• 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

Another View of President Biden:

Biden is dishonest, delusional, and dangerous

By Drew Allen at American Thinker:

As the Taliban seized control of Afghanistan, the president of the United States went into hiding. Biden’s most recent disappearing act in a moment of crisis proved once again that he’s not leading the nation and that America is without a commander-in-chief. But his belated and disgraceful address to the Nation served to highlight the 3 D’s that define the modern Democratic Party — dishonesty, delusion, and danger.

It was an embarrassing and feeble display from the start. Biden, an allegedly fully vaccinated man, removed his face diaper for the cameras as he made the ten foot walk from offstage to the podium.

But right out of the gate Joe Biden lied to the American people. He announced, “My national security team and I have been closely monitoring the situation on the ground in Afghanistan and moving quickly to execute the plans we had put in place to respond to every constituency including and — contingency — including the rapid collapse we are seeing now.”

The truth is Joe Biden had no plan — no contingency; certainly not for the rapid collapse. Afghanis clung to a U.S. military plane as it took off from an airport in Kabul. It was a frenzied exodus — Ashraf Ghani, the former Afghan president fled, and U.S. embassy personnel were rushed out of the now-abandoned embassy. 

Thousands of U.S. citizens currently remain trapped in Afghanistan as the Taliban hunts them down. Yet Joe Biden lied and claimed a contingency plan was in place for “the rapid collapse we’re seeing now.” It’s dishonest. Joe Biden is a liar.

As a matter of fact, per CNN, Biden ignored military leaders’ warnings that his hasty withdrawal would likely result in the collapse of the Afghan government and a Taliban insurrection in the capitol. He didn’t plan for every contingency. He dismissed this one — the one that happened.

But so too is Biden delusional. He claimed that “I am president of the United States of America, and the buck stops with me.” And yet at no point in his teleprompter address did he accept responsibility for this disaster. Instead he blamed Trump and the Afghani people. Trump isn’t president and the Afghani people aren’t responsible for the evacuation of American personnel in Afghanistan. Biden is. But he cares more about ice cream than he does about the American citizen. He spends more time choosing his flavor of ice cream than he does planning a responsible evacuation of Afghanistan. 

It is Biden who publicly announced in July that the military mission would end by August 31. It is Biden, who ignored the council of his military advisors, and ended the mission even ahead of schedule. It is Biden who abandoned the Afghani people in the dead of night without having the decency to notify the Afghani commander at Bagram Airforce base of America’s sudden departure back in July.

Per the AP, “The U.S. left Afghanistan’s Bagram Airfield after nearly 20 years by shutting off the electricity and slipping away in the night without notifying the base’s new Afghan commander, who discovered the Americans’ departure more than two hours after they left, Afghan military officials said.”  

Despite this betrayal, Biden had the audacity to claim in his teleprompter address that, “when I hosted President Ghani and Chairman Abdullah at the White House in June, and again when I spoke by phone to Ghani in July, we had very frank conversations. We talked about how Afghanistan should prepare to fight their civil wars after the U.S. military departed.” Apparently Biden wasn’t very frank, because the Afghani commander of Bagram Air Force Base didn’t learn of our departure until after we’d left.

But lies and delusion coincided when Biden made the claim that, “We’ll continue to speak out for the basic rights of the Afghan people, of women and girls, just as we speak out all over the world.” The Taliban routinely executes gays, and stones women. Biden cozies up to the Chinese while they torture and kill Muslims in their internment camps. Biden and the Democrat party don’t speak up for anyone’s basic human rights all over the world. They only invent non-existent violations in the United States.

Biden’s irresponsible abandonment of Afghanistan is also dangerous. Not only are Americans in Afghanistan presently in danger of losing their lives because of his recklessness and incompetence, but future Americans will also be in danger of losing their lives at the hands of the Taliban.

Our mission in Afghanistan was to neutralize the threat of the Taliban and al Qaida; to prevent a future terrorist attack. Biden claimed that “I’m adamant we focus on the threats we face today, in 2021, not yesterday’s threats.” 

But yesterday’s threats are now today’s threats. We spent 20 years fighting against the Taliban, who sheltered Osama Bin Laden as he plotted the 9/11 attacks. 20 years later the Taliban has overtaken Afghanistan in a matter of days. What was the point?

Biden doesn’t care. He’s already resumed his vacation. Then again, per CNN, the Taliban is “just chanting ‘Death to America’ but they seem friendly at the same time.” Meanwhile the DHS has issued new terror threats for Americans opposing COVID measures.

Biden and the Democrats are dishonest, delusional, and dangerous.

Drew Allen is the host of “The Drew Allen Show” podcast. He is a Texas-bred, California-based and millennial author, columnist, and political analyst. His work can be read and seen and heard at drewthomasallen.com

Today Our American Communications And Educational Systems Are Run By Lefty Dem Fem and Big Tech Fascists!

Jason Chaffetz: Dear Republican Trump haters – What did you get for your trade?

Trump’s good policies have been replaced by policies antithetical to prosperity, freedom and security

Jason Chaffetz

 By Jason Chaffetz| Fox News

A little less than a year ago, a significant number of independent and Republican voters decided to trade bad tweets for bad policy. Today, your Twitter feed is void of President Trump‘s tweets. But the price was high.  

Gone are the good policies that drove the Trump economy and made the world a safer place. In their place are policies antithetical to prosperity, freedom and security. 

You traded energy efficiency for dependency on the Middle East. Whereas a year ago you enjoyed inexpensive gas, high paying energy jobs, and fewer incentives to entangle ourselves in Middle Eastern politics, today President Biden is begging OPEC to produce more oil. Apparently, his climate agenda can handle more oil production as long as Americans aren’t the ones profiting from it. 


You traded an energy pipeline out of Canada for a crime pipeline out of Mexico. Instead of creating jobs for skilled American workers, Biden is creating opportunities for cartels, traffickers and COVID-positive migrants. By the end of 2021, according to New Mexico Rep. Yvette Herrell, the number of undocumented and illegal migrants welcomed across our borders by the Biden administration will be equivalent to the population of her whole state – about 2 million people.   

