• 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 Obama, Hillary, Bernie Advance of Fascist Leftwingism in America

Did Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders Save America?

by Steve McCann   at  American Thinker:

The citizenry of a nation that has experienced unprecedented peace, prosperity and global or regional hegemony over four or more generations are often lulled to sleep believing there will never be an end to their good fortune.   Inevitably these countries and empires have floundered and decayed as they gradually and unwittingly descended into societal, political and economic chaos invariably precipitated by their respective ruling classes.  Over the past fifty years, the United States has been adrift on this same calamitous course.   However, it appears that America may have been granted a reprieve through an event that could have been a long-term disaster potentially turning out to be its salvation.  That event was the presidency of Barack Obama and the ensuing hubris of his fellow-travelers in the American Left.

Over the past 55 years, regardless of any Republican in the White House or in charge of Congress, no one has been able to halt the incessant spread of left-wing radicalism in the nation’s institutions and culture as well as the exponential growth of government with its tentacles increasingly intertwined in the day-to-day lives of all Americans.   As long as the people remained largely disengaged the potential damage to society as a whole and to the financial health of the country was ignored by the vast majority of the population.

Since 2012 this indifference has begun to change as the reality of the nation’s future and the motives and tactics of those in the American Left has come into focus.  That reality has come to the fore as the result of the aggressive pursuit of extremist policies in the cultural and economic arenas by the Obama administration combined with the exposure of left-wing domination in the Democratic Party brought about by the unexpected and nearly successful candidacy of Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Nonetheless, had the Democratic Party hierarchy and Obama not been adamant in nominating the worst campaigner and most unlikeable presidential candidate in modern American history, Hillary Clinton, the stealth takeover of the nation would have continued apace.   It is almost certain that Donald Trump would have lost to a “moderate” Democrat who was more likeable and an aggressive campaigner.   Trump’s high negatives and the fact that he beat Hillary by an aggregate of only 70,000 votes in the key states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin reveals that Hillary was, in all likelihood, the only nominee he could defeat.

However, Obama and his minions in the Party were unwavering in their decision to actively support only Hillary Clinton and all her baggage, while viewing Bernie Sanders as a foil.   Buoyed by unquestioned belief in Obama’s fabricated popularity coupled with the assumption that the nation had accepted the basic tenets of their version of democratic-socialism, this cabal was so certain of victory that the prospect of Hillary losing to Trump or any Republican was inconceivable.

This overconfident mindset was the culmination of a unique set of events and circumstances beginning in the 1960’s, as the strategy of gradualism utilized during the first six decades of the Twentieth Century by the comparatively more moderate Progressives of that era was discarded in favor of more immediate and assertive tactics.

In the 1960’s the increasingly radicalized American Left began to aggressively infiltrate the mainstream media, the entertainment complex, the education establishment and government bureaucracies.  Due primarily to the fecklessness of the opposition party and ambivalence of the populace, by the early-1990’s the left succeeded in dominating these sectors of the American ruling establishment and the transformation of the culture and society commenced in earnest.

However, the strategic lynchpin of the overall strategy was the seizure of near absolute control of the Democratic Party while the indoctrination of a majority of the populace with anti-American and pro-socialist dogma continued apace.  Surprisingly, the goal of Democratic Party domination was achieved much sooner than anticipated.  With the election of an acolyte of left-wing indoctrination, Barack Obama, and the unabashed exploitation of his skin color and unspoken fealty to socialist/Marxist dogma, the left was in de facto control of the Democratic Party by 2012 and more emboldened in their determination to shut down speech and dissent while aggressively promoting radical cultural changes.

Nonetheless, the American Left has had less than thirty years and only one generation to fully indoctrinate with their failed and self-serving philosophy.  By the end of the Obama presidency 36% of the electorate still identified themselves as conservative (39% in 2000) while 25% self-identified as liberal (21% in 2000) and 34% as moderate (36% in 2000).  Additionally, 37% of those claiming to be moderate identified their views as leaning conservative while just 23% as leaning liberal. Thus, only 33% of Americans currently identify with or believe in current Progressive ideology despite 8 years of the Obama presidency and the left’s ongoing domination of the media, entertainment and education establishments.

While the timing may have been in place to have the first African-American elected President, the timing to turn the United States into a bastion of socialism was not.  The radicalization of the nation’s cultural and religious institutions by the left and the attempt to create a preponderant dependent class has not been in place long enough to change the essential character of a clear majority of the population.  However, Obama and the Democratic Party hierarchy chose to be oblivious to this reality and governed as if a majority of Americans were, in fact, sympathetic to their unique oligarchical iteration of socialism.

The Barack Obama presidency coupled with the overt left-wing take-over of the Democratic Party occurred too early in the history of the nation for the left to fully achieve their objectives.  While needing to do a better job of keeping their ideological bent in the shadows, Obama and his fellow-travelers should have been less obvious in their take-over of the Party and unquestioned support of an unelectable nominee in 2016 in order to control the Senate and the White House for at least another decade.

A decade which would have assured an irretrievably left-wing and all-powerful Judiciary, the near elimination of 1st, 2nd  and 4th  Amendment rights, a stagnant economy manipulated by the Progressives in Washington D.C., open borders in order to manipulate the composition of the voting citizenry, thus ensuring the left retained power in perpetuity, with religious and economic freedom limited to what the federal government bureaucrats declare as acceptable.

Fortunately for America, the conjoined hubris of the Democratic Party hierarchy, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton combined with the socialist absolutism of Bernie Sanders, opened the door for the left to unabashedly come out of the closet during the 2016 campaign.  Thus, offering a clear and unambiguous contrast between the Republican and Democratic Parties and their nominees.

Donald Trump and Ted Cruz were the only Republican presidential candidates out of a field of 14 to clearly and instinctively see the reality on the ground and the political opening obliviously provided by the Democrats.  By waging a scorched earth campaign strategy, Trump won not only the nomination but ultimately the Presidency.   The resultant dismay and disbelief of the Ruling Elites and the Democratic Party hierarchy further exposed the unhinged radicalism of the left.

Panic has set in on the American Left with Trump in the White House and the Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, as the realization sets in that the likelihood of the Progressives achieving their overarching socialist utopian dream may well be gone with the wind.   However, the specter of not only losing their illusory political supremacy but to do so to someone they view as a reprobate in the White House has so inflamed their passion that their threadbare tactics of fear and intimidation have given way to an unhinged and unabashed public unveiling of their fascist tendencies and their unconstitutional and potentially violent methodology of transforming the United States.  Their ability to hoodwink a majority of the American people is now fully and inalterably compromised.

What these permanent adolescents and their megalomaniacal leadership fail to understand is that they, due to their hubris, obliviousness and single-mindedness, are responsible for the circumstances that eventuated with Donald Trump as President and the Republicans in control of Congress.  The opportunity to dramatically reverse the course the nation was previously sailing with the Progressives at the helm is now within the realm of possibility.

To the surprise of many skeptics, Donald Trump thus far has pursued a primarily conservative agenda with a few exceptions such as spending and his random bombastic governing style in domestic and foreign affairs.  However, the elimination of vast swaths of regulations, the appointment of constitutionalists to the Judiciary including the Supreme Court, as well as tax reform and immigration enforcement, are foundational pieces of this vital course correction.    Trump and the rest of the Republican Party and a majority of the citizenry must continue to seize the moment and maintain the momentum in the upcoming 2018 mid-term elections.  Thus, ensuring Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders exalted status in the pantheon of 21st Century American patriots that helped liberate the United States from the clutches of the American Left.



Our Donald Confronts our Friendly NATO Thieves!


by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

Get out the fainting couches! President Trump is in Europe, and once again he is saying the unsayable. The occasion is the NATO summit that began today in Brussels. Trump fired an opening salvo that included two themes, as reported by Bloomberg. The first is that Germany, in particular, undermines the alliance’s defenses against Russia by being too dependent on Russian natural gas:

“It’s very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia where we’re supposed to be guarding against Russia and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars a year to Russia,” Trump said before meeting with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on Wednesday morning.

Trump pressed on: “If you look at it, Germany is a captive of Russia, because they supply — they got rid of their coal plants, got rid of their nuclear, they’re getting so much of the oil and gas from Russia. I think it’s something NATO has to look at.”

