• 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

When will Americans Begin to Notice the Schiff Fascists Now Destroying Our American Dream to Seek and Honor TRUTH!

Where would we Americans be today without the devotion for truth and freedom exercised by honest Jewish folks such as John Hinderaker and Dennis Prager?

Our American Christian community, may God Bless Them, seems to have retreated into the Roman catacombs again  (for another 500 years?).   At least they still worship the importance of Truth over Evil when  80% of their voters went for  and elected Donald J. Trump to the American Presidency in 2016!!


What makes Evil in a live human animal? ……  THE ABSENCE OF TRUTH AND HUMAN DECENCY, something I learned at Church and in school, kindergarten to college and graduate school when America was still the AMERICAN DREAM!

It isn’t too hard to understand….UNLESS YOU ARE FASCISTS LIKE  ADAM SCHIFF,  NANCY PELOSI, JERRY NADLER,  CHARLES SCHUMER, RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, BERNIE SANDERS, ERIC SWALWELL, MAXINE WATERS, GEORGE SOROS, HOLLYWOOD, AND UNIVERSITIES and other mouths running today’s Fascistic Dem Party absent of traditional American values dreamed and honored.

Fox News is also among this crowd of evil, but probably not by design…., perhaps their STAR animals don’t know the evil they are  nursing when selling  Adam Schiff and crowd.   “Conservative” Fox advertises “fair and balanced”  news….and so,  sells  Schiff FASCIST disorders and lies  as equal to those honest traditional Republicans and Democrats who still honor and strive for Truth and honesty but are too gutless or too uneducated to know or remember how vitally important EXERCISING TRUTH IS IN A FREEDOM LOVING COUNTRY  LIKE AMERICA IN MY LIFETIME  STRUGGLED TO MAINTAIN WHEN IT VALUED THE GUIDE OF GODFEARING JUDEOCHRISTIANITY!

I have never met John Hinderaker, one of my heroes trying to save our traditional American values in our days of Schiff swamp.   He seems to be a very gentle gentleman when evaluating the fascist and fascistic horrors now overwhelming our dreams of America!   Such gentlemen are better than no gentlemen at all.

The human female animal prefers security over freedom.   Fascism whether German, Soviet, Maoist, or Schiff-style doesn’t really seem to matter as long as she feels ‘SECURE’.

Ban All the Red Hats?

Hero Ben Stein Prays for President Trump, A True Hero!

Why I Pray For Trump, A True Hero

by  Ben Stein   at  HotAir:

I should tell you that I pray for Trump because he believes in America. He wants an America that is true to its founding ideals of liberty and free enterprise. I also pray for him because he’s been the victim of the most consistent, slimiest hate campaign since Abraham Lincoln. He hasn’t done anything seriously wrong and yet the media powers treat him as if he were John Wilkes Booth. I don’t like his tariff fights with China but what can we do? They’ve been robbing us blind in terms of technology for decades now. For the Chinese, a brilliant and proud people and at least the equal of any people on this earth, there is no stopping point between now and them ruling the earth.

That’s what Trump’s struggle is about: to stop the world from becoming a vast Chinese empire. I don’t blame the Chinese for their ambitions. They were treated very badly all over the world for generations. But now, like a spring that has been compressed for too long, they are springing back madly.

They have their own problems: they are doing deficit spending on a titanic scale and it cannot last. They have restive minorities like the Uighurs and others. They will eventually spend themselves into big trouble. But in the meantime, they cause trouble in their very large orbit. Trump understands this and wants to stop them and get them to work cooperatively with us and the rest of the big countries. Would Kamala Harris get it? Would Bernie? Would Cory?

Why I pray for Trump, a true hero

My Miller Analogies Test Saved My Life

“The test aims to measure an individual’s logical and analytical reasoning through the use of partial analogies. A sample test question might be

Bach : Composing :: Monet :

  • a. painting
  • b. composing
  • c. writing
  • d. orating

This should be read as “Bach is to (:) Composing as (::) Monet is to (:) _______.” The answer would be a. painting because just as Bach is most known for composing music, Monet is most known for his painting. The open slot may appear in any of the four positions.

Unlike analogies found on past editions of the GRE and the SAT, the MAT’s analogies demand a broad knowledge of Western culture, testing subjects such as science, music, literature, philosophy, mathematics, art, and history. Thus, exemplary success on the MAT requires more than a nuanced and cultivated vocabulary.”

