• 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

Disorder In Today’s America!

MAY 25, 2022 BY SCOTT JOHNSON at PowerLine:


We are still processing the tragedy yesterday in Uvalde, Texas. The Associated Press has just posted the story “Gunman kills 19 children, 2 adults in Texas school rampage” with the latest information as of this morning. (The comparable Reuters story is here.) The scene is still being processed and the count may or may not be final.

At the moment we can only pray: pray that the facts will be known, pray that the injured will recover, pray that the memory of the murdered children will live on, pray that the families of the victims find consolation in their faith and in the memories of their loved ones, and pray for our troubled country.

Losing loved ones in something like the ordinary course of life is hard enough. Losing children to insane mayhem is something else. Seeing video of adults weeping and comforting each other brings it home in a way with which any parent can identify. It hurts.

But for the heroic deeds of law enforcement it could have been worse. “The attacker was killed by a Border Patrol agent who rushed into the school without waiting for backup, according to a law enforcement official,” according to the AP story. The story reports:

One Border Patrol agent who was working nearby when the shooting began rushed into the school without waiting for backup and shot and killed the gunman, who was behind a barricade, according to a law enforcement official speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about it. The agent was wounded but able to walk out of the school, the law enforcement official said.

More here. While we pray for the kids and their families, we can thank God for men such as the elite Border Patrol agent and others who intervened. They saved a lot of lives.

We are apparently fated to have our heartbreak and sorrow aggravated by a certain breed of politicians. The breed finds the moment of unspeakable tragedy fit to undertake histrionic displays and hysterical lectures promoting their favored causes. Among this number is President Biden, who could have met the moment but chose not to. He failed it. The White House has posted the transcript of his remarks here.


Race-Based Illness at the Best of the Best

At elite universities one must never, ever criticize students of color, especially the black students. Those individuals are sacred.

By Mark Bauerlein at American Greatness:

May 24, 2022

It looks like the long persecution of Professor Joshua Katz by his employer Princeton University has come to an end. The Washington Free Beacon reported last week that the school president “passed his recommendation that Katz be stripped of his tenure and fired to the university board of trustees,” and the board rubber-stamped it Monday. The whole episode nicely exemplifies the cowardice and incompetence of the liberals who run elite institutions in the United States today. 

The ostensible cause of the termination is a relationship Katz had with a student many years ago, an impropriety that was handled and closed long before the current controversy began. In truth, this current situation has nothing to do with Katz’s private history. The older matter is a false pretext for his termination. Katz’s current sin originates far from the Princeton campus, on the website Quillette, where on July 8, 2020, he published a piece called “A Declaration of Independence by a Princeton Professor.” 

That word independence should clue you in immediately to the danger Katz risked when he wrote the essay, for few personality traits are more ruinous in the academic habitat than that of one’s willingness to dissent, to go one’s own way, to gainsay conventional wisdom. For all of the humanities professoriate’s praise of “speaking truth to power,” it is a profession populated by timid conformists with fearful sensibilities. Few fields in the world exert and police their dogmas more vigilantly than does that of our tenured wordsmiths. Katz was doing what all of them pretend to do but don’t—and so he had to pay. 

The essay was not an original or separate expression. It followed from something else, an antiracism initiative of his colleagues at Princeton, which they laid out in a forceful letter addressed to Princeton’s high administrators and dated July 4, 2020. (The text of the letter is here—and do note how Katz turned their July 4 timing against them with his own title.) The letter rode the wave of George Floyd protests, asserting that the United States was a fundamentally racist nation whose guilt remains high. Princeton University also has a big race problem, the drafters charged, in that it maintains “anti-black practices” in faculty hiring and service, and it allows “microaggressions and outright racist incidents” to continue to the present day. 

The situation calls for immediate reform, the letter insisted. A set of specific demands followed, including: 

  • An outside committee that would monitor racism at Princeton;
  • Anti-racism training for all; 
  • An extra sabbatical and extra resources for junior faculty of color;
  • A policy favoring departments with higher faculty diversity numbers;
  • Rewards for “antiracist student activism”;
  • Penalties for departments that show no diversity improvements;

The monitoring of faculty research and publication for evidence of racism.
That is just a partial list. There are many more demands, but you get the idea of just how illiberal and hostile to academic freedom this list of demands really is. Call it a faculty version of the dozens of “list of demands” issued by black students back in 2015 in the wake of the Ferguson, Missouri shooting, which called for changes on campus that even the most liberal administrators realized would crush basic academic norms. Nevertheless, this time more than 200 members of the Princeton community signed it, demonstrating an astonishing willingness of the nation’s elite educators to climb on a shameless and destructive identity-politics bandwagon.

Not Katz, though. His Quillette rejoinder opens with this comment on the signatories: “I am embarrassed for them.” Remarking on the perks assistant professors of color would enjoy should the administrators comply, he considers this “pigmentation” criterion “mind-boggling.” As for the surveillance of faculty research and publication (for signs of racist leanings), Katz calls it “outrageous.” He worries that it will evolve into a “star chamber with a low bar for cancellation, judgment, suspension, even dismissal.” To those who might find that warning alarmist, consider the irony of his concern in light of what has just happened to Katz himself. 

(Note: One can hardly imagine a more direct violation of academic freedom than this committee proposal. Not only would it scrutinize faculty work for signs of bigotry each year, but it would also define what bigotry is and where the lines should be drawn. Would a researcher who studies the black-white achievement gap and cites SAT and GRE scores as evidence be guilty of racist activity? He would if the committee said so.) 

Katz also had something to add about rewards given to antiracist student activists. The demand letter had gone so far as to single out one such group as deserving of apology. Here is the full sentence: 

Acknowledge, credit, and incentivize anti-racist student activism. Such acknowledgment should, at a minimum, take the form of reparative action, beginning with a formal public University apology to the members of the Black Justice League and their allies. 

The letter doesn’t detail why an apology is due. Obviously, there’s a history here, but the letter doesn’t explain it. It merely demands “reparative action.” 

This particular exaction Katz did not let stand. His comment upon it refers to one historical episode—but not one the signatories had in mind. Here is what he says: 

The Black Justice League, which was active on campus from 2014 until 2016, was a small local terrorist organization that made life miserable for the many (including the many black students) who did not agree with its members’ demands. Recently I watched an ‘Instagram Live’ of one of its alumni leaders, who—emboldened by recent events and egged on by over 200 supporters who were baying for blood—presided over what was effectively a Struggle Session against one of his former classmates. It was one of the most evil things I have ever witnessed, and I do not say this lightly. 

Read that paragraph twice. Those words are, in fact, the crux of the two-year machinations to remove Katz from Princeton classics. Here we have a contrary judgment of a group the letter framed as a wronged party. The letter cast the League as sinned against. Katz marked them as vicious. 

And that ends the story of Katz’s crimes. We can stop right there. Nothing more needs to be pondered or analyzed or debated about the case. Those two sentences say it all; they sealed his doom the moment they were read in central New Jersey. 

The reason is simple. In higher education in America in the 2020s, if you have tenure and a decent record of publication and teaching, you can argue over many things, raise doubts about this or that leftist dogma, pose worries about identity politics, challenge the secular religion that rules the departments, and only suffer a little ostracism here and some discrimination there. If you do it with a smile, firmly but collegially, some will surely despise you, but others will stay polite and even pleasant. Everyone knows you are no threat to the prevailing order, and life goes on. 

But—you must never, ever criticize students of color, especially the black students. At elite universities, those individuals are sacred. Really, they are. They possess a moral authority that surpasses that of everybody else. Those 19-year-olds scare the presidents and provosts and deans to death. If you ever want to see a $500,000-per-year college leader, usually so composed and involved, turn to stone—no confidence on his face anymore, the firmness gone from his posture—just get eight black students to march down the corridor to his office with menacing scowls on their countenances. 

Our president knows what it means: nothing but pain. Remember, those kids were recruited to Ivy U with prophecies of success and joy and welcome. “You will prosper and thrill at our most inclusive and inspiring haven,” they were told. Promises were made, and if those students one year in weren’t happy, if their lesser grades knocked them out of pre-med, if they didn’t find the school’s traditions to their liking, well, that’s the school’s fault. Administrators and professors told them so every time they raised the question of systemic racism and noted the rarity of black professors in their own departments. 

Katz wouldn’t play this dishonest game. He blurted a discomfiting truth about those sacred ones. When he called this one activist group “terrorists,” the charge could not stay put as a narrow description of the nasty acts of specific persons, which, we may add, Katz stated were perpetrated against other black students as well as whites. No, a taboo had been broken; no qualifying distinctions could be admitted. Katz had chided a black group, period. He was guilty, the verdict was instantaneous, and termination was inevitable. All that remained to do was to find a pretext for the execution, one that went beyond words (and thereby didn’t deny Katz’s academic free speech). The old case of a student relationship was revived, the patent farce of it being the time of the involvement: 2006. 

The whole sorry affair reveals a sickness in elite academia that goes much deeper than political bias. It’s not an ideology—it’s an anthropology. Our leading intellectuals have made skin color into a focus of taboos, prohibitions, shame, crime, and punishment. In the name of antiracism, they have countenanced overt wrongs against conscience. They have elevated racial difference into a treacherous and imposing reality. How one behaves relative to it is closely watched. The ones who operate cannily within it, who know how to exploit its codes—not just obey them—and who cleverly direct its policing toward inconvenient personages—they prosper. You don’t get to be president of such institutions unless you are an unprincipled, scheming, finger-always-in-the-wind, ever so flexible, superficially conscientious and deeply calculating bureaucrat, as is the current holder of that post at Princeton. 

Katz couldn’t take it anymore. He had to speak up and speak out. His blunt Thoreauvian dissent did, indeed, offend his colleagues and supervisors. The identity politicians knew immediately that this brand of refusal had to be shut down. They didn’t want him to inspire any imitators.

As for the more or less moderate liberals on campus, those utterly bourgeois figures who flirt with radicalism in a nice, safe way, they had a different response, though still a reactive one. Katz made them uncomfortable, especially where they agreed with him. He put them on the spot: “You know how illiberal this letter is—I have protested—you should, too.” In other words, he pressured them to live up to their own pretensions, and they didn’t like that. No way would they swim against the woke tide. His action forced them to acknowledge their own weasel character. To have done that to a group of people who regard themselves as superior beings was unforgivable. 

Katz will move on to a more interesting and fulfilling life. I am sure of that. Princeton’s leadership believes that with Katz gone, the troubles will pass. But, as with every other elite university, the Princeton brand has been slipping for years, and the Katz affair adds one more degradation to the record.

Our major institutions are led by people who don’t understand that the protective politically correct actions they take only harm the institutions they lead. They can’t do otherwise, of course, or they would lose their jobs. One wonders, though, if any of those well-paid executives ever look in the mirror and feel a sore temptation to hit the office and do exactly what Katz did, pronounce a great big “no” to the forces of political correctness. If they did, they’d end up in early retirement but perhaps much happier. The spiritual improvement that comes with honesty may be worth a lot more than the material cost. 


