Virginia’s Spanberger gets it wrong; Hegseth gets is right

March 17, 2026

Virginia is turning into a very different place since the election. The Youngkin-Sears administration had done a good job. Glen Youngkin and Winsome Sears brought $121 billion in committed private sector investments, had 270,000 more Virginians working, and nearly 200,000 open and unfilled jobs. They also had 4 straight years of record budget surpluses. All of these good things were the result of conservative pro-growth and pro-worker policies.

The new Governor, Democrat Abigail Spanberger, seems to be a student of New York City’s Muslim Communist Mayor, Zohran Mamdani. While claiming to be a moderate, she supported President Joe Biden’s reckless spending, and his inflationary and job-killing regulations. Now, she wants to bring that same failed economic agenda to Virginia.

She also opposes Virginia’s right-to-work law. This helps union bosses force workers to join a union just to get a job. That threatens the business climate that has made Virginia a location for private investment and job creation.

She claimed to want to increase affordability for Virginians, but has turned her back on her promises and supports placing taxes on virtually everything. 

That list of tax additions includes: Additional local sales tax in all Virginia counties and cities; new personal property tax on electric leaf blowers and electric landscaping equipment; taxes on large employers; gun and ammunition taxes; new income tax brackets; a delivery tax for Northern Virginia; an investment income tax; an event tax; a storage facility tax; a gym membership tax; dog walking and dog grooming taxes; a counseling tax; a digital personal property tax; new car taxes and highway use fees; a vehicle repair tax; a home repair tax; a dry cleaning tax; a rideshare tax; and a fantasy sports tax.

How is that affordability promise looking for you?

Spanberger is following the disastrous lead of California and New York City. Small businesses, working families and anyone who believes in free enterprise will suffer under her governorship.

As bad as all of those are, as well as some other reckless policies, she also wants to change the voting districts. But the goal is for immediate results, not fairness. This is an especially interesting issue, because she has been seen on video criticizing what she now professes. She said not long ago, “Gerrymandering is detrimental to our democracy and it weakens the individual voices that form our electorates. Opposing gerrymandering should be a bipartisan priority.”

She supports an item on the April 21 ballot that would put an amendment on the November ballot allowing state lawmakers to redraw the congressional district map at will. Normally, redistricting occurs every 10 years following the census, not when a legislature makes a partisan decision to change it. 

All Virginians who believe in honesty and fair elections are strongly encouraged to vote “No” on this issue.

And Congressional Democrats and others are busy with their war on all things Trump.

The effort to forever end Iran’s years of killing Americans and its efforts to become a nuclear power are atop the list. One specific criticism of the Department of War is what they say is the unnecessary spending of millions by Secretary Pete Hegseth on fancy foods for our military.

"Hegseth spent $93 billion in one month – roughly the cost of extending the ACA tax credits for three years," New York Sen. Chuck Schumer wrote. "But instead of lowering American’s healthcare costs, Hegseth used millions of taxpayer dollars on fruit baskets, Herman Miller recliners, ice cream machines, Alaskan King Crabs, and a Steinway & Sons grand piano.”

And, not surprisingly, the California Governor, the wild and crazy Gavin Newsome, also jumped on that bandwagon, along with several others.

But predictably, these critics are uninformed, misinformed, or lying through their teeth. A little research would protect them from these earth-shatteringly embarrassing faux pas.  

History is on Hegseth’s side.

“Steak and lobster! The outrage!” said The Whiskey Cowboy. “Special meals in association with deployment, before battle, or special events in the military is a tradition. This is nothing new. Those of us who have served know full well the sacrifices troops make during deployment and even in non-deployment times. We also know the risks that come with serving. It is part of the job. It is part of what we signed up for.

“So, the outrage seen by some concerning the steak and lobster meals served to troops now is beyond idiotic.” 

Real Clear Politics reported that when Gen. Lloyd Austin was the Secretary of Defense (now War) under President Joe Biden: “The military spent $103.7 million on meat, fish and poultry, including $16.6 million on ribeye steak and 147 orders of lobster tail for $6.1 million. Orders of blueberries, ice cream and doughnuts also exceeded $100,000.”

And Washington Examiner columnist Salena Zito wrote: “It is a common practice for the Pentagon to provide these special meals, often known as “surf and turf Fridays,” to our service men and women at least once a week. And this has been the case for decades.”

Yet again, the Left’s efforts to counter Trump’s administration at every turn includes a deep dive into the sewer to develop misinformation and outright lies. This behavior is not just dirty politics, it is un-American.

Crime in the U.S. was lower in 2025, but problems still exist

March 10, 2026

The Council on Criminal Justice (CCJ) report of crime levels in 2025 is positive. Here are some takeaways:

* “Reported levels of 11 of the 13 offenses covered in this report were lower in 2025 than in 2024; nine of the offenses declined by 10% or more. 

* “Looking at changes in violent offenses, the rate of reported homicides was 21 percent lower in 2025 than in 2024 in the 35 study cities providing data for that crime, representing 922 fewer homicides. There were 9 percent fewer reported aggravated assaults, 22 percent fewer gun assaults, and 2 percent fewer domestic violence incidents last year than in 2024. Robbery fell by 23 percent while carjackings decreased by 43 percent.” 

* “When nationwide data for jurisdictions of all sizes is reported by the FBI later this year, there is a strong possibility that homicides in 2025 will drop to about 4.0 per 100,000 residents. That would be the lowest rate ever recorded in law enforcement or public health data going back to 1900, and would mark the largest single-year percentage drop in the homicide rate on record.”

That, of course, is very good news, and a checkmark for the Trump administration and its focus on crime. Unfortunately, despite the good news from the CCJ, murder in this day and time is not as unusual as we might like it to be, and as it should be. 

There are still far too many murders, and over the last several years a troubling trend has developed: Murdering someone because you don’t like them, what they do, or their ideas.

What, exactly, is the definition of “murder?” That term is — as are so many these days — frequently misapplied to incidents involving someone’s death. Britannica online defines it this way: “murder, in criminal law, the killing of one person by another that is not legally justified or excusable, usually distinguished from the crime of manslaughter by the element malice aforethought.”

The murders of two people fairly recently draws attention to this irrational event.

Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk and UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson were senselessly murdered. While suspects have been charged and legal proceedings are ongoing, neither suspect has confessed or been found guilty. However, while it imperative that the guilty parties are convicted and appropriately punished, this trend must be halted. The murders of these two people for the reasons that have been identified are senseless and inexcusable — one because of his beliefs and the other for the job he held. 

This behavior is related to many other things that people do for no good reason, or perhaps no reason at all. It represents a failure of that person to have learned proper and acceptable behavior, and the failure of families and our culture to instill the concepts of basic humanity.

There is also some weird behavior associated with these senseless murders, such as how many people agree with why these two people were senselessly murdered, and support their deaths.

Looking at the two victims of this horrendous stupidity, what happened in these two examples?

Charlie Kirk co founded Turning Point USA (TPUSA) — a conservative student organization — in 2012 and served as its executive director. He supported several conservative positions, including opposition to abortion, gun control, DEI programs, and LGBTQ rights, and became aligned with Christian principles. 