I was born in 1934 and raised in St. Paul, Minnesota destined to love accumulating knowledge.  My favorite word in life from 3 years old  on to high school and beyond, was accumulating answers to the  question word…”WHY”.

I was horribly dyslexic…..long before that word and trouble was ever discovered.   I was crippled throughout grade school (1939 to 1948) unless vision was involved.    By third grade I could draw maps of the United States and its states by heart.   I was already collecting road maps, because when our neighbor, Mr. Dieckman went off to War in 1942, he gave me a dozen of his AAA State Road Maps to keep so I would remember him.  (I still have most of them among about 200 I eventually collected road maps from Skelly, Standard, Phillips 66, Pure Oil, Deep Rock, and many other gas station corporations which then handed road maps out free to customers.)

I learned classical music masterpieces and masterpiece gardens  from Mom’s punishment for me  asking too many questions.   From age 4 to 7 I spent countless  hours standing erect as a soldier in front of an blank wall  across from  our front door.   Far above my child’s left shoulder where I stood each time for 60 minutes hung  a welcoming picture, a beautiful landscape garden picture painted by a nineteenth century Canadian, R. Atkinson Fox….written at the bottom right corner of the setting.

Mom was a flower garden gal, mostly perennials….especially during the war.   Mom was from a German family…..a perfectionist in everything she did….sewing, cooking, reading, dancing, skating.  During the War she undertook nursing for the War effort.   Dad at 41 was an air raid warden in our very modest part of St. Paul, throughout the Spring and Summer of 1942.

“If you ask me one more question, you’re going to the wall, Glenn Ray….Do you understand me?”….she’d shout in desperation.    I always obeyed……for four or five minutes, before I’d be driven to ask  another “Why” or “What” question, especially when she was working.    It was in June, 1942 I could read newspaper sections of the Sunday St. Paul Pioneer Press that covered the war…..the front pages, and especially the rotogravure war cover section filled with pictures and paragraphs bringing the reality of war battles to the home front.    Shortly thereafter I found myself reading whatever throughout the newspaper……!

But, I couldn’t read story books.   I have never been able to read a novel from cover to cover and often page to page.   I couldn’t remember whatever I had just read.

In third grade one of my favorite teachers of all time welcomed me to read her 1920 to 1943 National Geographics which she supplied for the curious in her classes.   I could practically  speed read when there were pictures…all black and white, of course, of all sorts of people and animals throughout the world.   Mother had bought my first world atlas the Christmas of 1942…..and then a globe the next year’s Christmas…..

She did so to stop me asking her questions…..something I didn’t know until teen years.

My sister entered kindergarten a year older than I.   Mother’s habit that kept me at the wall especially between 10 and 11AM five days a week  rose from her love of  listening  to  classical music on radio…..from Chicago in the late 1930s to 40s  of all places.  (Mom and dad had met competing in ballroom dancing).

Think of the radio  static that would meet and sometimes conquer the beautiful music of Beethoven, Johann Strauss,  Grieg, and so on during a weekday then from Chicago!   I wanted to please her, but I’d forget every five minutes and ask her  questions stirring in my mind.

So, at four, I am at the wall.  My sister is at kindergarten that morning I had a big question to ask…..It was Spring….and I had been at that wall over twenty times already.  I was used to the routine and had learned to be quiet, or else!    So I began being absorbed by the beautiful music while viewing a beautiful idealized garden painting of R. Atkinson Fox.  After all, Mother was a devoted flower gardener, so I already knew what  peonies and hollyhocks were.  I knew it was an elm tree growing on our ‘boulevard’ section near the street and most of the names of the  flowers in her garden.

……”I wonder what the name of those beautiful trees are” came to mind while studying the painting .  I had recognized the peonies and hollyhocks  looked like mom’e plants.  I noticed the lovely trees looked just like Mrs. Rowell’s front yard tree.  “I’ll go and ask her!”…and did so exactly when the sixty minutes of picture staring was over.

Kids then were confined to tend to the back or side doors of neighbor’s homes  in those days.  It was my first visit to Mrs. Rowell’s house next door.

I remember she was very surprised to see me….I had a question for her….”Mrs. Rowell, what is the name of the tree you have in the front yard.

“Why, Glenn……That is a Lombardy Popular!”  I can still see her face bright and smiling in front of me.

“Thank you”, I responded as I was programmed to do.  I can still remember she used the word “Whatever”  in her  question…..”caused you to ask?”

I didn’t know how to answer….but said, “Thank you” as I was trained to do.

I have been captured by great Classical music all of my life since.   In May of 1942 I became the chief gardener tending and also planting for our war effort “Victory Garden”, and became its sole director and caretaker of until until the end of 1945.

My hobby and then my career  in Landscape Gardening led me to create “Masterpiece Landscaping” in 1990.    How could I get to be  so lucky, still working in the world I love?

I loved accumulating knowledge.   Yet, after my first B/A degree, a major in Geography, I didn’t know where to go, what to do, so I joined  the Army.    But, I loved learning, so I thought I might return to the University (Minnesota at the time) to get an Education degree.  But, I had to take a new exam, a  PSAT requirement  to be accepted.   I had never had such a test before.    Most of my grades were well earned A or B graded.  But I missed honors, as I did in high school because of my reading disability….I failed in Geomorphology and nearly so in Cartography.

The PSAT exam seemed  like being forced to read and remember “Vanity Fair”  when a junior in high school.   I couldn’t read a page and remember anything, so I went to Classic Comics to get the gist of  matters and escape a foul grade.

But PSAT was different…..and my worry was worthy.  I got notice I was turned down by the College of Education at the University of Minnesota.   “What an crushing insult”, I thought! I loved learning.  I knew a lot of learning stuff in a lot of fields.   But, I had become aware of my reading disorder. Nevertheless,   I made a complaint to the University.   I had graduated from a then  outstanding  high school in St. Paul, tops in several studies….but lows in others….Yet, I had amassed a lot of school knowledge despite my reading difficulties as many grades had indicated.

I was allowed to see a University Dean of some sort regarding my cause.   “I’ve never been a scholastic failure”, was my cause.  Yes, some grades were below par, Geometry and English….yet top grades in some sciences, social studies, history, and Latin.

The Dean was polite.  He asked me if I’d  take a new test in the scholastic market….”a Miller Analogies Test”, he said.   It would be my only hope, he warned.    It was spring, 1959, as I recall…..60 years ago.  He told me not to expect much, but he’d let me take the test anyway.

A week or so later the Dean called  asking me very blandly  to come to his office.  He needed to talk to me directly.   (I did think  the ‘exam’ was rather easy….quite easy…more like algebra, but with words rather than numbers.  I got good grades in high school algebra.

“You managed the test quite well.  I’ll even tell you what you rated…..97th percentile!”

I’ll be 85 next month.   I have surrounding me throughout my house  around a  thousand books, mostly histories, biographies,  Roman and ancient culture oriented, and hundreds of  books of the plant world.   I have studied many areas, especially biographies of Stalin, Hitler, Lenin, American history, and nearly all of the plant world texts, referring to many of them when needed.   I did receive that  Bachelor’s degree in Education, and later a  graduate degree in Soviet Studies in Russian at Middlebury, and one degree from  earning  a Master’s degree in Horticulture at the University of Minnesota.

I became quite fluent with my Russian and practiced it in the old USSR twice, in 1966 when it was still quite savage, and again in 1990 with a Minnesota church group who had raised money to aid victims of the Chernobyl disaster.

In 1990 I  began  the  landscape garden company, Masterpiece Landscaping,  at which I still work in creating beautiful settings….forty hours a week in my own half acre, and 20 hours a week still making beautiful settings with  the company.

But, I don’t remember the name of that  kind Dean who allowed me to be tested with the Miller Analogies Test.   I wanted to thank him so many times!



Mankind’s Drive to Seek Truth!

The Religious Moment On The Moon NASA Never Wanted You To See

Religious faith always animated the American quest to explore the heavens.


. . . After Aldrin ended the communication, he read a verse from the Gospel of John: “I am the vine, you are the branches. Whosoever abides in me will bring forth much fruit. Apart from me you can do nothing.” He then opened two small packages containing consecrated bread and wine from his church in Texas. Aldrin poured the wine into a chalice. “In the one-sixth gravity of the moon, the wine curled slowly and gracefully up the side of the cup,” he later recalled. As Neil Armstrong looked on in silence, Aldrin took communion. The first foods ever prepared or consumed on the moon were the Body and Blood of Christ.

Aldrin had intended to broadcast the communion passage to Earth, but at the last moment NASA silenced him to avoid exacerbating an ongoing legal battle with Madalyn Murray O’Hair, a miserable, militant atheist widely considered “the most hated woman in America.” Seven months earlier, Murray had sued NASA for permitting the Apollo 8 astronauts to read from the Book of Genesis during a Christmas Eve broadcast from lunar orbit. By the time Apollo 11 landed on the moon, the skittish space agency kowtowed to the atheist activist and censored the lunar communion.

. . . We mustered the physical courage to land men on another world only to lose the courage of our convictions and hide that humble moment of spiritual triumph when our astronaut gave thanks to God in heavenly communion. Such ironies abound throughout history. Yet in the space agency’s radio silence and the eternal silence of outer space, Buzz Aldrin consecrated that historic moment.
(Article was sent by Mark Waldeland.)

Top Diplomat Trump Goes to Work

Trump scores big at this year’s G20

by Brett Velicovich  at Fox news:

President Trump is a natural-born diplomat – and his stellar performance at this year’s G20 summit proves it.

While the Democrats were dealing with the fallout from the political circus they put on during their first round of presidential primary debates in Florida, the president spent the weekend working with foreign leaders to solve some of the most important geopolitical challenges facing America.

At the beginning of the summit, President Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss possible resolutions to the ongoing security predicaments in Iran, Venezuela, and Syria. Russia is at odds with America’s approach to all three of those countries, providing moral and material support to brutal dictators whom the U.S. wants to see ousted, and the president’s conversation with Putin was an important step toward reducing those tensions.


Trump also held talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India – a vital discussion that focused on improving bilateral trade relations between the world’s wealthiest, most powerful democracy and the world’s most populous democracy.

Predictably, the liberal media were quick to attack Donald Trump’s actions, accusing him of cozying up to hostile leaders.

More importantly, Donald Trump arranged an impromptu meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, becoming the first U.S. president to cross into the hermit kingdom. The meeting wasn’t just symbolic, either – both countries agreed to resume the denuclearization talks that stalled when Trump walked out of the most recent summit in response to North Korea’s demands for sanctions relief.

Trump’s meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping produced a similar result – the president noted that the talks “went better than expected” after China recently reneged on previous commitments. Although some had feared that the talks would stall, he confirmed that U.S. diplomats will “start where they left off with China” as the two sides resume bilateral negotiations in pursuit of a historic trade deal.

Predictably, the liberal media were quick to attack Donald Trump’s actions, accusing him of cozying up to hostile leaders.

CNN’s Jim Acosta, for instance, asked if the president was “afraid of offending” the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammad bin Salman, when he declined to comment about the death of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

The Washington Post also criticized President Trump for meeting with U.S. adversaries, publishing an article with the headline, “Trump appears more at ease with strongmen than democratic leaders at G-20 summit.”

What the biased press fail to understand is that this president is not a warmonger like so many of his recent predecessors. He doesn’t want America to become a militant crusader against every autocrat on the planet, and that means occasionally having to hold dialogues with foreign leaders we might find distasteful.

Donald Trump’s foreign policy vision is crystal clear – American interests must come first. Washington should not sacrifice those interests for the sake of “liberating” foreign populations or telling them how to draft their constitutions. Nor should it reject cooperation with foreign governments just because they don’t share all of America’s values. After all, President Franklin D. Roosevelt wasn’t above working with the totalitarian Soviet Union to defeat the forces of fascism in World War II.


Crucially, President Trump also understands that peace is a product of diplomacy and that it’s impossible to improve America’s relations with hostile powers without talking to them first. That’s precisely why the president takes every opportunity to hold discussions with foreign leaders, a practice that has already opened the door to important negotiations with countries such as North Korea, Russia, and China.

In contrast to his detractors, who refuse to believe that America has anything to gain from engaging in diplomacy with our adversaries, Donald Trump is determined to pursue every avenue available for ensuring peace and prosperity for the American people. That’s what the art of diplomacy is all about.




Taming the Bench: MAGA Means Ending Judicial Precedent

“It is a maxim among these lawyers, that whatever hath been done before may legally be done again: and therefore they take special care to record all the decisions formerly made against common justice and the general reason of mankind. These, under the name of precedents, they produce as authorities, to justify the most iniquitous opinions; and the judges never fail of decreeing accordingly.” So said Anglo-Irish essayist Jonathan Swift in Gulliver’s Travels in 1726. Unfortunately, something has changed almost three centuries later:

The decisions have perhaps become even more iniquitous.

Swift was rightly mocking the notion of “judicial precedent.” Yet it’s even more preposterous in our time and place, for at least 18th-century British judges didn’t have a constitution to violate. How is the principle even remotely defensible, however, in a nation with our Constitution, the “supreme law of the land”?

One justice who apparently understands this is Clarence Thomas, who just wrote the majority opinion in a recent decision (Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt) overturning a 1979 precedent. He was the ideal candidate for the task, as it has been noted that he’s not a “Court conservative” as much as an originalist. A conservative, after all, would hew to the status quo, which here means honoring precedent. In contrast, as SCOTUSblog pointed out in 2007, Thomas “believes that precedent qua precedent concerning constitutional law has no value at all; he does not give stare decisis  [the notion that judicial decisions should not be undone] any weight.”

This is why I’ve long said that Thomas is by far the best SCOTUS justice of recent decades (yes, that includes Scalia). Moreover, it’s certainly right to distinguish between Thomas’ originalism and being merely a “Court conservative,” which more and more is seeming akin to a court jester.

Why this is so was encapsulated well by British philosopher G.K. Chesterton when he wrote, “The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition.”

Stare decisis’ folly should be obvious. In what other field would anyone assert that once a decision is made, it stays made? Since it’s a statistical certainty that not all decisions will be good ones, this standard only ensures the permanency of error.

Yet to fully grasp stare decisis’ outrageousness, an analogy is useful. Chief Justice John Roberts once correctly said that a judge’s role is only to call “balls and strikes” (this was before he decided that a ball could be a strike when striking a blow for statism). Expanding on this, judges are in fact like baseball umpires, whereas the players are akin to the people, the sport’s ruling body is a sort of legislature and the rulebook is essentially its constitution.

Now, it goes without saying that if an umpire “ruled” contrary to the rulebook — let’s say, refusing to call a player out after three strikes because he believed they were too few — we wouldn’t flatter his falsity and legitimize his legerdemain by calling him a “pragmatist” with a “living document” philosophy. We’d recognize him as a bad umpire derelict in his duty, and he’d be fired.

To the point, however, what would you say about someone who not only accepted his judgment, but viewed it as unchangeable “precedent”?

This notion is just as ridiculous when applied to judges — only far more dangerous. It should in fact disqualify someone from the bench, for justices take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

They do not take an oath to uphold other judges.

Imagine the reaction if we applied this stare decisis philosophy to President Trump’s determinations. Imagine we said that not only can he “change” the law on the basis that it’s “living,” but that his decisions should then be binding on all future presidents. How would that go over?

No, the analogy isn’t invalid because he’s not a black-robed lawyer. All these officeholders take an oath to uphold the Constitution — and none of them are supposed to be above that supreme law of the land.

Many want to be, though. Power is an aphrodisiac, and this brings us to why judges’ love affair with precedent reflects nothing noble. As Thomas Jefferson explained in an 1820 letter in which he warned about judicial supremacy, “Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privileges of their corps.”

This was perhaps reflected in liberal Justice Stephen Breyer’s reaction to the recently overturned precedent. “Today’s decision can only cause one to wonder which cases the court will overrule next,” he complained. A good justice would be concerned only with what unconstitutional precedent would not be overturned next.

But why is Breyer upset? Is it because he wants to maintain the power of his corps and its privilege of being above the law?

Stare decisis is just a euphemistic way of saying that judges’ decisions — “precedent” — should take precedence over the Constitution. This perverts our system. It undermines the republic. We’re supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The Constitution reflects the people’s will in that it was ratified by the states and because Americans tacitly approve it to this day it by allowing it to stand; after all, they can amend it through their representatives.

Yet when judges place their own opinions above the Constitution, such as when elevating precedent, they establish themselves as an oligarchy. We then don’t have the rule of law but the rule of lawyers, a government of, by and for those who’ve arrogated to themselves the power and privilege to manipulate the law according to their own will.

Note, too, that hard and fast respect for precedent actually has no precedent, as our history’s more than 100 overturned SCOTUS decisions attest. So why do leftists now act as if it’s sacrosanct?

Because after more than a century of moving the courts “left,” there’s now a large body of unconstitutional, leftist precedents that serve their agenda. Stare decisis is not for these people principle but ploy, a convenient value of the moment.

Thus, when going through the Senate confirmation process, the norm now is for more “conservative” judges to be asked if they’ll abide by certain precedents (i.e., Roe v. Wade). Translated, this is a demand to conserve yesterday’s progressives’ mistakes.

In reality, judicial nominees should be asked if they’ll respect precedent — and then be roundly rejected upon answering yes. For we can’t MAGA unless we MAJJA: Make American Judges Judges Again. For tolerating oligarchs in black robes ensures a dark future.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Gab (preferably) or Twitter, or log on to SelwynDuke.com



The Human Female Animal Is NOT Born to Become a Problem Solver…..And then there was Margaret Thatcher, 40 Years Ago!


by Steven Hayward   at PowerLine:

Today is the 40th anniversary of the election of Margaret Thatcher as the first female prime minister of Great Britain—a precursor of the election the following year of Ronald Reagan.

Before her arrival many people thought England’s long, slow postwar decline was irreversible.  “Britain is becoming a third world country . . . an offshore industrial slum,” Economist magazine correspondent Robert Moss wrote in 1977. Daniel Yergin and Joseph Stanislaw recall in their book The Commanding Heights of the episode when Thatcher visited the Conservative party’s research department after she became party leader, where she found a party staffer writing a paper on how the Tory party should adopt a “middle way” between left and right. Thatcher erupted.  “She was not interested in refurbishing Harold Macmillan,” Yergin and Stanislaw recount. “Instead, she reached into her brief case and pulled out a book.  It was [Friedrich] Hayek’s The Constitution of Liberty.  She held it up for all to see.  ‘This,’ she said sternly, ‘is what we believe.’  She slammed it down on the table and then proceeded to deliver a monologue on the ills of the British economy.”

If the the feminist and identify politics left were sincere about their demands for “diversity” and female representation at the summits of power, Thatcher would be one of their patron saints. Certainly she was not averse to feminist sentiments, such as her famous early (1965) comment that “If you want a speech made you should ask a man, but if you want something done you should ask a woman.” But of course the feminist/diversicrat left is really interested in leftism, not “diversity.” I recall that back in the 1980s feminists would refer to Thatcher (also Jeane Kirkpatrick, then our UN ambassador) as “female impersonators.”

The Adam Smith Institute in London has this nice recollection of Thatcher’s top ten achievements in office, among which my favorite is Number 10:

By taking a firm stand against Soviet aggression and expansionism, and supporting President Reagan by deploying US missiles to counter Soviet missile deployment, she was instrumental in bringing the Cold War to its end in victory for the West and freedom for those who had suffered under Communist dictatorships.

Just now, with our socialist moment in American politics, it is worth recalling her fabulous smackdown of socialism in the House of Commons (Memo to: President Trump—take notes on this):

And in contrast to the current female prime minister of Britain, I think we know how she would handle Brexit:



President Trump’s Outstanding Teaching and Learning Skills Seeking Truth and Consequences!


by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

Scott wrote last week about Byron York’s revealing podcast with John Dowd, who represented President Trump during a substantial portion of Trump’s dealings with special counsel Robert Mueller. Byron has now posted, on Ricochet, the second installment of his interview with Dowd. He writes about it here. An excerpt:

In our earlier talk, Dowd stressed that the Trump White House fully cooperated with Mueller’s investigation, and that on more than one occasion Trump instructed Dowd to inform Mueller that the president respected the prosecutor’s work. But how could one say Trump fully cooperated when the president was, at the same time, loudly denouncing the probe as a “witch hunt” and a “hoax,” and bashing Mueller’s prosecutors as “17 angry Democrats”?

The answer lay in Trump’s longtime habit of operating on two levels. On the surface, Trump sets off controversies, often using Twitter to say something outrageous that sets the media agenda and leaves some commentators with their hair on fire. At the same time, below the surface, Trump is actually taking steps to get a particular job done.

That was true with the Russia probe. For public consumption, Trump was denouncing Mueller and trashing his team. Behind the scenes, Trump was cooperating and making sure his staff did the same. The Trump White House offered everyone (except, of course, the president himself) to be interviewed, and reams and reams of documents that other White Houses might have withheld on the grounds of executive or other privilege. So Trump simultaneously attacked and cooperated.

Asked about the attacks, Dowd said Mueller understood that Trump had to mount a political defense on the Russia issue. “Bob understood this, it was political,” Dowd said. ” [Trump] had to handle the political side, and that was his way of doing it with his tweets and his comments … Bob was a big boy about the political side of it. He understood the president had to address the politics of it. He couldn’t just say nothing. People were pounding him about this thing every day, both privately and publicly, and he had to take [Mueller] on.”

