• 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


(The first time I wrote the following LUCK OF MY LIFE at this site, was about fifteen years ago. I was born dyslexic….and have never been able to read a novel. I LOVED LEARNINGS FROM THE PAST! So much so I studied LATIN and ROME for three years at St. Paul Central, the last three years of its LIFE in the school!

I wish to thank the recent reader who reminded me of the writing. HOW CORRUPT AMERICAN PUBLIC SCHOOLS HAVE BECOME IN THEIR TEACHINGS SINCE THAT TIME!!! ghr…

One of the most eventful times in my young life was listening to  lectures  by a 68 year old (going on 120)  old maid school teacher, Mabel Wicker at Central High School in St. Paul, the fall of 1948.   If she did weigh 100 pounds,  every pound was distant and cold.   She had apparently one and only one drive in life…… to teach Shakespeare, Dickens,  George Eliot and the like.

I was 14  that late  September.   I was impaired as a reader.  I couldn’t read fiction whether five pages or five hundred.   Earlier in my life I  had trouble recognizing letters, but strangely, I was never bothered  when ‘reading’  encyclopedias and newspapers,  or scanning and studying atlases.

By second grade I knew the population of St. Paul in 1930 was 271,606, according to my memory at age I am writing this note.    Eventually,  I could read many  wonderful lines of Shakespeare after beautifully toned by this red-wigged relic, Miss Wicker,  once she  had pronounced them in lecture.

“Let me have men about me that are fat…….Sleek-headed men, and as such men as sleep a-nights. ……Yon Cassius has a lean and hungry look.   He thinks too much.    Such men are dangerous.”

I found reviews similar to  the following Julius Caesar  guide at GrAde Savers.   Do read the following to put Caesar’s comment about Cassius in context:

“A soothsayer approaches Caesar and calls out for attention. Caesar allows him to speak, and the man tells Caesar, “Beware the ides of March” (1.2.25). Caesar ignores this warning and calls the man a dreamer. Caesar then leaves with his assembled men.

Brutus and Cassius remain on the stage. Cassius tells Brutus that he has noticed Brutus acting more serious lately. Brutus tells him that he is “with himself at war” (1.2.48) and that Cassius should not worry about it. After a shout and cheering from offstage, Brutus remarks he is afraid the people will crown Caesar king. Cassius is thrilled to hear this, and tells Brutus that they were both born as free men the same way Caesar was. He tells Brutus a story in which he and Caesar were holding a swimming contest across the Tiber river, and Caesar started to drown. Cassius claims that he rescued Caesar and carried him to the shore. He then complains that Caesar has become so powerful that even though he once saved Caesar’s life, he must now bow before him.

Cassius then tells Brutus that “Brutus” is just as good a name as “Caesar”, and that both names could just as easily rule Rome. He invokes the image of Brutus’ ancestor who founded the Roman Republic and expelled the former kings. Brutus, afraid that Caesar will become a king, struggles to decide whether to join Cassius in taking action against Caesar, but ultimately decides against it.

Caesar returns, accompanied by his followers. He turns to Antony and remarks, “Let me have men about me that are fat, / Sleek-headed men, and such as sleep a-nights. / Yon Cassius has a lean and hungry look. / He thinks too much. Such men are dangerous” (1.2.193-196). Antony dismisses Caesar’s concern, but Caesar is not convinced that Cassius is completely trustworthy. He tells Antony to come with him and let him know if there is anything to be worried about.

Casca remains onstage with Brutus and Cassius and tells them that the three shouts they heard were because Antony offered Caesar the crown three times, but he turned it down each time. Casca then says that Caesar swooned and fell down with his mouth foaming at the lips. (Caesar was considered to be epileptic, called the “falling sickness”.) When Caesar awoke, he begged to be forgiven for his infirmary. Casca adds that the people forgave Caesar and worshipped him even more for turning away the crown. He also explains that Murellus and Flavius, the public tribunes, were removed from office for pulling the decorations off of Caesar’s statues. Cassius, hoping to lure him into the conspiracy against Caesar, invites Casca to dinner the next night. Brutus also takes his leave, but agrees to meet with Cassius the next night as well. In a soliloquy, Cassius informs the audience that he will fake several handwritten notes and throw them into Brutus’ room in an attempt to make Brutus think the common people want him to take action against Caesar.

Act One, Scene Three

Casca meets with Cicero, one of the great Roman orators, and tells him he has seen many strange things on the streets of Rome that night including a slave with a burning yet uninjured left hand, a lion loose in the streets, and an  owl hooting in the daytime. Cicero tells him men interpret things in their own way, and takes his leave.”

Or how about this quote from Julius Caesar which I haven’t forgotten:    Again from GrAdeSaver:

“You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things!”    Caesar complains about the public masses around him.

“Julius Caesar opens with the tribunes of the people chastising the plebeians for being fickle. They refer to the masses as “You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things!”(1.1.34). This imagery of the masses as stones will continue throughout the play. They are in fact a fickle group of people, easily swayed by whoever is speaking to them, as evidenced later in the play when Antony turns a hostile crowd into a mob against Brutus and Cassius.”

Miss Wicker’s teachings of Shakespeare’s lessons of life and society overwhelmed me emotionally, educationally, and I think, spiritually.    My Church told me Man was flawed.    I understood murder and theft as a child.   Now I was beginning to understand conspiracy, jealousy  and  intrigue.

I believe Abraham Lincoln received most of his early learnings from the Bible and Shakespeare, taught to him by his step-mother.     One cannot go far wrong in life when nursed into learning from such ‘primary’ readers.

In “Merchant of Venice”, I learned when Miss Wicker expressed Shylock’s questions:       “I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.”

I remember to this day the tears which covered my eyes as she continued her “lecturing” simply by reciting the play hilights  by memory.

I learned that “the quality of mercy is not strained …….it droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven upon the Earth below.  It is twice blessed.    It blesseth him that giveth and him that receiveth…….as mercy’s   ‘attorney’ Portia  pleaded on his behalf…..or as I remembered the verse more than 60 years later….but I looked it up at found this:

“The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven,
Upon the place beneath.
It is twice blessed.
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
It is mightiest in the mightiest,
It becomes the throned monarch better than his crown.
His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,
An attribute to awe and majesty.
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings.
But mercy is above this sceptred sway,
It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,
It is an attribute to God himself.
And earthly power doth  then show  likest God’s,
Where mercy seasons justice.
Therefore Jew,
Though justice be thy plea, consider this,
That in the course of justice none of us should  see salvation,
We all do pray for mercy
And that same prayer doth teach us all to render the deeds of mercy.
I have spoke thus much to mittgate the justice of thy plea,
Which if thou dost follow,
This strict court of Venice
Must needs give sentance gainst the merchant there.”

(Oh damn….I forgot to continue….”It is the mightiest in the mightiest, It becomes the throned monarch better than his crown.”   This I remembered but could go not further in memory.)

Art, when made beautiful is the greatest teacher of all.   I was lucky, so lucky in my learning life that these wonderful old maid school teachers loved beautiful art so much, they became artists themselves in their knowledge and its delivery.

It all died my senior year when the Liberal Educators squelched the classical curriculum.   No grades were to be given beyond pass-fail.   No Shakespeare, nothing classical.   “We are going to teach you how to think.” the principal Mr. Lenander declared in an assembly to the seniors.

In social studies that year we were supposed to learn how to plan cities.

That eventually was changed to “We are going to teach you what to think”, a few years before the Obama Era by the intellectually sterile  Left who gained control of learnings in America…..the Bill Ayers crowd.

Share this:

Customize buttons


When America Used To Be Beautiful!March 20, 2022

Back In The Yesteryear Of My Lucky Life…August 24, 2021With 4 comments

The Most Profound Words I Have Never Forgotten:October 2, 2020With 2 comments

Glenn H. Ray, on August 7, 2017 at 10:50 pm said: Edit CommentMr. Thompson, you hit the leftist’s jackpot murdering in America, the poisoning of the nation’s Federal Constitution. This Left projects its own evil upon every group they oppose. It is They who are the fascists, the racists, the jealous, vile, and deceitful, the salespersons of fake news who own nearly all of news television and newsprint, and it is They who propagandize at university nearly universally to hate America. It is They who are disrupting, destroying the country!Reply

Glenn H. Ray, on August 1, 2018 at 11:41 pm said: Edit CommentNote: It’s August 1, 2018…..and I’m still alive to the joy of some and the despair of others, mostly Leftists. I taught Russian at the University of Minnesota High School as my first career, Having earned a MA degree in Russian at Middlebury College, I received an NDEA grant in 1966….to travel around European USSR, that fascistic police state, the USSR. The Soviets were short of money….the US short of Russian Language teachers so a deal was made creating this “National Defense Education Act” allowing around twenty high school American teachers of Russian would spend time and money in the Soviet Union “getting acquainted” to a devious “Jim Acosta” fake news style police state.
Our America of today with its CNN, MSNBC, PBS, NBC, CBS, ABC its universities, and news industries, is being served an enormous dose of fascism from its Democrat Party, press and schools……the leftist kind united with about 3 million or more illegal immigrants swamping our borders, with the rise of fascist California….since the election of Barack Hussein Obama in 2008.
Ignorance is now bliss in America…..Feminism, fascism, ignorance, seem “married” together to remove knowledge, wisdom, tolerance, and JudeoChristian decency from our American experience…probably forever. What do you think, dear readers? ghr

“Vladimir Putin is well known as a Stalinist”

May 5, 2022

Spitballing Putin’s Mystery Ailment

By Ted Noel, M.D. at American Thinker:

After the fourth email of Putin’s hand flapping crossed my desk, I gave in and started my research. Those dozens of dust-binned claims of Putin being on death’s door might even have some credibility. But what do all of those mean? And why me? Just because I spilled the beans on the public evidence that Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit likely suffers from Parkinson’s Disease? Now everyone thinks Vlad has it, too?

Let’s get one thing clear from the beginning. That hand flapping tremor in the video just doesn’t look like Parkinson’s. PD usually has a “pill rolling” tremor, which is much smaller than the one in the video. This agrees with multiple neurologists who are reported to have concluded that whatever Putin may have, PD doesn’t appear likely. Putin’s is a whole-hand flapping tremor of sufficient violence to blow papers off a desk. And at this point, we must make the standard disclaimers.

I have not examined Vladimir Putin. I have not verified the tremor video, but since it came from several usually reliable sources, it appears legit. And that puts me in the same position as our national intelligence analysts. We must make the most reasonable conclusion possible from admittedly inadequate evidence. In other words, it has become my job to rush in where angels fear to tread. As Willie Edwards from “Swamp People” says about us trying to wrangle alligators, “Good luck with that.”

What follows is informed speculation.

Flapping tremors are called “asterixis” and are most commonly a result of alcoholism and liver failure. The tremor is not what should bother us. Rather, the metabolic consequences of lifetime vodka consumption should concern us. That gradually causes liver failure and increased blood ammonia levels. And while ammonia makes glass clear, it does the opposite for thinking. It’s a sedative. And that takes us to something we’re all familiar with: intoxication. But before we get there, we must take a small side trip.

Vladimir Putin is well known as a Stalinist. He believes that the greatest geopolitical tragedy in history is the fall of the Soviet Empire. He would like nothing better than to impose the Kremlin’s iron gauntlet around the neck of all those nations that broke away beginning in 1989. His invasions of Georgia and Crimea seem to be just preludes to dragging many free peoples back under his steel boot. And as a KGB officer, he is well aware of the mechanisms to keep control once it is established. His murder of Alexander Litvinenko, multiple reporters, and attempted murders of Alexei Navalny and Sergei and Yulia Skrupal show us a completely amoral authoritarian.

Imagine this evil character when a bit intoxicated. Alcohol may be a sedative, but vodka doesn’t put you to sleep at first. Instead, it knocks out your self-control centers. The true you comes through. In vino veritas! We are familiar with this from movies where an angry drunk gets into fights. Now imagine that drunk with an army and nuclear weapons.

Image: Puffy Putin clutches a table. YouTube video.

Ammonia in the blood acts as a sedative. It’s quite gradual and, at low levels, we can expect it to behave like alcohol. But it doesn’t go away easily. A failing liver keeps on making it, and the chemistry of the brain locks it in. Here comes the “liver flap.” The control centers slowly go to sleep while the rest of the brain keeps going. Now we have Ivan the Terrible.