He believed that it was important to speak to those who held different views. At his public appearances, he would ask for comments, and in a calm and thoughtful manner present his differing ideas, which often were effective to those who had different views. But he was murdered for that on a college campus on September 10th last year.

On December 4, 2024, UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was shot and killed in a targeted attack on a Manhattan street just before 7:00 a.m. Luigi Mangione was arrested and charged with the crime days later. The investigation turned up a manifesto of Mangione’s expressing anger toward corporate America, and reflected the intense public frustration over health insurance coverage denials that had developed. So, a man was murdered because he was associated with a particular type of company.

While violence in 2025 was lower than before, political violence has been on the rise over the last few years. In America, whatever your politics are, how radically different they may be from that of others, any level of political violence is a highly inappropriate and unacceptable response.

What is behind these senseless and unjustifiable acts of violence and inhuman behavior is essentially the mere dissatisfaction with contrary ideas. But why is it the chosen action in these situations to commit violence or other negative actions against someone simply because they have different ideas than you, or because they are involved in a business that you don’t like?

People must learn to deal with such differences, like Americans used to do. The freedoms our Constitution guarantees us make that necessary. The idea of free speech is to have a variety of ideas from which we as a people select our pathway, not one dictated set of ideas.

We cannot allow political passions to produce violence.

Israel and the U.S. seek to reduce Iran’s Islamic threat

March 3, 2026

The history of conflict between the United States and Iran goes back nearly 50 years. Iran was officially designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism by the United States Department of State on January 19, 1984, and is widely held to be the greatest state sponsor of terrorism in the world.

Data from the Department of Defense (now the Department of War) shows that Iran was responsible for at least 608 American troop deaths in Iraq between 2003 and 2011, which is roughly 17 percent of all U.S. personnel deaths there. As many as 995 American deaths have resulted from Iranian violence, according to another estimate.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force supports numerous proxy forces. This support includes providing money, weapons, and training to groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, as well as various Shia militias, and their violent actions.

With one of the goals of Iran’s Islamic leaders being “death to America,” the rulers have worked to develop nuclear weapons, and that has been regarded as one of the most dangerous things that could occur. In response, President Donald Trump worked to negotiate Iran away from that goal. 

Moving Iran away from its goals of Islamic superiority was, in fact, a growing attitude among the Iranian people. They recently participated in public protests against their rulers. But those tyrannical rulers murdered more than 30,000 protesters.

And then when Iran refused to negotiate with Trump, he ordered attacks on the nuclear facilities, doing great damage to them.

However, that did not dissuade Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has been the supreme leader of Iran since 1989. Efforts to develop nuclear weapons were renewed, and this refusal to make a move toward being a peaceful nation spurred the attacks last weekend on Iran by Israel and the United States, which resulted in the death of Khamenei and some 40 other leaders. 

When news of Khamenei’s death became known in Iran, the Iranian people cheered, seeing the possibility of a normal home place in their future. When the news reached the rest of the world, Iranians across the globe celebrated, including here in the United States. 

Tennessee Republican Rep. Tim Burchett agreed with the Iranians. He commented, “They hung kids for tweets. They cut women’s eyes out for wearing makeup. They threw gay folks off of buildings. They murdered Americans. Who will grieve for this dirtbag?”

However, while Iranians inside and outside of Iran celebrated, and others recognized that this was a giant step toward eliminating an Islamic threat to our country, here in America, Democrats did not celebrate what the Iranians thought was wonderful. Instead, they gathered in several protests around the country.

There was much criticism among Congressional Democrats and others of Trump’s action. He should have asked Congress for permission, they say. 

In response, protests were organized, but most or many were not done off the cuff. “Scores of protests were sponsored by a coalition of leftwing groups, including: the ANSWER Coalition, the National Iranian American Council, 50501, American Muslims for Palestine, the People’s Forum, Palestinian Youth Movement, CodePink, Black Alliance for Peace and the Democratic Socialists of America,” as published by the UK’s The Guardian.

“The coalition listed other ‘emergency protests’ on Saturday, including in Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Denver, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami and Minneapolis,” the story continued.

Conservative commentator Guy Benson takes this view: “The emerging consensus among many elected Democrats is some version of: To be clear, Iran’s outlaw regime is deeply evil, exports terrorism around the world, pursues genocidal nuclear weapons, is drenched in American blood, and slaughters its own civilians en masse. But …” we still don’t like what he did.

And, surprisingly, a “handful of House Democrats are justifying the operation, bucking most of their party who are calling the operation a reckless and illegal action,” as reported by Fox News. Among those supporting the actions are: Rep. Greg Landsman, D Ohio, Rep. Tom Suozzi, D N.Y., Josh Gottheimer, D N.J., and Sen. Jacky Rosen, D Nev., and Sen. John Fetterman, D Pa.

And, we must not forget or ignore that despite the over-heated rhetoric from the Left, Trump’s using the military is no different than what other presidents before him have done.

Two examples: Former President Bill Clinton utilized military forces in Somalia in1993 for Black Hawk Down; deployed troops in Bosnia in 1995; and in Kosovo in 1999 for NATO airstrikes. Former President Barack Obama did likewise in Libya in 2011 for airstrikes on Muammar Gaddafi; in 2014 through 2017 against Isis in Iraq and Syria; and in Yemen. Neither Clinton nor Obama approached Congress for approval.

It is not unusual, or unconstitutional, for a President to unilaterally employ military forces for an important national security concern, particularly when time is critical, and publicity of Congressional action would threaten the action.

And when you consider the target of these actions — an Islamic-ruled enemy nation with a history of killing Americans, and working to develop nuclear weapons that could be used against us — this was a good decision. Under Islamic rule, Iran is dangerous, and that needs to change, despite what Democrats may think.

Politics should never be part of decisions on legal matters

February 24, 2026

The term “originalism” refers to the idea that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted based on its original meaning at the time it was created and adopted. And therefore, an “originalist” is someone who understands the logic of this position and who accepts it.

The contrary position held by many is that the Constitution is a “living document,” which means that what the Founders thought 250 years ago is meaningless today, and the Constitution should be interpreted today using concepts that are “more modern,” even if they are actually contrary to the original meaning.

Under this way of thinking the right of free speech could be interpreted as meaning not that we are free to say a broad array of things, but that we can only say what the controlling individuals allow us to say, however limited that may be.

That mentality is like believing the Constitution is merely an ancient guideline, sort of like a drawing of the design of a house that can be altered to suit the desires of the owner.

But that concept is both foolish and dangerous. It’s like believing that the commandment “thou shalt not steal” really contains an unwritten phrase: “unless you want to.”

When the Constitution and laws are viewed under this foolish concept, it is referred to as “judicial activism.” Every law and constitutional ideal changes with the tide of human preference. That is like being on the ocean in a boat with no motor, sails, or oars, and being completely at the mercy of the weather and the water.

Originalism prevents activist interpretation of the Constitution’s concepts, and establishes standards our Founders intended to last forever, or at least until they are changed by appropriate methods, such as through acts of Congress supported by a substantial majority of the people.

An area where there is great difference on meaning is the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

That language seems fairly clear. But some disagree, and try to alter the meaning to help achieve their goals. However, if the original language is not clear enough, perhaps the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 may help. It defines the Amendment’s meaning as an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes, such as self-defense in the home, and other similar things.

Contrarians to the original context of the Amendment say that it does not say what types of Arms are covered and which ones are not. Of course. That is the salient point.

The Founders did not say that pistols are covered but rifles and cannons are not. They said “keep and bear Arms”: Meaning, all Arms. 

We have a wider variety of Arms/weapons around now than in the 1700s. Anti-gunners want to outlaw “assault rifles” — whatever those are, as no legal description exists — and magazines holding more than 10 rounds. They also want to outlaw automatic rifles and machine guns. Their argument is that the Founders would likely have not included these in the right to bear Arms, if they had existed in the 1700s. We will never know if that is true.

However, we must remember that our Founders were not worried about different types of guns, they were concerned about specific types of government. One type of government they meticulously avoided was a pure democracy, because of the danger of that type of government to become tyrannical, where 51 percent of the people could vote to jail or kill the other 49 percent.

And while some of today’s weapons can be more of a problem than the others, the imperative question remains: Why should law-abiding citizens be forbidden from owning them if they want them? 

Many states have gun laws, and some of those laws are very restrictive. Yet, in some of these states, gun crimes are commonly committed, anyway. It isn’t the guns that are the problem, it is the persons who have the guns, often illegally, that is the problem. Many law-abiding citizens own one or more guns. Neither the person or his or her guns have committed crimes.

Instead of interfering with the constitutionally guaranteed rights by limiting or outlawing gun ownership, we instead need to work very hard to teach people from a very young age about right and wrong, and being a good citizen. Discourage crime through high standards, strict adherence, and severe/harsh punishment for disobeying those standards and the laws that they have produced.

Teaching our young people how to be a good human being is a critical factor, one that has been ignored much too often in recent years. The nuclear family has fallen drastically in practice, and our education system is infected with many people who are interested in pushing their preferred political ideals more than presenting approved subject matter.

Consequently, the sense of proper behavior, and understanding and appreciating our system of government are well below the acceptable level. But it is not too late to begin restoring these concepts to where they should be.

Why aren’t secure voting and borders important to Democrats?

February 17, 2025

It is safe to say that nearly everyone believes that elections at all levels are critically important. After all, that activity chooses the people who serve us by operating our towns, counties, states and nation. And in America, we are blessed with the right and privilege of being able to select those people.

Elections therefore should be thoughtfully and efficiently organized, with some level of convenience, and highly secured by rules that protect the election process and results. That way, the candidates that the voters choose actually win the elections.

It is also safe to say that there is some degree of illegal activity in most every election, although sometimes very small.

With this in mind, in 2025, the House of Representatives passed the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. The aim of this legislation is to make elections more secure.

The original SAVE Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, but the revised SAVE America Act also increases the security of elections, requiring a government-issued photo ID to vote in federal elections.

Voter ID is hardly controversial. Gallup and Pew Research Center polls, among others, found that more than 80 percent of American citizens support photo ID to vote.

Yet, some oppose the idea of an ID or a photo ID as necessary to vote, saying that this puts some people in a situation where they will not be able to vote. However, why can anyone who is a citizen of the USA, and therefore eligible to vote, not be able to get the required ID with just a little effort?

As to the complaint of having any ID to vote, here are a few things that you need an ID or photo ID for: get a US Passport, get through a TSA checkpoint, apply for government programs, drive a motor vehicle, pick up prescriptions, buy alcohol, buy a gun, open a bank account, rent or buy a house or car, get married, rent a hotel room, and last, but not least: attend the Democrat National Convention.

So, Democrats believe that it is important to show a photo ID to participate in a convention that nominates the party’s candidate for President, but think it is unfair to require the voters who elect the President to show a photo ID.

Other examples of the apparent confused logic: Democrats want ICE agents to show photo IDs when arresting illegal aliens, but oppose photo IDs to vote.

Recently, Georgia Democrat Sen. Jon Ossoff required attendees to present a government-issued photo ID to enter his "Rally for Our Republic," but opposes a photo ID for federal elections.

And, Rep. Michael Cloud, R-Texas, noted on X that House rules require members to insert their identification card before voting on legislation.

“Notable that 213 Democrats just used their congressional photo ID to vote NO on a voter ID bill,” he wrote.

The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia commented, “The burden of acquiring, possessing, and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe.”

Yes, it is possible, perhaps likely, that some American citizens will have problems under these requirements. No system is perfect. The current system stands as a hallmark of imperfection.

A poll by Newsmax/TIPP shows that Americans view illegal immigration negatively. Overall, Americans think illegal immigration impacts the U.S. negatively by a 50 to 21 percent margin, with 39 percent of Democrats, 58 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Independents saying it’s a problem.

On the backing of ICE, while 78 percent of Republicans support ICE, only 22 percent of Democrats and 36 percent of Independents do.

It is difficult to understand why so many oppose ICE deporting illegal aliens with criminal charges, or who are just in the country illegally, which also is a crime. It has not always been like this.

Comparing recent Presidents on the subject of deportations and the reactions to that, data from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security show that Bill Clinton deported 12.5 million with no protests/riots; George W. Bush deported 10.3 million with no protests/riots; Barack Obama deported 5.3 million with no protests/riots; and Donald Trump has deported 1.5 million with 350 protests/riots. 

Wonder why there is this huge difference in presidents doing the same thing for the same reason? Could political considerations, or personal feelings be involved?

Newsmax magazine published a piece in its February edition regarding federal government salaries. “The average salary in a large majority of federal agencies now exceeds $100,000 annually,” the article says.

Open The Books, the watchdog group that promotes transparency throughout the federal government, reported the agencies and departments with the highest average pay, and listed 12, along with the average annual pay and the number of employees.

Leading the pack is the Commodity Futures Trading Commission with 721 employees, and an average annual pay of $236,006. The largest number of employees is the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation with 6,036 employees, and an average annual pay of $173,627. 

And the lowest paid of the group are the Office of Management and Budget, with 811 employees, and the Federal Trade Commission, with 1,302 employee,  both of which have an average annual pay of $164,468.

America’s 250th year is one of disagreement, not celebration

February 10, 2026

As the United States of America approaches its 250th birthday, we see a country sharply divided, perhaps more so than ever.

The political Right is attempting to take the unique and wonderful design and work to restore it to its original form. The political Left is desperately trying to subvert those actions and turn the country instead into what it prefers: a pure democracy.

But democracies are not what you may think. On that subject, the late commentator Walter Williams said, “The Founders knew that a democracy would lead to some kind of tyranny.”

Founder John Adams offered: “"Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a Democracy yet, that did not commit suicide." 

It is relevant to note that neither the Declaration of Independence nor the U.S. Constitution even mention “democracy.” Instead, the founders envisioned a representative republic — a “Republican Form of Government” — a system that was designed to avoid the “tyranny of the majority,” a huge negative feature of democracies.

They favored a republic — a representative government, or government by the people — over a pure democracy, as James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 10.

