and the shocking degree of silence in response.

In fact, some media outlets were even celebrating the low birth rates without expressing any curiosity as to the sudden cause. While it’s impossible to prove definitively that the correlation equals causation, it’s stupefying that these shots are not under suspicion given that they are already tied to heart problems, blood clots, massive inflammatory syndromes, and menstrual irregularities and that the lipid nano particles are deposited largely in the ovaries and the testes.

When you are dealing with 1-in-1,000-year anomalies, it takes a civilization-changing event to account for the anomaly. COVID itself cannot be a factor in the sudden drop, because the birth rates were not declining nine months after COVID hit or even in the first year and a half. The other culprit could have been lockdowns, which perhaps disrupted travel, relationships, and cohabitation. But if that were the case, by now we should be seeing a bounce-back effect. Instead, as my friend “Gato Malo” points out on his Substack, the numbers are getting worse.

Sweden is a perfect country to study because it never locked down and should not have been affected socially by the lockdowns. Yet not only did the Swedes experience a sharp decline in births nine months after their vaccination program, the numbers are further deteriorating over time. According to Statistics Sweden, live births are down 8.1% for the year (8.7% per capita), but as Gato observes, the worst month was October 2022 (the most recent month with data), which saw a 13.2% per capita decline. What on earth could explain the fact that this trend is getting worse, other than … you know what? He collated the data from 25 years, and this data, which is in plain sight, raises the question of why there is no policy concern whatsoever.

He further demonstrates that the plummeting birth rates correlate perfectly with the uptake of the vaccines in Sweden among the childbearing population.

Furthermore, any hypothesis as to the cause of the plummeting birth rates would also have to logically account for the rise in neonatal deaths. For example, lockdowns would not explain why the babies being born are experiencing more health problems. The spike protein embedded in the babies’ blood, however, would. Israeli researcher Josh Guetzkow obtained neonatal death data from Israeli health insurance fund Maccabi, which covers 25% of Israelis. He found a tripling of neonatal deaths in two of the quarters post-vaccination.

The timing is very peculiar, according to Guetzkow:

In February, 2021, the Israeli Ministry of Health started to officially recommend COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women in their 2nd and 3rd trimesters, so the timing of the second quarter spike would coincide with women being jabbed later in their pregnancy 2-4 months prior.

The 4th quarter spike coincides with the booster vaccination campaign in Israel in August and especially September — a drive that aggressively targeted pregnant women. Unfortunately the health insurer claimed not to have information on the vaccination status of pregnant women, so we are not able to differentiate by vaccination status.

This clearly rules out COVID as the culprit, because the neonatal deaths in the earlier quarters in 2020 were low. He goes on to note that this data complements earlier findings he publicized from two major Israeli hospitals showing a sudden increase in stillbirths, miscarriages, and abortions (collectively, SBMA) around the same time. The insurance data does not illuminate the vaccination status of the mothers suffering these reproductive problems, but his earlier data showed a 34% higher rate of SBMAs in Rambam hospital in Haifa among vaccinated women through October 2021.

Obviously, we all understand that you can’t definitively prove causation from correlation, but the lack of any curiosity from the medical community or the government is appalling, especially when the mechanism of action of the spike protein can logically cause these complications (including low sperm count and motility). We have now entered a new era of “speed of science” in which governments can foist novel products upon our bodies with multiple glaring and blaring safety signals setting off alarm bells all over the world, yet until we can prove conclusively the therapeutics are responsible for 100% of the anomaly, they will continue to be promoted. That is completely backward and represents a flagrant violation of the Nuremberg Code.

In a sane world, the makers of these therapies would be behind bars, but instead they are getting a promotion to concoct even more products with this same dangerous technology. Last week, the U.K. announced the formation of a 10-year partnership with Moderna to invest in more R&D for mRNA technology and to build a vaccine manufacturing center that can produce 250 million vaccines a year, particularly for the very problematic RSV shot the company is planning to release next year. In the irony of all ironies, the U.K.’s Health Security Agency will be overseeing this partnership. The UKHSA was the first health surveillance body in the world that published comprehensive weekly COVID updates showing negative efficacy of the shots almost a year and a half ago.

Typically, failure of a corporate partner is an impetus for a government to break the partnership. In the case of vaccines, however, the more they fail, the more they are elevated, subsidized, and even mandated. Unless their definition of failure is the opposite of how humanity would define it.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Gays, You’re Not Black

 December 14, 2022 by Ann Coulter


Gays, You’re Not Black

   For at least a half-century now, every special pleader in America has made the following argument: Yeah, but what if we were black?

     This is supposed to be rhetorical kryptonite, capable of anathematizing “discrimination” against any group: atheists, women, gays, immigrants, illegal immigrants, the disabled, Muslims — basically anyone except a fully abled, cis-gendered, white male born in this country.

Oh my gosh! You’re right — we DO have to let girls try out for the Green Bay Packers!

     OK, fine, we’ll hire more blind lifeguards.

Of course, Shadi Abdullah is welcome to be president of our campus Hillel group.

Naturally, the “What if they were black?” argument came up ad nauseum at the Supreme Court last week during oral arguments over Colorado’s “anti-discrimination” law. According to Colorado, making two gay guys who are married to one another feel “unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable or undesirable” is the equivalent of separate water fountains for black people.

A web designer had petitioned the court, objecting to the law’s requirement that she design a website celebrating a gay marriage, in contravention of her religious beliefs. But if you’d heard only the questions from Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, you’d think the petitioner was refusing to design websites for black people.


JUSTICE JACKSON: “[C]an I ask you a hypothetical … [What if] they want to have a sign next to the [shopping mall] Santa that says, ‘only white children.’ Why isn’t your argument that they should be able to do that?” [The hypothetical went on for hours, but that was the gist of it.]

These were a few of Justice Sotomayor’s questions:

— “What’s the difference between that and ‘I don’t believe black people and white people should get married’?”

— “Tell me how that’s different, by the way. What you’re basically saying is, in our Ollie’s Barbecue case, the company there said, ‘I’ll serve blacks but only on a takeout window, not inside my restaurant because that sends a message that I endorse integration ….’”

— “Well, when I sit down to eat a meal by a full chef who creates this beautiful picture on a plate, why can’t he say, ‘I make specialized meals for my clients. I will not serve a black person.’”

Here’s a cheat sheet that should help answer the justices’ questions:

Can I refuse to let black kids sit on Santa’s lap? — NO.

Can I refuse to serve black people at my restaurant? — NO.

Can I refuse to bake one of my wedding cakes for black people? — NO.

Can I refuse to write speeches for black people? — NO.

Can I refuse to perform marriage ceremonies for black people — NO.

Can I refuse to let black people into the Marines? — NO.

Can I discriminate against black people for any reason, ever? — NO.

Displaying his own unique approach, Eric Olson, Colorado’s solicitor general, who was defending the law (popular name: “We Won the Right to Gay Marriage and Now We’re Shooting the Wounded”), made this pioneering argument: “What [a business] can’t do is say, ‘I reserve the right to refuse service, which means in practice I will not serve black people.’”

A good rule of thumb is that any claim of discrimination that requires a comparison to black people is sophistry.

No offense — I’m sure the rest of you have really moving tales of woe, full of pathos and suffering. But gays, atheists, disabled people, women (whatever the hell that is), immigrants, illegals, please try to remember: YOU’RE NOT BLACK.

It’s discrimination on the basis of race — and only discrimination on the basis of race — that is forbidden by our Constitution. Other forms of “discrimination” may be stupid (if so, the market will punish you) or blindingly logical (football teams allowing only healthy young men to try out, or religious groups limiting officeholders to practitioners of the religion).

Only one type of discrimination ever stirred up such mass revulsion in this country that we decided to amend our Constitution to prohibit it: race discrimination.

You’d think that at a moment when our entire national dialogue is fixated on the legacy of slavery, it wouldn’t be so difficult for people to grasp that black Americans’ unique history is not amenable to cut-and-paste victimhood.

To make up for slavery and Jim Crow, we abrogated constitutional provisions about freedom of association, freedom of contract and freedom of speech. We tossed out basic rules of fairness to allow (temporarily) affirmative action, set-asides and quotas. Behemoth departments were created in Washington to stamp out the last vestiges of discrimination on the basis of race.

By now, of course, the only discrimination involving black Americans is in their favor. But that doesn’t change the rule: NO DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF RACE.

As G.K. Chesterton said, “When you break the big laws, you do not get freedom, you do not even get anarchy. You get the small laws.”

That’s what “discrimination” law is today. Instead of one big law: “No Race Discrimination!” we have a million little laws about strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, rational basis test, public accommodations, bona fide occupational qualifications, and on and on and on. At the same time, we have open race discrimination against whites and Asians.

Unless you’re alleging race discrimination, take your lumps like a cis-gendered white man. You can be fired, not hired, turned away, rejected, called names, disciplined, looked askance at — and no one cares.  

This simple rule allows us to live in what we call “freedom.” As the libertarians would say (if they were real libertarians), start your own website business, bakery, Hillel organization, professional football team, holiday, all-women’s eating club, etc. etc. etc.

Gays, you’re not black. (And you’re not Allan Bakke.) Gays’ median household income is about $115,000 — the highest of any group in America. It’s $45,000 for black people. To my gay readers, answer this honestly: When you move into a neighborhood, do home prices go up or down?

Blacks must be looking at gay rights activists in bewilderment, thinking: Why couldn’t we be oppressed like that?

For the rest of you, memorize this, recite it in the shower, write it on your hand: “Unless I’m being discriminated against on the basis of my race, I will stop being a pain in everyone’s ass.”


Carl R. Trueman Op-ed: Identity politics on the right

Carl R. Trueman, Voices Contributor | Friday, December 16, 2022


A visitor watches the work of US artist Wardell Milan, “Amerika: Klansman, David” (2019), representing a deconstructed face with a KKK hood, during a preview on December 4, 2019, ahead of the opening the following day of the Art Basel international fair that takes place annually in Miami Beach the first week of December. – Climate change, pollution, racial issues and social commentary are some of the issues addressed by hundreds of artists showcased in Art Basel by more than 200 galleries from all over the world. | AFP via Getty Images/Leila Macor

The recent controversy surrounding Thomas Achord, a classical Christian school headmaster exposed for running a white supremacist Twitter account, has proved instructive on a number of fronts. It demonstrates that real racism and white supremacy do exist, a point that the grade inflation to which these terms have been subjected by the professional anti-racists of the last few years has served only to obscure. We must not allow the trivialization of racism to blind us to the places where it actually is. It is also a reminder that a radical right that cannot effectively operate a pseudonymous Twitter account is unlikely to be seizing control of America by force any time soon.

The views Achord and his Twitter cronies expressed were vile; their impotent online posturing unintentionally comedic. And then there was the personal abuse to which Alastair Roberts, the man who exposed the situation, was subjected by professing Christians — a reminder that for some Protestants, all Scripture is inspired and perspicuous, but some parts (e.g., the imprecatory bits) are apparently more inspired and perspicuous than others (e.g., the references to kind words deflecting wrath, turning the other cheek, observing the Ninth Commandment, and those pesky sections on not insulting brothers in the faith). 

Beyond the bluster, though, two other issues struck me as noteworthy. First, it is clear that identity politics has a home on the reactionary right just as it does on the progressive left. This is no real surprise: In a world where everything has become politicized, such a scenario was bound to come to pass. The danger for Christians is that the apparent polarizing of society makes the stakes of political debates seem extremely high. In such a situation, extreme positions become attractive, even irresistible. As otherwise ordinary Christians see the country slipping away from them and into the hands of those whose culture war seems to have no moral limits, there is a temptation to repay like with like and to become the mirror image of the other side. This has to be resisted. And that resistance has to start in the pulpit, where the tone and direction are set for Christians in the pews. 

Some may resist and argue that this is to bring politics into the pulpit. Unfortunately, in a world where everything is political, everything said in the pulpit is already political to some degree. And as we live in a world where the central contested political questions of our time all connect to the question of what it means to be human, then everything has to be political at some level. Now, this is not to say that preaching should be party-political, nor that its primary focus should be this world rather than the next. But it is to say that, after the commandment to love God, the commandment to love one’s neighbor is next in order of importance. And loving one’s neighbor — knowing how to live in the polis — is political. Thus, if there is in Christ no Jew or Gentile, then the racism of the right and of the left has no place in the Church. 

The second issue that the Achord controversy touched to some extent is that of Christian nationalism. The term itself seems rather slippery, covering everything from hard-right racism to what many of us would simply have regarded as old-fashioned patriotism. In this context, a recent essay by Brad Littlejohn is a most welcome and helpful intervention. Until there is a stable and agreed-upon definition, “Christian nationalism” seems likely to function for the left as “cultural Marxism” does for the right: a convenient pejorative for discrediting that person just to the right — or the left — of what you yourself find acceptable.  

Here it might be useful for Christians of all sides to rehabilitate the term “patriotism.” Unlike many Americans, it seems, I (along with thousands of other immigrants and aspiring immigrants) actually think America is on the whole a basically good country and one that her citizens should love. There is nothing wrong with that, because love for one’s country does not logically entail that one must despise and look down on all others. Christian patriotism avoids that. Take marriage as an analogy. If a husband declares his wife to be the most beautiful woman in the world, he is not saying that every other woman is ugly. What he is actually doing is expressing his special love for her and his deep gratitude for the joyful companionship she brings to his life. To love one’s country, to be patriotic, is thus not to sneer at every other nation or to look with scorn upon other peoples. It is simply the appropriate response of gratitude and love for the place where one belongs, that gives one an identity, that provides one with community and with purpose. Seen in that light, to be unpatriotic or to espouse chauvinistic nationalism are both morally wrong. 

The tawdry Achord affair has revealed an ugly side to a certain part of the American Christian world. Real white supremacy really exists and is a real sin. It requires real action and real repentance from those Christians who espouse it. But in reacting to this, we need to be careful not to fall into the sin of ingratitude for other things — such as the country, warts and all, that we call home. 

Originally published at First Things. 

Carl R. Trueman is a professor of biblical and religious studies at Grove City College. He is an esteemed church historian and previously served as the William E. Simon Fellow in Religion and Public Life at Princeton University. Trueman has authored or edited more than a dozen books, including The Rise and Triumpth of the Modern SelfThe Creedal Imperative, Luther on the Christian Life, and Histories and Fallacies.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Leech Dismount

Ann Coulter | Nov 16, 2022


The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of, and

AP Photo/Tom E. Puskar

Trump’s been called a lot of things in recent years, but I’m going to call him something new.

First, a refresher. In 2015, the Republican Party was on life support, with a “Do Not Resuscitate” order pinned to its chest and a priest called to administer last rites. Voters kept telling the party they wanted less immigration, less tax-cutting and less warmongering, but the GOP kept giving us more immigration, more tax-cutting and more warmongering. (For a detailed account of this state of affairs, see my columns and books — they make great Christmas gifts — free shipping for Amazon Prime members!)

Only when all other treatments had failed did we turn to an ancient medical treatment: the leech.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Donald J. Trump. There was no greater leech in all the land!

No insult intended. Leeching is a time-honored medical tradition, dating back to the Stone Age, for every conceivable ailment — an overabundance of peccant humors, convulsions, flatulence, scarlet fever, pleurisy, inflamed eyes and diseases of the throat, to name a few. Even today, leeches are the best treatment, as I understand it, for certain anticoagulant purposes. But because they are worms and bloodsuckers, not all patients find the treatment especially tasteful.

Trump was our parasitic worm.

Though any doctor will tell you leeching rarely works, the next time you hear someone say we didn’t get anything from Trump, I respectfully suggest you reply: “I’ve got five words for you: Gorsuch. Kavanaugh. Coney F—ing Barrett.”

True, the only reason we got them is that neither Jared Kushner nor Kim Kardashian had any interest in the judiciary, so the Federalist Society picked Trump’s judges without interference. Albeit completely by accident, the leech still gave us a generation of solid Supreme Court justices. If that sounds like cold comfort, please recall that we just lost the Senate, and barely won the House by the skin of our teeth.

Moreover, without our leech, we would currently either be in Year Six of the Hillary administration, or Year Six of Jeb!’s presidency (who would have given us justices equal in stature to Harriet Miers and David Souter).

But you don’t leave the leech on the body forever. In leechery, once the parasite has served its purpose, it must be carefully removed and submerged in a solution of 70% alcohol to ensure that it is dead. (A common but incorrect method of performing the dismount is to set the leech on fire.)

Naturally, I am not suggesting we burn Trump or submerge him in a 70% alcohol solution.

If we’re coming up with a master list of possibilities after a few drinks, we might consider a traditional game of our dear Afghan allies, who play polo using a severed human head as the ball.

I submit it would be bad for the office for Trump’s head to be used in a polo match.

Another idea to come from our perpetual wars is to model the dismount on the de-Ba’athification after Saddam. This workable, but harsh, method would require sending troops to rout Trump from whatever underground bunker he’s hiding in.

I have to reject that, too, for reasons of dignity.

But the one method that I am absolutely, positively, 100% sure will not work is to attack Trump supporters as deplorable, white supremacist insurrectionists.

You will notice that this is the precise method settled on by Biden, the Democrats and the media, for utterly cynical reasons. At this stage, Trump is poisonous to the conservative agenda, so he and the media have exactly the same agenda: Promote Trump.

Liberals want Trump more than we ever did.

Leeching as a medical treatment is not based on the leech’s inherent nobility. Trump was a desperation move.

Our idea was that Trump, for narcissistic reasons, would occasionally do things that we wanted. That was more than we were getting from the Republican Party. I defy anyone to name any of the other 16 GOP presidential candidates who could have beaten Hillary.

We hadn’t planned to get to that point, but there’s no use arguing with the GPS. That’s where we were.

The people who gave Trump more primary votes than any Republican in history weren’t idiots, haters or racists. To the contrary, anyone who withstood the slings and arrows to make Trump president in 2016 is not deplorable, but honorable. Not duped, but clear-eyed. They didn’t screw up; they did the right thing.

It may take some of them a little longer to figure out that we’ve gotten everything out of the leech that we’re ever going to get. But they are good and decent people and will realize soon enough: It’s over. We got our parasitic worm, and it’s time to move on. Sometimes the worm turns; sometimes we turn on the worm.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Warning! Crime Deniers on the Ballot in All 50 States!

Ann Coulter | Nov 02, 2022


The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of, and

AP Photo/Matt Rourke

Next Tuesday, voters, please remember that Democrats will never run out of excuses for criminals. They drone on about “racism,” “root causes,” “poverty,” “drug addiction,” “his gun dropped,” “mental illness,” “learning disabilities,” “he made a mistake” and “prison doesn’t work”!

It’s not the government’s job to probe criminals’ psyches. These are predators, monsters, feral beasts attacking civilization, with no regard for your property, bodily integrity or life. The government’s only job is to keep them away from us, not to ensure that they have fulfilling lives.

At the New York gubernatorial debate last week, feisty Republican challenger Rep. Lee Zeldin hit Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, hard on the crime wave engulfing New York. Finally, he said, “We’re halfway through the debate, she still hasn’t talked about locking up anyone committing any crimes.”

In a city where citizens are afraid to leave their homes because of crime, Hochul’s blithe response made headlines. She said: “I don’t know why that’s so important to you.”

Her unfathomably out-of-touch reply was so infuriating, viewers might have missed the first part of her answer: “Anyone who commits a crime under our laws, especially with the change we made to bail, has consequences.”

“Has consequences.” Take note, New Yorkers! She did not say, “will go to jail” or “will be prosecuted” or “will be removed from the streets for the welfare of society.”

“Has consequences” is progressive code for “restorative justice.” In lieu of actual punishment, the criminal will be required to write a letter to the victim, hug it out or attend a family “mediation.” Thus, if a pack of teenagers beat the crap out of your kid at school, he will be forced to sit down with his attackers so they can tell him, Hey, sorry, man, we thought you dissed us.

One of the major drivers of New York’s unprecedented increase in crime is the “no bail” law — meaning “no jail.” The same predators are arrested over and over again but can never be put in jail, thanks to the Democrats.

Apart from their overriding objective of keeping “black bodies” out of jail — as opposed to, say, protecting the white and black bodies of their victims — the Democrats’ argument for never jailing arrestees is that bail “discriminates” against the poor, who can’t afford to pay. First, show me the rich person mugging New Yorkers or shoving commuters in front of subway trains.

Second, we’re lucky when we can even catch one of these monsters. And, if caught, the vast majority of guilty criminals will never spend a day in prison. Only about 30% of those arrested for a violent crime go to prison — and those were the statistics before Soros-backed district attorneys started releasing criminals all over the country. Those were the statistics before the racial reckoning.

Another fantastic Democratic idea for reducing crime is to deploy “violence interrupters,” i.e. otherwise difficult-to-employ ex-cons who get a nice social work job from the city. Or to fund endless “mental health” services, the sole purpose of which is to create more useless government jobs for Victim Studies majors from Bard College.

Look, if some idiot wants to counsel rapists and muggers in prison — fantastic! They can volunteer. But the counseling needs to take place behind prison walls, where their clients belong.

Though I think it’s kind of important to mention that there is no evidence that “mental health” counseling has ever worked. The New York Times admitted as much in an uncharacteristic burst of honesty in 1983: “Dozens of studies … have found that rehabilitation programs in prison have failed, that there is no reliable way of telling whether a prisoner has reformed and that many released early commit new crimes.”

No matter what they call it, liberals have been pushing their anything-but-prison plans forever.

Here are some Times headlines from as far back as the 1980s:

  • 1982: “According to a recent Rand Corporation study, [putting fewer criminals in prison] could reduce both the prison population and the crime rate.”
  • 1987: “After years of increased sentences, and an extraordinary drain on our state’s treasury, we need to acknowledge that longer sentences do not deter most crime.”
  • 1988: “An Answer to Jails Is Reading”
  • 1989: “Prison Can Be a Dumb Solution”
  • 1991: “Alternative to Prison Mends Fences and Lives”

Note that it wasn’t until 1994, and the election of Rudolph Giuliani, that crime actually, for the first time, went down. (Giuliani did not follow the Times’ advice.)

And leaping ahead to the present, here is the Times in 2020: “Can Prosecutors Be Taught To Avoid Jail Sentences?”

(I couldn’t help but notice that every one of the writers above was a female. So the good news is, we have no shortage of prison volunteers!)

“Alternatives to prison” never have worked, never will work, and liberals don’t care that they don’t work. They just don’t want criminals in prison.

This is a parlor game of one-upmanship for Democrats:

I’m the most compassionate!

No, I am!

Look — the object of my compassion is way worse than yours! He’s a rapist and a murderer!

The purpose of the criminal justice system is to lock up bad guys, not to allow liberals to feel good about themselves. (Least of all is it to ensure that all ethnicities are incarcerated at the exact same percentages.)

In fact, now that I think about it, separating criminals from the law-abiding is the government’s most basic responsibility. It’s also the only government program where liberals suddenly become hard-nosed fiscal conservatives. In just this one case, we get detailed breakdowns of the cost of prison. How much do the public schools cost? How about the cost of subsidized housing for able-bodied (but nonworking) Americans? How about food stamps? How about the endless layers of “social workers”?

Democrats can’t change and won’t change — they can only be defeated at the polls. (Even that’s only a start.) If you ever want to leave your home again, without fear of your body or property being violated, vote Republican on Nov. 8.

Michael Brown Op-ed: The Left is also guilty of marrying politics with the Gospel

By Michael Brown, CP Op-Ed Contributor| Thursday, October 27, 2022


Senator Raphael G. Warnock attends the 2022 King Holiday Observance Beloved Community Commemorative Service at Ebenezer Baptist Church on Jan. 17, 2022, in Atlanta, Georgia. | Getty Images/Paras Griffin

As we approach the 2022 midterms, and even more as we approach the 2024 presidential elections, Christian conservatives who are politically active will be accused of marrying the Gospel with politics. “Have you not heard of the separation of Church and State?” our critics will ask.

But that sword cuts both ways. the Left is also guilty of this very thing, to the point of celebrating the marriage of politics with the Gospel.

To be clear, I believe that it is very dangerous to conflate the Gospel with politics as if the goals of both were identical.

I have addressed this concern in many relevant articles as well as in my recent book The Political Seduction of the Church.

Of course, I believe that our faith should inform our politics and we should be politically involved. I consider this part of our sacred stewardship in a country like America, as long as we don’t confuse the Gospel with politics.

But, to repeat, it is just not the Right that is guilty of blurring these lines. The Left most certainly is, and even more blatantly.

Here’s an example from the past and an example from the present that underscores my point.

In 1988, both Pat Robertson and Jesse Jackson ran for president.

Speaking about Robertson, the website noted that in the 1980s he “became increasingly involved in politics, and he subsequently resigned as minister in order to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 1988.”

So, he was no longer “Rev. Pat Robertson,” but just Pat Robertson. This way, there would be no blurring of the lines between his beliefs as a minister of the Gospel and his political agenda. He was here to serve all Americans as a potential president, not simply preach the Gospel as a minister.

In stark contrast, to this day, Jesse Jackson is known as “the Rev. Jesse Jackson.” The Left has no problem with blurring the lines between Church and State, as long as it’s for their causes. Being a reverend and a politician is great, as long as you are on the Left.

Consequently, when a Republican candidate who is also a Christian speaks up for the unborn or points back to some of our founding, Christian values, he or she is accused of being a dangerous Christian nationalist. “You are a Christian dominionistic trying to take over our country! How dare you try to impose a theocracy on us.”

But when a gay clergyman supports a Democratic candidate or cause, he or she is hailed as a pioneer, a reformer, someone who exemplifies the true American spirit.

The double standard is glaring.

If you think I’m exaggerating, consider the current Senate race in Georgia.

The Republican candidate is Herschel Walker, a football legend and a Christian conservative.

As stated on the website,

“As a Christian, a father, and a husband, Herschel knows that strong families are the bedrock of our country. Herschel’s upbringing in rural Georgia instilled a personal faith in God, which he carries with him to this day. He prays every day for this country, and with God’s help will bring those values with him to Washington. Herschel is a compassionate conservative who is pro-life and pro-family.”

Not surprisingly, critics group Walker with dangerous Christian nationalists.

Walker is running to unseat Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock, whose Twitter handle is @ReverendWarnock. (His full name is listed on Twitter as Reverend Raphael Warnock.)

Yet Rev. Warnock is proudly pro-abortion to the point of claiming that his pro-choice views are “consistent with my view as a minister.”

And Rev. Warnock, who is the senior pastor of Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church, said this in an editorial posted on the flagship gay website in October 2020: 

“Some might find it strange that a pastor would submit himself to the business of politics, and I would agree. But this fight, this campaign, is a continuation of my lifelong commitment to service. Our votes are sacred, living prayers of action for the kind of world we want to live in. In November, it’s on all of us to make it known that we support the protection of LGBTQ people and to help build a better nation where all Americans can without fear of retribution be themselves authentically.”

So, not only does Warnock link together his calling to be a pastor and his calling to be a politician, but he also champions LGBTQ+ causes in the name of being a pastor.

Yet it is Walker who is maligned by the Left as blurring the lines between Church and State and Warnock who is hailed as both a political and spiritual hero.

To drive the point home a little more, can you imagine how hysterical the reaction from the Left would be if a conservative Christian pastor ran for national office, as a pastor? He would be branded as one of the most dangerous men in the country, surely an insurrectionist and white supremacist (whatever the color of his own skin) with plans to establish a theocracy.

But a “progressive,” left-leaning pastor? He should be celebrated.

This looks like a classic example of “rules for thee but not for me.”

In this case, the Left says to the Right, “Keep your religion out of your politics!”

Then the Left says to its own, “We celebrate the union of religion and politics, as long as it’s our kind of religion.”

Jesus addressed this long ago, telling His disciples, “If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.” (John 15:19)

No wonder the world is threatened by our faith but embraces the faith of the Left.

That’s because it is only a biblically based Gospel that poses a threat to the world system. A compromised Gospel is warmly welcomed by the world for the very reason that it is no longer the Gospel at all.

Dr. Michael Brown( is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program. His latest book is Revival Or We Die: A Great Awakening Is Our Only Hope. Connect with him on FacebookTwitter, or YouTube.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Why a Red Wave Is Suddenly Possible

Ann Coulter | Oct 19, 2022 |

Read more at    

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of, and

After months of warning you about the GOP’s chronic overconfidence problem, now I’m feeling overconfident! Inasmuch as I will be giving a speech at my alma mater, Cornell University, the day after the election, I’m about to do something very stupid: make an election prediction.

My reasoning is, here we are, three weeks from the election, and this week, two major polls, Harvard Harris and Times Sienna, suddenly show Republicans gaining ground. This triggered a primordial memory from the 1980 election, the first presidential race I paid attention to.

That’s when I discovered the iron rule of election polls: They will never, ever be wrong in favor of Republicans. Another is that polls will generally show the Democrat winning until the election gets close — and the media finally start telling the truth.

Thus, for example, after being hectored for most of 1980 that Ronald Reagan was headed for another Goldwater-style fiasco, here’s the sort of thing a teenager would have read in The New York Times weeks before he won a landslide victory against President Jimmy Carter, taking 489 electoral college votes to Carter’s 49.

— Sept. 15, 1980: “Reagan and Carter Even In Washington Post Poll”

— Sept. 21, 1980 “Allowing for the margin of error, the polls indicate a virtual dead heat between Mr. Carter and Mr. Reagan”

— Oct. 23, 1980: “Poll Shows President Has Pulled To Even Position With Reagan”

In mid-September, the Times’ Anthony Lewis painted a vivid picture of Reagan’s coming annihilation, citing a bunch of state polls:

— “A recent New York Times poll of registered likely voters [in New York] showed Carter leading Reagan, 44 to 38.”


— In Washington state, “a poll for the Carter campaign put the president ahead by 3 points against Reagan.”


— In Illinois, a “poll for Carter’s campaign put him ahead by 5 points.”


— In Connecticut, a “Hartford Courant poll showed: Reagan 36, Carter 35.”


A month later, the Times produced yet more polls of gloom:

— Oct. 9, 1980 headline: “Texas Looming As A Close Battle Between President And Reagan”


— Oct. 16, 1980, headline: “Ohio Race Expected To Be Close As Labor Mobilizes For President”


And then Reagan won more electoral college votes than any non-incumbent in history. You’d think the polls would have picked up on the fact that history was about to be made. Nope!

This is not just an enjoyable stroll down memory lane, though it is that. It is to remind Republican-leaning voters, even in seemingly blue strongholds like New York, Oregon and Washington, to please vote. Because, win or lose, one thing polls will never do is overestimate a Republican’s chances.


— Sept. 23, Roper Poll: Carter leads Gerald Ford 46%-29%.

ACTUAL RESULT: Jimmy Carter won by 2 percentage points.


— Oct. 15, The New York Daily News poll: Reagan 45%; Walter Mondale 41%.

ACTUAL RESULT: Reagan beat Mondale by nearly 20 points, 58.8% to 40%.


— Oct. 5, New York Times/CBS News Poll: George H.W. Bush 45%; Michael Dukakis 43%.

ACTUAL RESULT: Bush 53.4%; Dukakis 45.6%.


Oct. 18, Newsweek poll: Bill Clinton 46%; GHW Bush 31%

ACTUAL RESULT: Clinton: 43%; GHW Bush: 37.7%


— Oct. 22, The New York Times/CBS News Poll: Clinton 55%; Bob Dole 33%.

ACTUAL RESULT: Clinton 49%; Dole 40%.


— Oct. 3, The New York Times/CBS News Poll: Al Gore 45%; George W. Bush 39%.

ACTUAL RESULT: Bush 47.9%; Gore 48.4%.

For some mysterious reason, election polls were pretty accurate in the 2004, 2008 and 2012 elections. Perhaps pollsters had gotten better. Maybe they noticed that people sometimes do look back at their forecasts. Or it could be that Republicans were running such losers those years that it would be nearly impossible for anyone to underestimate their performance.

But, boy, did the pollsters make up for any inadvertent honesty when Donald Trump ran in 2016!

The Times had the best pollsters in the business and sophisticated computer modeling. Based on their high-tech number-crunching, on Oct. 18, the paper reported: “Hillary has a 91% chance to win.” On Election Day, the forecasters were a little less exuberant, announcing that Hillary had a mere 85% chance of winning. A Trump victory, the Times said, was as likely as “an NFL kicker miss[ing] a 37-yard field goal.”

We know how that turned out.

On Election Day 2020, Times’s forecasters exulted that Joe Biden was ahead “by more than 8 points nationwide — the largest lead a candidate has held in the final polls since Bill Clinton in 1996.”

He won by 4 points.

Maybe it’s not a wild and reckless prediction, but the news this week suggests that the media are slowly edging up to the truth, and that Republicans could be on track to well outperform the polls.

This would be a good year for it. The Senate map, combined with five GOPs retiring, make 2022 a tough year for Republicans, who are defending seats in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida and North Carolina, and trying to flip at least one state out of Nevada, Arizona and Georgia for a bare majority.

But Republicans winning requires that voters not be discouraged by the polls and remember to vote, even when the media tell you it’s hopeless, like in New York, Arizona and Pennsylvania.

Mostly, I just want to wake up the morning after the election and find out Dr. Mehmet Oz has won in Pennsylvania and defeated that slovenly, goatee-sporting Michael Moore-wannabe, John Fetterman, who is passionate about only two things: not bathing and releasing vicious murderers. And that Lee Zeldin has beaten the demented, “release all the criminals!” New York governor, Kathy Hochul, with the crazy “What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?” makeup.

Then, the world will make sense again.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: For More Crime, Vote Democrat!

Ann Coulter | Oct 12, 2022


The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of, and What

AP Photo/Matt Rourke

New York Mayor Eric Adams would have been the Democrats’ runaway choice for president if only he’d kept his campaign promise and cut crime in the Big Apple. No mayoral candidate talked about “safety, safety, safety” more than he. As Adams told MSNBC during the campaign:

“Public safety and justice is the prerequisite to prosperity. And I think that we have become too symbolic, instead of realistic, on how you keep cities safe. And it’s time for the Democratic Party to understand this. America wants to be safe. And we can do it with justice at the same time.”

If a black mayor had saved New York City, no one could have beaten him. Not only that, but Adams has a black deputy mayor for public safety (Phil Banks), a black police commissioner (Keechant L. Sewell) and a black district attorney (Alvin Bragg).

As conservatives never tire of pointing out, murder victims are overwhelmingly black (as are murder perpetrators, but let’s not mention that). In a world that has only recently discovered that “Black Lives Matter,” wouldn’t an all-black law enforcement team come down like a sledgehammer on crime?

Adams wasn’t setting some pie-in-the-sky, impossible goal for himself. You don’t have to go back to the 1950s to conceive of a safe New York. Just think back to about five years ago. New Yorkers lived in a virtually crime-free city for 20 years under mayors Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg.

In fact, those mayors made the city so safe, even communist Mayor Bill de Blasio couldn’t wreck it overnight. It took a virus from China (which apparently required that criminals be released, but citizens be locked up) and a fentanyl addict dying in Minneapolis for him to spring the criminals it had taken Giuliani and Bloomberg 20 years to catch.

The point is: You can’t fool New Yorkers anymore. They know it’s possible to keep violent psychos off the street.

Just not by a Democrat.

The problem is, no Democrat can support any policy that would reduce crime because, unfortunately, that would simply not be possible without putting more “black bodies” in prison.


The Democratic Party treats black criminals as sacred beings, much like the temple in India where they worship rats.

Recall that when Bloomberg ran for president in 2020, he had to apologize for policies that reduced murders from 600 a year to an astounding 300 a year — in a city where more than 60% of murder victims are black, and nearly 90% are black or Hispanic.

Apology not accepted!

Yes, perhaps vastly more black lives would “matter” in the sense of continuing to exist. But more “black bodies” would be subjected to stop-and-frisk by the police. Obviously, that’s a no-go. Unpack your invisible backpack, white supremacist!

Liberals love to boast about New York’s murder rate going up at a less astronomical clip than other crimes. Well, yeah — criminals are notoriously poor marksmen. They are approximately as likely to hit small children and elderly bystanders as their intended target. Congratulations, New York!

On the other hand, shootings in the city have gone from about 900 a year in 2018 to nearly 2,000 a year, according to The New York Times.

It turns out Adams is the Democrats’ Donald Trump: All talk, no action.

There were hints that Adams wasn’t going to get the job done when, earlier this year, Politico reported he was meeting with crime experts Al Sharpton and Joe Biden. He proudly noted that he’d recently thanked a group of police officers … for letting a perp get away. (At least no black bodies were hurt!) He even suggested that a video of the escaping suspect be screened for officers to show them how it’s done.

Commenting on the episode, Adams said, “You have to inspect what you expect or it’s suspect.” Doggerel from elected officials often precedes a collapse in crime rates.

Apart from encouraging cops not to do their jobs, Adams’ main anti-crime initiative has been to slap “Gun Free Zone” signs around Times Square.

So how’s it going? In addition to the shootings, since Adams has been mayor, forcible rape is up 63%, grand larceny 38%, robberies 24%, car theft 25% and major felonies in the transit system 51%.

Every single day, there’s a new mind-blowing crime in New York.

Here are a few vignettes from Life in the Big City: On Tuesday this week, a 19-year-old public school teacher’s assistant in Brooklyn was shot in the head outside his school in the middle of the day. Last Thursday, three New Yorkers were stabbed on the subway within seven hours, one fatally. The previous Saturday night, nine (extremely body-positive) women dressed from head to toe in neon green bodysuits boarded the subway at Times Square and proceeded to pummel and rob a couple of 19-year-old girls. Days earlier, a random psycho stabbed an EMS worker to death in a frenzied attack in broad daylight outside a Queens deli.

The bad news for New York is that unless Lee Zeldin is elected governor this November, there is no hope. Things will continue to spiral downward into a dystopian horror. The good news for the country is that at this stage, it looks like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis isn’t even going to have to campaign to be our next president.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Venezuela’s Welfare Has Run Out. Now They Want Ours

Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 28, 2022

Read more at—p–n2613737/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of, and

Venezuela's Welfare Has Run Out. Now They Want Ours

Source: AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos

The massive news coverage of Gov. Ron DeSantis’ “political stunt” of sending 50 illegal aliens to Martha’s Vineyard reminds me of the media’s “political stunt” of referring to illegals as “legal asylum-seekers.”

Number one: They broke into our country. They’re illegal aliens. Number two: All asylum claims are frauds. Every single one.

Asylum is nothing but a conveyer belt to bring the worst people on Earth to our shores. You say you turned your own country into a hellhole? Fantastic! Come right in!

No one gets asylum from a well-run country. Why would we want to admit people who have demonstrated the wisdom, foresight and diligence to produce a functioning society? Rewards await only those who’ve participated in the creation of complete disaster zones. (Just think of what these great thinkers could do for our country!)

Take the Venezuelan illegal aliens whom DeSantis sent to Martha’s Vineyard. Biden’s press secretary and human kewpie doll, Karine Jean-Pierre, repeatedly referred to the briefly loved illegals as “people who are fleeing communism, who are fleeing hardship … desperate people — people who are trying to come here because they’re fleeing communism themselves.”

How did Venezuela become communist again?

As The Martha’s Vineyard Times explained (once the illegals were safely expelled and the island fumigated), Venezuela’s “humanitarian crisis” resulted from that country’s “complicated political and socioeconomic history.”

Actually, it’s not that complicated. Poor people in Venezuela voted for it. Oh boy, did they vote for it.

The ridiculous peasant Hugo Chavez promised Venezuela’s poor that he would take vengeance on the rich — “the squalid ones” — and give their stuff to the poor. Millions of poor people responded: YESSSSS!!!

Beginning in 1998, and five times after that, the poor came out in droves to support this clown. Fist pumping! Dancing in the streets! Red shirts as far as the eye could see!

As The New York Times described it, “To the adoring, impoverished masses who catapulted him to power, Hugo Chavez Frias is El Comandante, their protector and benefactor, the bold leader who will wipe out 40 years of inequality and corruption and redirect this country’s enormous oil wealth to better their lives.”

Chavez basically promised to deliver the Ta-Nehisi Coates “equity” agenda that’s so popular with the Democratic Party right now. The poor believed the rich were rich because they had stolen from the poor. Chavez vowed to take it back. It was sort of a 1619 Project for Venezuela.

As promised, Chavez proceeded to seize private businesses, farms (by 2011, he’d expropriated 6 million acres of farmland) and golf resorts, telling poor people to move onto the club greens.

Anybody want asylum yet? Nope!

Between 1998 and Chavez’s death in 2013 — whereupon he was promptly replaced with his handpicked successor, President Nicolas Maduro — Venezuela’s poor voted for him over and over and over again: in 1998 (80% public approval rating his first year in office), in 2000 (winning 60% of the vote), in 2004 (59% against recalling him), in 2006 (winning 63% of the vote), in 2009 (54% voted to make him president for life) and finally in 2012 (winning 55% of the vote).

Never has any public been polled more often and returned the same resounding answer.

Well, they’re not fist-pumping anymore. Instead, Venezuela’s poor are claiming they “deserve” to access America’s generous welfare state.

Twenty years of Chavez’s Diversity, Inclusion and Equity (DIE!) produced this: “a country whose economy has collapsed … malnutrition and disease are soaring [and m]illions have emigrated to escape the grind of finding enough to eat, of living without reliable electricity or tap water,” as Bloomberg News put it in 2019.

Venezuela is sitting on the largest oil reserves in the world, and the communists still couldn’t get it to work.

Who could have seen that coming??? Oh, anyone with two functioning brain cells. There were little hints, like Chavez promising his very first year in office “to follow the path of Fidel,” and describing Cuba as “a sea of happiness, social justice and true peace.”

Millions of Venezuela’s poor thought that sounded just peachy, and the rest did nothing. They act as if this 100% predictable catastrophe was a natural disaster for which they bear no responsibility.

Yeah, I definitely want these people as my fellow citizens. They’ve shown solid judgment.

Now that their own choices have wrecked their country, they demand free admission into ours. Unless they’re professional baseball players, I’m not seeing what’s in it for us.

In the kewpie doll’s press conference proclaiming that these innocent little lambs “deserve better” (than being sent to a fabulous beach resort), she cheerfully listed the great heaping portions of welfare being ladled out to Hispanics:

“[O]ur administration has delivered billions of dollars in loans to Hispanic small businesses, expanded the child tax credit to provide help to millions of families and reduce Hispanic child poverty by more than 40%, expanded access to quality healthcare to thousands of Latino families … And thanks to President Biden’s student loan debt relief program, almost half of Latino students with federal loans will see their debts forgiven.”

The Democratic Party is cribbing Chavez’s lines. And it will work, because the same people who fell for it last time will be voting for it here.

To be sure, the Venezuelan “asylum-seekers” aren’t any worse than other members of that illustrious group. If (when) they are granted asylum, these poor decision-makers will join:

— Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon bombers (sometimes, they’re persecuted for a reason);

— Ibragim Todashev, who, along with Tamerlan, slit the throats of three Jewish men in Boston;

— Beatrice Munyenyezi, a genocidal Rwandan, who won asylum by lying about being a victim of the genocide, rather than a perpetrator.

Those are just a few of our standout asylum grantees. To be fair, the illegal Venezuelans haven’t killed anybody yet, as far as we know. They’re more like a homeless guy who shows up on your doorstep after a lifetime of bad choices and demands that you give him your house.

Perhaps, just this once, we should defer to the wisdom of our moral betters on Martha’s Vineyard and tell the Venezuelans: We love you! Now get the hell out.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: