Tag: politics

LIFE UNDER COMRADE ZOH

So, all you Mamdani voters got your wish. He won, but my message is to be careful what you wish for. You drank the Kool-Aide, but in my opinion, you got suckered. You fell for the mirage of free stuff. You fell for the promise of free buses and subways, rent controlled apartments, government-operated grocery stores and the like.

Consequently, you have elected an inexperienced, antisemitic communist who has continually associated with known terrorists and has exhibited a deep disdain for America, its way of life and its system of government. All of this has been well-documented by Zoh’s own words and actions.

Many of his supporters view him as a panacea for their economic and social problems. Many of them are frustrated by their failure to get a good job, afford a home, and support a family. They choose to blame the system not themselves. Maybe they didn’t go to college or learn a trade. Or maybe they went to college but earned a worthless degree in Asian studies, liberal arts or humanities, etc., rather than one such as accounting, finance, engineering or the medical field that would translate into gainful employment and a career. They not only want what other people have without working for it, they feel entitled to it. They are not cognizant of or choose to ignore the historical failures of socialism/communism. They don’t realize that America does not owe them success; it owes them the opportunity to succeed. Success comes from the individual’s ingenuity, ambition and work ethic.

Zoh is charismatic and articulate, but he is a phony. He tells people what they want to hear, but I assert that he is not the solution to their problems. The solution has to come from within. Such is the basis of America’s free enterprise system.

Astute people know there is no such thing as free stuff. Somehow, somewhere, someone has to pay for it. Don’t expect Zoh to deliver on most of his promises, which I discussed in a previous blog. Some of them are illegal; some are just not practical; others will require the approval of NYS or the Feds. Governor Hochul will probably cooperate to an extent, because she is afraid of the radical left, but she cannot afford to be “all in” as she is facing a tough election campaign next year. President Trump, whom Zoh arrogantly and foolishly has antagonized in an effort to act tough for his base, will likely provide only the bare minimum of money and other assistance.

Where will Zoh get the billions of dollars necessary to implement his policies? He has told us he will raise taxes on businesses and rich individuals to the tune of $8 billion according to the NY Post. This may sound good to the masses, but it is deeply flawed. For one thing, it will cause an exodus from NYC and possibly NYS. This has already begun, and now that he has actually been elected it will increase, perhaps considerably.

In the internet age it is no longer necessary to be located physically in NYC to do business there. Many financial institutions have already relocated much of their business activities to other more tax-friendly states, such as Texas and Florida. Additionally, wealthy people can easily relocate, and those who choose to stay have the wherewithal to transfer their wealth elsewhere. To quote the late Margaret Thatcher, “the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

Zoh does not have the foggiest notion of how to administer a city of eight million people. He lacks the requisite experience and knowledge. You, I, and millions of others would be better qualified. His ill-advised policies will adversely affect every aspect of life politically, economically and socially.

His antipathy toward the police and leniency toward criminals have been extensively documented. He has characterized the police as “racist,” and “wicked” and has advocated cutting their funding and curtailing their authority. The exodus of cops has already begun. We have already seen the results of lax law enforcement in other cities such as Chicago and Minneapolis. As I have written in other blogs his administration has the potential to ruin a once-great city that to many is the very symbol of the USA.

As I have written in previous blogs Comrade Zoh is NOT a socialist as he and the media like to portray him. He is an antisemitic communist who hates America and all that it stands for. What is the difference?

Socialism and communism are both economic systems focused on shared ownership of the means of production, but they differ as to the role of the government and the extent of private ownership. Briefly, socialism is characterized by a mixed economy with private property existing alongside public ownership. On the other hand, communism features a stateless, classless society where all property is communally owned, and resources are distributed based on need (“from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”). Historically, communist states have been ruled by autocratic governments that have subjugated the citizenry, eliminated private property and individual liberties and controlled all aspects of life politically, economically and socially. 

Historically, socialist states have developed through the democratic process, whereas communist states have developed as a result of violence. For example, much of Western Europe is socialist; China and Soviet Russia of the Cold War Era are and were communist. These systems have failed everywhere they have been tried. The most recent examples are Cuba and Venezuela.

Conclusion

Lefties everywhere are hailing Zoh’s election as a clear mandate and a portent of the rising tide of socialism. Some of them such as Bernie Sanders and AOC are predicting that this trend will continue through the 2026 and 2028 elections. On the other hand, most moderates and conservatives maintain Zoh’s mayoralty will be an abject failure for all the reasons I have cited and will demonstrate once again that socialism/communism will not work. Who is correct? We’ll see, but for the sake of our way of life and the future of our children and grandchildren I strongly hope it is the latter.

by Tags: , , , , , , Leave a comment

THE SCHUMER SHUTDOWN

The contents of this blog are a compendium of information gleaned from multiple media sources. Any content that is my opinion is noted as such.

As of today, October 1, the Federal government is shut down due to Congress’ failure to pass a CR to extend the federal government’s funding for next year. It seems that every year the funding agreement is a bone of contention between the Dems and the GOP. Normally, the two sides negotiate down to the wire and reach an agreement at the “eleventh hour,” but not this year.

As the deadline approached, a bill to keep the government operating passed in the House barely, but it failed in the Senate 55-45. (60 votes were required for passage.) President Donald Trump and a bipartisan group of congressional leaders met at the White House on Monday in a last-ditch effort to forestall a shutdown, but no compromise was reached. The Senate is expected to vote again on Wednesday, likely on the same two measures that failed Tuesday, and likely with the same result. So, we have a shutdown. The primary issue seems to be that Congressional Democrats are demanding overhauls to Medicaid cuts and extensions to health care tax credits, which would cost an estimated $1.7 trillion. Republicans are opposed, but they have signaled they would agree to address those concerns in a separate bill.

The current situation is far from unique. Since 1976 the government has undergone ten shutdowns and numerous additional funding gaps that did not result in a shutdown. The last shutdown was from December 22, 2018, to January 25, 2019 during President Trump’s first term. It lasted 35 days and was the longest ever. The primary issue was Congress’ refusal to provide funding for the U.S.-Mexico border wall. Another recent notable shutdown was for 16 days in 2013 during the Obama presidency over the GOP’s demands to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Prior to the 1980s, funding gaps did not normally result in shutdowns. The difference between the two is a funding gap occurs whenever Congress has missed the deadline to pass a budget or a stopgap spending bill (also called a continuing resolution). In those instances, federal government agencies were able to continue to operate on the “assumption” that funding would eventually be restored. And eventually it was. No harm, no foul.

After 1980, however, Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti issued legal opinions that eliminated this tactic. His opinion stated that under federal law agencies were prohibited from spending money without prior congressional approval. Only essential services – such as national security, air traffic control and law enforcement – could continue. Thus, funding gaps morphed into shutdowns.

Some of the implications of the current shutdown are as follows:

  1. “Essential” personnel – such as military service members (including hundreds of members of the National Guard that Trump has deployed to various U.S. cities), law enforcement officers ICE agents, and air traffic controllers – would be required to keep working, with pay deferred until funding has been restored.
  2. Federal contractors, including hourly workers such as janitors and security guards, are not required to work and are also not guaranteed back pay.
  3. Congresspersons would continue to get paid their $174,000 annual salaries (naturally).
  4. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid disbursements would continue unabated, although there could be delays.
  5. Various “nonessential” federal services, such as national parks, monuments and museums, would be halted, reduced, or closed.
  6. Hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions of nonessential government employees would be furloughed, placed on unpaid leave, or terminated. Most significantly, the determination of which employees get furloughed, placed on unpaid leave or terminated will be the sole province of the Executive Branch, i.e. President Trump and the Budget Office without recourse. Thus, they could take this opportunity to effect further DOGE cuts, which the Dems have opposed. The Office of Management and Budget has not yet provided an estimate of how many federal workers are expected to go without pay, furloughed or fired. However, OMB Director Russ Vought has threatened mass firings. Democrats have called this an intimidation tactic, but they cannot stop it.
  7. Mail would continue unabated as the U.S. Postal Service has its own revenue stream independent of government funding.
  8. Ultimately, the ramifications of the shutdown will likely spread beyond the purely political arena and impact the lives of many Americans who rely tangentially on the above government payments and services.

Conclusion

In my opinion, once again, the Dems have walked into a trap and find themselves on the wrong side of a critical issue. According to a recent NYT/ Siena Poll 65% of Americans are opposed to a shutdown.

In my view the blame for this one rests squarely on the Senate Dems and their inept, blundering leader, (Up)Chuck Schumer. His approval rating is very low, and he is facing a primary challenge for his Senate seat from AOC, which many believe he will lose. Moreover, the left wing of his party is dissatisfied with his leadership, and he faces a likely challenge there as well. I believe he is doing this to placate the left wing, but it will backfire.

To make matters worse Fox News has been playing recordings of Schumer, Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and other Dems condemning past government shutdowns, which contradict their current ranting in favor of this one. I don’t know how they can spin that discrepancy. The optics are really bad. Yes, they will try to blame the GOPers for the shutdown, but the public will not be fooled.

It is in the Senate where the Dems have blocked the CR. Even though the GOP has a slim majority there the Dems were able to prevent them from getting the required 60 votes.

Eventually, this shutdown, like all the others, will be resolved via a CR, and government operations will return to normal (such as they are). This shutdown will become known as the “Schumer Shutdown” and will constitute his political epitaph. Regular readers of my blogs are cognizant of my extreme antipathy for him and, I will not be sorry to see him go.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

CHARLIE KIRK’S LEGACY

In my view, we can all agree that the assassination of Charlie Kirk was a senseless, horrific tragedy (those of us that are sane, anyway). Charlie was a healer, not a divider, and the outpouring of praise, respect and love for him since his assassination has been astounding. It’s almost what one might expect for a Head of State. As his wife, Erika and many others have said, if the goal of the assassin was to silence Charlie and his cause the assassin miscalculated greatly, and the repercussions for those who opposed Kirk will be just the opposite.

In fact, it has already begun. His death has sparked international attention and has reignited the condemnation of violence rather than peaceful and respectful discourse as a means of resolving political differences.  To paraphrase what Erika said in Charlie’s eulogy and what many other commentators have since reiterated, “they have unleashed the whirlwind.” Trump announced that Kirk would posthumously receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is the highest medal that can be awarded to a civilian.

Charlie has been martyred. As I said, he has become more popular in death than he was in life. In the aftermath (of his assassination), millions of people who had never heard of Charlie Kirk and his forum, Turning Point, have become ardent supporters. They have become cognizant of what he stood for and his ability to communicate peacefully and respectfully with young people, especially college students. TP’s popularity has never been higher. Recently, tens of thousands of fans have been attending TP’s sessions and often there have been many more who could not get into the venue. Fox News has reported that there have been in excess of 120,000 requests for new TP chapters.

Kirk was born and raised in the Chicago suburbs of Arlington Heights and Prospect Heights. He attended Harper College, but he dropped out after one semester to pursue his real dream, political activism. (He was a prime example of “college is not for everyone.”)

He published a range of books and hosted The Charlie Kirk Show, a talk radio program. He co-founded Turning Point (USA) (TPUSA) in 2012 and was its executive director. Kirk described it as a student organization advocating for free markets and limited government.  Kirk remained the executive director, chief fundraiser, and the public face of Turning Point USA until his death. Kirk was one of the most prominent voices of the MAGA movement and an ardent supporter of President Trump. Many people viewed him as an icon of contemporary conservatism.

He became renown for visiting college campuses where he would debate peacefully and respectfully with anyone, not only students but also anyone in the audience who espoused an opposing viewpoint. He would listen patiently to their side of an issue and then say “prove me wrong” as he rebutted their arguments.

According to the Associated Press and other media outlets video clips of these campus appearances spread online. AP reported that the result was “a steady stream of donations that transformed TPUSA into one of the country’s largest political organizations.”  Eventually, TPUSA began holding massive rallies in which top conservative leaders addressed tens of thousands of young voters. 

Commencing in October 2020 Kirk hosted a daily three-hour radio talk show, The Charlie Kirk Show, on Salem Media Group’s “The Answer” radio channel. Also, he launched “Turning Point Live,” which was a three-hour streaming talk show aimed at Gen Z’ers. It was among the most-popular podcasts on Apple Podcasts. According to internal data from TPUSA, Kirk’s podcast was downloaded between 500,000 and 750,000 times each day in 2024.  

In 2021, TPUSA launched Turning Point Academy, an online alternative to schools that were “poisoning our youth with anti-American ideas.” TPA was intended to cater to families seeking an “America-first education.”

In a March 2025 interview with California Governor Gavin Newsom Kirk related that while building TPUSA, “I recognized that there was an ideological imbalance on a lot of these college campuses, and we wanted to provide a counterpoint rooted in conservative, pro-freedom, pro-liberty, America First ideas.”  He added that when TPUSA began, about 75% of college students identified as Democrat. Non-progressive students were afraid to voice their opinions and beliefs for fear of retaliation from students, professors, and school administrators. TPUSA provided emotional support for them.

TPUSA sought to make both the colleges and professors accountable for their actions. TPUSA’s goal was to shift the youth vote at least 10 points toward Republicans, a target that they achieved by the 2024 presidential election. I believe this shift helped Trump win the election. TPUSA’s other activities include the publication of the “School Board Watchlist” and the “Professor Watchlist,” which are lists sourced by published news stories that describe instances of radical behavior among college professors and schools.

Conclusion

In view of the foregoing, it is easy to see how Kirk became a target of the radical left. In retrospect it should not be surprising that a deranged far-left activist, fueled by the irresponsible, hateful and inaccurate characterizations spewed by Dem politicians and their supporters in the media would decide to assassinate him. Erika Kirk has said she “forgives” the assassin, which is her right, but I and many others cannot. Charlie was a great man, an icon, who was an inspiration to millions. The assassin’s goal was to silence him, but as I said above, it has had the opposite effect.

Rest in peace, Charlie. You will be sorely missed and long remembered.

by Tags: , , 2 Comments

WHO REALLY KILLED CHARLIE KIRK?

In my view, we can all agree that the assassination of Charlie Kirk was a senseless, horrific tragedy (those of us that are sane, anyway). Charlie was a healer, not a divider, and the outpouring of praise, respect and love for him since his assassination has been astounding. It’s almost what one might expect for a head of state. As his wife, Erika and many others have said, if the goal was to silence Charlie and his cause the assassin miscalculated greatly. In fact, it has had the opposite effect. More on this later.

So, back to the title of this blog. Who really killed Charlie Kirk? We all know that the disaffected dirtbag loser Tyler Robinson, pulled the trigger, but who financed him? Who supported him? Who inspired him? How did he conclude that Charlie was such a “danger to society” that killing him was “justified?” Good questions. Read on for my opinion as to the answers.

1. Utah records disclosed that Robinson was registered as a voter, but he was not affiliated with either political party. His voter status is inactive, (which means he did not vote in the prior two general elections).  However, according to Utah Governor Spencer Cox speaking on NBC’s Meet the Press, there clearly was a leftist ideology [regarding Robinson]”  Indeed, Robinson’s family and friends denoted he had become “more political in recent years, had “turned left politically,” had become “more supportive of gay and transgender rights,” and had become a persistent critic of Kirk. The AP reported that it was unclear what had caused this transformation of Robinson’s personal politics, but I believe his relationship with his gay, transgender roommate likely played a significant part. Cox added that the ammunition found at the scene was engraved with taunting, anti-fascist and meme culture messaging.

2. The AP reported that last week, the House observed a “moment of prayer for Charlie Kirk and his family” at the request of Speaker Mike Johnson. A subsequent request for a “moment of prayer out loud elicited vocal objections and chaos on the House floor,” primarily by Dems. I view this as a blatant lack of respect, but that’s just me.

3. The left-leaning media and social media outlets have traditionally slanted their news coverage. Much of what they report as “fact” is often exaggerated, taken out of context or simply false. Unfortunately, a goodly number of people believe it as fact and formulate incorrect opinions. For example, on MSNBC, which has largely been discredited as an objective news outlet, Rachel Maddow, who is well-known for her far-left politics and virulent hatred of Donald Trump, devoted just 22 seconds of airtime to Charlie Kirk’s assassination. She characterized Kirk’s murder as “horrific,” but then quickly shifted to speculation that the Trump administration could use the assassination as a pretext to intensify “crackdowns.” I believe Maddow had an axe to grind. According to Outkick last year Maddow had devoted an entire segment on her show denouncing Kirk as a “racist.” Kirk had then denounced Maddow for “calling me a racist,” which he described as a “typical leftist smear.”  Maddow’s disrespectful characterization of Kirk was in violation of a company-wide directive from Comcast and MSNBC executives that condemned violence and urged employees to “uphold civil discourse across its platforms.” The statement stressed that while employees may “disagree, robustly and passionately,” debate must be conducted “with respect.” “The tragic loss of Charlie Kirk … reminds us of the fragility of life and the urgent need for unity. Comcast CEO Brian Roberts and President Mike Cavanagh added “our hearts are heavy … there is no place for violence or hate in our society.” Clearly, Maddow and other commentators at MSNBC are out of step with the brass.

4. The FBI and the DOJ are cognizant that although Robinson pulled the trigger he may not have acted alone. They will be conducting an extensive investigation in order to ascertain whether or not Robinson was part of a broad conspiracy. For instance, he may have been influenced by some of the participants of various radical chat rooms he frequented, and he may have been supported financially by “dark money” from surreptitious radical groups, domestic and/or foreign. During a recent interview on Hannity Patel disclosed that the FBI will be “interviewing scores of people, on not just these chats on Discord, but any communications that this individual [Robinson] had.” When asked by Senator John Kennedy whether Robinson had acted alone Patel hedged replying “There are a number of individuals that are currently being investigated and interrogated – and a number yet to be investigated and interrogated related to that chat room…. We’re running them all down.” That may just be the FBI being thorough, but it sounds to me like it is considering at least the possibility of a conspiracy.

