This has been a bad week for the MSM ? Never Trump forces.

First you had the Emmys that not only became a parody of Hollywood never trumpdom but actually managed to set another new low for viewers.

Then you had CNN reporting that their own months of insisting the Trump was deranged for saying he was wiretapped was false.

Next you had climate change folks suddenly declare their models from ten years ago to be overly alarmist

Then you had the possibility that the Obamacare repeal which they had considered dead might suddenly be alive again

And then to top it all off the President gives a speech to the UN that not only called out North Korea and Iran (to the point where the MSM found themselves defending them) but explicitly called out Socialism and Communism for what they’ve always been was crimes recipes for failure, poverty starvation and oppression.

All of these things are bad enough but in the most ironic twist of ate left their only hope of scoring a win against Trump comes from the one person they may hate more, Sarah Palin.

You see there is a special election coming up in Alabama and the president, administration and ironically the establishment are backing Senator Strange are backing Luther Strange the incumbent, in fact the president is going to make a personal appearence for Senator Strange.

But while Strange is Ok as far as GOP senators go the tea party wing backs Judge Roy Moore who ranks high on the most hated judges by the left list and none other than Sarah Palin herself is going to Alabama to campaign for him.

Now the reality for conservatives is that no matter who is elected Ro Moore or Luther Strange president Trump will have an ally who will help to build the wall, fight terror, defund Planned Parenthood and get some version of the Obamacare repealed passed.

But think about how far our friends on the left have fallen when their best hope to hand this president a symbolic defeat is at the hands of the woman they most despise.

Break out the popcorn boys, this is going to be fun.

[If] you do not speak up to warn the wicked about their ways, they shall die in their sins, but I will hold you responsible for their blood.    –Ezekiel 33:8

Massachusetts General Law defines abortion as “the knowing destruction of the life of an unborn child.” Further, it defines an “unborn child” as “the individual human life in existence and developing from implantation of the embryo in the uterus until birth.” Now, we can argue about whether that individual human life began at implantation or at conception, but Massachusetts law is clear that the unborn child is a life and not just a “blob of tissue.” Unfortunately, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) in Moe vs Secretary of Administration and Finance (1981) decided that taxpayer funds must be used to kill that life if its mother so wishes.

Prior to Moe, the state operated under the Doyle-Flynn Amendment – the state-level equivalent of the federal Hyde Amendment, which has been upheld repeatedly by the US Supreme Court – which prohibited taxpayer funds from being used to pay for abortions. But in 1981, the SJC took it upon itself to go beyond the federal Roe v. Wade decision and decreed that taxpayer funds must indeed be used to pay for abortions for poor women under the guise of “equal protection.” Why the legally-recognized life in the womb is not also due equal protection of the laws is not clear, but the SJC ruled that since state Medicaid funds were used to pay for legitimate maternity care and other health care for indigent women, Medicaid must also pay for abortions.

As did Roe v. Wade, this decision clearly overstepped the judicial role of interpreting the Massachusetts Constitution and enshrined a policy decision with the weight of a constitutional amendment, thus prohibiting the legislature from even debating the issue. Legally, the only proper response is an actual constitutional amendment that the SJC cannot misinterpret to its own ends. The Alliance to Stop Taxpayer Funded Abortion has taken up the challenge and is currently gathering signatures with the hope of bringing this question to Bay State voters in November 2020.

The amendment as proposed reads “Nothing in this Constitution shall require taxpayer funding for abortions.” Note that it does not make abortion illegal in MA. It only permits the legislature to debate whether taxpayer funds should be used to pay for them.

The amendment process in Massachusetts is extraordinarily difficult. The first step is to gather 64,750 signatures by November, 2017. In actuality, this means we need to gather close to 100,000 signatures because it seems like the Secretary of State’s office looks for any excuse to reject valid signatures. If there is a stray pen mark on a sheet with 25 valid signatures, the entire sheet may be thrown out. So, volunteers – including my wife and I – are being very careful with the signed sheets.

Assuming we get the required signatures, the motion must be approved by 50 members of the state legislature in two consecutive sessions in order to be put on the ballot in 2020 to allow citizens to vote on the amendment. Assuming it passes, Massachusetts will be in line with the federal government  and the legislative history of the state in letting the legislature decide whether taxpayer funds will be used to pay to knowingly destroy the life of an unborn child.

There are many ways you can help. Of course, you can volunteer, or donate to the Alliance, and if you’re a registered Massachusetts voter, please sign a petition. And please keep our efforts in your prayers.

Update: Stacy McCain talks about this (and a few other things) here.

Many college students have become increasingly strident in their views about the U.S. Constitution despite understanding little about the document.

These trends have grown more troublesome in the past few years in the media law course I teach. In the past, most students recognized that they didn’t know too much about the U.S. Constitution. Now many think the most important treatise in U.S. history got many things wrong.

This generation–known as iGen–were born between 1995 and 2012. These young people have spent much of their lives with a smartphone in their hands. Jean Twenge, a psychology professor at San Diego State University, has written about this generation–many of whom populate today’s colleges and universities. “Opposing viewpoints can’t just be argued against; they have to be shut down,” she wrote recently in The Wall Street Journal. For the most part, it appears that these viewpoints come from the social justice warriors they had as teachers.

In an online discussion for my law class, some students said they simply want to do away with the U.S. Constitution and start over. “The Constitution is America’s sacred cow,” one student wrote. “It was written by a bunch of rich, white men to protect other rich, white men. The framers did not trust ‘ordinary’ people to make every day decisions. It is a racist document, although others would argue this. It is completely ambiguous. It was written in 1787 and it is now 2017 and we still refer back to this document and debate what the framers truly meant…. Progressives want government to change things while conservatives favor the status quo.”

The student was nonplussed when I pointed out that 12 states—almost all controlled by Republicans—have passed legislation to call a constitutional convention. The central focus of the bid to rewrite the U.S. Constitution comes from people who want to limit government power. For more information, see http://prospect.org/article/march-toward-constitutional-convention-slows-crawl

The argument that the U.S. Constitution is racist and sexist was a constant theme in the students’ responses.

A typical response came from one student. “It was stated that slavery was not prohibited, and it basically encouraged taxing on these human beings that were deemed as property. One simple section made way for racism, prejudice, and everything in-between…. Since this was the foundation of our country, it has obviously led to more issues involving race hundreds of years later.”

It was rather ironic when I asked if anyone in class whether they could describe the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments for me. No one could. These amendments eliminated slavery and provided the power to enforce the change. No one could name the five freedoms guaranteed under the First Amendment–let alone provide the protections of more than two or three amendments. Alas, that is probably true for many Americans.

Other complaints centered on the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment—a constant meme from leftists, including many educators.

“[T]here is no reason a regular citizen needs an assault rifle for ‘protection,” one student wrote. “It is too vague and has allowed for people to get away with literal murder in some cases because they can invoke their ‘right to bear arms.’”

Anti-Trump sentiment appeared in many comments. Many students thought that the Electoral College should be abandoned because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016. One student argued that the law should require that presidential candidates must have political experience.

Another student maintained that no one over 50 years old should be allowed to seek the presidency.

“If anyone under the age of 35 is considered too young, then anyone over the age of 50 should be considered too old,” the student argued. “They are still yearning for the good old days, and they try to replicate their youth or young adulthood. They are not in touch with the changes that are going on around them, or they refuse to accept the changes.”

I pointed out that such a requirement would violate laws—much like those against racism and sexism—under which age cannot be used as a criterion for discrimination.

Simply put, the attitudes in the discussion struck me as a fundamental change in the views of my students. I think these attitudes are largely a result of the increased number of social justice warriors in academia.

Unlike many of my colleagues, I don’t impose my conservative views on my students. Nevertheless, I do try to point out the logical fallacies of many of the positions leftists take about the U.S. Constitution.

It appears that I have a lot of work to do this semester.

the reality is those events are walking talking Trump 2020 ads that are going to coin votes for him in every swing state that the left has to win back if they are going to beat him next time around.

The Grand Prize Winner of the Boston Common Protest Pageant: Donald Trump 2020 Campaign

Ever since I covered the Boston marches this month I’ve been explaining to anyone who will listen that these marches in general and ANTIFA in particular, while making leftists in blue states feel good and self righteous about themselves, are going to coin votes for Donald Trump.  I got an awful lot of pushback on twitter for saying that celebrations of stifling free speech, these chants and the violence that came with them were politically foolish.  Tweets like this were typical

Accordingly like online leftists the media pretty much ignored ANTIFA’s labeling of all Trump supports as Fascists and Nazis and even defended their violence in accordance to the 1st law of Media outrage which states:

The level of Outrage or interest of the media and their allies on the left concerning any insult or prevarication concerning a person or thing will routinely be equal to the inverse of the degree of the political distance between said media / leftists and the target of said insult or prevarication at the time it is mad

We lo and behold the day after we were treated to ANTIFA chants of “No Trump, No Wall, No USA at all” the blogfather is noticing the same thing I am

I’ve noticed a sudden media pivot against Antifa in the last couple of days, which I assume means that someone has polled this stuff and it’s electoral poison for Democrats. Which should come as no surprise, unless you live in a Media Bubble.

And we’re seeing stuff like this from Joe Scarborough Mika and the panel:

as had Headline News:

Even Michael Moore has figured it out:

The Question is, why the sudden change? Well it’s all in accordance with DaTechGuy’s 2nd Law of Media Outrage

The level of acceptance of the positions and/or actions of any group or organization by the left and media is directly proportional to their current or potential value in electing liberal Democrats.

One doesn’t have to be an expensive political consultant to know that visuals of people in masks beating reporters and their political foes combined with chants of “No Fascist USA” and “No USA at all” being linked to the single most visible group of leftists/Democrats is not going to help Democrat Senators running in blue states.  That’s why the LA Times is doing all it can to segregate ANTIFA from the rest of the left, but as Dave Weigel put it this week:

And with that inability to thread the needle the days of the MSM defending ANTIFA have ended as the folks at Philadelinquency explain

For those of you who love putting on black bandanas it’s going to get interesting as most of your conformist liberal friends grow from disagreement to disavowing political alignment and then that may even contort into a clear divide and perhaps even separation and you two blocking each other on social media. The liberal voting mass will listen to their “smart friend” who is trying to help out Senator Casey or Save Claire! and feel less inclined to march with you. It may turn into complete ostracization at political rallies and events. Political expediency will demand this. It’s a political singularity that is a certainty. You will not be able to escape it.

For those of you who are liberal and hold down a corporate job: as you’ve been more than welcoming to extremism these last few months your new-found discovery that extremism is bad and unproductive in politics will force you into logic pretzels you never thought possible. You’ll cope by ignoring most of the shit you’ve said or done because there’s a ring on the merry-go-round that needs to be grabbed. You can’t have any of your more far-left and green friends holding you back.

How bad has it gotten for ANTIFA? Even Washington Post Humorists are denouncing them:

Now, I am an unapologetic, unrepentant, unreconstructed liberal. But I have absolutely no doubts about this issue, for reasons moral, ethical, logical and, above all, tactical.

And believe me under that 2nd law of media outrage those final three words will be the primary driver of all the media’s reactions from here on in.

Update:  Now you really know the 2nd law is in play, even San Francisco Nancy is coming out against Antifa.


If you like what you’ve seen here and want to support independent journalism please consider hitting DaTipJar to help me secure a full paycheck for the week I have to take off (I’ve just been called back to my job starting today) while Stacy McCain is here ($460) please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



We’ve talked about how the events on the Boston Common justified some folks on the left and a few days later we named the Honorable Mentions in the Contest of being the big winner from events on the Boston Common.

Now the time has come to name the biggest single winner from the events of last weekend: Donald J. Trump.

To some of you this might seem counter intuitive. Since Charlottsville the entire MSM has fully embraced their new “Donald Trump/Nazi/KKK” meme to the point where you have to make real effort to find the word “Russia” in any kind of coverage anymore.

Furthermore in Boston for a week we’ve heard about a Nazi/Klan rally about to happen in Boston and once the event took place the media fully embraced the tale of tens of thousands of ordinary citizens assembling without violence united to counter the Nazis and their hero Donald J Trump.

Unfortunately for the MSM there were two problems with their uncritical assessment of the events of Boston. First of all the conspicuous lack of Nazis to protest.

IF ONE LINE captured the essence of Saturday’s Boston Common rally and counter-protest, it was a quote halfway through Mark Arsenault’s Page 1 story in the Boston Globe:

“‘Excuse me,’ one man in the counter-protest innocently asked a Globe reporter. ‘Where are the white supremacists?'”

That was the day in a nutshell. Participants in the “Boston Free Speech Rally” had been demonized as a troupe of neo-Nazis prepared to reprise the horror that had erupted in Charlottesville. They turned out to be a couple dozen courteous people linked by little more than a commitment to — surprise! — free speech.

And then there were the actions of some of the protesters particularly the ANTIFA folks which while downplayed by the national and local media were highlighted by Boston Police Tweets like this

and this:

and covered like my own and others showing ANTIFA thugs being, well Antifa thugs

And a few days later in Arizona, they were going after police again:

A group of anti-Trump demonstrators used gas canisters, rocks and bottles to assault police Tuesday night and create havoc at what officials said was mostly a peaceful protest in Phoenix.

Video captured by a local reporter also shows a smoking object being thrown at police while hundreds of officers attempted to keep order at a rally after President Trump’s speech at the Phoenix Convention Center had ended.

Targeting police might be popular with the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democrat party, but swing voters who don’t like their car windows smashed or their small business vandalized might not be all that anxious to vote for a party whose foot soldiers are masked and whose violence the media is defending them and calling em peace activists.

And even if you accept that the violence was from a comparatively small part of the crowd in Boston, the chants calling the USA racist and fascists were not.

Yeah that will get you those votes you need to flip back swing states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin or Iowa.

And while you aren’t seeing the MSM play any of those chants trust me, videos like that one are being shared all over facebook and the fact that they can be seen on facebook and not on ABC/NBC/CBS/MSNBC or CNN will simply confirm the President’s charge that the MSM have been conveyors of fake news all along.

The events of Boston and Phoenix might make folks in blue states and a media obsessed with statues and millionaire footballs players without seven figure paychecks feel good about themselves

But the reality is those events are walking talking Trump 2020 ads that are going to coin votes for him in every swing state that the left has to win back if they are going to beat him next time around.

Now of course it’s possible that Donald Trump might decide that as much fun as it is to bait the left and the Establishment GOP he’d much rather go back to his old life.

But if he decides to run for re-election, in my opinion, the events of Boston and Phoenix have already done the job.

Useful idiots indeed.


if you like what you’ve seen here and want to support independent journalism please consider hitting DaTipJar to help me secure a full paycheck for next week ($270 to go) please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



20 years ago the Media found itself in a situation they didn’t want to be in. The had gone all in on the death and funeral of Princess Diana when the day before her funeral Mother Theresa of Calcutta died. This invariably produced coverage comparisons that didn’t make the MSM look good like this from Mike Barnicle at the globe:

Realistically, nobody expects the coverage of Mother Teresa’s passing to equal the volume accorded Princess Diana. After all, Mother Teresa does not have two handsome children to appear in solemn procession behind her casket. Will not have millions of bouquets tossed in the street outside her palatial home. Wore only one outfit. Touched the emotions of a largely invisible group and did so far from the light of glamour.

That cut the MSM to the quick and they were put on the spot as a network exec admitted

One network news executive who requested anonymity said, “Honestly, we wouldn’t be sending all of our anchors and covering Mother Teresa’s funeral so extensively if it weren’t for all the Diana coverage.

“We’d be strongly criticized if we didn’t cover Mother Teresa in a big way.”

And while he made up for it by giving Christopher Hitchens one more chance to hit her during the funeral,the late Peter Jennings didn’t like being in a box.

ABC’s Jennings said TV news is in a no-win situation: “Mother Teresa’s death has not led to the worldwide frenzy that led us to break into coverage (for Diana). Given the extent to which the media covered Princess Diana, we will invariably be criticized for our coverage of Mother Teresa. But Mother Teresa is a very important story, and I don’t think the two should be compared.”

And that Brings us to Claire McCaskill and Missouri State Senator Maria Chappelle.

As I’ve already written McCaskill when it comes to electoral politics McCaskill is one of the smartest pols in the game. She knew that 2012 was iffy and made sure post Obamacare she faced a Republican of her own choosing (instead of the one Sarah Palin had backed) She was willing to go after Harry Reid in a public way when it would be noticed but wouldn’t make a difference in terms of the Senate and knowing that she was going to need Trump voters tweeted out

and having made the statement against violent protests at the inauguration she backed them up despite loud objections from the left figuring it was all good:

So she will rejoice in stories like this and posts like this and highlight them to distance herself from the violent protests because regardless of the face she presents to the twitter world the radicals in her state who turned a thug like Michael Brown into a gentle giant know that the reality is she has their back.

Well unfortunately for her, one of those lefties Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal choose this time to on facebook her hope that the President of the United States be assassinated.

Missouri lawmaker acknowledged Thursday that she posted and later deleted a comment on Facebook about hoping for President Donald Trump’s assassination, saying she was frustrated with the president’s response to the white supremacist rally and violence in Charlottesville, Virginia.

and in a state that Donald Trump won by almost 20 points and the GOP controls both houses of the legislature by wide margins local democrats Democrats wasted no time calling for her head:

Stephen Webber, the Missouri Democratic Party Chair, said in a statement, “State Senator Chappelle-Nadal’s comments are indefensible. All sides need to agree that there is no room for suggestions of political violence in America — and the Missouri Democratic Party will absolutely not tolerate calls for the assassination of the President. I believe she should resign.”

The Senate Democratic Causus is condemning the comment. Senate Democratic Leader Gina Walsh said, “I strongly condemn and disavow Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal’s horrible comments. Promoting, supporting or suggesting violence against anyone, especially our elected leaders, is never acceptable. There is too much rancor and hate in today’s political discourse, and Sen. Chappelle-Nadal should be ashamed of herself for adding her voice to this toxic environment. Sen. Chappelle-Nadal’s unacceptable behavior has no place in our caucus, the Capitol, or the Democratic Party. Let me be clear, her views in no way represent the constituents of the 14th District or the great State of Missouri.”

And with the combination of political violence in the news her own statements about getting past last week’s violence, and the electoral polling in Missouri going in the wrong direction tide of Claire McCaskill joined in as well:

U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and the chairman of the Missouri Democratic Party both called Thursday for the resignation of Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal, for posting a Facebook comment stating: “I hope Trump is assassinated!”

“I condemn it,” McCaskill said in a brief emailed statement. “It’s outrageous. And she should resign.”

Now that’s a very clear statement with no ambiguity at all, but there is one thing I find odd and interesting about her condemnation of Maria Chappelle Nadal.  While you can find Senator McCaskill’s condemnation of State Senator Maria Chappelle Nadal words mentioned in just about every news story on the subject, you know where you won’t find it, at least as of 8 PM Eastern time last night?  Anywhere on her twitter feed.

That might seem odd until you consider this story

Which was reported from Netroots nation

let’s keep in mind that Evans is a left-leaning candidate hoping to change Georgia from red to blue. But that’s not enough. It seems the issue is, at least in part, that Evans is white.

Evans, a Smyrna state legislator who is white, was drowned out by demonstrators supporting Stacey Abrams, an Atlanta lawmaker who is black. A phalanx of sign-wielding protesters formed a line in front of her as soon as she took the podium, while others chanted “support black women” and “trust black women.” What followed was several minutes of pleading – “ let’s talk through it,” Evans implored repeatedly – and an attempt to plow through the speech.

Like I said Claire McCaskill is a smart woman who knows that while she can’t win Missouri without Trump voters the last thing she needs is far left of the party that dominates social media coming down on her for daring to call for the resignation of a black woman Senator in her state.

That’s the type of thing that can produce a primary candidate of color who while not a big danger to win in a general election is likely to force her to make public statements that she really doesn’t want to make.

McCaskill may have had no choice but to condemn Senator Nadal but she’s no fool so she’ll do all she can to make sure her condemnation remains as local a story as possible.

That being the case let me repeat my advice of January to her potential opponents.

If I was running the RNC or a conservative pac I’d encourage donors to quietly start financing a radical leftists, possibly a black nationalist to primary her and point to this event as a reason to do so

Hell if it was my call I’d take a card out of McCaskill’s own deck and quietly finance a “Draft Maria Chappelle Nadal for US Senate” movement.  I suspect the end result would be quite efficacious for the GOP.

And remember any Democrat who does anything to prevent a black woman from running for that seat must be racist.


If you want a source of reporting other than the MSM please consider hitting DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



This is one of those “to tell the story I first have to tell you this story” posts, so please bear with.

During the early months of last year (February, to be precise), I posted a lengthy dissertation on my personal blog about my favorite guitar and its assorted adventures since coming into my possession a few years ago. Said guitar is a 1976 Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, which as noted in the aforementioned post is pretty much the absolute low end of desirability among electric guitar players/collectors in general and Les Paul aficionados in particulari. This holds firm even with the Les Paul being rivaled only by the Fender Stratocaster in terms of popularity among six-string gunslingers. Nevertheless, it is my instrument of choice.

In my case, I bought my Les Paul off of ebay (some hard-earned wisdom when it comes to guitar buying and ebay: don’t mix the two). It arrived sorely in need of some tender loving care, which after being applied transformed the guitar into a genuinely superb instrument despite all the slagging said model, made during said time period, usually receives.

Although it seems impossible given how you cannot find a rock’n’roll band of any stripe from the past forty-five years without a Les Paul being close at, if not in, hand, there was a time when Gibson dropped it from its product line due to years of steadily declining sales. Throughout nearly the entirety of the 1960s, not a single one was built. It was only in 1969 that demand created by the Eric Claptons and Jimmy Pages of this world among others reached a sufficient level for the guitar’s reintroduction, and even then haltingly; it would be two decades before new ownership both rescued Gibson from imminent demise and brought the Les Paul back in anything close to its original, highly prized form. How highly prized? The ones made from 1957 to 1960, after which production was halted, routinely command six figures, often with a crooked number leading the way.

Which leads from this story to the story, namely A.J. Delgado.

Ms. Delgado was, until the end of last year, a longtime member of conservative new media’s upper echelon. The daughter of Cuban immigrants, Ms. Delgado was an established lawyer before she started routinely gracing assorted high flyer publications and becoming a regular guest on political television. In last year’s Presidential election – which, by the way, is still over – she threw her support to Donald Trump, going so far as to directly work for his campaign. It was during this time period she met a man who also worked for the campaign, and as happens (not excusing it, just stating the facts) an office romance ensued. Yes, the man was married, but he swore to Ms. Delgado that he and his wife were separated. It later became apparent the man’s interpretation of what entails being separated from one’s spouse was quite different than the norm, as when Ms. Delgado informed him she was unexpectedly expecting, he responded with, “So is my wife.” Awkward.

After dropping a few quite unsubtle hints about what had been/was going on, Ms. Delgado went silent on social media for several months while most everyone who had feted her just weeks before dropped her like a hot potato. No more writing gigs. No more television appearances. It got to the point where a now thoroughly unemployed Ms. Delgado was forced to move in with her mother. She recently gave birth to a son, and has now re-emerged on social media talking not politics, but personal matters related to being a new, single mother.

A third element now enters the story, that being a story in and of itself: Jesus and the woman caught in adultery. When you read John’s account, note that there was no question of whether the woman was being falsely accused. She was guilty. The penalty for adultery under Mosaic law was being stoned to death. The law called for both guilty parties to be stoned to death, but apparently the man involved in this affair was either considered insufficiently guilty or was deemed inadequate for this exercise’s primary purpose which had nothing to do with following the law. It was an effort to trap Jesus in His own words. Say let her go, and Jesus would be violating the law. Say stone her, and all of Jesus’ words about forgiving sin and such would be exposed as hollow rhetoric. Let’s see you get out of this one, carpenter boy!

Jesus, rather than responding, said nothing; instead (depending on which translation you read) stooping over or sitting down on the ground and beginning to write in the dust with His finger. What He wrote was not recorded. Most theologians and such over the ensuing centuries have surmised Jesus was writing down a list of the sins committed by the would-be rock chuck gang. Could well be. Could also be He was writing, “Get ready to be disappointed, boys; you’re about to get the first and last word in mic drop a couple of thousand years before there are any mics to drop.” At this point Jesus stood up, said His famous few words about whoever was there that was without sin could go right ahead and start turning the adulteress into a miniature quarry, and resumed his writing as the crowd one by one dropped their stones in more ways than one and walked away, eventually leaving only Jesus and the adulteress.

Jesus, doubtless thankful that Richard Rosenblatt and Ritchie Cordell had not yet written “I Think We’re Alone Now,” asked what to the woman most likely seemed like a bizarre question: where are your accusers? Has no one condemned you? She stifled the temptation of responding, “Uh … don’t you see there’s no one here? Why are you asking me the obvious?” Instead, she replied with a simple, “No, Lord.” Presumably she had heard of Jesus before this moment; He was the talk of the nation. Perhaps she had even heard Him speak, or heard one of His disciples when Jesus sent them out to evangelize. Perhaps not. Nevertheless, even in her utterly terrified state – remember, just a few minutes before this moment she was going to be brutally executed – she realized the Man before her was far, far more than just another itinerant preacher. Jesus had done what no mere man could have done. He had saved her life.

Jesus then said, “Neither do I (condemn you). Go and sin no more.” Mull this over for a moment. Jesus neither condemned the woman for her actions nor condoned them. Instead, he offered mercy and grace accompanied by a stern warning: leave your past life behind. No more adultery. You should be dead right now. Instead, this is your chance to begin life anew. Don’t blow it. (It has long and often been surmised the woman was Mary Magdalene, who would later reappear in the Gospels, but there is no hard Scriptural evidence for this either yea or nay.)

By now, the logical conclusion is, “Ah-HAH! He’s comparing the story of Jesus and the adulteress to A.J. Delgado’s story!” Actually, no, although it does serve a purpose of illustrating why people should lay off the judgmental junk. The real comparison is between Ms. Delgado and the Les Paul guitar in general, my Les Paul Deluxe in particular.

Like the Les Paul, Ms. Delgado’s glory days, if you will, came before she went offline to focus on her new role as a single mom. Like the Les Paul on its first go-around, Ms. Delgado was shunned. Like my Les Paul Deluxe, since her reentry into the public realm Ms. Delgado has been considered as quite the lesser to her former self, having had an affair with a married man and having birthed a child out of wedlock. This time last year she was the hot hand, the prominent feature. Now, she changes diapers in solitude, the cameras and clamor having long departed.

It is easy to say Ms. Delgado is reaping what she has sown, thus eliminating the need to extend any of that love, grace, and mercy stuff. Sure, give her credit for not murdering … er, aborting her son when it would have been all too easy to do so, deny all rumors of an affair, and carry on with everything as before. Other than that, forget about it. And her.

There is another option.

One could try the neither condoning nor condemning tack. You know, what would Jesus do. Or, in this case, did. He offered the adulteress a fresh start, bringing her back literally from the brink of death and telling her you have another chance; don’t throw it away by throwing yourself into the wrong man’s arms again. He offered her grace and mercy. All she had to do was accept it and, going forward, walk with Him figuratively by her side, following His teachings and allowing herself to be transformed by His love. You know … like my Les Paul Deluxe when it was properly treated, changing it from a somewhat battered and thoroughly unwanted relic to something of immense value. At least to me. And certainly Ms. Delgado is of infinitely greater value than any guitar.

So what do you say? Maybe extend the same love, grace, and mercy to her God has extended to each of us? Maybe send her some encouraging words and lift her up in prayer? Maybe, just maybe, acknowledge that in devoting herself to her son Ms. Delgado is doing something of great value, something that deserves a tip of the cap to the person doing this thing?

C’mon. We can do it.

Let’s do it.

The party is already in bad shape. If we show people we’re a bunch of thieves, it will destroy us. In the name of party unity, please drop this fight.

Paul Dever 1948 to Tip O’Neill after stealing a party primary from him

Then perhaps they wouldn’t have to worry about this:

At the heart of this matter is a knowable fact: are the votes of the DSCC delegates that were cast and counted on Saturday, May 20 in the California Democratic Party elections accurate and valid?

To answer this question, the California Democratic Party will need to investigate the possibility that individuals who secured delegate badges were not, in fact, those actual delegates. Additionally, the CDP will need to determine why ineligible individuals were awarded delegate badges as proxies and were not

screened out. The CDP will also need to explain why financial eligibility is not clearly marked on credentialing materials. Finally, the CDP will have to answer how multiple individuals were able to obtain multiple ballots and vote more than once.

This is what we’re getting Kimberly Ellis a San Francisco activist concerning her run for state chair against Eric C. Bauman as the NYT reports

The party is expected to issue a final ruling on Ms. Ellis’s allegations by Aug. 20; in an interview, she said she would go to court if the party ruled against her. This has left Mr. Bauman, who encountered a barrage of shouts of “not my chairman” when he delivered his victory speech, struggling to put behind him a contest that has been the subject of recounts even as he seeks to position Democrats for a challenging congressional election in 2018.

The irony of the same Democrat activists who have insisted for years that voter ID is racism and that voter fraud is a myth are going whole hog into this fight is delightful, but what’s really interesting is the contrast to 1948 when James Michael Curly and his machine stole a delegate election from Tip O’Neill and figured (correctly) that O’Neill would in the end drop his contesting of the election because such a revelation would have destroyed the Democrat party in Massachusetts at a time when the party had never held a majority in the Massachusetts House of Representatives.

That willingness to hide corruption paid off.  Other than a brief period from 1953-1954 the Democrats had had the majority in the state ever since from that point on Tip O’Neill’s was set on a path that would lead him to the Speakership of the House of Representatives.

Of course California circa 2017 is not Massachusetts circa 1948 and I seriously doubt that a A black woman who supports Bernie Sanders with a campaign slogan “Unbought and Unbossed” is going to left the party steal an election ( assuming they actually did ). With the Democrats supermajority in the state and current demographics  I doubt even being exposed as a bunch of thieves can cost them the Majority in California.

But we can still hope can’t we?

Via Hotair


A quick Layoff bleg update. Yesterday was the scheduled end to my layoff bleg and I’m sorry to say we didn’t manage half of the goal I had set although we did manage to raise enough to get me a paycheck this week and next week. This will make August a very lean month.

So if you are inclined and at all able I would ask you to hit DaTipJar at this time even if we don’t make the goal another $315 will mean a full paycheck for August 25th.

Update: At the last minute a tip jar hit brought us to $1365 (not counting paypal fees of course) that makes us only 2 $15 tipjar hits away from that Aug 25th paycheck and just 12 $100 tipjar hits from making the entire goal and guaranteeing me a paycheck till the day Stacy McCain Makes his speech in Leominster MA Sept 9th.

Please consider getting us to that point.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basic but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



By John Ruberry

“And it was inevitable that some of these people pushed back…”
Ray Bradbury, The Martian Chronicles.

Could it be that the deep-blue residents of America’s second-most populous county, Cook County–Chicago is the county seat–have had enough?

Probably not, at least yet. But serious dissent may be bubbling as the effects of Cook County’s unpopular soda tax sink to the bottom of the glass.

Cook County Board President Toni “Taxwinkle” Preckwinkle, a former Chicago alderman who represented the University of Chicago area–the Obamas were among her constituents–touted that tax as a public health measure. The new tax covers not just soda but also many other sweetened beverages including those with corn syrup, such as diet sodas, some iced teas, and bottled sweetened Starbucks coffee–but not, for instance, cavity-causing Frappuccinos prepared at a Starbucks location by a barista. Even “free refills” are taxed now. But Preckwinkle, a hardened leftist, exposed her true colors by suing a retail association that delayed collection in a legal challenge of the tax for a month for $17 million of what she claims is lost revenue. That is how thug states such as Venezuela and Russia are run. Dissent will not be tolerated–enemies will be punished.

Preckwinkle defeated a Democratic incumbent in a 2010 primary election vowing to repeal an unpopular one-percent county sales tax. She phased it out, yes. But last year Preckwinkle brought it back.

And the soda tax was never about health. If it was, then why the lawsuit? Taxwinkle is a liar. Besides, federal law prevents taxing food stamp recipients–there are nearly 900,000 of them in Cook County–on their sweetened beverage purchases. Poor people consume larger amounts of sweetened beverages than wealthier folks and the health problems blamed on these drinks, such as diabetes and obesity, are more prevalent among the less wealthy.

The soda tax is a penny per ounce. That doesn’t seem like much, but the cost of a case of Diet Coke, as you seen in this Tweet, soars by 5o-percent after the Taxwinkle tax is figured in.

My friends and co-workers–and yes, there are some liberal Democrats within that group–are furious about the soda tax, even the ones who don’t drink what most people here call “pop.” Yesterday one man told me, “I live just south of Lake County, I’m going to buy all my Coke there,” adding, “There is a big sign outside the Target there, ‘No county sugary drink tax here.'” And of course he won’t only buy soda there–he’ll probably buy most, maybe all of his groceries there. Why wait in two long check-out lines? Grocers on the wrong side of the county line not only will face lower sales, some may be forced to close down and of course lay off their employees. Oh, I forgot to tell that new Lake County shopper that he should top off his gas tank up there, as there is also a Cook County gasoline tax.

And there are so many other taxes Cook County residents, particularly Chicagoans, have to endure. In an example provided by the free market Illinois Policy Institute, the base price of a two liter bottle of pop is $2.49. But when the 67 county soda tax is added, on top of the nation’s highest 10.25 percent sales tax, and an additional 3 percent Chicago soda tax, the true cost of that soda jug is $3.49. And if you accept a bag, paper or plastic, when you buy that sugary drink in Chicago, there is an additional 7 cent per bag tax. Unless you are paying by food stamps, formally known as SNAP–the “N” stands for nutrition–with your Illinois Link card.

When was the last time you devoured a grocery bag?

Keeping track of all of these taxes are a nightmare for retailers. That extra cost of course is passed on to consumers.

Last month Illinois’ income tax rate was hiked by 32 percent. Illinoisans are burdened with among the highest property rates in the nation. Yet, Illinois, Cook County, and Chicago are functionally bankrupt, which exposes another left-wing lie–fiscal stability in Democratic-run sinkholes is always only just one more tax hike away.

Why does Crook County need the soda tax, and yes, the next tax, what ever that one is going to be? To pay for lavish but woefully-underfunded county worker pensions and the Cook County Health System.

Chicago is a sanctuary city and Cook is a sanctuary county–Cook County health facilities are often the health care provider of choice of the area’s large population of illegal immigrants. No, I’m not saying we should cut off care to illegals with health concerns, but as a Cook County taxpayer, it’s fair to know what that care costs me.

Liberalism is very expensive.

Blogger in downtown Chicago

Next year Taxwinkle will face voters. She’ll probably be reelected. Rebellions take time to build, after all, it took ten years from the passage of the Stamp Act until the first battle of the American Revolution to be fought.

How did Preckwinkle fare in her last election? She ran unopposed.

Shame on you, Cook County Republican Party.

Meanwhile Illinois, Cook County, and Chicago continue to lose residents.

Quietly, the rebellion has begun.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Via Drudge McClatchy reports that Democrats desperate to find anything that resembles victor are finding some hope deep in a few state legislative races:

In a party desperate for victories, Democratic candidates are finding the most success in little-noticed state legislative races. They’ve already won four seats previously under Republican control, some of them in battleground districts that split evenly between President Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Party leaders say it’s a sign that they are benefitting from a broad backlash to the Republican president, one that failed to lift a quartet of special election U.S. House candidates — including Jon Ossoff in Georgia or Rob Quist in Montana — to victories of their own.

In one respect this is not that huge a surprise.  After all in 2014 the GOP had a spectacular year on the state level.

On the state level, the wave continued. State legislatures are also now controlled by Republicans.  That translates to 68 out of 98 legislative chambers according to Real Clear Politics, who also notes that 23 Gubernatorial offices are now held by Republicans in states where both houses are also under Republican control.

Politico noted that Republicans gained more than 300 seats in legislatures and controls legislatures in 29 states; the biggest gains since the 1920’s.

And in 2016 things, as Ballotpedia reports, things continued to improve

Republicans flipped 138 seats while Democrats flipped 95 seats. The Republican Party‘s share of seats in state legislatures increased by 43 seats across the country. Republicans controlled 4,161 (56.4 percent) of the 7,383 legislative seats heading into the election.

In 2010 and 2014, Republicans won hundreds of formerly Democratic-held state legislative seats across the United States. These past successes put them at a relatively greater partisan risk in 2016, since the GOP held a higher percentage of the seats up for election than Democrats. However, Republicans were able to maintain and increase their advantage in state legislative chambers nationwide.

Given the extreme gains for the GOP it would be quite a shock if there wasn’t some recovery for Dems and that McClatchy Story suggests the Democrats are investing in those local races to try to make it happen.

Democrats have vowed to pay more attention to state legislative races after losing hundreds of those seats during President Obama’s tenure. There are signs the party is doing just that six months into Trump’s presidency: The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a high-profile group with the support of former President Barack Obama and former Attorney General Eric Holder, raised more than $10 million in the second fundraising quarter.

So given these facts and the latest polls showing Trump at 39% can someone tell me why in April Nancy Pelosi was talking like this:(emphasis mine)

Addressing the 2018 midterm elections, Pelosi revealed that Democrats are considering an expansive offensive in Texas, including a possible challenge to Republican U.S. Rep. Pete Olson, who represents Sugar Land. The diversifying Houston suburb is the same region former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay represented during his reign at the U.S. Capitol, and Trump carried that district by eight points.

Earlier this year, Democrats announced they were considering mounting serious challenges to Republican U.S. Reps. Pete Sessions of Dallas and John Culberson of Houston, in addition to their typical target — the West Texas district of Republican U.S. Rep. Will Hurd.

An audience member asked Pelosi if the party intended to go after any Republicans in seats that are overwhelmingly conservative. Pelosi said no; House Democrats would spend their money only on seats they believe they can win, she said.

She said that would “absolutely” be enough for Democrats to win the gavel in 2018.

But Sunday, even after the GOP fell on it’s face over Obamacare and the White House was playing musical staff Nancy Pelosi is reportedly saying stuff like this

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Sunday it was “unimportant” for Democrats to win back a majority in the lower chamber in the mid-term elections, The Hill reported.

“That’s so unimportant. What is important is that we have the lively debate on a better deal,” Pelosi told Fox News host Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday” when asked about the chances Democrats had to win back the House in 2018.

What does that tell you?  It tells me that no matter how bad things look for the GOP the American people have decided that the Democrats are worse.

However JJ Sefton at Ace’s place finds the bright side for the left:

Considering the masks coming off at the moment of truth for Obamacare Repeal, I would not want to wager that the GOP-led legislature will do anything different when it comes to this equally crucial issue. Yup, I’m calling it now: there will be no tax reform. Two reasons, 1) anything that denudes power, influence and lucre from DC will be opposed tooth and nail and 2) they hate Donald Trump so it’s automatic that they will oppose it.

Hence, Nancy Pelosi saying it’s not important for Dems to win the 2018 Midterms is not necessarily a botox-leaking-into-the-cerbral-cortex-induced comment , especially when you have Republicans like McCain, Collins, Murkowski and most of the rest, including of course the leadership.

Of course that won’t stop the bleeding at the state level including the apparently unnewsworthy defection a sitting governor, which our friends on the left consider no big loss.

Those ignorant West Virginia grapes were sour anyways


The Layoff bleg continues. with  5 days to go we’re $  1635 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show (shows?) and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.