Yet, the Democrats, both those in and not in the U.S. Congress, have the bad habit of referring to “our democracy” as if it is one. Or maybe it’s just a preference they want to push.

The closest the country comes to “democracy” is when it is described as a "democratic republic" or a "representative democracy," phrases which flirt with the term “democracy, but recognize that it is not one. 

The Left is actively working as swiftly as possible to “fundamentally transform the United States of America,” as per Barack Obama. 

It tries to pass and sometimes does pass laws and takes actions that weaken the system, while opposing those that maintain or strengthen it.

The Left appoints judges and justices that will not honor the original intent of the Constitution and federal and state laws, and will “interpret” them in ways never imagined when they were created.

It wants to enlarge the U.S. Supreme Court and pack it with liberal justices who will make law from the bench by mis-interpreting the Constitution and laws in ways that help them in their subversive efforts.

Their presidents, governors and mayors support the election of and make appointments of attorneys general and prosecutors who have a soft-on-crime attitude that values criminals more than law-abiding citizens.

The Left often criticizes its political opponents for doing things it has done in the past, as if they never imagined such things before.

Victor Davis Hanson, a military historian, and conservative political commentator who writes and does video commentaries for The Daily Caller, offered this view in one of those videos of what the Left is doing, relative to recent incidents in Minnesota.

“I want to talk very quickly today about what is going on in Minnesota. What I’m really disturbed about is the utter hypocrisy that we’re seeing with this street insurrectionary movement. 

“They have canonized Renee Good and Alex Pretti for resisting ICE officers, and they were tragically shot and they’ve become martyrs. Why did the Left tell us that it was perfectly okay for somebody to go to a demonstration with a military-grade, semi-automatic weapon with extra clips and just stick it in his waistband, visible [to] anybody, and then get into a brawl with law enforcement officers? 

“At the same time, tell us if anybody had a concealed weapon anywhere on January 6, they needed to be put in jail? All of our most prominent liberals are saying the state of Minnesota has a right to do what? Attack federal officers? 

“I thought the Left didn’t like state’s rights. I thought they said that this was insurrectionary.”

For the second time in a very short period of time, Congressional Democrats have tried to jam through favored concepts by stuffing them into government funding bills, the purpose of which is to prevent a government shutdown. It is a common practice to put controversial items in an important bill that has great support or, in this case, has great importance. But while it is not a good thing, even though it is a common practice in other legislation, it should not be allowed in government funding emergency legislation. It has a strong resemblance to blackmail.

In the latest of these attempts, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, has said that there are three demands necessary to get Democrats’ support for 

a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill that must pass by Feb. 13 to avoid a partial government shutdown.

While these may be good ideas, and one of them has already been put into effect, this is not the way to get them implemented. A truly good idea will likely get adequate support, without threatening a government shutdown.

Give the Left credit: they are adamant and working continuously to change the country into one ruled by those with socialist/communist ideals, not the ideals of personal freedom that our Founders believed in so earnestly. But the Democrats hard work will bring freedom-ending change to America, if they are successful.

Violent “protests” are illegal, and often lead to tragedies

February 3, 2026

As the original report of an event that will have strong interest among contrasting groups is released, people start reacting. Some react quite conservatively, mentioning only what has been broadcast or published. Others add information that is only partly true, or what they believe is true, even though it was not part of the initial news item, and hasn’t been confirmed.  And still others deliberately make up things that suits their narrative.

All sides use these devices to strengthen their particular position in these hotly debated events about who was right and who was wrong. Along the way, new information often comes along, that can affect how people react.

A new piece of information has appeared regarding Renee Good and Alex Pretti, both of whom were shot and killed by ICE personnel in Minnesota last month as they participated in illegal protests/riots that interfered with the federal agents doing their job to remove illegal aliens with criminal backgrounds or charges.

The two incidents that occurred weeks apart were handled as separate and unrelated events. However, new information purports to show a connection between these two individuals from many years ago.

According to the report, Good and Pretti, both 37 years-old, were classmates from 2006-2010 at the University of Minnesota, and knew each other as members of a club. It says that police discovered the connection when they accessed Pretti’s encrypted phone data, showing that both he and Good belonged to a group chat called “Kingfield Signal ICE watch group.”

Signal group chats are used by anti-ICE activists in Minneapolis and elsewhere to track, identify and impede federal law enforcement officers, according to FBI Director Kash Patel.

"We immediately opened up that investigation because that sort of Signal chat being coordinated with individuals, not just locally in Minnesota, but maybe even around the country — if that leads to a break in the federal statute or a violation of some law, then we are going to arrest people," Patel said. "You cannot create a scenario that illegally entraps and puts law enforcement in harm's way," he added.

That Pretti was a member of the Kingfield Signal ICE watch group, was confirmed by Jeanne Massey, who coordinates rapid response for that and other groups. Good’s involvement, however, has not been confirmed. But the idea that the two knew each other for many years prior to the recent events adds to the discourse, making both Good and Pretti look somewhat worse.

Both Good and Pretti were voluntarily participating in interference with ICE’s legal activities to arrest and deport illegal aliens, focusing on the “worst of the worst.” Some 70 percent of those captured so far have been charged with or convicted of crimes, either in the U.S., their home country, or perhaps some combination.

Good and her spouse, Becca Good, were present at an ICE enforcement activity, and both had made critical remarks to agents. When she blocked a street with her vehicle, refused to exit the vehicle when ordered, and then drove at an ICE agent, she was shot.

Pretti had been involved in interfering with ICE several days before the day he died, damaging an ICE vehicle and being injured as he resisted arrest. On the day of his death, he was with a mob interfering with ICE, carrying a pistol and resisting arrest with no ID. While he did have a concealed carry permit, carrying a weapon while physically and illegally interfering with law enforcement activity was not very smart.

The U.S. Constitution protects Americans expressing their thoughts and feelings about things in public gatherings. But that protection has limits: The public gatherings must be peaceful, including things like carrying signs and chanting or singing. They must not involve violence or interference with lawful activities of law enforcement, such as blocking them, physically attacking them, getting in their faces or touching them or their equipment.

The activities of both Good and Pretti, and hundreds of others, violated the Constitution’s protection of peaceful behavior, opening up the possibility of their being arrested. This behavior cannot be ignored, let alone encouraged. 

Why Americans choose to defend illegal aliens and their crimes, and try to prevent their deportation is a fair question. There is much more sympathy for cases like those of Good and Pretti than for the much larger number of Americans killed or injured by illegal aliens.

Obviously, being in the country illegally is a crime, at least a misdemeanor, and in cases where illegals have been deported and have returned, is a felony. And crimes must be dealt with for the safety of the American people.

The tragic deaths of Good, Pretti and any others that may have died, or may die in the future can easily be avoided.

If blue governors and mayors would turn over those illegals to the federal government in their states and cities, there would be less need, or perhaps no need, for ICE to move into these areas.

And if those who dislike the efforts of federal law enforcement to remove the criminal element and the others here illegally would protest peacefully, or not protest legal actions at all, these deaths, injuries, and arrests would not occur.

Democrats will make Virginia much like California and Minnesota

January 27, 2026

Democrats in the General Assembly wasted no time in getting to work ending the Commonwealth’s movement toward sensible governance in the preceding four years, and heading in the direction of California and Minnesota.

Newly elected Governor Abigail Spanberger also wasted no time discarding the phony badge she wore saying she was a “moderate” candidate.

From the Americans for Tax Reform website: “Under unified Democrat control, Virginia is poised to become a tax-hiking outlier in a region full of states that are phasing out their income taxes. Immediately upon seizing control of government, Virginia Democrats introduced the following bills that seek to impose an array of new and higher taxes:

“HB 378 – Imposes a 3.8 percent net investment income tax on individuals, trusts, and estates beginning in taxable year 2027. If enacted, HB 378 would raise VA’s top marginal income tax rate on portfolio and passive income to 9.55percent.

“HB 900 – Authorizes sales tax hikes in various transportation districts, imposes a new tax on each and every retail delivery in Northern Virginia (Amazon, Uber Eats, FedEx, UPS, etc.), similar to the one imposed in Minnesota by Gov. Tim Walz (D). 

“HB 919 – Imposes a firearm and ammunition tax equal to 11 percent of the gross receipts from the retail sale of any firearm or ammunition by a dealer in firearms, firearms manufacturer, or ammunition vendor, as such terms are defined in the bill. 

“HB 978 – Extends the retail sales and use tax to dry cleaning, landscaping, and other previously exempt services.”

Some suggest that Virginia’s tax rate could rise from 5.75 percent to 13.8 percent, the highest in the nation.

And then there is House Bill 863 which moves down the path toward soft-on-crime government. The bill contains language that would effectively eliminate minimum sentencing requirements for such crimes as manslaughter, rape, possession and distribution of child pornography, and assaulting a law enforcement officer. Democrats are said to also seek to remove the mandatory five-day minimum sentence for certain first-time DUI offenses.

Along that same line of mis-thinking, Spanberger took the oath of office and a couple of breaths, and then signed 10 executive actions. One of those was to fulfill a campaign promise to rescind the executive order of her predecessor, former Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin, which required Virginia law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration officials.

So, the new governor wants Virginia to become another Minnesota?

Defending this foolish decision, Spanberger commented that "State and local law enforcement should not be required to divert their limited resources to enforce federal, civil immigration laws – it is the responsibility of federal law enforcement," and that "Virginia state and local law enforcement officers must be able to focus on their core responsibilities: investigating crime and community policing."

There is also a move that would require government contracts under $100,000 to be awarded to minority-owned and women-owned businesses. It instructs the executive branch of Virginia’s government to base the awarding of at least 42 percent of its contracts on DEI criteria, rather than to whatever businesses appear to be the most qualified or best suited. It also requires allocating a certain portion of those contracts to certified DEI businesses.

Spanberger also announced Virginia would rejoin the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) – a move she said would lower costs.

"For me, this is about cost savings. RGGI generated hundreds of millions of dollars for Virginia — dollars that went directly to flood mitigation, energy efficiency programs, and lowering bills for families who need help most," Spanberger said. "Withdrawing from RGGI did not lower energy costs. In fact, the opposite happened — it just took money out of Virginia's pocket. It is time to fix that mistake." 

Republican State Senator Glen Sturtevant said, however, that the RGGI is a 501(c)(3) carbon tax entity that taxes member states through citizen’s electric bills, meaning electric bills will increase. He said further that by withdrawing from RGGI, Youngkin saved Virginians between $500 million and $1 billion.

There is also a bill to regulate gas-powered leaf blowers and other electric landscaping equipment. These machines are quite noisy. But, they are also quite efficient.

However, the most troubling topics deal with voting. There is a bill to end hand counting of ballots that can be read by a scanner. Scanners, of course, can be controlled online. 

And there is talk of proposing a constitutional redistricting amendment. Attempting to justify this, Spanberger said during a joint session of the Virginia General Assembly that "Virginia's proposed redistricting amendment is a response to what we're seeing in other states that have taken extreme measures to undermine democratic norms." 

However, critics claim this move would give Democrats a 10-1 advantage in voting districts, since their goal is keeping control.  Many districts vote Republican, although the large eastern districts near D.C. and Richmond vote Democrat.

Spanberger’s new-found love of redistricting is wholly partisan. Back in 2019 she commented that “Gerrymandering is detrimental to our democracy and it weakens the individual voices that form our electorates. Opposing gerrymandering should be a bipartisan priority.”

And, Spanberger’s often mentioned plan for improved “affordability” is just words, not actions.

Virginia will join California and Minnesota, and the people will suffer.

Last year saw many positive things happen in our country

January 20, 2026

Well, the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term has now been completed. Yes, the United States of America still has problems. It always has had, and it always will have. But some improvements have been recorded.

Let’s be clear, Trump is not perfect; he has his problems. But the same is true of Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Adam Schiff, Elizabeth Warren, Maxine Waters, Hakeem Jeffries, Hillary Clinton, Jasmine Crockett, Eric Swalwell, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and every other human being.

But Trump may be the most heavily criticized POTUS ever, or at least he is in recent memory. 

It truly appears that some people oppose what Trump does because of how much they dislike him, irrespective of what he is doing that may be is good for the country.

Michigan Republican Congresswoman Lisa McClain gave an example of just how wild and crazy the dislike of Trump is, saying, “President Trump could have the cure for cancer and the Democrats would still be upset."

But despite the fog that interferes with how some folks view things, the economy has some positive aspects, and some other factors will likely improve as time passes. The following information was provided by WhiteHouse.gov.

Egg prices are down 84 percent; gas is less than $3.00 per gallon for the first time in four years; the federal deficit is down 40 percent, the lowest since 2019; we have global contracts of $170 billion, which is 14 times as much as in the Biden administration.

Michael & Susan Dell donated $6.25 billion to fund Trump Accounts for 25 million children; Black Friday showed a record-breaking $11.8 billion in online spending; we have $12 billion in aid for American farmers; the trade deficit fell to $52.8 billion, down 35 percent, year-over-year; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent projects 3 percent GDP growth this year, despite the shutdown.

Eli Lilly will build a $6.5 billion Texas plant; tariffs will bring Volvo XC60 production to the US.

On the foreign policy front, there has also been some positive movement. According to the U.S. State Department, “Under the first year of President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s leadership, the State Department has implemented a bold America First foreign policy focused on making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous.

“Since January, the State Department has helped stop the flow of deadly drugs into the United States, created American jobs by advancing commercial interests abroad, secured additional defense investments from our allies, streamlined foreign assistance programs, and ushered in a new era of peace through strength, all while slashing waste and reorganizing the agency to ensure that our government serves the American people as efficiently and as effectively as possible.”

The State Department has also done some house-cleaning. It “secured cost savings of $270,860,693 via 659 descoped contracts and 533 contracts that were terminated or not renewed, as reflected in the Federal Procurement Data System. The Department trimmed travel budgets, spending $100 million less on travel than last year.”

The Cato Institute reports that the number of federal employees has dropped from about 3,000,000 at the beginning of 2025 to less than 2,750,000, a reduction of approximately 250,000 as of early December. Fewer federal employees require less tax money for their salaries, lowering federal spending a bit.

One of the areas drawing the most anti-Trump opposition is the effort to remove illegal aliens from the country, focusing primarily on those with criminal records or criminal charges. Illegal entry is a misdemeanor, and illegal reentry is a felony.

Numbers from December show that more than 2.5 million illegal aliens have left the U.S. because of the administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration, including an estimated 1.9 million self-deportations and more than 622,000 deportations, as reported on the DHS website.

Last year, between Jan. 20 and Dec. 11, about 595,000 illegal aliens had been arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The Department of Homeland Security reported that 70 percent, or approximately 416,000 illegals, had "criminal convictions or pending criminal charges" in the United States.

While so many Democrats/leftists/progressives condemn the actions of ICE to remove illegal and often criminal aliens from blue cities and states, the number of that group who have expressed sorrow or horror because of the many Americans who have been murdered or otherwise attack by illegal aliens remains quite small.

 The Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) posted a list of hundreds of Americans who were murdered by illegal aliens, or were died from actions such as vehicle wrecks.

In comments prior to the list of those killed, ALIPAC noted the following: “We did not include our thousands of documented cases of illegals raping, robbing, assaulting, and harming Americans in other ways to focus this section on those who lost their lives due to our government's failure to protect our states and citizens from invaders.”

The Trump administration has a long way to go to get things where Trump wants them to be, and where the 77 million Americans who voted for him want them to be. But many of these items take time to evolve, and things are moving in the right direction.

Violent protests quite frequently produce terrible results

January 13, 2026

The chaos that developed last year in opposition to the efforts of the Trump administration to remove illegal aliens from the country, especially the dangerous ones, has recently increased substantially. A woman who recently had been obstructing ICE agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota was shot and killed, and in another incident, two illegal aliens were shot by ICE agents when they resisted them.

It is perplexing that so many Americans vigorously oppose the removal of people who are in the country illegally, many of whom are murderers, rapists, drug/child/female traffickers, etc.

And, whatever natural dislike for this action one may have, this anti-law enforcement attitude has been intensified by the actions and vile messages of many prominent Democrats. Some serve in Congress, others are state governors, city or town mayors, political candidates, or celebrities.

The Babylon Bee, a mostly satirical and humorous website, posted an article about this. This situation is not funny. Particularly when people — either protesters or law enforcement personnel — are injured or killed. However, part of the article is not funny, and actually describes how some on the political left view this situation.

“Following recent ICE-related shootings, Democrat leaders stepped forward to remind the nation that everything would be much safer if law enforcement would just stop enforcing the law.

“According to Democrat lawmakers, the recent spate of violence and rioting could all have been avoided if law enforcement agents had just avoided conflict and sought peaceful resolutions by not preventing criminals from continuing to break the law.”

In their effort to end the valid removal of persons in the country illegally — a crime — protesters have well exceeded the U.S. Constitution’s protection of the people “peaceably to assemble,” leaving behind the idea of peaceful assembly. These protests are more appropriately labeled “riots.” They focus on interfering with law enforcement personnel, and often physical contact with them is part of trying to stop them from carrying out their duties.

There have been other such activities in our past, like those of the late 60s and early 70s brought on by the Vietnam War, and other things. Those gatherings started as peaceful protests but degenerated into riots with violence. However, these events started with inappropriate and illegal behavior.

In addition to the physical efforts to prevent law enforcement personnel from doing their job, these supporters of illegal aliens are threatening the agents, physically attacking them, doxing and vilifying them, and threatening their families, forcing them to wear masks.

As law enforcement tries to remove illegal aliens from the country to make it safer, these radical people are making things less safe and secure in an effort to stop them.

The woman who died was 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good. Those who support blocking efforts to deport illegal aliens described her as a terrified mother and poet who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Evidence suggests that description is inaccurate.

She was driving with her wife — her lesbian partner, identified as Becca Good — in the Minneapolis neighborhood where the active ICE operation was being conducted. She stopped her SUV diagonally across the road, deliberately blocking traffic. 

In a video, ICE agents are shown approaching Good’s SUV and issuing lawful orders for her to exit the car. She remained in the driver’s seat.

The video shows that her expression was not one of fear, but one resembling defiance. At the same time, Becca Good taunted the officers from behind the vehicle, saying, “You want to come at us? I say go get yourself some lunch, big boy.”

The officer who ultimately fired the fatal shot was wearing a video camera. The video shows Good backing the SUV up a little bit. She briefly made direct eye contact with the agent, who was then standing in front of the SUV, and then gunned the engine, and moved forward. Shots were then fired.

There have been opinions offered that the agent is alive and not seriously injured because of how he reacted. He was in danger and acted to protect himself, they say.

Renee and Becca Good, and others, were there specifically to interfer with ICE agents who were doing their job. They were there to create confrontation with law enforcement. And that is exactly what happened.

Becca Good, near the SUV where her spouse died, blamed herself for her having been killed. Speaking to a bystander who came to see what the commotion was, she replied, “I made her come down here, it’s my fault,” she said. “They just shot my wife.”

Most people do not want to see law enforcement personnel or protesters be injured or die. It is sad that Renee Good died. 

However, it is not difficult to prevent things like this from happening. If people want to protest what law enforcement is doing, they should do that peacefully, like carrying signs or chanting. But do not be involved in illegally interfering with law enforcement personnel performing their legal duties.

This woman’s tragic death and the injury to the ICE agent should be a lesson and a warning to those who may want to criminally interfere with law enforcement in the future.

Every New Year offers many opportunities for improvement

January 6, 2026

As we begin 2026, the 250th year of our country’s existence, and we look at the current state of affairs, we realize how far the country has moved away from our original values and traditions. Many wonder if the country can possibly move back to the traditions and values that made it great. And will it? 

Quite a few troubling things have happened in recent years. One of the most recent is the election of Zohran Mamdani as the Mayor of New York City. He identifies as a Shia Muslim and a democratic socialist. And he took the oath of office on the Islamic Quran when he was sworn in early on January 1, not on the Bible, as is customary.

He is not the first Muslim to serve in public office, of course, but is the first one to serve as New York’s mayor. He ran on and was elected on a radical, non-traditional platform of socialist/communist concepts. Yet he had wide support in the election, showing that lots of New Yorkers are fully behind his heavy socialist/communist beliefs and intentions, which run contrary to the traditions of America.

We have seen this attitude of moving away from traditions creep into education, resulting in many students graduating from high school underprepared for college or life in general. School systems and teachers improperly made changes in curricula and grading standards, and that has produced students with lower abilities, and non-traditional, and often inaccurate, beliefs.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in 2025 showed some of the worst scores ever. As reported in Newsmax magazine, some of those results are: 

* High school seniors reading comprehension is the worst since the early 1990s.

*More high school seniors were deficient in math and reading than in any previous NAEP assessment.

* High School seniors recorded their lowest scores ever.

* Only one in three U.S. high school seniors is adequately prepared for college math.

Perhaps as a result of these less well-prepared graduating seniors, many colleges and universities dropped using SAT or ACT scores for undergraduate admissions. Because so many students’ scores were below the acceptable level, admission requirements had to be eased, or students would not be admitted. Students were then admitted based on elements other than their academic abilities and learning level, such as the much loved, but dangerously foolish DEI concept — diversity, equity and inclusion.

Speaking to the change in the educational culture over recent years, Brian Mueller, president of Grand Canyon University in Phoenix, Arizona, noted that “It’s very dangerous when we have 20- and 21-year-olds in our country who don’t understand 20th-century Western civilization and its history.”

And, there is a generation gap where younger generations have different ideas about such things as work ethic, moral values, the respect they show others, political views, religious beliefs, free speech, and marriage and having children.

Where crime is concerned, people’s attitudes towards dealing with criminals is somewhat troublesome. A poll in 2025 asking about the best way to fight crime showed that only 25 percent of respondents thought tougher sentencing was the most effective way to reduce crime. More mental health and addiction services were preferred by 28 percent, 22 percent liked a greater police presence as the best approach, and 16 percent thought more community programs were best. Harsh punishment for serious crimes is a better support for law and order.

The high number of violent crimes — such as murder, rape, and assault — committed by persons previously convicted of crimes, but given light sentences, or no sentences, ought to be a wake-up call to the soft-on-crime prosecutors and judges in office, of which there are far too many. Hopefully, it will be.

During the Biden administration the Justice Department indicted Venezuelan “President” Maduro and his wife for crimes against America, offered a huge reward for his capture, but nothing happened. Last weekend, the Trump administration sent military and law enforcement personnel there and arrested the Maduros after those crimes continued in Trump’s first year of office, despite warnings and actions to stop the drug boats smuggling drugs into the U.S. 

Venezuelans in Venezuela, America and all over the world, are thrilled and celebrating that the man who ruined their country and their lives has been arrested. But American leftists are outraged, either not knowing or not caring that similar actions have been legally and constitutionally taken by former presidents Biden, Obama, Clinton and both George Bushes.

There are some signs of returning to the better days. In higher education, for example, civics and traditional American values are showing up, again. Harvard, Brown and Princeton universities are tightening up acceptance requirements. 

Law professor Jonathon Turley commented that those changes to lower standards was an “ill-conceived and poorly supported movement to achieve greater equity and diversity by eliminating standardized testing in higher education.” “In other words, test scores remain the best indicator for continued performance in college,” Turley added.

If our country is to remain strong and the leader of the world in individual freedom and sensible, productive ways of doing things, we must restore the traditional values that built the nation and successfully sustained it for more than 200 years.

As 2025 ends, we should be thrilled that it isn’t like 2024

December 30, 2025

President Donald Trump’s critics are complaining that the world is ending because not everything he campaigned on has been completed. And his popularity is suffering.

But the facts say otherwise: inflation is down significantly, the markets are up, GDP is growing, borders are far more secure, and trade is booming.

Another of the good things that Trump worked on was to end or reduce conflicts between countries. And agreements have been achieved between Israel and Gaza; Israel and Iran; the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda; Armenia and Azerbaijan; India and Pakistan; Thailand and Cambodia; and Egypt and Ethiopia.

Trump has had a varying degree of involvement with resolving these conflicts, being more involved in some than with others. But he has done quite a lot to broker peace among nations in conflict. And, he has been credited for his role by nearly all of these nations.

Crime analyst Jeff Asher has said the United States is on track for the largest one-year drop in murders ever recorded. He cited year-over-year data from the Real Time Crime index showing that the murder rate has decreased nationally from 2024 to 2025 by almost 20 percent.

The growth rate of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2024 was just slightly higher than recessionary levels, a pitiful 2.4 percent. However, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis tells us that by the third quarter of 2025 — the last complete quarter — the rate was 4.2 percent. This shows that the economic policies of the Trump administration have increased the growth rate of GDP by 79 percent over the last year of the pathetic Biden administration. 

This was accomplished in less than a full year, and the Trump team calls this an historic economic achievement.

The Washington Examiner reported that since Trump took office about 595,000 illegal aliens have been arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) between Jan. 20 and Dec. 11, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

According to ICE, 70 percent, or approximately 416,000 illegals, had "criminal convictions or pending criminal charges" in the United States. This supports Trump’s promise to focus on getting the "worst of the worst.”

ICE officials also noted that even those without criminal records in the U.S. can still pose threats to public safety, saying that many are wanted for violent crimes in other countries, or are tied to gangs, terrorism and serious crimes.

And, illegal border crossings are at the lowest level ever recorded, according to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem.

“In President Trump’s first year back in office, more than 2.5 million illegal aliens have left the U.S. because of the Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration, including an estimated 1.9 million self-deportations and more than 622,000 deportations,” as reported on the DHS website.

As deportations — both voluntary and by government — continue, and border security virtually stops illegal entry, the country is much safer. Murders, rapes, drug and child trafficking and other crimes caused by illegal aliens are much less common now.

Gas prices in 2024 were averaging around $3 per gallon for regular. Today, that per gallon average price is $2.85, but some much lower prices are available. Prices are as low as $2.25 in some places.

It should be recognized that reducing prices is much more difficult and takes longer than raising prices. Prices can be raised at any time, and for no reason at all. Lowering prices, however, depends on other factors, such as the price of components used in producing products, transportation costs, and economic conditions, and can take a fairly long time.

Some good things have happened in 2025.

And now for something completely different.

One of the bright spots for many people is following the comments of Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana. He has a way with words that is certainly entertaining.

Some examples:

“For my first eight years I lived in a small, overpriced one-bedroom apartment. … I would describe the design aesthetic as ‘early Salvation Army.’” 

“Either way, I have to dodge reporters, who are like stray dogs — once you feed them, you can’t get rid of them. … Reporters are also like hyenas. They hunt in packs.”

“This amendment is all Henry and no Kissinger.”

“But it’s undeniable that many Americans believe that the brain is an amazing organ — it starts working in the mother’s womb and doesn’t stop until you get elected to Congress.”

“For as long as I can remember, one thing has been true about me: I have the right to remain silent, but not the ability.”

“Welfare, I believe, was meant to be a bridge, not a parking lot.”

“Most nights, when I come home to my little Capitol Hill apartment, I’ve got two wheels down and my axle dragging.”

“Put another way, you don’t have to be crazy to serve in the Senate; they will happily train you.”

“I observed to a reporter one time that you can lead a person to Congress but you can’t make him think.”

“Maybe it’s because we both understand that you can’t make everyone happy unless you are alcohol.”

Happy New Year!

Some areas of controversy of 2025 will continue into 2026

December 23, 2025

As the end of 2025 draws near, there are a few things of interest that will still be with us after the New Year arrives.

There is a proposed $6.2 billion merger of two large media organizations, Nexstar and Tegna. If this deal goes through, the merged company would be the largest TV organization in the country, and would reach more than 80 percent of U.S. households. 

Opposing the merger are some conservative groups, including the Conservative Political Action Conference, Newsmax, and the Zionist Organization of America. Their argument opposes the huge degree of coverage the company would have, viewing it as a threat to viewpoint diversity, particularly at the local news level.

On their side is the Telecommunications Act of 1996, amended in 2004, which limits the degree of television ownership at 39 percent, which is slightly less than half of the 80 percent level of ownership the merger would represent.

The Federal Communications Commission Chairman (FCC), Brendan Carr, has supported raising the cap, which would allow the merger to go through.

However, a legal analysis by appellate scholars titled "The FCC Lacks Statutory Authority to Revise the Telecommunications Act's 39% National Ownership Cap for Television” concludes that the FCC does not have the authority to raise, eliminate, or waive the long-standing 39 percent cap. Only Congress has the authority to make such changes, the analysis states.

Given what we have seen in the news and on social media involving the controlling of certain ideas that the media organizations dislike, having one giant voice that covers 80 percent of the country is a very dangerous prospect.

And, as we have seen, questionable court actions have only added to the concerns that our legal system is sometimes driven more by politics than it is by the law and the Constitution. This trend may continue in 2026.

Federal district judges have been issuing orders with nationwide effect. One example: U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered President Donald Trump’s administration to immediately halt efforts to remove criminal illegal aliens until he has more time to consider whether Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act was illegal. And, there are other instances where a district judge has also intervened in a presidential action.

There are 94 federal judicial districts and each one has at least one district judge, who is appointed for a life term. In total there are more than 670 federal district judges in the U.S. And as some of these judges see it, each of them, having judicial authority over a very small area of the country, somehow has the power to overrule the President of the United States.

A theory on what has led to many judges making rulings and taking other actions beyond their actual authority is the existing assumption that judges hold absolute immunity for their actions. There are cases where obvious errors and deliberately improper actions by judges have been ignored. Judicial immunity has been awarded to judges by other judges.

However, in a fairly recent 6-3 ruling stemming from Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship, the court said nationwide injunctions issued by district court judges "likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts."

"Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them," said Justice Amy Coney Barrett, author of the opinion.

"When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too," Barrett said in the opinion joined by five other justices on the court.

Unwanted pregnancies that are ended by abortion is a topic that is frequently in the news. Many people favor abortion, and many others oppose it. There is a great deal of emotion on both sides of that discussion.  

This part of the column is not about abortion, per se; it does not speak for it or against it. It is to address a fairly recent and very serious related issue.

Nine states — including New Mexico, Colorado, Minnesota, Maryland, and Oregon, plus the District of Columbia — already allow abortion up to the moment of birth.

California passed a bill that would allow infants to be “aborted” up to 28 days after birth, and Governor Gavin Newsom signed it. Maryland tried to pass a similar law, but it was defeated.

A language device used to “justify” this horrific idea is replacing the term “prenatal” in the written law with the term “perinatal.” “Prenatal” means before birth, but “perinatal” includes a period after birth. This subtle change legalizes infanticide, or murdering newborn children.

How any of us may feel about abortion, this is not permissible or acceptable. It is more than a little frightening to learn that some people in this country would try to justify killing living babies. Could this conceivably be extended to a full year, or more?

While there are other on-going problems in the country, it is possible that one or more of the three issues discussed will be resolved next year. Certainly, we can cross our fingers for that.

Venezuela’s actions deserve the attention they’ve been getting

December 16, 2025

The Trump administration’s efforts to stop drug-laden boats from Venezuela from reaching the U.S. has drawn heavy opposition from Congressional and other Democrats. These are the same Democrats who fiercely defend illegal aliens being in the country, which is a rather strange conflict of interests.

It appears from their reactions to the two topics that the Democrats are more concerned with illegals being deported than they are with Americans being killed by illicit drugs that are smuggled into the country.

And a recent action in the seizing of a Venezuelan oil tanker has added fuel to the Democrat’s fire.

Among the Democrats who have concerns about this is Sen. Chris Coons from Delaware, who said on NewsNation that he is “gravely concerned that [Trump] is sleepwalking us into a war with Venezuela.” Coons is the ranking member on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, and said that he has not received anything from the administration regarding a potential war with Venezuela.

This same concern was expressed by Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky. Paul thinks the seizure could increase tensions between the U.S. and Venezuela. The libertarian senator, who is a sometimes critic of the Trump administration, added that it isn’t “the job of the American government to go looking for monsters around the world, looking for adversaries, and beginning wars.”

However, other GOP senators had a different response to the event, saying they were awaiting more information. Republican Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri, Jon Husted of Ohio and Roger Marshall of Kansas commented that they did not know the specifics of the seizure. 

Hawley said, as he walked into an elevator, “I will look into it.” Husted commented that he had been in meetings and was not able have been briefed on the matter. And Marshall said that the seizure is “news to me,” but that the U.S. “should be pushing back on Venezuela.” He said that he is “concerned about the drug cartel that is running” the South American country.

The administration offered information that somewhat clarifies its position on the matter. Attorney General Pam Bondi released a video of the seizure on X (formerly Twitter). She commented that the FBI, Homeland Security, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Pentagon had executed the seizure warrant on the tanker, because it was transporting sanctioned oil from Venezuela and Iran.

The sanction was due to Venezuela’s “involvement in an illicit oil shipping network supporting foreign terrorist organizations,” Bondi said.

Adding to Bondi’s comments, White House deputy assistant Sebastian Gorka said on Newsmax’s "Rob Schmitt Tonight" that the tanker is part of a growing "shadow fleet" of vessels evading sanctions and breaching international law.

"This is a member of a shadow fleet," he said. "The attempts to evade sanctions, and also to just do an end run around international law with flags of convenience — we're not going to allow this anymore."

"So, whether it's Venezuela or whether it's other countries like Iran that are making money in ways that are illegal and counter to the U.S. national interest, as elucidated so very, very eloquently in the president's national security strategy that we published on Friday, we are very serious," Gorka continued.

He warned that the U.S. will be on the watch for any and all illegal maritime operations, including narcotics smuggling, and oil tankers operating in violation of sanctions.

"Whether it's drug boats, whether it's illegal tankers, we're going to take action where we see fit and where it threatens our national security interests as the United States," he said.

Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz commented that the seizure indicates it is “a bad idea to be a drug trafficker,” but said he did not anticipate the U.S. being in a war with Venezuela. 

While Cruz did not respond to a question regarding whether the president should ask Congress to declare war, he did say that, “If you’re a narcotrafficker, and you’re thinking about getting on a speedboat that is filled with a bunch of cocaine, you’re having second thoughts right now because President Trump is saving the lives of Americans.”  

“The poison that Maduro is flooding into this country is killing Americans and President Trump is fulfilling his responsibility as commander in chief, by saying we’re going to stop this poison that’s killing our kids,” he added.

Democrats are great at one thing: criticizing Donald Trump. It appears they will go to any lengths, use any criticism to try to make Trump look bad. And, apparently it doesn’t matter to them if they turn their backs on the harm that illegal aliens and their counterparts in rogue nations cause, in order to cast aspersions on Trump and his administration.

And let us not forget that so much of this craziness is the direct result of the foolish and dangerous policies of the Biden/Harris administration in ignoring the border crashing by illegals and the death and destruction they brought along with them.

The Trump administration is focused on things that need to be dealt with to restore the country’s national security and other assets. Slowly but surely things should improve. We should applaud this, not criticize it.