Interesting. Hypothesis: Trump adopts the persona of a vain and boastful man who overestimates his own abilities, because it is the surest way to cause his opponents to underestimate him.




Why Are Jews Held So Sacrosanct in American Political Life These Days?


Having escaped condemnation for her anti-Semitic remarks, and indeed having avoided even a straight resolution condemning anti-Semtism itself, Rep. Ilhan Omar has gone on the attack. That’s not surprising, but some might be surprised at the target of her latest attack.

This time, it’s not Jews. This time the target is former president Barack Obama. The New York Post reports:

Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar ripped former President Barack Obama in an interview published Friday, belittling his “pretty face” and saying his agenda of hope and change was an illusion.

She cited the “caging of kids” at the Mexican border and the “droning of countries around the world” on Obama’s watch — and argued that he wasn’t much different from President Trump

“We can’t be only upset with Trump,” the freshman firebrand told Politico Magazine.

“His policies are bad, but many of the people who came before him also had really bad policies. They just were more polished than he was,” Omar said.

“And that’s not what we should be looking for anymore. We don’t want anybody to get away with murder because they are polished. We want to recognize the actual policies that are behind the pretty face and the smile.”

If this were the view of only Omar and some fringe Democrats, it wouldn’t be a big deal. The problem for Democrats is that it’s the view of significant portion of congressional Democrats and Democratic voters. Omar is saying what many Democratic politicians believe but have been afraid to say until now.

How many House Democrats share Omar’s view? What percentage of Democratic voters do? These are the big questions, to which I don’t know the answers.

But if you strip away Omar’s inflammatory rhetoric and focus on her two substantive talking points — the detention of illegal immigrants at the border and the use of lethal force by the U.S. military abroad, I wouldn’t be surprised if her views have something approaching, or maybe even exceeding, majority support among Democrats.

Few Democrats would agree with Omar’s absurd suggestion that Presidents Obama and Trump are two sides of the same coin — a pretty side and an ugly side. But Trump will leave the stage either in 2021 or 2025. The policy rift in the Democratic party looks like its here to stay.

Either that or Omar’s side will prevail, in which case the Democrats risk years in the political wilderness.

The furies have been unleashed…..by Paul Mirengoff  at  PowerLine.


by Glenn H. Ray

Why is it in our today’s America, the only community  forever protected and held in  perfection, sans public criticism in our country’s  world of standard national communication, is our Jewish brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles and so on?

No matter how true, how important,  and honestly  presented the negative criticism might be within our Jewish world , the topic, the speech, the article, the book, or the paragraph alone could,  would   stir threats, even disorder on campuses, causing  screams  of historic proportions throughout our American political networks.   Yet in order of noise,  language fowl, television, and printed  attack,  most likely,  the trouble  tarts  would be 60% Democrat, 30% Republican, 7% Jewish,  and miscellaneous 3%.

Folks, we Americans  advertise our American belief in the importance of free enterprise which includes  free speech.   Ilhan Omar apparently has a background of life and learning foreign to our America.    I am guessing she believes what she says from her life’s experiences.   I am presuming she is an American citizen, and so has an American right in life to express her views in our Good old USA!

Some of America’s most devious politicians happen to be leftist Jews in Congress and the law industry…..All Americans should get to know truthless Adam Schiff,   Jerrold Nadler,  Richard Blumenthal, and such ‘unlikables’   better.

I, like our gifted President Donald J. Trump, am NOT an anti-Semite.   I was born and raised in a JudeoChristian urban environment in which the only community minority until high school was Jewish.  I attended a very well disciplined high school, 1948-1952  in which about a quarter of students in my classes were Jewish.   Inevitably, I buddied up with a lot  of the  Jewish guys, despite the displeasure of some of their mothers…. ….displeased only because I was a Gentile…..

We were made well educated in those days…..We had good times learning together in civilized classrooms with great teachers, a  demanding standard in those days.

My current favorite “social, educational,  and political” American  is Dennis Prager,   another   conservative who  is not an anti-Semite.

My son-in-law,  born in New York City, is a Jewish Democrat  fellow.   They live on Manhattan.   They have a good marriage.   He’s good to my daughter!  I adore him!