The parallels with Adolph Hitler are worthy. While he had Parkinson’s Disease, the loss of judgment is similar. His generals kept telling him the war was lost, but he insisted they push forward to the glorious victory as thousands of Hitler Jugend died for nothing.

Loss of judgment due to liver failure in a powerful megalomaniac is a little different. He believes that he is destined to restore a permanently lost glory. But he has no respect for life in the quest. It matters little that most of his forces are combat ineffective due to casualties. It matters less that years of armor production have become steel alloy salad at the hands of the Ukrainian army. The sinking of his Black Sea flagship is of no consequence. If Ukraine will not surrender, he will bomb it into the Stone Age in his rage. Transnistria and Moldova will join the cauldron. If twenty generals die on the front lines because his army is incompetent, so what? I’ll send the twenty-first. There is only one possible outcome: Victory!

Russia Is Still Run By Soviet Type Fascists….Only “ALMOST” Stalinist By Culture Mood?!

May 4, 2022  Topic: Russia-Ukraine War  Region: Europe  Tags: RussiaSphere Of InfluenceUkraineNuclear WeaponsNATO

Ukraine Is a Russian Vital Interest, and Moscow Will Behave Accordingly

Advocates of helping Ukraine achieve “victory” and thereby humiliate Russia are flirting with Armageddon.

by Ted Galen Carpenter at the National Interest:

Analysts and pundits in the United States and Europe are increasingly optimistic that Ukraine can win its war against Russia. They also are prodding the Biden administration to increase the flow of military hardware to Kyiv to maximize Ukraine’s chances of victory. A new missive along those lines comes from Council on Foreign Relations Senior Fellow Max Boot in a May 2 Washington Post column. Boot contends that the United States should provide Ukraine “with every weapon it needs to win.” Nor, according to Boot, should the administration let Vladimir Putin’s threats of escalation deter Washington from that course of action.

More worrisome than recklessly hawkish sentiments from smug pundits is that U.S. and European officials also speak openly of helping Ukraine win its war and inflict a humiliating defeat on Russia. The U.S. delegation headed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that visited Kyiv at the beginning of May repeatedly emphasized that theme, along with a pledge of Washington’s continuing military assistance until victory is achieved.

What such individuals do not seem to comprehend is that Ukraine is a vital Russian security interest, and the Kremlin likely will do whatever is necessary—probably even the use of tactical nuclear weapons—to prevent a defeat. The failure to understand just how important Ukraine is to Russia caused Western leaders to disregard Moscow’s warnings over more than a decade against making Kyiv a NATO member or an informal military ally. For the same reason, they seem to be making an even more dangerous blunder by ignoring the Kremlin’s latest warnings about dire consequences if NATO uses Ukraine as a pawn in a proxy war against Russia.

Boot and other pundits even dismiss comments coming from Russia about the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons. Michael McFaul, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia, contends blithely that warnings from Putin about using nuclear weapons in response to mounting Western military assistance to Kyiv should be ignored. “The threat of escalation is cheap talk,” McFaul states confidently. “Putin is bluffing.”

Boot likewise considers the risk of a nuclear confrontation to be minimal. “The least likely scenario is the most apocalyptic one: Russia attacking NATO countries with conventional or nuclear weapons. Putin isn’t suicidal, and he knows that the U.S. response would be devastating.” Boot does concede that “a more limited use of nuclear weapons against Ukrainian bases or population centers is slightly more plausible.” However, Biden can thwart such a scenario

…by emphasizing that, while under current circumstances the United States will not fight Russia directly, all bets are off if Putin goes nuclear. Even without resorting to nuclear weapons of their own, NATO could launch airstrikes that would rapidly sink the entire Russian Black Sea fleet and destroy much of the Russian army in and around Ukraine. That would shake Putin’s criminal regime to its foundations.

Such confident hawks insist that the Biden administration not give in to Russia’s “nuclear blackmail.” They seem serenely oblivious to the probable consequences if they are wrong. Typically, Boot appears to believe that the mere threat of NATO airstrikes against Russian targets would intimidate Putin. The possibility that Russia would instead decide to wage a wider nuclear war in response to sinking “the entire Russian Black Sea fleet” or the destruction of “much of the Russian army in and around Ukraine” doesn’t seem even to occur to him. Yet such a response from a cornered great power facing a catastrophic defeat involving a vital security interest (a compliant Ukraine) is not only possible, it is highly probable.

Contrary to the dangerously blasé attitudes on the part of foreign policy hawks, it is imperative for the United States and its NATO allies to take the Kremlin’s new warnings very seriously. Perhaps Western elites erroneously believe that Russian leaders are as prone as their U.S. counterparts to invoke the concept of vital interests with casual promiscuity. Political leaders who insisted that Vietnam and Iraq constituted vital U.S. security interests were certainly guilty of that offense. The degree of risk that the United States is incurring to assist Ukraine is the latest evidence of such carelessness and sloppy thinking.

However, nations have genuine vital interests, and great powers will do almost anything to prevail in such situations. For example, the United States would never tolerate outside interference if it took military action to prevent Canada or Mexico from joining a powerful, hostile military alliance led by China. Any effort on Beijing’s part to support a Canadian or Mexican armed “resistance” would be considered an extremely provocative act. And if Washington concluded that because of that outside interference it was about to lose the war, it would be extraordinarily hazardous for the People’s Republic of China to assume that U.S. leaders would keep the conflict non-nuclear.

Ukraine occupies an importance to Russia comparable to Canada’s or Mexico’s importance to the United States. Preventing Ukraine from becoming a NATO military pawn is the most vital of vital interests to Russian leaders. The closer that Moscow comes to suffering defeat in the Ukraine war, the more likely it is that the Kremlin will do whatever is necessary, take whatever risks are necessary, to prevent such an outcome. Advocates of helping Ukraine achieve “victory” and thereby humiliate Russia are flirting with Armageddon.

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at the National Interest, is the author of twelve books and more than 950 articles on international affairs.

Fascist Dems Move To Remove Civil Majority Whip, Dem Jim Clyburn……(He’s PRO LIFE!)

Texas progressives demand Clyburn rescind his endorsement of only pro-life Dem in House

KAREN TOWNSEND May 05, 2022   

Democratic National Convention via AP

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn traveled to Texas Wednesday to campaign for Rep. Henry Cuellar. When the trip was first announced over a week ago, this wasn’t seen as a big story. Clyburn endorsed Cuellar in the primary race and is supporting him in the run-off race against progressive Jessica Cisneros. Then the leak from the Supreme Court happened on Monday night and the timing of the trip became awkward.

Henry Cuellar is the only pro-life Democrat in the House. He was first elected to the House in 2005. The Democrat leadership in the House supports his re-election which puts them at odds with the progressive wing of the party. The progressive candidate challenging Cuellar is the same one who challenged him in 2020, Jessica Cisneros. Cisneros gave Cuellar a run for his money in 2020 and the same holds true today. Cuellar was the only House Democrat last year to vote against a proposal to codify Roe v. Wade. In light of the Supreme Court leak and the left’s total freak-out over the opinion, Cisneros issued a statement calling on Democrat House leadership to rescind its support for Cuellar.

Clyburn wasn’t swayed and came to Texas anyway to campaign with Cuellar. The message from Clyburn is that the Democrat Party is a big tent party (I know) and he may not agree with Cuellar’s views but his is an important voice in the House. Clyburn kept to the campaign’s schedule and attended several events around Laredo with Cuellar.

“We have a big-tent party, and if we’re gonna be a big-tent party, we got to be a big-tent party,” Clyburn told reporters after an evening rally at an outdoor barbecue joint. “I don’t believe we ought to have a litmus test in the Democratic Party. I think we have to bring as many people into the party as we possibly can.”

Addressing a crowd of about 80 people from the stage of his campaign rally, Clyburn hailed Cuellar for his role as a chief deputy whip, saying together they have been “very effective in getting Joe Biden’s [agenda] across the finish line.” He joked that he does not always agree with Cuellar just like he did not always agree with his late wife of 58 years. But he said people do not “grow” if they speak only with those they agree with.

“We have to sit down with people with whom we do not agree and try to find common ground so that you do what is necessary to continue moving this country forward,” Clyburn said.

That event at the barbeque restaurant was noted by a reporter on Twitter covering it and one snarky response by another Texas reporter caught my eye. Not that the snark was unusual but the reason for the snark.


The response that the turnout was small was odd to me. We aren’t talking about an event for Robert Francis O’Rourke. This is a longtime incumbent running for re-election from Laredo. It was a Wednesday evening and it was outside. How many regular people can come out on a week night, apparently around dinner time as food was served, to listen to politicians? The quote above says there was about 80 people in attendance, which sounds pretty good, right?

Cuellar made of point of prioritizing his beliefs.

“I’m a Democrat — but I follow the words of [Lyndon B. Johnson], who said many years ago, ‘I’m an American, I’m a Texan and then I’m a Democrat — in that order,’” Cuellar said. “If you put the party first before your country, you’re doing a disservice. I think what we need to do … is make sure that we put our country, our district, first, and that’s what I do.”

There is little room in today’s Democrat Party for reasonable members. Cuellar is pro-life but he’s still a Democrat and votes with the party leadership on most issues. He is a moderate, especially by today’s standards, but he’s a Democrat. Cuellar is supported by the top three Democrats in the House, including Clyburn. Cuellar’s supporters know him and likely will not be swayed by the hyperbole coming from Cisneros and other progressives.

Cuellar has the support of not only Clyburn but also House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the No. 2 House Democrat, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Their names and others were featured prominently on campaign literature that was handed out at the rally.

Asked about the high court’s leaked opinion after the rally, Cuellar reiterated a statement he issued Tuesday evening. He criticized the draft opinion, saying it is “not based on precedent” and “not incremental in nature like they should be.” But he told reporters he is a Catholic and “you know my position,” adding that many people in his district believe in “at least some sort of limitation on exception.”

After the rally, attendees said they supported Cuellar, often offering effusive praise and recalling a long relationship with him, but made clear they disagreed with him on abortion.

State Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins of San Antonio, a Cuellar endorser who spoke at the rally, also said her views on abortion did not align with Cuellar’s. But she said she understood that belief was grounded in his Catholic faith.

“I’m pro-choice all the way, OK? But that’s one issue,” she said.” That one issue don’t separate me from supporting someone in my party because we can agree to disagree, and I hope we as Texans and we as Americans really start looking at it that way. One issue doesn’t stop us from having a relationship.”

Oddly, Cisneros tried to scare pro-abortion Texans by saying Cuellar may be the one vote, “the deciding vote”, on the “future of our reproductive rights.” Not sure exactly what she’s talking about but does she realize that she’s running for a House seat and not one in the Senate? Anyway, the abortion issue isn’t going to save the midterm election cycle for progressives, if you ask me. There are too many other issues on the minds of voters in Biden’s America. They are far more concerned about inflation gobbling up whatever pay raises they may be lucky enough to receive, or the open border bringing thousands of illegals into their community in Laredo, or supply chain issues hampering their work and everyday lives.

The run-off election date for Cuellar and Cisneros is May 24. Will Democrats in the district go more for a candidate endorsed by Bernie Sanders and AOC, or will they stick with the incumbent who has the support of House leadership? We’ll know soon.


Democrats Don’t Just Want To Keep Roe, They Want The Unlimited Ability To Kill Preborn Babies

BY: JORDAN BOYD at the Federalist:

MAY 05, 2022

unlimited abortion

While voters are hesitant to endorse unlimited abortion, many Democrats have made it a key part of their platform going into the midterms.

Author Jordan Boyd profile


Democrats are outraged that, according to a leaked version of the Dobbs v. Jackson opinion, the United States Supreme Court is poised to strike down Roe v. Wade — but their hypocritical insistence that abortion is the “law of the land” is fueled by the party’s determination to codify abortion without any restrictions.

Polling suggests that a majority of Americans are opposed to killing babies in the womb up until birth. A 2021 survey from The Associated Press and NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 80 percent of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in the third trimester of pregnancy. A more recent Fox News poll conducted shortly before the Dobbs opinion leak found that 54 percent of registered voters support laws restricting abortion after 15 weeks.

Despite the fact that American voters are hesitant to endorse unlimited abortion, many elected Democrats have made it a key part of their party’s platform going into the 2022 midterms.

When asked “if he supports any legal limits on abortion,” Democrat Sen. Raphael Warnock refused to answer directly and instead said, “I support a woman’s right to choose.”

Pennsylvania’s Democrat Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, who is running for a chance at a U.S. Senate seat, was even more straightforward about what he believes about unlimited abortions.

“Are there any limits on abortion that you would find appropriate?” a reporter asked.

“I don’t believe so, no,” Fetterman replied after pledging to nuke the filibuster to codify Roe v. Wade.


Democrat candidates have also joined the frenzy of leftists scrambling to proclaim their belief that women have “a right to choose” to end the life of an unborn baby at any time without question.

When Fox News’s Bret Baier asked Ohio Democrat congressman and Senate nominee Tim Ryan whether he supports any limits on abortion, Ryan tried to skirt the question.

“I think what we had established in Roe, is something that we can continue to work with, and I think those could be the parameters,” Ryan began.

“My question is about any limits to abortion?  At any point? Late-term? Anything?” Baier asked.

“You gotta leave it up to the woman,” Ryan said.

When Baier pressed him again, Ryan said “you and I sitting here can’t account for all the different scenarios…”


Similarly, when NBC’s Chuck Todd asked Ohio Democrat gubernatorial nominee Nan Whaley “where do you draw limits on the issue of abortion?” she deflected.

“I think that we need to make sure we have access. I’ve fought with Pro-Choice Ohio and Planned Parenthood to keep our clinics open,” she said. “I don’t think government should be involved in it.”


Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke admitted on Thursday that when it comes to legal restrictions on abortion, he believes “this is a decision for a woman to make.”


Pennsylvania Senate candidate Conor Lamb acknowledged his support for unlimited abortion during his state’s Democrat debate this week.

“If your right is a right, it’s your right the whole way through pregnancy,” Lamb said. “This is a constitutional right that women have, and that they deserve to have.”

Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution this week that “My support of abortion is grounded in the belief that this is not the role of our government, it is not the role of lawmakers.”

“It is the responsibility of women and their doctors, women and their families, women and whomever they choose to bring into the conversation, but it is not the conversation for government to be having,” she said.

Arizona gubernatorial candidate Katie Hobbs also insisted in a local interview that she is not a fan of imposing limits on abortion.

“What would your limits be on this? This limits nearly all abortions after 15 weeks. Where do you draw the line?” the host asked.

“Well, women deserve access to abortion care. Abortion is health care. I’ve been very clear on my position on that throughout my time in the legislature. So if I’m elected governor, that’s what folks are getting. And I will work with the legislature that’s in place to ensure that women have continued access to reproductive health care,” she said.

The host once again pressed her on the issue.

“But where do you draw the line though?” he asked. “I mean, if it’s not 15 weeks, is it 24 weeks? Where do you draw the line where you say, okay, abortions after this point of time, no, it’s a no go?”

“Abortion is a personal decision between a woman and her family and her doctor. And that’s something that needs to be discussed in the medical exam room, not by politicians,” she replied.

Are Minnesota Dems Driving To Create IGNORANCE AS THEIR GOD?

MAY 5, 2022 BY JOHN HINDERAKER at PowerLine:


Remember when Democrats assured us that they just wanted to get rid of statues of Confederate generals, plus Jefferson Davis? That was the issue in Charlottesville. But of course it didn’t stop there. Liberals don’t hate the Confederacy, they hate America. So inevitably, the Great Emancipator is now in their sights.

Here in Minnesota, Democratic Representative Jamie Becker-Finn complains about having to see a portrait of Lincoln in the Minnesota House chamber. My colleague Bill Walsh reports:

Cancel culture has now reached President Abraham Lincoln, the man who wrote the Emancipation Proclamation declaring enslaved people “shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free.” Democrat Rep. Jamie Becker-Finn (DFL-Roseville) complained about Lincoln’s presence on the House floor this week during a debate on an education bill.

We are asked to serve, we serve in this body, we have to look at President Lincoln every day we are in this space.

