• 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

Problem Solving!



A new covid vaccine booster has been released, and the authorities say we all should get it. But what evidence is there that the new vaccine is effective? A neurosurgeon with whom we have corresponded on covid matters writes:

I wanted to bring to your attention a new CDC/MMWR study regarding the updated “bivalent” boosters, released by the CDC on Tuesday:


I think it would be of great interest to your readers, as a follow up to your Dr. Jha post.

This study is notable because it is the first “real world” study on the efficacy of bivalent boosters. Recall that this update was approved by the FDA and CDC with little real world data (relying only on its effect on mice and the antibody response of a few hundred people). Ironically, this study was also posted at almost the same time Dr. Jha was making his public comments: “We can prevent every COVID death in America if everyone gets their updated booster.”

This CDC study actually found very modest real-world protection against symptomatic infection. In fact, in almost all subgroups, the vaccine efficacy was less than 50% two months after the booster dose, when it should be at its peak effectiveness. For comparison, this efficacy is similar (at best) to the original monovalent booster it replaced, despite being specifically formulated and updated for the current Omicron strains. Even worse, the efficacy for older age groups (65+) is much lower, around 30%. So for the age group that may need the most protection it fares the least effective. And this is only after two months. If this bivalent booster wanes like its predecessor, it will trend even lower in the coming months.

The study did not look at more severe outcomes such as hospitalization and death. As that has been the main talking point of Dr. Jha’s “experts” — that the vaccine prevents severe outcomes rather than symptomatic illness or transmission — his comments are not exactly refuted by this study. But still, on a relative basis, the updated booster would be expected to do far better in preventing symptomatic infection if it is also going to prevent severe illness, hospitalization, or death.

Of course, the authors of this study provide guidance through “rose colored” glasses, stating this marginal result actually offers “significant additional protection” and that “[a]ll persons should stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccines, including bivalent booster doses, if it has been ≥2 months since their last monovalent vaccine dose (1).” This is the only paragraph the media have picked up, neglecting the details.

This booster underwent expedited review by the FDA and CDC and gained near unanimous support in the FDA and CDC committees for approval despite no real-world effectiveness data. Consequently, it is being mandated by a number of universities and institutions that mistake their guidance for rigorous scientific review. We can only hope that the new GOP Congress will investigate the new FDA and CDC process, which have appeared to replace usual scientific rigor with selected “experts’ opinion.”.

I would only add that while, as our correspondent says, this study–the only real-world data relied on by CDC–can’t entirely refute the claim that the new booster provides significant benefit with regard to severe infection, it can’t support that claim either, since the issue wasn’t even addressed.

“Time to nuke academia from orbit”.



 I didn’t think any other politician (except perhaps John Fetterman) could make Joe Biden sound like a MENSA member, but behold Canada’s Justin Trudeau, at a recent parliamentary hearing: “Using protests to demand changes to public policy is something that I think is worrisome”

 Guess what’s racist now? Fossils.

The rise of scientific racism in palaeoanthropology

A forensic anthropologist unmasks insidious interpretations of fossil finds.

. . . The delays in recognizing how racism damages and paralyses science remind us how much stamina is required to become anti-racist. White privilege and presumed superiority in all matters of importance have been the norm for so long that it has become a fundamental construct of Western societies. To counter this deeply embedded narrative . . . requires courage, especially when you have been a beneficiary of these prejudicial practices. To recognize, expose and call out the racism in science is not easy, particularly in the hallowed halls of academia.

Gosh, I never pondered how much courage it must take to denounce racism on a college campus these days. Who knew.

Chaser—the only places/things where we haven’t detected racism are the places we haven’t been to yet, but the scientific community is ready!

Astrobiologists concerned about imperialistic consequences of galactic exploration

[B]ecause some subset of these and other questions considered by those in his field are going to have societal implications, they are also going to lead to some amount of activism.

Rooted in DEI ideology and an anti-colonialist framework, much of this activism is carried out in the popular press among well-credentialed academics who emphasize the supposed need to rethink the language of their fields and make vocal exhortations to decolonize space.

“[S]pace exploration is…an extension of our imperial and colonial histories,” said science historian and U.S. National Radio Astronomy Observatory fellow Rebecca Charbonneau in an August 2022 interview with Scientific American.

Time to nuke academia from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure. Ripley-Hicks 2024!

 Good to see team USA didn’t run up the score in its metric football match with England yesterday.

Instapundit reminds us of The Simpson’s take on the subject: