Conservative Conversation + Podcasts

Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.

Think You’re Up to Date on All the Challenges to the 2020 Election? Think Again.


A good and dear friend of ours, who just happened to have also been one of the best lawyers ever produced by the Louisiana Bar, Mike Walker (a most worthy adversary, and I have the scars to prove it!), recently sent out a message about an invaluable treasure trove of information about the 2020 Election and offered his own analysis of the findings of that study. The website he referenced can be accessed here, and I cannot recommend it too highly, especially for those of us, and I include myself in that number, who thought we were well informed about( a) the totality of the irregularities in that election and the number of legal actions taken to try to remedy those problems and (b) just how blatant the mainstream media lies about the suits filed by or on behalf of President Trump really were and how corruptly inaccurate they were in their incessant bleating about the fact that they were all, or almost all, about claims of fraud.

Here are the highlights of Mike’s analysis:

It’s raining, and I’m recuperating from back surgery.  So out of sheer boredom, I got to looking around on the internet, prompted primarily the Stasi raid on Trump and the hit on Rep. Scott Perry.   ….

I’ve gotten real tired of hearing from the media that Trump/Trump supporters have “lost every lawsuit brought to challenge the election” and that there has never been any evidence of fraud produced to maintain these suits.  Well, as a Supreme Court Justice once said, “There are liars, damned liars, and there are God-damned liars.”  Put the media and the Dems behind Door #3.

If you go to, you will find an excellent breakdown of all election cases filed to date, with tabular descriptions of all 2020 Presidential Election-Related Lawsuits.   A physicist by the name John Droz, Jr., compiled it  apparently aided by a group calling itself “Promoting American Election Integrity,” whose website contains this and a number of other reports offered in an effort directed toward advocating making voting easy and cheating hard.  What you will find is very granular—the author(s) put a lot of painstaking research into this project—but the takeaways put the lie to the popular version advanced by the media, that there has been nothing but failure for interests seeking to challenge elections.  Examples:

–there have been 92 decisions, but only 30 decided on the merits;

–of those 30, 22 were decided favorably to Trump/GOP or Trump interests;

–5 cases involved Trump, his campaign, or the GOP as a or the defendant;

–of those 5, 4 were decided on the merits, 3 favorably to GOP defendants.

The other 62 cases did not reach adjudication on the merits.  Primary among them were dismissals for lack of standing (i.e., voter who filed as plaintiff had never registered to vote), mootness (the complaint resolved without the court’s intervention), the complaint was untimely or subject to the defense of laches (whoever filed it waited too long or conditions had evolved making it manifestly unfair to allow the lawsuit to go to decision), jurisdiction (court found it had no legal authority to entertain the claim) or ripeness (the condition complained of had not evolved to the point causing injury which could be addressed by the court).

What inspired me to write this, though, is that mainstream reporting has disingenuously invited the public to believe that all of the election-related cases sought to throw out election results due to fraud, and resulted in courts’ rejection of that allegation.  Another complete and utter falsehood.  Of the cases dismissed or withdrawn for mootness, lack of standing, etc., the claims were in large part objections to poll observer access; requests to sequester ballots until after election day; failure of the state to enforce absentee ballot deadlines; use of unreliable voting machines; legality of no-excuse absentee voting; and unsolicited mailing of absentee voter registration applications, to name those comprising the majority of the claims.  Thus, the media would have you believe that Trump interests/GOP went to trial on whether cheating had occurred to such an extent that the vote totals were illicitly skewed in Biden’s favor.  To the contrary, every one of the 92 cases dealt with election rules, voters, machines or processes, and very few got to the merits on those.  But NONE ever adjudicated a claim that elections were thrown to Biden through fraud, as the media would have you believe.  The issue has simply never been tried.  Of the 92 cases filed, 51 were about election rules; 33 were about election processes; 3 were about voters’ qualifications or fulfillment of state law requirements for voting; and 6 were about voting machines.  While these 6 conceivably might have decided the issue of whether fraud had changed the election outcome, none of them ever got to the merits; some are still pending.  One, O’Rourke v. Dominion, which conceivably could have gotten to the stage where the court would opine on whether skullduggery had in fact taken place, was couched as a civil rights action on behalf of 160 million voters seeking damages against Dominion, Facebook,  Mich. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer,  Ga. Secy. of State Raffensperger, and a host of other public officials around the country.  On a Motion to Dismiss, the court found that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim for relief legally cognizant under civil rights law and therefore lacked standing to bring the suit.  The case was thrown out without ever getting to the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims.  Trump/GOP were not plaintiffs in this suit.  BUT THAT IS THE CLOSEST ANY CASE HAS COME TO A COURT DECIDING THE “ISSUE OF ELECTION FRAUD.”

I send this primarily because I keep talking to people who seem to think that every case which has involved election issues was filed by Trump and resulted in a court holding that there was no evidence of fraud, or that the election was not stolen.  Such a perception is a stunning win for the Dems and their media, in that they have fooled a significant portion of the population.  They are, as Gingrich said yesterday, “Bad people doing bad things.”  So maybe I’m just behind the curve and everyone already knows what I’ve set forth above, but I don’t get that impression from the people I’ve spoken with.

Recently, I stumbled upon news about the creation of a truly wretched group in DC (dare I say: but I repeat myself?) named The 65 Project, created to try to get every lawyer who represented President Trump disbarred, suspended, or disciplined in some way for having the ghastly temerity to advance a client’s cause in a Court of Law. My post about this group can be accessed here, and I noted the name was based on what they understood was the number of cases filed by President Trump, every one of which, according to these Masters of the Universe, was unsuccessful for some reason or other. Here is the way it describes its purpose:

Right after the 2020 election, Trump’s Big Lie Lawyers filed 65 lawsuits across swing states to overturn the legitimate election results. Finding the assertions baseless and riddled with false statements, Republican and Democratic appointed judges uniformly dismissed the lawsuits.

Once you read this analysis, you will more fully appreciate the depths of depravity to which so many of our “betters” have sunk. The above statement is, quite simply, one lie after another, a fact that will become crystal clear after you read this set of factual reports on the actual cases filed regarding the 2020 Election.

As I am technologically still residing in the Paleolithic Era, I was unable to include the entire graphic analyzing the cases and their disposition, but I urge all, with full credit and appreciation noted to the group “Promoting American Election Integrity” and to friend Mike for unearthing this invaluable source, to go to the link above and study this report for yourself. It will be time well spent in readying yourself for the inevitable jousting with the stalwarts of the regime, a thankless task if ever there was one.

God Bless America!

When Is ‘Enough’ Enough? A President’s Home Violated by the FBI


Could this be “the tipping point” we hear about all the time? This has never happened in American history:

Question: if you were trying to foment a Second Civil War in America, what would you do differently from what these street thugs are doing right now? I write this after learning of the FBI’s training materials teaching agents to be on the lookout for “Militia Violent Extremists” who revere the Betsy Ross Flag, the Gadsden Flag, the Molon Labe flag, and who view Ashli Babbitt as a martyr. I am all of those and more and have researched and written extensively about why it is clear that Ashli Babbitt was murdered by Pelosi’s lackey on January 6.

No President in our history has been subject to this kind of blatant, raw, Gestapo-like use of blind force. I am very concerned about this act of what is clearly an out-of-control renegade law enforcement agency, deeply corrupted by political influence, and led by one of the sleaziest Directors in its history. In fact, it may trigger some of those who are devoted to President Trump and what he accomplished for us into some retaliatory action the nature of which cannot possibly be predicted, not even by “geniuses” such as Director Wray and the Drooler-in-Chief.

In my opinion, for what it’s worth, this is a dangerous moment for our country, as if we don’t have quite enough on our plate due to the monumental incompetence and radicalism of this Potemkin “Presidency,” and I fear, based on the evidence as I see it, we are more rapidly than most citizens realize moving into the beginnings of a real police state.

Pray for America.

God Bless America!

The Pollyanna Reports, II


Reason # i,517 to like the best Governor in America! Our Governor, Ron DeSantis, clearly in my totally non-objective and absolutely biased opinion, the best Governor, by far, in America, has very publicly fired one of George Soros’ hand-picked DA’s who decided what laws he would and would not enforce. And publicly announcing it the way he did is the best way to start getting all this woke [ ] under some kind of control and we can only hope that some of the other Republican governors will have the backbone DeSantis did in the way he handled this rogue “prosecutor” in Tampa. I started to use another anatomical reference but that would eliminate some other good governors such as the Governor of South Dakota.

Here is part of the Governor’s press release:

TAMPA, Fla.— Today, Governor Ron DeSantis suspended State Attorney Andrew Warren of the 13th Judicial Circuit due to neglect of duty. The Governor has the authority to suspend a state officer under Article IV, Section 7 of the Constitution of the State of Florida. The Governor has appointed Susan Lopez to serve as State Attorney for the period of suspension. She has most recently been serving as a Judge on the Hillsborough County Court. To view the order suspending Andrew Warren and appointing Susan Lopez, click here.

“State Attorneys have a duty to prosecute crimes as defined in Florida law, not to pick and choose which laws to enforce based on his personal agenda,” said Governor Ron DeSantis. “It is my duty to hold Florida’s elected officials to the highest standards for the people of Florida. I have the utmost trust that Judge Susan Lopez will lead the office through this transition and faithfully uphold the rule of law.”

More specifics on the hubris displayed by this Soros-created monstrosity of a public official are spelled out in this article from Just the News:

In June of last year, Warren “signed a letter saying that he would not enforce any prohibitions on sex change operations for minors,” DeSantis said during the press conference; elsewhere, Warren also “signed a letter saying he would not enforce ANY laws relating to protecting the right to life in the state of Florida,” the governor added.

As a longtime actual trial lawyer, a phrase used to distinguish what we did from “billboard” and “TV” “lawyers, in a time long, long ago, I am continually astonished that a member of the Bar — ANY member of the Bar — would be arrogant enough to take it upon themselves to decide which laws they simply would not enforce. I knew, and dealt with, some very arrogant lawyers (and, sad to say, Judges), and some of my adversaries almost certainly applied that label to me from time to time. However, acknowledging the effect of the passage of (much) time, I do not recall any of them suggesting we should just ignore a law, any law, at any time. It seems that Mr. Warren, like so many far-leftists, learned nothing from the recall of the Marxist DA in San Francisco and what appears to be the coming recall of the nutcase DA in Los Angeles due to their picking and choosing what laws they would or would not enforce.

We thank our lucky stars every single day that we have a Governor with the strength to do what no other Governor, to my knowledge, has done, and we applaud him for taking this one small step in rescuing the Rule of Law from the woke mob of Social Justice warriors!

Thank you, Governor DeSantis!


God Bless America!

Trump’s Virtues: An Important Speech


Very short and very challenging food for thought. I was drawn to read the entire piece and that proved to be a most rewarding exercise as it introduced me to an excellent short talk on the virtues of Donald Trump and why we shouldn’t be turning our backs on him at this early stage of the 2024 Presidential Campaign. Here, before linking to the video itself, is the opening paragraph of the article, which can be found here:

I recently wrote a column about why I believed Trump should not run in 2024. I was wrong. I allowed my distaste for Trump’s personality to override his virtues, which are considerable. Some people want Trump without his vices. I was among them — until yesterday, when I watched and listened to Tom Klingenstein’s speech titled “Trump’s virtues.”  It was masterful and shamed me that I did not make the distinction between Trump’s character and his virtues, the former being deeply flawed, the latter being almost perfect. I need to man up in my defense of the former President’s virtues. The speech was among the most pointed I have heard and deserves some exposure. Klingenstein says:

Other Republicans say some version of “I like Trump policies but I don’t like the rest of him.” This gets it almost backwards. Although Trump advanced many important policies, it is the ‘rest of him’ that contains the virtue that inspires the movement… Trump was born for the current crisis, a life and death struggle against a totalitarian enemy I call woke communism… that control all the cultural and economic powers in America…

[Trump] revealed, not caused, the divide in this country. In war, you must make a stand… Trump is a manly man… traditional manhood, even when flawed, is absolutely essential… Trump plays to win… There are no clean hands in a fistfight…Trump is unreservedly, unquestionably pro-America… Trump is a refreshing break from the guilt and self-loathing that marks our age…

How wonderful it is to hear a speaker in this age of wokeness and cowardly cancellation for saying the “wrong” thing, i.e., something not within the approved narrative of the Ruling Elite come right out and refer to someone as “a manly man”! I must admit I had to go back and rerun that part of the video I enjoyed hearing it so much! I am sending this video along not in the interest of starting any kind of debate about the 2024 election as it is far too early to be joining that battle. I am, however, sending it along as I think it represents a very valuable contribution to that future debate and the decision we will all be required to make in the future. I hope you find it as interesting and illuminating as I did.

God Bless America!

Starting a Tyranny? Job One: Kill All The Lawyers!


“Something Wicked This Way Comes.”

There is a movement afoot, launched by denizens of The Swamp who stealthily slithered out from their dark waters, which is extremely dangerous to the future of the Rule of Law in America. To those who may be saying or thinking something right now to the effect of “just another tale of woe from another lawyer about lawyers — who cares?”, I would ask that you recall when you or a family member or a close friend really needed a good lawyer to advocate for your cause, whatever it might have been. I would wager that one of your first requirements, if the matter was a contentious one as many are by the time they get to the lawyer’s office, was that the lawyer “fight like hell” for your side of the case. And that he or she fight for you against all obstacles no matter what his or her own personal beliefs might be about your cause. It is highly unlikely that you narrowed your field of choices to members of a certain political party, lawyers who wore red hats or blue hats, lawyers who checked off certain “identity boxes” so prevalent these days as most likely none of these artificial “qualities” mattered in the slightest to your selection of an attorney.

Shakespeare’s Misunderstood High Praise of Lawyers.

The line usually cited about the roles of lawyers is from Shakespeare: “the first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.” Rarely is enough context given when that line is offered in support of those who hate lawyers for a realization that it is one of the most highly complimentary statements ever made about the legal profession; but that’s for another day. For those who might wish to look further into it, and explore how Dick the Butcher was actually saying that if a tyranny (such as that of Cade) is to succeed, the first thing the tyrant must do is get rid of all the lawyers, see here and here.

A Man For All Seasons Explains Why We -and The Devil- Need Lawyers.

However, to me this passage from A Man For All Seasons by Robert Bolt paints a vivid picture of what happens when lawyers are removed from society, along with their primary function: to be a warrior for a client’s cause, come hell or high water and to “Never, never, ever give up” as Sir Winston so memorably phrased it. Here is what Sir Thomas More had to say on the subject:

“William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

William Roper: “Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!”

Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”
― Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons

The Tyrannical Thinking Behind the New Movement Threatening The Rule of Law.

While I am no longer in the arena where the battle lines are drawn, the basic foundational principles on which our kind of practice, trial advocacy, was based have remained unchanged. And the move afoot, primarily spearheaded by The 65 Projectis described as:

“A dark money group with ties to Democratic Party heavyweights will spend millions this year to expose and try to disbar more than 100 lawyers who worked on Donald Trump’s post-election lawsuits …”

This kind of thinking is so foreign and antithetical to everything we learned and experienced in many years of trial practice that when I first started reading about this new movement, fueled by far-leftists in the throes of the most extreme form of Trump Derangement Syndrome, I thought it couldn’t possibly be a serious effort on the part of responsible Americans who had even a minimal knowledge of the duties and responsibilities of a lawyer under our legal system. The more I read, the more frightening this Stasi-like organization became and the more obviously evil – I use that word advisedly- the thinking of some of its leaders became.

The Actual Sworn Duties of an Actual Lawyer to a Client.

Before taking a closer look at the bizarre activities of the hatemongers of this despicable “non”-profit, it might help to take a brief look at what are the actual duties of a lawyer to the client, whether the client is Joe the Plumber, Jack the Deplorable Clinger or President Donald J. Trump. Here are the current rules by which we were bound, from the Louisiana Code of Professional Responsibility:

Rule 1.2 [partial]: “… A lawyer shall abide by a client’s decision whether to settle a matter. …”

(b) “A lawyer’s representation of a client, including representation by appointment, does not constitute an endorsement of the client’s political, religious, economic, social or moral views or activities.”

Rule 1.3: “A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.”

Rule 3.1: “A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law. … ”

(Emphasis added.)

Nowhere in these rules is there an exception for lawyers who have the unmitigated gall to actually (!) represent, and -even worse!- advocate for, President Trump, nor a limitation as to the points which may be argued for him- or any client. And one will search in vain to find the words Democrat or Republican, left or right, red or blue, liberal or conservative. They are not there, and hopefully never will be, something The 65 Project is striving mightily to change. If they are successful, our society may well wind up in the situation Sir Thomas More warned Roper about, with all the laws cut down and nothing to protect its citizens from the all-too-rapacious demands of the far left for utter tyranny and subjugation in the true form of 1984 or Kafka’s The Trial. Or, for that matter, to protect its citizens from precisely the kind of despicable and disgraceful treatment to which the Federal Courts in the District of Columbia are subjecting the January 6 defendants, with total disregard for their rights under the Constitution and The Bill of Rights.

The 65 Project: A Clear and Present Danger to the Anglo-American Adversarial System of Law.

To fully appreciate the vile and vicious nature of The 65 Project’s aims, it is only necessary to quote the words of its “Senior Advisor” and apparent founder, David Brock, and here it is necessary that I include a note about that name. I must note, with sorrow, that my Mother’s family name was Brock and we named our Son Brock in honor of the family. My Grandfather, obviously a man of another era with very different standards of personal decency and manners, would have been horrified to learn that this cretin carried his family’s name. Here, with some background on the organization, is the way he describes what they hope to achieve:

Here’s what Brock describes as the mission of his project: “[Project 65] will not only bring the grievances in the bar complaints but shame them and make them toxic in their communities.” According to Axios, Brock’s plan is nothing less than a war of the strong against the weak: “I think the littler fish are probably more vulnerable to what we’re doing… You’re threatening their livelihoods. And you know, they’ve got reputations in their local communities.”

Give Brock points for honesty, at least. Not everyone has the guts to gloat about being pure evil. Project 65 is torn right from the playbook of Saul Alinsky (“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it”): Shame lawyers, plague them with hefty legal bills, and especially pick off ones who are less famous and backed by fewer resources. Given all that, it’s better to call Project 65 Project Shame, Project Fear, or the Project of Personal Destruction. And wait, why is it even called Project 65? Because (groan) that’s the number of lawsuits filed to support the “Big Lie,” of course.

One must ask: Who appointed David Brock to be some kind of deity with the power to “shame” his fellow Americans and to threaten their livelihoods, by which they feed and clothe and keep a roof over the heads of their family? The hubris involved in such a statement may fairly be called breathtaking, but it is typical of the mindset of the “Masters of the Universe” in Washington these days. And it is also fair to ask who gave this person (?) and others like him in the leadership of The 65 Project the power to deem those even raising questions about the legitimacy of the 2020 election guilty of “spreading The Big Lie”? I appreciate, regretfully, that there is such a deep and abiding hatred of President Trump that it has affected the mental health of many on the left—and the right, a/k/a NTers- but the idea that one cannot even advance arguments to that effect have been, until recently, unknown in our society.

I should also note that the article from which the above quote was taken was authored by Jeffrey Clark, former Assistant Attorney General of the United States, who has recently been the subject of an ethics charge by the District of Columbia Bar. A cursory review of the report outlining the charges against him, which can be found here, bear the faint aroma, to be kind about it, of a pure vendetta as they relate to a research document in the form of a letter he drafted for his superiors at the DOJ which was never sent. One must ask: is faulty research now the stuff of disbarment? If so, I am thankful my research memoranda are not being examined by the ghouls of The 65 Project or I would be a goner.

Who Are The Targets of The 65 Project?

It has filed many ethics complaints in several states and the targets, as outlined in one of the first articles about the group, fall into three categories:

  • Trump’s legal inner circle, including lawyers such as campaign hands Jenna Ellis and Boris Epshteyn and post-election lawyers like Sidney Powell and Joe DiGenova.
  • Lawyers who signed on as “alternate electors,” who planned to submit their names to the Electoral College in lieu of legitimate elector slates if Trump-aligned legal challenges succeeded.
  • Licensed attorneys who participated in or were present at the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Before examining these claims a bit closer, it should not have to be said that conduct such as a lawyer lying to a Court in a document filed in the record of any matter, for example, should be punished to the full extent of any applicable ethical rules. An example of this would be the FBI lawyer who forged documents filed with FISA, received a ludicrously light discipline by the DC Bar and is now back in practice with his license fully restored. Maybe not a perfect fit for our discussion, but that definitely is the kind of blatant conduct which should be addressed by the Bar.

But, and it is a critically important “but” in this discussion, arguing various positions for a client, even if those are unpopular or are viewed as “frivolous” or a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law, are permissible, in the latter case, expressly permitted under the Louisiana Rule cited above. If the latter category were a basis for ethical charges, would the Attorney General of Mississippi be in jeopardy of losing his license for arguing, in the Dobbs case, that Roe v. Wade should be overturned? While the answer is obvious, the hypothet is no more outlandish than claiming that an attorney lied to a Court in making arguments based on sworn testimony and affidavits as were made by many of the attorneys targeted by this sleazy group. Examples of —at the minimum – irregularities are legion and are collected, to name just one such publication, in my opinion the best, Mollie Hemingway’s excellent book Rigged.

A very few examples of how far this group is reaching in order to assure no lawyer in his or her right mind will ever agree to represent a client who does not get the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval from the ruling elite may suffice. Cleta Mitchell, a member of the DC Bar with impeccable credentials, is the target of a complaint because she was on a conference call between President Trump and the Georgia Secretary of State. The details are available here on The Project 65 website. Another attorney, Professor John Eastman, whose integrity was, before he became a target for these thought police patrols, unquestioned has today been hit with an ethics charge filed with the Supreme Court for advancing arguments which troubled the elite’s enforcers; it can be accessed here. Another attorney, in Pennsylvania, was charged with an ethical violation because he made an appearance in a Trump lawsuit-in other words, simply signed a document in behalf of Trump. There are a depressingly large number of other examples available.

Possible Bases for Counterattacks Against These Thought Police Enforcers for the Elite.

There are several arguments available to counter these charges, as noted by Mr. Clark’s article:

Their goals run afoul of the First Amendment’s Petition Clause, as often citizens’ petitions for a redress of grievances come in the form of lawsuits.

It can be argued that forming an organization to hound lawyers who served as advocates for Republicans may be a conspiracy to violate the civil rights of the lawyers and their clients.

Counter-complaints can be filed against any 65 Project complainant in his or her own State Bar.

Especially in view of the stated aims, as so graphically stated by one of its own directors, to “shame” and damage the reputations of the targeted attorneys, libel and slander actions could be brought and recent examples have shown these suits can be very, very successful, as in the case of the young student who was slandered by such guardians of the truth as CNN and others.

What is the Future of this Vicious Crusade?

An indication of what could be a powerful backlash against these enforcers is found in a statement of a legal ethics scholar at Fordham University, here:

Some legal scholars have also questioned the 65 Project’s tactics, worrying that their campaign — buttressed by TV ad buys and publicity-heavy rollouts of new complaints — upends the traditionally confidential process for attorney disciplinary proceedings.

”It’s unclear whether the point is to use the publicity and the website and the public nature of it to pressure disciplinary authorities to do something they might not otherwise do,” said Bruce Green, a legal ethics scholar at Fordham University, “or whether the point is to use the filing as a way to publicly shame lawyers.”

While no one knows where this unsavory group will take their campaign of personal destruction or how successful it may be, in the opinion of this “well-seasoned” (euphemism for old) relic of a lawyer, it does seem to me that they have picked some fights with some very competent, very skilled, very able lawyers. Those highly respected lawyers did not get their reputations by being intimidated by the likes of David Brock and his band of hoodlums. In other words, as so memorably exclaimed by Bette Davis long ago, “fasten your seat belts, it’s going to be a bumpy ride!”

God Bless America!

Gomer Pyle: Call Your Office!


Hunter Biden’s indictments may be “delayed.” As Gomer would say: Gollee!

Remember Gomer Pyle? I recalled one of his most famous expressions when I read an article today about possible plans of the Department of [In]Justice to “delay” moving forward with charges against Hunter Biden because of “election year sensitivities.”

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise | You don't say. Well, surprise, surprise, surprise. | image tagged in surprise,gomer pyle | made w/ Imgflip meme maker

Recent reports have repeatedly claimed that the US Attorney in Delaware is “getting closer” to indictments on a number of charges. Every time I heard one of those reports, I just laughed out loud and mentioned the availability of a very valuable bridge for a bargain price. Here’s a bit of the New York Post report of today; I know everyone will have the same reaction I did— Gomer Pyle, call your office!

Word is that the Biden Justice Department is finally getting set to press charges against first son Hunter after long dragging its feet on the probe. But it looks likely the feds will shy from the key issues exposed in The Post’s reporting on Hunter’s laptop to spare Democrats in advance of this year’s midterm elections.


Yet the probe’s dragged on, with neither an indictment nor exoneration — raising eyebrows among legal experts. “It is very unusual, if witnesses have already testified, for the prosecutor to not immediately submit the matter for a vote,” notes former Utah US Attorney Brett Tolman. “The fact that Hunter Biden has not been indicted yet can only be explained by purposeful delay.”

DOJ memos warn of “election year sensitivities” in relation to indictments. Yet the probe has stretched out for years now; there’s been plenty of time to make announcements.


Clearly, there’s no need for “sensitivities” here — unless politics is the motive. Confirmation of that will come if Hunter’s only charged with relatively innocuous gun and tax crimes, with all the selling-Joe’s-influence stuff quietly dropped, and then scores a generous plea deal so Democrats and their media allies can bury the whole scandal again.

Of course, we cannot know whether or not the indictments will proceed as they should considering the overwhelming mountain of evidence in the public domain courtesy of what has to be the most gargantuan ego known to modern science, that of the very personification of the word “entitled,” Hunter Biden. Stranger things have happened, I guess; Nixon went to China and Trump defeated the “inevitable” candidacy of Hildebeast. But, with little items like this article, it seems justifiable to say we have a fairly good idea where this is headed.

If these indictments are made to “go away,” this clearly will be the most rotten, corrupt administration in American history. If indictments are handed down, this will still clearly be the most rotten, corrupt administration in American history.

God Bless America.

Florida or California? Surely, You Jest.


An unapologetic paean to our new home state: Florida!

Author’s Note: While the following discussion will make occasional attempts to be fair and balanced in its analysis and comparisons of these two states, they will probably be fleeting and half-hearted at best. Most of this piece will be almost completely biased, prejudiced, partial, and one-sided, with little or no attempt to be disinterested or objective. My Lady and I love our new home state, and that will certainly be apparent throughout the following article.

Some personal thoughts/impressions about our new home: Keyword: Gratitude.

The Gulf breezes which gave our hometown its name rustling through the pine trees and palm trees around our new home in our wonderful new home state of Florida. The sound of the turtle dove cooing in the late evening shadows. The sounds of silence should be heard by more of our fellow citizens, many of whom occupy what must be called a cauldron of cacophony all their lives. As pleasant as those moments can be, nothing comes close to having that reverie explosively interrupted, as it was a couple of nights ago, by the sound and sight of the Blue Angels flying very low over our deck on their way to a westbound turn for their homeward run up the beach (colloquially known here as a Beach Buzz) to their home at NAS Pensacola after a weekend show (this one was in Michigan). Nothing.

There are many beautiful sunrises around this old orb, but none more beautiful than the one in this photo, taken two blocks from our house:

There are many beautiful beaches as well, but very few can match Pensacola Beach for its sugary sand and clear emerald water:

We see the phrase bandied about “Another day in Paradise” and our version of that credo is “Another day in the bubble” as that really does describe the feeling of gratitude one feels to be able to live in this quiet and tranquil venue. We are about 6-8 minutes from all basic sources of food (the fast variety and groceries), big box stores such as Lowe’s and Walmart, and a few minutes more into the “big town” of Gulf Breeze Proper, for other services such as library, hospital, etc. A couple of minutes from there across Santa Rosa Sound is Pensacola Beach, a magnet for sun-seekers from all over the world.

Did I mention the sunsets? How does one describe these in phrases (sounds?) other than “ahhh” or “ohhh,” or maybe the current acronym OMG! Here is a sample, taken from the balcony of our condo on the beach:

And the people! At the risk of gilding the lily, we feel the people in this area are, by and large (necessary qualification due to the bad apple syndrome), some of the friendliest we have ever encountered in all our travels. In our general area, many of the small neighborhoods have weekly Happy Hours – ours is on Thursday evenings, at the community gazebo, reminiscent of the old bandstands which once graced so many town squares across the country- and the effect on the feeling of neighborliness is amazing, just seeing each other from time to time instead of being hermetically sealed within one’s walls as is the case in so many parts of the country these days.

We here in our northwest corner of Florida, commonly referred to as the Panhandle, are also a very patriotic people, with American flags and service flags aplenty. Here is our contribution to the Red, White, and Blue landscape:

I wanted to share these thoughts, for what they’re worth, as a preamble to those of others who have moved here from other places—we spent most of our life together toiling in the vineyards of the law, based in Baton Rouge—and then a brief look at some boring statistics (sorry) which support my thesis that there is little or no question as to which place to choose.

“A Sunshine State of Mind”

So reads the title of an excellent article by Karol Markowicz, columnist with the New York Post and formerly lifelong native of Brooklyn who made the move to South Florida last year. In her most recent writing about her new home, she opened with these words:

“I thank God for this place.” It might seem a weird thing to say, unapologetically earnest and deeply uncool, but, in Florida, it’s very common to overhear someone saying exactly this. On the beach. By a pool. In a restaurant. At the checkout line at Publix.

Some other phrases you hear a lot: “I wish we had made the move sooner.” “I feel like I’ve added years to my life.” “Living the dream.” “Another day in paradise.”

It is a unique moment in Florida’s history. The feeling of gratitude is very real. Millions of people seem to have woken up one day and decided they had to become Floridians right away. I am among them.

In the course of her discussion, she notes several themes she has discerned among Floridians and we can attest to the veracity of all of them as we are some of the “early adopters” she mentions:

But while I’m comparing: there is a state pride in Florida that I haven’t seen in New York in a long time. “FloGrown” decals on the backs of cars are standard, even in my bluer new south Florida home. I’m from here and you new arrivals better recognize that. Those who got here before the pandemic freedom rush are particularly proud. They discovered the cool band when they were still rocking the local bars. They’re the early adopters, the ones who were right all along.


If the state has a current unifying theory, it’s freedom. The governor talks about it frequently. His campaign merchandise includes caps and flags bearing the phrase “let us alone,” a tribute to a slogan on the first flag of Florida, raised in 1845. It’s the “free state of Florida,” and everyone knows it.


“Welcome to the land of the free,” is another thing Floridians actually say regularly. Glad to be here, I say in response.

Another concise sketch of some of the aspects of the Florida phenomenon came from the always witty and razor-sharp mind of Roger Kimball, writing in The Spectator. In As Goes Floridahe sums it up thusly:

But the Florida example is as much about tone as it is substance. From the tut-tutting of the Covid scolds and the furrowed brows of the enforcers of woke dogma to the experts-know-best sanctimony of this administration’s policymakers, a dreary, mood dominates Joe Biden’s Democratic Party. In Florida, things feel different: more exciting, more open-minded, more optimistic, more American. Perhaps that’s the true significance of Florida today: as a refresher course in all the things that make America great.

As goes Florida…

A very good discussion of the rot and filth of California’s major cities from which their residents are fleeing is found in California and Florida Battle for the Soul of a Nation, written a year ago by Kyle Smith of the New York Post. After describing the repugnant and disgusting scenes in such places as San Francisco, he has this to say about Florida:

Any visitor to Florida can tell you the state simply looks orderly. Florida municipalities use a variety of measures to discourage loitering on the streets, including arresting for trespassing, and it largely works: When was the last time you read about an epidemic of homelessness in Fort Lauderdale?

As a society, we shouldn’t want people sleeping on the streets. If the police stop them from doing so, they’ll either find someone to stay with or report to a shelter. It is an insult to the public for its government to simply ignore concerns about orderly streets out of fear that some advocacy group hoping for a fat payout will denounce its agents as “mean” for denying people the right to set up camp on the streets.

Maintaining basic order and the rule of law is the first duty of government; a healthy society depends on people feeling secure. Secure people are free to pursue their dreams.

“Florida in 2020 feels reminiscent of California in the 1950s,” writes Jacksonville resident Charles C.W. Cooke in National Review, calling it “a place to which ordinary people are flocking in order to take advantage of the nice weather, good economy, open spaces and explosive construction.”

California may be a dynamic and diverse state, but Florida is no slouch in either department, a place where you’re equally likely to meet refugees from socialist Venezuela or socialist New York.

Florida is America’s freest state, according to a Cato Institute survey: No. 1 in fiscal freedom, No. 1 in educational freedom. Cato dubs California one of the least free states and flat-out dubs it “the most cronyist state in the union,” meaning government and its chosen allies work to milk the public purse for all they can.

A few days ago, American Greatness published one of the most thorough pieces on this issue I have seen, and it is worth examining closely as it adds much to the debate at hand. It is Florida or Californiaand it lays out the statistical contrasts quite clearly. Those aspects of the article will be addressed in the section below on boring statistics. For present purposes, however, he has this to say about the themes found in Florida but not in California (or, of course, New York):

When you tally up all these standings, clearly Florida wins hands down. Florida in a recent survey ranked No. 1 on freedom while California came in dead last.

If you were to reproduce these models nationally, Americans would have an easy choice to make. Without even more massive cheating, there is no way Newsom could get over 81 million votes. I doubt he would get six states to swing his way. America would be choosing freedom over government control, honesty over hypocrisy, and economic success over proven disaster.

Lest one gets the mistaken impression that I am now and always have been a California hater, I would note that for years when we traveled to the Golden State with a national legal organization then based in LA (now moved to Dallas), San Francisco was our very favorite city in the USA. It was, in a word, beautiful. What the far-left loons have done to that gorgeous city, where so many hearts were left, and little cable cars climb halfway to the stars, is nothing short of criminal.

Having shared some of my thoughts/feelings and those of others to support my thesis that it’s Florida by a mile over California, it will be helpful to take a quick look at some boring statistics, which will also bear them out.

Boring, but Persuasive, Statistics Proving How Far Ahead of California Florida really is.

“Figures won’t lie” (but liars will figure!), and several recent studies reveal that unless some of those liars persist in lying about these well-researched figures, it is obvious to any objective (important qualifier) observer that there is no comparison between the two states when it comes to cold, hard facts. And, yes, we all know that John Adams famously said, “facts are stubborn things,” but here they are in all their stark reality. I should note that the bulk of these findings are drawn from Florida or California, linked above, with some data being drawn from a publication issued by, California v. Florida- Which State is Better to Live In? 2022 Full Comparison, and an article from the San Jose Mercury News entitled Moving out: California cities are bleeding residents. How long will the trend last?.

The piece linked above opens as follows:

Which will it be come 2024?

Is America going to choose the Florida model or the California way? What if it comes down to Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom versus Republican Governor Ron DeSantis for president of the United States? One has an America First philosophy and the other a socialist one. One works, the other fails, badly. One sees people and businesses moving to the state in droves, the other, people are moving out in record numbers.

Which will it be, if the faceoff occurs? The Sunshine State or the Golden State?

The author then goes through a number of categories and examines the figures relative to each area; here is a summary of those analyses:

On The Economy: Florida job growth: 2.4%. California: 1.2%. Net legal migration for Florida: 1.3%; California: “an astonishingly negative 0.2%. Florida gained a Congressional seat in the last Census; California lost one.

On the Cost of Living: Gas now over an average of $6.50 a gallon and climbing in California; we are paying in the range of $4.40. Housing is, quite simply, unaffordable in California. Median home value (repeat: median!) is approaching $700,000.

On Taxes: this is one of the most often-cited reasons many new Floridians give for their move here. We have no (repeat: no) state income tax at all. Florida ranks fourth lowest in taxes overall in the nation. Tax rates in California are among the highest in the nation, if not clearly the highest of all.

On Crime: California: murders, rapes, and burglary are at all-time highs. Its cities are among the most dangerous and unsafe in the country. Its prosecutors do not enforce the law as witnessed by the recent recall of the Marxist DA of San Francisco. Shoplifting items with a value less than $950 will not be prosecuted. Florida ranks in the middle of all states on crime per thousand; prosecutors actually enforce the law and go after lawbreakers. (Imagine! What a quaint concept!)

On Education: This is one of the brightest spots for Florida, now ranked third in the country; California is not even in the top 20. California’s illiteracy rate is now the same as Mississippi’s, and there is little to no school choice but a great deal of indoctrination around sex, gender, and race (CRT). Florida has banned CRT— in the words of Gov. DeSantis: “We are not spending tax dollars to teach kids to hate our country or to hate each other, and instead we’re placing a renewed emphasis on American civics in our high schools.”

On Environment: Florida has 18 days of unhealthy air a year compared to California’s 201 bad days. Florida has almost no homeless problem; we all see so many images of the homeless taking over large parts of California’s major cities there is no need to repeat that data here.

On Guns: Florida’s right to bear arms is written in the state constitution; it allows concealed and open carry. It has “stand your ground” self-defense laws. As to California, no other state regulates firearms as much as California-the effect of the recent ruling of the Supreme Court on the Second Amendment may have a significant impact on some, or many, of those regulations.

On Abortion: California has probably the most liberal abortion laws in America. It plans to pay women to come there as “abortion tourists.” (I must confess to having never heard that phrase before researching this article; due to my status as a dinosaur, I guess.) Florida has enacted strict abortion laws and only allows the practice up to 15 weeks.

On Financial Stability: Florida is very stable, with a strong bond rating, a balanced budget and liquidity rate of 5.8%. California has a very low bond rating and its liquidity rating is very low.

On Climate: here comes my one passing attempt at some objectivity in favor of California. Florida’s weather, as we can attest, is much more humid than California and is generally warm all year long, with the winter temperatures rarely dropping below 40 degrees. And, of course, we live in “hurricane alley” with the season running from June to November; we can, like so many of our fellow Floridians, attest to the severity of some of these storms and the misery it can inflict upon its residents. California’s overall climate is, on balance, more favorable than Florida’s.

Governor Ron DeSantis: he is, quite simply, the best Governor in the United States, hands down. We had the pleasure of hearing him speak recently (at a Hillsdale College function in Naples, Florida), and to call him a dynamic and inspirational speaker would be an understatement. We have all heard the speculations about a possible Presidential run in 2024. While it is far too early to even try to address that question, we can say that if he does run, he will be by far the most formidable candidate – perhaps, in the opinion of many, even more formidable than President Trump. As to Gov. Hairdo of California, I will let this little cartoon speak to that:

“Please Don’t Move to Pensacola!”

A few days ago, I heard a bit of an interview given by our Governor, Ron DeSantis, in which he commented on the sudden phenomenon of seeing more and more California license plates around Florida as more and more Golden State people are escaping the insane policies of that totally out-of-control state for the immeasurably better quality of life here in our new home state. He emphasized that he was born and raised in the Sunshine State and that, until not long ago, it was very rare to see a California plate here; now it is becoming a more frequent sight. As if to emphasize his point, a few days ago we were out and about in Pensacola and here was one of those more and more ubiquitous Californians right in front of us:

Later, I discovered a delightful bit of parody in which the author urges that people considering a move from places like, well, California, to our state and to our city, specifically, think twice before making the move. I highly recommend reading the entire piece as it will definitely lighten up your day. Here are a few brief excerpts:

Please don’t move to Pensacola. Seriously. I know it has superficial attractions like miles of clean beaches, real estate costs which are a third, or a fourth or a fifth of home values in hip-and-happening major metro areas and sure, you can easily park on the streets downtown, but do you really want to give up the joys of huge cities and vast suburbs for life in a state with no income tax?

You can fish in the Gulf of Mexico, but it’s hardly an adventure when you only have to travel a few minutes. And okay, the white sand at the wide beaches is famously crunchy and you don’t have to worry about hypodermic needles washing ashore so where’s the sport?


Getting decent food around Pensacola is not easy. How fresh can the seafood possibly be when it’s pulled off boats every morning? Does anyone really have time to visit the many restaurants, galleries and shops downtown or the 120 booths with local foods and crafts set up Saturdays at the Palafox Market? Or what about the local and wonderful Apple Market? What about Naval Air Station Pensacola, the remarkable National Naval Aviation Museum and the famous Blue Angels flying teams? If you move here won’t you miss the fight for restaurant reservations, combat parking and dinner prices that resemble the national debt?


Please don’t move to Pensacola. You won’t like it here. It’s true your mortgage payment might be a third of what you’re now paying in chic metro centers but what about the commute, the state income taxes, and jousting to find a parking space?

You’ll miss them in Pensacola. Honest.

Florida or California?

So, there you have it. Would that all decisions in life would be this easy! By all means, come to Florida; however, if you’re moving here from a deep blue state, please leave all the attitudes and politics which drove you to move to our beautiful state back there. As the popular slogan here goes:

Don't California My Florida Men's T-shirt

Poll: Kamala would beat DeSantis in 2024


If you believe that, I’ve got a bridge….

Before we look at this “scientific” poll, reported by, consider this impersonation of this moron who presently serves, due to the wisdom of the 81 Million voters —time for another bridge?- who put the Drooler-in-Chief in office, as Vice-President of the United States. It is a truly uncanny mirror image of this pathetic excuse for a public servant now residing in Number One Observatory Circle in Washington, requiring just a little imagination due to the slightly different hair color and complexion. Here it is:

As a preliminary and precautionary statement, I should note that findings like the one reported in the referenced article should be taken with a large grain-boulder?- of salt due to many factors not the least of which is the old saying that a week is a very long time in politics and the very volatile state of American society under the “leadership” of “President” Potemkin and the train wreck which is his administration. One would be a fool to discount even the wildest possibilities these days, characterized as they are by huge sales of American oil to China while prices are in the $7.00 per gallon range in some parts of the country, to mention only one inanity tearing the country apart. So it behooves us to take a close look at this poll, although my personal view of it is succinctly expressed in the sub-title above.

Our Lives, Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor


Three Important Documents to Read on This Birthday Celebration of our Beloved Nation!

As we embark on the Birthday Celebration of the greatest Nation ever devised by the mind of man, it is helpful to review some of the history and backgrounds of the foundational document itself, important words from one of our most revered and firmly grounded Presidents on the meaning of the words, and a most moving account of what actually became of those Founding Fathers, about whom Dr. Franklin noted “[i]ndeed we must all hang together, otherwise we shall most assuredly hang separately.”

Here are three writings I most respectfully submit are most appropriate for this particular weekend. I have savored them for their wisdom, one obviously in particular, and I hope you will enjoy them as well. The first is a post I did here a year ago setting forth what I consider to be a most beautiful analysis of the words of the Declaration by President Calvin Coolidge. The second is a speech often given by Rush Limbaugh’s (RIP) father telling the truly heartbreaking stories of what became of many of the signers—and their wives and children, with one signer losing his wife and 13 children- after they committed one of the most courageous acts in all of history. The third, of course, is that magnificent document we celebrate this weekend.

President Coolidge on the Declaration of Independence on its 150th Anniversary
July 4, 2021

To me, of all the millions of words written about the Declaration of Independence and the Fourth of July (full disclosure: I have not read all of them; I only wish I could!), none comes closer to capturing the very essence of what our Founding Fathers expressed through Mr. Jefferson’s beautiful words than the speech by President Calvin Coolidge, one of our greatest Presidents, on the occasion of the 150th Anniversary of the publication of that history-changing document at Independence Hall. While I heartily recommend reading the entire speech which can be found here, this is the passage I have always considered to be the very heart of President Coolidge’s message that day — 95 years ago! — and, therefore, that of our Founding Fathers, as well.

About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.

Happy Fourth of July, and God Bless America!

My Father’s Speech: The Americans
Nov 21, 2018

My father, Rush H. Limbaugh, Jr., delivered this oft-requested address locally a number of times, but it had never before appeared in print until it was published in The Limbaugh Letter. My dad was renowned for his oratory skills and for his original mind; this speech is, I think, a superb demonstration of both. I will always be grateful to him for instilling in me a passion for the ideas and lives of America’s Founders, as well as a deep appreciation for the inspirational power of words, which you will see evidenced here:

“Our Lives, Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor”

It was a glorious morning. The sun was shining and the wind was from the Southeast. Up especially early, a tall bony, redheaded young Virginian found time to buy a new thermometer, for which he paid three pounds, fifteen shillings. He also bought gloves for Martha, his wife, who was ill at home.

Thomas Jefferson arrived early at the statehouse. The temperature was 72.5 degrees and the horseflies weren’t nearly so bad at that hour. It was a lovely room, very large, with gleaming white walls. The chairs were comfortable. Facing the single door were two brass fireplaces, but they would not be used today.

The moment the door was shut, and it was always kept locked, the room became an oven. The tall windows were shut, so that loud quarreling voices could not be heard by passersby. Small openings atop the windows allowed a slight stir of air, and also a large number of horseflies. Jefferson records that “the horseflies were dexterous in finding necks, and the silk of stockings was nothing to them.” All discussing was punctuated by the slap of hands on necks.

On the wall at the back, facing the president’s desk, was a panoply — consisting of a drum, swords, and banners seized from Fort Ticonderoga the previous year. Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold had captured the place, shouting that they were taking it “in the name of the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress!”

Now Congress got to work, promptly taking up an emergency measure about which there was discussion but no dissension. “Resolved: That an application be made to the Committee of Safety of Pennsylvania for a supply of flints for the troops at New York.”

Then Congress transformed itself into a committee of the whole. The Declaration of Independence was read aloud once more, and debate resumed. Though Jefferson was the best writer of all of them, he had been somewhat verbose. Congress hacked the excess away. They did a good job, as a side-by-side comparison of the rough draft and the final text shows. They cut the phrase “by a self-assumed power.” “Climb” was replaced by “must read,” then “must” was eliminated, then the whole sentence, and soon the whole paragraph was cut. Jefferson groaned as they continued what he later called “their depredations.” “Inherent and inalienable rights” came out “certain unalienable rights,” and to this day no one knows who suggested the elegant change.

A total of 86 alterations were made. Almost 500 words were eliminated, leaving 1,337. At last, after three days of wrangling, the document was put to a vote.

Here in this hall Patrick Henry had once thundered: “I am no longer a Virginian, sir, but an American.” But today the loud, sometimes bitter argument stilled, and without fanfare the vote was taken from north to south by colonies, as was the custom. On July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was adopted.

There were no trumpets blown. No one stood on his chair and cheered. The afternoon was waning and Congress had no thought of delaying the full calendar of routine business on its hands. For several hours they worked on many other problems before adjourning for the day.

Much To Lose

What kind of men were the 56 signers who adopted the Declaration of Independence and who, by their signing, committed an act of treason against the crown? To each of you, the names Franklin, Adams, Hancock and Jefferson are almost as familiar as household words. Most of us, however, know nothing of the other signers. Who were they? What happened to them?

I imagine that many of you are somewhat surprised at the names not there: George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Patrick Henry. All were elsewhere.

Ben Franklin was the only really old man. Eighteen were under 40; three were in their 20s. Of the 56 almost half – 24 – were judges and lawyers. Eleven were merchants, nine were landowners and farmers, and the remaining 12 were doctors, ministers, and politicians.

With only a few exceptions, such as Samuel Adams of Massachusetts, these were men of substantial property. All but two had families. The vast majority were men of education and standing in their communities. They had economic security as few men had in the 18th Century.

Each had more to lose from revolution than he had to gain by it. John Hancock, one of the richest men in America, already had a price of 500 pounds on his head. He signed in enormous letters so that his Majesty could now read his name without glasses and could now double the reward. Ben Franklin wryly noted: “Indeed we must all hang together, otherwise we shall most assuredly hang separately.”

Fat Benjamin Harrison of Virginia told tiny Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts: “With me it will all be over in a minute, but you, you will be dancing on air an hour after I am gone.”

These men knew what they risked. The penalty for treason was death by hanging. And remember, a great British fleet was already at anchor in New York Harbor.

They were sober men. There were no dreamy-eyed intellectuals or draft card burners here. They were far from hot-eyed fanatics yammering for an explosion. They simply asked for the status quo. It was change they resisted. It was equality with the mother country they desired. It was taxation with representation they sought. They were all conservatives, yet they rebelled.

It was principle, not property, that had brought these men to Philadelphia. Two of them became presidents of the United States. Seven of them became state governors. One died in office as vice president of the United States. Several would go on to be US Senators. One, the richest man in America, in 1828 founded the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. One, a delegate from Philadelphia, was the only real poet, musician and philosopher of the signers. (It was he, Francis Hopkinson not Betsy Ross who designed the United States flag.)

Richard Henry Lee, a delegate from Virginia, had introduced the resolution to adopt the Declaration of Independence in June of 1776. He was prophetic in his concluding remarks: “Why then sir, why do we longer delay? Why still deliberate? Let this happy day give birth to an American Republic. Let her arise not to devastate and to conquer but to reestablish the reign of peace and law.

“The eyes of Europe are fixed upon us. She demands of us a living example of freedom that may exhibit a contrast in the felicity of the citizen to the ever-increasing tyranny which desolates her polluted shores. She invites us to prepare an asylum where the unhappy may find solace, and the persecuted repost.

“If we are not this day wanting in our duty, the names of the American Legislatures of 1776 will be placed by posterity at the side of all of those whose memory has been and ever will be dear to virtuous men and good citizens.”

Though the resolution was formally adopted July 4, it was not until July 8 that two of the states authorized their delegates to sign, and it was not until August 2 that the signers met at Philadelphia to actually put their names to the Declaration.

William Ellery, delegate from Rhode Island, was curious to see the signers’ faces as they committed this supreme act of personal courage. He saw some men sign quickly, “but in no face was he able to discern real fear.” Stephan Hopkins, Ellery’s colleague from Rhode Island, was a man past 60. As he signed with a shaking pen, he declared: “My hand trembles, but my heart does not.”

Even before the list was published, the British marked down every member of Congress suspected of having put his name to treason. All of them became the objects of vicious manhunts. Some were taken. Some, like Jefferson, had narrow escapes. All who had property or families near British strongholds suffered.

Francis Lewis, New York delegate saw his home plundered — and his estates in what is now Harlem — completely destroyed by British Soldiers. Mrs. Lewis was captured and treated with great brutality. Though she was later exchanged for two British prisoners through the efforts of Congress, she died from the effects of her abuse.

William Floyd, another New York delegate, was able to escape with his wife and children across Long Island Sound to Connecticut, where they lived as refugees without income for seven years. When they came home they found a devastated ruin.

Philips Livingstone had all his great holdings in New York confiscated and his family driven out of their home. Livingstone died in 1778 still working in Congress for the cause.

Louis Morris, the fourth New York delegate, saw all his timber, crops, and livestock taken. For seven years he was barred from his home and family.

John Hart of Trenton, New Jersey, risked his life to return home to see his dying wife. Hessian soldiers rode after him, and he escaped in the woods. While his wife lay on her deathbed, the soldiers ruined his farm and wrecked his homestead. Hart, 65, slept in caves and woods as he was hunted across the countryside. When at long last, emaciated by hardship, he was able to sneak home, he found his wife had already been buried, and his 13 children taken away. He never saw them again. He died a broken man in 1779, without ever finding his family.

Dr. John Witherspoon, signer, was president of the College of New Jersey, later called Princeton. The British occupied the town of Princeton, and billeted troops in the college. They trampled and burned the finest college library in the country.

Judge Richard Stockton, another New Jersey delegate signer, had rushed back to his estate in an effort to evacuate his wife and children. The family found refuge with friends, but a Tory sympathizer betrayed them. Judge Stockton was pulled from bed in the night and brutally beaten by the arresting soldiers. Thrown into a common jail, he was deliberately starved. Congress finally arranged for Stockton’s parole, but his health was ruined. The judge was released as an invalid, when he could no longer harm the British cause.

He returned home to find his estate looted and did not live to see the triumph of the Revolution. His family was forced to live off charity.

Robert Morris, merchant prince of Philadelphia, delegate and signer, met Washington’s appeals and pleas for money year after year. He made and raised arms and provisions which made it possible for Washington to cross the Delaware at Trenton. In the process he lost 150 ships at sea, bleeding his own fortune and credit almost dry.

George Clymer, Pennsylvania signer, escaped with his family from their home, but their property was completely destroyed by the British in the Germantown and Brandywine campaigns.

Dr. Benjamin Rush, also from Pennsylvania, was forced to flee to Maryland. As a heroic surgeon with the army, Rush had several narrow escapes.

John Martin, a Tory in his views previous to the debate, lived in a strongly loyalist area of Pennsylvania. When he came out for independence, most of his neighbors and even some of his relatives ostracized him. He was a sensitive and troubled man, and many believed this action killed him. When he died in 1777, his last words to his tormentors were: “Tell them that they will live to see the hour when they shall acknowledge it [the signing] to have been the most glorious service that I have ever rendered to my country.”

William Ellery, Rhode Island delegate, saw his property and home burned to the ground.

Thomas Lynch, Jr., South Carolina delegate, had his health broken from privation and exposures while serving as a company commander in the military. His doctors ordered him to seek a cure in the West Indies and on the voyage, he and his young bride were drowned at sea.

Edward Rutledge, Arthur Middleton, and Thomas Heyward, Jr., the other three South Carolina signers, were taken by the British in the siege of Charleston. They were carried as prisoners of war to St. Augustine, Florida, where they were singled out for indignities. They were exchanged at the end of the war, the British in the meantime having completely devastated their large landholdings and estates.

Thomas Nelson, signer of Virginia, was at the front in command of the Virginia military forces. With British General Charles Cornwallis in Yorktown, fire from 70 heavy American guns began to destroy Yorktown piece by piece. Lord Cornwallis and his staff moved their headquarters into Nelson’s palatial home. While American cannonballs were making a shambles of the town, the house of Governor Nelson remained untouched. Nelson turned in rage to the American gunners and asked, “Why do you spare my home?”

They replied, “Sir, out of respect to you.” Nelson cried, “Give me the cannon!” and fired on his magnificent home himself, smashing it to bits. But Nelson’s sacrifice was not quite over. He had raised $2 million for the Revolutionary cause by pledging his own estates. When the loans came due, a newer peacetime Congress refused to honor them, and Nelson’s property was forfeited. He was never reimbursed. He died, impoverished, a few years later at the age of 50.

Lives, Fortunes, Honor

Of those 56 who signed the Declaration of Independence, nine died of wounds or hardships during the war. Five were captured and imprisoned, in each case with brutal treatment. Several lost wives, sons or entire families. One lost his 13 children. Two wives were brutally treated. All were at one time or another the victims of manhunts and driven from their homes. Twelve signers had their homes completely burned. Seventeen lost everything they owned. Yet not one defected or went back on his pledged word. Their honor, and the nation they sacrificed so much to create is still intact.

And, finally, there is the New Jersey signer, Abraham Clark.

He gave two sons to the officer corps in the Revolutionary Army. They were captured and sent to that infamous British prison hulk afloat in New York Harbor known as the hell ship Jersey, where 11,000 American captives were to die. The younger Clarks were treated with a special brutality because of their father. One was put in solitary and given no food. With the end almost in sight, with the war almost won, no one could have blamed Abraham Clark for acceding to the British request when they offered him his sons’ lives if he would recant and come out for the King and Parliament. The utter despair in this man’s heart, the anguish in his very soul, must reach out to each one of us down through 200 years with his answer: “No.”

The 56 signers of the Declaration Of Independence proved by their every deed that they made no idle boast when they composed the most magnificent curtain line in history. “And for the support of this Declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”

Rush’s Epilogue: My friends, I know you have a copy of the Declaration of Independence somewhere around the house – in an old history book (newer ones may well omit it), an encyclopedia, or one of those artificially aged “parchments” we all got in school years ago. I suggest that each of you take the time this month to read through the text of the Declaration, one of the most noble and beautiful political documents in human history.

There is no more profound sentence than this: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness…”

These are far more than mere poetic words. The underlying ideas that infuse every sentence of this treatise have sustained this nation for more than two centuries. They were forged in the crucible of great sacrifice. They are living words that spring from and satisfy the deepest cries for liberty in the human spirit.

“Sacred honor” isn’t a phrase we use much these days, but every American life is touched by the bounty of this, the Founders’ legacy. It is freedom, tested by blood, and watered with tears.

The Declaration of Independence

“We mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”

Thank God there were men like that all those years ago, many of whom did, indeed, give their lives, and their families, so that we might live in the freest, most prosperous, greatest land in history!

Wishing you and yours a Very Happy Fourth of July, and

God Bless America!

Justice Thomas Sounds the Alarm on the ‘Actual Malice’ Rule in Defamation Cases


In the exuberant happiness, relief, and pure joy of what one observer has called “one of the greatest weeks in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court”, one very short dissent by the Justice who is now recognized as “the undisputed intellectual leader of the Court” has been largely overlooked. However, its importance cannot be overemphasized as a potential “harbinger of something important still to come.”

That lone dissent, as so many of his dissents have been over the years, was written by Justice Clarence Thomas who, if my admittedly somewhat blinded judgment in view of our admiration for the man may be pardoned, should clearly be Chief Justice Thomas. In his dissent on Coral Ridge Ministries v. Southern Poverty Law Center, Justice Thomas — once again — expressed his frustration over the reluctance of the Court to take up the extremely unjust rule of New York Times v. Sullivan which requires a showing of “actual malice” before a defamation suit can proceed. The result of this rule is that interest groups and media organizations have been allowed “to cast false aspersions on public figures with near impunity.”

What caught my attention about this case was — aside from the fact that I try to follow Justice Thomas’ writings as closely as possible — that the defendant in this case, the despicable, disgusting, odious, execrable Southern Poverty Law Center, is, as it is described in yesterday’s Powerline piece on this case, “one of the great grifter organizations of our time” and one which specializes in smearing conservative organizations only, often inflicting great damage on them. Some time ago, I decided to do some fairly deep research on this grotesque façade of a “public interest group” and my findings (published under the title “The Poverty Palace That Hate Built” can be found here) were sickening, to put it mildly.

Here are a few portions of the dissent but I wholeheartedly recommend reading it in its entirety to more fully appreciate the deep and searching intelligence of this horribly unjustly maligned man who we are certain will be remembered in future histories of the Court as one of the greatest Justices to ever serve on the Court:

Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc., is a Christian non-profit dedicated to spreading the “Gospel of Jesus Christ” and “a biblically informed view of the world, using all available media.” 406 F. Supp. 3d 1258, 1268 (MD Ala. 2019) (internal quotation marks omitted). In 2017, Coral Ridge applied to receive donations through AmazonSmile, a program that allows Amazon customers to contribute to approved nonprofits. To its dismay, Coral Ridge learned it was ineligible for the program. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) had designated Coral Ridge an “Anti-LGBT hate group” because of its biblical views concerning human sexuality and marriage. Id., at 1270 (internal quotation marks omitted). AmazonSmile excluded Coral Ridge based on SPLC’s “hate group” designation.


I would grant certiorari in this case to revisit the “actual malice” standard. This case is one of many showing how New York Times and its progeny have allowed media organizations and interest groups “to cast false aspersions on public figures with near impunity.” Tah, 991 F. 3d, at 254 (opinion of Silberman, J.). SPLC’s “hate group” designation lumped Coral Ridge’s Christian ministry with groups like the Ku Klux Klan and Neo-Nazis. It placed Coral Ridge on an interactive, online “Hate Map” and caused Coral Ridge concrete financial injury by excluding it from the AmazonSmile donation program. Nonetheless, unable to satisfy the “almost impossible” actual-malice standard this Court has imposed, Coral Ridge could not hold SPLC to account for what it maintains is a blatant falsehood. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc., 472 U. S. 749, 771 (1985) (White, J., concurring in judgment).

An excellent brief analysis of this dissent can be found at and it contains the following observations:

The culprit here is twofold: 1) the requirement that to be actionable, a statement must be one of fact, not opinion; and 2) the “actual malice” standard–the standard that a public figure plaintiff must prove not only that the defendant (here, SPLC) was careless in libeling him or her, but rather that the defendant knew that what it said was false, or knew that it was likely false, and said it anyway. For obvious reasons, this subjective standard has proved impossible to meet in nearly all cases involving public figures.

Justice Thomas concluded his dissent with these most appropriate words:

Because the Court should not “insulate those who perpetrate lies from traditional remedies like libel suits” unless “the First Amendment requires” us to do so, Berisha, 594 U. S., at ___ (opinion of THOMAS, J.) (slip op., at 3), I respectfully dissent from the denial of certiorari.

Deep wisdom from the mind of a great man.

The 2A Is Not a ‘Second Class Right’: Great Victory in the Supreme Court


In what has been described as “the biggest win for gun rights since the Court’s Heller ruling,” the United States Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, today held that New York’s “proper-cause requirement” violates…

“ …the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.”

The case is New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al., vs. Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police, et al., and the full opinion can be found here. Justice Thomas writes:

In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008), and McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742 (2010), we recognized that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right of an ordinary, law-abiding citizen to possess a handgun in the home for self-defense. In this case, petitioners and respondents agree that ordinary, law-abiding citizens have a similar right to carry handguns publicly for their self-defense. We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.

In one of the most bracing and vibrant defenses of the Second Amendment seen in a very long time— sadly, from any court in the land — the opinion declared:

The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self defense. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

In a most interesting concurring opinion, possibly significant not only for its brilliant reasoning but when viewed in the light of recent barbarities being committed at the homes of the conservative Justices, Justice Alito noted:

“Today, unfortunately, many Americans have good reason to fear that they will be victimized if they are unable to protect themselves. And today, no less than in 1791, the Second Amendment guarantees their right to do so,”

It will surprise no one, I am sure, that the three liberal Justices dissented. One promising note: Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority!

If I sound just a tad more exuberant about this than I have been about most recent developments battering our Beloved Nation lately, it is because I am overjoyed and overwhelmed with gratitude and appreciation that we are finally seeing perhaps the beginning of leadership by the adult and mature segment of our government instead of the Ding Dong School we have been witnessing for the last year and a half.

God bless the six justices who gave us this great news and God Bless America!

Common Elements of Every Swamp: Rot, Decay, Slime, Scum and Deadly Creatures and Snakes


We were lifelong natives of South Louisiana until our recent move to Florida so we can state with total humility that we know a little something about swamps, as much of that part of the USA is built near, in, on, or close to a real, not figurative, swamp. There is a very old joke about Louisiana, prompted by its “wide-open” brand of politics, especially prevalent during the time of Edwin Edwards, which defines Louisiana as a place where half the state is under water and the other half is under indictment!

Sad but true, and another truism that might be uniquely timely in these troubled days is the fact that all swamps have certain elements in common, such as:

  • Rot
  • Decay
  • Slime
  • Deadly Creatures
  • Snakes

Our former home in Baton Rouge was about six blocks from a small swampy area known as Bluebonnet Swamp and much of the public library in that area fronted on one edge of that swamp. Additionally, we were about a one-hour drive from one of the largest swamps in America, the Atchafalaya Basin Swamp, a tour of which with anyone but a certified guide very familiar with the area will point out another common feature of all swamps. One can get lost very quickly in a swamp, even if in broad daylight with all of one’s wits about them. Here’s a representative photo of a little piece of this swamp:

Atchafalaya Swamp | Louisiana Swamp Base

And here is one of those creatures which make swamps like this so dangerous:

alligator in the Atchafalaya basin swamp - YouTube

This points to another similarity that all “swamp critters” have in common: they are animals or reptiles or serpents. they obviously have no moral compunction whatsoever about killing a victim.

We will now discuss with reference to another Swamp, killing his reputation, his family, his home, his future, or his children’s future. In that swamp, most ironically located in our nation’s capital, named in honor of one of the greatest, most honorable, most honest, most straightforward Americans who ever lived, the similarities are remarkable:

  • Rot: see, e.g., the Clintons, Obama, Schumer, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, McCabe, Biden, Harris, etc., etc., etc.
  • Decay: see, e.g., Pelosi, Biden, Leahy, Feinstein, etc., etc., etc.
  • Slime: see, e.g., Biden, Hunter; Biden, James; Biden, Joe; Clinton, Bill; Clinton, Hillary; Psaki, Jen; Sullivan, Jake; Obama, Barack; Obama, Michelle; Jarrett, Valerie; Rice, Susan
  • Deadly Creatures: all of the above
  • Snakes: All of the above, plus: Sztrok, Peter; Page, Lisa; Sussman, Michael; Cheney, Liz; Romney, Mitt; every single juror in the Sussman trial; Judge [ ] (ethics – that quaint ancient concept- inhibits me from naming him, as I am still a licensed attorney)

From the moment I learned of the verdict in the Sussman case, I have been unable to get these images out of my head and I kept thinking of the way we casually throw around the nickname “The Swamp” without realizing the many ways it is indeed so similar to the actual swamps we have lived around all our lives in South Louisiana.

Should anyone have any lingering doubts about why it is so hard to recruit good, solid, honest citizens to go to work for us and represent us in our nation’s capital, just take another look at that dramatis personae and ask yourself what level of sheer, strong, unadulterated courage it would take to expose your family to the treachery of such creatures?

Is there hope for America with this pool of evil now effectively running our national government? Absolutely — but only if there is a deep, far-reaching change in our culture in which we, once again, hold liars and inside dealers and thoroughly amoral creatures like Hillary Clinton accountable and no longer reward them with promotions, mansions, book deals, and influence we “proles,” in the term of Orwell’s 1984, could never dream of. One midterm and one Presidential election will be a great — and, hopefully, joyful! — start but it’s going to take a lot more to clear out these entrenched serpents from their nesting places.

God Bless America!

Memorial Day 2022 in Small Town America


The Real Strength of the USA

We recently discovered a jewel of Patriotic America relatively near our new home in Florida and I decided to share it with you as it is my deep and abiding belief that towns like this, and the spirit of optimism and patriotism they embody, are the real hope for a return of the kind of America so many of us remember as existing not so very long ago.

The town is Milton, FL, and some years the back number of civic leaders started an initiative to build a Veterans Memorial Park to honor the fallen who defended us from so many evils over the years. I will try hard not to exaggerate too much when I say it is one of the most moving places of this type I have visited outside, obviously, the magnificent, glorious memorials in our nation’s Capital.

Each year the local chapter of the DAR (Daughters of the American Revolution) put out banners recognizing residents of Milton who served and they were all out this afternoon when we visited. These are similar to those highlighted in the recent post by our colleague, Douglas Pratt, in which he pointed out, with such understandable pride, the banner recognizing his Father’s service in WWII. Here are a few:

The sculpture at the entrance to the Memorial Park, the Great American Eagle:

A very moving sculpture— Fallen, Not Forgotten:

One of my personal favorites, especially remembering all the devoted, loving War Dogs who meant more to our fighting men and women than we will ever know:

The interior of the park is surrounded by very large tableaus outlining major events in many wars going back to 1775 and at the bottom of that honoring those who died in WWII, there is this quotation from General George Patton— “It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should Thank God that such men lived.”

May we all honor, in our own way, on the day set aside for our remembrance, the memory of those who gave the last full measure of devotion so that we may remain the freest and most exceptional Nation ever created by the mind of man.

Fallen, Not Forgotten.

President and First Lady DeSantis?


An idea whose time has come? We proud Floridians just signed this petition to draft the man we consider the best governor in America to run for President in 2024; here are details from the synopsis of the article outlining the launch of the Ready for Ron PAC:

Ronald Reagan’s campaign chair launches committee to ‘draft’ Ron DeSantis to jump into 2024 presidential race before Trump does

  • The ‘Ready for Ron’ PAC is led by Ed Rollins, Ronald Reagan’s campaign chairman in in 1984, the year he won a landslide victory and cinched 49 states
  • The draft committee is unaffiliated with DeSantis himself, and now is working to amass an army of supporters to convince him to run for president
  • The group is also headed by Lilian Rodriguez-Baz
  • Asked whether DeSantis should run if Trump jumps in, Rodriguez-Baz told ‘We’re not concerned with whether or not Trump is going to run’
  • A recent poll of Wisconsin state GOP convention-goers found that more Republicans want DeSantis to be the nominee than Trump

And here is the link to the sign-up form, for those who think, as more and more seem to be coming to this view, that this is a preferable solution to the question of the best way to save the Republic from the Marxist barbarians who seem to be determined to destroy their own country.

Yes, I know that even one week is said to be a lifetime in politics and I also know that the kind of thinking represented by this PAC as well as our openly backing it may ruffle some Trumpian feathers. Even worse, it might bring a smile to that group of “Republicans” known as Never Trumpers who helped elect this pathetic, doddering, dangerous idiot to the Presidency, something I am loath to do.

So be it. The only point I am trying to make is that with the midterms being, in effect, right on top of us, the 2024 campaign will start the day after those elections. If we have learned one thing since the Rigged (Mollie Hemingway’s excellent book) election of 2020 it is that we should leave no stone unturned in our efforts to assure we are not cheated out of our franchise again.

President DeSantis! It sure has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it?

God Bless America!

My Blue(s) Heaven


People have as many “addictions” as there are people, I suppose. I hesitate to even use that word in view of the horrendous nightmares it has visited upon so many families, including, most definitely, ours. However, I guess if one is to have one of those, it might not be the worst outcome to be totally “addicted” to the finest aerobatics demonstration team ever assembled, The Blue Angels, who are based at Pensacola Naval Air Station, a short drive from our new home here in the Florida Panhandle.

As a result, I try to get out to the base every Tuesday or Wednesday for their practice sessions and I also try to be on the beach when they return home from one of their shows around the country to announce their return home on Sunday evenings with the tradition, well known in these parts, we call “The Beach Buzz!” Here’s a shot from their practice of this morning at the base which I offer as Exhibit A in support of the proposition that I am well and truly “hooked” on the Blues!

This is the Sound of Freedom and may it long resonate, no matter the current trends or grotesqueries.

God Bless America!

The Midterm ‘Red Wave: Too Good to Be True?


The GOP will lose the midterm elections. No way, you say? Read on.

The so-called conventional wisdom (an oxymoron if there ever was one) in the political scene these days is illustrated by just this morning’s small selection of headlines:

Mike Bloomberg says Democrats are heading for a ‘wipeout’ in the midterms if they don’t ‘correct course’ and admit schools were closed for too long during COVID

Democrats Are Making Life Too Easy for Republicans

Bloomberg Says Dems ‘headed for a wipeout’ in Mid-term Elections

There is an old reliable truism that goes something like this: “When something looks too good to be true, it usually is.” It was definitely a standby phrase in our law practice and I could not count the times we invoked that saying when considering amazingly positive developments in our cases, almost all of which proved to be illusory or downright false.

I was prompted to set down these thoughts by a note I received from a very good friend, Mike Walker, one of the finest and most professional attorneys ever to practice in Louisiana and one whose intellect and incisive analytical skills I greatly respect. Mike, who likes to use the nom de plume “Winston Smith”, a most appropriate one considering the surreal times we are living in, wrote the following, which I am quoting verbatim:

The recent action of New York City in allowing illegals to vote should worry every conservative, moderate, Republican or anyone who depends on the rule of law in this country.  I am coming to believe that the Dems intend to place illegal aliens from the southern border in states whose electoral votes usually determine the outcome of national elections (Pa., Ariz., N.M., Mich., Ga., etc.).  Those states’ democratic legislatures will enact, as NYC did,  new laws right before the midterm elections, to allow illegal aliens or anyone else to vote without identification.  Voila’, no more GOP presidential victories ever.  While Biden’s attempt to enact legislation nationally to remove voter i.d. requirements has for the present failed, it is the states, not the national government, which currently regulate election law.  There are many states currently under the control of liberal democrat governors and legislatures which would slavishly hew to the dictates of the national democratic party.  The result is achievable in time for the midterms.  I believe this will be attempted and is likely to succeed unless moderates and conservatives wake up and enact state laws requiring that only legal citizens with legal identification be allowed to vote.   Remember, the entire 2020 election swung on 42,000 votes in 3 states.  Getting that number of illegals in the right places is probably already a done deal.  If due to last-minute changes to the states’ election laws they are allowed to vote (as happened in the last election), there’s no way a Republican ever gets elected again.

Tragically, it’s not likely that there enough Americans who are remotely aware of this or who give a damn.

Just sayin’,

Winston Smith

He added the following thought-provoking postscript:

Just coming to realize that the Dems want us to think that the elections are going to be a landslide for the GOP.  What am I missing here?

A little far-fetched for your taste? Really? Was the election outcome in 2020 just a tad far-fetched? Would you have ever in your wildest dreams expected the widespread destruction wreaked on the great and stable America left by President Trump by this group of left-wing lunatics, lead by a dementia-stricken “President” and a “Vice-President” bereft of even normal intelligence? The blatantly unconstitutional imprisonment without trial of American citizens in that jurisprudential cesspool known as the District of Columbia, some of whom committed the “crime” of walking into what they thought was their Capitol Building? One of the worst and most disgraceful retreats in American history in Afghanistan? The literal disappearance of the Southern Border by virtue of this President’s abject violation of his oath to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”?

Admittedly, this is a tip-of-the-iceberg list, but we are all painfully familiar with the indignities inflicted on our beloved Nation by this Socialist/Marxist cabal, and Mike’s note brought into sharp focus a concern I have been experiencing for some time and one which is being noted more and more lately as doubts begin to show about all the celebratory euphoria with regard to the coming “landslide.” Such a concern is clearly evident in a piece by the estimable Victor Davis Hanson in a piece entitled “How America Became La La Land”, here, as follows:

What explains an America that suddenly no longer works?

First, all of these problems are self-induced. They did not exist until Biden birthed them for ideological or political reasons. Apparently, his administration wanted a changing, more favorable electorate and demography at any cost.

Just like all Americans who are thoroughly disgusted and ashamed by the actions of this worst-Administration-in-American History, I am thrilled by all these wonderful polls coming out showing how we are absolutely, positively guaranteed to flip the House and that we have a fair to good chance of taking the Senate and how we really, really this time have the Loons on the run. It’s all so wonderful to hear.


Is it too good to be true?

Lost: The Truth About the War in Ukraine. If Found, Please Return ASAP.


Reward offered upon confirmation of veracity.

As I was putting together some preliminary thoughts about the quandary I hope to address here, I found a recent post at Powerline, the opening paragraph of which sums up my — our — dilemma far better than I could. It can be found here, and is as follows:

A certain amount of caution is recommended about reporting and commenting on the Ukraine War, mostly because solid facts are hard to come by (the “fog of war” and all that), and judgment about what to do is in equally short supply, especially inside the head of our president.

Since I wrote a short and very admiring piece about Zelensky, I have tried to read (almost) everything I could get my hands on about the war and the combatants involved, to see whether I have been missing something along the way. Truth be told, I have apparently missed a lot, as one can find support for any side of the arguments about the war if one looks hard enough.

For example:

  1. The Russians have been defeated in their attempt to take Kyiv. Ukraine has not defeated the Russians at Kyiv, they have just pulled back to regroup and can come back after they mop up in the East. Take your pick.
  2. Zelensky is the Sir Winston Churchill of our time. Zelensky is a corrupt product of the deep corruption for which Ukraine is most noted and has millions stashed away in offshore banks Take your pick.
  3. The sanctions we have imposed on Russia, Putin, the oligarchs, etc., etc., are the most devastating in the history of sanctions in all of recorded history and have, in the typically inane words of our Potemkin “President”, “turned the ruble into rubble.” The sanctions we have imposed have had a serious initial impact on the Russian population in general but are unlikely to have any serious impact on Russia’s conduct of the war in Ukraine; the ruble was, in fact, hit hard at first and has now recovered to levels above where it was before the sanctions. Take your pick.
  4. Putin is a vicious mad-dog monster who just woke up one morning and decided to level an entire nation and slaughter millions in the process. Putin has been telling the West in clear and unmistakable terms that this invasion would take place if the West and NATO did not put a stop to its overtures to Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO and the EU. Take your pick.
  5. Putin is likely to be removed in a palace coup due to his mishandling of the war in Ukraine. Putin is stronger than ever with approval ratings, at last report, in the range of 78% (a level our “President” and his imbecile of a Vice President can only dream of). Take your pick.
  6. The war will end by mid-May. The war will grind on as long as it takes Russia to obliterate the entire country—and its leadership. Take your pick.
  7. Putin is winning decisively. Ukraine is winning and will, in short order, turn back the Russian onslaught. Take your pick.
  8. Biden engaged in real statesmanship in publicly calling Putin a “war criminal” and openly pushing for “regime change” in the Kremlin. Biden’s irresponsible remarks and more and more obvious cognitive deficiencies regarding the man with the largest nuclear arsenal in the world could get us all (ALL) killed. Take your pick.

What follows is a relatively brief discourse on the authorities I have found on all sides of some of these issues and I note that I use the word “brief” advisedly in viewing the voluminous nature of much of this content. That said, I cannot recommend too highly a complete reading of the writings cited here as, together, they give a much clearer picture of what is actually happening on the ground in Ukraine, unfiltered through the far left lens of disgraces to journalism like CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post and the New York Times.

I will most highly recommend one particular podcast as the most comprehensive resource I have found for a thorough and deeply researched treatment of the history leading up to this unspeakable tragedy. I emphasize that while I do not pretend to have any “answers” to all these questions, I have found some sources which seem to be, in my humble opinion as just a lay observer nowhere near the level of “nuanced” “intellectualism” of some of the elites (some of whom got us here in the first place), very solid writings about the long and sordid history leading up to this tragedy.

Another phrasing of that same truth is found in a short piece by a financial consultant James Rickards entitled “I’ve Never Heard So Many Lies”:

All wars are full of lies. Winston Churchill famously said, “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.”

We accept that idea broadly. Secret invasion plans should be closely held. The identities of spies must be kept under wraps. New weapons and defensive tools should not be revealed because enemies will be alerted to their potential and begin offensive workarounds.

Still, just because the government has legitimate reasons to deceive the public in wartime does not mean that citizens don’t have a duty to find the truth to the extent they can.

The Russian-Ukraine kinetic war and the broader U.S.-Russian economic war are full of more lies than any public events I’ve seen in my lifetime including Vietnam, Watergate and the Iraq War.

That’s how big the lies are.

I. “Ukraine has won the Battle of Kyiv”

When I decided to make a concentrated effort to learn as much as I could about the war, one of the first publications I turned to was the daily reporting of the Institute for the Study of War. I was impressed by the thoroughness of their reports and most impressed by the membership of their Board of Directors, which includes Gen. Jack Keane. Gradually it started to dawn on me that most, if not all, of their reporting was sourced to the Ukrainian General Staff. For example, here is the opening paragraph of their report of April 3:

Ukraine has won the Battle of Kyiv. Russian forces are completing their withdrawal, but not in good order. Ukrainian forces are continuing to clear Kyiv Oblast of isolated Russian troops left behind in the retreat, which some Ukrainian officials describe as “lost orcs.” Russian forces had attempted to conduct an orderly retreat from their positions around Kyiv with designated covering forces supported by artillery and mines to allow the main body to withdraw. The main body of Russian troops has withdrawn from the west bank of the Dnipro and is completing its withdrawal from the east bank, but the retrograde has been sufficiently disorderly that some Russian troops were left behind.

And here are their “Key Takeaways” from the same date:

  • Ukraine has won the Battle of Kyiv, and Russian forces are completing their withdrawals from both the east and the west banks of the Dnipro in disorder.
  • Russian forces retreating from around Kyiv will likely need considerable time before they can return to combat.
  • Incidents of refusals of orders to engage in combat operations among Russian units continue and may lead to the redeployment of two BTGs that had arrived near Donbas within the last few days to their home stations in South Ossetia.
  • The continued existence of an independent Ukrainian state with its capital in Kyiv is no longer in question at this time, although much fighting remains and the war could still turn Russia’s way.

II. Ukraine has not won the battle of Kyiv.

The other side of this issue, decidedly less rosy and optimistic, was stated in the Rickards piece, cited above, and echoed by the estimable Roger Kimball, in an article entitled “Trading Realpolitik for a Puppet Show”, here.

Here’s the official U.S. narrative as echoed by the mainstream media: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was unprovoked, Putin’s three-day blitzkrieg of Kyiv has failed, Russian forces are bogged down and valiant Ukrainian troops are putting up a powerful defense and regaining lost ground with the help of weapons from NATO.


Russia never planned a blitzkrieg on Kyiv. That’s a Western invention intended to make Putin look like a failure. In fact, Russia is slowly and methodically taking territory in the south and east of Ukraine in order to control the seacoasts, eliminate pro-fascist elements in Mariupol and establish pro-Russian autonomous zones in Donbas.

Also noted in this piece is the view of our own military and here I am (with great regret) constrained to note one is most highly advised to take any information from the current Pentagon leadership with a grain of salt the size of one of Hunter Biden’s cocaine rocks:

Most tellingly, Pentagon leaks say the same thing. The story from inside the Pentagon is that Putin is not acting recklessly but is being patient and methodical. It also says that, despite some civilian casualties, Putin is actually using a restrained approach. Furthermore, there are no signs he is preparing for the use of chemical or biological weapons.

III. The Slaughter in Bucha was a War Crime by Russia

The consensus of the reporting of the media at the time this is being written, as well as what seems to be the almost-universally accepted narrative world-wide, is that this was a war crime committed by the butchers of the Red Army. The images being viewed daily over the world could easily have been the same they left behind as they slaughtered their way to Berlin. Their reputation for wanton cruelty, such as the Katyn Massacre in which an estimated 20,000 Polish Army officers were gunned down in 1940, has been long established and lends credence to this side of the argument.

IV. The Bucha Atrocity Was a False Flag Operation and a Lie

In “About the Bucha ‘Reported’ Atrocities” on the Meaning in History blog, these passages are found:

… Even a casual observer of the news feeds has to notice that virtually all of the anti-Russian claims—wildly over optimistic assessments, claims of Putin’s mental decline and or desperation, fake news of atrocities and casualties, mislabeling of photos, etc.—appear first in British media outlets.

This has also happened in the case of the “reported”—i.e., unverified—Russian atrocities in Bucha. A few tweets illustrate the very dodgy character of this narrative. It took no less than two days, maybe longer, of reoccupation of Bucha by Ukraine for the narrative to develop. Weird, huh?


No forensic findings—only narrative designed to prolong and increase sanctions. Ultimate goal? Probably to hold wavering NATO countries in line:


… Let’s see if the Ukrainians provide verifiable medical forensic data to sustain their accusations.

Similar questions about the “accepted” narrative were set forth in a most interesting discussion found in American Greatness entitled “Who Really Committed War Cremes in Bucha?”, dated April 9. For the sake of brevity, here is a truncated version of the author’s main points:

First, this fits with a pattern of Ukrainian forces violating the rules of war, as evidenced by numerous videos showing the shooting of prisonerstorturing civilians, and the like. …

Second, Ukrainian President Voldomyr Zelenskyy has given numerous speeches calling for the punishment of “saboteurs” and “traitors,” saying the war will ultimately end with the “de-Russification” of Ukraine. These are tough words, which clearly would tend to inflame and encourage the more extremist elements.

Three, the atmosphere in Ukraine is ripe for war crimes. …

Four, the timeline of reports creates real doubts about whether Russia perpetrated the Bucha Massacre. …

Fifth, in at least some of the photos of Bucha , the victims appear to have white armbands—a sign of friendliness towards Russian forces and an indicator used by Russian forces themselves—and Russian-supplied emergency rations. …

Finally, the Ukrainians surely know that allegations of Russian atrocities—like earlier stories about Russia attacking nuclear plants and suggestions of Russia’s imminent use of chemical weapons—are the easiest way to manipulate the West into becoming a combatant. …

My selection of his main points is entirely and arbitrarily mine; I highly recommend a full reading of this excellent article.

V. Volodymyr Zelensky is the Sir Winston Churchill of our time

Not long ago, I wrote a post entitled “Zelensky: A President Who Loves His Country- And Would Die For It” in which I praised his speech before the Congress and noted my admiration for his strength and obvious love of country. One of the ideas behind this admittedly laudatory discussion was the contrast I saw between that President and the corrupt, dishonest, cognitively-impaired cretin who presently occupies —illegitimately in my opinion, but that is for another day — that position in our Nation. One comment said that “90% of your post is fawning over a corrupt man.” While I did not know I was even capable of “fawning” over anyone (My Lady and family obviously excepted) , my recent research has lent heartening evidence to the fact that I am apparently not alone in admiring this man in these impossible-to-imagine trials, as one of Sir Winston’s most noted biographers recently published an op-ed “Churchill, Zelensky and the American Right”, in the Wall Street Journal, noting the following:

No reflection on Churchill today would be complete without noting the Churchillian leadership of President Volodymyr Zelensky. Mr. Zelensky saw the Afghan president flee when the Taliban advanced on Kabul last year and decided he wouldn’t be that kind of leader. He summoned his inner Churchill and decided to stay in his capital and fight it out. If he dies in Kyiv, Mr. Zelensky will become a martyr to Ukrainians for centuries and could be even more of a threat to Mr. Putin in death than he is in life.

Like Churchill, Mr. Zelensky endures nightly attacks on his capital city for weeks on end, speaks to his people without ever sugaring the pill, appeals for the tools to finish the job, and, in a direct paraphrase of Churchill’s June 4, 1940, speech after Dunkirk, has promised to fight in the forests and the streets and not to surrender. Churchill never had to face enemy ground troops in London’s suburbs or assassination squads.

Mr. Putin has described Mr. Zelensky as a neo-Nazi and a drug addict. The neo-Nazi jibe stretches credulity for many reasons, not least Mr. Zelensky’s Jewishness. With regard to addiction, I wish Mr. Putin had revealed what drug Mr. Zelensky is taking so that I could get some. Churchill said in January 1940: “Finland—superb, nay, sublime. In the jaws of peril, Finland shows what free men can do. The service rendered by Finland to mankind is magnificent.” Today he would apply those same words to Ukraine.

There are people in the conservative movement who oppose and attack Mr. Zelensky. I understand their arguments intellectually. Some are ideological; others have to do with World War II; still others go back to Catherine the Great or to events as recent as the Trump presidency. I beseech them to recognize that as of Feb. 24 everything has changed, not only because of Mr. Putin’s invasion, but because of the brutal way it has been carried out. For all our sophisticated appreciation of realpolitik, we mustn’t blind ourselves to the fact that an evil man has done a terribly evil thing.

VI, Zelensky is just another corrupt product of one of the most corrupt nations in the world.

This side of the argument is best summarized in the Kimball piece linked above, in which he has this to say about the “new Churchill” canard:

… But what about Zelenskyy, the “new Churchill”?  On the plus side, Rickards acknowledges, he has “succeeded in presenting himself as a strong wartime leader, standing up to the big, bad Putin.” He’s telegenic, a fighter, and a PR genius. No wonder the U.S. Congress gave him a standing ovation. But he is also a complicated figure. As Rickards also notes, Zelenskyy is “a corrupt oligarch with millions of dollars hidden offshore. His acting skills have enhanced his propaganda efforts, but it doesn’t take much training to see how phony he is.” Moreover, “innocent civilians, including women and children, are dying under his failed leadership and inability to come to terms with Putin before the invasion began. In a nutshell, Zelenskyy bet on support from Biden and the West and lost.”

VII. Conclusion: Sources on the History of Events Leading up to this Tragedy

Several detailed and extensively researched articles have appeared lately outlining the history of the last 20 years or so leading up to this point. Before I cite those authorities, and while I wish it was not at all necessary to do so, I must make it clear that nothing in this post should be taken to excuse in any way whatsoever the cruel and brutal attack on Ukraine and its people. These discussions and resources are offered as research aids for anyone who might wish to delve further into this most sordid chapter in the history of modern warfare.

The leading article I would recommend appeared in the Wall Street Journal recently under the title “Vladimir Putin’s 20-Year March to War in Ukraine — and How the West Mishandled it” — it is a chilling reminder of how many “red flags” were blown through on the way to February 24, 2022, by many in the West. I highly recommend a thorough reading of this lengthy analysis. A more succinct discussion can be found in “Bill Clinton’s supreme NATO screw-up comes back to haunt us”, containing these thoughts, starting with a reference to George Kennan’s book American Diplomacy:

Kennan understood, as Clinton and his team did not, that a Russian “sphere of influence” was one of those “national realities.”  He singled out Ukraine for special mention in this regard.  “Ukraine,” he wrote, “deserves full recognition for the peculiar genius and abilities of its people and for the requirements and possibilities of its development as a linguistic and cultural entity.”  But, he continued, “Ukraine is economically as much a part of Russia as Pennsylvania is a part of the United States.”  Meanwhile, the Baltic states and other satellite states, he advised, should not proceed from “feelings of revenge and hatred toward the Russian people who have shared their tragedy.”

Kennan would have rolled his eyes at the notion pressed by Clinton in his Atlantic article that, as president, he “tried to put Russia on another path.”  Kennan lacked the intellectual and ahistorical hubris of the Clinton foreign policy team.  He understood that Russians, not American policymakers, would decide Russia’s political future.  And the Russian political tradition, as the late Russian scholar Richard Pipes repeatedly noted, was one of “patrimonialism,” where all power flows directly from an autocratic leader or group of leaders.  Vladimir Putin fits within that Russian tradition.

I also recommend “How the West Sowed the Seeds of War in Ukraine” by Pedro Gonzalez, here.

I conclude with a reference to a resource that is not only, in my opinion, perhaps the very best of all those I noted in my research, but maybe one of the best in-depth historical analyses I have ever heard in a relatively brief delivery. It is entitled “Thoughts on Ukraine” and is on the podcast The MartyrMade podcast by Darryl Cooper.

I have learned — at times the hard way — that there are no guarantees in life, but in this case I will come close to assuring anyone who is willing to invest the almost 2 1/2 hours it will take to get through this discussion that your views on the many diplomatic misadventures along the way will almost certainly change to one degree or another. With that knowledge may well come, as it did for me, a real and chilling sense of foreboding for what the future holds, especially, obviously, as long as our National “leadership” class, led by the worst “President” in American history, remains in power.

Pray for Ukraine— and America!

Question: Do You Know a Single Person Who Cares Whether “The Academy” Even Exists?


Headline: “Will Smith resigns from the Academy over Chris Rock Oscars slap”

“The list of those I have hurt is long and includes Chris, his family, many of my dear friends and loved ones, all those in attendance, and global audiences at home,” Smith said.

The world — yes, the world, not just Ukraine and Russia — is at war, the American economy is imploding, we have become a legal impossibility — a nation without borders — the theoretical Leader of the Free World has no idea where he is or what he is saying more than half the time, the Vice President is a raving moron, our major cities look like some of the cities Putin just bombed, we have persons in “leadership” in Washington who are in many cases abysmally uneducated and who quite literally hate the Nation they are supposed to serve, we have a system of “Justice” which refuses to prosecute a single one of the serious criminals involved in the Black Lives Matter and Antifa riots but which, at the same time, holds scores of persons alleged to have committed crimes but who have never been charged in prison without bail. And yet, in the midst of this madness, many of our “citizens” are spending actual units of their time on Earth talking about movie stars doing what they do — acting like street people hitting each other and screaming obscenities at each other.

We are no longer a serious nation.

God help us.

Florida Ascendant: ‘It Ain’t Bragging If It’s True!’


Bragging rights of some new Floridians!

This meme so perfectly sums up the way we, and so many of our fellow Floridians (and DeSantis supporters, but I repeat myself!) feel about our State and perhaps those of us who are relatively new to The Sunshine State feel it even more keenly. But the column below from Powerline puts the numbers and data to the real phenomenon and those numbers are nothing short of remarkable! One line in that article really caught our eyes as discussed below.

As is obvious, I stole the title above from the Powerline piece (in the best plagiarism tradition of “our” “President”) but it fit too perfectly not to use it. The figures, from current census bureau data, speak for themselves and show that while the deepest blue of all the states, New York, California, Minnesota, and Illinois, are quite literally hemorrhaging population, Florida and Texas lead the country in population gain:

Current Census Bureau data speak for themselves:

Four of the nation’s top 10 metro areas with the highest population growth last year were in Florida — more than any other state, according to new US Census data.
In addition, two Florida counties qualified for the top 10 percentage population growth list.
Eight of the top 10 counties with the steepest numerical population declines were either in New York and California, according to the Census data.
Los Angeles County lost the most residents with 184,000, while New York County shed roughly 117,000, the numbers released last week show.

Statewide, Florida’s population increased by 211,000 between July 2020 and July 2021, according to the census report — second only to Texas.

California, Illinois and New York registered the sharpest overall population losses last year.

Florida’s growth isn’t mainly retirees. It is a great place to do business:

The US Census also revealed this month that the Sunshine State accounted for more new business applications than any other state.

Here is the part which really caught our eyes as we were in the city mentioned only a few weeks ago (to attend a National Leadership Conference sponsored by Hillsdale College) and the author summed up the way we felt about that city perfectly:

I have been to Florida four times in the last four months, and can attest that the state is booming. You pretty much have to see Naples, for example, to believe it. It isn’t just economic prosperity, either–Florida has an atmosphere of fun, activity, and freedom that draws people from across the country.

As we are folks who love to explore restaurants and great dining and, in my case, wine lists (!), we found Naples to be one of the great dining venues we have ever had the incredibly good fortune to visit. It is, as the author intimates, an amazing place that really does have to be experienced fully to appreciate all its beauty, glamor, wealth (our poor little Honda CRV looked like a jalopy in comparison to all the Bentleys, Rolls, Porches, Lamborghinis, etc.) and near-perfect climate.

But, as the author points out, no account of this success story would be complete if it did not note the superior leadership of our Governor and the Republican-controlled Legislature:

Florida benefits, obviously, from excellent leadership. Governor Ron DeSantis and the state’s Republican legislature have scored another win with the state’s anti-grooming law, which protects small children from being indoctrinated with LGBTQ+ theories in the public schools. Remarkably, liberals have chosen grooming as a hill to die on, as in the Oscars last night, even though polls show the Florida law is supported overwhelmingly by Florida Democrats, let alone Republicans and Independents.

As usual, DeSantis gets the last word:

During remarks ahead of the signing, DeSantis blasted Hollywood elites for repeatedly lying about the bill and claiming it is discriminatory.

“If the same Hollywood elites who upheld degenerates like Harvey Weinstein now oppose our efforts to protect parental rights, I wear that like a badge of honor,” DeSantis said.

The exodus of voters from blue states to red states is one of several demographic trends that bode well for conservatives in future decades.

Let me close this encomium to our adopted home State by posing the following questions about our national political scene, depressing though it is, as it relates to the 2024 Presidential Election. I would greatly appreciate any views anyone cares to offer as to the following issues which have been on my mind for quite some time and will move more and more to the forefront after the mid-terms as we move toward 2024:

  • Will Trump run in 2024?
  • Even if he does run, would DeSantis become the nominee?
  • If he does not run, is there a likely candidate on the scene anywhere close to DeSantis at this point?

Whatever the answers to those questions may be, it is painfully clear our poor, beleaguered, battered, embarrassed, and depressed Nation has only one way to go!

God Bless America!

Zelenskyy – A President Who Loves His Country! And Would Die For It.


“It was a privilege to see a leader in whom honor is personified.”

I write to urge every single American who has not seen the indescribably moving speech of President Zelenskyy and the heart-rending video which accompanied it to please, please watch it, as “those who watched Mr. Zelensky’s address to the joint congressional session won’t soon forget it.”, as stated in an op-ed in this morning’s Wall Street Journal. Here is the full video, with apologies for the nanny-warning of our betters, but this was the best one I could find.

It defied belief, living as we do in the cowardly world of pusillanimous Pajama Boys/Girls like Biden, Harris, Blinkin, Milley, Buttigieg, et al., to see such a leader, again as the WSJ piece referred to, “a leader in whom honor is personified.” As the author went on to say, “the least we can do is have his back.”, a sentiment with which I wholeheartedly agree, noting that one can agree with that term without beating the drums of war as so many wildly irresponsible “elites” are doing in Washington right now (referring, obviously, to hawks like Lindsey Graham, and others like him who are ready to send others’ sons and daughters into what is likely to become a slaughter, considering the lunatic cruelty being shown by Putin).

While I urge a full reading of Karl Rove’s piece in the WSJ, linked above, probably the best summary I have seen of the current situation after the speech is found in Powerline, by Scott Johnson, and I am taking the liberty of copying it out here for your convenience; I especially note the links in this article to the two pieces by Victor Davis Hanson which are, as usual, some of the best you will find on the subject anywhere. Here is the link. Here is the column:



Z was the 1969 political thriller that won the Academy Award for Best Foreign Film. Referring to the political assassination with which the film begins, “Z” stood for “he lives.” I hope that when the Russia’s war on Ukraine comes to an end, “Z” can stand for Zelenksy and his survival will be literal rather than metaphorical.

Zelensky’s appearance before Congress yesterday prompts these obvious thoughts.

• Ukraine is an independent and sovereign country. I support its persistence as such.

• Victor Davis Hanson presents the excruciating choices available to it under present circumstances in the American Greatness column “Zelensky’s classical choices.” He sketches four choices: Salamis, Thebes, Thermopylae, or Melos.

• If I were Ukrainian, I don’t know for which I would opt. What about Victor? He suggests it is too soon to tell (“These four choices depend not just on reason, morality, and emotion, but on the pulse of the battlefield in the next few days”).

• I support the choice of Ukrainians as represented by President Zelensky. If he choose to fight, we should support his desire to fight so long as it is consistent with the interests of the United States.

• Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is unprovoked aggression. Putin himself has been unable to state a reason that can be taken at face value.

• David Goldman invokes the specter of World War I in his Asia Times/PJ Media column “Reliving the nightmare of 1914.” Goldman cites Christopher Clark’s 2013 book The Sleepwalkers. I’m sure the thought is on the mind of many others.

• American interests limit what we can prudently do to support Ukraine’s resistance. How far can we go without provoking Russia into expanding the war or going to war with Russia ourselves?

• The Biden administration’s alleged efforts to “deter” Russia’s aggression were a complete and utter failure. The administration’s denial that it intended to “deter” Russia is pitiful.

• VDH’s “classical choices” column is somewhat clinical in nature. His own judgment is explicit here: “So far Zelenskyy has been brilliant as he expresses his appreciation for Western sanctions and arms. His insight seems to balance his otherwise unhinged demand for far more dangerous escalations—specifically to establish a no-fly zone and thus in World War III style confront, in the air above Ukraine, a bellicose Russia with the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.”

• He provides additional observations in today’s column “10 realities of Ukraine.” His tenth “reality” observes:

It is not “un-American” to point out that prior American appeasement under the Obama and the Biden Administrations explains not why Putin wished to go into Ukraine, but why he felt he could. It is not “treasonous” to say Ukraine and the United States previously should have stayed out of each other’s domestic affairs and politics — but still do not excuse Putin’s savage aggression. It is not traitorous to admit that Russia for centuries relied on buffer states between Europe — lost when its Warsaw Pact satellite members joined NATO after its defeat in the Cold War. But that reality also does not justify Putin’s savage attack.

That still leaves us with the question: What is to be done? I.e., what more is to be done, if anything?

It is, most decidedly, not my usual style to push any particular cause, loath as I am to be seen as one of the virtue signalers so thick on the ground these days, but I am making an exception in this case by urging everyone to help, to the extent they are able, by sending contributions to trustworthy charities who will actually use the money to help the pathetically besieged people of Ukraine survive. Our choice has been Franklin Graham’s Samaritan Purse which has set up a temporary hospital in Lviv, as shown on Tucker Carlson last night. The link for donations is here.

May God please deliver the people of Ukraine from their current nightmare of cruelty and May He punish mightily the savage Butcher of the Kremlin for his war crimes.

Jim George

Profile picture of Jim George