May 25, 2022

Has there ever been a more cruel, tone-deaf president?

By Patricia McCarthy at American Thinker:

All that is left of Joe Biden’s never very bright mind is his viciousness.

Biden’s speech after the Buffalo mass shooting was as obscene as his speech in the wake of the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas was last night.

He was barely there — frail and blank, reading the teleprompter with no emotion until he got to blaming guns.  Then he yelled with thoroughly phony anger at all Americans who revere the Second Amendment.  It never occurs to leftists like Biden that had one or two or three of the staff at the market in Buffalo or the school in Uvalde been armed and trained, those nineteen children might be alive.  Israel figured this out decades ago. 

If he ever had a soul, it’s long gone.  If he ever had empathy for others, that has never been evident.  Joe Biden has always and only cared about Joe Biden.  Those who have known him over the years most certainly know this; anyone who has known him well knows he is not a good man, all of which makes the people who installed him in the office of the president as heartless and power-mad as he is. 

In the fifteen months he has been in office, he has nearly destroyed this nation.  In his mindless quest to “transition” away from fossil fuels, he has almost brought the country to a standstill.  No baby formula, gas prices nearly double what they were under Trump.  Diesel so costly, the truckers we all depend on for nearly everything cannot afford to fill their tanks.  So market shelves are becoming empty of products we’ve long taken for granted.  Almost every move or step Biden has taken seems calculated to do damage to the middle and working classes and to further enrich the already massively wealthy — the Pelosis, the McConnells, the Kerrys, the Bezoses, etc.  Those folks have become astonishingly wealthier due to the pandemic, a government-perpetrated hoax if there ever was one. 

And this most terrible president cannot let a tragedy like the massacre in Buffalo and then in Uvalde, Texas go to political waste

As a nation, we have to ask: When in God’s name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby? When in God’s name will we do what we all know in our gut needs to be done?

It’s been 3,448 days — 10 years since I stood up at a high school in Connecticut — a grade school in Connecticut, where another gunman massacred 26 people, including 20 first graders, at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Since then, there have been over 900 incidents of gunfire reported on school grounds.

Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Santa Fe High School in Texas. Oxford High School in Michigan. The list goes on and on.

And the list grows when it includes mass shootings at places like movie theaters, houses of worship, and, as we saw just 10 days ago, at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York.

I am sick and tired of it. We have to act. And don’t tell me we can’t have an impact on this carnage.

Does Biden ever speak worryingly about the hundreds of deaths that occur in Chicago every month?  No.  Did he spend any time decrying the deaths in Waukesha?  Nope.  To Biden and his handlers, deaths caused by minorities are justifiable unless their weapons can be blamed rather than the perpetrators themselves.  This brings us to the utter inanity of his latest speech.

What in God’s name do you need an assault weapon for except to kill someone?

Deer aren’t running through the forest with Kevlar vests on, for God’s sake. It’s just sick.

And the gun manufacturers have spent two decades aggressively marketing assault weapons which make them the most and largest profit.

For God’s sake, we have to have the courage to stand up to the industry.

People have an absolute right to defend themselves, by any means necessary.  But gun-grabbers like our leftists always blame the law-abiding for the bad acts of criminals.  Anyone with a modicum of common sense knows that the criminals will always find a way to get guns.  Common sense dictates that citizens are safer when the bad guys must assume that everyone might be armed.  Mass shootings do not occur in places where many people may be armed. 

The Second Amendment is not the problem; anti–Second Amendment activists are the problem.  Mass shooters always choose locations where they know no one will be carrying a weapon.  The Colorado theater where the Aurora shooting occurred bore a sign saying, “This is a gun-free zone.”  Such shooters are mentally ill — deranged, even, but not necessarily stupid.  Most of them can read.  They laugh at the left’s anti-gun campaigns; it makes their mania so much simpler to indulge.

If there is one thing that characterizes the left, it is its lack of common sense.  There were two shootings last week, in New York and California, two states with the most restrictive gun laws.  Meanwhile, Illinois has very strict gun laws, too, but hundreds are killed each month in gang and other criminal violence in Chicago.  The same goes for Baltimore and St. Louis.  Biden gives no speeches about the tragedies of those deaths.  The gun laws Biden advocates, laws that would leave guns only in the hands of criminals, are a boon to the murderous crazies; they let them know where it is safe to kill people. 

Biden talked and talked about unifying the nation, but he has, from day one, with every word and deed done the opposite.  He has brought this country to the lowest point in many decades, economically, culturally.  With his wide open border policy and evisceration of the military, his capitulation to China and his fomenting of war in Ukraine, he has made us catastrophically less safe. 

Biden’s speech paid lip service to the families of the murdered children but only as an introduction to his angry rhetoric re: the gun lobby.  “It’s time to act.”  This from the man who supports letting criminals go free without bail but tortures those still imprisoned for being present at the Capitol on January 6. 

He lied when he said that after the assault weapon ban, shootings went down.  They did not.

Joe Biden is the worst president in my lifetime for countless reasons, but his contempt for those of us who revere the Bill of Rights and the Constitution makes him the most dangerous.

(Note from Glenn….I used to teach American History fifty years ago when schools were American, civilized, and sought TRUTH.)

“Fascism is an evolution of socialism”. 

May 25, 2022

Forget the Marxists: Here’s the Real Enemy of America

By Frederick Hink at American Thinker:

To win any fight, we must first know our enemy.  There are those who argue we are in a struggle with Marxism, though in reality, we battle the organizational and operational tenets of the Marxist tree, not the ideology itself.  We know that this is not a Marxist movement because it ignores Marxism’s core clientele: the workers.  In fact, these people despise the Marxist’s traditional constituents.  Instead, they toil for a small minority of the “marginalized” in society whom middle Americans find to be fringe and anathema to their core values.

Even then, their movement doesn’t seek a revolution of the marginalized.  They define the ills of society so that governments can unilaterally impose restitutive “justice”: defunding law enforcement and prosecution, promoting violence and riots, and forcing curriculum indoctrination throughout the educational system.  They seek power through chaos.

If there is a power that wishes to usurp a democratic and free market society, then to attack with the chaos of a Marxist “revolution” will drive those most affected to willingly surrender freedom for security — You will own nothing and be happy! — and into the warm arms of the promise of a new civilization dedicated to the progress of mankind.  Italy once succumbed to the promises and adopted fascism upon the bourgeoisie’s and governing elites’ fears from the encroaching evils of socialism, as had been witnessed in Soviet Russia.

Don’t be fooled by rhetoric.  Fascism is an evolution of socialism.  The difference is how the economy is managed.  Ludwig von Mises summarized the primary differences between socialism (the Russian pattern) and fascism (the German pattern).  Socialism owns everything, and the individual is simply a serf to the state; fascism “preserves private ownership of the means of production and keeps the appearance of ordinary markets,” though these markets are highly controlled by the state.  The German pattern, Nazism, introduced, through its barbarity, the dark specter of fascism, but fascism’s evil birth was in Italy.

Disillusionment following WWI was the catalyst for fascism.  Benito Mussolini, an avowed socialist, too became disillusioned and, with the partnership of neo-Hegelian philosopher Giovanni Gentile (who stated, “Fascism is a form of socialism; in fact, it is its most viable form”) developed a system and philosophy that nationalized the will of the people and integrated limited markets into the state.

Socialism enslaves the soul; fascism enslaves the illusion of freedom.

Fascism has been described as Corporatism.  Many mistakenly believe that it was centered on capitalism and nationalism and was thus a right-wing movement.  It was not.  Mussolini termed Corporatism (the state) as a means of economic and societal organization and control within the confines of fascism; the state is the corporation, and the individual silos of the economy, which he termed syndicates, are the means to collectivize society.

In a 1926 speech, Mussolini laid out the role of markets within the state:

The Ministry of Corporations is not a bureaucratic organ, nor does it wish to exercise the functions of syndical organizations which are necessarily independent, since they aim at organizing, selecting and improving the members of syndicates[.] … [I]n the centre and outside, [the] integral corporation becomes an accomplished fact, where balance is achieved between interests and forces of the economic world. … The achievement of these aims is speeded up by the fact that all economic organizations, acknowledged, safeguarded and supported by the Corporative State, exist within the orbit of Fascism; in other terms they accept the conception of Fascism in theory and in practice.

It is the actual structure of Mussolini’s fascism — the partnership between governmental authority and economic syndical cooperation — that is the model for current attempts at using fascism to infiltrate and control global economic, political, and cultural institutions.

Capitalism has the power to shape society and act as a powerful catalyst for change. …  When we harness the power of both the public and private sectors, we can achieve truly incredible things.

—Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, 2022 Letter to CEOs

No, Larry Fink, Bill Gates, George Soros, nor any of the other Davos creeps is a Mussolini lurking in the weeds.  Each of them is a steward of individual syndicates, but the power rests in the corporation: the World Economic Forum.

Today, we see the WEF as the binding strap on the fascio, or syndicates.  It acts as both an ideological center and an organizing force for universally stated goals for the management of mankind.  A brief listing of these WEF U.S.-based partner corporations (below) demonstrates the syndicates organized under the umbrella of the corporation.

As we enter a unique window of opportunity to shape the recovery, this initiative will offer insights to help inform all those determining the future state of global relations, the direction of national economies, the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons. Drawing from the vision and vast expertise of the leaders engaged across the Forum’s communities, the Great Reset initiative has a set of dimensions to build a new social contract that honours the dignity of every human being.

— World Economic Forum, the Great Reset

The implementation of ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance), as an example, has been ordered from the WEF to the world financial syndicates, and Mr. Fink is taking his orders seriously by aggressively pushing ESG.  ESG is fast becoming the great culling of industry.  While there has been recent pushback, Davos and the WEF are not deterred.  ESG uses metrics to provide social responsibility scores for corporate commitment to woke management and the war against climate change.  ESG will be a requirement for Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings in the near future.  It is already having deleterious effects on the oil and gas industry and is one of the origins of our current energy crisis.  The energy syndicate, too, has followed its orders.

The Fascist conception of the State is all embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism, is totalitarian, and the Fascist State – a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values – interprets, develops, and potentates the whole life of a people.

— Fascism Doctrine and Institutions, by Benito Mussolini, Giovanni Gentile (1932)

Those outside fascism hold no value.  We must fight back against the tirades of these infantile intellectual dwarfs; fight back against woke capitalism; fight back against the indoctrination of your children; fight back against their unleashing of chaos upon our streets.  Use your two votes, at the ballot box and in your wallet, to push back as much as you can, but there will be more for us to do.  

We are not fighting Marxism, socialism, or communism.  This is a top-down revolution.  We are fighting a fascism that surpasses Mussolini’s and Hitler’s dreams of complete power over the people, for this is global in nature.  The sooner we can develop the strategy to stave off these attacks and possibly even beat them back, the sooner we can start the long march toward freedom once again.  Without defining and understanding the enemy, we will lose.

Frederick Hink was a long-time market intelligence consultant, executive director of an education advocacy group, and former politician.  Fred writes at frederickhink.substack.com and can be reached at frederickhink@protonmail.com.

Remember Minneapolis’ Racist 6’4″ George Floyd, THE THIEF? THE ROBBER? THE RIOTER, THE LEFTIES who sent police officers to JAIL?


Former Minneapolis police officers Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng and Thomas Lane were found guilty of violating George Floyd’s civil rights by a federal jury in St. Paul, Minnesota, on Thursday.

The 12 jurors – four men and eight women – found Lane, Kueng and Thao guilty of depriving Floyd of his civil rights by showing deliberate indifference to his medical needs as former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin knelt on Floyd for more than 9 minutes on May 25, 2020, ultimately killing him. The jurors also found Thao and Kueng guilty of an additional charge for failing to intervene to stop Chauvin. Lane, who did not face the extra charge, testified that he asked Chauvin twice to reposition Floyd while restraining him but was denied both times.

Violating a person’s civil rights “is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any,” according to the Department of Justice. Federal sentencing guidelines suggest the officers could receive a lesser sentence.

Phil Cavuto of Fox News today compared the recent disaster at Uvalde, Texas of an eighteen year old white killer of twenty one humans at school with the “suffering of six foot six, powerful black thief, George Floyd, whose drug intakes and violence while robbing businesses and fighting police caused his accidental death! The court leftists claimed cause of death was white racism…..

Black and White leftist savages spent hours, days, months savaging American towns and communities for more than a year before they slipped under human control.

DEMS REMAINED LEFTY DEMS TO THIS VERY DAY! Do follow the news political manipulations, first burped by Fox News’ Phil Cavuto reference today…GHR

Please Review the case against the police officers that May a couple years ago.

That Schumer Mouth In Action!

BREAKING: Schumer calls off gun-control votes

ED MORRISSEY May 25, 2022 at HotAir: 

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Maybe old dogs can learn new tricks after all. Or maybe Nancy Pelosi finally shared some sage advice with Chuck Schumer about calling for votes on bills that can’t even get all of his own caucus together.

Either way, Schumer’s planned stunt votes on gun control have been postponed on account of math:

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) told colleagues on the Senate floor Wednesday that he will not immediately bring gun-control measures to the floor in the wake of two mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas, because he doesn’t expect them to muster enough Republican votes to pass.

Instead, the Democratic leader said he will wait for Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and other members of his caucus to try to negotiate a bipartisan compromise with Republicans on a measure that has a better chance of securing 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.

“There are some who want this body to quickly vote on sensible gun safety legislation, legislation supported by the vast majority of Americans,” he said. “They want to see this body vote quickly so the American people can know which side each senator is on …. I’m sympathetic to that, and I believe that accountability votes are important.”

But Schumer said he thought that bringing gun-control legislation in the immediate aftermath of Buffalo and Uvalde, where two lone shooters left a total of 31 people dead in the span of 10 days, would be fruitless because of staunch Republican opposition to such reforms.

Schumer was singing a different tune earlier, queuing up some quick floor votes on two long-moribund bills as a way to stick it to Republicans for midterm messaging. What happened? It appears that his own caucus thought better of exploiting the tragedy in Uvalde for cheap political point-scoring. Instead, a handful of them want more time to work across the aisle to see if Congress can actually pass something responsive to the issues at hand.

Kyrsten Sinema in particular seems skeptical that Schumer’s bills were the answer:



It’s not just Manchin and Sinema that want to take more time to mull over the options. Jon Tester said he’d vote to open debate on a bill to expand background checks, but only if Schumer could reach some sort of compromise that would pass:


Manchin’s not happy with the House bill, though, and might not vote to open debate:


Just how would that have affected the Uvalde shooting? The perpetrator bought his weapons legally over the past week, as it turns out. And the report about body armor appears to have been erroneous as well:


With all of this ambiguity and lack of cohesion, Schumer apparently decided that it was better to wait than to conduct a stunt vote that might end up embarrassing him and his caucus. That’s certainly a novel strategy from Schumer in this session. There’s a first time for everything, it appears.

And there might not be a vote at all in this session:


Needless to say, progressives who wanted Schumer to hold Republican feet to the fire are, um … not impressed.



Can Schumer resist pressure like this to avoid yet another extreme-policy vote that will torpedo endangered incumbents like Mark Kelly — who’s still veeeewwwwwwy qwwwiiiieeeetttt about any issue this year? Stay tuned!


Biden Admin: K-12 Schools Must Put Boys In Girls’ Bathrooms To Get Federal Lunch Money

BY: JOY PULLMANN at the Federalist:

MAY 25, 2022

Middle schoolers at school lunch

Joe Biden and Democrats weren’t kidding about their pledge to transform public institutions into gender dysphoria contagion zones.

Author Joy Pullmann profile


K-12 schools must allow boys into girls’ private areas to obtain federal funds for lunches, breakfasts, and snacks, the Biden administration announced this month. A U.S. Department of Education spokesman told The Federalist the Biden administration’s press releases from several agencies announcing this policy will be followed by formal rulemaking in June.

“It seems to be playing politics with feeding poor kids, which is really unfortunate,” John Elcesser, executive director of the Indiana Non-Public Education Association, said via phone amid weeks of attempting to sort out these new demands with government officials on behalf of private schools in his state. “Because if a school feels like they cannot participate because it’s in conflict with their mission or values, if a religious exemption is not granted, you’re taking away a program that’s feeding low-income kids.”

Before many schools shut down in response to Covid-19, the National School Lunch Program fed nearly 30 million kids every school day, in approximately 100,000 public and private schools and residential care facilities.

Under this new demand, establishments that accept any federal food funding, including food stamps, must also allow males who claim to be female to access female private spaces, such as showers, bathrooms, and sleeping areas. Such organizations must also follow protocols such as requiring staff to use inaccurate pronouns to describe transgender people and allowing male staff to dress as women while on the job.

Religious institutions, however, qualify for a waiver exempting them from these requirements, said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Greg Baylor in an interview Monday. According to the 1972 Title IX law, he said, religious institutions don’t have to file any paperwork to be exempt, although they can if they wish.

Baylor noted, however, that publicly affirming a commitment to sexual reality by seeking an exemption acknowledgment from federal agencies may assist extremist pressure campaigns. The activist group Human Rights Campaign’s blueprint for the Biden administration pushed for narrowing religious exemptions for multiple federal regulations and for the administration to “out” individuals and institutions who request such exemptions.

The Biden administration appears to be following that blueprint closely. According to Elcesser, USDA officials are telling schools to file paperwork to be exempt, although the Title IX law says that’s an option but not required. The USDA confirmed that to The Federalist Tuesday with this emailed statement: “Organizations may request a religious exemption by submitting a written declaration to the Secretary of Agriculture identifying the provisions that conflict with a specific tenet of the religious organization.”

Government schools can receive no exemption. At best, parents and taxpayers can urge school districts to not comply while inevitable lawsuits over the Biden administration’s interpretation work through courts for years.

“The Biden administration is grossly extending the Bostock holding where it does not belong. Like many of the Biden administration’s power grabs, this imposition transgresses areas of proper state and local authority. As the principal guardians of federalism, state attorneys general have the ability to combat such overreach where it injures state functions,” Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, a Republican, told The Federalist in a statement.

Even if this regulation is ultimately overturned by one means or another, millions of American children will be forced to eat their school lunches with a side of sexual politics.

“There is a lot of harm that comes from inflicting this interpretation of Title IX on public schools and private schools that are not eligible for the exemption,” Baylor said. In Loudoun County, Virginia, in 2021, a young woman was sexually assaulted in a school bathroom by a young man granted access by the district’s transgender policies.

Parents have told The Federalist that their daughters no longer use the bathrooms or locker rooms at their public schools because they don’t feel safe there. Many parents are finding after the fact that school districts are helping their children live as the opposite sex and hide that from their families.

“Some percentage of school districts want to be told by the federal government that they have to implement gender ideology,” Baylor observed. “If anyone complains, they can say, ‘We’re just doing what they told us. Go blame Joe Biden, not me.’”

As Biden promised to do while campaigning, his administration is pushing sexual confusion on as many institutions as it can. This aim has gotten a huge boost from the 2020 Supreme Court decision Bostock v. Clayton County, an unconstitutional ruling that gives this extremist sexual agenda a legal fig leaf. That 5-4 decision clinched by President Donald Trump-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch, however, concerned sex differences not in education but employment.

While the majority opinion said Bostock only applied to Title VII, or employment law, it provided the rationale and excuse to extend this reasoning elsewhere. And the Biden administration’s press releases are ignoring the ruling’s claimed limits to apply it to other areas of federal code, particularly education’s Title IX, as many predicted.

Not only is the Biden administration’s use of federal food subsidies to impose sexual politics legally suspect in substance, it’s also legally suspect procedurally, Baylor said. That’s because press releases are not legally enforceable. Only federal regulations that have followed proper legal procedures are.

That hasn’t happened yet with this Biden administration demand, although the USED spokesman said the proposed regulation will be issued in June. Yet even after the regulation is issued, federal agencies are required to accept public comments for several months, then they must spend several more months reviewing all comments and responding, then writing and issuing a final regulation, which then can — and will be, Baylor said — challenged in court.

“When they do things some other way, just by some regulatory guidance or a press release or a memo, that in itself can be a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and that’s precisely what we’ve argued in some of the cases we’ve filed on this issue,” Baylor said. “…We think they’re making shortcuts and we’ve challenged that in court.”

So it appears with this demand, just like with the Biden administration’s so-called vaccine mandate, the administration is slow-walking the legal procedures required. That delays inevitable lawsuits, which themselves take years to work out. This process effectively imposes unpopular, extremist gender policies extra-legally, through fiat and intimidation. Meanwhile, many elected officials can and do sit on their hands and claim it’s the courts’ job to solve what they can end immediately through legislative action.

Given that Biden holds the presidency for more than two more years, all this means that American children who don’t attend Christian schools will be subject to social chaos at school for a long time, atop lockdowns that have already deeply damaged their learning trajectories. Remedies include withdrawing children from public schools, school boards refusing to follow regulations that are not legally binding until all court challenges are resolved, schools refusing to accept federal funding that comes at such a high cost, and state legislatures and Congress passing new laws to limit and undo the disastrous Bostock decision.

“The uncertainty is really unfortunate, and what we need are courageous parents who share their views with school administrators and school boards. We need courageous school administrators and school boards to do the right thing and push back on this interpretation of Title IX, because there are real harms to kids as a consequence,” Baylor said.


 MAY 25, 2022 BY SCOTT JOHNSON at PowerLine:


We are still processing the tragedy yesterday in Uvalde, Texas. The Associated Press has just posted the story “Gunman kills 19 children, 2 adults in Texas school rampage” with the latest information as of this morning. (The comparable Reuters story is here.) The scene is still being processed and the count may or may not be final.

At the moment we can only pray: pray that the facts will be known, pray that the injured will recover, pray that the memory of the murdered children will live on, pray that the families of the victims find consolation in their faith and in the memories of their loved ones, and pray for our troubled country.

Losing loved ones in something like the ordinary course of life is hard enough. Losing children to insane mayhem is something else. Seeing video of adults weeping and comforting each other brings it home in a way with which any parent can identify. It hurts.

But for the heroic deeds of law enforcement it could have been worse. “The attacker was killed by a Border Patrol agent who rushed into the school without waiting for backup, according to a law enforcement official,” according to the AP story. The story reports:

One Border Patrol agent who was working nearby when the shooting began rushed into the school without waiting for backup and shot and killed the gunman, who was behind a barricade, according to a law enforcement official speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about it. The agent was wounded but able to walk out of the school, the law enforcement official said.

More here. While we pray for the kids and their families, we can thank God for men such as the elite Border Patrol agent and others who intervened. They saved a lot of lives.

We are apparently fated to have our heartbreak and sorrow aggravated by a certain breed of politicians. The breed finds the moment of unspeakable tragedy a fit moment to undertake histrionic displays and hysterical lectures promoting their favored causes. Among this number is President Biden, who could have met the moment but chose not to. He failed it. The White House has posted the transcript of his remarks here.

Are Angry Migrants Dem Delights?

May 24, 2022

Angry migrants protest for their ‘right’ to be in the US illegally

By Monica Showalter at American Thinker:

Apparently, being illegally present in the U.S. is now a “right” rather than a criminal act, and not even a “privilege” when done legally.  For some 60,000 would-be illegal border-crossers amassed at the U.S. border, it’s now a “right.”

This is why we’re seeing would-be illegal border-crossers now holding protests in cities such as Tijuana as a judge’s order on Title 42 forces the Border Patrol to turn back tens of thousands of unvetted entries into the States. 

According to Breitbart News:

Foreign nationals protested in Tijuana, Mexico, on Sunday to demand President Joe Biden end the Title 42 public health authority at the United States-Mexico border, a policy they declared “racist.”

Months ago, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced that on May 23 the Biden administration would end Title 42. The authority was first issued by former President Donald Trump in 2020 and has allowed officials to quickly remove illegal aliens from the U.S. after their arrival at the border.

In April, Trump-appointed Judge Robert R. Summerhays announced he would block the Biden administration from ending Title 42. Late last week, Summerhays issued a preliminary injunction against Biden’s efforts to end Title 42 — blocking the policy from being eliminated.

On Sunday, foreign nationals marched through Tijuana to beg Biden to end Title 42.

“End Title 42 now!” one sign reads while another seemingly states, “Down with Title 42, Down with racists.” One other sign reads, “No more Title 42” and another one states, “Defend asylum.”

Protesters also waved rainbow flags, representing gay pride, as well as the flag often waved by transgender advocates. Others carried the flags of their nations of origin, such as Mexico, Guatemala, and Honduras.

Let’s just unpack this a little and note how the ironies abound.

Number one: Notice how they are waving the flags of the countries they are desperate not to be sent back to.  Sound like the right kind of people to let into the U.S. with all their meritless claims to asylum?  Or do they sound like conquering invaders?

Two, their yells of “racism” at the supposed racist hellhole they nevertheless would rather live in have a hollow ring.  If a place is irredeemably racist, why the heck would any sane person want to live in it?  You wouldn’t want to move into a toxic dump.  Why would you want to leave your abode in Central America or 150-some other countries and move to a racist snake pit?  The case for their sincerity is a little skeezy, but there’s no question they’re canny as to what goes on in the States, knowing how to push the right buttons to advance their interests.

There’s probably a lot of coaching going on here.  Someone on Twitter noted that it looked like a Soros front group–type operation, and over in Brownsville, it’s pretty obvious that the stateside lefties are involved too in goading these illegal migrants on.

According to Border Report:

BROWNSVILLE, Texas (Border Report) — A group of migrant advocates from across the country who came to protest the “Remain in Mexico” policy prior to the pandemic, have returned to the base of the Gateway International Bridge upset about Title 42.

This points to the high concentration of organized interests that stand to benefit from mass uncontrolled illegal migration — from NGOs, which stand to draw huge government benefits, to Mexican cartels and human smuggling syndicates, which draw huge amounts of cash from their fees. 

These interests are so entrenched, in fact, that the infrastructure for moving to the U.S. illegally is incredibly well established and now a growth area.  Michelle Malkin has pointed out that migrants are leaving Yelp-like reviews of various services.  In 2019, I noted this:

To get a sense of just how out of “the shadows” the vast illegal alien smuggling pipeline to America is, consider the little mention that migrants can now offer Yelp-style reviews for attaining the finest in illegal alien–enabling services, not just in one’s choice of smuggling coyote, but in all the vast numbers of choices in NGOs offering shelters and services, according to Michelle Malkin, whose new book, Open Borders: Who’s Funding America’s Destruction, comes out tomorrow.

That’s far from all of it; the apps and innovations are still coming.  According to Border Report, there’s a hot new TikTok app for illegals that’s getting its developer lots and lots of clicks and, presumably, revenue:

“The quick format of the videos, where you’re able to watch a TikTok in 10 seconds and then watch another one, is really convenient for immigrants — especially if you’re on the move — you’re going through Mexico or through Central America,” said Espina, explaining his videos’ popularity with traveling migrants.

The social media activist’s videos include warnings about crocodile sightings, the latest Title 42 developments and descriptions of items left behind by migrants.

You have a tracker with you like a super-GPS telling you your every move.  How convenient for them.

This brings us back to the odd sense of entitlement these migrants have toward the concept of breaking U.S. immigration law at the border.

In the past, immigrants came to the U.S. legally, with a full sense of gratitude and awe at the great privilege of being allowed to live in the U.S.  Some of them, from the worst of the hellholes abroad, would kiss the ground as they debarked from their planes.  They worked hard, they learned English, they asked for nothing other than opportunity, and they started businesses, creating great wealth for themselves and their families.  Their kids excelled in school, recognizing that this was their one big chance.  They helped each other and developed communities, often cross-cultural communities, such as Colombians and Cambodians living together and rapidly learning English so as to be able to interact with one another.  They stayed in the U.S., too, not flying back and forth and sending remittances to prop up the governments of the places they said they were terrified of having to live in.  It all amounted to a successful way of integrating immigrants of any nationality into the American mainstream. 

Today, it’s about a spoils system and a lot of entitlements, including the “right” to live and work here illegally, if not sop up welfare benefits, which a tremendous number of them do.  We’re seeing disproportionate crime; inability to assimilate; and, increasingly, illegal voting in U.S. elections as a creeping “right” of illegals.

The entitlement mentality seems to be strongest in the Central American migrants, likely because so many of them already have illegal migrant relatives making money in the states and sending untaxed remittances that they expect this “right” to be here illegally to be delivered to them, too.  It’s a side-effect of so much non-enforcement of immigration law that everyone’s relatives now expect the same free ride that the others have gotten.

All of this lays a poor groundwork for successful migration and integration into U.S. society as immigrants.  When all you want is what you want and you want it now, and there’s so much infrastructure and advocacy in place enabling you, and you know how to push the right “racism” buttons to a country you’ve never lived in and never experienced racism in, and everyone else has gotten what you want already, why wouldn’t you look on illegal residence as a “right” you are entitled to?

Breitbart reported that the sentiment is so strong among the migrants that they are now pushing their way past border officials in the phony asylum claims lines.  Given that they are waving the flags of the countries they’d rather not be sent back to, it has the look of an invasion.  Just as Vlad Putin felt he was entitled to Ukraine, these migrants have been convinced by a rotten NGO and cartel system that they are as entitled to all the spoils of the U.S. as he is.

Do Fascist Dems Own The Entire FBI Brass?

MAY 24, 2022 BY JOHN HINDERAKER at PowerLine:


I was skeptical that the Sussman prosecution would tell us much that is new, but some significant nuggets have come out. Like this one: “FBI brass were ‘fired up’ about now-debunked Trump-Russia ties.”

FBI leaders, including then-Director James Comey, were “fired up” about a potential connection between the Trump campaign and Russia — which ultimately was proven false, text messages and court testimony revealed Tuesday.

On Sept. 21, 2016, two days after Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann gave then-FBI General Counsel James Baker info about a supposed digital back channel between the Trump Organization and Moscow-based Alfa Bank, agent Joe Pientka texted colleague Curtis Heide: “People on 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server.”

So there was zero evidence of any connection between presidential candidate Donald Trump and the Alfa Bank, or any other Russians of note, and all one of Hillary Clinton’s lawyers had to do was waltz into the Bureau with some fabricated “data” and FBI Director James Comey and others were “fired up.” The lust to defeat the interloper Trump and elect Hillary Clinton is palpable.

“Did you guys open a case? Reachout [sic] and put tools on?” Pientka asked. “If not I will call Dan as Priestap says its [sic] not an option – we must do it.”

That is, did they open a case to investigate presidential candidate Trump? Failing to do so is “not an option,” evidence be damned. And one wonders what “tools” were to be put on the case.

“[R]oger,” Heide replied. “we are opening a [counterintelligence] case today.”

Later in the day, Pientka told Heide that a unit would be assigned to the case shortly, adding, “go forth and conquer.”

That is, go forth and conquer the rebel Donald Trump, who was standing up for the American people against the swamp–of which the FBI’s political leaders are charter members.

The FBI almost immediately began lying about Sussman:

Two days later, Heide and fellow FBI agent Allison Sands drafted an electronic communication to investigators incorrectly stating the Justice Department had referred the matter to the FBI on Sept. 19, the day Sussmann met with Baker.

In fact, it wasn’t DOJ, it was the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign. But this lie strikes me as curious. If the FBI really believed that Sussman was acting as a disinterested, concerned citizen, why didn’t it just say that the investigation was prompted by information from a concerned citizen? Why lie, unless key people within the Bureau knew that Sussman was acting for the Hillary Clinton campaign, and the purpose of the FBI’s investigation was to help Clinton get elected?

In any event, the agents charged with the “investigation” quickly concluded that Trump’s purported link to Alfa was bogus:

Despite the enthusiasm of their bosses, rank-and-file agents quickly became convinced the data handed over by Sussmann was worthless. Last week, FBI supervisory agent Scott Hellman testified of the white paper: “I thought perhaps the person who drafted this document was suffering from a mental disability.”

Well, that is pretty strong! So why did the “investigation” continue?

When asked by prosecutor Jonathan Algor why he kept up with the investigation if he believed there was no evidence to back it, Heide answered: “Headquarters told us that not investigating the matter was not an option.”

It was not an option because James Comey and other top FBI officials were determined to help Hillary. They expected to be rewarded when she inevitably won. They were shocked when the upstart Trump won instead, and immediately set about undermining his administration, which they did with all of the skill you would expect from seasoned political infighters.

It is a disgusting story, which inevitably raises the question: can the FBI be salvaged? I have a friend, recently retired from the Bureau, who says that a large majority of agents are honest, and the FBI was betrayed by a dozen politicians at the top, starting with James Comey. That may be true. But public confidence in what once was regarded as America’s premier law enforcement agency is so shaken that one wonders whether it makes sense to abolish the FBI and start over.