Trump said no to federally funding abortion. You traded for Biden, who wants your taxes to pay for abortion, and your tax dollars are being sent around the world to fund abortion in other countries.  


You traded rising wages for rising prices. Inflation is up sharply – 5.4% from a year ago, swallowing any wage gains produced by a tight labor market. In just the first eight months of the new administration, we are all paying more for food, gas, housing and vehicles.  

More from Opinion

With Democrats controlling the House, the Senate and the presidency, our national debt has exploded to more than $28 trillion. That’s enroute to an expected $40 trillion to $45 trillion within 10 years. In just seven months, 

Though President Trump was no fan of austerity, his spending priorities, tax reductions and approach to regulations at least drove economic growth and prosperity. Since Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., took control of the House purse strings three years ago, Democrat bills marketed as COVID relief or infrastructure are generally filled with bailouts and slush funds. We’re lucky if the percentages available to fulfill the bill’s purpose is above single digits.  

You traded safety and security for less safety and security. What happened in Afghanistan over the weekend will reverberate for decades to come.  Allowing Islamic extremists to walk away with American assets and dispose of U.S. allies in the region will only embolden terrorists across the globe.

You traded fairness for a George Orwell version of equality. Under the new administration, there are two systems of justice. 

Furthermore, the one and only spending priority Democrats have shown a willingness to cut is security. Their spending legislation cuts military spending by nearly $400 billion over the next 10 years. 

Their immigration agenda demands dramatic reductions in border security and deportations. Their rhetoric demands defunding the police, releasing criminals without bail, reducing felonies to misdemeanors, and electing prosecutors who refuse to charge those who commit crimes. They have no solution to the crime problem that continues to get worse under their watch.  

You traded fairness for a George Orwell version of equality. Under the new administration, there are two systems of justice. Protesters on the left can set buildings ablaze, vandalize them and shoplift with impunity. Protesters on the right will be branded, surveilled and prosecuted as domestic terrorists.   


Americans are not better off than we were eight months ago, with one notable exception. Trump’s efforts to engage the private sector in fast-tracking the vaccine have been enormously successful. For that success, Joe Biden is happy to take credit.   

But the grim reality for Trump haters is this: the tradeoff has been costly. The cost could become even more dear if Democrats are successful in leveraging their slim majority to commandeer control of local elections. Their ability to tilt the playing field dramatically in their favor could prevent voters from ever restoring the freedom and prosperity we took for granted just eight months ago. 

In Today’s America Lefty Fascists Own The Education World, Communications World, Female World, and Political World!

The Breonna Taylor story the left doesn’t want you to hear

By John Mattingly at American Thinker:

Since helping to execute a search warrant for evidence in a drug-trafficking ring and being shot by Kenneth Walker — the boyfriend of Breonna Taylor — in the process, my life has never been the same.

Three days after the tragic death of George Floyd — which left the nation in an uproar — the 911 call in which Walker says someone had broken in and shot his girlfriend was released to the public.  Though I wanted to respond and set the record straight about what had transpired that night, I couldn’t say anything about the case, because my fellow Louisville Metro Police Department officers and I were under a gag order.  The media and the social justice outrage mob were out to get us; we weren’t allowed to stand up for ourselves; and our mayor and chief refused to set the record straight with the facts, leaving us involved to dangle in the wind.

My side of the story is completely different from what you’ve heard from the media.  They want you to believe that I and my fellow officers are evil racists who barged into that apartment and killed Breonna while she slept.  This couldn’t be farther from the truth, and I learned pretty quickly that the media and our local government officials want to make sure you never learn the truth about what happened that night.

Earlier this year, my friends at Post Hill Press courageously agreed to publish my book giving an account of what really happened that night.  But before we could even begin, their distributor, Simon & Schuster, publicly declared their refusal to distribute my book — without even reading the manuscript.

After spending the last year and a half watching the media, celebrities, sports figures, attorneys, and politicians spread blatant lies about the situation without any accountability, I know I must do whatever I can to make sure the true story is told.  I am grateful to my friends at Post Hill Press for all of their support and guidance, but after much consideration, I have decided it is best that I explore other publishing options for my book.

I cannot continue to sit by and watch the media twist the narrative of what happened that night into a work of fiction that serves to support their anti-police agenda.  In reality, my colleagues and I hammered on the door several times — “Police, search warrant!” — over and over, with no response.  After several attempts to get someone to open the door, we were forced to make entry.  I was the first officer to attempt to make an entry into the apartment and was met with gunfire by Walker before I was able to enter the apartment.  Breonna was tragically standing right next to him.  She wasn’t asleep.

They don’t want you to know that my family and I received death threats for months on end, or that I had to move my family to another city far from our home to keep my wife and our five-year-old son out of harm’s way.  Our social media pages were flooded with vile threats and insults.  As my wife and I watched footage of major American cities going up in flames, we were doxed by the local Black Lives Matter chapter.  It was utterly terrifying, to say the least.

The establishment — media, politicians, and full-time social justice lawyers — thrive on division and hate.  As a police officer, I have watched them slander my brothers and sisters across the country with little regard for the facts.  They drum up hatred against us so they can stay relevant and gain more power.

I am not the first person to be canceled by the publishing industry for going against the “woke” narrative.  Earlier this year, Simon & Schuster canceled a book from Senator Josh Hawley.  Their employees also demanded that the company never publish an author associated with the Trump administration again.

Whether you’re a United States senator or a cop from Louisville, the left doesn’t want your story to be told if you stand in its way.  Leftists want you to leave them alone as they divide America with their falsehoods.

I, for one, won’t sit by idly and let that happen.  I plan to tell the truth, no matter the cost.

Image: PxHere.


Reuters: Biden approval hits new low after sharp weekend drop


AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Allahpundit wrote about two polls this morning that showed that respondents, including Democrats, weren’t thrilled with Biden’s handling of the Afghanistan exit. This afternoon/evening there’s another poll out from Reuters which shows Biden’s approval has hit a new low for his 7-months in office.

The national opinion poll, conducted on Monday, found that 46% of American adults approved of Biden’s performance in office, the lowest recorded in weekly polls that started when Biden took office in January.

It is also down from the 53% who felt the same way in a similar Reuters/Ipsos poll that ran on Friday.

That’s a 7-point drop in three days. No wonder the White House is in an panic and sending Joe back to the basement Camp David. It also helps explain why his media allies are so desperately pleading for their fellow reporters to give him a break. Unless they can turn this around fast, it’s going to stick and Biden could spend months climbing out of this hole.

What’s interesting here is that even though they clearly didn’t like Biden’s handling of this, Americans basically agree with him: “a majority of both Republican and Democratic voters said the chaos was a sign that the United States should leave.” I’m guessing the White House had its own polling suggesting the same thing which is why Biden’s speech yesterday was heavy on the need to withdraw and very light on what went wrong.

Despite the support for the goal, 75% of respondents support sending in troops to complete the withdrawal. So there’s overwhelming agreement that we need to fix this screw up, even if that entails the same risk we’re trying to avoid by leaving. But as you get into the details things become a bit less clear.

a majority of the 18 to 65-year-olds who took the Ipsos survey – 68% – agreed that the war “was going to end badly, no matter when the U.S. left,” and 61% wanted the United States to complete its withdrawal of troops on schedule.

Yet a smaller majority – 51% – also agreed that “it would have been worth it for the United States to leave troops in Afghanistan another year,” and 50% wanted to send troops back into the country to fight the Taliban.

Reuters suggest the seemingly contradictory responses might be the result of Americans who aren’t entirely sure what to think about all of this yet. Here again, you can bet the White House views this as an opportunity to step in and emphasize the inevitability of failure. I’ve already seen a lot of this sort of thing today. The Washington Post ran an editorial earlier saying unequivocally that this disaster was Biden’s mess. I read through some of the comments on that editorial and they are overwhelmingly from Biden fans making precisely this sort of inevitability argument:

Once Trump negotiated directly with the Taliban to exit, the legitimacy of the Afghan government was destroyed. They started to fall apart at that moment.

Leaving a small force would then be too vulnerable. Remember the Marine barracks in Beirut? We would either need to increase our force 20x to defend ourselves, or leave.

I’m glad we are leaving.

Are you kidding me?  If that could have worked, it would have worked a long time ago.  It couldn’t, and didn’t.
One more:
Avoidable? Nonsens. Yes, in theory everything is avoidable and rosy. Not in reality though. Allied forces never rooted in Afghan soil, not in all those years. They were heavily armed occupiers. When you walk around in villages, armed, not talking the language, you have no credibility. You are a stranger, aliens. Soldiers longed for home. Families wondered what on earth they were doing there, except fearing for their life. The culture, religion, traditions, the way people reason and see things, it is all very different. Western armies had no business there.
If you can allow me to go on a tangent, there have been a lot of comparisons to our exit from Saigon in the past few days. The basic message of those was a) Biden said this wouldn’t happen and it did but also underlying that was another point b) this was always doomed to fail…lessons of Vietnam, etc.
What bothers me about this debate is that the legacy of Vietnam isn’t the only relevant legacy. We also fought a war in Korea which we fought to preserve the original division of the country. As a result, North Korea is a communist hellhole where people are starving and South Korea is a prosperous ally that produces excellent cars and boy bands. None of that would have happened if not for our willingness to fight (we lost ten times as many men in Korea as we did in Afghanistan) and beyond that to stay for the long haul. We’ve had troops in Korea for 71 years.

That doesn’t mean the same would necessarily be true in Afghanistan or that we were wrong to leave. Americans should make those decisions and at this point most of them want out. But I think the proposition that this was always doomed or that similar invasions always result in failure like we’re seeing now isn’t true. The lessons of Vietnam shouldn’t be forgotten but the lessons of Korea shouldn’t be ignored. Our time in Afghanistan does seem to be ending in a mess but that wasn’t inevitable and President Biden shouldn’t be let off the hook on the grounds that was destined to be a clusterf**k. Hopefully his polling will continue to reflect that there were other, better ways to handle this.

How Stupid Can BIDEN Democrats BE?



I hear some conservatives saying that we should have gone into Afghanistan, defeated the forces that attacked us on 9/11, and then left. The obvious problem with this view is that as soon as we left, the forces that attacked us or collaborated in the attack would have returned to power.

Sure, we would have killed and captured some bad guys, but basically we would have been back where we were before 9/11. Who would want that?

Now, the forces responsible for 9/11, including al Qaeda (see below) are returning to power or prominence. But at least they suffered nearly 20 years of lost or diminished power, during which they experienced hardship and, most importantly, were unable to execute attacks against the U.S.

Still, the return of the Taliban to power presents a clear and present danger to the U.S., as this Washington Post article suggests. According to the Post:

[A]s the militants commandeer Afghanistan’s security and intelligence institutions, the Biden administration faces a far steeper challenge in fulfilling the president’s pledge to prevent al-Qaeda, the Islamic State and other terrorist groups that have operated there from regaining strength and threatening the United States.

Current and former officials said that the process for identifying and responding to terrorist plots has been upended as the Pentagon and the CIA — instead of planning for operations alongside an allied government and friendly spy agency in Kabul — are forced to contemplate an environment abruptly off-limits and under the control of a hostile regime.

“The counterterrorism posture went from problematic with the U.S. withdrawal to extraordinarily bad with the Taliban in full control,” said Marc Polymeropoulos, a veteran intelligence officer who served as a CIA base chief in Afghanistan. “Suddenly one wonders if we will go entirely dark. It’s like a bad dream.”

Many conservatives like to ridicule our intelligence services, and to some extent they deserve it. But it’s a fact that al Qaeda has been unable to attack our homeland since 9/11.

Unless you believe al Qaeda lost interest in attacking us, our security and intelligence services must have done something right. Our presence in Afghanistan was one of those things.

As inconvenient as it may be, al Qaeda is still around. The Post reports:

There are worrisome signs it may become more difficult for the United States to prevent a resurgence by al-Qaeda, which a recent United Nations report said maintained a presence in at least 15 Afghan provinces and showed “no indication of breaking ties” with the Taliban despite pledges to do so as part of a 2020 deal struck between the Afghan militants and Trump administration.

(Emphasis added)

A very foolish deal.

Nor is it only al Qaeda we need to worry about:

Foreign intelligence officials said they are detecting signs that the Taliban’s victory has energized global jihadists, a threat that may only grow as the Taliban releases al-Qaeda operatives who were imprisoned by the Afghan government.

An intelligence official from an Arab nation, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe evolving assessments, said officials had seen an uptick in jihadist communications about developments in Afghanistan. The Taliban takeover, this official said, “is encouraging many jihadists to think about traveling to Afghanistan now instead of Syria or Iraq.”

According to a European intelligence official, the Taliban’s victory has become a rallying cry for jihadist sympathizers there. “The U.S. appears in all of this now as a weak nation,” he said.

An al-Qaeda fighter who goes by the name Abu Khaled said the Taliban’s conquest was momentous for all extremists. “God willing, the success of the Taliban will be also a chance to unify mujahideen movements like al-Qaeda and Daesh,” he said, using another name for the Islamic State.

Of course. It’s easy to forget that the rise of al Qaeda and other such movements was fueled by the successes of the Taliban and other such movements, coupled with the Clinton administration’s fecklessness in dealing with them. And the rise of ISIS was fueled by the Obama-Biden pullout from Iraq.

It’s worth noting that the adverse consequences I discuss here — the resurgence of jihadists encouraged by America’s defeat and the inability to deal with threats emanating from Afghanistan — all flow from Biden’s decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, not from the way he carried it out. It’s also worth noting that we were preventing these consequences with a commitment of only 2,500 to 3,500 U.S. forces and very few American casualties.

That False Choice Obama Is Still Around!



The false choice was one of Barack Obama’s most annoying rhetorical devices as well one of his favorites. It is a device he used frequently in “explaining” the rationale for funding Iran and entering into the JCPOA. It was either that or war. I heard an unsubtle echo of Barack Obama’s favorite rhetorical device in Slow Joe Biden’s comments on the ongoing disgrace in Afghanistan:

There was only the cold reality of either following through on the agreement to withdraw our forces or escalating the conflict and sending thousands more American troops back into combat in Afghanistan, lurching into the third decade of conflict.

This one line combines the false choice and the passing of the buck. It is almost laughable.

There is barely a line of the speech that could pass the laugh test. This one too reminded me of Obama:

And our true strategic competitors — China and Russia — would love nothing more than the United States to continue to funnel billions of dollars in resources and attention into stabilizing Afghanistan indefinitely.

Deep thoughts from a lifetime of stupidity and error.

We can hear another echo of the Obama era in Paul Sperry’s enraging New York Post column “Taliban leader was freed from Guantanamo Bay in 2014 swap by Obama.” I can’t think of a true word Obama uttered about the Bowe Bergdahl deal. Sperry’s story puts an exclamation mark on the mendacity of that sorry chapter of Obama’s presidency and this sorry chapter of Biden’s.

Joe Biden’s Speech Yesterday WAS A DISGRACE!



Joe Biden’s speech today was a disgrace. He read briefly from a teleprompter, and took neither questions nor responsibility. It is reasonable to infer that his mental condition is such that he is not able to answer questions, or else his actions have been so indefensible that there is no answer to the questions that might be asked.https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=powerlineUS&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NwYWNlX2NhcmQiOnsiYnVja2V0Ijoib2ZmIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1427366138577629185&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.powerlineblog.com%2Farchives%2F2021%2F08%2Fbidens-deflection-wont-work.php&sessionId=b8450fea102572dbfae9d15e23e0a93fda23d106&siteScreenName=powerlineUS&theme=light&widgetsVersion=1890d59c%3A1627936082797&width=550px

It is a remarkable fact that in the last week, the Taliban has answered more questions from American media than President Biden.

Biden pretended that he is being criticized for withdrawing from Afghanistan. This is a bad joke. I, for one, wrote years ago that we should wind up our involvement in that country. I did not suggest, however, that we should pull out precipitously, without evacuating civilians first, and suddenly deprive Afghan forces of air cover so that it would be difficult or impossible for them to fight effectively. Nor did I write that we should abandon our bases without even bothering to secure or at least destroy materiel that has now fallen into the hands of the Taliban. I did not advocate that we pull out our military personnel first and only worry about civilians later, nor did I suggest that we wait until the Taliban have encircled the Kabul airport before trying to get either Americans or friendly Afghans onto airplanes.

The disaster in Kabul is so complete that even Kato Kaelin–remember him?–understands the fatuity of Biden’s excuses:https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=powerlineUS&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NwYWNlX2NhcmQiOnsiYnVja2V0Ijoib2ZmIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1427366021350903825&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.powerlineblog.com%2Farchives%2F2021%2F08%2Fbidens-deflection-wont-work.php&sessionId=b8450fea102572dbfae9d15e23e0a93fda23d106&siteScreenName=powerlineUS&theme=light&widgetsVersion=1890d59c%3A1627936082797&width=550px

Like me, Donald Trump wanted to get out of Afghanistan, but he didn’t advocate doing so in the disastrous manner that we have just witnessed. Trump said this today:

Can anyone even imagine taking out our Military before evacuating civilians and others who have been good to our Country and who should be allowed to seek refuge? In addition, these people left topflight and highly sophisticated equipment. Who can believe such incompetence? Under my Administration, all civilians and equipment would have been removed.

We have all seen videos and photos documenting the fiasco in Kabul, but this is one I hadn’t seen until this afternoon:https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=powerlineUS&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-2&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NwYWNlX2NhcmQiOnsiYnVja2V0Ijoib2ZmIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1427363089834512384&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.powerlineblog.com%2Farchives%2F2021%2F08%2Fbidens-deflection-wont-work.php&sessionId=b8450fea102572dbfae9d15e23e0a93fda23d106&siteScreenName=powerlineUS&theme=light&widgetsVersion=1890d59c%3A1627936082797&width=550px

Kudos to the C-17 crew for saving those Afghans, notwithstanding the seeming paucity of women and children. But this apparently is Biden’s idea of an orderly withdrawal.

Will Biden get away with the deflection he attempted this afternoon? I don’t think so. The first poll data are out, from the reputable Trafalgar Group, whose methodology you can read about here. The survey was conducted over the weekend and covered 1,084 likely voters. The question was, “What best describes how you feel about how President Biden is handling US military operations in Afghanistan?” Not, of course, what do you think about withdrawal as a concept.

The bottom line is that 69.3% said they disapprove, with 59.5% strongly disapproving. Even Democrats disapprove by 48.2% to 39.8%.

These numbers are remarkably bad for the first days of the crisis, and will only get worse as people learn more about the disaster. Biden tried to give a “Mission Accomplished” speech today, but I think he failed.

The DEMS’ Fascistic Assault Against Conservative America…..

A Brief History of the Assault on Conservatives as ‘Violent Extremists’

By Janet Levy at American Thinker:

The assault on conservative Americans began several decades ago with attacks on traditional principles and values. Belief in individual liberty and responsibility, free enterprise, and the rule of law was willfully conflated with “right-wing extremism.” Pride in America, a desire to protect our borders, and opposition to illegal immigration were branded as xenophobic. Championing the constitutional right to bear arms was decried as gun-crazed zealotry. Belief in religion, natural law, and the sanctity of human life was maligned as backward and anachronistic.

This vilification of conservatives has coincided with a deliberate shift from the real threats: radical Islamic and leftist groups. Islamic terrorist attacks have been declared as having “nothing to do with Islam” or excused by spurious claims that the perpetrators were mentally ill or misunderstood religious doctrine. When a military psychiatrist massacred 13 people in Fort Hood yelling ‘Allahu akbar,’ it was dismissed as “workplace violence.” And the violence, arson, destruction of public property, and killing of citizens and police officers unleashed by Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM) during the ‘Summer of Love’ are described as “mostly peaceful protests.”

Top Democrats haven’t shied away from embellishing the false narrative of a serious domestic terrorism threat from “right-wing extremists.” On his campaign trail in 2008, Barack Obama demeaned working-class voters hit hard by job losses, saying, “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion, or antipathy to people who aren’t like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment, or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” His statement aptly served the purpose of pillorying conservatives.

Ironically, when elected in 2009, President Obama’s first speech was to members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Cairo. It was praised by several MB affiliates deemed “unindicted co-conspirators” in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terror-funding trial in U.S. history, involving the transfer of $12 million to Hamas. The trial ended in 2008, with five indictments and the designation of over 300 MB-affiliates as co-conspirators. But material provided to the defense hasn’t yet been made public – or released even to Congress.

The shift in threat orientation — from Islamic groups to the right-wing – may perhaps be traced to 1993, following the first World Trade Center bombing. Then-president Bill Clinton had ordered FBI chief Louis Freeh to focus on domestic terrorists, or “right-wing militia groups.” As a result, valuable evidence of Al Qaeda operations, including the training of Arab nationals at U.S. flight schools, was ignored. Also disregarded was intelligence on Middle Eastern involvement in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. Military intelligence efforts such as Able Danger and Operation Green Quest were peremptorily disbanded. The first had data-mined information on Al Qaeda networks linked to 9/11, and the second had amassed evidence of terror finance, including that by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Under President Obama, the department of homeland security (DHS) ratcheted up fears of “right-wing extremism.” Its 2009 report, released by its new secretary, Janet Napolitano, theorized that the election of the first mixed-race president, the recession, the possible passage of firearm restrictions, and veterans reintegrating into civilian life would catalyze right-wing radicalization and recruitment. The report even conjured up the absurd specter of menacing groups imagining a ‘New World Order.’

To bolster the level of alarm, it incorporated a statement from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) warning of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists learning the art of warfare in the armed forces. The SPLC, a radical leftist advocacy group funded by George Soros, is a favorite of Democrat administrations, even of federal investigative agencies. The DHS report describes it as a “prominent civil rights organization.” The non-profit takes a bleak view of American society — as uniformly racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, and seething with “racial violence” and intolerance for “those who are different.” It does not consider MB affiliates and radical Islamist and Left organizations as dangerous. Both Harper’s and The New Yorker have described SPLC as a cash cow that served its now-disgraced founder Morris Dees.

Continuing the saga of whitewashing Islamic threats is the Terrorism and Extremist Violence in the U.S. (TEVUS) database, created in 2009 by the Obama administration. Administered by the DHS, it uses taxpayer funds to amplify White and right-wing violence when little or no violence actually exists. The reporting methodology excludes violence perpetrated by non-whites and falsifies the racial identification of other violent perpetrators. For example, the 19 Arab hijackers who murdered 3,000 people in the 9/11 attacks are described as “White/Caucasian, non-Hispanic.” (The TEVUS database does have ‘Arab’ as an option. However, the census does not include ‘Arab’, therefore, many Americans of Arab or Iranian origin end up describing themselves as White.) As a result, the maximum terror deaths are attributed to Whites, skewing statistics to make right-wing violence appear commonplace. TEVUS conveniently covers up the violence of BLM and fails to refer to Antifa even once.

In 2012, when the “National Security 5” — five members of Congress led by Michele Bachmann (R-MN) — called attention to the infiltration of government by MB operatives, they were criticized and their request for investigations was ignored. They had gathered a mountain of evidence, even identifying individual MB operatives in key positions, including those related to national security. The next year, the CIA, under John Brennan, who associated closely with Islamists, purged its training material of terms such as ‘jihad’ and ‘radical Islam.’ An interagency task force peopled with known MB sympathizers then extended the purge to all counterterrorism training material. Agents at all levels of military and law enforcement underwent mandatory retraining.

In 2017, yet another behemoth targeting conservatives was unleashed. Big Tech, the United Nations, the National Security Council, the European Union, and the British, French, and Canadian governments developed the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) to share, flag, and remove terrorist content. Under the guidance of the notorious SPLC, the forum departed from its efforts to exclude content from radical Islamist groups and announced it was adding “white supremacist” and other “hate group” material they perceived as promoting “violent extremism.”

Deploying what’s called the Dynamic Matrix of Extremism and Terrorism (DMET), a secret database and instrument of censorship, GIFCT ostracizes, deplatforms, and demonetizes groups opposing abortion and vaccination, and disputing the official narrative on COVID-19, the Bundy family, Jihad Watch and others. It draws legal sustenance from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the Rabat Plan of Action, and the U.N.’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights while ignoring free speech, enshrined in the Constitution of the U.S.

During the Trump presidency, a wave of censorship of conservative voices swept social media. Material posted by leftist groups like Antifa and BLM and Islamist groups, no matter how inflammatory or violence-inciting, was allowed, while conservative groups were silenced. In 2019, a Project Veritas exposé featured a Google insider who revealed that conservative websites like American ThinkerDaily CallerGateway PunditRebel Media, and others were being targeted, censored, and blacklisted. The exposé video has disappeared from YouTube.

The demonization of patriots reached its nadir in the Big Lie that the January 6th protests at the Capitol amounted to an “insurrection.” A legitimate protest against how the presidential elections were conducted was painted as seditious.  Last week, the DHS issued a terror warning conflating Americans protesting COVID-19 restrictions to jihadists who might strike on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.  A DHS bulletin warned, “anti-government, anti-authority violent extremists” may try to “exploit the emergence of COVID-19 variants by viewing the potential re-establishment of public health restrictions across the U.S. as a rationale to conduct attacks.”

The attacks on, and the maligning of, conservatives or those who advance narratives not favored by the Left have reached unimaginable proportions. They include constitutional violations such as wholesale censorship, vicious defamation, unjust imprisonment, unpunished assaults, and denial of rights to a fair and speedy trial. This perilous trajectory must be corrected. Otherwise, it will signal the end of our constitutional republic.

“The Biden agenda is apparently to help erode the idea of citizenship and anybody defined as an American”.

Are We in a Revolution and Don’t Even Know It?

We are in the midst of a revolutionary epoch and probably most don’t even know it.

By Victor Davis Hanson at American Greatness:

August 15, 2021

Institutions are being absorbed not just by the woke apparat, but by an array of ideologies that seeks to destroy them. 

The collective madness that ensued from the pandemic, the quarantine, the self-induced recession, the George Floyd killing and subsequent months of exempted riots, the election year, and the resurgence of variants of the Chinese-engineered coronavirus, all ignited the fuse of formerly inert socialist dynamite. And the ensuing explosion of revolutionary fervor in just a few months has made America almost unrecognizable. 

“Workers of the world unite!” was the old Marxist internationalist war cry. The perceived enemies of coerced socialism were nationalism— and the idea of singular countries defined by borders containing unique citizens legally distinct from mere migratory residents, and sharing ties and traditions that transcended race and class. All that is now problematic. 

If it is true that two million illegal aliens will cross the southern border with impunity in the current fiscal year, then the Biden agenda is apparently to help erode the idea of citizenship and anybody defined as an American. Under the socialist ethos, the indigent in Yucatan and the impoverished migrant from Nigeria have as much right to enter and live in the United States as U.S. citizens. And their respective rights under the living Constitution are now nearly identical. 

In just seven months, our southern border has vanished. Apparently, it was an artificial construct that obstructed the migrations of the global community. We are back to a natural, pre-civilizational and Rousseauian idea of freeing migrating tribes from the chains of civilization. And what better way to start than dispensing with unique borders, citizenship, and the idea of a nation state? 

Socialism aligns foreign policy with the interests of the global oppressed rather than the citizens of a particular nation. In reductionist terms, what do lifting sanctions on Iran and appeasing its theocracy, reaching out to Hamas and snubbing Israel, and allowing the Taliban to overrun Afghanistan have in common? Just as the United States is trying to rebrand itself as a sort of new, non-Western nation, so it clumsily seeks to recalibrate its foreign policy to cease support for the overdog, the American client, and the more Westernized. We are to believe that an empowered Persian Shiite crescent offers equity to the silenced of the Middle East. The Taliban, perhaps regrettably, better represents indigenous Afghan culture than does the Westernized bourgeois elite in Kabul. Hezbollah and Hamas are the more authentic Middle Easterners than the Western Zionist interlopers of Israel. In other words, our foreign policy is in a revolutionary flux. 

Liberals try to yank capitalism to the left; but true revolutionaries seek to dismantle the very tenets upon which it is based. No wonder that a recent poll showed most Democrats had a more favorable view (59 percent) of socialism than of capitalism (49 percent). 

So, the Right shouts “They are socialists!” And the Left fires back “smears and lies!” while quietly the Biden Administration has already begun systematically to warp the rules of free-market capitalism. In other words, we are apparently all to be socialists now. 

By continuing to suspend rental payments to landlords who have no redress to the courts for violations of their contractual leases, the government essentially has redefined private property as we know it. Who really owns an apartment or a room in a house if the occupant has not paid rent since last spring? Is the de facto owner the renter in physical control of the unit, or the increasingly impotent title holder who must still pay the insurance, taxes, and upkeep? 

Do we still recognize the principle that those who owe money must pay it back? Biden is talking about vastly expanding any prior idea of student loan debt cancellations by massive new amnesties. As capitalism transitions into socialism, what about the parents who saved to pay their children’s tuition, the students who worked part-time and took only the units they could pay for, or the working-class youths who decided loans were too risky and preferred instead at 18 to go straight to work? 

Are they hapless Kulaks? And what do we name the indebted students and the loan-sharking universities who finagled a collective $1.7 trillion in student debt? Revolutionaries? Who pays for what others have incurred? 

Supply and demand under capitalism adjudicate wages and thus the rate of unemployment. But have we ever seen an expanding economy seeking to meet pent-up consumer demands for goods and services without the labor to meet that need? The workers are everywhere and nowhere, but the government has deliberately persuaded millions not to return officially to work, given rising unemployment compensation is more remunerative than the wages of working. Have we now finally embraced the old Marxist canard, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”? 

Inflation and the devaluation of the currency are now seemingly a good thing; printing dollars erodes the savings of the thrifty and money spreads to those who allegedly need and deserve it. 

Note we owe nearly $30 trillion in national debt. Yet as the Biden Administration runs a $2 trillion annual deficit, it pushes an “infrastructure” bill that will mean additionally somewhere between $2 to $4 trillion of more printed cash. Ronald Reagan talked of “starving the beast”—cutting taxes to deprive the voracious bureaucratic state of its fiscal food. 

Now instead we are “gorging the beast”: exponentially expanding government with so much debt that higher taxes are inevitable. And with the red ink comes redistribution in the socialist sense of borrowing more to give to the deserving, and taking more from the undeserving—to borrow even more for the more deserving still. 

Socialism does not believe in the construct of “merit,” given it is predicated on free will that trends supposedly towards selfishness, and results in an absence of “equity”: that is why colleges have dropped standardized tests for applicants, and are jettisoning traditional ideas of “exclusionary” honors programs. 

Remember, under socialism, in T-ball style, we all win—or lose. Our shared purposes are not to help meet and surpass purportedly artificially constructed standards of excellence to ensure greater prosperity, security, and comfort, but to demolish such ossified constructs, and rebrand the formerly failed as the now successful. 

The revolution has already redefined crime as a construct in the eye of the bourgeois beholder. Our woke elite told us to cool it for 120 days of last summer’s riots, looting and arson, since in the words of the “1619 Project” architect and former New York Times reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones, “Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.” Torch a federal courthouse, a church, or police precinct and why worry over mere “brick and mortar”? Take over a few city blocks and, presto, we have a “summer of love.” 

“Defund the police” became a socialist slogan supposedly to remind us that “crime” is what the rich call going into Walgreens to grab something they never fret about needing. COVID-19 is not the real reason why prisoners are freed from jails and prison to commit new crimes at an alarming rate. Indeed, those people didn’t really commit crimes so much as reflect society’s bad karma of arbitrarily labeling what they did as “crimes” in the first place, which in truth were often simply cries from the heart.  

Two years ago, it would have been considered absurd that youth would ride bikes into drug stores and steal with impunity as security guards watched, or thieves could enter into Neiman-Marcus department stores and skip out with thousands of dollars of rich people’s favorites. Over $2 billion in “stuff” was destroyed in 2020. And almost none of the violence was ever properly investigated, the perpetrators arrested, charged, tried, convicted, sentenced, or incarcerated. 

In such revolutionary times, no one knows any more what is and is not a crime. Illegally storming the border when positive for COVID-19? Destroying a public statue of George Washington or Thomas Jefferson? Looting a corporate chain store? Knocking out an Asian-American septuagenarian? Or turning over the tables of Jewish-Americans as they eat? Taking over municipal blocks and declaring the confiscation an autonomous zone? Not crimes. “Illegal parading” inside the U.S. Capitol building? Crime.

Twenty years ago, on the eve of 9/11, there were earlier heated debates over cash reparations. The acrimony has now again resurfaced after the rioting that followed the death of George Floyd. 

Yet the Left this time around did not envision reparations as just monetary gifting for the distant descendants of the enslaved and the generations who grew up under Jim Crow. Rather, it is already recalibrating the Great Society doctrine of “proportional representation” quotas, achieved through “disparate impact,” into new reparatory and disproportionate quotas and allotments. 

We are jettisoning the old idea under our Lebanese-like system of racial spoils that each group deserved representation in hiring and admission commensurate to its percentages of the population—trumping many traditional meritocratic criteria of examination scores, grades, or prior work experience. 

No more. If one examines current fall 2021 entering classes at many of our elite universities, many minority groups will enroll with numbers disproportionate to their current demographic percentages but proportionate to the idea of reparatory “overrepresentation.” 

The same holds true of the racial make-up of new television shows and commercials, pilot training programs, and corporate board room representation. Again, the idea is that blacks, for example, should be represented in percentages exceeding 12 percent in any coveted honors or awards—to make up for past underrepresentation, given prior mere proportionality offers no reparatory justice. 

In a strange way, for all the furor over reparation payments, the issue already is beginning to be settled quietly by our major institutions. Note class consideration will have no role in such disproportionate and compensatory action. 

Another revolutionary crackpot idea was ending nuclear power and fossil fuels and replacing them with wind and solar generation that would power our homes and our new envisioned national fleet of electric cars. No one quite believed the revolutionary Left would be so suicidal as to spike the energy costs of the middle class, make the United States dependent again on imported oil from the autocratic Middle East and Russia, and strangle the oil and gas industry that had enriched America. 

But without much debate, Joe Biden has cancelled the huge ANWR oil and gas project in Alaska. He shut down the Keystone Pipeline and destroyed Alberta’s export of oil to the United States. He nixed all new fossil fuel leases on federal lands. He discouraged frackers from using their full inventory of rigs. As gasoline heads to $5 a gallon, Joe Biden, in the months before the next midterm elections, asks OPEC to send us its hated carbon fuel to help our addicted, but suddenly furious, commuter-voters.  

Here is a final reminder of why the revolution has already turned society upside down. The canniest elements of the aristocracy always cut deals with the revolution and indeed often remain the nomenklatura. What unites Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and the Silicon Valley billionaire crowd are the exemptions they purchased from revolutionary justice. 

In the old days they would have gotten dachas on the Black Sea coast and three dial phones on their desks. These days they keep their billions if they give a hundred million dollars in “civility” bounties here to Van Jones (ex-truther and expert on why white people are supposedly responsible for mass shootings) or there seed $500 million to key voting precincts to help ensure the good people defeat the bad. 

In 1961, Cubans were not quite aware that they were experiencing a Marxist takeover. Nor were Russians fully cognizant in 1917 of the plans that the Bolsheviks had for them over the next few decades. It is hard to see during anarchy, chaos, and collapsing institutions that leftists still have an agenda for what will emerge on the other side. 

In other words, we are in the midst of a revolutionary epoch and probably most don’t even know it.

Note From Mark Waldeland!

Physics professor: ‘Chance of life originating on its own by natural processes is zero’


‘Canceled Science: What Some Atheists Don’t Want You to See’

Physicist Eric Hedin was canceled before the term cancel culture was even coined.

He taught a very popular class at Ball State University for six years called “Boundaries of Science” before pressure from atheists in 2013 prompted campus leaders to cancel the course.

Hedin never taught “Boundaries of Science” at Ball State again, but he continued teaching physics there and even got tenure. Eventually he left the Indiana campus to take a job at Biola University, a private Christian school in Southern California.

More recently Hedin has revisited the Ball State experience that thrust his name into the national spotlight and made him the poster boy for intelligent design for a season. Earlier this year he published the book “Canceled Science: What Some Atheists Don’t Want You to See.”

“Canceled Science tells the dramatic story of the atheist campaign to cancel Hedin’s course, reveals the evidence the atheists tried to bury, and explores discoveries that have revolutionized our understanding of the nature and origin of matter, space, and even time itself,” the online book description states.

Hedin, in an interview with The College Fix on Tuesday, said his book comes at a time when there’s more evidence than ever for intelligent design.

(The following Q&A has been edited for length and clarity)

As the title of your book suggests, what is it that atheists don’t want us to see?

Evidence that points to something beyond nature as being responsible for major aspects of our universe, in particular the origin of the universe. The laws of nature all seem to be finely tuned to a value that of course allows life, but there’s some razor sharp or knife-edge tuning to these parameters that really can’t be explained by saying, “Oh, it’s just luck.” The level of biological information that is within the cell far exceeds what can be attained by any natural process we can think of, and actually there are laws of physics that claim that natural processes cannot generate that level of complexity that is functional, specific, information-rich, resembling machines, architecture and coding. There’s also the esoteric aspects of human nature: a mind, a consciousness, emotions, a spiritual sense. These go beyond what can be explained by appealing to random interactions between particles guided by the push-pull forces that we find in nature. We see the universe, we look at it, we study it, and we find evidence of intelligent design. The more we study nature, the more evidence for something beyond nature comes into the picture.

Do people who have not studied this issue in depth truly understand the mathematical enormity of the fine-tuning argument? It’s not just “the chances are low” that life arose by chance.

Honestly, as a physicist I would be willing to say the physical reality chance of life originating on its own by natural processes within this universe is zero, not just low. It’s because the universe is not infinitely big. There is a finite universe. We don’t have an infinite amount of time, the universe has a finite age, roughly 13.8 billion years. That limited time, limited spatial extent of the universe means that there’s a limited amount that any natural randomness could generate. The probabilistic resources of our universe fall short of what is necessary to develop even one large functional protein molecule that would be just one of tens of thousands of different protein molecules that are needed for human life to exist. It’s almost to me desperate to keep trying to think that this could have happened by chance.

It’s been said that it takes more faith to be an atheist. Why do your peers in the scientific community ignore all the evidence that points to design in life and nature?

Atheism has some similarities to a religion. The teaching of evolution and the teaching of naturalism is ingrained in the sciences and the educational system. There are people who want to keep it that way because they know if it didn’t happen naturally, then it’s happening supernaturally, and that opens the door for a divine designer and they are very opposed to that. A lot of times they think, “Well, we just need to keep studying and we will find some, almost vital force, some emergent system of complexity that explains it all naturally, even though what we already know dictates against that.” That was why I called my course at Ball State “Boundaries of Science.” There are boundaries to what nature can accomplish naturally.

Who should read your book?

I wrote the book to appeal to a broad audience. It has a high school-plus level of assumption of scientific literacy. It’s not a textbook filled with equations. It’s heavily resourced and references scientific literature, so it’s not just my own ruminations. I particularly hope that people would read it who wonder what is the scientific evidence just in general for something beyond naturalism. I also think it can be very useful for people of faith who believe that there’s a God behind the universe and origin of life but are unsure how to navigate science that they may pick up from popular media or a course they took in high school or college. I believe it can be a faith-strengthening read for people who may approach it from that angle.

The intelligent design movement does not endorse a particular religion per se, just that all this could not have happened by accident, correct?

That is the main thrust, although my own personal conviction is that the designer is the God of the Bible. That comes through in a few places in the book but I don’t start with that.

Is there a place for Christian scientists? How do students who attend a Christian university and major in science forge a career?

A lot of scientific research is neutral with regard to faith and God and origins. If you are an engineer trying to design some system, you just need to know the practicalities, and we teach that. Even within biological research a lot of the day-to-day, nitty-gritty research, you just better know your stuff, your biochemistry, and the interactions, and how things work at the cellular level. [Christian universities] teach all that.

Is there an example of a scientific breakthrough that came about thanks to a stance in support of intelligent design?

It used to be the idea that DNA was composed of a lot of “junk DNA” and that was considered to be evidence for evolution, it was thought to be left over relics. Some atheists made a big point of that. But I believe you can point to certain researchers committed to intelligent design and the belief that that’s how our life and our cells came into existence who persisted in suggesting that if we study junk DNA those portions of the DNA that are considered junk, we should actually find something that’s useful, maybe we don’t understand it yet. Well, it turns out, that’s the case! Part of the junk DNA that turned out to be important tells the cellular mechanisms when to turn on and when to turn off, it’s kind of a control sequence.

The College Fix has featured professors from respected secular institutions that have questioned a natural origin of the universe, including Yale University’s David GelernterUniversity of Oklahoma’s Michael Strauss and Rice University’s James Tour. We’ve also reported on how over 1,000 scientists — including many past and current professors from various institutions — have signed “A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism.” Is there a growing acceptance of intelligent design?

I have heard some things that indicate that there is a greater degree of acceptance, maybe not across the board but at least being admitted in some scientific peer-reviewed articles. Other scientists who maybe once adhered to Darwin are dissenting. So I believe the evidence is having an effect. After a while you get tired of trying to ramrod something against the evidence and I think that this idea of naturalism just doesn’t add up with what we continue to discover.

MORE: Physics professor tells students scientific evidence points to a ‘designer’