They Will Never Understand Donald Trump

Townhall 

It’s been over ten years since Donald Trump came down that escalator and said the thing that we’re not supposed to say – that illegal immigration is not an act of love, except in the most appalling figurative sense, that too many illegal aliens are criminals in other ways beyond just being illegal aliens, and that they should all go home – yet, apparently, the smart people have failed to pay any attention to him since. Again and again, he does things and triumphs, leaving them baffled. They really don’t understand Donald Trump, not in the least. It’s remarkable. This guy is entirely transparent. He does the same thing again and again and again. Yet, when he does the same thing again and again and again, the smart set – which includes Democrats, regime media folks (to the extent that is different), and even some alleged conservatives – is stunned, staggered, and baffled and draws all the wrong conclusions. Which is fine with me. I like it when my opponents get my side wrong.

What am I talking about in this particular case? This happens all the time, and there were a lot of cases of our betters not understanding Trump. Well, a few days ago,  the President – I love hearing him called that as much as his opponents hate it – met with Zohran Mamdani, the communist mayor-elect of New York City, at the White House. The big shocker for people who aren’t paying attention and shouldn’t have been surprised was that Trump didn't act like a jerk to him. He played the gracious host. He was nice and polite, joking around, flattering, and generally not being aggressive or hostile to his guest. Well, Trump‘s critics were gravely disappointed. How could he not be aggressive and hostile to this guy? 

Of course, Donald Trump is aggressive and hostile to people at appropriate times. And here, I’m talking about the seditionist Democrat vets and ridiculous CIA clerks, who try to pretend they are the equal of vets, who are encouraging dumb 23-year-old barracks lawyers to ruin their lives with a term in Leavenworth and a bad conduct discharge to provide Democrats some performance art propaganda. The smart set is mad aboutTrump‘s very hostile reaction to that seditious blue falconry. But they’re also mad that Trump was nice to Mamdani. Mean is bad, but nice is also bad. It’s really weird that they’re mad about Trump, no matter what he does or how he does it. You might conclude that this is a game Trump can’t win, except Trump isn't playing their game. He’s the undisputed champion of the world at doing what Trump does.

We know why they’re objecting to Trump. It’s because they don’t like Trump. But what’s their explanation, because they have to fake an explanation? Some of the critics actually asserted that Donald Trump is somehow sympathetic to Zohran Mamdani’s lefty politics. They actually took Trump's courtesy and flattery as manifestations of his actual beliefs rather than as part of his playing this Instagram amateur. The idea that somehow the goofy commie foreigner that the dummies in the Big Apple elected to accelerate the ruin of their city is going to convert Donald Trump to the joys of Marxism is so stupid that it pains me to even address it. But that’s what they think. They think that Donald Trump’s going to go socialist, and their evidence is that he didn’t punch Ugandan Che in the pinko’s piehole. 

What the hell is wrong with these people? Do they not know anything about how Donald Trump works after all this time? Did they not internalize the things they have seen him do over the last decade? They have eyes but will not see. It’s remarkable. Is there anybody out there who actually believes that Donald Trump was doing anything but putting on a show with this guy? If they do, they’re dumb, and if they don’t, they think you’re dumb – this is the eternal question of American politics today.

So, what did Donald Trump win by not getting into a giant Scat Francisco sidewalk contest with the teen socialist heartthrob? He won by looking normal. Normal people out there don’t like politics. They don’t understand why pols have to hate each other in public. They like the idea that people on both sides of the aisle can shake hands and be friendly and polite. And Donald Trump gets it. Oh, he delivers the heat when he needs to. He knows how to own the libs. But he’s also a master of optics. He’s the king of public relations. And he has sensed that this is a moment to show unity, just like down the road, there’s going to be a moment to show Mamdani the Gucci loafer Trump‘s going to use to kick his butt.

Again, Trump is the undisputed champion of the world at this stuff, and he knew exactly what he was doing. He brought in a fresh, young, and popular Democrat ingenue, put him in a position as a supplicant – the guy looked like he was crawling to his elder for approval – and then acted measured, reasonable, and nice. Yeah, it was disappointing for a lot of the people who are disappointed in Trump, no matter what Trump does, but normal people probably took a look at this tableau and thought, “Good, it’s nice to see people talking about their differences rather than threatening to kill people.” Or, in the case of the Democrats’ perverted constituents, actually killing people.

Trump did the same thing with Putin, and it hasn’t worked yet. He did the same thing with the Little Rocket Man, and we haven’t gone to war with North Korea. He did the same thing with MBS, which made everybody mad because apparently this Third World potentate allegedly acted like a Third World potentate to some Third World jihadi supporter and we’re supposed to care so much that we toss away a major ally. Oh, by the way, here’s a hint from a guy who had to persuade people as a job – the fact that someone was a WaPo journalist does not make me more sympathetic to him. Just saying.

In any case, Trump is nice to people whom the smart set says we’re not supposed to be nice to. Keep in mind, this is the same smart set with an unbroken track record of foreign policy and other failures over the last few decades. Trump, on the other hand, is ending wars left and right, winning fights when he is drawn into them, and has just happened to create Middle East peace, which no one else was able to do. Trump is racking up triumph after triumph. Is his record perfect? No. He hasn’t solved the Ukraine War yet, though it’s kind of odd that solving the Ukraine War is America’s problem, just like every problem around the world is apparently America’s problem. In this case, he’s done an amazing job, and his critics have, well, completely screwed up everything they put their soft little paws on.

You might think people would learn from how Trump succeeds while being consistently underestimated, because it happens over and over again. They decree that he’s a fool, an amateur, and a clown, and he comes back and triumphs where they failed. Right now, we have a bunch of people doom-mongering about the economy. They’re absolutely sure Trump’s going to lose the midterms. I’m not sure he’s going to lose the midterms. He certainly could. But that’s not set in stone. This is the guy who brings in wins that we never imagined possible. He brings in wins seemingly out of the blue when we were told he’s doomed. Holy cow, he just dispatched Marjorie Taylor Greene; where did that come from? We were told that her narcissistic chimp-out was going to tear us apart. We’re not torn apart, but she’s hitting the bricks. We’re told we’re going to lose the redistricting fight. The Texas abomination just got stayed, and I wouldn’t want to be a Penceophilic femboy Fredocon Indiana state senator right now. If you are one of those geniuses who is surprised that he’s turned defeat into victory, all I can suggest is that you pay closer attention to how this guy works. You’ve had a decade to learn how this guy works. Maybe you should try paying attention to him instead of whining about him all the time.

Look, Donald Trump is a sui generis politician. There’s no one else like him, but he has patterns. He has habits. He has tactics, techniques, and procedures that he doesn’t bother to conceal. The guy’s totally transparent, yet he’s able to hide in plain sight. Why? To examine what he does is to take him seriously. To look at how he works is to concede that he’s not a fool, not a clown, not a hapless and feckless naif who somehow stumbles into victory after victory. They can’t treat him as somebody who’s an effective politician because that gives him credit and giving him credit is simply a bridge too far.

Their analysis is clouded by their hate, but that’s good. It gives him an advantage. When your opponents refuse to learn from you, you always have the element of surprise.

Entertainment thread for Nov 24

 

The past is the past.

To Destroy Leftism, Save Society

American  Thinker 

Feminists in the ’60s and ’70s had a slogan that sought to politicize the household: The personal is political.  The rallying cry was meant to challenge traditional family values and the expectation that women should be caring wives and mothers who looked after the home.  Breaking free from the “prison” of the nuclear family was described as “liberating” for American women.

So-called “student activists” and “black liberation” groups adopted the argument for their own purposes, and protest movements sought out ways to invade Americans’ private spaces.  The idea was to make people feel uncomfortable so that they were forced to acknowledge whatever “issues” protesters were pushing.  Feminists, anti-war activists, and civil rights protesters targeted citizens in restaurants, movie theaters, parks, churches, and shopping districts.  They made it impossible for ordinary families to enjoy ordinary days without being force-fed heaping spoonfuls of acidic politics.

These kinds of aggressive tactics that politicize every part of life have come with tremendous costs.  Generations of women increasingly resented their traditional roles as wives and mothers.  Rising divorce rates fractured the stability of nuclear families.  Divorced men abandoned their children.  Children grew up without both male and female role models.  Young adults entered the workforce before first acquiring basic social skills normally developed during childhood. 

More broadly, society suffered because the space between the political sphere and the social sphere entirely disappeared.  Society and the political State are not the same thing.  Government, laws, taxes, and mandates come with either the application or threat of force.  The political State is coercion.  Society, on the other hand, is much broader.  It includes a people’s religion, customs, traditions, history, and familiar interactions.  Those influences certainly “push” people to behave in certain ways, but there is considerable room for disagreement and compromise.  Society is cooperation.  

It would be difficult for young Americans to appreciate this fact, but seventy years ago, much of the social sphere flourished beyond the reach of raw politics.  Men belonged to veterans’ organizations, bowling leagues, and public service groups.  Women volunteered to help local schools, held book clubs, and organized social gatherings.  Children attended summer camps, worked low-wage jobs, and participated in school clubs.  Families attended church and enjoyed local festivals.  Neighborhood functions brought entire blocks of families together.  “Belonging” to things mattered to people.  Membership numbers for recreational clubs and civic organizations during the first half of the twentieth century were much higher than they are today.

Politics did not always dominate American society. 

Nostalgic Hollywood writers have become increasingly fond of portraying life before personal computers and cell phones.  When they depict suburban streets in the ’80s, several things always pop out.  Children are riding bikes and exploring the world as far as their legs can take them.  Parents have no problem punishing kids when they misbehave.  And politics is just one small part of community life.  In order to drive this last point home, yard signs for Democrats and Republicans are shown side by side to remind Americans of a time when neighbors didn’t attack each other because of their personal political beliefs.

Today, not only are computers and cell phones everywhere, but also politics is everywhere.  Schools teach children to become “activists” before they’re even teens.  Instead of riding bikes and exploring the world, kids regurgitate talking points about “transgenderism,” abortion, “right-wing” fascism, “white supremacy,” and the “patriarchy.”  And toleration for other people’s political beliefs no longer exists.  Yard signs are defaced or stolen.  Political slogans and Antifa threats are graffitied onto churches, businesses, and even homes.  

Several generations of Americans have been taught that “the personal is political,” and because of that, tens of millions of Americans now see every political opponent as a personal threat.  When every person with an opposing point of view is labeled a “threat,” it is impossible not to see “oppression” everywhere.  Young Americans have been so indoctrinated to believe that their opinions are “correct” and that contrary opinions are “dangerous” that they think it is both rational and reasonable to censor disagreement as “hate speech,” punish “thought criminals,” and hide behind the imaginary walls of a “safe space.”

If only they understood that society was filled with safe spaces before leftist activists politicized everything.  Little league games and swim competitions were opportunities for kids to compete athletically — not physically dangerous clown shows for adults to preach about boys being “girls.”  Town festivals did not begin with “land acknowledgments” or other mayoral decrees informing the locals that they’re “oppressive colonialists” and “bigots.”  School clubs did not obsess about “diversity, inclusion, and equity.”  Republican-voting families and Democrat-voting families still laughed together at backyard barbecues.  When Americans were not worried about “triggering” each other with harmless words, they could enjoy one another’s company and build social bonds that mattered more than personal political beliefs.  Safe spaces existed everywhere because politics did not.

As just one pertinent example of how politicized civic organizations have become, recently leaked training documents from the country’s largest public school teachers’ union show outright hostility toward Republican parents.  Without even the pretense of impartiality, the National Education Association advises teachers, “Over the last ten years, Republicans in state legislatures have increasingly turned to anti-transgender rhetoric and legislation as a powerful complement to their arsenal of racist dog whistles used to whip up fear and consolidate power.”  Moreover, the NEA insists, “The right has exploited ignorance about transgender people and our lack of an affirmative, race-forward message to advance anti-trans attacks, further splinter and impugn the left, and sabotage progressives on a broad range of issues.”  

The NEA encourages teachers to “name the villains who violate our values.”  Why must teachers inject such partisan political messages into their classrooms?  The NEA provides the answer: because “certain politicians are pushing laws that restrict our freedoms because of the color of our skin, what’s in our wallets, or because we are transgender” and because those politicians “exploit divisions and fears among us so they can get and hold onto power, denying us the basic rights, resources, and respect all people deserve.”  Nothing screams, “The personal is political!” quite like public schools teaching children that Republicans are “villains” and “oppressors” who do not deserve to be parents.

The politicization of everything always begins with the politicization of language.  Unconstitutional race-based admissions and hiring practices are defended as “virtues” of “diversity, inclusion, and equity.”  Market-distorting corporate preferences for the moneymaking “climate change” racket and other leftist political causes are justified as “environmental, social, and governance” ethics issues.  

Our political programmers insist that “trans-women are real women” and expect fathers to watch boys physically abuse their daughters.  On this issue, the NEA instructs teachers to lie by “supporting transgender women athletes as part of the broader fight for equality in girls’ and women’s sports” and by “connecting attacks on trans women athletes to the long legacy of discrimination against all women athletes.”  The teachers’ unions have no shame.

As Democrats ruin Thanksgiving celebrations this year by lecturing their extended families on why “Trump is Hitler” and “Republicans are evil,” try to remember that this social catastrophe did not arrive overnight.  Leftists since Marx have been destroying society and cultural unity by politicizing everything in society and our culture.  Democrats have destroyed our personal connections by politicizing our relationships.  The end result is that the political sphere — and its enforcer, the State — have crushed the family, community, and society.

To remedy our plight and subdue leftism for good, family, community, and society will have to make a comeback.  We do that one conversation at a time.

The Left’s Lost Cause

American  Thinker 

America was a target of Marxists long before our grandparents were toddlers.

“When we get ready to take the United States,” declared Alexander Trachtenberg at the National Convention of Communist Parties in New York City’s Madison Square Garden in 1944, “we will not take it under the label of communism; we will not take it under the label of socialism ...We will take the United States under labels we have made very lovable; we will take it under liberalism, under democracy. But take it we will.”

Was this just the ranting of a political rebel –– New York City was a magnet for communists after the first and second world wars –– or was it an aural “writing on the wall” predicting the future of America?

The rest of the 20th century would tell us.

The scheme of Marxists to subvert America to a communist state cropped up in the 1940s in the public schools, one of which I attended, with the introduction of what was called "Progressive Education."

This was a program of mind-dulling that would incline Americans of a young age to accept ideas at odds with their upbringing in order to prepare them for life in a New Age vastly different from any of the past. The process would be gentle, unalarming, and gradual. With help from a cooperating mainstream media, the public would, by the end of the century, be ready for a major transformation.

It has been many decades now that I and observant Americans have watched partial truths and outright lies distorting public information in support of leftist aims, delivered by apparently intelligent people in media, in education, in government, and in church.

This has blurred the public’s perception of their own country and of the world they live in. That former clarity was the function of a sound education. But preparing students for an intelligent life in a free country lost its traction after 1960, as education got tainted with Marxist doctrine.

The left’s assault on truth and reality from mainstream channels of information and education echoes in a remark by Brock Chisholm, the first director-general of the World Health Organization: “To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions and national identification.”

The washing of American minds with leftist dogma during the latter half of the 20th century has been a regular feature of mainstream publishing, school programs, church sermons, and popular entertainment.

I remember the popular cry in the last decade of the century: “It's the ’90s now!”

That sound bite with its corny ring against “the past” was meant to validate any B.S. in the name of “progress” ––progress, that is, in support of a Marxist-driven “New Age.”

Mainstream Americans had been groomed for a leap into a leftist new age before the ’90s. The process intensified after the 1960s (some of it initiated by the Supreme Court) with direct attacks on time-honored values, redefining even murder if necessary to follow rules of political instead of moralcorrectives.

Intentional killing of infants in the womb and murdering abusive parents and male spouses became “justified” for the first time in American history.

And what was to be expected of schoolkids who were being taught that what they felt was right for them was O.K., while their minds received ideas for “acceptable O.K.s” from books and school programs that were sterilized of moral content?

The disruption of common sense, reason, and morality from “progressive education” was in line with the left’s “value-neutral” dogma.

Making values valueless was necessary in order to destroy the concept of “right and wrong” in young minds and reprogram future Americans for the coming of a New Age.

President George H. W. Bush announced that prospect in 1991 with his New World Order speech, in which he did not speak of the consequences of relinquishing the sovereignty of the United States and its national identity.

Weren’t we supposed to notice that submitting to a New World Order was outright mockery of the millions who fought and died for the freedom of America?

With growing concern, reaching a point of alarm for me and many others during the 1980s, I watched the young speak less clearly, saw many of them lose self-direction and seek their way in peer identity, in drugs, in substitutes for the real world obtained from digital devices, in song lyrics that bashed American culture or embraced a culture of death –– morbidly appropriate for a state of terminal sickness.

I was shocked to the core when, for the first time in my life, I heard a young adult tell me with a straight face that he “didn't like to think.”

The dream of rebellious hotshots of the 1960s, presumably smarter than all who came before them, had at last met its moment of truth in history. It was time, was it not, to open the gates of that New Age prophesied by Marxists when our grandparents were kids: an age in a world free of war, free of want, free of hate, free of God ...

... Well, not all of us agreed with this trip to Global Oz. Most of us saw the bull in it, early on, and knew that the yellow-brick road was constructed by haters of America, haters of God, haters of a natural, nuclear family, haters of the Creation.

It was clear to thoughtful Americans that any goal that ends freedom and makes human beings chattels of the state is a call to a fight, not an embrace.

As we approached the 21st century, it was plain to me and others with a memory of recent history that our culture was in mortal danger and that a future fit for human beings was fading rapidly from view. The “new social order” planned by Marxists in the early years of the 20th century was in place, ready for the vaunted great New Age.

Some of us rightly or wrongly dubbed “conservative” predict something very different from what is expected by our leftist visionaries. While Marxists like Zohran Mamdani, New York City’s mayor-elect, like California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, and numerous other prominent opportunists of the political left gloat over the progress made by communists in this country, we believe that their gloating will end when at last they realize that they’ve been pursuing a monumental lost cause.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Ukrainians Protest Russian Envoy's Visit To French Island Cemetery

 

Pro-Ukraine demonstrators on Monday protested a visit to the island of Oleron off France's west coast by Russia's ambassador to Paris, who paid tribute to four Soviet nationals who fought alongside the French during World War II.

The visit by Russian ambassador Alexei Meshkov to the cemetery in Saint-Pierre-Oleron came as Russia's war against Ukraine drags through its fourth year, with millions forced to flee their homes and tens of thousands killed in Europe's worst conflict since World War II.

Meshkov laid flowers at two white gravestones, the final resting place of four Soviet nationals who joined the French resistance during World War II. The graves feature red stars that symbolise the Red Army, and the hammer and sickle.

Earlier on Monday, around 30 pro-Ukraine demonstrators protested the visit, holding Ukrainian flags and a sign reading "Cursed be war!" 

 

 During the ambassador's visit later in the day police kept a smaller group of protesters away from the Russian delegation to prevent any incidents. 

 

 

Meshkov travelled to the cemetery after the Russian authorities restored the monument, which Russia's embassy said had until recently been in a "state of neglect".

Michel Parent, head of the local federation of municipalities, said he saw "no problem with people coming to salute the Russian soldiers".

"What I do have a problem with is the ambassador's visit," he told AFP. 

 

 

"I want to say no to Russia's aggression against Ukraine. Today it's Ukraine, tomorrow it will be Europe."

Olga Gaillard-Bazilesko, head of Oleron for Ukraine, a local association, said the Russian ambassador "has no business being here today".

"Who's next? Is (Russian President Vladimir) Putin going to come?" she said. "Russia has no place in Europe. Their place is in the international court."

Meshkov dismissed the protest.

"The memory of those who liberated this island must be sacred to the island's inhabitants," he said. 

 

 According to a commemorative plaque at the cemetery, around 30 "Soviet nationals, who were in fact Ukrainian", were enlisted by the German occupation army and "sent to the Western Front" before joining French resistance fighters who helped liberate Oleron in April 1945.  

 

 Under Putin, victory in what Russians call the Great Patriotic War has been raised to cult status, with officials stressing the importance of maintaining Soviet war graves. 

 

https://www.barrons.com/news/ukrainians-protest-russian-envoy-s-visit-to-french-island-cemetery-c0685627  

 

 

The Lazy Professors

Townhall 

I love my job, and I'm not just saying that because my bosses read my articles. I love what I do, and I'm glad to wake up every day and write about things that are important to me and to you.

We've all had jobs where that wasn't always the case. I know I've had them. I've worked in call centers and warehouses. I had a disastrous time teaching at Milwaukee Public Schools (that's a long story for another post). But in all those cases, in jobs I both liked and loathed, the bottom line is this: I showed up.

And if I didn't, my bosses would have rightly shown me the door.

But for teachers in the University of Wisconsin system, they seem to think that actually doing work for their salary is a great personal offense. The Wisconsin state Legislature is requiring UW educators to, you know, actually educate and teach at least one course per semester.

The horror.

Here's more:

When lawmakers passed a new state budget this year, they approved a roughly $256 million increase in funding for Wisconsin’s 13 public universities. But that money came with strings attached, including new requirements for how much faculty need to teach.

Now, UW system employees are pushing back. They argue implementing the teaching workload requirements could raise constitutional questions and the mandate inaccurately measures all the work educators put into their jobs.

“There's an awful lot that faculty do that's not physically teaching classes X number of hours per week,” said Neil Kraus, a UW-River Falls political science professor and a union leader with AFT-Wisconsin, which represents employees across the UW system.

The requirement is one class per semester and 12 credits per year. That's what? A max of two classes per week, each being between two and three hours? 

Oh, and because I know you're wondering, depending on the teaching job in question, these professors can make on average $75,000 per year and up to $200,000 (or more) if you're a tenured professor. Classes in the UW system usually start after Labor Day and go until mid-December for the fall semester. The spring semester starts mid- to late-January and goes until early to mid-May. That gives professors who don't teach the summer session June, July, and August off on top of a month for Christmas and about a week for spring break.

Would that we all had such cushy jobs.

On the other hand, the less time these educators, most of them undoubtedly Leftists, stay away from our children, the better. But in that case, they are free to find employment elsewhere instead of mooching off taxpayers.

I Fully Support Donald Trump Because the Alternative Is to Support a Republican

posted by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse 

When the Tea Party surfaced in 2010, the grassroots voter base (unvoiced in DC) did not have a figurehead. So, the UniParty apparatus weaponized the DOJ, IRS and regulatory agencies to target, divide and destroy us.

When the Tea Party reassembled in 2016, the grassroots voter base (unvoiced in DC) now had Donald Trump. So, the same UniParty weaponized the DOJ, FBI and Intelligence Community to target, divide and destroy him first (Spygate, Russiagate, Impeachments etc.), until they could get back to targeting us (Arctic Frost).

The difference between the Tea Party targeting in 2010, and MAGA targeting 2016-through today, is the pesky impediment called Donald Trump.

Review the 15-year history and you will see these commonalities, including DC’s use of Main Justice and the FBI.

The McConnell-minded Republicans were happy to see the Tea Party targeted in 2011/2012. The same is true for the targeting of MAGA in later years.

This core reality is why I support President Trump; indeed, I actually cherish his fighting for us, because the alternative is reliance on our Republican abusers.

Battered Conservative No More.

In my opinion, the strongest, most based and unflinching MAGA-minded America-First supporters, are the people who bear the visible scars from the extreme Tea Party targeting.

Those of us who went through the furnace of frustration are forged with a unique type of resolve that will never stop supporting Donald Trump.

We can see through the UniParty tricks, schemes and Machiavellian constructs, and we trust nothing.

The DC guards weaponized virtue as an attack strategy. They use our love of country against us. However, one glance at the scars and that approach doesn’t work any longer….

….. and they hate us even more because of that.

That outlook brings me to a place of thankfulness.

I think most of us here realize we have a few years with a political leader in our corner; that means advocacy for our specific interests is on a diminishing timeline.

If we, well, really he, does not get that thing accomplished in the next three years, well, it’s unlikely to happen.  That clock ticking raises the stakes for us and makes policy issues sensitive and urgent.  This is an entirely understandable sentiment.

I fully support Donald Trump, because the alternative is dependency on a Republican.

Don’t forget to pray.

Today I pray for our nation. ♦ I ask that You give our President wisdom beyond his own understanding, and the courage to choose the right path no matter how narrow the gate. ♦ I pray for all in authority over us that You would give them grace and strength to stand against the temptation to use power as a weapon, but rather to carry it reverently as one would a child. ♦ I pray for the spiritual leaders of our country, that they would hear Your voice and know Your heart. ♦ I pray they would lead from their knees, and by that simple grace bring each one of us to our knees before Your throne. ♦ Have mercy on our nation Lord; In Jesus name, Amen

Insurgent Warfare Continues at the Pentagon: War Department Policy Update Adds Language of Transgenderism

RedState 

The most essential purpose of a military force is to defend its nation, people, and way of life. As many have thoroughly noted, recent years brought seismic social transformation that reordered the U.S. military’s institutional loves from constitutionalism, ordered liberty, and founding principles to an affection for the most radical elements of progressive political doctrines.

In my 20-year military career, I watched the force transform from a place where the traditional family was a sacred pillar to one where service members risk investigation for defending the most basic ontological values. Thus it was music to my ears when then-Secretary of Defense—now, Secretary of War—Pete Hegseth proclaimed that “DEI is dead at DOD.” Yet despite his best efforts, that statement is contested in action and deed by social insurgents who remain firmly embedded up to the highest levels of Pentagon management.

It’s widely reported that numerous offices dedicated to DEI initiatives were simply rebranded. Even in commands that truly shuttered these precincts of political commissar, the ideology remains represented by many uniformed military and civilian employees. Closing the church doesn’t automatically de-convert its members. That reality presented itself again recently in a subtle—but strategic—choice of terminology contained within a recent War Department policy update. 

The Department of Defense updated DOD Instruction 1327.06: Military Leave, Liberty, and Administrative Absence in August, adding language referring to “non-birth” parents (see above X post). This update—made seven months into the second Trump administration—matters because it makes military policy a vehicle to legitimize activist language of the so-called "transgender" movement.

It was well understood when I joined the military that mothers birth children, and fathers don’t. Husband and wife changed to spouse when former President Obama overturned ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ The purpose was to proffer institutional legitimacy to natural or adoptive parents choosing homosexual lifestyles. The Biden administration took this further in forcing the transgender movement onto the military. Culturally-Marxist terms like ‘birthing’ and ‘non-birthing’ people and parents were adopted across governmental agencies as so-called ‘progress’ flags flew alongside the stars and stripes at federal facilities. This cultural revolution forced its way into the armed forces as well.

Some have questioned why I draw attention to what might appear to be a small matter of a few words among thousands in a single document. The answer is that institutional language matters, as it conveys values and teaches people how to think. If you can reduce a father to a ‘non-birth’ parent, and raise gay relationships to be perceived on par with holy matrimony, you undermine the most basic foundation upon which our society is built. A military that denies reality cannot know what is worth defending.

The language of the transgender cult is one of dark fantasy that denies ladies the Biblical dignity of representing the glory of man (See 1st Corinthians 11:17). It reduces feminine to a stereotype, and woman to a pejorative ‘cis’ identity, “chest feeder,” “menstruating person,” or “birthing person.” Men are dismissed as “non-birthers.” Leaving old school misogyny behind, the revolutionary architects of such language broadcast a total contempt for humanity, and women in particular—believing their existence so cheap that misguided and depraved men can put the role on like a suit. If you can get the military to follow such a perverse line of thinking, you can condition its members to merely follow whatever orders are given with total disregard for whether they are in accordance with defending, preserving, protecting, and conserving the United States of America. 

When I initially brought this up in social media posting (see above; I also shared it on LinkedIn), some replied that non-birth parent is a reference to adoptive parents. This is false. Adoption and adoptive parents are referenced separately in the regulation a total of 64 times, with a standalone section about adoption on page 30. The inclusion of ‘non-birth parents’ as a category is a separate matter entirely.

In addition, the previous version (.PFD) of the Defense Department’s leave instruction did not contain a single reference to “non-birth” parents. It referred to birthing as an event exclusive to women.

This reality-based version of the War Department’s leave policy was implemented on January 15, 2021, during the Biden administration. It took until 2025 for the military to insert the transgendered language, in direct violation of President Trump’s Executive Order 14168—Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, Executive Order 14185—Restoring America's Fighting Force, and the January 29, 2025 Secretary of Defense Memorandum: Restoring America’s Fighting Force. 

The Under Secretary of War for Personnel and Readiness was tasked to execute these orders across the War Department. But that office, led by Anthony Tata, inserted and published transgendered language into the new leave policy. This is the same office responsible for reintegrating military members kicked out by the Biden administration through unlawful COVID policies. It has taken 11 months to reinstate a total of four military service members of the over 8,000 forced out.

The problem of senior War Department lieutenants working to thwart the agenda that Americans voted for in November 2024 goes deeper. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll recently told Politico’s White House bureau chief, Dasha Burns, that he sees no difference between men and women in the U.S. Army’s crucible known as Ranger School. “I probably watched 100 soldiers walk by and could not tell you gender,” he said of a recent visit to a Ranger School training site. This comes despite years’ worth of well-sourced reporting that standards were modified for women being force integrated into the extremely physically-challenging course. This was done by order of the Obama administration for purposes of social engineering. Proof of the detrimental impact this has on warfighting readiness continues to be dismissed by ideologically-driven power brokers across the U.S. military complex.

I appreciate that War Secretary Pete Hegseth says the military is done with the woke agenda. But a concerning number of his subordinates and policy writers beg to differ. Something serious must be done to fight the deeply-entrenched, rebellious military culture ensconced during the Obama and Biden eras. A force that denies reality and resists legitimate rule constitutes—as many of our ancestors warned—a threat to liberty.

Are You Falling for Media's Midterm Doom Narrative on Trump's Presidency?

RedState 

Political news reports out of Washington these days are full of encouraging details that media tell us augur well for Democrats in the midterm elections set in 11 months.

These reports can find and deliver gloomy news on the economy because, apparently, only Republicans are responsible for a soft economy, which everyone needs to understand is now good for Democrats. 

They also note that President Trump’s approval ratings are underwater, as they always are and were last year when Trump captured every single swing state. 

The media see ominous signs of discord among Republicans, which presumably would be good for Democrats, right? And they ignore the same predictable discord among Democrats because that wouldn’t fit the current fashionable narrative of Hope. 

By the way, does anyone recall a time when discord did not dominate Swamp news?

The GOP happens to control Washington at the moment — the White House, the House of Representatives, and the Senate. That’s thanks to the electoral spanking that voters administered last year to the party that tried to sell the nation on a nitwit vice president as a credible successor to an addlepated commander in chief.

All of which explains mainstream media’s current eagerness to pronounce the looming doom of the overwhelmingly successful congressional, judicial, and policy agenda of a president, who is in reality exceptionally good for the business side of media that despise him. 

Out of curiosity, sports aside, what else is of compelling news interest these days besides anything involving Donald Trump?

There is a serious problem, however, with this widely distributed narrative that is so hopelessly optimistic for Democrats: Like pretty much all the coverage of Donald Trump that they dish out, it is only part of the story.

Remember how they told us that Joe Biden was reportedly “sharp as a tack,” even while fairies that no one else could see danced before the president’s empty eyes? 

Remember how we were told about 10 years ago that Hillary Clinton’s ascension to hubby’s Oval Office was virtually guaranteed because her opponent was a crude political neophyte?

Clinton was so thoroughly shocked by Trump’s historic upset that she couldn’t appear publicly until the next day. An avid media consumer, Trump may have been a little startled himself, which he’d never admit. 

The fact is, the rich guy from the Fifth Avenue penthouse outworked his opponent. And he did it again in 2020 and 2023-24, despite all the hoaxes, legal hurdles, and court dates thrown in the way to break him. 

All of which failed.

Clinton’s staff planted questions in town hall audiences. Kamala Harris paid a million dollars to talk with Oprah before an adoring audience. Harris was running as a change agent to succeed Jill Biden’s senile husband, but admitted to a nationwide TV audience she could not think of anything she’d have done differently.

More importantly, Trump listened to voters. And then he crafted policies to address those concerns and actually saw them through. Changing your mind is one thing. But keeping promises rules.

You may not like everything about Trump, or anything. But can you picture Chuck Schumer chuckling with delight as he scooped out french fries for surprised customers at a suburban McDonald’s drive-thru? An inauthentic Schumer wouldn’t know which end to eat first. And customers at the window wouldn't know him from Hakeem Jeffries.

Schumer and Jeffries are both from Brooklyn, you know. So is Bernie Sanders. Two Jews and a black are so-called leaders of the national party of diversity, all from the same borough of the same city that just chose a democratic socialist as mayor.

We should take their word that passes for diversity.

And therein lies the problem for the Democrat Party. Its leadership, if you can call it that, is old, stodgy, and clueless. 

To demonstrate his leftist bona fides, the Senate minority leader led his party into the Schumer Shutdown, which became a record-breaking political sinkhole that won them nothing but blame.

That same left-wing crowd hustled Biden and Harris into spending multiple trillions on favored causes that ignited the worst inflation since Jimmy Carter lost the 1980 election over the same issue.

Then came November 5 last year, and the Democrat ticket that spent $100 million every seven days of the 15-week campaign watched helplessly as their worst nightmare cruised back into the White House to start painting gold everywhere. 

So, why are Schumer and Jeffries still touting leftist lines? Wouldn’t it be better to try a different direction than the one just rejected with 58 percent of the electoral votes?

When the GOP ticket got royally spanked in the 1964 presidential election, the party got the message. It changed direction. Just two years later, Republicans captured three new Senate seats, 47 in the House, and eight new governor’s offices. 

Then, two years after that, the GOP began a winning streak of five of the next six presidential elections.

What alternatives have Democrats offered since the Clinton debacle? Marathon speeches. Photo op stunts at the Capitol. Let’s see, oh, Trump is bad, really bad. And….that’s it. The man inhabits Democrat heads as well as the Oval Office.

You haven’t seen much about this in the news, but quietly, a youth revolt is building within the party of Andrew Jackson across the country. About time.

A younger generation is trying to assert itself. That’s how wolf packs and elk herds and political parties rejuvenate.

You might date its tepid start from 2018 when a 10-term New York House Democrat leader named Joseph Crowley, a likely heir to caucus leader Nancy Pelosi, was upset in a party primary by an uppity 28-year-old bartender named Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

A one-time campaign worker for Bernie Sanders, AOC is now 36, which makes her age-eligible to mount a 2028 primary challenge to Sen. Schumer, who turns 75 this week. 

Dick Durbin, who turned 81 on Friday, is retiring next year from the Illinois Senate seat that he’s occupied since late last century. “I know it's time to pass the torch," he said as if that was news to anyone but him. 

Nancy Pelosi, who turns 86 in March, is also dropping out of Congress after 20 House terms that somehow made her a multi-millionaire.

It is true. Operating in a congressional minority is a politically powerless and frustrating position. Although given the shameful Weekend with Bernie Biden Scandal, they richly deserve it. And the multiple benefits, perqs, and a $174,000 salary for partial workweeks aren't too bad as jobs go. 

In a series of recent articles, Axios detailed mounting anger among Democrat House members and candidates against their own party’s leadership over allegedly weak opposition to President Trump and his policies. Many vowed not to support Jeffries as House caucus leader.

They see a growing anger among their base that has, in some cases, morphed into a disregard for American institutions, political traditions, and even the rule of law.

Progressive House Democrats aimed particular anger at Senate Democrats who voted to reopen the government after a record-long shutdown. "We had a moment right now where we needed fighters,” said Alabama Rep. Shomari Figures (AL-02).

According to Lee Miringoff of the Marist University Institute for Political Opinion, the deepening party divide is caused by age and an identity crisis:

The Democratic Party is searching for its identity, and I think there’s a wide split between the pragmatic old guard and the well-known people — the Bidens, the Schumers, the Pelosis — that group … and other Democrats of the more progressive, new generation.  

And, let's be honest, after all the skullduggery they so futilely threw at Trump for a decade, it certainly didn't improve their mental condition losing again to the nonstop man who is the Eveready battery of politics.

One major question: Although not widely known, these divisions will complicate the kind of party unity necessary for several hundred individual victories across the country next year. 

If Democrats nonetheless erase the GOP’s slim current House and Senate controls, the latent militancy of so many incoming members augurs for a tumultuous final two years of the Trump presidency.

But a key midterm question remains: Absent fresh campaign policy ideas from ambitious Democrats, will “Trump is still bad” be a strong enough platform to capture enough district wins when the man’s name will not appear on a single ballot?