The humanity! Bill surmises, no doubt correctly, that Becker-Finn’s contempt for Lincoln stems from the Great Sioux Massacre of 1862. In that uprising, the Sioux committed the worst massacre by either side in the period from 1492 to the present, slaughtering, among many others, 100 children under the age of 10:

Rep. Becker-Finn describes herself as a Leech Lake Ojibwe descendant, so we assume her objection to Lincoln is based on his role in the Dakota War of 1862. … President Lincoln personally reviewed the case files of hundreds of Sioux who were sentenced to death for their roles in the uprising. After his review, Lincoln commuted the sentences of all but 38 of them after determining they were simply soldiers fighting in battle. He reduced the list to those “guilty of individual murders and atrocious abuse of their female captives.”

Becker-Finn gives no credit to President Lincoln for his discretion in sentencing and apparently believes Lincoln should have acquitted all of the men convicted of these heinous crimes.

This is the kind of idiocy that we are used to, coming from the Left. The truth is that far more than 38 Sioux should have been hanged. But in many cases, their mass murders left no survivors to testify. In other instances, there were survivors but they were unable to identify under oath the specific Indians who committed murders and rapes. And no doubt some who should have been hanged escaped, or were killed in the encounters with actual soldiers, rather than women and children, that ended the “war.”

Years ago, Scott and I wrote an op-ed in the Star Tribune debunking leftist myths about the hanging of 38 murderers and rapists in Mankato. But the myths persist. Our governor participates annually in a horseback ride that culminates in Mankato, honoring the 38 murderers and rapists. He has officially apologized for what was in fact a miscarriage of justice only to the extent that so many vicious criminals went unpunished.

In the current issue of Thinking Minnesota, John Phelan has a sober and balanced account of the 1862 massacres and ensuing “war.” This is how it started:

On the morning of Sunday, August 17, four Lower Sioux — Killing Ghost, Breaking Up, Runs against Something When Crawling, and Brown Wing — were hunting deer near Acton Township in Meeker County. Coming across the farmstead of Mr. and Mrs. Robinson Jones, they found some eggs and debated whether to steal them. They goaded each other into doing rather more.

They went to Jones’ store and then followed him to the house of his son-in-law, Howard Baker. There, they challenged Jones, Baker, and another visitor, Viranus Webster, to a shooting contest, which they accepted. Jones and Baker fired but did not reload. The Sioux then turned and shot the Joneses, Baker, and Webster dead. They rode away, passing Jones’ store where his 15-year-old daughter, Clara, was watching from the doorway. She, too, was shot dead.

The next morning, Sioux led by Little Crow, who had reluctantly joined in the spree killings, attacked the Lower Agency:

Indians besiege the town of New Ulm

The Lower Agency was wiped out and Myrick was reputedly found with grass stuffed in his mouth. But some of Little Crow’s Sioux — perhaps no more than 200 out of 2,000 — pursued fleeing survivors like Dr. Philander Humphrey and his family. Mrs. Humphrey was weakened from recent childbirth, so they rested in a house. Dr. Humphrey sent his 12-year-old son for help, but before he returned the doctor was shot dead and the house set on fire, burning his wife and two children alive. When Humprey’s son returned, he witnessed Sioux cutting off his father’s head.

The killings spread. More than 50 were murdered at Milford Township. At Lake Shetek, 15 were murdered including Willie, Belle, and Francis Duley, aged 10 years, 4 years, and 6 months respectively. Elsewhere, August Schwandt, then aged 12, recalled how Sioux approached his family’s cabin, shot his father, and hacked to death his mother, two brothers, pregnant sister and her husband, and a hired hand. August himself was beaten and left for dead.

Refugees fleeing the Dakota onslaught

Many of those who fled fared no better. Helen Carrothers was among an ambushed group. She recalled how a Sioux took a baby belonging to a seriously ill woman named Henderson and “holding her by one foot, head downwards, deliberately hacked her body, limb from limb, with his tomahawk, throwing the pieces at the head of Mrs. Henderson. Some of the Indians made a big fire and when it was burning fiercely, they lifted the feather bed on which Mrs. Henderson lay, and tossed bed and woman and the mangled portions of her children into the flames.”

These are the crimes that are celebrated by Minnesota’s far-left governor, Tim Walz. It is quite remarkable that in the aftermath of these appalling massacres, the U.S. government’s response was so moderate. But that isn’t how crazed leftists like Walz and Rep. Becker-Finn see it. Watch for the portrait of Abraham Lincoln to disappear from the House chamber before long.