Trump is right about this. Germany stupidly closed nuclear and coal power plants in favor of huge investments in “green” energy. Those investments, predictably, have failed to do anything other than drive the price of electricity unacceptably high. Germany is now backing away from its “green” policies in favor of natural gas. Where does it get most of its natural gas? From Russia.

The specific focus of Trump’s criticism is the proposed Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would take gas from Russia to Germany. That pipeline has been controversial for a while, as CNBCexplains:

Some European countries oppose Nord Stream 2, arguing that it increases Europe’s dependence on Russia and poses threats to their national security. The opposition comes primarily from the Baltic states and former Soviet satellite nations, including Ukraine, Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

They argue Europe should not be filling Moscow’s coffers after Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and in light of its broader efforts to destabilize the European Union.

Nord Stream 2 also reduces Europe’s reliance on Russian gas that runs through Ukraine’s pipeline system, opponents say. That makes it easier for the Kremlin to punish its Eastern European neighbors by cutting off gas supplies while minimizing damage to its lucrative markets in the broader EU.

So President Trump is siding with Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltic countries. He also is agreeing with Barack Obama:

President Barack Obama opposed Nord Stream 2 and President George W. Bush came out against the original Nord Stream prior to its completion in 2011. Like the central and eastern European countries, they worried it increased Russian influence over the Continent.

That policy has carried over into the Trump administration.

The concern about Russian influence in Central and Western Europe is well founded. In the past, Putin’s regime has demanded concessions from the West by threatening to cut off natural gas supplies. These first two headlines are from the New York Times; the Times may have forgotten, but the Ukrainians, Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians haven’t: Russia Cuts Gas, and Europe Shivers, January 6, 2009Gazprom Cuts Russia’s Natural Gas Supply to Ukraine, June 16, 2014; Telegraph: Putin mocks the West and threatens to turn off gas supplies, March 7, 2014; Financial Times: Europe supply in jeopardy as Putin warns of Ukraine gas cut, April 11, 2014. Given this history–and these links are just a few samples–why would Germany want to increase its dependence on Russian natural gas?

I think the answer is that German post-war guilt is now indistinguishable from lazy softness. Russia is playing a hard game, annexing Crimea, putting constant pressure on Ukraine, making preparations to invade the Baltics. Putin’s regime is trying to restore the Russian empire, and it is questionable whether Europeans west of Poland have the will to resist. Trump is obviously, and rightly, trying to stiffen their spines.

Trump’s second point, one that he made during the 2016 campaign and often since, is that our NATO allies need to begin bearing their fair share of the cost of the alliance. In the aftermath of World War II, when the U.S. had just about the only industrial economy that hadn’t been bombed, it made sense for the bulk of the money to come from U.S. taxpayers. That hasn’t been true for a long time, and Trump shouldn’t have to be the first president to assert the interests of American taxpayers. On this issue, too, he is right:

“Many countries owe us,” Trump said in Brussels, before attending the summit at NATO headquarters. “The United States is paying far too much and other countries are not paying enough… This has been going on for decades, for decades, it’s disproportionate and not fair to the taxpayers of the United States.”

Trump is going to succeed here. A number of NATO countries have pledged to increase their defense contributions, but he is pressing them to act more rapidly. This tweet from earlier today sums up the situation well:

Donald J. Trump


What good is NATO if Germany is paying Russia billions of dollars for gas and energy? Why are there only 5 out of 29 countries that have met their commitment? The U.S. is paying for Europe’s protection, then loses billions on Trade. Must pay 2% of GDP IMMEDIATELY, not by 2025.

This one came just 15 minutes ago:

Donald J. Trump


Billions of additional dollars are being spent by NATO countries since my visit last year, at my request, but it isn’t nearly enough. U.S. spends too much. Europe’s borders are BAD! Pipeline dollars to Russia are not acceptable!

Trump is right about a more equal sharing of the costs of defending Europe and the North Atlantic. More importantly, he is right about the sheep-like quiescence of too many Western Europeans–Angela Merkel is one among many–in the face of a serious challenge from Russia.

Pretty much all the press coverage of the NATO summit, consisting mostly of hand-wringing and Trump-bashing, is ignorant and partisan. President Trump is standing up for American security and American taxpayers, as he promised to do. He could do it more effectively if nearly the entire American establishment were not arrayed against him and, implicitly, on the side of the Putin regime.


Cornell West reeks fascistic socialism….and he’s no afraid to sell it at one university of another for decades.  Today’s American university is the place  nasty deceitful Americans can not only make a living, but can be pictorially advertised throughout the nation’s academic world from coast to coast.

Mouth counts for everything among today’s American LeftoNazis.  Please read the following a couple times at least to absorb the real measures  of their feelings. ghr


John Sexton embeds entertaining video of Tucker Carlson and Cornel West, and offers a good explanation of why socialism always fails, from the perspective of the vast majority. He focuses on a good question that Tucker asked West: If democratic socialism works, why doesn’t Venezuela have toilet paper? The video is embedded at the end of this post.

Of course West’s answers are lame–“real” socialism has never been tried, blah, blah, blah. You could infer from this that West is an idiot and, if he were arguing in good faith, that would be a fair assessment.

But I think the truth is worse. I think the leaders of the socialist movement are perfectly well aware that the inevitable result of socialism is tyranny and mass poverty. But for them, this isn’t a bug, it is a feature. In fact, it is the whole point. Socialism is now, and always has been, a pretext under which power-mad psychopaths seize power and terrorize their fellow humans.

Viewed with cold realism, socialism works very well for those who bring it about. It worked for Lenin and Stalin. It almost worked for Trotsky, but socialism is like “Game of Thrones”–it is a risky business. It didn’t work for the Old Bolsheviks for the same reason: they lost out to the more vicious and more power-crazed socialist, Stalin. It worked for Yezhov, Yagoda and Beria, although they, too, lost out after years of demented revels. It worked for Khruschev, Brezhnev and Andropov.

Socialism worked for Mao. It worked for Fidel Castro. It worked for Erich Honecker and Nicolae Ceaușescu, until the very end. It worked for Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, again with sad ends that didn’t inflict anywhere near enough pain to negate the years of glory and power that went before. It worked for Hugo Chavez, who like Castro, parlayed socialism into a multi-billion dollar fortune, and it has worked so far for Nicolas Maduro. All of these psychopaths, and many others, got exactly what they wanted out of socialism. From their point of view, it is a successful ideology.

While the vast majority suffer under socialism, such suffering is by no means universal. Any number of commissars, Stasi informants, Cuban snitches, petty apparatchiks with dachas, etc., have parlayed their sadistic tendencies into good livings and what they want most, power over others. If you follow Twitter, or generally pay attention to the American Left, you see an army of would-be commissars who yearn for the day when they can accuse a neighbor of wrongthink and have him sent to an American Gulag. In the meantime, they settle for mob action, “doxxing,” and so on.

Socialism isn’t misguided, it is evil. Socialism isn’t a failure, any more than the Black Death was a failure. Sadly, it has worked all too well for more than a century.


The Left’s Drive to Destroy Democratic America Increases

As Trump Builds, the Resistance Shouts ‘Destroy!’

by Roger Kimball at PJMedia:

To every thing,” observed the sage of Ecclesiastes, “there is a season…. A time to be born, and a time to die; … A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up,” et cetera. What this estimable observer of human life omitted from his bracing catalogue of oppositions is the fact that one side of these partnerships tends to be much easier to accomplish than the other.

To the eye of experience, this is obvious. How much time, labor, and inherited expertise go into building an automobile, a house, a city, a civilization. How quickly they can be destroyed by disaster or neglect.

Our house on Long Island Sound was built in 1924 as a summer cottage. Over the years, various owners added this and that, until it was a modest suburban home. Over the course of a few hours in October 2012, it was all but destroyed by Hurricane Sandy. It took more than a year, much labor and a lot of money, to put everything back together.

Look at Venezuela. With the world’s largest proven oil reserves, the South American country emerged from military rule in 1959 and became a bastion of prosperity in the Southern hemisphere. Then came the socialist Hugo Chavez in 1999. His policies pushed the country into decline, slowly at first, and then rapidly. Today, under the rule of Chavez’s hand-picked successor Nicolás Maduro, the country is on the verge of collapse. Inflation is running at 40,000 percent, there are widespread shortages of food, medicine, and other basic necessities, looting and corruption are rampant, people and capital are fleeing the country.

It did not take long to destroy Venezuela. It will take many years, much heartache and suffering, and enormous resources to put it back together.

There is a lesson here for the loud and unseemly American Leftists and their unlikely brethren, the soi-disant “conservative” Never Trumpers, who are trampling on civility, rejecting the processes of democratic governance, and encouraging violence. “There’s a deal of ruin in a nation,” Adam Smith observed to a disconsolate Brit during the American Revolution, especially a nation as prosperous and stable as the United States.

But even here there is a ne plus ultra, a threshold of destructiveness beyond which “things fall apart,” as Yeats put in it in The Second Coming, and “the centre cannot hold”:

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere

The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity.

Representative Maxine Waters with her incontinent ravings; Never-Trump commentator Jennifer Rubin pronouncing a “lifetime sentence” of harassment upon Donald Trump’s press secretary Sarah Sanders because she supports the president. Such “passionate intensity,” I submit — and you, Dear Reader, can supply a hundred additional examples — are both childish and irresponsible.


Democrats Demand Open Borders


by John Hinderaker   at PowerLine:

Yesterday the Democrats organized pro-illegal immigration rallies across the country. The demonstrations were putatively addressed to the separation of illegal immigrant families at the border–never mind that President Trump has already issued an executive order addressing that issue–but the real agenda was open borders, i.e., no national sovereignty. Come one, come all.

This was most plainly expressed by the “Abolish ICE” theme that permeated the demonstrations:

I think everyone understands that “abolish ICE” means no enforcement of immigration laws. The Democrats obviously think they can make hay with the immigration issue, but I don’t understand why. Granted, it will fire up elements of their base. But it motivates the Republican base, and especially Trump voters, too. But the more fundamental point is that, broadly speaking, the Democrats’ positions on immigration are unpopular.

This Harvard-Harris poll that was released on Thursday is, I think, typical:

Although American voters are sympathetic to immigrant families being separated at the border, they demand stronger border security and immigration enforcement. Voters do not believe that families ought to be separated when they cross illegally (88%), and they support the Trump administration’s late policy reversal, allowing families to stay together (71%), even if it was done unilaterally through an executive order.

A majority of voters want immigration reform (73%) and secure borders (76%). Voters also want stricter enforcement of immigration laws (70%). Voters support prosecuting immigrants who cross the border illegally (53%) and sending these immigrants home (64%). A majority (55%) also stand against so-called “catch and release” policies.

So 76% want secure borders, and 70% want stricter enforcement of immigration laws–the opposite of “abolish ICE.” These are overwhelming majorities. I frankly cannot understand why the Democrats want to make unpopular positions on an important issue the centerpiece of the midterm elections. All I can say is, I hope they keep it up.


Reporter’s Fake News Falsely Claimed Annapolis Killer was a Trump Guy……RESIGNS for the LIE!

Reporter Who Claimed Annapolis Shooter Had MAGA Hat Resigns

One of the stranger stories to come from the mass shooting at the newspaper office in Maryland this week didn’t originate anywhere near the scene of the crime. A reporter from another small newspaper outlet in Massachusettes, The Republican, decided to tweet something during the height of the tension surrounding the attack which didn’t go over very well (to put it extremely mildly). Conor Berry tweeted a picture of a Donald Trump campaign “Make America Great Again” hat, stating that the shooter had dropped such a cap on the floor of the newsroom before murdering five people and injuring two others. This turned out to literally be “fake news” and the tweet has since been deleted, but the reporter has now resigned from his position.

Backlash was swift. Berry deleted the tweet and apologized in a follow-up tweet Friday morning.

“Folks, My 21-year career as a “journalist,” a fancy term that makes my skin crawl, frankly, came to a screeching halt yesterday with one stupid, regrettable tweet,” Barry wrote. “Can’t take it back; wish I could. My since apologies to all good, hardworking reporters and to POTUS supporters.” …

In his resignation letter, Berry conceded that his tweet “taints the good work of fair-minded journalists everywhere.”

Wayne Phaneuf, executive editor of the Republican, said journalists must be “more vigilant than ever” in their efforts to be fair and accurate.

Was the tweet a good idea? Obviously not and Berry admits as much. Was it a firing offense? That’s a different question, though it doesn’t matter since Berry technically resigned. (We have no idea if that was his idea or “suggested strongly” by his editor.) But the incident indeed raises a couple of disturbing questions.

I should first point out that I’m coming to this conversation as a person who also writes about these subjects for a living, but let’s face it… I’m a blogger. My Twitter profile includes a warning that the contents probably include sarcasm. And most of our readers are familiar with my frequently inappropriate sense of humor. But even I would have felt a cold chill running down my spine before hitting the “tweet” button on that item Berry sent.

Along the same line of thinking, Berry isn’t a blogger. He’s a conventional, old media journalist. If he tweets out an image of a hat with a flat statement of something which allegedly happened right in the middle of the mass shooting coverage, people would probably have no reason to suspect that it was anything other than an accurate report. And plenty of people did precisely that and ran with the completely fictitious story.

Add all of that up and I suppose there’s a definite reason for Berry to face some sort of serious repercussions from his decision. If you’re a Trump supporter that’s probably an easy call to make. Even if you’re a NeverTrumper you’ve got to have some uneasy feelings about that tweet coming from the account of a journalist.

But should it tank his career? I’m regularly accused of being a Trumpian or a Trump apologist (when I’m not being accused of being a Trump hater when I criticize one of his policies such as the RFS). But even from my perch, I’m bothered by the idea. It was a joke. Yes… it was a terrible joke and it led to a short-lived flurry of accusations and shouting in the social media wars. But the rumor was squelched pretty quickly. The timing couldn’t have been worse and, to be honest, it wasn’t even funny. But it does seem as if it was just a stupid (really, really, tremendously, shockingly stupid) attempt at getting a rhetorical shot in at the President and his supporters.

It’s the sort of thing which should make all readers immediately aware that Berry is not an even-handed player in journalism and that he very much hates President Trump, which likely colors his reporting. But is that really any sort of unique feature in the MSM today? If we fired every journalist with an ax to grind against Donald Trump most of the cable news network sets would look like ghost towns.

I just don’t know. I find what Berry did alarming and worthy of strong criticism. But we’re sort of sending the message that reporters have to be 100% grim and serious in every moment of their lives and they can’t be allowed to be boorish jackasses once in a while like everyone else.


Supreme Court Backs President Trump’s “Travel Ban”


by Scott Johnson  at PowerLine:

The Supreme Court vindicated President Trump’s final iteration of his so-called “travel ban” order in Trump v. Hawaii this morning. The ruling was 5-4. Although the plaintiffs prevailed in the lower courts, the Supreme Court’s rational wing was unimpressed by the arguments ginned up to frustrate Trump’s executive order. The ruling left Trump free to be Trump and interred the Court’s 1944 Korematsu decision upholding Japanese internment by the Roosevelt administration to boot.

It also reminds me again to thank the Senate Republicans who toughed it out to leave the appointment of the successor to Justice Scalia to the winner of the 2016 election. Thanks especially to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley. They took a lot of abuse from the media in an early preview of the hysteria we have endured since Trump improbably won.

President Trump’s statement on the Supreme Court ruling seems perfectly reasonable to me:

Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a tremendous victory for the American People and the Constitution. The Supreme Court has upheld the clear authority of the President to defend the national security of the United States. In this era of worldwide terrorism and extremist movements bent on harming innocent civilians, we must properly vet those coming into our country.

This ruling is also a moment of profound vindication following months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country. As long as I am President, I will defend the sovereignty, safety, and security of the American People, and fight for an immigration system that serves the national interests of the United States and its citizens. Our country will always be safe, secure, and protected on my watch.

The Supreme Court’s ruling will not put an end to “the hysterical commentary from the media and and Democratic politicians[.]” The hysteria continues.