Furthermore, Patel confirmed that investigators had confiscated electronics from both the suspect’s home and that of his alleged partner. “We’ve seized multiple electronic devices from the home of the suspect and his romantic partner. We’ve got computers, we’ve got laptops, gaming systems, cell phones.” Patel added, “the evidence and information will come out. I won’t stylize the evidence, but I will say what was found in terms of information was a text message exchange where he, the suspect, specifically stated that he had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and he was going to do that.” When pressed on Robinson’s possible motive, Patel noted words attributed to him: “And when he was asked why, he said some hatred cannot be negotiated with.”

Therefore, I maintain that although Robinson pulled the trigger all of the foregoing had some responsibility for Kirk’s murder to some degree.

Conclusion

Writing in the NY Post columnist Miranda Devine asserted that “we are suffering through an epidemic of leftist violence. She characterized the Kirk assassination as “the latest manifestation of the hateful rhetoric aimed at President Trump and his MAGA movement. Any negative incident is seen as justification for violence.” Several additional commentators have opined similarly, and I concur. To buttress her point, she cited a recent poll that 48% of self-identified “liberals” felt it would be “somewhat justified” to murder Elon Musk and 51% said the same with respect to Trump. Most of you will recall I cited several examples in my previous blog.

In my opinion, clearly Robinson was influenced by his association with the radicals who populate the chatrooms he accessed, his roommate, and incendiary statements by political figures and celebrities. Over the last few years, they were able to change his political ideology. In addition, he came to believe that violence, rather than respectful debate, was an “acceptable” even “necessary” way to resolve personal and political differences. Moreover, it is very possible that he was influenced and supported financially by dark money emanating from radical domestic and foreign groups.

In addition, as I mentioned in my previous blog let’s not overlook the atmosphere of hate and divisiveness created and perpetuated by hateful speech of left-leaning politicians, celebrities, and the media. Labeling a person as “fascist,” “Hitler,” “evil,” and “a threat to democracy” resonates with a disaffected loner like Robinson. If a lie is repeated often enough it becomes perceived as the truth. In their twisted mind they come to view the murder of those persons as justified.

As reported in the NY Post as predicted by Erika Kirk in the wake of Charlie’s assassination we are experiencing a massive shift of voters from the Dem Party to the GOP. Florida reported that the rate of GOP registrations has tripled. Other areas have reported similar GOP gains.

People are fed up and turned off by the excessive violence on the left. For instance, Christopher from Bucks County, PA said he was “embarrassed for voting left in my life.” Sheilfer, a farmer in CA, was turned off by the “jubilation” [exhibited by some Dems over Kirk’s murder]. Finally, Siqi a finance executive said “my entire life I voted Democrat… Today, I registered Republican. Obviously, this does not augur well for the Dems in the upcoming midterm elections and beyond.

by Tags: , , , 2 Comments

LEFT WING VIOLENCE

The empirical evidence keeps mounting up. The senseless, horrific assassination of Charlie Kirk was the latest example of an alarming trend that began a decade ago. Just off the top of my head I can recall several examples of left-wing violence since then, such as:

  1. The two assassination attempts of Donald Trump in Butler, PA and at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach. In the first one the assassin missed by a fraction of a millimeter and only because Trump fortuitously turned his head at the last minute to make reference to a chart off to the side. Unfortunately, an innocent bystander was killed. In the second instance an assassin was able to hide in the bushes on the golf course for hours lying in wait for Trump to pass by until an alert secret service officer discovered him.
  2. The near murder of Senate Majority Leader Steve Scalise as part of a mass shooting in June 2017 during a practice session for the annual Congressional Softball Game in Alexandria, VA.
  3. The “Black Lives Matter” riots in various cities including Minneapolis, NYC and Portland in May 2020 after the killing of George Floyd by police. These were characterized by instances of vandalism, looting, and clashes with authorities. Many Dems dismissed these riots as “nonviolent,” but tell that to the victims.
  4. The over 8,700 Antifa-inspired riots that occurred in 68 locations throughout the country between May 25th and July 31st, 2020. The images of cities burning, businesses being destroyed and people being carjacked, assaulted and worse are indelibly etched in my mind.
  5. The assassination attempt on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in June 2022. The assassin planned to break into Kavanaugh’s home, kill him, and then commit suicide, but, for some reason, he had a change of heart.
  6. The continuing lawlessness being perpetrated in our cities predominantly those run by Dems due to sanctuary policies, lax law enforcement, no cash bail, and woke DAs and juries. Ironically, most of the victims of these crimes are minorities, the poor, and the disadvantaged, the very people that the Dems profess to sympathize with and seek to help.
  7. The wanton destruction of much of Minneapolis, Chicago and other cities during the summer of 2021.
  8. The assassination of Charlie Hurt. This was a huge blow to the psyche of America. Charlie was beloved by a goodly number of people. In particular, many young people idolized him. He was not an antagonistic person. Far from it. He was a healer, a good person whose aim was to foster discussions of differences of opinion openly and peacefully, often on college campuses, and he was very good at it. His assassination was such as waste. His legion of fans and supporters are beside themselves with grief. Many of them as well as his wife, Stephanie, have vowed to continue or even enhance his work.

These are merely a few examples. The Dems are fond of saying that there is violence on both sides, but that is a false narrative. I cannot think of any violence within recent memory planned and perpetrated by conservatives. (I don’t count the January 6 protest because it was overblown by the Dems and their allies in the mainstream media to damage Trump, and the protesters didn’t kill anyone. A cop shot one of the protesters unnecessarily.) If you can, I would like to hear it.

Why is this? Why do lefties have the urge to settle political differences violently rather than by peaceful debate? There are several reasons for this, but in my view the primary factor is the hateful rhetoric emanating from (1) left-leaning politicians, such as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, (2) news commentators such as Rachel Maddow, Morning Joe and virtually anyone on CNN or MSNBC, (3) celebrities such as Robert DeNiro, and (4) social media postings.

It has become quite common to refer to any conservative or Republican as “racist,” “Nazi,” “Hitler,” “evil,” and “a threat to democracy.” If a lie is repeated often enough, it becomes believable. Most of us realize that these monikers are ridiculously false, but there are many unstable people that take them seriously. In their twisted minds they perceive that those characterizations from the types of sources I mentioned give them license to attack those persons so labeled.

In a moment of sanity Comcast, which owns MSNBC, fired Matthew Dowd, one of its political analysts, for his “insensitive” and “inappropriate” commentary regarding the Charlie Kirk assassination. In my view there are many others in the media who deserve the same fate. Furthermore, Comcast cautioned its commentators to “maintain a respectful exchange of ideas” regardless of whether or not they agree with Kirk’s views.

Conclusion

The details of the Charlie Kirk assassination are so horrific that many people hope that it will be the “last straw,” that it will shock Americans enough to put an end to the senseless violence that has been plaguing our country. I, too, hope so, but I fear it will not.

The only way to stop the senseless and arbitrary violence is to win elections. Get out and vote, vote, vote!

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

COMRADE ZOH’S INNER CIRCLE AND POLICIES REVEALED

It is going from bad to worse. It was bad enough that NYC, the nation’s largest city and longtime symbol of capitalism and free enterprise, is on the cusp of electing a communist mayor. Now, we are just learning the depth of inanity that would be in store for the city.

My hope and expectation was that Comrade Zoh, recognizing his radical bent and inexperience in business, finance and basic governance, would, as mayor, attempt to broaden the political scope of his administration by including some more moderate and experienced advisors. Instead, the opposite appears to be the case.

According to the NY Post Comrade Zoh’s inner circle will consist almost entirely of persons who have virtually the same limited experience and radical ideas as he does. The Post has characterized them as “30-something or even younger Gen Zers with little-to-no experience in government – but long histories of radical left-wing politics.” Apparently, there will be no moderating voices in this inner circle, no dissent, no one to try to temper some of his far-out policies. Also, there will be no one with a background of advocating for the wants and needs of the working class and disadvantaged people, which, ironically, Comrade Zoh claims to champion. There will be no healthy exchange of different ideas or courses of action. Rather, everyone will be in lockstep. In my opinion, if that comes to pass it will be most distressing for the future of NYC and its residents.

According to the NY Post Comrade Zoh’s top advisors are not members of the working class. Like him, many of them attended private schools and were raised in wealth and privilege. In addition, they are wealthy in their own right sporting six figure annual incomes, well above the average NYCer’s salary of $58,000. Thus, they cannot possibly identify with the wants, needs and problems of the average NYCer , much less the poor, downtrodden and disadvantaged of which there are many. Their life experiences and attitudes are totally different. As an illustration, many of them have close ties to the radical billionaire George Soros and various so-called elites.

Comrade Zoh and his supporters have gone to great lengths to disguise, downplay and mitigate many of his radical policies. I contend that many, if not most, of his supporters are not cognizant of them. In addition, I contend that most of these policies are impractical, overly costly and/or of questionable legality.

Recently, the NY Post was able to obtain a list of some of them and published it for those who care to edify themselves. They are the following:

  1. Decriminalize all drugs, petty crimes and sex work.
  2. Expunge all convictions for petty crimes including sex work and drug offenses and immediately release everyone who is currently incarcerated for those crimes.
  3. Criminals under 26 would be charged as “youthful” offenders.
  4. Eliminate cash bail and pretrial incarceration.
  5. Close the detention facility at Rikers Island.
  6. Establish a review board that would have the authority to prosecute law enforcement officers for “misconduct.”
  7. Expunge all gang databases.
  8. Allow illegal immigrants to vote and run for political office.
  9. Restrict ICE’s access further and extend and expand sanctuary protections.
  10. Decertify banks that contract with or fund ICE.
  11. Abolish the Board of Education.
  12. Cease the creation of new charter schools.
  13. Eliminate the presence of police and safety officers in schools
  14. Guarantee tenure for teachers and eliminate standardized testing as a basis for teacher evaluations.
  15. Allocate money to promote DEI in public schools.
  16. Reparations for Native Americans and Blacks.
  17. Allow trans-minors access to transition-related care WITHOUT parental consent.
  18. Make all public transportation free.
  19. Establish government-owned and operated grocery stores.
  20. Establish government-owned and operated tech companies and utilities.
  21. Universal rent control.
  22. Avowed antisemite.

According to the most recent polls Comrade Zoh remains the clear front-runner with former Governor Andrew Cuomo as his closest competitor. The results of an American Pulse Research & Polling survey released in August disclosed Comrade Zoh garnered 37% compared to Cuomo’s 25%. However, a recent Tulchin Research poll disclosed that in a two-man race Cuomo would defeat Comrade Zoh 52-41. Will some or all of the other candidates drop out? Your guess is as good as mine.

Conclusion

Voters of NYC, this is the real type of mayor and government you are on the cusp of electing. Is this what you really want? The media characterizes Zoh as a socialist. Not true.

Socialism is a somewhat benign interpretation of his real beliefs. It is intended to disguise or mitigate his real beliefs, which have many elements of communism. Generally, it is characterized by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership. Think Sweden. Communism goes further. It is a stateless, classless society where resources are distributed based on need.  Put succinctly, it is a society where everything is owned by everyone, and all members have equal rights to the benefits of society. Think Communist China or the Soviet Union.

Folks, Zoh is a COMMUNIST plain and simple, and also an avowed antisemite.

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

TRUMP’S CRIME INTERVENTION IN DC

Once again, the Dems find themselves on the wrong side of a critical issue, a so-called 80-20 issue. Those of you who have been following the news (the real news) are cognizant that this is not the first time, and probably it will not be the last. The Dems have exhibited a propensity for this self-destruction, and if they continue to do so I predict dire consequences for them in the 2026 midterm elections. The party in power nearly always loses seats in the midterms, but 2026 may very well prove to be the exception.

As I have said in previous blogs, this is not the first time the Dems have fallen into this trap. Once again, Trump has co-opted the sensible and popular side of an issue, and the Dems have been left with a Hobson’s choice – either admit he is right and agree, or take the unpopular, illogical side. For example, three other fairly recent issues come to mind, (1) the Dems’ open border policy, (2) their openly favoring the rights of illegal immigrants over American citizens, and (3) their support of the rights of transgenders over those of females. Blinded by their insane, irrational hatred of Trump they have allowed themselves to be maneuvered into espousing the unpopular, illogical side of these issues. In my opinion these issues along with the economy played a significant part in their resounding defeat in the 2024 elections.

Crime has been one of the most significant issues for voters. People simply do not feel safe and secure, which are fundamental rights and expectations of everyone. This is the case pretty much everywhere to some extent, but it is particularly prevalent in “blue” cities like NY, Chi, LA and DC, among others. Many have characterized DC as the most crime-ridden capital in the world. At the very least it is highly dangerous and an embarrassment to the US.

All too often, criminals are not arrested, especially for “non-violent” crimes such as carjacking or assault, which are routinely ignored. (Anyone who has been a victim of one of those crimes will tell you they are most definitely NOT non-violent.) If they are arrested, due to “no cash” bail laws, they are soon released to commit more crimes, which they often do. Criminals know how to “work” the system. There have been many instances of criminals being arrested multiple times.

Shoplifting is common in some areas. Criminals simply walk into a business, brazenly take whatever they want, and walk out. Employees and security guards let them go. No one bothers to call the police. It is well known that the police are loath to arrest perpetrators of petty crimes, and if they do the jails are a revolving door. In blue jurisdictions “woke” prosecutors and judges often reduce felonies to misdemeanors, and juries tend to favor the rights of the accused over those of the victim. For instance, recently a grand jury in DC refused to indict a protester who had hit an ICE officer with a sandwich while the officer was in performance of his official duties, which legally is an assault.

Trump has dealt with this problem in a decisive, rational manner. In DC he activated the national guard to supplement and support local police who appeared to be overwhelmed. Their mere presence has had a significant benefit. Crime is way down. Homicide has been virtually eliminated. There were none in the first two weeks and, as I write this blog, only one since then.

Trump’s actions have received wide praise. Many citizens have rejoiced to reporters that, for the first times in years, they feel safe and secure enough to actually go out to restaurants and other venues. Even far left DC Mayor Muriel Bowser told reporters that she believed the boosted law enforcement presence was working.

In spite of the foregoing and the plethora of positive supporting empirical evidence the usual critics and naysayers are still in denial. For example, despite FBI data that has identified Chicago as one of the most violent and crime-ridden cities in the US IL Governor J B Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson have criticized Trump’s actions in DC and have refused his repeated offers to provide Federal troops to support local police. In my view, they are willing to place their constituents in jeopardy and permit criminals to operate with impunity rather than accept help from Trump. They feel to do so would constitute recognition that his policy is right and is working. Consequently, in effect, they are siding with criminals over law-abiding citizens.  It should be noted that the majority of these crimes are “black on black,” which contradicts the Dems’ claim that they seek to help the poor and disadvantaged.

To be sure, there have been critics. For instance, Politico cited reports from the Rochester Institute of Technology and the DOJ, itself, declaring that the murder rate and all violent crimes in DC had declined from 2023 to 2024. The implication was that DC had matters under control, did not need federal assistance, and Trump had “overstepped” in providing it. However, supporters have denoted that even those rates were still unacceptably high. Additionally, some observers have expressed doubt as to the veracity of those crime numbers. For example, there is evidence that many violent crimes may have been classified as misdemeanors. Moreover, as I said, it is a fact that in the weeks immediately following Trump’s deployment of federal troops there were NO homicides in DC and, as I write this, only one thereafter. Finally, the White House cited several high-profile victims of crimes, including the murders of two embassy staffers, and a congressional intern as well as assaults on various members of Congress, which have drawn much media reportage.

Conclusion

The foregoing is yet another example of the Dems being out of touch with the will of the voters, another example of their blind hatred of Donald Trump maneuvering them onto the wrong side of an 80-20 issue. How could they possibly think that supporting criminals over victims and violence over safety are winning strategies? It is simply amazing. I have never seen anything like it. There is no way to “spin” this. The public will not fooled.

As I have written many times, the Dems have allowed the far-left minority to hijack their party. The moderates, if there are any, have been cowed into silence. For God’s sake, they are about to elect a Marxist as Mayor of NYC, a Marxist!

Normally, there is an ebb and flow to the popularity and power of the two political parties from one election cycle to the next. Based on that, one could expect the Dems, which are down now, to make a comeback. However, I don’t see how they can rebound from this in the foreseeable future.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

LABOR DAY

On September 1 we will celebrate Labor Day (“LD”).  As we all know, the holiday has traditionally been celebrated on the first Monday of September.  It is a federal holiday to honor and recognize the American labor movement and the contributions of laborers to the development and achievements of the US economy. It is celebrated in various forms and at various dates in approximately 80 countries.

To most Americans LD merely symbolizes the unofficial end of summer and the impending beginning of the school year.  They enjoy the three-day weekend off from work.  They spend the day with family and/or friends. They enjoy picnics, parades, vacations, shopping, baseball games and other sports activities, and barbecues. They lament, but grudgingly accept, holiday traffic and long lines at airports.

Wikipedia predicts that LD travel will be exceptionally heavy with respect to all modes of travel particularly flying and driving. Generally, the worst times to drive are the afternoons and early evenings on Thursday and Friday, with peak congestion expected on Monday.  To avoid the heaviest traffic, drive before the afternoon rush on Thursday and Friday, and on Saturday. Usually, early morning or evening travel is the best bet. As always, adverse weather and/or accidents could easily cause further complications, disruptions, and delays.

On a positive note, gasoline prices are expected to be the lowest since 2020 and considerably lower than just last year. Currently, the average price at the pump is approximately $3.15 per gallon. The primary reason for this is increased supply, which in my opinion, is because of President Trump’s “drill baby, drill” policy.

According to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 2025 will feature the busiest Labor Day travel period on record. Normally airports are the most congested on the Friday before LD, but every day of the weekend will likely be problematic. Whichever day you fly expect long lines, flight delays and cancellations. Weather is the big “X” factor. One never knows what could crop up to complicate matters.

The TSA predicts that in excess of 17 million people are expected to fly through next Wednesday. Plan for massive flight delays especially passing through security. On a typical day, approximately 2.5 million passengers pass through security checkpoints, but this number is expected to rise to nearly three million per day during the LD weekend. 

Why does the summer season appear to be so short? Every year it seems like summer has just begun and here comes LD. I believe it is because in our minds, we transfer the approximately three post-Labor Day weeks of the season to Autumn.

What is the meaning and purpose of LD?  Why do we celebrate it?  How did it come about?  Good questions.  Read on for the answers.

As I said above, the purpose of LD is to celebrate the accomplishments of the American Labor movement.  Whatever one’s political views and affiliations, I think it is important and appropriate to understand Labor’s contributions to the growth and development of the US.  For one thing, cheap labor was an integral component of the Industrial Revolution.  When all was said and done, someone had to build all the roads, railroads, and cars, and operate all the factories and steel mills.  In addition, the labor activism of the late 1800s and early 1900s was largely responsible for the relatively high wages and extensive benefits that are enjoyed by today’s US labor force (compared to that of other countries).

It should be noted that union membership has been declining sharply and steadily.  For example, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1950 approximately 40% of American workers were members of a union compared to a record low of just 9.9% in 2024. Moreover, the flood of illegal immigrants in recent years has served to depress wages of both union and non-union workers.

The history of LD began in the 1870s in Canada.  Labor Unions were illegal in Canada, and 26 members of the Toronto Typographical Union had been imprisoned for striking for a nine-hour work day.  That action led to demonstrations and rallies and raising the profile of labor unrest in both Canada and the US.  Two of the most outspoken leaders were Peter McGuire, founder of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and an official of the American Federation of Labor, and Matthew Maguire, Secretary of the Central Labor Union in NY.

Historical accounts differ, but one or both of these men are credited with being the first to propose a holiday to celebrate labor.  In any event, the CLU planned and organized the first LD celebration in NYC on September 5, 1885.  Approximately, 20,000 workers and their families participated.  The concept spread.  In 1887 Oregon became the first state to sanction the holiday.

The Pullman Labor Strike in 1893 provided the final impetus for a national labor holiday.  The Pullman Company had been founded and was run by George Pullman.  Pullman, IL, where the company operated, was a classic company town.  All the workers lived there and paid rent to the company, which was automatically deducted from their paychecks.  Workers’ housing was segregated according to their jobs; everyone shopped at the Company Store.

Many viewed such an arrangement as a form of slavery, because workers were, in actuality, trapped due to their omnipresent debt to the Company. (Think of the song “Sixteen Tons.”)  In 1893 the country was in the midst of a recession.  The company laid off hundreds of workers and reduced the wages of many others.  Of course, living expenses remained constant.  These actions led to a strike.  President Cleveland declared the strike to be illegal and “broke” it with Federal troops.  Some striking workers were killed in the ensuing violence.

This incensed many Americans, and 1894 was an election year.  So, Congress expeditiously passed a bill establishing LD as a national holiday, and the President promptly signed it into law.  This entire process took only six days, so you can imagine the extent of the public outcry.  Incidentally, this action failed to save President Cleveland’s political career; he was defeated anyway.

Eventually, the government settled on the first Monday in September as the official date.  Many countries celebrate it on May 1 in conjunction with International Workers’ Day, but the Federal government did not want the association with that date for obvious reasons.

One of the supreme ironies of LD is that because it is such a big shopping day, many workers, especially retailers, are required to work.  LD is considered to be one of the biggest retail sales days of the year.  Some people use the day as a benchmark to change over their summer clothes to fall clothes.  Fashion-minded people claim it the latest day when one should wear white clothes (although “winter white,” whatever that is, is still permissible.)

Like other holidays, LD should be a time for all of us to come together and reflect on what makes America, despite its flaws, the greatest country in the world.  Disaffected residents as well as some people in other countries may like to criticize us for our real and perceived flaws, yet foreigners still want to come here, in some cases, desperately.  In essence, many of them are “voting with their feet.”

Despite what you may see on tv or read in newspapers or on social media, most Americans are decent, hard-working, caring persons.  Whenever disaster or tragedy strikes we unite to help those in distress.  Many have donated their time and/or money without being asked and without expecting any payback or even recognition.  If you doubt me, just look at the outpouring of kindness and empathy shown by “average” Americans toward the victims of the catastrophic events in recent years, such as superstorm Sandy, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and mass shootings. Those people, not the destructive thugs and professional agitators one sees on the tv news destroying property, attacking the police, and beating up those with whom they disagree, are the “real” Americans.  It is the proverbial “silver lining” in a very dark cloud.

CONCLUSION

I hope you all enjoy your LD holiday however you choose to spend it.  Feel free to tell me how you celebrated.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

JAS CROCKETT

In my opinion, Jas Crockett has a big, loud mouth and an empty head. In recent months the member of House of Representative from the State of Texas has rocketed from obscurity to prominence. How has she managed that? By diligently and tirelessly working to benefit the lives of the people in her district? No? By sponsoring major legislation? No. By accomplishing anything positive for her district, her Party or her country? No, no, and no. What is has done and what she is really good at is finding a camera and spewing vituperative inanities to get attention.

Jasmine Felicia Crockett was born on March 29, 1981 in St. Louis, MO.  She attended Rhodes College in Memphis, TN intending to become a CPA. But, after one of her professors told her that she had “too much personality” to pursue that career she began to reconsider. After witnessing a series of hate crimes and violence on campus toward AAs she decided to become an attorney. She attained a BA in 2002 and her Juris Doctor in 2006.

She entered politics in 2019, after incumbent representative Eric Johnson vacated his seat in the Texas legislature to run for mayor of Dallas. In 2020 she narrowly defeated his appointed replacement, Lorraine Birbal, in the Dem primary in a runoff and then won the election unopposed. She assumed office in January 2021.

In 2022 she ran for the vacated seat in Texas’ 30th congressional district. Again, she beat her Dem opponent in the primary in a runoff. Subsequently, she won the election in November 2022 and won re-election in 2024.

In short order she has raised her profile and gained national attention. She aggressively seeks any kind of attention. She doesn’t care if it is positive or negative. For the most part her public comments lack, decorum, accuracy, civility and class. They have been more suitable for a street corner rabble-rouser than a member of the US Congress.

First, during a 2023 impeachment hearing against President Biden she accused fellow congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and other Republicans of hypocrisy asserting that those launching the impeachment inquiry, and those who brought-forth charges against Biden, were ignoring what she characterized as documented evidence of President Trump’s impeachable offenses. “He keeps national secrets in the ‘shi**er.’ ” Then, she reiterated those accusations at the Dem Presidential convention this time referencing Trump’s “thinking chair—y’all know what I said the other time.”

Next, in March 2025, she referred to Texas Governor Greg Abbott, who is handicapped and uses a wheelchair, “Governor Hot Wheels” and a “Hot Ass Mess” in a speech she gave at the Human Rights Campaign’s annual dinner. (In response, Abbott took the high road replying: “It’s another day and another disaster by the Democrats.” As a result of her behavior Representative Randy Weber filed a censure resolution against her.

In addition to her unprofessional conduct unbefitting a member of Congress according to multiple media reports she has run through staffers at a prolific pace. She is rarely in her office to work on legislative matters “unless the TV cameras are rolling.” Rather than focusing on the needs of her constituents she is more interested in her profile with the public. She has been described as an “influencer” rather then a member of Congress. Another source described her as “all diva, no wow.” Furthermore when she does interact with her staff she is frequently rude, crude, lewd, and abusive. Finally, a former staffer characterized her thusly: “She is never in the office and is very disengaged. She does her bull—t that goes viral and then freaks out over the most random things.”

Conclusion

In a short time due to her relentless publicity-seeking she has become one of the more recognizable members of Congress, albeit in a mostly negative sense. She appeals to the lowest common denominator of the public, the disaffected, far left, anti-American, antisemitic suffers of TDS who are influenced by sound bites rather than facts.

If her goal was to develop name recognition, she certainly has succeeded. However, in my opinion she has failed dismally in the primary role of any representative, which is to serve the needs of her congressional district. I am not aware of her having contributed any substantive achievement such as sponsoring a bill or accomplishing anything positive for her district, her party or her country. Her notoriety has been aided and abetted by the reluctance of the more moderate Dems, such as such as (Up)Chuck Schumer and Hakim Jefferies, to criticize her extreme actions.

A significant portion of the electorate views her as a caricature who spews inane negative garbage just to get attention. All she does is criticize President Trump and his policies. She does not offer any alternative ideas or policies, because she has none. Furthermore, her carping is full of inaccuracies, exaggerations and vituperations.

As a final footnote, CBS News and other media outlets have speculated that Texas’ current redistricting plan for 2026 would eliminate Crockett’s House seat. If that were to occur if she wanted to remain in Congress, she would have to seek election in redrawn district with a different and perhaps less friendly constituency. Crockett has claimed she is being targeted. Perhaps, but I, for one, would not be sorry to see her go.

In my view, her antics, language and attitude have been an embarrassment to the institution of the Congress. If, in fact, she does lose her seat I say, good riddance.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

CAN COMRADE ZOH BE STOPPED?

We are less than three months from election day on November 4, and all indications are that NYC is on the precipice of self-destruction. And what’s more NYS and the country may be dragged down as well.

On that date Comrade Zoh will likely be elected mayor of NYC. Zoh’s extreme views, which I have detailed in previous blogs are unrealistic, unworkable and, in a few cases, illegal. They will drive people and businesses away to relocate in other states with lower taxes, lower crime and “friendlier” lifestyles. This trend has already commenced, and if Zoh becomes mayor it will only accelerate.

As we all know, Comrade Zoh won the Dem primary for mayor decisively, which in NYC, where Dems hold a 6:1 edge in registration over GOPers, is tantamount to election. How did he manage to win? I have discussed this in previous blogs in detail, and I don’t see the need to regurgitate it all here, but, in summary, in my view there were four main reasons.

  1. Zoh is a charismatic figure and a compelling speaker reminiscent of another rabble-rouser in Germany in the 1930s.
  2. His campaign was well-organized and well-funded by outside leftist groups.
  3. He has been and still is being portrayed as a socialist, whereas in reality his own statements identify him as a communist in the Soviet mold. Voters were unaware of or indifferent to his communist policies and as well as his virulent antisemitism.
  4. His primary opponents, Andrew Cuomo and Eric Adams, are unpopular and each is carrying significant political “baggage.”

As I write this, Comrade Zoh has a decisive lead in the polls. For instance, according to Politico he has the support of 35% of registered voters, followed by Cuomo with 25%, Curtis Sliwa with 14%, Adams at 11% and attorney Jim Walden with 1%. The remainder were undecided. Even more inexplicably, a recently published Haaritz, US News survey disclosed that Zoh has a 17% lead among Jewish voters.

The more we find out about Comrade Zoh the worse it gets. The NY Post has reported that he is closely aligned with Mahmoud Khalil, the former Columbia University “student” and known terrorist who was one of the leaders of the pro-Palestinian/ pro-Hamas/anti-Israel/antisemitic protests over the last few years. The US has ample grounds to deport him and has been trying to do so but so far, it has not succeeded.

Conclusion

Zoh has received strong support from far-left Dems such as AOC and Bernie Sanders as well as the left-leaning media and various left-leaning PACs both domestic and foreign. Most moderate Dems, including Senate Minority Leader (Up)Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, have declined to endorse him, but inexplicably have failed to speak out against him. In my opinion, this is due to a lack of courage. They are afraid of the small but vocal far left wing of the Dem Party. They will probably be primaried anyway in 2026, so for the sake of the Party they might as well do what’s right. Speak their minds.

At this point, I don’t see how Zoh can be stopped. In my opinion, this election will be a watershed moment not only for NYC and NYS but also for the Dems and America as a whole. Dems will have to run on his record in 2026 and beyond. They will pay for their cowardice.

Moreover, the impact of a communist mayor in NYC, the largest and most prestigious city in the country, will be enormous and far-reaching. Everybody likes free stuff. The problem is that free stuff is not really free; somewhere, somehow, somebody has to pay for it. It’s been proven time and again that communist/socialist policies do not work. Never have; never will. In the words of the late Margaret Thatcher, “[t]he problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

The financial, political, economic and social ramifications of Conrade Zoh’s election will be incalculable. We may be sowing the seeds of our own destruction.

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment