• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Message from American Citizen, Lloyd Marcus!

We Must Say No to the 1619 Project in Schools

by  Lloyd Marcus  at  American Thinker:


In 1967, I was a black 18-year-old from the Baltimore ghetto who was a freshman at the prestigious Maryland Institute College of Art. Progressives are tripling-down on infecting youths with their insidiously evil lie that all American white men are racist. And yet, I was a poor black kid attending college thanks to scholarships from two white senators and white Baltimore mayor William Donald Schaefer.

A required course was, “The History of Ideas.” The first day of class, the professor passionately trashed Christianity, America, and President Abraham Lincoln. I felt like my head would explode as the professor crushed every tenet of my Christian upbringing and reasons why I loved my country.

My dad was assistant pastor of a storefront church and a Baltimore City firefighter. My mom worked as a domestic, cleaning and ironing for white people. I thought, “Surely, my professor is much more knowledgeable than my unsophisticated parents.” Yes, I was a naive idiot.

By the way, both my parents were excellent at their jobs. By their example, all five of us kids strive for excellence. “Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men.” Colossians 3:23

Fast forward to today. Far too many youths are anti-American zombies infected via public education; sleeper-cells ready to attack their parents when commanded by progressives. Remember when Michelle Obama instructed students to monitor family discussions for what progressives deemed racist and discriminatory comments? Transforming our kids into stealth operatives, progressives instructed students to steal their parents’ guns and turn them over to their teacher.

The same way we have shamefully allowed progressives to infect students with the LGBTQ agenda beginning in pre-k, white students are taught to hate themselves and their country. Outrageously, innocent white students are cruelly taught that they are born racist and must feel guilty for being white. Actress Rosanna Arquette tweeted her disgust and shame for being born white and her white privilege.

Years ago, a white friend’s son came home from middle school in tears, devastated over the evil his white male ancestors did to women, Indians, and blacks. This little boy was taught that as a white male, he was bad. Today, he is an adult Communist who hates America and believes white men are the greatest source of evil in the world. This is the dire consequent of allowing progressives to have their wicked way in public education.

Why are progressives so relentless in their quest to cause our white youths to hate themselves and their country? Succinctly, progressives hate America’s Christian founding, they hate capitalism, they hate traditional principles and values, they hate all things wholesome and good. Progressives’ ideology is evil.

President Trump is a throwback to old-school Americanism. His values reflect those of a majority of Americans. This is why progressives have tremendous disdain for Trump and his millions of supporters. Fueled by their insane hatred and delusional superiority, progressives feel morally justified to physically attack anyone who dares to publicly express support for Trump and love for America. Progressives have activated their young sleeper-cells to carry out violent attacks against Trump supporters whether they be seniors, women, or children.

Incredibly, progressives believe they can block Trump’s reelection and block other pro-America candidates in the future by launching another initiative to infect white students with hatred for themselves and America.

The New York Times, working with the Pulitzer Center,  plans to introduce a new curriculum rooted in lies to be used in schools titled, “The 1619 Project.” The Times will use every area of its newspaper to sell the absurd lie that America was really founded in 1619 when slaves landed on our shore. Therefore, every American achievement is illegitimate, cruelly built on the backs of slaves. Progressives want the 1619 Project in schools to further their insidiously evil narrative that whites should hate themselves, hate America and feel compelled to pay blacks back big-time.

As a proud and grateful American who happens to be black, I find the New York Times’ 1619 Project absurd, extremely divisive, cruel, and evil.

Slavery in America ended 152 years ago. The Times, Cory Booker, and his fellow Democrat presidential candidates claiming that blacks are still suffering the effects of slavery is demonically exploitative and manipulative. Their evil lie weakens black Americans rather than empowering them.

Blacks are only 12% of the population. Therefore, progressives are ignoring the truth that white America gave a non-vetted, undeserving, and anti-American black Barack Hussein Obama two terms as leader of the free world. Progressives ignore the truth that white America made Oprah, a stout dark-complexioned black woman a billionaire, while hanging onto her every word as if it were gospel.

Brother and sister Americans, I beseech you to please do not allow the New York Times to further infect public education with their insidiously evil lie-filled 1619 project. As they say in old western movies, “Let’s head them off at the pass!”

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American



Please, Fellow Americans, Be Aware of the Fascistic Google War Against Our American Prager U!

I missed the following note from PragerU world regarding Google’s fascistic War against conservative communications in today’s leftist “Democrat” America.   This past  Tuesday, August 27,  we 85 year olds, graduates of 1952’s St. Paul Central High Schools, met for our 14th class reunion.

In our today’s  profoundly  problematic 21st century America, one couldn’t find a more civil, civilized, well educated, polite, JudeoChristian group of  Americans to be with, even in our 82nd year of life.

That is what in our generation we were trained, programmed, educated to be, by school,  Church and Synagogue, by newsprint and radio,  by mother, barber, and baker!

Real mothers existed then.   Adults were Bible aware.   Learning goodness was vital. Movies were civil.   Actors and actresses spoke beautiful American English, governed, trained, accomplished by radio and teachers.  Despite the Depression and the War,  honesty was vital to ones soul. Truth was sought, nearly all collectively examined and taught by old maid school marms, the very, very well educated ones like the ones we had who taught us  at 1948-1952 St. Paul Central High School.  How lucky we were.

Today, fascistic Google exists selling, controlling  its pompous devotion to  leftism and arrogance.   Google is NOT alone!   It’s a virus.

To Dennis……I hate to say this,  Dennis.   I don’t think you would have had much of a need for your wonderful schooling at PragerU in 1948-1952.    You probably would have been selling knowledge at a true American University instead….

But,  our Dennis  had to go to Court last Tuesday……Please read his message below:

“Dear Friend,

PragerU will head to court tomorrow morning to fight for freedom of speech in America.

PragerU has a court date in our lawsuit against Google/YouTube scheduled for tomorrow August 27th in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The outcome of this case is critical, and it will determine whether Americans can continue to express their views freely online.

We will be sharing a live stream of the hearing on PragerU’s social media channels starting at 9:00 am PT/12:00 pm ET.  Make sure to tune in!

There is no doubt about it: Conservative values are under attack.

We are seeing an outright assault against conservatives by Big Tech. Not only are these companies using their algorithms to suppress accounts and content that present a conservative point of view, but they are also preventing millions of Americans from even seeing videos from PragerU.

Currently, over 200 of our videos are restricted by YouTube, and many others are demonetized on its platform. Even 5 of our videos on the 10 Commandments have been restricted!

Last month, Dennis Prager testified before the U.S. Senate on how Big Tech censorship is the greatest threat against free speech today. The hearing revealed how Big Tech companies have a long-running pattern of targeting conservatives.

This is why our lawsuit is so important. We are taking on the world’s two largest search engines: YouTube and Google. These two platforms control the content that billions of people see worldwide, and with that power, Google is using its platform to ban ideas and perpetuate the misinformation of the Left. We cannot — and will not — let that happen on our watch.

Can we count on your support today to help us continue to spread public awareness on this important issue? A majority of the public still trusts Google/YouTube, and with your help, we can break that trust. Please consider making a tax-deductible donation today.

Freedom of speech is one of the most fundamental human rights protected by our Constitution. If conservatives are banned from having a voice online, it is only a matter of time until the freedom of speech is eliminated entirely.

We are determined to fight for as long as needed to secure this right for all. Please make a generous donation now to help PragerU fight Big Tech bias. August is our fundraising month, and we depend on support from people like you.

Won’t you stand with PragerU today and donate to help us fight Big Tech bias?

We appreciate your support,

The PragerU Team”

King of American Creeps, ex FBI Man Comey, to Escape Jail Where He Belongs?


by John Hinderaker   at PowerLine:

The Inspector General for the Department of Justice released his report on his investigation of former FBI Director James Comey’s handling of FBI documents this morning. You can read the full report here. The report addresses the seven memos that Comey wrote on his meetings and conversations with President-Elect and President Trump, some of which he kept copies of in his home safe and gave to his personal lawyers. In one instance, he arranged for the contents of his memo to be reported by the New York Times. By his own acknowledgement, this was for the purpose of bringing about the appointment of a special counsel to investigate President Trump.

First, some excerpts from the report; then a few comments on my impressions of the report.

As described in this report, we conclude that Comey’s retention, handling, and dissemination of certain Memos violated Department and FBI policies, and his FBI Employment Agreement.


Comey told the OIG he created Memo 2 because he viewed Trump as “fundamentally dishonest” and was “worried very much that [Trump] would say I had said things at this dinner that were not true; that I had promised him something; that I had given him assurances about something.” Comey said he saw that possibility as “dangerous,…to me, but also to the FBI.” Comey told the OIG that during the dinner, the President asked for his loyalty, and that in that moment, Trump was not

…asking me for my loyalty because I’m a Government employee. He want[ed] my loyalty, personally. And if President Trump were sitting here, I think he would consider that a personal conversation [—][“]I want you lashed to me.[“]


Comey told the OIG that, when he was removed as FBI Director, he had four memos—Memo 2, Memo 4, Memo 6, and Memo 7—in his personal safe at home. He stated that he did not notify anyone at the FBI that he had retained these documents. He told the OIG that he had “had them there for quite a while,” and that because he viewed them as personal documents, like his will or his passport, it “never would’ve occurred to [him]” to give those back to the FBI. He also stated that he did not seek permission of the FBI to retain these Memos, because he did not consider them to be FBI records.


Comey told the OIG that on Tuesday, May 16, 2017, he “w[o]ke up at 2 o’clock in the morning, like, struck by a lightning bolt.” He said he suddenly realized that if, as the President had said in his May 12, 2017 tweet, there were “tapes,” then Comey’s version of his one-on-one conversations with Trump could be corroborated. In particular, Comey told us he thought that the President “would be heard on that tape asking [Comey] to let Flynn go” as Comey had documented in Memo 4. Comey said he also realized that “Trump will eventually figure out he shouldn’t have said that. And he may well destroy the tapes,” so somebody needed to preserve them. Comey said he was

…lying there, playing this in my mind. And I thought, you know what, I can actually do something. That if I put out into the public square that encounter, that will force DOJ, likely to appoint a Special Counsel to go get the tapes. Or even if they won’t do that, it will force them to go get the tapes.

Comey told the OIG he lay awake thinking the tapes could be preserved, “[b]ut only if I spur [the appointment of a Special Counsel] by putting this out.”


Comey’s characterization of the Memos as personal records finds no support in the law and is wholly incompatible with the plain language of the statutes, regulations, and policies defining Federal records, and the terms of Comey’s FBI Employment Agreement. By definition, Federal records include “all recorded information, regardless of form or characteristics, made or received by a Federal agency…in connection with the transaction of public business.”80 This definition expressly covers any “act of creating and recording information by agency personnel in the course of their official duties, regardless of the method(s) or the medium involved.”81 Comey’s FBI Employment Agreement likewise acknowledged that “[a]ll information acquired by [Comey] in connection with [his] official duties with the FBI…remain[s] the property of the United States of America.”
Comey’s drafting of the Memos can only be viewed as the “act of creating and recording information by agency personnel in the course of their official duties.” …

Further, much of the content of the Memos was directly tied to FBI investigative activities.


As Comey well knew, classified information is never considered personal property; rather, it is the property of the U.S. government


Comey’s actions with respect to the Memos violated Department and FBI policies concerning the retention, handling, and dissemination of FBI records and information, and violated the requirements of Comey’s FBI Employment Agreement.

Comey violated Department and FBI policies, and the terms of his FBI Employment Agreement, by retaining copies of Memos 2, 4, 6, and 7 after he was removed as Director, regardless of each Memo’s classification level. As a departing FBI employee, Comey was required to relinquish any official documents in his possession and to seek specific authorization from the FBI in order to personally retain any FBI documents. Comey failed to comply with these requirements.

In view of the clarity of relevant provisions of law, policies, and Comey’s Employment Agreement, the assertion that the Memos were personal records was not reasonable. …

Comey violated FBI policies and the requirements of his FBI Employment Agreement when he sent a copy of Memo 4 to Richman with instructions to provide the contents to a reporter, and when he transmitted copies of Memos 2, 4, 6, and a redacted version of 7 to his three attorneys.


Comey said his view at the time was that “if the world knew there might be tapes of Donald Trump asking me to drop an investigation, there would be tremendous pressure for [the Deputy Attorney General] to hand it to an independent prosecutor.” Comey also said he believed that this was something he was “uniquely situated to do” as a private citizen, but that he chose to do this through an intermediary because he did not want to respond to questions from reporters.

Comey violated FBI policy and the requirements of his FBI Employment Agreement when he chose this path. By disclosing the contents of Memo 4, through Richman, to The New York Times, Comey made public sensitive investigative information related to an ongoing FBI investigation, information he had properly declined to disclose while still FBI Director during his March 20, 2017 congressional testimony. Comey was not authorized to disclose the statements he attributed to President Trump in Memo 4, which Comey viewed as evidence of an alleged attempt to obstruct the Flynn investigation and which were relevant to the ongoing Flynn investigation. Comey clearly considered the contents of Memo 4 highly sensitive—in fact, as he stated in his June 8, 2017 congressional testimony, Comey and other senior leaders of the FBI had decided not to report the President’s statements to the Attorney General or Deputy Attorney General, and to keep the President’s statements “very closely held,” so that the FBI leadership could “figure out what to do with it down the road as our investigation progressed.” Comey placed in the public domain evidence relevant to the investigation of Flynn, and what he clearly viewed as evidence of an attempt to obstruct justice by President Trump. Rather than continuing to safeguard such evidence, Comey unilaterally and without authorization disclosed it to all. By his own admission, Comey disclosed the contents of Memo 4 in an attempt to force the Department to take official investigative actions—to appoint a Special Counsel and preserve any tapes as evidence.


Members of Comey’s senior leadership team used the adjectives “surprised,” “stunned,” “shocked,” and “disappointment” to describe their reactions to learning that Comey acted on his own to provide the contents of Memo 4, through Richman, to a reporter. The unauthorized disclosure of this information—information that Comey knew only by virtue of his position as FBI Director—violated the terms of his FBI Employment Agreement and the FBI’s Prepublication Review Policy.


Former Director Comey failed to live up to this responsibility. By not safeguarding sensitive information obtained during the course of his FBI employment, and by using it to create public pressure for official action, Comey set a dangerous example for the over 35,000 current FBI employees—and the many thousands more former FBI employees—who similarly have access to or knowledge of non-public information. Comey said he was compelled to take these actions “if I love this country…and I love the Department of Justice, and I love the FBI.” However, were current or former FBI employees to follow the former Director’s example and disclose sensitive information in service of their own strongly held personal convictions, the FBI would be unable to dispatch its law enforcement duties properly, as Comey himself noted in his March 20, 2017 congressional testimony. Comey expressed a similar concern to President Trump, according to Memo 4, in discussing leaks of FBI information, telling Trump that the FBI’s ability to conduct its work is compromised “if people run around telling the press what we do.” This is no doubt part of the reason why Comey’s closest advisors used the words “surprised,” “stunned,” “shocked,” and “disappointment” to describe their reactions to learning what Comey had done.

We have previously faulted Comey for acting unilaterally and inconsistent with Department policy. Comey’s unauthorized disclosure of sensitive law enforcement information about the Flynn investigation merits similar criticism. In a country built on the rule of law, it is of utmost importance that all FBI employees adhere to Department and FBI policies, particularly when confronted by what appear to be extraordinary circumstances or compelling personal convictions. Comey had several other lawful options available to him to advocate for the appointment of a Special Counsel, which he told us was his goal in making the disclosure. What was not permitted was the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive investigative information, obtained during the course of FBI employment, in order to achieve a personally desired outcome.

The IG’s report is being described in some news accounts as “scathing.” As these excerpts show, that is a fair characterization. Additional thoughts:

1) On Twitter this morning, Comey took a victory lap, as though the IG’s report somehow vindicated him. While it is true that the Attorney General exercised his discretion in favor of not charging Comey criminally, any suggestion that the IG report in any way exonerates Comey is absurd.

2) It appears that Comey testified falsely before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. He told the committee that he had shared one of his memos, but failed to disclose that he had also distributed several others outside the FBI. Comey told the IG it was because the Senators didn’t ask the proper question. However, that isn’t correct, as the transcript shows:

COLLINS: And finally, did you show copies of your memos [Emphasis added.] to anyone outside the Department of Justice?


COLLINS: And to whom did you show copies?

COMEY: I asked—the president tweeted on Friday [May 12], after I got fired, that I better hope there’s not tapes. I woke up in the middle of the night on Monday night, because it didn’t dawn on me originally that there might be corroboration for our conversation. There might be a tape.

And my judgment was, I needed to get that out into the public square. And so I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. Didn’t do it myself, for a variety of reasons. But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel. And so I asked a friend of mine to do it.

COLLINS: And was that Mr. Wittes?

COMEY: No, no.

COLLINS: Who was that?

COMEY: A good friend of mine who’s a professor at Columbia Law School.

COLLINS: Thank you. ….

Comey told the OIG that he did not tell Senator Collins about sharing four of the Memos with his three attorneys because Comey was “trying to answer the question that [he] was asked, and not reveal confidential communications with my lawyers.”

3) The overriding impression one gets from the IG’s report is that James Comey was a swamp creature who was dedicated to destroying President Trump. Comey regards it as a scandal that the president asked Comey to be loyal to him. In fact, Comey was disloyal. He was scheming against the president he was supposed to be serving. That is the real scandal.

4) On May 16, 2017, the New York Times broke a story about one of Comey’s meetings with Trump. The paper claimed its story was based on information from two sources:

The sources for the May 16, 2017 article were described as “a memo…Comey wrote shortly after the meeting,” and “two people who read the memo.” The May 16 article further stated that “The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of…Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.” The May 16 article also reported that two people had confirmed that “Comey created similar memos—including some that are classified—about every phone call and meeting he had with the [P]resident….”

One of the sources, of course, was Richman. But who was the second? No one could answer that question. One possibility is that the Times lied. Perhaps the story was too good to wait for a second source, who probably never would have surfaced.


DOJ Inspector General’s Report Blasts James Comey


by Glenn H. Ray:

The first university learning degree I received was in 1956 with a major in Geography and minor in Russian.    I was exploring.   Grades had meaning then.   I wanted to study the world and learn a foreign language.   Russian was an easy choice for me….nothing to do with ancestry.  It had to do with my and my country’s  future.  The fascist, terrifying USSR was then the powerful enemy of our American way.

My instructors, solid professors, were all male and all phD’s….NO funky graduate students who could barely speak English, and no easy gradings for leftists as in our ‘modern’ era.    Tuition cost me only $30 per quarter.

We undergraduates were often told at the beginning of each  class instruction to look to the front, to the back and to both sides and then yourself because in two years three of you today’s  students will no longer be at the University of Minnesota’s College of Liberal Arts.   They told the Truth as it turned out.

To get this first college degree I had to study climatology,  geology,  geomorphology,  astronomy, as well as geography of the world’s continents and their countries which truly fascinated me.

No longer did I have to cheat about reading novels in those English classes.   I suffer a dyslexia, (not yet ‘invented’ then, so I had no clue)…. I couldn’t, can’t,  make anything out of  reading real novels.    I have those  remarkable visual skills I was born with, instead.

It was the content of novels.    I’d buy the classic comics such as Dicken’s Tale of Two Cities, zip through them, enjoy them enough to search out and then read accurately  in the actual novel the most exciting sections of the novel.    Anything by William Thackeray, and such, was  too dull, to distant visually from the mind or whatever,  to remember or  grasp anything.  Mentally, I couldn’t connect  every time I’d try to read a novel.

I have a personal library in my old age of a couple thousand books, mostly  texts,  histories,  biographies,  “1984”, reality stuff including nineteenth century readings like McGuffey readers.   Here, my memory was solid.   I loved sharing these  learnings, so my first career became teaching high schoolers…….

I learned something about the disappearance of the dinosaurs those 65 million years ago…..you remember, those huge creatures running around America’s Dakota’s, eating those fern trees and the tonnage of the Brontosaurs, the ones especially  tasty to Tyrannosaurus Rex…..

……and the more recent stuff including  the glacial periods of tens of thousands of years ago…..like the last one  in northern Minnesota around Duluth before Lake Superior was born with the melting of thousands of feet of glacial ice!!!

THANK GOD FOR THAT GLOBAL WARMING OR WE HUMANS WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LIVE HERE….but our today’s lefty Democrat Party doesn’t give a damn about TRUTH!.   They don’t seem to be interested in knowledge either.

Neither were the Soviets, folks.

Please continue reading below regarding Truth instead of today’s Politics regarding “Global Warming”:

No U.S. Warming Since 2005


Free people are not equal.  Equal people are not free.

“A gun is like a parachute.  If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.”

 Here are 6 Conundrums of socialism in the United States of America:

1. America is capitalist and greedy – yet half of the population is subsidized.

2. Half of the population is subsidized – yet they think they are victims.

3. They think they are victims – yet their representatives run the government.

4. Their representatives run the government – yet the poor keep getting poorer.

5. The poor keep getting poorer – yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.

6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about – yet they want America to be more like those other countries.

Think about it! And that, my friends, pretty much sums up the USA in the 21st Century.   Makes you wonder who is doing the math.

These 3 short sentences tell you a lot about the direction of our current government and cultural environment:

1. We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.

Funny how that works. And here’s another one worth considering…

2. Seems we constantly hear about how Social Security is going to run out of money.

 But we never hear about welfare

or food stamps running out of money!

   What’s interesting is the first group “worked for” their money, but the second didn’t.

 3. Why are we cutting benefits for our veterans, no pay raises for our military and cutting our army to a level lower than  before WWII,  but we are not stopping the payments or benefits to illegal aliens.

“If you do not take an interest in the affairs of your government, then you are doomed to live under the rule of fools.”

  – Plato

(The above set of conundrums was  sent to this site  by a local  Republican business man.)

Another Chernobyl at Russia’s Sarov?

Russia’s New Chernobyl?

It’s been almost three weeks since a nuclear accident took place near the secret military city of Sarov, and Russia has only now begun to acknowledge it. Yesterday, the country’s weather service reported the elevated presence of four isotopes in the environment while still claiming that no particular danger exists:

Russia’s state weather and environment monitoring agency on Monday released new details about a brief spike in radioactivity following a mysterious explosion at the navy’s testing range that has been surrounded by secrecy and fueled fears of increased radiation levels.

The Aug. 8 incident at the Russian navy’s range in Nyonoksa on the White Sea killed two servicemen and five nuclear engineers and injured six others. The authorities reported a rise in radiation levels in nearby Severodvinsk, but insisted it didn’t pose any danger.

Russia’s state weather and environmental monitoring agency Rosgidromet said Monday the brief rise in radiation levels was caused by a cloud of radioactive gases containing isotopes of barium, strontium and lanthanum that drifted across the area. The agency said its monitoring has found no trace of radiation in air or ground samples since Aug. 8.

Russia has finally — if indirectly — acknowledged that the accident involved their new nuclear-powered cruise missile, which NATO calls Skyfall:

Russian officials have not conceded that the explosion involved the missile called the Skyfall. But on Monday, a Russian diplomat for the first time spoke of the accident in terms of the purpose for such a missile.

The diplomat, Aleksei Karpov, Russia’s envoy to international organizations in Vienna, blamed the United States for setting Russia on the path to developing a new device by withdrawing from an antiballistic missile treaty over 15 years ago.

Just how bad was this explosion? The types of isotopes in the leading edge of the cloud makes it clear that this was a reactor explosion, as was Chernobyl in 1986, if not on the same scale. It also leads observers to conclude that the radiation risk is likely worse in the region than Russia’s weather service admits:

“These are fission products,” Joshua Pollack, a leading expert on nuclear and missile proliferation, told Insider. “If anyone still doubts that a nuclear reactor was involved in this incident, this report should go a long way toward resolving that.”

Alexander Uvarov, the editor of the independent news site AtomInfo.ru, told the news agency RIA Novosti that these isotopes were products of nuclear fission involving uranium, Agence France-Presse reported Monday. This collection of radioisotopes could be released by a reaction involving uranium-235.

Nils Bohmer, a Norwegian nuclear-safety expert, told The Barents Observer that “the presence of decay products like barium and strontium is coming from a nuclear chain reaction,” adding that it was evidence that it “was a nuclear reactor that exploded.”

The Russians have acted as though the danger was higher than they were willing to admit on camera. In their zeal to protect themselves from criticism over the accident, Russian authorities left residents in the dark about the risks, including the first responders:

The Defense Ministry denied any radiation leak even as the local administration in Severodvinsk reported a hike in radiation levels and told residents to stay indoors — a move that prompted frightened residents to buy iodine, which can help reduce risks from exposure to radiation.

Russian media reported that the victims of the explosion received high doses of radiation. They said that medical workers at the Arkhangelsk city hospital that treated three of those injured said they hadn’t been warned that they would treat people exposed to radiation and lacked elementary protective gear.

The Moscow Times on Monday cited Igor Semin, a cardiovascular surgeon at the hospital, who scathingly criticized the authorities in a social network post for failing to warn the hospital workers about the deadly risks. “They were abandoned and left to fend for themselves,” the newspaper quoted Semin as saying.

Anyone who has studied the Chernobyl accident will find frightening parallels in this new accident. For years, the Soviets denied the true scope of the accident, and in the first few hours denied an accident had taken place at all. When Western nations began detecting high levels of radiation on the winds, the Soviets admitted that an accident had taken place but denied the scope of the problem. They delayed evacuations so as not to embarrass the political leadership, lied to the first responders, and only admitted to the true nature of the accident after the Soviet system had collapsed — bad engineering combined with incompetent operation.

This accident may not be anywhere near as bad as Chernobyl, but given the Russian government’s desire to follow the Chernobyl playbook, it must be pretty bad on its own. They’re only admitting to what cannot be denied — the dispersal of radioactive elements — while still denying any other implications of what seems clearly to be a reactor explosion, which would be a highly contaminative event. The need for secrecy suggests something closer to the worst-case scenario rather than the best-case scenario.

Perhaps this will convince Russia and others to dispense with the idea of nuclear propulsion on missiles. Don’t count on that, though; Chernobyl should have forced the Soviets to shut down all of its RBMK-type reactors, but they continued to operate — and in fact ten still operate in Russia. Some lessons never quite get learned when accountability is non-existent.

Russia’s new Chernobyl?

(Note:   In 1990 I had traveled to the USSR, fascist Soviet Russia,  with an Anoka, Minnesota group of Christians who had gathered thousands of dollars to donate personally to Russian hospitals serving the countless thousands of victims of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.   I was fluent in speaking Russian at the time and was glad to be of service.
I had been teaching Russian in my ‘earlier’ life, and had spent a month in the USSR in 1966, practicing the language when it was still a first class nasty  fascist government.
Our current Dems in Congress today  seem to be have become purveyors of a Soviet type fascist  state.   Countless Americans don’t seem to care.   Most are Democrats!)  ghr


The shabby depravity of CNN, NBC, MSNBC, the NYT, et al.

by Patricia McCarthy  at American Thinker:

The same media employed all the same tactics to candidate Trump even before he became the candidate.  They mocked him; late-night comics devoted their programs to deriding the man.  Once he became the candidate, they all doubled down and became downright vicious.  When it comes to venomous cruelty, no one tops the Left, in the media and in the entertainment sector.  When focused on a perceived enemy of their regressive progressiveness, they toss aside any sense of decency and go for the jugular.  They become everything we teach our children and grandchildren never to become: contemptible, intolerant snobs.  That is exactly who these persons with a media platform have become: malignant reprobates.  Nothing proves this more than their campaign to convince voters that Trump is unfit for office, mentally ill, etc.  They are dragging out the most Trump-deranged people to diagnose a man they’ve never met.  Obviously, every one of these so-called experts should have his license revoked for malpractice.  For example, Dr. Allen Frances’s guest spot on CNN suggests he may well have been dispatched from Duke for displaying severe mental health problems himself.  Physician, heal thyself!

Dr. Frances appeared on CNN’s Reliable Sources over the weekend to claim that Trump may be responsible for “more deaths than Hitler, Mao, and Stalin.”  Dr. Frances needs a history lesson.  Execrable host Brian Stelter let the man rant and rave without offering a shred of evidence for his assertions.  Of course not.  CNN then promoted the clip on Twitter!  There is clearly not a single sentient person at CNN.

Yale psychiatrist Bandy Lee likes to say  Trump’s “mental health is a national and global emergency.”  If this is what passes for a Yale psychiatrist, then Yale is a university to avoid; it is pumping out moonbats who cannot possibly be taken seriously.  George Conway, the hopefully former husband of Kellyanne, likes to accuse Trump of being “unstable.”  The same people who support Joe Biden for president think Trump is suffering from Alzheimer’s!

The man who can field questions from a hateful press for forty-five minutes in 90-degree heat without missing a beat is mentally ill?  No.  That would be the angry press that spends its time and opportunities to question the president haranguing him and trying to trick him into some misstatement it can use to bolster its own tawdry reputation.  These media people are pathetic.  Chris Cuomo is upset that Trump has not aged in office as previous presidents have; he chalks up his vigor as “not caring about the people.”  Just who is mentally ill?

The paralyzing instability of the Left is not confined to cable news outlets.  It has seriously affected nearly everyone at the NYT, the WaPo, the LAT, and every other leftist newspaper in the nation.  After admitting that their intense focus only on the Russia hoax for over two years had failed, NYT editor Dean Baquet directed his staff to now go all in on the Trump-is-a-racist theme.  To start, they have set out to rewrite American history as having begun in 1619, built on slavery and slavery alone.  It’s all a disgusting lie, but they are throwing everything against the wall to see what sticks.

If they think this ploy will sway voters against Trump, they are, again, sadly mistaken. These people hate our successful president so much that they have been rendered senseless.  They all need some kind of rehab for their crazed loathing of a good, smart, and very stable president.  “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule (Nietzsche).”  Now we know that what we are experiencing with this frenzied Left is nothing new; it’s just tedious.

The ratings for CNN and MSNBC are nearly nonexistent.  Not one program has even a million viewers.  Ancient Aliens beats Anderson Cooper!  This is good news, for it tells us that the American people are far more perceptive than their self-appointed betters.  The proof is that hardly anyone in this great nation of 350M people pays a bit of attention to what these arrogant elitists think or say.

The principal difference between the American Left and right is that the Left assumes that the population is dull-witted and easily led.  The right, like the Founders, believes in the informed good judgment of the American people.



Fascistic Supreme Court Judge, Ginsburg, to be Retiring Soon!!!

Democrats Brace for War over Supreme Court

by  Fletch Daniels at American Thinker:


The news that Ruth Bader Ginsburg was treated for pancreatic cancer raised the possibility of a Supreme Court opening within the next year.

The 86-year-old Ginsburg’s health has been declining for years, to where the last year has felt like a bad remake of the 1989 Weekend at Bernie’s movie.  Instead of enjoying her golden years in retirement, Ginsburg has been propped up and hidden in the hopes of holding the seat until a Democrat is elected.

The always elegant Michael Moore, who previously placed a Ginsburg doll atop a Christmas tree, summed up the Democrat zeitgeist when he tweeted, “HOLYMOTHEROFRBG!! EVERYBODY, RIGHT THIS SECOND, JOIN A MOVEMENT, CAMPAIGN, GRASS ROOTS GROUP -WHATEVER – AND WORK NONSTOP BTWN RIGHT NOW & NOV 2020!”

The Left is already manning the barricades.  The resulting hearing will make the Brett Kavanaugh fiasco, a dark moment in U.S. history, look like a charming affair.  In the event that President Donald Trump nominates Amy Coney Barrett, as many conservatives hope, this hearing will be a preview of the Apocalypse.

The rise of hatred on the Left, aided by years of persistent media bias and leftist propaganda, has created a rolling tidal wave of hate ready to crash on shore in violence.  The two most likely triggering events that would cause that crash are the re-election of President Trump and the next opening on the Supreme Court, particularly to fill Ginsburg’s seat.  It’s an increasingly good bet that the latter will come first.

The Democrats are telegraphing they will go scorched earth to fight Barrett, and Senator Chuck Schumer will appeal to President Trump to prevent her nomination.  Trump should politely decline.

There are a few reasons why Barrett generates so much fear and hatred among Democrats.

The first reason is the routine hatred liberals reserve for all conservative-minded minorities and women, particularly if they are also people of faith.  This is why Miguel Estrada’s nomination to the federal bench was torpedoed in 2001, to prevent the possibility of a young Hispanic conservative rising to the Supreme Court.  It is why Sarah Palin was mocked so relentlessly and unfairly.  Any conservatives who challenge the liberal narrative demanding that minorities and women pledge fealty to liberal orthodoxy must be destroyed, lest other people start getting ideas.

Democrats also know they will have a more difficult time disqualifying Barrett and will have to reach deeper into their toxic playbook than saying she is a secret pedophile who likes gang rape and nice walks on the beach.

Barrett is also young, meaning she could be on the Court for decades.

For Democrats, these Supreme Court wars boil down to abortion, the issue that most excites their perverse passion.  It is a sad state of affairs when a major political party so champions the killing of the most vulnerable Americans as a mythical foundational right that they feel they must destroy anyone who could threaten this.  They also understand that the fragile Roe v. Wade decision is built on a non-existent foundation.

Dianne Feinstein has already previewed a primary argument to be wielded against Barrett if she is nominated with Feinstein’s “dogma lives loudly within you” comments in 2017.  Democrats will argue that, as a believing Catholic, Barrett is somehow not qualified to be on the Supreme Court, that real believing Christians, vice the Nancy Pelosi variety, are biased and can’t interpret the Constitution.

Besides being a slur against all people of faith, this is absurd.  The Constitution was written by people of faith for the purpose of governing a moral people, and there is nothing in the Constitution that is even remotely prohibitive of people of faith serving as judges.

As John Adams presciently observed, “our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”  But most people of faith recoil in horror at abortion, so Democrats are highly suspicious of faith-abiding Americans.  Democrats will then resort to ever more outrageous accusations, hoping something sticks.

While predicting presidential Supreme Court nominations is often a fool’s game, I hope President Trump does nominate Barrett if given the opportunity, both because she would be a superb judge and because it would serve as the kind of illustrative moment this president is so gifted at creating.

Liberals will be unable to check their worst impulses, and Americans, a majority of whom identify as people of faith, will watch the Left descend upon this courageous woman like a screaming pack of banshees since, to borrow from Feinstein, the insanity lives loudly within them.  Also, it is blatantly unfair not to consider a person who is a woman and a Christian just because it offends liberal sensibilities.

Regardless, the nomination of any of the judges on the list produced by the Federalist Society will result in a liberal meltdown.

What can we expect?

If and when the vacancy occurs, Democrats will first argue that any nomination should be put off until after the 2020 election.  Senator Mitch McConnell will reject this outright, since he is too smart to fall for this trap.  Failing at winning this argument, media-aided liberals will try to leverage it to argue for a more palatable (liberal) nominee in the interest of compromise, which will be rejected.

Once the nomination is made, the Left will go to war.

Mobs will gather outside the homes of targeted Republican senators to intimidate and threaten them and their family members.  Death threats will become ubiquitous background noise.  Just imagine the recent protest outside McConnell’s house when a participant cheerily threatened to stab him through the heart.  Now multiply that evil intensity by a thousand.

Liberals will fiercely target any Republican senator who is viewed as wobbly, socially liberal, or from a blue state.  Senators Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Martha McSally, Cory Gardner, and Mitt Romney will all be targeted, as will others, in the hope of flipping four Republicans.

Antifa-style violence is likely to break into the streets.  We are fast approaching the moment in history where some Supreme Court justices and their families will need as much protection as what is afforded the president.

Former Obama official David Axelrod warned that a SCOTUS vacancy “will tear this country apart.”  Whose fault is that?  Democrats have always been the aggressors in the judicial wars.  Ginsburg was confirmed 96-3.  Sonia Sotomayor: 68-31.  Elena Kagan: 63-37.  While Axelrod knows his political tribe all too well, Republicans should stand strong against intimidation and violence.

The entire leftstream media will blanket the airwaves and papers with around-the-clock condemnation of the nominee as being out of the mainstream, joined by academia and the entertainment industry.  They will justify every outrage as part of the resistance, a euphemism to cover all evil acts.

Republicans must expect this and be prepared for the coming fight.  No matter how bad they think it will get, it will be worse.  But, if Republicans stand together, victory is assured.

Liberal anger and hatred have been building toward this moment.  All that is left is to wait for the right event to light the fuse.  That may be coming soon.



More Trouble for LADY OMAR, Minnesota’s Star of the North


by  John Hinderaker   at PowerLine:

We have generally stayed away from commentary on Ilhan Omar’s tangled personal life, except as it relates directly to potential criminal and ethical issues. But we would perhaps be remiss if we failed to note this New York Post story: “My husband dumped me for Ilhan Omar, DC mom says in divorce filing.”

A Washington, DC, mom says her political-consultant husband left her for Rep. Ilhan Omar, according to a bombshell divorce filing obtained by The Post.

Dr. Beth Jordan Mynett says her cheating spouse, Tim Mynett, told her in April that he was having an affair with the Somali-born US representative and that he even made a “shocking declaration of love” for the Minnesota congresswoman before he ditched his wife, alleges the filing, submitted in DC Superior Court on Tuesday.

There are more lurid allegations at the link, but the story is not only of prurient interest. There are at least two reasons why it is worth noting. First, this:

The 37-year-old congresswoman and mom of three paid Tim Mynett and his E. Street Group approximately $230,000 through her campaign since 2018 for fundraising consulting, digital communications, internet advertising and travel expenses.

Omar has already been found guilty of improperly using campaign funds to pay her own personal expenses, including legal fees for one of her divorces. [UPDATE: My memory was at fault here. See update below.] Mrs. Mynett’s divorce pleading alleges:

Beth Mynett is seeking primary physical custody of her and her husband’s son in part because of Tim Mynett’s “extensive travel” with Omar, the document says.

“Defendant’s more recent travel and long work hours now appear to be more related to his affair with Rep. Omar than with his actual work commitments,” the court papers state.

If the $230,000 that Omar’s campaign has paid to Mynett includes travel costs relating to romance rather than political consulting, or if the fees charged were inflated for the joint personal benefit of Mynett and Omar, it would represent another violation on Omar’s part. An appropriate agency should investigate the appropriateness of the funds paid by Omar’s campaign to Mynett.

Second, Minnesota’s dominant news organization, the Star Tribune, has treated Ilhan Omar with kid gloves throughout her career. While belatedly and minimally referring to the controversies that have engulfed Omar, the local paper has consistently had its thumb on the scale on behalf of a fellow Democrat. There can be no doubt that if a scandal along the lines that Ilhan is now experiencing with her soon-to-be third divorce involved a Republican, the Star Tribune would be all over it. Will it share the news of Omar’s dubious business and personal relationships with one of the chief beneficiaries of her campaign with its readers? We will see. So far, the Star Tribune apparently has never mentioned Tim Mynett’s name:

SCOTT adds: The Daily Mail really owns the tabloid edition of the Omar saga. Its account of the latest developments is posted here.

UPDATE: My memory of the Minnesota campaign finance board’s findings was incorrect. It did find that Omar improperly spent campaign funds to cover personal expenses–which is the point here–including personal legal fees. But it rejected the claim that those legal fees included work on Omar’s divorce: “Based on the analysis above, the preponderence of the evidence indicates that the $2,250 paid to the Kjellberg Law Office was not payment for Rep. Omar’s marital dissolution.” My apologies.

FURTHER UPDATE: The Star Tribune covers the divorce filing and tries to make up for lost ground on the Omar story, here.

Why is Today’s American Jewish Community so Fond of the Fascistic Left?

Jewish Rabbis and Disloyalty

by  Ilya Feoktistov   at  American Thinker:

Like the boy in the tale of the emperor’s new clothes, President Trump has once again spoken a taboo truth: Some American Jews seem to be more loyal to an increasingly anti-Jewish and far-left Democratic Party than they are to the Jewish people. That’s not necessarily an immoral position for most American Jews to take: As individuals, they have no concrete duty of loyalty to the Jewish people, and it is their absolute right to seek stronger allegiances through political, rather than through religious or ethnic affinity. But American Jewish leaders, picked and paid as such by the Jewish community, are in a different position. Those Jewish leaders whose fiduciary duty of loyalty is to the Jewish missions of their organizations, but whose primary loyalty is to the Tlaibanized progressive movement and the party that champions it, are betraying that duty in some truly indecent ways.

Consider Reconstructionist Rabbi Toba Spitzer. As president of the Massachusetts Board of Rabbis (MBR), and as the long-time rabbi of the cultish Congregation Dorshei Tzedek, Spitzer has aggressively promoted extreme left-wing causes. Many are direct threats to the Jewish community: embracing anti-Semitic Islamist extremists like Linda Sarsour, hostility toward the U.S. government, hostility toward the Israeli government, support for the anti-SemiticOccupy Wall Street movement, support for the anti-Semitic Black Lives Mattermovement, and open border refugee policies are some examples. Yet Rabbi Spitzer and the MBR insist that these causes are Jewish religious imperatives, even as they proclaim Jew-haters like the Hamas front group, CAIR, and the terror-affiliated Islamic Society of Boston to be their friends and allies. At the same time, Spitzer and the MBR demonize in vicious terms those fellow Jews who don’t agree with their political viewpoints.

Last year, Spitzer wrote that, when it comes to Israel, American Jews should ask themselves: “Do we believe that the physical continuity of the Jewish people supersedes other Jewish values?” In other words: Should the Israelis choose to die en masse instead of committing what Rabbi Spitzer feels is the unforgivable sin of perpetuating the fight with the Palestinians? Implicitly answering in the affirmative, Spitzer challenged the “existential narrative” of Israel, arguing that Jewish sovereignty — and the Jewish lives protected by its existence — should not supersede the Jewish values of “lovingkindness” (chesed) and “mercy” (rachamim) toward “supporters of Hamas” — her words, not mine.

Rabbi Spitzer’s question, and the argument implicit in it, comes from ignorance. According to the Jewish canon, which deals with the laws of armed conflict at length, war against the likes of Hamas is literally a mitzvah. Beyond Judaism, the principle of individual and collective self-defense of life and property is a universal human value enshrined in the law of nations and in free sovereign legal systems like those of the United States. It is an inhuman demand, most often made by totalitarians, that a class of people die or submit to being robbed without putting up a fight — for the good of another class or people.

Indeed, pikuach nefesh — thepreservation of innocent life, through war if necessary — is the highestJewish value, which supersedes all other Jewish values, except for the bans on murder, sexual crime, and sacrilege. Indeed, some Jews during the Holocaust, like those victimized by the Bitch of Belsen, might have been forced to take part in all three to survive. Having not been faced with the choice, most of us have little standing to blame them. “Shabbat, Yom Kippur, Pesach, if they come in conflict with the question of survival,” said Israel’s former chief Ashkenazi rabbi and Buchenwald survivor Yisrael Meir Lau; “if they are in a clash with the desire of living, of existence — the Torah says… to live, not to die.”

This year, Rabbi Spitzer expanded on her argument in an article chillingly titled“Beyond Erasure,” in which she faulted “the American Jewish establishment” for embracing an “existential frame” of thinking that Israel “is vitally connected to Jewish survival in the modern world,” because this thinking “has led to an attempt to erase Palestinian history.” After almost four millennia of supreme religious devotion to a Jewish state in Israel, Spitzer urged American Jews in 2019 to detach themselves — emotionally, religiously, morally — from commitment to Israel’s physical continuity and to national self-determination for its Jews.

Along with detaching American Jews from Israel, Spitzer seeks to detach them from their money. In a 2017 interview, Rabbi Spitzer echoed the insidious economic anti-Semitism that is one of the unifying hallmarks of socialism: “The Jewish community in Boston is — certainly with exceptions — disproportionately well-off. I think that real change is going to require that we give up some of that economic privilege.” Ironically, Spitzer’s Massachusetts Board of Rabbis is largely funded by the Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Boston, whose new president, Rabbi Marc Baker, pledged in his inaugural speech to make the Boston Jewish community’s continued existence, prosperity, and connection to Israel among his top priorities.

While making common cause with anti-Semites and attacking fellow Jews, Spitzer conveniently ignores the threats facing the Jewish community. As shetold her congregation in 2010: “Jews in modern America face little to none of the hatred and pressure that gays and lesbians and transgender people continue to face.” Spitzer is empirically wrong, but politically correct. In 2010, Jews were statistically almost one-and-a-half times more likely to be victims of hate crimes than LGBT persons. Within the leftist moral universe, however, Jews often exist as privileged millionaire fat-cats, Wall Street ‘banksters,’ and murderous baby killers committing genocide against the Palestinians. The implications of contemporary Jewish victimhood therefore make leftist Jews like Spitzer uncomfortable, unless they can be used against Donald Trump.

Even if hate crime against both Jews and LGBT persons entirely disappeared, and even if Hillary Clinton was in the White House, Spitzer’s true issues with “modern America” would remain. America is “the belly of the beast,” Spitzer complained about our capitalist society. “Like the ancient Israelites,” sheprophesized about entitlement cuts under President Obama in 2011, “our failure to acknowledge the covenantal obligations that we owe one another as American citizens… is sure to bring in its wake a Deuteronomic list of curses,” unless we “end the travesty of poverty in a country — and a world — in which we have so much.” As Newmann quips: “For all their condescension toward the Christian Right, in their own way, liberal Jews affirm no less strongly the principle that voting for certain politicians can seal your place in Heaven or Hell.”

Writing about why a leading Jewish rabbi – the president of the Massachusetts Board of Rabbis, no less — is so sanguine about Jewish life, property, and religious values requires brutal bluntness:

Rabbi Spitzer is a secular radical who dresses up in a kippah and tallit to exploit the Jewish religion in the name of leftist politics. The Jewish values that she preaches are not Jewish. They are nothing more than tired 19th-century socialist totalitarianism clothed in the postmodern garb of social justice and “Tikkun Olam.” Rabbi Spitzer is willing to sacrifice Jewish money and lives at the altar of Marxist envy, and to blend the sanctity of her people’s religion with the profanity of her own politics. The Jews must not let her.

I was born into poverty in the Soviet Union, of the kind that Rabbi Spitzer would certainly deplore in the United States, after my Jewish family’s wealth was redistributed by Spitzer’s ideological kith and kin some sixty years prior. My great-great-grandfather, a wealthy gem merchant, sympathized with his Bolshevik employees, and allowed them to meet secretly at night in the dark corners of his warehouses. His sympathies saved his own and his family’s lives, though not his wealth; but those sympathies also destroyed his country and the lives of many others. I hope that the Massachusetts Jewish community and its donors understand the consequences of Rabbi Spitzer’s sympathies; and the plans that her comrades have in store for Jewish wealth and physical continuity — in Israel, America, and anywhere else.


Note from ghr:   I was born and raised K through Eighth grade, 1939 to 1948 in an American Christian urban community   school district whose only minority was Jewish.   Despite the overwhelming mix and share during World War II they were exceedingly clannish, cold, unfriendly as  were the two Jewish  families living on our block.   Not once did they join the wartime gatherings twice a year of  all  the 16 families always invited to the neighborhood picnics.  Nor did they in anyway respond…..

I was the welcoming  boy who delivered the invitations all four years.   I still remember during these picnics the disappointments stated by those Christian neighbors who always invited the Jewish families.

The same coldness occurred among the Jewish students in the local grade school I attended.

Why during the President GW Bush years did one of my Jewish clients of over 30 years who always had to be secretive of the couple’s  conservative persuasions, experience a sudden total guest walk out while hosting their turn in the  twelfth year of the group’s Jewish Holiday gathering for lunch and  afternoon drinks together?

Why did nearly all of the visiting explode with screams and curses against the generous host and hostess for an “atrocity” one of their  female guests had claimed to have discovered?……

One of the gal guests went into the hostess’ kitchen to seek a drinking glass… She opened a  cupboard door seeing not a glass but an eleven by eight inch picture of then Republican President George W. Bush.   She cursed and screamed,  shouting noises of all kind, I was told by my wonderful client of 30 years.    Whereupon the lefty group, shocked as if electricity had burned them, left the house and dinner, never to  see these conservatives again.

Perhaps that is all yesterday, but I doubt it.

Today we Americans do have  our precious Dennis Prager.   May God Bless Him and His Followers.   Our civilization may recover from those fascistics and fascists now attempting to destroy our freedom-loving America forever.

Who will win the 2020 Presidential election?