Tag: politics

GERRYMANDERING

As always, the contents of this blog represent a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

Gerrymandering is the act of manipulating the redistribution of electoral districts in order to favor a particular candidate or political party. It has been prominent in the news recently, as both political parties have been engaging in the practice to gain an edge in Congressional representation as well as in their own state legislatures. This practice is especially significant now in advance of the 2026 midterm elections. Currently, the Republicans have very slim margins in both the Senate and the House, and maintaining control will be difficult but crucial. I believe if the Dems seize control of one or both houses, they will seek to stifle Trump’s agenda and possibly impeach him again on some “trumped up” charges. More on this later.

The law requires redistribution in at least every decade. Traditionally, these redistributions have been effectuated in response to periodic census results. The law requires such redistributions to be equitable. One of its major requirements is not to disadvantage any race. As you will see below, all too often, that has not been the case.

According to Wikipedia the practice of gerrymandering originated in 1812 when Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry signed a bill that resulted in the manipulation of electoral districts in a partisan manner with the intention of benefiting his Democratic-Republican Party. It concentrated Federalist voters into a few districts (packing) while spreading Democratic-Republican voters across many districts to maximize their influence. Of course, this was controversial, and the Boston Gazette conceived the term to lampoon the distorted, politically skewed maps. In particular, it denigrated one district it said was “shaped like a salamander.”

As I said, currently the practice has become quite common. For example, in just the last five years Alabama, Maryland, Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Illinois, and Utah, among others, have or are planning to gerrymander. Both political parties have engaged in or are planning to engage in this practice and always to the advantage of the party in power in that particular state. The goal is packing (concentrating the opposition party’s voters into a few “safe” districts where they will win by large margins, or cracking (widely dispersing the opposition’s voters so they rarely or never have a large enough majority to win a particular district). Some of these redistributions have been so egregiously inequitable that they have attracted the attention of the Judiciary.

Over the years there have been various cases involving redistricting. However, a few days ago the Supreme Court issued a ruling that promises to have a seismic effect regarding this issue. By a 6-3 margin it ruled that Louisiana’s redistricting plan, (which had been mandated by a federal judge in 2014) in which the state had packed black voters into a newly-created second black majority district constituted a violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees all citizens equal protection under the law. The court ruled that this practice unduly reduced the statewide effect of the black vote,

The ruling was very controversial and has precipitated vitriolic objections from many black leaders, Dem politicians and their supporters. For example, NAACP President Derrick Johnson characterized it as a “license for corrupt politicians who want to rig the system by silencing entire communities.” In fact, the opposite is true. The Court’s main objection was Louisiana’s packing blacks into just the two black heavily majority districts, which they would win anyway, and which had resulted in more congressional seats for whites at the expense of blacks.

Conclusion

This ruling will likely impact many states. They will have to redistribute their voting districts before the 2026 elections. Most of these redistributions will favor one party or the other. The key question is which party will benefit on a net basis. Early indications are that the G.O.P will benefit more as the current districting is viewed as more favorable to Dems, but we will have to wait and see. Politics aside I believe this was the right decision to foster voter equality.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

TRUMP’S STRANGLE STRATEGY

As always, the contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

I like President Trump’s current strategy to blockade Iranian shipping attempting to navigate the Strait of Hormuz. At this stage of the war, it is the best strategy. I prefer it over the alternatives such as additional massive bombing of Iran’s oil wells or agreeing to a peace settlement that falls short of the primary objectives of the war, which for those who may have forgotten is to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weaponry.

The obvious objective of the blockade is to strangle Iran’s economy by depriving it of its sole source of revenue – oil. Normally, some 80% of Iran’s oil and 20% of the world’s oil and liquid natural gas passes through the Strait. It is the best and most expeditious route for these products to transit between the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. As I write this, the blockade has generally been very effective even though a few ships have managed to sneak through.

Iran has no alternative sources of revenue. It has no other natural resources, no manufacturing to speak of, and certainly no tourism. All it has is huge deposits of oil, which heretofore have sustained its economy and funded its desire to foment terrorism throughout the ME and the rest of the world through various proxies.

According to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth all ships (some 34 in total) traveling to or from Iranian ports have been “turned around without incident.”  Moreover, the blockade has been expanding. As I write this, the US now has three carrier groups in the region. Hegseth added “just this week, we seized two Iranian ‘dark fleet’ ships in the Indo-Pacific region that had left Iranian ports before the blockade went into effect.” Furthermore, in posts on his Truth Social platform Trump claimed: “Iran is collapsing financially! [It] want[s] the Strait of Hormuz opened immediately. [It is] starving for cash! [It is] [l]osing about $500 million a day.” Recently, it was reported that Iran has about 127 million barrels of crude oil reserves that are stored in parked tankers. That sounds like a lot, but in truth it will not last long. But that doesn’t mean that the blockade wouldn’t hurt Iran,” he said.

For various reasons a goodly portion of congresspersons and other critics has opposed the war from its inception. As I explained in previous blogs they fall into four categories: (1) those with a political agenda whether or not it is beneficial to America, (2) “never Trumpers,” who blindly and automatically oppose any action or policy Trump undertakes, (3) antisemites and anti-Israel critics, and (4) those who are misinformed by the “fake news” media and/or ignorant of or choose to ignore the lessons of history. These categories of vociferous naysayers include many Dem politicians such as Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, Gavin Newsome, Kamala Harris and AOC, who should know better. Perhaps, some or all of them should brush up on their knowledge of history.

On May 1 the Trump Administration may face a Congressional challenge with respect to the continued deployment of the military in Iran. Some Congresspersons have opined that the duration of the US’s military campaign against Iran is limited by the War Powers Act of 1973, which mandates that a President commence military withdrawal after 60 days unless Congress either declares war, authorizes the specific action, or extends the deadline. Congress has not taken either action and is unlikely to do so.

The Administration has “pushed back” claiming there is “no firm deadline for ending the conflict as it has not formally characterized the campaign as a “war.” Consequently, congressional approval is not required. The 60th day is May 1. We’ll have to see how this matter is resolved. It may require a ruling by SCOTUS.

Conclusion

The blockade has been opposed by the usual suspects as detailed above. Due to their ten-year record of lies, exaggerations and obfuscations that have invariably been ultimately debunked their opinion no longer has any credence if it ever did.

In my opinion, however, it has proven to be a very successful strategy. It has strangled Iran’s economy by depriving it of some $500 million of oil revenue per day. As a result, in addition to not having any nuclear weapons or an effective military Iran’s economy and finances are being severely degraded. It has nothing. NOTHING.

At this point, we don’t have to fight. We don’t have to risk American lives. We can just sit back and watch Iran strangle to death unless it accepts our terms.

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

KATHY HOCHUL HAS LOST HER MIND

As always, the content of this blog is a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

In my opinion, current empirical evidence indicates that NYS Governor Kathy Hochul has lost her mind. Recently she gave a speech in which she urged wealthy individuals who previously had relocated from NYS to other locales to return. In what universe does she think there is even a remote chance that will happen? If she honestly believes that, she is delusional. Did she forget that just a few years ago she gave a speech in which she basically told wealthy people and others who objected to her left-leaning policies and her cozying up to NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani that if they didn’t like it, they should “get out.” (Like the words from that old-time song, “Get on the bus, Gus.”)

That is just what many of them have done. Recently, NY State Senator Steve Rhoades disclosed the brutal statistic that “one [NY resident] leaves [the state] every 2 minutes and 23 seconds.” Think about that. Repub gubernatorial candidate Bruce Blakeman sarcastically declared that “Hochul has finally discovered what New Yorkers already know. When you raise taxes, drive up the cost of living make it harder to do business, and try to destroy families’ savings people leave.” Moreover, he characterized Hochul’s pleas to the rich to return “the most honest moment of her administration.” In my view, if it’s not number one, it’s certainly in the top three.

Rich people are very astute. That’s how they became rich in the first place. They left primarily because of her governance. They were tired of the deteriorating quality of life, particularly in NYC. They were tired of the outrageously high cost of living, including rent, taxes, food and other necessities. They know that Hochul’s reputation is that she says one thing and then does the opposite, case in point, her congestion policy. Now they can see the handwriting on the wall. Despite her assertions to the contrary at some point, probably after the 2026 election she will give in to the lefties and raise taxes, and not just on the “wealthy.”

The lefties are becoming increasingly creative in ways to confiscate your money. For example, there has been talk of levying a “death tax” on a decedent’s wealth. By the way, in NYC how much annual income defines one as “wealthy?” Is it $100,000, $200,000, more? That sounds like a lot, but any NYC resident will tell you money doesn’t go very far when one factors in the high cost of living and punitive tax base. Now, having experienced the low or no-state taxes of Florida, Texas, Tennessee and other “red states” the rich have no intention of returning.

Furthermore, Hochul and Mamdani have formed a political partnership despite their ideological differences. As you may recall Hochul, in an attempt to unite the moderate and left-wing portions of the Dem Party in NYS, endorsed the socialist/communist/antisemitic Mamdani in his successful 2025 mayoral campaign. She was hopeful that he would support her in her re-election bid. He did, but he can always withdraw it or threaten to do so, and she knows it.

Hochul’s call for the rich former residents to return comes as she attempts to expand the state’s tax base in order to satisfy one of Mamdani’s primary demands that she raise tax rates. Blakeman derisively stated “Kathy Hochul finally discovered what New Yorkers already know. When you raise taxes, drive up the cost of living, make it harder to do business, and try to destroy families’ savings, people leave.” Barstool Sports Founder Dave Portnoy was not constrained by political niceties. He called it “unbelievable arrogance and hypocrisy” to ask wealthy New Yorkers to return home.

Mamdani has already become the dominant partner in the aforementioned alignment. It’s very unusual, if not unique, for a mayor to hold sway over a governor, but that’s how I see it. The left wing is very aggressive. Hochul is desperate to secure its support in her re-election campaign. She won a tight race in 2022, and she needs a united party behind her to win in 2026. As I indicated above already, she has been facing immense political pressure from the socialist wing to raise income and corporate taxes in order to pay for its planned extravagant spending programs, such as subsidizing bus rides and universal free childcare and healthcare. So far, she has resisted, but I expect her to cave eventually.

Conclusion

For New Yorkers the hits just keep on coming. It’s hard for me to feel sorry for them since they elected him. What did they expect would happen? They asked for it (socialism/communism), and they’re getting it.

Mamdani and his crew don’t have the foggiest notion of how to govern. I wouldn’t select them to run a lemonade stand much a large, complex city like NYC. Unless the adults manage to retake control, I fear that NYC, which has always been the crown jewel of the US, will inevitably deteriorate into a communist/socialist hellhole, i.e. an extremely unpleasant, filthy, squalid, miserable, chaotic, nightmarish place in which to live, work or even visit. If you think that is an extreme statement, just wait.

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

VOTER ID

As always, the contents of this blog are a compendium of various media reports supplemented by my personal opinion, where noted.

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act is a proposed US federal law that aims to restrict voting in federal elections to citizens. Voters would be required to present proof of citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate in order to register to vote. Furthermore, it would necessitate anyone voting in person to produce a photo ID, such as a driver’s license, strengthen procedures for on-line voting, and mandate stricter voter roll maintenance by the states to prevent unauthorized persons from voting. President Trump has characterized the Bill as his “number one [legislative] priority.”

The SAVE Act was narrowly approved by the House earlier this year, however, it faces strong opposition in the Senate. The Repubs hold a 53-47 margin in the Senate, but the cloture rules require 60 “yea” votes to pass the bill. The Senate voted 51-48 to commence debate on the bill, but the Repubs acknowledge that at the present time they “don’t have the votes” to pass the bill. Already Repub Senators Lisa Murkowski and Thom Tillis have expressed “concerns” indicating they may not support it. The debate is expected to be lengthy and contentious. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has signaled that he will endeavor to keep it on the floor at least into next week to provide opportunity for a “full and robust debate.”

As I said above the bill is very controversial among the individual congresspersons. I discussed the pros and cons at length in a previous blog, and I don’t see a need to repeat them now. Briefly, the Republicans claim it will (1) eliminate voting irregularities including outright fraud of which there have been many examples in our history, and (2) provide for free and fair elections, which is the cornerstone of our Republic.

In my opinion these are logical and necessary goals. Who would oppose them? Why? Of course, the Congressional Dems. They claim it would disenfranchise minority voters disproportionally. As I explained in my previous in my view this is a load of malarkey. Not only is it fictitious, but also every poll shows that even minorities don’t agree. In fact, many of them take umbrage and deride that argument as racist.

We all know the real reason. Dems want as many noncitizens as possible to be able to vote, because they feel most of them will vote Dem. That is a major reason why they opened our borders for four years. Moreover, loose voter rolls and voting requirements favor them as well. The bottom line is that in the current political climate the only way the Dems can win a national election is by cheating.

Probably, the bill will fail to pass, but at least the Dems will have been forced to disclose their opinions regarding this issue on the record. Some Dems, particularly those who represent districts that Trump won in 2024 or those who are running for re-election in 2026 will have to choose between the lesser of two evils. On one hand, party leadership is pressuring them to vote “no,” but on the other hand doing so will likely hurt their prospects for re-election.

What’s really interesting and informative are some of the comments Dems have made in the past on this issue. In the age of the internet, one can no longer dismiss past comments as “exaggerated” or “taken out of context.” For example, take (Up)Chuck Schumer, aka “dead man walking (politically).” I saw a video of a speech he gave in 1996 in which he advocated voter ID. He made the same arguments that Repubs do today. Once again, it illustrates he is an opportunist, a political chameleon, and not to be trusted.

Conclusion

The polls regarding this issue are as one-sided as any I have ever seen. They are all consistent – Pew, Gallup, Heritage, Rasmussen, Fox, even fake-news CNN. Some 71% of respondents are in favor of the bill, including 69% of independents and even half of Dems. 81% favor requiring voter ID, including 79% of independents and 70% of Democrats. 80% want states to purge non-citizens from voter rolls. 61% support sharing unredacted voter rolls with the Department of Homeland Security. 58% recognize at least some voter fraud exists in elections. The bill is widely viewed as a “common sense” way to combat fraud and protect the integrity of our elections.”

Once again, the Dem congresspersons find themselves on the wrong side of an 80-20 issue. Once again, they will be exposed as not caring about the well-being of their constituents but only about gaining and retaining power.

I urge you to remember this on Election Day.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

STATE OF THE UNION

The contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

In accordance with Article II, Section 3, Clause 1 of the US Constitution the President “shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” The Constitution does not offer any specifics, such as the date and manner of delivery.

President George Washington delivered the initial SOTU in person to a joint session of Congress on January 1, 1801. Thereafter, most presidents chose to deliver a written report. In 1913 President Woodrow Wilson broke with tradition and commenced the practice of delivering the SOTU in person. Later, with the advent of radio, then TV and later the internet, the SOTU began to be communicated live to a nationwide and worldwide audience. Traditionally, presidents have delivered the SOTU between January 1 and March 1.

Typically, presidents utilize the SOTU to present a positive account of their past accomplishments and prospective plans. Political sycophants in the audience frequently interrupt the speech to stand and applaud while political opponents often just sit stone-faced. Most viewers are aware that the SOTU is short on facts and long on politics, hyperbole and theatre. Fact checkers would have a field day. As the expression goes, “it is what it is.” It should be noted that the opposition party gets to offer a rebuttal.

Last night President Trump delivered the SOTU for 2026. Everyone will have his or her own opinion. Below please find my comments and takeaways:

  1. Trump’s speech was typical “Trump.” That is, he sprinkled the serious content with moments of humor and sarcasm. For example, on several occasions he chastised Dems in the audience for not standing up to acknowledge his special guests, and then when many of them (not Nancy Pelosi) did stand up to show support for the “Stop Insider Trading Act,” which aims to prohibit congressmen from profiting from trading on inside information, he feigned surprise. Undoubtedly, some of his detractors will criticize him for his style, but I loved it.
  2. Many Dems exhibited a considerable lack of class and professionalism. Approximately 70 of them boycotted the speech entirely; some texted; some interrupted by shouting slogans; one or two nodded off; once again Al Green had to be ceremoniously escorted out of the chamber; and most who did attend mostly sat on their hands even for poignant and patriotic moments.
  3. He admonished the Dems for their stance on various “80-20” issues, such as gender transition of minors without their parents’ consent or even knowledge, sanctuary policies, and opposing voter ID for elections. As I have blogged previously we all know that the only reason to oppose voter ID is to foster cheating.
  4. On several occasions he denoted that the Dems’ policies inexplicably favored illegal aliens over citizens, whereas the Repubs’ policies appropriately favor American citizens over illegals.
  5. He called out NYC mayor Mamdani for his hypocritical stance of requiring volunteer snow shovelers to present multiple forms of ID in stark contrast to his advocating no IDs to vote.
  6. He criticized Dems for causing multiple government shutdowns in order to defund ICE and to gain Medicare and other rights for illegals.
  7. He vowed to continue the fight to reduce healthcare costs.
  8. On the international front he mentioned the many peace deals he had brokered to settle longstanding conflicts and the ongoing negotiations between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas. He reiterated that Iran will “never” be allowed to possess nuclear capability. I believe Trump knows Iran is stalling (its version of a “rope a dope”), and he will attack sooner rather than later.
  9. My one criticism was he couldn’t resist admonishing the Supreme Court for its recent opinion, which struck down his “reciprocal tariff” policy. He characterized it as “a very unfortunate ruling.” He didn’t have to do that, particularly since his Administration is already pursuing alternate pathways to achieve his goal, and most of the other countries have indicated that they will honor their tariff agreements anyway. Moreover, he will need the court’s support on other crucial matters prospectively.
  10. He emphasized several of his major accomplishments, such as reducing inflation, improving the economy, passing the Big Beautiful Bill, closing the border, and drastically reducing the flow of fentanyl and other deadly drugs. Inflation, unemployment, food prices and gas at the pump are down. Oil production and the financial markets are up. (Remember, the financial markets are a leading indicator, so this bodes well for the economy prospectively.) The BBB will provide the most substantial income tax reduction for the middle and working classes in my lifetime, such as no tax on tips or overtime, reduced taxes on social security for most seniors and the advent of the “Trump Accounts” for children of American citizens.
  11. On several occasions he repeated the theme of patriotism. For example, he lauded the Olympic gold medal performance of the men’s hockey team. They had been his guests at the White House, and he introduced them to wild and sustained applause (even from some, but not all Dems in attendance). In addition, he presented the star goalie with the Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor. The women’s gold medal team was also invited. They could not attend due to a scheduling conflict, but it is expected that they will prospectively. He introduced a 100-yer-old veteran of the Korean War and a WWII veteran who will be celebrating his 100th birthday on July 4 and presented them both with the Congressional Medal of Honor.
  12. He touted America’s upcoming 250th Birthday Celebration on July 4 and its hosting of the 2026 World Cup this summer and the 2028 Republican Convention in 2028.

Conclusion

A sampling of post-speech polls was generally favorable. For instance, 54% believed that Trump was focusing on the right issues; a majority opined that his immigration and economic policies are “in line with the nation’s best interest;” 45% expressed full faith in his leadership; 43% support his using US military power “responsibly;” and a plurality of 38% felt that he would be able to deal with Iran “appropriately.” Respondents were evenly divided on his tariff policy. However, 45% felt he was paying insufficient attention to the cost of living, and 40% expressed “no confidence” that he could make things more affordable. These polls are merely a snapshot. They are informative but no means dispositive.

Since he entered politics Trump has been heavily criticized for many things, but one cannot deny his patriotism. His deep love for America is epitomized by his twin slogans “MAGA” and “America First.” When all is said and done, I, for one, will rest easily as long as he is the President.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

VOTER ID LAWS

As always, the following is gleaned from a compendium of multiple media accounts supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

Once again, the Dems are espousing the wrong side of an 80-20 issue. It should be surprising that they keep finding themselves in this position, but it seems to be their modus operandi. It seems that they can’t help themselves. Their TDS overrules all rationality. Anything President Trump is for they must be against regardless of the will of the people. The current issue is whether or not a person should be required to produce proper identification in order to vote.

Before 2006, no state required a person to present ID in order to vote. However, in 2006 Indiana became the first state to pass a law requiring voters to produce ID at the polls. Its legality was challenged, but eventually, the Supreme Court upheld this requirement as long as the laws were “neutral and did not significantly burden voters.” According to Wikipedia currently thirty-six states have implemented voter ID laws with varying degrees of stringency. The other 14 states plus Washington D.C. still allow voting without ID. Support for voter ID laws is often fueled by concerns over voter fraud. A 2013 poll disclosed that 43% of voters believed that voter fraud was “relatively common,” and a 2010 survey revealed that some 80% of respondents supported some form of ID requirement.  At the present time various polls have reported bilateral support. Some 80% of the public, including some 70% of Dems, support voter ID laws.

Critics of strict voter ID laws argue that they disproportionately affect minority, low-income, and elderly populations. Furthermore, they claim it is a “non-issue” as voter ID fraud is “exceedingly rare.” I don’t subscribe to these arguments. Our history is replete with instances of elections whose results were tainted by suspicions of voter irregularities, if not outright fraud. For example, for years there were suspicions that “machines” such as NYC’s Tammany Hall perpetrated such irregularities. In the 1960s it was suspected that Chicago Mayor Richard Daley padded Dem votes. The joke was that in Chicago even dead people voted. The 2000 presidential election results were tainted by irregularities such as the infamous “hanging chads” in Florida. Eventually the Supreme Court had to weigh in. To this day, many Gore supporters insist he was the real winner. Most recently many Trump supporters have questioned the validity of the 2020 presidential election.

The arguments against voter ID laws had some validity in the South during the “Jim Crow” period when voter suppression of Blacks was common. Nowadays, I don’t believe that is an issue. In fact, many minorities view the Dems’ opposition to voter ID as an insult and racist in and of itself. The implication is that Dem politicians such as Chuck Schumer, Kamala Harris and Jamie Raskin, to name a few, consider minorities and women to be incapable obtaining a valid ID via the DMV or the internet. Schumer has even characterized voter ID laws such as the Trump sponsored SAVE America Act as “Jim Crow 2.0.” Pollsters who have queried minorities regarding this matter have generally been met with puzzlement or indignation.

Let’s be honest. We all know the real reason for the Dems’ opposition. They want legions of non-citizens to be able to vote. They feel that most of them would vote Democrat in order to continue to get freebies from the government, and that would result in Dems having a better chance to win elections. I and many others firmly believe that that was one of the reasons why they pursued the open borders policy during the Biden Administration.

Conclusion

Voter ID requirements are necessary in order to engender confidence that elections are fair and equitable. Furthermore, one is required to produce ID for a myriad of routine activities in everyday life such as driving a car, flying on an airplane, gaining employment, applying for or receiving government benefits, getting a marriage license, and age-restricted purchases such as alcohol or cigarettes. Why not for voting, which in my view is the most important act for a citizen.

Fair and equitable elections are one of the cornerstones of our democracy. If the public does not have confidence in election results our entire system of government would dissipate.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

CLUELESS CELEBRITIES

The content of this blog is a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my own opinion, where indicated.

I don’t know about you, but I, for one, am sick and tired of clueless celebrities spouting their opinions on serious issues, offering unsolicited, often inane advice on how we should live our lives. You see them on tv or read about them virtually every day. They continually feel the need to opine on every “hot” issue, no doubt to feed their massive egos. Their latest target is ICE’s roundup of illegal immigrants, but there have been many others too numerous to mention them all as they flit from issue to issue.

They speak out authoritatively without the foggiest idea of what they are talking about. They don’t comprehend that no one values their opinion anymore. Many of them are “has beens” anyway looking to become relevant again, to resurrect their careers. They may be great at acting, singing, athletics or whatever, but when it comes to real life issues, they are clueless.

They advise the rest of us on how to live our lives. I don’t need to take advice on serious life issues from the likes of Jane Fonda (aka “Hanoi Jane”), Molly Ringwald (who hasn’t had a “hit” movie in forever), George Clooney, LeBron James, Bruce Springsteen, Chuck Schumer, or Lady Gaga, among many others. When do you suppose was the last time one of them shopped for food or gassed up their car? They have no conception of the cost of feeding or sheltering their family. They are insulated from crime behind their walled communities and personal security teams. I doubt any of them have ever met an immigrant, legal or illegal, unless he/she was a caregiver or gardener. I have two words of advice for them: “SHUT UP!”

Conclusion

I just had to get that off my chest. Thanks for listening. Do any of you feel the same way? I’d like to know.

by Tags: , Leave a comment

INSURRECTION IN MINNEAPOLIS

This blog is a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

Where is that bold, aggressive, daring president we elected? One of the major reasons he was elected was to locate, collect and deport the millions of illegal aliens that had infested the US during the Biden Administration. These people broke federal laws just by sneaking into the country. Many of them have been living quietly under the radar, but too many of them have committed heinous crimes in the US, such as rape and murder, and against children no less. Some are repeated offenders. Others have been soaking up social services meant for Americans such as Medicaid and hospital services. Most of the country is fed up and wants action.

Yes, his administration has deployed ICE personnel to roust illegals in various venues with much success, however, he has been strangely reluctant to deal decisively with the blatant insurrection in Minneapolis. In my opinion, this is completely out of character. It’s as if he went to sleep as one night as Donald Trump and woke up the next morning as Joe Biden (reminiscent of the movie, Big in which a 10-year-old boy wakes up one morning as Tom Hanks).

In recent years the country has become increasingly divided over the issue of illegal immigration. In particular ICE’s activities have become a major flashpoint among some people and in some areas of the country. Some states and cities have offered sanctuary to these illegals. Law enforcement officials have not been turning them over to ICE as the law requires. Instead, when they are detained, they simply release them. In addition, they actually inhibit ICE’s efforts to find them. Make no mistake. Granting sanctuary to illegals is contrary to federal law, and, as we know federal law supersedes state and local law. Otherwise, we have anarchy.

In Minneapolis the pro-illegal immigrant crowd has proceeded to a new level of resistance. They have gone way beyond mere peaceful demonstrations. They appear to be well-organized and well-funded. Many of them appear to be “professional agitators” who are paid to show up to protest any and all causes. Some may even be illegal aliens. Law enforcement officials need to follow the money and ascertain the identity of those who have been organizing and funding these protests.

They have taunted, physically attacked and doxed ICE personnel. They have destroyed federal property and even stolen sensitive federal documents and information. Yesterday, some even invaded at least one church and disrupted services. While doxing isn’t always a crime per se it becomes illegal when it becomes conjoined with criminal acts, such as stalking, harassment, threats, or incitement to violence, It is particularly insidious and dangerous in the current situation because the perpetrators have been employing it to disclose private information with “malicious intent to cause harm or fear” with respect to some ICE agents and their families.

Matters were exacerbated even further following the fatal shooting of a protester named Renee Good by an ICE official after she had hit him with her car. While no one wants to see a fatality, the empirical evidence indicates she was the instigator. Of course, each side has blamed the other.

Rather than trying to calm the situation MN Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, aided and abetted by much of the mainstream media, have, by their words and actions, openly incited more violence. They have caused local police to stand down and have left ICE personnel alone to deal with the protesters. They have stated repeatedly that they do not recognize ICE’s authority, and they want them expelled from their city and state. Clearly, their words and deeds are contraventions of federal law and are irresponsible and unconscionable. I see their actions as a direct challenge to federal authority not unlike the actions of the segregationist South before the Civil War and in the 1950s and 1960s.

This is classic insurrection. These people need to be put in their place NOW before other sanctuary areas become emboldened to follow suit.

The Insurrection Act dates back to 1807. It authorizes the president to deploy federal military troops inside the country to restore order and enforce the law if he determines that unrest or rebellion makes it impossible to enforce the law through the regular courts and police. According to most legal experts the Insurrection Act is only meant to be invoked in extreme situations, when normal law enforcement has broken down. In my view, the current situation in Minneapolis fits those parameters. The law does not clearly define what counts as an “insurrection” or “rebellion,” however, in 1827 the US Supreme Court opined that the president alone has the authority to decide when the law applies.

Trump haters may strenuously object to his use of the Act, but according to the Brennan Center for Justice it has been invoked 30 times in US history in response to various situations, including to enforce school desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s and during the 1992 Los Angeles riots following the acquittal of police officers who had severely beaten Rodney King.

Conclusion

These riots have obscured the other massive story emanating from Minnesota, the missing $19 billion Medicaid funds due to alleged fraud. It has been alleged that the perpetrators were mostly Somalis, both citizens and illegals. It is obvious that Governor Walz, US Representative Ilhan Omar and other officials either aided and abetted these crimes or ignored them for political reasons.

This is related to another disturbing story regarding Omar, namely how she went from being virtually broke one year ago to being worth an estimated $30 million presently. The financial dealings of both her and her husband are shrouded in mystery. The House Oversight Committee is investigating and has subpoenaed her spouse to testify. In the words of the late Desi Arnaz, “they have some ‘splaining to do.”

These are very serious allegations with potentially far-reaching consequences. I have blogged about this matter in more detail previously. We may be on the cusp of uncovering a new level of fraud, deceit and greed with respect to elected officials.

Once again, the Dems find themselves on the wrong side of an 80-20 issue. They are violating federal law by defending illegal aliens who have committed crimes against law-abiding Americans, in some cases children, rather than assisting federal officials who are performing their legal duties to protect us. You notice that these Dem politicians never mention the names of those citizens who have been victimized, but they are quick to defend the illegals. Good luck with that issue in the 2026 elections.

I hope that Trump makes the right decision and cleans up the mess in Minneapolis expeditiously.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

I HAVE A DREAM

Tomorrow, Monday, January 19, we will celebrate the birthday of, in my mind, the greatest civil rights leader in American history.  Of course, I am referring to Martin Luther King, Jr.  MLK Day is a national holiday, and as is the case with many of our holidays, we celebrate it on a Monday, in this instance the third one in January, rather than on the actual day of MLK’s birth (January 15). MLK Day has been recognized in all 50 states since the early 2000s, however, some states, such as Alabama and Mississippi, have combined it with “Robert E. Lee Day” to honor the birthday of the commanding general of the Confederacy who was born on January 19.

This year will mark the 58th anniversary of his untimely assassination on April 4, 1968.  Like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the assassination of President JFK on November 22, 1963, and the terror attack on 9/11/2001 most of us will always remember where we were when we heard the horrible news.

For some people, the holiday holds no special meaning; it is just a day off from work, a day to spend with family or friends, part of a long three-day weekend.  For many of us, however, particularly those of us who were alive in the 1950s and 1960s, it is much, much more.

MLK was born on January 15, 1929.  MLK was more than just a pastor.  He believed that more advancement in civil rights could be achieved by civil disobedience and non-violence rather than by violence.  He preached peaceful disobedience such as sit-ins, marches and demonstrations, often in the face of wanton violence and cruelty by the police and others, rather than by rioting and violence.  In this regard, he was inspired by Mahatma Gandhi.  In turn, he inspired many others such as Nelson Mandela and the Black Civil Rights movement in South Africa.

He also recognized the power of the press to bring attention to his cause and influence public opinion. For example, as many as 70 million people around the world witnessed the police brutality inflicted on the peaceful black and white marchers in Selma, Alabama, in March of 1965, including women and children as well as men.  Those images, broadcast live on TV and radio, appalled and disgusted many people and provided an immeasurable boost to the public awareness of the injustices being visited upon blacks in the South. These events were captured dramatically and realistically in the 2014 movie, “Selma,” which featured David Oyelowo as MLK.  If you haven’t seen it, I recommend it.

Unlike any other African American leaders before or since, he had the ability to unite, rather than divide.  Although he was criticized by some of the more militant civil rights leaders of the time, such as Stokely Carmichael, he commanded the support and respect of a large majority of blacks and many whites as well. In that regard, he was similar to Mandela.

After his death, despite the urgings of some civil rights leaders who wanted to continue MLK’s philosophy, more militant African American leaders, such as Mr. Carmichael, came into prominence. There was rioting in over 100 US cities, and a slew of violent incidents at the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago in front of the national press and millions of Americans, which many believe swung the 1968 presidential election to Richard Nixon. 

MLK came into prominence in 1955 when he led a bus boycott, peacefully, in Montgomery, Alabama.  The boycott had been fueled by the famous Rosa Parks incident in which she had refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white person.  She was arrested on December 1. (Most people don’t know that earlier that year in March a similar incident had occurred, also in Montgomery, involving Claudette Colvin, a black girl who had also refused to give up her seat to a white man.  However, that case did not receive the same notoriety.  Civil rights lawyers declined to pursue it because Colvin was 15, unmarried and pregnant. They chose to wait for a case with a more favorable fact pattern, and they were proven to be right.)

Later, MLK became the leader of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and remained so until his death. He applied his non-violence philosophy to protests in Selma, Ala., St. Augustine, FL, and the March on Washington, D. C., among others. He made it a policy never to endorse a particular political party or candidate. He believed he could be more effective if he were neutral and not beholden to anyone.  Furthermore, in his view, neither party was all bad, and neither one was perfect.  In his words, “[t]hey both have weaknesses.”

Perhaps, MLK’s signature moment occurred during the famous March on Washington in August 1963.  Ironically, MLK was not the primary organizer of the March.  That was Bayard Rustin, a colleague.  The primary purpose of the March was to dramatize the plight of blacks in the South.  Civil rights leaders, including Roy Wilkins, NAACP, Whitney Young, National Urban League, A. Philip Randolph, Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, John Lewis, SNCC, James Farmer CORE, and MLK, wanted to bring awareness of these issues right to the seat of the Federal government.  More than 250,000 people of all ethnicities and colors attended.  MLK was one of several speakers, and he only spoke for 17 minutes.  But, his “I Have a Dream” speech became one of the most famous speeches ever.  The March, in general, and MLK’s speech, in particular, are credited with bringing civil rights to the political forefront and facilitating the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Some little-known facts about MLK:

1. His birth name was Michael King, Jr., after his father.  In 1931 his father changed his own name to Martin Luther King, after the German theologian, Martin Luther, whom he admired.  At the same time, he changed his son’s name.

2. In 1958 MLK was stabbed in the chest after a speech by a woman who had been stalking him, and he nearly died.

3. The FBI began tapping MLK’s telephone as early as 1963.  Robert Kennedy, who was Attorney General at the time and who is viewed as a staunch supporter of civil rights, in general, and MLK, in particular, authorized the tapping.

4. MLK won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964 at the age of 35, the youngest age ever at the time.

5. MLK won a Grammy Award in 1971, posthumously.  It should be noted that he won it, not because he displayed a great singing voice, but for a “Spoken Word Album,” “Why I Oppose the War in Vietnam.”  In addition, he won countless other awards and was awarded some 50 honorary degrees from various colleges and universities.

6. Even though MLK was one of the great public speakers of his time, inexplicably, he got a “C” in a public speaking course at the seminary.  (Kind of like a baseball scout saying Babe Ruth can hit “a little bit.”)

7. MLK is one of three individuals and the only native-born American to have a holiday named after him.  In case you’re wondering, the others are George Washington (born in the COLONY of Virginia), and Christopher Columbus.

Some MLK quotes to ponder:

1. “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
2. “The time is always right to do what is right.”
3. “We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools.”
4. “Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that.  Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that.”
5. “Free at last. Free at last. Thank God almighty, we are free at last.”
6. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

In recent years there has been much division among African Americans as well as their leaders.  Some are moderate and want to work within the system; others are more militant.  In my view, many of these militants are no more than “race hustlers,” have their own agendas and look for any excuse to foment distrust and discord.  They do more harm than good. If you doubt me, just randomly turn on CNN or MSNBC and listen to some of the news coverage. The coverage and commentary of some of the guest commentators (and a few of the news anchors as well) are ignorant, subjective and divisive.

Most often, crimes are viewed through the lens of race rather than the facts, and the media will very often jump to conclusions without regard of the facts. Later, when the facts become known if, as is often the case they are change the narrative, they are ignored or downplayed. “White on black” crimes get extensive coverage while “black on black” crimes, which are far more numerous, are largely ignored.

I firmly believe that MLK would have been appalled by the violent, arbitrary and senseless rioting and sharp uptick in crime of the past several years that have been instigated, financed, aided, and abetted by BLM, ANTIFA, professional agitators, many Dem political leaders and much of the media. Certain people of color (we all know who are) love to play the “race card” to justify their actions. (In my opinion this is a sure sign that they have no real argument.) Moreover, I find this to be senseless and ironic since most of the victims are themselves poor minorities. How is that helping the civil rights movement?  That is not what MLK stood for.  Furthermore, in my view, he would not have been an exponent of the extreme “cancel culture,” “critical race theory,” DEI, and “political correctness” movements of recent years that many see as divisive.

One can speculate whether and to what extent MLK’s assassination changed the course of history.  In my opinion, had MLK lived, the Civil Rights Movement would have been considerably different over the last 50 years, more peaceful and less divisive, with better results.  Furthermore, his assassination had a significant impact, not only on the history of the civil rights movement, but also on the overall history of the country, itself.  I hope and believe that eventually a moderate leader will emerge and bridge the gap as MLK did half a century ago.

CONCLUSION

In my opinion, we have made much progress in the area of civil rights.  For example, we have elected an African American president (twice) and vice president; African Americans have been elected to Congress and been appointed to the Supreme Court; and African Americans hold and have held positions of prominence in every field of endeavor, including business, entertainment, sports, and the military.  But it is still a work in progress.  We can do more.

So, as you enjoy the holiday in whatever manner you choose, I ask you to reflect for a moment on where we are as a nation regarding civil rights, where we want to go and how we get there.

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

SOCIAL SERVICES GREED, FRAUD AND CORRUPTION IN MINNESOTA

The contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where noted.

The capacity for greed and corruption of some people never ceases to amaze me. The greed, fraud and corruption recently uncovered in Minnesota is an illustrative example. As I write this, various federal agencies are investigating this colossal theft and misappropriation of public money. Moreover, there are indications that it may extend to other locales besides MN.

MN has the largest Somali population in the U.S. Estimates vary, but a 2023 Pew Research analysis put the number at around 130,000, most of whom live in the Twin Cities. Around 95% of Somalis in Minnesota are U.S. citizens. In my view most of them are law abiding citizens. Unfortunately, the misdeeds of a few will likely cast aspersions on all of them.

MN is virtually drowning in fraud. Federal prosecutors are investigating what they describe as “staggering, industrial-scale” fraud in the state’s social services programs involving numerous individuals and shell companies that allegedly stole and misappropriated federal and state funds intended for vulnerable persons, such as special needs children, disabled adults and the elderly, with potential losses that could exceed $9 billion.

According to First Assistant U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson that would amount to approximately one-half of the roughly $18 billion in federal funds that have supported various Minnesota-run programs since 2018. Fraud was found in programs earmarked for child nutrition, housing services and autism, among others. “I’m sure everyone is wondering how much of this $18 billion was fraud,” Thompson said. “That’s the $18 billion question.”

According to federal prosecutors members of the Somali diaspora, a group with growing political power, were largely responsible. More than 90 individuals, approximately 82 of which are Somali Americans have been charged so far, with over 60 convictions. They expect more charges in the ongoing investigations prospectively. MN Department of Human Services has identified 14 state-run programs as “high risk” for fraud because of program vulnerabilities, evidence of fraudulent activity and/or suspicious billing patterns. Thompson reported that they are seeing more red flags than legitimate claims, and many suspects created entities that billed multiple programs at once.

The New York Times was the first media outlet to disclose the shocking and disturbing details. The total [fraud] is more than Minnesota spends annually to run its Department of Corrections,” the Times reported. According to various law enforcement officials the fraud originated in “pockets of Minnesota’s Somali diaspora.” “Scores of these persons made small fortunes by setting up companies that billed state agencies for millions of dollars’ worth of social services that were never provided.

It appears that the genesis of these frauds was around 2002 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The perpetrators exploited MN’s sanctuary state laws and policies. Typically, they created shell companies that would then bill state agencies for services that were never provided. Instead, the money was used for luxury items such as purchasing real estate (namely properties in Kenya and Dubai), cars, and travel.

One major perpetrator was identified as Feeding Our Future, which is nothing more than a phony charity run by Somali nationals. It was given a $250 million grant under the Federal Child Nutrition Program. It was supposed to use this grant money to provide some 125 million meals to needy children. Federal counterterrorism sources have confirmed that millions of dollars were stolen and diverted to Somalia where it was used by various criminal enterprises including Somali terrorists such as Al-Shabaab. In the words of one confidential source “the largest funder of Al-Shabaab is the Minnesota taxpayer.”

Investigators claim there are many more examples not only of fraud perpetrated by those in the Somali community, but also of a concerted effort by government officials to cover it up. Last Thursday, Peter Schweizer, the President of the Government Accountability Institute, in an interview with The National News Desk characterized the evidence as “overwhelming.” He averred “the corruption went on and on and on for years because there was this climate of fear of wanting to raise these issues they’re concerned about, you know, maybe being called racist or bigoted.”

This week House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer, R-Ky. sent written notice to Minnesota’s Governor Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison demanding information about why state regulators, especially those in the Democrat-led administration, were “reluctant” to take action in with respect to allegations involving the Somali community.” Some people, including me, suspect that they allowed it to continue so as not to offend the Somali population, which votes overwhelmingly Democrat. Comer has also requested documents and information related to accusations that the MN Department of Human Services “deleted data to cover up the rampant fraud.” In a related matter on Thursday, December 18, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Minnesota disclosed that Abdinajib Hassan Yussuf, the owner of Star Autism Center in St. Cloud, MN was charged with one count of wire fraud.

In addition:

  1. Dems are playing the racism card claiming that federal investigators are targeting Somalis unfairly. I stipulate that the overwhelming majority of Somalis are honest, hardworking people, but at the same time I would like to denote that most of the perpetrators are Somalis.
  2. Republicans have been criticizing Governor Tim Walz’s administration as well as other MN state officials for a lack of oversight and slow response.
  3. Far left Democrat House Representative Ilhan Omar, who represents the district in Congress and who derives much of her political support from the Somali community, was asked by CNN how the fraud got so out of control. She deflected responsibility claiming, “when you have these kind[s] of new programs that are designed to help people, you’re oftentimes relying on third parties to be able to facilitate.” Given her position and pro-Somali/anti-American history it strains credulity that she would not be cognizant of the scheme or perhaps approved it. I believe she was involved “up to her eyeballs.”
  4. Of course, most of the mainstream media has been downplaying the scandal.
  5. In response to the investigations, in October MN Governor Tim Walz ordered a third-party audit and paused payments to some 14 programs for 90 days. One program has since been shut down entirely.
  6. Walz says the state aggressively increased resources for fraud detection and prevention and recently appointed a statewide director of program integrity to oversee those efforts. This was a classic case of “locking the barn door after the horse has escaped.” Regarding the fraud, he maintained “I am the one that will fix it.” I doubt that.
  7. Republicans have blamed Walz’s administration, with Trump calling MN under the Democratic governor a “hub of fraudulent money laundering activity.”
  8. Stephen Miller, in his typical combative manner, opined, we shouldn’t be shocked by the MN fraud case considering Somalia’s primary occupation is ‘pirate.’
  9. According to Linda Miller, president and co-founder of the Program Integrity Alliance, a nonprofit focused on fraud prevention in the public sector and a former assistant director with the GAO, attempts to scam government programs have been rare but are likely becoming more common nationwide. Fraudsters have seen how easy it was during the pandemic “to just submit these fake invoices and get paid millions of dollars.” She added, the risk of fraud increases when programs expand quickly without sufficient staffing, modern technology or robust data verification systems. There are very likely people attempting to defraud these programs all over the country.” We should all take heed.

Conclusion

This scandal has become a major political and criminal issue. Under this administration it will not be swept under the rug. People are being prosecuted with more to come. MN state politicians and other officials responsible may very well see their careers ended. It is unconscionable that criminal elements were basically able to steal billions of dollars meant for Americans and funnel it to themselves and terrorist organizations.

Everyone is claiming they were unaware. I don’t know what’s worse, that or that they were complicit. I believe that the person in charge has the ultimate responsibility for any wrongdoing. As governor, Waltz, in the words of the late Desi Arnaz, has some ‘splaining’ to do. And to think, this buffoon was almost elected VP.

The blame game is already in full force, and it could get ugly when all is said and done particularly with the all-important midterm elections looming. In the meantime, politicians are doing what they do best, deflecting blame from themselves and onto others.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment