In Minnesotistan a Democrat candidate for the U.S. senate cunningly dodges a question

When a candidate for high office is asked a straightforward question about his or her position on a key issue and repeatedly dodges, refusing to answer the question and instead spouting some canned talking-point, what does that tell ya, unequivocally?

As should be screamingly obvious to everyone, it tells you the candidate KNOWS most voters don't like that party's true position on the issue.  So the candidate repeatedly refuses to answer the question.  And most of the time the "reporter" doesn't press the point, since the Media loves Democrats and hates conservatives.

Example # infinity: In the Dem-ruled shithole of Minnesota a communist dipshit named Peggy Flannigan is running for the U.S. senate.  Peggy's a loyal Democrat who embraces every lunatic policy of that totally fucked-up party.  Like, Minnesota law does not set a minimum age for a kid to get sex-change surgery.

So...a friendly female CNN talking-head interviewed Peggy on live TV, and the friendly female from normally-Dem-fellating CNN asked Peggy a simple, straightforward question.  Now watch Peggy's eyes as she refuses to answer:

Interviewer:  "Minnesota law does not set a minimum age for gender affirming care. Do you believe there should be one?"

Right away you know the female CNN interviewer is pro-Dem because she uses the phrase ordered by the Partei--"gender-affirming healthcare"--instead of "sex-change surgery."  Here's how Dem candidate Peggy responded:

"I mean, I believe what we need to do is make sure people have access, uh, to health care.  Frankly that's one of the reasons, you know, why I've run so hard on Medicare for all, uh, and making sure that gender-affirming care is available to all.

Note that phrasing again: "gender-affirming health care."  It is neither.

CNN: Should there be an age limit?

Peggy: Uh, I think gender-affirming care is part of health care. People need access to it for health care.  I think our law as it stands [i.e. no minimum age limit to chop off healthy body parts], uh, is, is a good law I've supported in the past.  But I think the real question...

Note Peggy insists that viewers agree with her that sex-change surgery is "health care," and that "people need access to health care."  No one argues with the second part.  The argument is whether sex-change surgery is "health care." What Peggy did was to change the attention of viewers away from the actual question asked to one that voters clearly agree with.

...uh, that people are struggling with is, if I go to the doctor, how am I going to pay that bill?  Um, you know, when folks have $16,000 deductibles, it's untenable for people. So that is the issue, uh, surrounding healthcare I hear from Minnesotans all across the state.

CNN:  "Okay, so you support the law as is, no limit.  So if a 10-year-old wanted it, you would be okay with that."

Peggy did NOT expect to get that follow-up question! 

Peggy: "Let me be clear. I want to be...I want to be clear that these, you know, medical decisions absolutely should be made between a, a family and their doctor.

This is a classic:  The position of the Democrat Partei [sic]--which is the law in every Dem-ruled shithole state--is that there's no minimum age for chopping healthy body parts off a mentally ill child.  Since this strikes most adults as clearly insane, Democrat candidates have been coached to avoid answering that question, by instead saying something most people agree with: that "medical decisions should be between a family (presumably parents?) and 'their' doctor."

SO let's chase down this bullshit Dem "logic" and see where it leads, eh?  Suppose 12-year-old Susie says "I feel uncomfortable having breasts, cuz I could get breast cancer.  I want to have mine removed."

If the family found a doctor willing to perform that operation, is that reasonable?

Democrat logic: "Absolutely!  Bravo to the girl for having the courage to eliminate a source of anxiety!"

Conservative: "Obviously breast cancer is scary and can be fatal, but the incidence is 132.5 per 100,000.   For those who can't do math, that's 1.325 out of a thousand, or a bit less than the chances of dying in a car accident.  You haven't stopped riding in cars, right?  But you're okay with having your kid's breasts removed?  Seems pretty irrational to me.

Back in the 1950s to 1960s, when older women demonstrated unusual mental behavior, a chunk of the "medical community" decided that could be "fixed" by a simple procedure called a "lobotomy," which involved inserting a hooked cutter thru the corner of the eye and cutting a connection between the "frontal lobe" and the rest of the brain.
   For those who don't get it: "Life-dysphoria, citizen?  The cure is simple: cut off the parts that make you feel dysphoria."
   Ring any bells?
   The patient immediate calms down--totally.  The body still lives but no one's really "in there" any longer.  And yet for years this was a totally accepted procedure by "the medical community."  Until rational people realized it was insane.
   Sex-change surgery is the new lobotomy--and the insanity will only end when the cost to settle the lawsuits overcome the profits.

Most Democrats strike me as totally disconnected from reality.  Fucked in the head.  Their refusal to answer simple questions tells you they know the Partei's position is insane.

Imagine the average IQ of a person who would vote for Peggy--and those just like her.  And yet in Minnesotistan Peggy will win--because most voters are hard-core Democrats. 

No state lets kids under 16 drive, buy tobacco or alcohol or get a tattoo, yet in Democrat-ruled shitholes state law allows doctors to mutilate a kid's healthy body.  To repeat: sex-change surgery at any age has the full support of Democrat-imposed law in that moronic (but oh-so-woke) state.

So Peggy dodges, dodges, dodges, then bleats "Let me be clear, I want to be clear."  Bitch, no one tried to stop you from being clear.  You were the one who changed the subject, refusing to answer the simple, direct question.  Like all Democrats you blew a cloud of smoke to hide your refusal to answer the question asked.  But good Democrats never noticed--because they agree with you and your insane Partei [sic].  

"Gender-affirming health-care" is a perfect example of Orwellian 'newspeak.'"  (If you're not familiar, look it up.)

If your genitalia doesn't affect your gender, how is cutting 'em off "gender affirming care"? 

Spoiler: In November the insane Democrat shitheads will win a majority in the House, and likely a tie in the senate.  But because the senate is full of shithead RINOs who support Dem policies, that will give the Dems an effective majority in that chamber as well.

At that point the only laws congress will pass will be those that benefit the Democrat Partei.  It won't be possible to pass any law that will benefit the United States. 

As the marvelous Douglas Adams wrote decades ago: "So long, and thanks for all the fish."

(For young Americans: google "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Universe."  Fabulous spoof of absurd rulers.) 

A brief look at the future

By 2036 every record had been destroyed or falsified.  Every history book had been rewritten, every historical photograph and critical date had been altered.  Every statue, every street, every building had been renamed.  All that existed was an endless present in which the Party was always right."    (--edited from George Orwell's "1984")

By 2028, thanks to millions of Democrat voters, the Democrat Socialists of America controlled...everything.  At first the Democrats had bleated that most Americans considered the DSA's policies far too radical to support.  But once DSA candidates started defeating Dem incumbents, and the Democrats realized they couldn't win without DSA votes, every Democrat politician had rushed to embrace the same policies they'd claimed to oppose only weeks earlier.

Funny how that works, eh?  Power easily wins over foolish consistency, right?

As a result most analysts were stunned to see how fast the combined votes of DSA supporters and "regular" Democrats won...everything.  And as they'd openly promised on their webpage in 2026, they'd quickly made DC and Puerto Rico states, which instantly gave 'em control of the senate (which they'd effectively had anyway because of the filibuster).  

Next they got four more Dem-ruled states to join the "National Popular Vote Interstate Compact," which abolished the Electoral College and elected the president by the winner of the national popular vote.  (If you haven't heard of that, google "NPVIC.")  They'd openly promised to do that in 2026.

Next, as they'd openly promised in 2026, to avoid the Supreme Court rejecting their plans, the DSA/Dems added 12 new "justices," all appointed by a committee of congressional Democrats.  So the Court was now a rubber-stamp for any DSA policy.

With the Court now controlled by the DSA, the DSA-controlled congress abolished the senate--as they'd openly promised in 2026. 

Next--as they'd openly promised in 2026--they had the DSA president issue an Executive Order that all future presidents would be appointed by members of the House.  In the past such a huge change to the Constitution would have required a Constitutional amendment, but because the new, expanded, DSA controlled the Supreme  Court, the new justices agreed that amending it wasn't necessary, cuz...reasons.  Pick anything you like: "National emergency"?  "Climate change"?  "Saving the poor"?

Next, as part of their openly-stated promise in 2026 to de-fund the military, the DSA cut the military budget in half, and ordered all U.S. troops out of the mid-east.  Iran instantly re-took control of the Strait and charged every non-Iranian oil tanker two million dollars per load.  The price of oil surged to $120 a barrel--but since they DSA government had banned gasoline cars, that only hurt the few U.S. voters who hadn't junked their gas-powered car for a faaabulous new EV.

Iran also resumed developing an atom bomb, which enabled the mullahs to intimidate every EU nation into doing as they demanded.

Next the DSA--as they'd openly promised in their published platform in 2026--enacted "Medicare for All," free daycare and free college for everyone who wanted to go.  Of course none of it was free, and it increased federal spending by $3 trillion a year.  But the Washington Post and the alphabet networks gushed that this was absolutely the most faaabulous thing EVAH! 

Next the DSA-ruled congress increased the minimum wage to $50 an hour, and banned electric utilities from using natural gas to produce electricity.  Cuz "global warming," eh?  But of course since the total U.S. demand for electricity was far more than wind, solar, nuclear and hydro could produce, and no one wanted to lose their electricity, within three months the price of electricity had tripled--once again proving the old laws of "supply and demand."

With the huge increase in the price of electricity, "advocates" for the poor sued, so the DSA-ruled congress quickly, effortlessly passed a law that anyone who claimed to make less than $50,000 a year--including "undocumented Americans"--would now be given "free electricity."

Of course a few deplorables and editors realized the electricity wasn't really "free," just paid for by the gruberment--meaning taxpayers, meaning money borrowed by the federal gruberment.  And because no one was required to actually verify their income (which wud be raaaacis'),  instantly half of Americans got "free" electricity.

And since even today 47% of Americans don't pay any income tax, they weren't paying indirectly either. 

Then in one of those unpredicted effects, tens of thousands of people who now got electricity for free realized they could make tens of thousands of dollars a year by quietly installing hidden chargers for electric vehicles, and charging neighbors who had to pay for their own electricity $20 for three hours.

ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and MS-NOW gushed that "free electric fo' duh po'"--and all of the other DSA policies--were duh mos' faaaabulous ideas EVAH--because the top priority of the Mainstream Media is supporting the Democrat Partei.

Of course all those programs combined cost six trillion dollars a year, and with the national debt over $50 trillion no other country wanted to buy U.S. T-bills unless the interest rate was over ten percent.  And for awhile the DSA put up with that.  Soon the annual deficit was $4 trillion a year--and we had to borrow even more money just to pay the interest.

Many DSA members of congress were surprised to learn that even huge nations had to pay interest on borrowed money.  Since they'd never taken Econ-101 (which obviously wasn't required for a women's-studies major) they'd always thought governments could simply print as much cash as they wanted.  "Why not," eh?  So the DSA came up with what seemed an obvious, brilliant solution: if you have to pay interest on borrowed money, but don't want to, just don't borrow any more.  Instead, just print whatever you need. 

It's SO obvious, eh?

A few "journalists" with at least a spoonful of economics knew history had proven again and again that this was a bad idea, but the DSA's daily talking points (just as the Dems used) said "Dis iz a faaabulous idea, so don't say anything bad about it."

So the Media didn't.

So the DSA cranked up the printing presses.  And just as happened to Weimar Germany and modern Venezuela (if you don't know, google both), inflation quickly jumped to 5%...per WEEK.  A staggering 260 percent annually.  And that was just for starters.

Soon a dozen eggs cost over $100.  (In Venezuela two eggs cost a day's salary.)  Even worse, savings carefully built up from years of work were now worth only 5 or 6 percent of their earlier value.  Voters screamed bloody murder.  But never fear, because the DSA was run by brilliant leaders like AOC and Kamala Harris--who quickly devised what seemed to be an obvious "solution" to complaints about high prices.  Can ya guess?

Of course you can, citizen!  They ordered price controls imposed on a hundred common agricultural products, including meat, milk, cheese, butter and--oddly--alcohol.

Since the max price the DSA rulers allowed producers to charge was less than what it cost to produce those items, producers couldn't make a profit by selling at the government-ordered price, eh?  So can ya predict what happened?  

Sure ya can!  The supply of those items did just as Econ-101 said it would (as proven again and again): they quickly vanished from store shelves.  Producers still made 'em, but only sold a small number at the DSA-commanded ceiling price.

Whoa!  So whaddya think happened to the rest of the production, eh?

It vanished into the "black market."  (If you're not familiar with the term, google it.  Happens whenever gruberments try to command people.  If you're a young American, ask your parents to explain "black markets."  If they don't know, look it up.)

Faced with continued shortages of critical products, how do ya think the DSA-run government responded?  Wow, you already guessed!  They sent armed agents from the Treasury Department to seize farms and factories that claimed to be producing less than before the decree, and prosecuted the owners.  The Washington Post and the alphabet networks fawned over this, saying the DSA move was faaabulous cuz the companies and farmers were "profiteering" by selling on the black market.  

And note the term "profiteering" instead of "making a profit."  The Media chose the former word carefully, cuz not all Americans yet thought "profit" was a bad thing.  But "profiteering" sounded bad, and by then 70% of Americans agreed that socialism was preferable to eeeebil capitalism.  (Polls show that even today 60% of Democrats--not just DSA members--believe socialism is preferable to capitalism.) 

And of course with "profit" and capitalism demonized by the DSA and their Media parrots, who do ya think was courageous enough to defend either?  No one. 

Then to re-start the seized factories, the DSA-controlled gruberment hired illegal aliens as government employees--with lavish salaries and pensions.

And as anyone who's ever had to deal with the Department of Motor Vehicles knows, that worked exactly as you could have predicted.  Crippled by gruberment red tape and govt-employee-union rules, output actually DEcreased, and soon only government officials could buy once-common products like meat and butter.  But just as members of congress exempted themselves from taking the jab for the Chyna virus, government officials were deemed "critical employees" and special government shops were created to let them buy things no longer on the shelves of other stores.  Instead ordinary citizens learned to plant "victory gardens"--a term from WW2.  

The alphabet networks and the Washington Post started running 2 or 3 articles a week gushing over how "victory gardens" were making Americans more healthy by avoiding pesticides and chemical fertilizers.  They gushed that the trendiest parties hosted by "the elites" in DC and NYC were now serving tasty dishes made from the hottest new food craze: mealworms.  "Absolutely fabulous!" gushed the Post.  "A taste sensation," fawned ABC.

Of course the elites weren't really eating dishes made from mealworms, but the DSA paid "influencers" to rave about it (just as the Dems already pay influencers to rave about Dem policies), and college kids instantly heard it was cool, so they did it--and then bragged about it to their frenz.  

After four years of DSA policies, 30 million new illegals had become U.S. citizens, and all voted for the faaabulous DSA.  The U.S. economy collapsed, and China bought a third of the most productive farmland in the U.S.  All totally legal, of course.

A couple of conservative orgs tried suing, but both lawsuits were thrown out by leftist judges because of "lack of standing"--the same way all lawsuits about election fraud are usually dismissed.  Conservative voter: "How can you claim I don't have 'standing' to sue for election fraud?"  Leftist judge: "Because I can.  Now shut up or I'll jail you for contempt." 

By 2050 the "old, unfair, capitalist" U.S. was only a distant memory.  Only gummint officials were allowed to fly--because by definition they were important.  (And of course by that time jet fuel was so expensive that average Americans couldn't afford the fares even if they'd been allowed to.)  The Washington Post and the alphabet networks gushed that this was actually a great thing: "The DSA is saving the Erf from fatal globull worming!"

By 2070 smart young Americans realized the U.S. was doomed and began emigrating to freer nations like China, Qatar and Iran, where smart, creative people could still buy steak, homes and cars.

By 2050 no American believed that back in 1970 four Air Force pilots making $25,000 a year could buy a single-engine Cessna airplane to fly to college football games, or that plumbers and electricians could buy 150-horsepower bass boats for pleasure.  Or that almost any American could easily afford to fly to Europe.

As a famous author wrote 90 years ago, that world was "gone with the wind."  (Hat tip to Margaret Mitchell, 1936, writing about a time as far removed from 1936 as 2050 will be from 1970.)

Sadly, almost no one reading this will have any idea what I'm talking about.  And fair enough: all your time is taken by trying to keep your family fed and keep a roof over their heads.  I get it.  That's your top priority--as it should be.  You don't have the spare time to spend worrying about what's happening to the country.  By great luck, I do.  and I understand that most adults don't.

By huge contrast, angry, childless socialist liberal women have all the time in the world to demonstrate and organize.  Their beta-male counterparts are the editors of Mainstream Media rags, and producers of all the network "newz."  Without kids (or for highly-paid Media editors) such people can effortlessly afford to give the DSA $5,000 campaign contributions.  You and I can't afford to do the same for the few genuine conservative candidates out there.  I totally understand.

Not to despair, citizen:  Everyone knows all great things must eventually come to an end, and we've had a great run.  And really, in the long term what difference does it make whether the end comes in 2030 or 2050, eh?  And besides, it'll all turn to shit so slowly (mostly) that most people won't notice.

"We're only particles of change...orbiting around the sun."  --Joni Mitchell

My sincere thanks to the wonderful women I've known who have put up with my ramblings.  May you be richly blessed.  And if I sometimes seemed preoccupied, distant or clueless, I deeply apologize, and look forward to apologizing in the next life as well.  Your love and devotion enabled me to do...whatever the hell this is.

And for men who may have some idea of what's happening here: some vestige of grace and hope will still be possible even as life in the DSA-ruled future turns much more difficult.  Won't be easy, but still possible.

Sanctuary state city orders that illegal aliens can be police

Connecticut is a Democrat-ruled shithole sanctuary state.  Yes, it's pretty as a picture, with lots of rich residents.  But the bad guys own it.  So let's see how that's working:

Being a "sanctuary state" the place is loaded with illegals, so ICE arrested a few in Danbury.  Duh mayor din' like dat, so he got hiz frenz on duh totally Dem-dominated city council to introduce a rule change to...wait for it...allow non-citizen migrants to serve as city police officers.

It was common knowledge that the odd rule change was proposed and approved as a fuck-you to the Trump administration after the arrests of several illegals in the Dem-ruled town.

The mayor was smug: “It’s legal.  It’s allowed.  It’s been recommended.  It’s timely, and sends a message to "our immigrant community that you are welcome in Danbury.”  

Wait..."Our immigrant community?  I think you left out a crucial word there, shithead: "illegal immigrant community."

Duh mayor accused ICE agents of "sowing fear" and making local businesses a “ghost town” in the wake of the raids.

SO...illegals can now be cops in Danbury.  Big win for illegals, eh?

Now if you're a Democrat you probably don't see any problem.  But there's a huge problem:  Does  anyone think illegal-alien cops will enforce laws against other illegals?  Not a chance. 

Now for the twist: The mayor of Danbury--Roberto Alves, the guy who urged his Dem-ruled council to change the city's rules to allow illegals to be cops--was an illegal alien himself when he first came to the U.S.  

Starting to see how it works yet?

Sure: Illegals flock to sanctuary states and cities, knowing they'll get everything for free, and soon elect a former illegal alien as mayor, who then does everything in his power to advance other illegals.  Perfectly understandable.  He's playing for his team.  Not for ours.

And Democrats love it.

You richly deserve what you're gonna get.  Question is, will your children deserve the fate you've inflicted on them?  Obviously they had no say in what you did.  But that won't make a bit of difference.  

Eh, their problem, not yours, right? 

Female Dem governor of Oregon signs bill removing all math and English requirements for HS grads

 

 

Great idea, eh? 

Michigan Dem candidate for governor says voting Democrat is more important than our lives

If you don't live in Michigan you probably don't know who Dana Nessel is.

She's the state's attorney-general, responsible for enforcing laws, serving under that state's utterly moronic governor, Gretch Whitmer.  Because Nessel is a hard-core corrupt Democrat, she has no interest in trying to ensure honest elections.  But it gets worse: she's running for governor, to succeed the term-limited Gretch Whitmer.

Now you'd think most people would prefer to be governed by sane rulers, eh?  If a candidate for governor bleated that the "needs" of murderous thugs should be prioritized above our own lives, would you think that was rational?  How dumb would you have to be to vote for that person?

Nessel is Jewish, and was invited to address an event for Jewish Democrats in Michigan--where she said this: 

“We have a moral imperative to place the needs of the world above even our own self-interest and, yes, even our own survival.”

Yes, she actually said that.  She went on to say that this so-called "moral imperative” required Jews to vote for Democrat candidates--presumably including the Democrat Partei's nominee for the U.S. senate, Abdul El-Sayed.

El-Sayed is a Muslim communist who made excuses for a Muslim terrorist attack on Jewish children in the preschool of a Michigan temple.  But because he's a Democrat, Nessel says Dems have a "moral imperative" to vote for him--even though he defends terror attacks on Jewish kids.  Does that seem rational to ya?

Now I'm not Jewish, and have no dog in that hunt, but it should be obvious to even stupid people that a Jewish Democrat urging citizens to vote for Dem candidates who support killing Jews seems insane.

Nessel isn't technically insane.  Instead she's a classic Democrat: they believe nothing is more important than winning power for The Partei.  It  outranks everything--and Dana claims to believe that's more important than survival of fellow Jews.

Actually that does seem insane.  But that's the Dem party in a nutshell.  And Muslim communist Democrat candidates like El-Sayed LOVE that irrationality.

Now the wrap: Because Michigan is majority-Democrat, both Nessel and Abdul will win--because Dem voters would vote for a serial killer if he or she had a D after its name.

Partei above all, comrade!

What we should have learned from 9/11, but didn't

For young Americans: Next week will mark the 25th anniversary of the attack on the U.S. by 19 Muslim hijackers that killed 2,980 innocent Americans and destroyed the two tallest buildings in New York City, and hit the Pentagon.

If you're under 35 years old that death and destruction makes no impression at all on you cuz you were 10 or younger in 2001.  So for 43% of the U.S. population, the attacks are as distant as 1970 was from the end of WW2--a total abstraction.  Meaningless.

I need to fix that for ya--because it literally means the difference between life and death.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 Muslim terrorists hijacked four jet airliners full of Americans.  They killed the pilots and flew each plane into the two tallest buildings in NYC.  The fires started by 20,000 gallons of jet fuel burned furiously, and after a few hours they softened the steel in the towers enough to cause both towers to collapse.

The terrorists flew the 3rd plane into a side of the Pentagon.  But in the last plane, passengers using cell phones had learned about the hijackings, and realized their only chance to live was to try to re-take control from the hijackers.

They almost did.  Unfortunately the hijackers flew the jet straight into the ground in Pennsylvania.

SO...what did we learn from the death of 2,980 innocent Americans, eh?

Apparently nothing.

After the attacks the rational thing to do would have been to close the borders to all Muslims, and deport all Muslims here on visas.  Then investigate Muzz who were U.S. citizens and deport all who had terrorist ties.

You won't be surprised to learn that your stupid, corrupt rulers--G.W. Bush, Obozo and bribem--did none of that.

(Immediately after taking office for his first term, Trump issued an EO prohibiting citizens from seven majority-Muslim nations known to support terrorism from entering the U.S.--but the Left immediately sued, screaming that the order was illegal.  And not surprisingly, leftist judges agreed.)

In the 25 years since the mass destruction by the Muslim hijackers, hundreds more Americans have been murdered by Islamic terror attacks just in the U.S.  In Europe Muslims murder a dozen non-Muzz every WEEK--and the ruling pols do nothing at all.  So now the mayor of the largest city in the U.K, and its capital city--is a Muslim.

You may have noticed that the mayor of the largest U.S. city--the city that saw the most destruction in the hijackings of 2001--is Muslim.

Starting to see a pattern yet?  No, you're not.

So instead of our president in 2001 instantly banning Muslims from entering the U.S, then deporting any found to have ANY ties with terrorist organizations, your rulers have done exactly the opposite, welcoming in millions more Muzz.  Seriously: The number of Muzz in the U.S. has gone from 1.8 million in 2001 to 4.5 million. 

In New York City, where most of the destruction of that day took place, the Muslim population has almost doubled, from 400,000 to over 700,000.  That's why NYC now has a communist Muslim mayor.

Islam bleats that they're "The religion of peace."  That's pure bullshit--pure propaganda.  Their own "holy book" has dozens of passages ordering good Muzz to kill non-Muslims.  Seriously.

And they do.  Multiple mosques in New York City openly preach hatred and terrorism in weekly sermons.  The videos are posted on social media for anyone to see, but the corrupt Muzz mayor just grins and laughs.  "Free speech, stupid deplorables!"

Non-muzz American Leftists and Dems eagerly parrot this.  "Why yew upset, citizen?  It beez totally legal to urge devout believers [Muzz] to do as the Koran commands!"  Americans refuse to believe that "the religion of peace" would command followers to kill non-Muslims, so you meekly, stupidly allow yourself to be muzzled rather than take the only action that will save your life.

Still not getting it?  Consider Darializa Chevalier, a Muzz communist in New York City who won the Democrat primary for New York's 13th congressional district.  Her most telling bleat is that when she couldn't find a napkin for her filthy hands, “I just wiped my hand on the American flag.” 

Wow, how much more contempt can you show for America than that, eh?

You really need to search for videos of this communist Muslim bitch to really appreciate how openly she shows her hatred for America, and how much she wants her comrades to take over America for communists and Muzz.

The political ascension of Islamists who openly despise us reflects our hatred for ourselves.

Mamdani, Abdul El-Sayed, Avila Chevalier and dozens of others agree with millionaire communist "influencer" Hasan Piker that America deserved 9/11.  Right after 9/11 the wailed and whined that Muslims were innocent, had nuffin to do wif' duh hijackings.  They bleated that the hijackings were NOT representative of Islam but were done by a "tiny minority of extremists."   

But today people like Hasan Piker, Mamdani, El-Sayed and other Muzz grin at us and bleat that "American deserved 9/11."  It's an in-your-face "fuck you."  And most of you never hear about it, and wouldn't believe it if you did because it's so outrageous.

And it’s a justified pride. Muslim terrorism killed thousands of New Yorkers and now run the city.

Hours after the Twin Towers collapsed, Muslims in New Jersey celebrated by passing out sweets, and today they claim we deserved it, just as they bleat that Israel deserved the massacre of Oct 7, 2024.  

And their warped religion commands that non-Muzz must either convert, or pay a special tax to their Muzz rulers, or--be killed.  That’s why they keep killing us.  You don't believe that--because you only know what the corrupt, lying Mainstream Media and Dem pols tell ya.

If you refuse to actually investigate to find the truth, do you deserve whatever happens to you and your family?

After 9/11 the U.S. Left--and all Democrat pols--demanded that we embrace our killers.  They demanded that we look to "root causes."  Ring any bells?

It didn’t have to be this way, any more than we had to suffer lockdowns during the Chyna virus scam.  But your rulers bleated that we just needed to "understand Islam."  "See, duh problem is NOT Islam but...tribalism!  So what we need to do is teach the populations of Muslim nations the magic of 'democracy.'  Yeh, dat's it!"

So we sent thousands of our best, most unselfish young men to Afghanistan to bring elections to a culture that could only think in terms of tribal power.

The results were predictable.

Finally a few Americans learned that contra to all the bullshit propaganda, they really did hate us-- because their religion teaches them from the earliest age to hate "infidels"--their term for non-Muzz.

First we blamed the attacks on the lack of democracy in the Muslim world.  Then we blamed our own intolerance.  We blamed Israel, global warming, "workplace stress," mental illness.

Everything except Islam.

Democrat pols and the Mainstream Media soothingly assured you that we could absolutely co-exist with Islam.  Both went to great lengths to avoid the one fact no one was allowed to utter:  Islam demands that all non-Muslims either convert, or submit and pay the "jizya" tax.

No one dared to raise the possibility that we couldn’t--let alone what to do if that was true.

25 years later, Democrats and the Mainstream Media are still blaming US for the attacks--not just 9/11 but all the others.  Many even suggest that the U.S. would be better off under Islamic rulers.  Former conservative Tucker Carlson noted that there's far less crime in Islamic nations than here.  (Carlson carefully avoided noting that the Koran orders devout Muslims to cut off the hands of thieves, because that would anger the U.S. Left, which praises theft as "reparations" or "re-distribution of wealth.")

So by obeying your rulers and refusing to say the thing they order us no to say, we've ended up accepting one outrageous thing after another.

Americans refuse even to consider the possibility that the only way to co-exist with Islam is to either convert or submit.

Instead Americans have learned to keep quiet. 

A people who forgive the killers of their children won't survive long.  "Suicidal empathy," anyone?

U.S. Democrats and leftist "elites" eagerly embraced Islam just as they embraced communism.  It's the "cool, woke" thing, eh?

The lesson of 9/11 is simple: you cannot co-exist with people who want to kill you.  The only way to survive is to make them realize that trying to kill you will result in their own death.  It IS that simple.

Hat tip to Front Page Magazine  

https://www.frontpagemag.com/what-we-never-learned-from-9-11/ 

Is the western world returning to medieval times?

Victor Davis Hanson is a historian and a great writer.  If you're not familiar with his writing you're missing a huge education--because those who refuse to learn from the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it, eh?

(For purists, Santayana actually wrote "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.")  

I've extensively edited VDH's piece below, and I encourage you to read the original, at this link.

In summary, Hanson says western technology has made fabulous societies possible, but socialists, communists and the Left are working like crazy to destroy it all, taking us back to the faaabulous middle ages.
===

For most people, the story of the medieval world was one of crowded cities, constant violent crime and occasional outbreaks of deadly plagues—the result of unclean urban conditions, rotting food, fouled water, open sewage, and unchecked rats, fleas and lice. 

Modern technology gave us the means to solve all those problems--and western societies did solve 'em--but only temporarily.  Because as anyone with a functioning brain can easily see, most big, Leftist-ruled cities are returning to medieval conditions.  You just didn't notice, in part because the Lying Mainstream Media refuses to tell ya.

Touring the magnificent cathedrals or "basilicas" (basilicae?) of Rome, Cologne, Paris, Florence, Milan and Seville you can see the emergence of brilliance starting in roughly 1400 A.D.

Oh wait...the Left demands that you not use that abbreviation today!  In another decade almost no one will know what that means.  The approved term is...do you know?  If you're an academic you sure as hell do, cuz if you use "A.D." you won't be given tenure.  Wow.

You think I'm kidding.

Go back farther:  The Romans built aqueducts that brought water 80 miles from mountains to Rome without a single pump.  Rome ruled the world--and yet was eventually destroyed by barbarians and collapsed around 450 A.D. 

No worry, citizen, cuz a mere 900 years later advanced societies had recovered the knowledge of Roman engineers and politicians.

900 years.  No big deal, eh?

We're now about 600 years after that recovery, so you'd think we'd have progressed a LOT, eh?  And for decades we did: western cities became jewels.  But somehow, starting about 1970, big cities in western nations started to resemble medieval ones: rampant crime, filth, disease and total dysfunction.

Unlike the rulers of medieval times, our rulers (soothingly called "officials" to disguise the truth) know how to stop disease, crime and filth--but have clearly chosen not to.  And you may wonder why.  You should ask why, and should be mad as hell by the answer.  (Spoiler: you'll never get an answer; the leftist bastards aren't that stupid.)

The deliberate mis-rule by your rulers stems from leftist ideology, which divides the world into “oppressors” and the blameless “oppressed.”  Leftists bleat that thugs, murderers, drug addicts, rapists and other demons are victims, and that the top priority of society must be to reward the killers and rapists--cuz dey iz "victims," eh?

Now, if Democrat/leftist rulers (pols) really believed their bullshit, they'd share their homes and elite islands (Martha's Vineyard) with the demons, eh?  But of course they don't: They live in clean, crime-free enclaves.  

For the terminally uninformed, the case of Martha's Vineyard is immensely instructive here: That island is totally inhabited and ruled by leftist/liberals/Democrats, who bleat that we MUST open ouah borders to duh whole world.  So a few years ago, to make a point, Florida's conservative governor flew two planeloads of invaders to Martha's Vineyard. 

And because the leftists/Democrats who live there are totally NOT hypocrites, they warmly welcomed the arrivals, built housing for 'em, and gave 'em food and money to live like regular folks, eh?

Hahahahahaha!  Just kidding.  The hypocritical leftists sons of whores picked up the phone and called the leftist shithead governor of their state and demanded that the governor get the invaders the hell off their faaaaabulous, crime-free enclave!

And like magic, that happened just 48 hours after the illegals arrived!  Wow!  Leftist rule in action, eh?

If you never heard about that it's because you're uninformed.

So: Obozo and bribem threw open our southern border to the whole world.  Not surprisingly, the U.S. was invaded by roughly 20 million unskilled, illiterate foreigners--9 million under Obozo and 11 million under bribem.  The Democrats then demanded that we house and feed the invaders, give 'em medical care and free college tuition.

Democrat governors ORDER their cops not to help arrest and deport the illegals.  Bribem even ordered the federal gruberment NOT to use the term "illegal aliens," but instead to use "undocumented Americans."  See how cunning that is?

It's against the law for people to camp on public sidewalks or someone else’s property—and yet the rulers of EVERY (yes) Democrat/leftist-ruled city ignore those laws.

Defecation, urination and drug injection are now routine on the sidewalks of Democrat-ruled cities.  And Dem pols totally ignore it--not a single critical word.  Not only that, they've ordered their cops NOT to arrest anyone for those crimes.  And when a city's rulers allow its streets and sidewalks to become medieval, should we be surprised by outbreaks of deadly medieval diseases like typhus--or that the storm drains now wash raw sewage from sidewalks into the ocean without treatment?

The priority for today’s leftist/Dem mayors and council-whores is to consider proposals for taxpayer-funded “sexual-relief facilities,” to give homeless people “private sexual relief through masturbation.”  That's not hyperbole--it's an actual proposal to the city council of LA.

Instead of arresting sidewalk campers, Dem rulers pay city workers in hazmat suits to wash "politically correct" feces, urine, blood and needle into storm drains. These modern marvels carry the mess out to pollute the ocean--cuz dat make it someone else's problem, eh?

Democrat/leftist rulers fine the law-abiding for emitting one part per billion of X in their waste--while allowing the "oppressed" to do as they wish.

Let's look at another area (and I can do this all day):

To deliver everything everyone needs requires trucks.  These have evolved from simple horse-drawn wagons to 80,000-pound semi's running at 70 or 80 miles per hour.  Got it?

It shouldn't surprise you that it takes a lot of skill and training to drive one of those big rigs, so states *originally* established fairly strict rules for giving people licenses to drive these things. 

Originally you had to pass a background check, including drug screening, and then pass a written test, then a thorough two-hour, in-person test of their driving skills.  And it worked to weed out the incompetent.

Except years ago the shitty leftist-ruled states began giving such licenses to illegal aliens who couldn't read road signs.

Say, that'll work well, eh?

And you think, What *possible* motive could states like Cali and NY have for giving commercial driver's licenses to illegals who couldn't read road signs, eh?  Where was the payoff?

Ohhh, dat it: duh payoff.  Fake "schools" took cash to give illegals certificates, and DMV workers took bribes (or obeyed orders from superiors) to give the illegals commercial licenses without testing.

The result?

Thousands of incompetent drivers. Many cannot distinguish a yield sign from a stop sign, and most cannot read a word of English. They drive as they please—racing, swerving, and veering, 80,000-pounds of kinetic energy.

But what was the payoff for leftist pols?  It let 'em feel "virtuous"--"woke."  Morally superior to the rest of us.

Let's go to a different indicator:

In December of 2024, in the shithole of NYC, Luigi Mangione ran up behind the CEO of a health-insurance company and shot him.  Straight-up assassination.

A few weeks ago he pleaded guilty to federal charges stemming from the assassination--yet thousands of young leftist females (?) continue to  fawn and slobber over him--cuz the they regard the assassination as "politically correct violence," thus a good thing.  Just as the Left crowed about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Many on the Left not only celebrated over Kirk's assassination but also mocked those who mourned him. 

When Lindsay Clancy strangled her three helpless small children, leftist/Dem women fawned over her, claiming she was actually the victim. 

Still think we've advanced?   

Our ancestors determined that actually enforcing laws reduces crime--not because the prospect of being caught, charged, convicted and sentenced to prison deters thugs (hint: it doesn't) but because it takes 'em off the streets for up to decades.

Yet Marxism (leftism, socialism) opposes this as "unfair."  The rationalization is that the thief or killer grew up in poverty so didn't know right from wrong."  Seriously.

Leftists ("wokies") insist that the thugs they champion must never suffer the consequences of their destructive ideology.  "Cuz dey wuz 'oppressed.'"

The Left can get away with this because they have the power to ensure that no homeless druggies are camping on the lawns of leftist Malibu celebrities, eh?

Similarly, shit-head leftist pols like Karen Bass and Gavin Newsom never worry about being mugged or stabbed in their "progressive, crime-ridden cities because they have 24/7 personal security details.

Nice, eh?
 
Leftist/socialist/Dem pols are taking our big cities back to medieval conditions.  And no one seems to be a bit concerned.

And there's a reason: the progressives, socialists, and Marxists bleat that they “care.”  They've decreed that the rape victim of an illegal alien is a nothing--just collateral damage that you must accept to ensure that the illegal alien remains free to stay in the U.S, unquestioned.

Today's leftist--a medievalist--demands that the 30-year military veteran be thrown out of the military for refusing the experimental mRNA vaccine—while at the same time welcoming the unvaccinated, COVID-infected illegal alien who, even as we were locked down and prohibited from attending funerals or church, strolled across the Rio Grande without a word from your leftist rulers.

The Left is all about virtue-signaling—at someone else’s expense.

Thus we arrive at the racist, white-hating murderer Decarlos Brown—now deemed “too incompetent to stand trial” after stabbing unarmed 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska in the throat three times, from behind, unprovoked, on a tram in a Democrat-ruled shithole.  Brown could be the poster child of our modern medievalism.

Source: American Greatness blog

https://amgreatness.com/2026/09/01/progressive-regression-and-the-new-medievalism/ 

Message for Democrats

 

x 

Atlantic prints a second LONG piece by a trans CIA officer/presidential briefer

The Atlantic is a leftist shit-mag.  Always has been.  They eagerly fawn over every Democrat and socialist and tranny policy.  Free country (well, at least for Democrats).  So carry on, leftists.

The problem is, all their readers eagerly eat up everything they print.  And the Lying, Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media fawningly, slobberingly parrots it all.  Latest example: a story SO gripping and heart-wrenching that the Atlantic published a preview of their upcoming October issue--in August!  Cuz it's SO gripping and heart-wrenching.  And blasts Trump and conservatives.

It's a LONG piece by a tranny CIA officer who was a member of bribem's National Security Council.  Despite Trump issuing an EO saying "only two sexes," the tranny was kept on after the 2016 election and was tasked as the regular personal briefer of Mike Pence--among many other exalted posts.

The piece makes it quite clear that the author LOVES Pence and hates Trump--because it's a leftist hit-piece on Trump, as you expected cuz it was in the Atlantic, eh?

Tranny author/CIA agent and Pence

Every paragraph in the piece drips with angst and trauma and emotional struggle.  Well of course!  Understandable, cuz every tranny's life centers around that struggle, eh?  So the recurring theme of the piece is the author constantly noting the praise showered on him/her/it by other members of the intel community and the pols they briefed.

And let me make clear that I don't doubt the ability of a homosexual or tranny to digest intel cables and produce a briefing sheet.  Even AI could do that.  My concern stems from this: If someone who's clearly born male claims to be a "real woman," is that a rational conclusion?

No.  Hell no.  Obviously no.  So when he continually insists that he really, reeeeally IS a woman, what else is he gonna spin to make it work with his unreal version of reality?

Consider that 99% of snakes are totally harmless.  Suppose your local eco-freak said "We want you to let this unidentified species of snake live in your home.  Not in a cage, of course, since dat wud be cruel.  So it gotta be free to roam anywhere in your house."

Odds are the snake isn't poisonous.  But would you risk it?

Same with trannies: they're clearly "off," but as I admitted earlier, chances are they could do the job competently, honestly.  And if the CIA was short of talent, and had to put a tranny into the key briefing position, okay.  But that is NOT the case.  The CIA shouldn't keep trannies on the payroll, any more than they should keep drug users on--even if the person is competent.  Why?  Cuz it's a risk we don't need to take.

So here's just one of a hundred examples of what bullshit propaganda the Atlantic piece is:  The author writes

When Trump was inaugurated for his second term, he declared “As of today it will be the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders: male and female.” 

Sounds like a true statement.  But the tranny could not resist lying, writing "The president signed an executive order banning me from restrooms in all federal buildings."

Horseshit.  The order said "two sexes," and that was later clarified to say people had to use the bathroom of their biological sex, not the one they arbitrarily claimed.  Is that "banning you from restrooms in all federal buildings"?  Of course not--but lying about it makes it seem SO cruel and oppressive, eh?  Which was the entire point.

Let me make this clear:  If someone wants to claim they're a dinosaur, that's their privilege.  I don't have ANY problems with that.  But when they DEMAND that all the rest of us agree with their clearly unreal claim, I've got a big problem with that.

Leftists: "Why yew so upset, deplorable?  Dis don' doo no harm!  If dis faaaabulous pyrsyn wants t' be female, how duz dat hurt YOU, eh?"

Glad you asked.  You won't like my answer, because you won't understand it.  That answer is that when cunning leftists enact either laws or mere "rules" endorsing any lie, reality gets junked:  If you accept that up is down, male is female, every definition is now up for grabs.  Reality becomes whatever some lunatic claims it is.

Democrats/socialists/communists: "SO??  Whut duh problem wif DAT?"

Told ya you wouldn't understand.

The Atlantic piece goes on for 4,000 words.

After Trump-2 was inaugurated:

I was now the senior intelligence official in the White House. For the incoming Trump administration, the trans woman would man the gates.

The author doesn't mention his/her/its exact job title, but "THE senior intel official at the White House" seems pretty powerful.

For as long as I can remember I’ve carried two dreams. The first came true in 2007, when I raised my hand, standing on the agency’s marble seal, and became a CIA officer. The second dream, I didn’t dare speak aloud; it came from ­an unexplainable conviction that I should have been born a woman. The longing, like homesickness, grew into an unbearable darkness.

Y'know what else is often described as an "unbearable darkness"?  Mental illness.  Now on a cosmic scale, this one isn't necessarily totally debilitating.  But it's still pushing "real" into second place, under "whut I *feel*"  Reality is shoved aside by the pyrsyn's feeeewings.

The author again:

in 2017, I wrote in these pages [the Atlantic--so he's been a total shill for 9 years] under the pseudonym Jenny Hall about how being openly trans at the CIA *made me a better officer.*  CIA recruiters used the essay on college campuses, and new officers—­not realizing they were talking with the author—told me that it had inspired them to apply.

Note the last part: In other words, slobber, fawn, praise: "My essay inspired 'them' to apply" to the CIA.  Who's "them," eh?  Trannies.  Do we want more trannies in the CIA?  Do we want ANY?  That depends almost entirely on your political party.  

Trannies deny reality.  More particularly, they claim reality is their reality, not reality as the rest of us know it.  And in an intel "analyst" that sets off my alarm bells.  And it should set yours off too. But of course if you're a Democrat, you're fine with it.  "Chances are that snake we insist you let live in your home is perfectly harmless."

There's a war going on.  (Spoiler: there's always a war going on.  You just never see it or read about it.)  It's between free societies and totalitarian ones.  To put it in more specific terms, between socialism and freedom.  The free group says "If you choose to be socialists (communists), it's your choice."  By contrast, the first group insists that every nation should be communist.

Of course you don't believe dat, eh?  That's because you know nothing about history.  Google "Hungarian revolution 1956" and get back to me.  Young people of Hungary were sick of being ruled by the communists, so they revolted.  In response, the USSR (the former Soviet Union) sent in hundreds of tanks.  Young Hungarians fought the good fight, but eventually were defeated by Soviet tanks, at the cost of thousands of lives. 

Young American: "Dis can't be true!  If true, my skool wud have taught it!"

Well there ya go, comrade.

Google "Chinese protest Tien an Minh square."  Same exact thing: young Chinese hated being ruled by fat commies, so they staged a beautiful but short-lived revolt, crushed by army tanks.

The example are damn near endless.  So how do these events tie to the Atlantic articles by the tranny CIA officer?

Because the Left never stops trying to defeat free nations.  Never.

"Julia" may not be a leftist, but he/she/it is definitely a tool of the Left--even if unknowingly.  But the editors of the Atlantic DO know.

"NOOOooo!  We iz NOT leftists, citizen!  We iz jus' defending ouah po' oppressed transgender sisters!  It gots nuffin to do wif' politics!  Nope nope nope!  Nuffin' at ALL!  We iz jus' tryin' to get ebrywun to accept dat appointing transgender comrades to duh highest positions in duh CIA and NSA iz reeeally guud fo' duh U.S!"

To conclude, let's review: in nature, what happens to animals that either refuse to learn, or are merely too stupid to learn, eh?

Think about that.

Of course you won't, cuz dere's a new Taylor Swift song out, eh?  Or something equally distracting.

There always is, eh?

If you've been paying attention (spoiler: most of ya haven't cuz you're too busy) you may know that one of the HUGE avenues for election fraud in the U.S. is mail-in ballots.  There are two ways this happens:

First, before duh Chyna virus, people who wanted to vote by mail had to request a ballot by mail.  But *because the Chyna virus had everyone scared to death of a virus that was and is less lethal than the flu* (yes, that's a fact), Dem-ruled states began mailing ballots to every registered voter.  No request needed.  And now that covid is gone, they're still doing it.

Problem is that when people move, they almost never bother to tell the state election board their address changed.  So the state continues to mail ballots to the person at their old address--ballots which can easily be "voted" by fraudsters--because Democrat "vote counters" don't try to match signatures or enforce witness signatures or postmarks.

Another problem is that Dems know when the Post Office delivers big stacks of ballots to apartment houses, and crooks with postal "master keys" then steal dozens of ballots in a minute, and are paid $50 bucks per ballot by the fraudsters.

SO...Republicans introduced a bill called the SAVE Act to reduce election fraud.  But Democrat senators have threatened to use their minority to block it with the filibuster (which takes 60 votes to end).  And now that RINOs are assured that the Dems will continue to block it, four RINOs have joined the Dems, so the filibuster isn't needed. 

SO...Trump ordered the Postal Service to only deliver mail-in ballots to known registered voters.  This doesn't prevent ballots from being stolen, but at least keeps recipients from selling ballots to fraudsters.

Of course as you already guessed, the Democrats immediately sued to block dis AWFUL oppression of po' minorities an'...um...uhhh...Democrats.  And a leftist shit-head judge immediately agreed, and issued an injunction blocking the order.

See, although the Constitution says only citizens are allowed to vote in federal elections, duh leftist judge sey *it beez illegal to try to enforce dat!*  It beez "oppression!"  Besides, Orange Hitler din' to an Environmental Impact Statement!  An' besides, Orange Hitler's order wuz printed on NON-recycled paper!  Can you believe it?  Carelessly disregarding Global Warming!  

But finally yesterday, to the surprise of almost everyone, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 for Trump. 

The Court's ruling allows the Postal Service to check addressees of mail-in ballots against a list of citizens maintained by the Department of Homeland Security.  But the fraud partei has vowed to challenge the order in another lower court on different grounds.  Cuz under Dem-rules no order from any court is final unless the Democrats like it.

Here's the executive order the Dems got blocked:
 >>"Several Federal laws, including 18 U.S.C. 1015 and 611, prohibit foreign nationals from registering to vote or voting in Federal elections. Yet States fail adequately to vet voters' citizenship...

Obviously the three braindead woke women dissented.

Here's how the communist Associated Press wire service twisted the story:
>>  The decision leaves room for new court challenges [lawsuits] that could further slow [block] Trump's order, *and other similar cases have already been filed.*
    Time is running short to impose major changes. North Carolina is sending out ballots Sept. 4 overseas and to military voters, and other states will quickly follow suit in just a few weeks. 
    The three liberal-leaning justices publicly dissented, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson writing that the rule "lets another shoe drop in the Kafkaesque nightmare that our precedents have been steadily creating for certain plaintiffs who seek to bring election-related challenges."
    While the emergency order is not final, it does *have the potential to create chaos around voting across the country,* with Trump often questioning the integrity of elections and the nation's highest court again the possible arbiter of a political controversy."
   Mail-in voting has long been a favorite target for Trump, who has claimed that it breeds fraud *despite strong evidence to the contrary*...>>

<<Bullshit: there is NO evidence that there's NO fraud in mail-in voting.  None.  Cuz you can't prove a negative.  All you can say is no evidence has been found.  But even that's a lie, since many precincts in Dem-run shitholes *counted* more votes than not just *registered* voters, but more than the total number of people of legal age to vote!  Lots of voters who went to vote in person were told that they'd already voted by mail.  Of course since there's no sign-in log for mail-in ballots there's no way to check sigs to see if the sig on the mail-in ballot matches that of the person wanting to vote in person.

Trying to find an anonymized ballot among thousands could be done, but would be hugely time-consuming.  Plus, some Dem-ruled states have shredded their ballots in violation of federal law.  Many boxes of counted ballots are missing.

The Lying Media always quotes "experts" they know will support the Dem party, never one that alleges fraud.  The Media know which experts to ask for comments because the Media knows which side each expert supports.

In a dispute between experts, the Media almost never has the expertise to determine who's right.  Yet in case after case the media instantly *decides which experts are right,* and tells you.  And since the entire media supports the Dem party it's no surprise that all the "experts" they quote parrot every Democrat claim, eh?

A few stories are slowly emerging showing how brazenly the Media did this with covid: they always quoted Fauci--the "expert" they liked--without adding a single critical word.  Yet many experts knew the virus had been modified in a lab and did NOT jump to humans from a bat or pangolin.  You just never knew they existed, because the Media never told you about them.

Source: Ace of Spades

https://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=421110 

What a firing in Europe means for the U.S.

The creature below is named "Petra de Sutter."  You won't be surprised to learn that a) Petra is not its real name; and b) whoever this really is was a member of the Green partei of Belgium; and c) then became a member of the damn leftist European Parliament.  

 

After those exalted positions, "Petra" was named Deputy Prime Minister for Groen (Flemish green party) as well as Minister for Public Enterprises and Public Administration.  Once that party was out of power, "Petra" won some sort of election as "Rector" of the U. of Ghent.

Clearly "Petra" has lived a charmed life.  The Belgian press is absolutely crammed with fawning, slobbering articles about the creature's faaaabulousness.  But something seemed a bit...off, so I checked Wiki.  (I know.)

The Wiki piece was as fawning as the Belgian press, swooning over all of "Petra's" faaabulous positions.  Wiki predictably only failed to mention one small thing--and you obviously already guessed: "Petra" isn't a woman.  And "Petra" isn't really its name. 

Question is, why didn't Wiki mention this.  Try asking the communist sons of bitches.  Good luck.

So why would I take my precious damn time to introduce you to this mentally ill (but clearly "connected" twit?  Because unbelievable as it may seem, this "twit" has just defined a pivotal point for our society.  (Democrats: "You idiot, Petra isn't an American, so how can she [sic] have any possible relevance to U.S. society?  You're stupid...and deplorable!")

I'll explain: "Petra" and the Left demand that we all unquestioningly accept the claim of trannies and their Leftist supporters that "trans women ARE women."  And the entire Democrat-fellating, Lying Mainstream Media eagerly parrot that lie.  For example, the fawning, slobbering Wiki propaganda piece never mentions that "Petra" is a biological male claiming to be female.  There's even a piece in the Belgian press blasting some TV interviewer for even asking duh faaaabulous "Petra" "When someone asks about your 'dead name,' does that hurt you?"

"Just NOT DONE," huffed the press.  Cuz by even alluding to the tranny's real sex, you expose the lie, and that's just...well in Europe you can be imprisoned for that.

When your 5-year-old kid claims he's a dinosaur, that's amusing, and you can indulge that fantasy with no harm.  Or you could gently tell him that claiming he's something unreal doesn't make it true, eh?  The difference is that your 5-year-old can't throw you in prison if you don't eagerly agree that he IS a dinosaur.  

By sharp contrast, trannies and their Leftist enablers have already passed laws giving them the power to throw YOU in prison if you deny their clearly unreal bleat that "trans women ARE women."

So far that's only happened in Europe and the U.K, but it's coming here fast. 

If you don't believe that (and you don't), consider this: ten days ago a mom and teen daughter were at a WNBA game, wearing T-shirts saying simply "XX is not XY."  Anything obscene there?  Of course not.  But arena staff ordered them to cover up what the staff called an "offensive message."  Wait, how was it offensive?  And to whom?

Sure: XX and XY refer to chromosomes, and are a way of saying men are not women.  So why would anyone be offended by this obvious truth (well, obvious to most rational adults)?  And in any event, since the message was obviously not obscene, by what alleged "right" did the WNBE order that they cover up?  Thought we had free speech (if not obscene), eh?

And why the hell would the "W" NBA be terminally upset by the obvious truth that men are not women? 

If you pay attention, you know why: one gal with courage.  Sophie Cunningham, a star WNBA player.  Remember the controversy she ignited?  She had the audacity to say biological men shouldn't compete against women.  Remember?

Not too long ago, that notion was so obvious and non-controversial that no one even bothered to say it.  But then leftists (yes) realized they could utterly fuck up the country NOT just by people changing sex (yeah, I know, "gender"), but by forcing all of us to agree with the lie that men who claim to be female really are.  And that if you deny that, you're somehow bad. 

Then within a couple of years, corrupt, glib shitheads like Gavin Newsom and Barky Obozo were forcing taxpayers to pay for sex-change operations for inmates, then for illegal aliens.  Democrat-ruled states passed LAWS allowing the state to take a child away from a parent who refused to eagerly embrace the lie, as by calling the child by their given name instead of their "dead name."  Ohhh the HORROR!  The states called it "child abuse."  Seriously.

If you get all your "newz" from the lying, Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media you don't believe a word of that last paragraph.  But every word is true.  It all happened so gradually, with the full support of the Mainstream Media and all Dem pols, that only a few people noticed.  And their voices were silenced. 

So back to "Petra:"  Right now in the U.S. you can't be imprisoned for saying men can't become real women by merely claiming so.  In that case, why do I claim "Petra" represents a "pivot point" for our society?  

Because crazy leftist Democrats are about to regain power here.  Which means leftists will be able to pass any law they want.  And one of the first ones (after "free" medical care, housing, food and college for all, abolish ICE, cops and prisons, free childcare and reparations) will be to make saying or even implying that "men can't be women" "hate speech," punishable by prison.

Of course you don't believe that's remotely possible, cuz you think the First Amendment guarantees the right of free speech.  After all, the Supreme Court says even burning the American flag is protected by free speech, so how could uttering an absolute truth put someone in prison?

Answer: the Supreme Court long ago ruled that not all speech is "protected."  Meaning if "duh gruberment" doesn't like X, yew cain't say it.  And gradually, as our courts were taken over by leftist judges, hundreds of lawsuits ruled that wearing a T-shirt saying "Fuck [whatever]," or burning the flag, or nude dancing, were all "protected speech." 

But that can also work the other direction: Leftist judges will absolutely uphold any law that says you can be imprisoned for saying "men aren't women."  

Oh, you think that's ridiculous?  I'll be that until ten minutes ago not one of you would have bet that a mom and daughter could legally be thrown out of an arena for wearing shirts saying simply "XX is not XY," eh?

Be honest: you never believed that could happen, cuz an absolute truth and not obscene.

Obviously that's a long way from being imprisoned--but the point is that there are NO barriers to congress passing such a law.  Trump obviously would veto it, but after 2028 the Dem prezzy will absolutely sign it into law.

The fatal flaw of democracy is that when the crazies outnumber the sane, it's all over.  In our case the DSA communists are forcing "normal" Democrat pols to embrace their insane policies to be re-elected (THE obvious goal of every politician).  So it's not that the U.S. has more trannies than cis people, but that if the Left has a majority, they can do whatever they want--there is NO remaining barrier, because the courts have ruled that certain "speech" is criminal.  

I don't have any problem if someone claims to be Napoleon, or a dinosaur, or the opposite sex.  The problem all of us should have is when "woke" politicians, pandering for votes, pass laws establishing "Human Rights Commissions" and give 'em the power to sue you and fine you for disagreeing with the crazies.  Or to fire you.  Yeah, that's one helluva red line for me.

So why is "Petra" relevant here?  Because in the U.K the gullible dipshits at Cambridge had appointed a young mentally ill black male as "the youngest black professor in the university's history."  Problem was, not a word of his resume was true.  His dissertation was plagiarized, even copying erroneous punctuation marks.  He claimed to have run 30 marathons in 35 days, and 300 miles in 3 days.  Claimed to have raised 5 million pounds for charities, but later said this was part of a team effort.  When asked who the other team members were, he said he was prevented from saying due to signing NDAs.

Every question about a tall tale had an equally unbelievable response.  And he did it all seemingly effortlessly.

He claimed someone had left a pig's head on his porch.  He said he complained to the cops and that they investigated and found one butcher who had sold a whole pig on the morning in question.  But the cops said there was no investigation, and the butcher said the cops never came to his shop to inquire.  Arday was simply accustomed to never being questioned, nor to have anyone try to verify his bullshit stories.  

So...his field was "sociology of education."  Now I'm convinced that all "doctors of education" are phonies, and same for most of sociology.  Put both together and I suspect it pegs the bullshit meter.  That seems to have been Arday's main skill.  

So a researcher at U. Ghent--Cofnas--did put Arday's dissertation thru plagiarism-detecting software.  Bingo.  And then lots more followed.  Cofnas went public, and Cambridge screamed bloody murder.  "How DARE you!! It's UNFAIR to question duh masterful research of dis faaaabulous young academic!  Din' yew see he iz duh youngest black professor EVAH at Cambridge?  You can't possibly believe dat all duh distinguished, brilliant PhDs in charge of hiring new profs would have missed all dis evidence if it was real, right?  So since that's not possible, you must be lying!  And no, we don't need to actually examine your so-called 'evidence' cuz we already know we're right and you're a raaaaaaaccist!"

Now at last we come to "Petra"--didn't work at Cambridge, and not even in the UK, but in effing Belgium.  "Petra"--who should be very good at identifying fakes, eh?--used its power as "Rector" at the U to fire Cofnas for "harassing the youngest black professor in Cambridge's history" at a totally different university not even in Belgium.

See, according to "wokie" rules no one in academia is allowed to even discover--let alone reveal--that a PhD committed academic fraud.  Well, at least if the fraudster is black.  Whites, of course, are still fair game.  Gee, why are we not surprised?

And the hoot is the number of commenters on X who snarled that the investigator, Cofnas, was a bad person for exposing the total fraud Arday.  Wow.

It's coming here.  In fact it already IS here.  It's just that now all the left can do is fire you, not prison.

Not quite yet. 

Another illegal invader--in northern Virginia--fatally stabs a mother dozens of times

Hey, ya know that thing Democrats sneer never happens?  Well it happened again.

 

The killer invaded in April of 2024 and was immediately released into the U.S. by the open-borders, pro-invader bribem regime.  The invader then went to northern Virginia where he started a "relationship" with a 42-year-old mother with a young daughter.  Then last Monday he stabbed her dozens of times, killing her.  Then he poured gasoline on her body and set her on fire.

Thanks, Democrats.  Imagine how much harder the life of the mother's now-orphaned young daughter will now be.  Thanks again, Democrats.  YOU voted this horror and cruelty into existence.  You approved all of it, and your fellators in the Media made sure Americans heard as little as possible about the mass invasion--and the murders and rapes that followed.  

Think about what you've done, and all the American kids growing up without one or both parents, thanks to your stupid desire to belong to the "woke" crowd. 

Democrats claim illegals aren't voting--so why are they screaming about ICE at polling places?

 

Where we stand on the eve of the mid-term elections

U.K. citizen and author Melanie Phillips is one of the very few people who understands what's happening.  I've edited her piece in the NY Post:

Labor Day weekend (ten days away), Islamic monsters are having the 63rd annual convention of the Islamic Society of North America.  One of the top speakers is a Muslim thug DSA candidate for the U.S. senate Abdul El-Sayed.

Other speakers include Siraj Wahhaj, who has called for the the U.S. to honor sharia law, including amputation, stoning and the execution of gay people.  He makes no secret of his aim to Islamize America.

Another scheduled speaker, Zaid Shakir, has said “Muslims could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.  We could take over this country in a very short time.”

How has America come to permit people who want to make the U.S. into a Muzz-ruled caliphate to freely promote such subversion?

Twenty years ago, in 2006, my best-selling book “Londonistan” described how the British establishment—politicians, government officials, even security and counter-intelligence officers—had totally submitted to the Islamic takeover of the U.K. 

Even after Islamic crazies flew loaded jetliners into the Twin Towers just five years earlier, and after the London Tube and bus bombings of 2005, U.K. pols and officials insanely denied that Islam was a threat.  Instead they corruptly, stupidly blamed it on...anything else:  anger over foreign conflicts such as “Israel-Palestine,” or on "Islamophobia."

A "phobia" is an irrational fear.  This was totally rational, so "Islamophobia" was horseshit.  The problem was--and is--Islam itself.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy to take over the U.K was to force the U.K (and all of Europe) to accept mass Muslim immigration, and to put all Muslim immigrants--including those with a dozen wives and several dozen children--on welfare.  Then use their bloc voting power to elect Muslim extremists to powerful positions, like mayor of London.  (Sound familiar?  Zohran Mamdani?)

Stupid, corrupt politicians deliberately ignored the jihadi strategy of demonstrating power to get corrupt pols to give them even more power.  So the pols ignored the mass Muslim prayer events that blocked entire streets; they rationalized the takeover of public spaces by jihadi demonstrations against Israel as “freedom of speech.”  

Sound familiar?

They deliberately ignored organized Muslim rape and grooming gangs, and the election of “Gaza First” members of Parliament.  Every warning sign was sanitized, dismissed, ignored.

In 2006 the BBC, academics and pols couldn't refute the facts in my book, so their defense was to sneer at it, to make the "cool kids" ignore it.  They screamed it was just "Islamophobia."  The "cool kids" got the message.

Meanwhile Americans shook their heads in astonishment at what was happening in the U.K, France, Germany, Sweden, Belgium and the Netherlands.  The few Americans who paid attention wondered when Europeans would wake up.

And now exactly the same thing is happening in America.  And not only is it being ignored by every Democrat pol, and by the Mainstream Media, it's being eagerly embraced.

New York City now has a communist Muslim mayor, Zohran Mamdani.  "Ohh, dat jus' one city, deplorable!  Not to worry!"

Muslims infest the House of Representatives, and now Abdul El-Sayed, from the Islamic-dominated shithole of Michigan, has a good chance of being the first Muslim elected to the U.S. senate.  "Don't worry, deplorable, dis jus' one guy!  And SO well spoken, eh?  Plus he fo' free college, national rent freeze, abolishing po-leece an' ICE, for open borders an' citizenship fo' millions of 'immigrants,' free food, free child-care, free government-run health care.  It'll be faaabulous!"

In the UK non-Muslims are so demoralized that virtually no one is even pushing back any longer.  The police arrest and jail anyone who so much as posts a comment on social media criticizing Islam.  The whole country is deep in decline and demoralization.  But in the U.S. at least a few states are fighting back.

Unfortunately (but totally predictably), every time a state legislature passes a law restricting Islamic takeovers in any way, Muslims and the ACLU have instantly sued.  And as far as I know leftist federal judges have overturned every such law.  

Events in the U.K. and Europe clearly show anyone who has eyes and a working brain how Islam is conquering one nation after another.

Of course you think "That can't happen here, cuz...um...reasons!  American women would nevah vote for a Muslim cuz they'd hate having to wear a black full-body bag, an' not being able to leave the house without a male family member, et cetera.  No woman I know would evah vote for that!"

Wake up, America, cuz they ARE voting for Islam--refusing to believe how women are treated in Islamic-ruled shit-holes.  Astonishingly, LOTS of liberal American women hate American men SO much that they'd vote for Joe Stalin just to have a chance to destroy what they see as "duh Patriarchy," eh?  [Parents: ask your kids who Stalin was.]

Bizarrely, the fatal failing is..."democracy."  Seriously.  When everyone gets to vote, and all votes are counted equally, you end up being ruled by stupid, corrupt politicians--because those who are stupid or lazy or angry at duh Patriarchy vote for candidates who promise 'em the most "free shit," or who promise to vote for laws that will "destroy duh Patriarchy."  Think about it.

The Founders of this great nation hoped to insulate us from that trap by having voters not pass laws directly, but by electing "representatives" the Founders hoped would be smarter and better educated, so wouldn't vote for clearly stupid policies.  Problem was, human nature: corrupt or merely stupid sons of whores started running for congress, and the presidency--and once they got elected by equally stupid voters, it was all over. 

Of course you're well educated, and not stupid, right?  But unfortunately you're now outnumbered by those who are dumb and uneducated.  And those people vote for candidates who promise to pass laws giving them ever more "free shit," or for laws that can clearly be predicted to eventually "destroy duh Patriarchy."  Like laws spending more money each year than the gruberment takes in.

Good luck, folks, cuz you're sure as hell gonna need it. 

 

You can't hate the Media enough

 

The Lying Mainstream Media: pushing sex-changes for illegal invaders and prison inmates for decades.

More on Satan's top lackey, Hasan Piker

The last poll before the Wisconsin gubernatorial primary had Piker's DSA candidate--radical leftist Francesca Hong, who'd said Thanksgiving should be cancelled--up by 22 percent.  Looked like a blowout, and Piker was gloating.

Strangely, the communist Hong ended up narrowly losing to the current lieutenant governor.

Piker responded by throwing a tantrum, lashing out at "the fucking national media" (that's a quote), accusing them of sabotaging Hong's campaign. 

Piker's response?  "Fuck 'em and fuck Thanksgiving," he huffed, referring to Hong's view that the holiday should be canceled because it "celebrates colonialism."  Then like all bullies do when punched in the mouth, Piker practically begged the Democratic Party to stop being so mean to him.

>>"I know we don't always see eye to eye on a lot of stuff, but you have to literally, at some point,  defend me," Piker whined. "Not because you love what I have to say, not because I'm part of this coalition, even though I am--whether you like it or not--but you are going to inevitably have to say, This is a ridiculous conversation that we're having..."

Millionaire Piker went on to say it would be helpful if Democrats could be "a little bit more honest about how I'm not this dangerous, toxic radical force." 

Of course Piker is a total communist, totally radical.  He knows it--brags about it.  He just doesn't want YOU to know it.  For him to whine that establishment Democrats need to be "more honest" and agree with his brazen lie that he's NOT radical--when that's exactly his claim to power--is ludicrous.  Here's what he's explicitly said he's pushing:

• abolishing the senate; 
• packing the Supreme Court;
• abolishing the Electoral College and replacing it with...well the Dems' original idea was to elect the prez by the winner of the national popular vote, but now the Dems have an even better (i.e. worse) idea:
• having congress select the president!
• abolishing ICE;
• abolishing police and prisons;
• criminals to be immediately released without having to post bail; 
• free college (camouflaged as "free education for all...up through college," cuz all most people hear is "free education" and think highschool);
• "forgiving" all student loans (meaning taxpayers pay off student loans--cuz everyone loves "forgiveness," right?)
• "Medicare for all" (government controls all healthcare, as in the UK and Canada); 
• unlimited immigration and giving all illegals citizenship;
• ending U.S. use of oil, gas and nuclear power;  
• de-funding the armed forces;

Who wouldn't support ALL those, eh?  And notice all the "free shit" for lazy folks.

The future of the U.S. is riding on the outcome of maybe 4 races--and not just because those may win the Dems majority control of both chambers of congress--something they already effectively have now due to cowardly Republicans.  No, the more serious problem is that if even 2 or 3 DSA candidates win, Democrats will know they can't win without DSA/socialist votes.  So wins for even 2 or 3 of Piker's communists will make almost all future Democrat candidates adopt most DSA policies.

That's the real problem, because "your" public schools have indoctrinated almost all kids to believe a) you can get things for "free;" b) "If you don't have as much stuff as you want, it's because you're oppressed by the rich, and corporations; c) the U.S. is evil and built on stolen land, so we need to adopt socialism to atone for past wrongs; and d) if you're white, you deserve to be conquered by mo' deserving foreigners.

Both Karl Marx and Lenin explicitly believed that the key to communist domination was to take control of education, because once a kid firmly believes anything, it's really hard to get him or her to change their views.  So Dems are winning more voters every year.

If El-Sayed wins, Democrats will realize that the only way to win will be to adopt Piker's communist policies.  They'll adopt his instruction to candidates to seem to just want us to consider those policies, but of course Dems in congress will vote for 'em.  They'll cunningly insert one socialist program at a time into "must-pass" bills.  They'll trade support for some trivial GOP policy to get the GOP not to filibuster a major communist bill in the senate.  

You've seen the playbook dozens of times before, but you're so busy with work and keeping food on the table that you can't remember past a month or so.  And of course it wouldn't make any difference if you did recognize the cunning, destructive tactics, cuz congress-whores do anything they want to get re-elected.  You can't stop 'em.

In the distant past there was some stigma associated with living off welfare.  That's all in the past.  Forcing people who never went to college to pay off $250,000 in student loans for some "womens' studies" major at Columbia or Hahvahd?    "Of course, deplorable!  It's only FAIR that you pay off my student loan!  Dat my RIGHT!"

Seriously, how many people do you know who would turn down "free money" if almost everyone else is getting it too, eh?   

Weak Republican candidates will start supporting DSA programs to give more "free stuff" to voters, so more poisonous policies will become law.

Hopefully you're beginning to see why I'm convinced the future doesn't look good.  Wish I had an idea about how to change it.  Sorry to say I don't. 

 

My prediction: It's too late. Dem socialists will win in November--by lying

Hasan Piker--advisor to dozens of DSA communists--is the closest creature to satan that I've ever seen.  Here he explains the importance of DSA candidates lying to voters:

"Our politicians, whether AOC or anybody else, are NOT running away from progress.  So their pragmatism isn't to moderate their policies but to moderate their comms, their communication."

If you didn't get that, read it again.  Piker is saying "his" candidates are NOT changing their positions to get elected, but instead are merely being "pragmatic" by claiming they no longer support communist policies.  And that's exactly what you're seeing. 

Piker admits Muslim communist Abdul El-Sayed's true beliefs are "electoral poison," then tells his minions how to fix that: "You got to moderate your message, even if you don't want to temper your movement, in order to sell it to the public."

"Moderate your message even if you don't 'temper' your movement" is commie-babble for not being honest about their communist policies--things they've openly pushed before but now are seeming to re-think.  But it's horseshit.

You may have seen that surveys of Democrat voters show about 60% have a favorable view of socialism and a negative view of capitalism.  And white women with a college degree favor socialism even more--over 70%, with about the same percentage saying they dislike capitalism.

Clearly these women have never lived under socialism.  Instead they've simply swallowed the communist propaganda, like "In Cuba and Europe, health-care is absolutely free, and faaaabulous!  Same for housing, and food!"

So health-care is free, eh?  Only if you can get it.  In Canada and the UK it's normal to have to wait six months to get an MRI.  Rather than waiting, Canuks who fear they may have cancer come to the U.S. and pay cash to get an MRI in a day or two.  Nowhere in the rest of the world can you get that--unless you're "connected," part of the ruling party. 

Of course American liberals never heard about that, and wouldn't believe it if a Canadian or a Brit told 'em.  Stupid liberals--men as well as women--totally buy the lie that healthcare in the socialist world is faaaabulous--because it's "free."

But obviously it is NOT free.  Nothing is free but the air you breathe, and sunshine.  Your taxes pay for everything the government supposedly "gives" citizens.  And if you don't understand that (and liberals absolutely don't) you're too fucking stupid to breathe.

Stupid liberals are on the verge of handing over control of the entire U.S. government to socialists.  And if you know history of other countries (spoiler: you don't), you know they'll never relinquish that power.

Of course you don't believe that cuz you're smaaaht, right?  You know control of our government has bounced back and forth, so it's absurd to think that would end, eh?

That's because you naively think communists actually support democracy--because they endlessly bleat that they do, eh?  Well look at Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Spain: You can vote communism in, but can't vote it out.  The Party changes the constitution so the president can serve as long as he wants.  The Party rigs elections because The Party counts the votes.  (Sound familiar?)  The Party appoints all the judges.  Only Party members get hired as university professors, ensuring that all college grads only hear how totally wonderful socialism/communism is.  (We've been there for decades.)

When there are shortages "It's not the Party's fault, comrade!  It's doze eeebil American capitalists preventing us from trading!"  In the case of Cuba they call it a "blockade," but the truth is that even friendly communist countries will no longer GIVE fellow socialists nations billions of dollars of food or medicine.  The USSR did that for decades with Cuba and finally said "enough."  

Wait, we were always told that all socialists were big on "solidarity" with fellow socialist nations!  Guess that was also horseshit. 

SO...what does this all mean for the U.S. just 80 days from now, eh?  To understand it you have to know military history.  (Spoiler: you don't.)

One of the areas where Trump has NO knowledge or expertise is military conflict.  He stupidly believes the leaders of Iran would realize they were totally out-gunned and would surrender, to be able to regain the ability to sell the $400 MILLION worth of oil they sold to the world every DAY.  And from Trump's limited perspective, that makes perfect sense.

But the Muzz leaders of Iran refused, because they knew they could claim they had defeated the U.S. (which they claim every day, if you care to watch), and could string Trump along with bullshit negotiations until the mid-terms.  They knew that if they could con Trump into NOT bombing 'em into oblivion til then, the Democrat party would use the power of the purse to force the U.S. to end all operations in the region and withdraw all forces.  The world will understandably see that as surrender, and the loss of face to the U.S. will be devastating.

More crucial: Iran will be free to build the atomic bombs they've been working on for years.  They admitted to having roughly a thousand pounds of 60%-enriched uranium, enough for about 20 atomic bombs.

After the first time Iran's leaders bleated "We have defeated the U.S." Trump could have ended that bullshit by ordering our Air Force to bomb them until nothing remained--as we did to win WW2.  But he naively believed they'd opt for a negotiated settlement, since it would obviously be far less destructive.  Very logical.  But Iran's rulers didn't care.

Now, with just 80 days left, Iran's leaders know they've won: Trump no longer has the option to bomb 'em into oblivion, simply because doing that so close to the election would make it seem that he was doing it to save congressional seats for the GOP.  And the Mainstream Media would eagerly, endlessly bleat that this was the only reason.

SO...with Iran still bragging that they've defeated the U.S., conservative voters will be demoralized and will stay home, while U.S. leftists will turn out in record numbers to seize control of congress.  In fact I predict we'll see dozens of Dem precincts reporting more ballots cast than eligible voters, just as in 2020.  But no judge will hear the case, and there won't be time to investigate before the new congress is sworn in.

Skeptical Repub voter: "Nah, we'll still be fine cuz only 60% of Democrats will vote for socialists!"

No, you're naive: Dems will vote for the Democrat candidate, even if communist--cuz in the last few weeks before the election the Dem-fellating Mainstream Media will show endless video of all the communist candidates sounding EVER so moderate and reasonable.

Their communist DSA candidates won't renounce support for the dozen commie priorities, but will simply say things like "We need to consider abolishing the senate, having Medicare for all, abolishing police and prisons, making college free, forgiving all student loans, allowing unlimited immigration and giving 'em citizenship, ending our use of oil, gas and nuclear power, allowing criminals to be immediately released without having to post bail, de-funding the armed forces, packing the Supreme Court, abolishing the Electoral College and replacing it with the winner of the popular vote, and having congress choose ouah president."

"SEE, citizen?  Just consider doze things, right?  Where's the harm in dat?"

So there's my prediction.  And in 80 days or so we should know--though we may have to wait another two weeks for the Dems to inject enough fake ballots into the count.

And the hoot is, almost no one who reads this will believes a word of it.