B-Man

You heartless people, going after those poor immigrants. (How am I supposed to exploit them for money now ?) HOLY SHLIT: Melissa Moorman, an employee of the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (@KYTC), was FIRED after she blew the whistle on a scheme to give driver's licenses to illegal aliens at $200 each "under the table." Moorman says that the scheme would happen 4-5 times PER DAY at multiple branches across the state, totaling potentially THOUSANDS of invalid licenses. KYTC claims the licenses were issued "in error." After exposing the scheme, Moorman was fired. The KYTC also denied any public request for documentation, withholding nearly 2,300 records. This needs a full investigation now

I meant her friends Jim Beam and Johnny Walker. Nancy Pelosi's J6 Whopper: Fmr. Chief of Capitol Police Sund Smacks Down Her Lies with Cold, Hard Facts https://twitchy.com/justmindy/2025/08/11/steven-sund-replies-to-nancy-pelosi-n2417128

Note Bibi is reaching out to the people of Iran, not the government who wouldn't accept the help anyway.

Cut off text: POTUS: "No. I don't want you to be comfortable."

I think that Nancy gets wrecked every night.

Ahhh, the old "I will vastly overstate what is happening, to try and make a point. (and fail)

"Fools errand" /ˈfo͞olz ˌerənd/ . a task or activity that has no hope of success. He will NOT directly answer a question.

It really doesn't matter. If they are committing crimes....................lock em up ! .

They Never NEVER respond to this argument. Their gerrymandering must be protected.

The owner insisting that the Editorial dpt. start representing all sides of an issue = completely gutting its opinion section because it was a too mean to Trump Roundy just keeps slinging things against the wall............................("Did you forget?") .

Enough of the squirrel back and forth. Back to the topic in the real world.

TRUMP FEDERALIZING DC POLICE, DEPLOYING NATIONAL GUARD IN CAPITAL CRIME CRACKDOWN. By Diana Nerozzi and Steven Nelson WASHINGTON — President Trump announced a historic escalation of law enforcement in DC on Monday, deploying the National Guard to patrol the streets and placing the city’s police department under federal control. “We’re going to clean it up real quick,” Trump told reporters at the White House, noting the high crime rate in the nation’s capital and the Aug. 3 attack on a former Department of Government Efficiency staffer trying to stop an attempted carjacking by 10 teens. “You spit, and we hit,” Trump said in describing how cops will respond to those who fight back against the law under the newly-established “public safety emergency.” If necessary, Trump added, ordinary military members could be deployed to join the National Guard and the local cops. The president has direct control over DC’s National Guard, unlike every other unit, which is under the authority of state governors. Under the District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973, Trump has the authority to use the DC Metropolitan Police Department for federal purposes for 30 days. https://nypost.com/2025/08/11/us-news/trump-federalizing-dc-police-deploying-national-guard-in-capital-crime-crackdown/

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Profanity Won’t Save a Party That’s Out of Coherent Arguments. Once, not too long ago, people with ideas aspired to enter politics by presenting their ideas, which were debated during rallies and speeches. Worthy candidates laid out a map to follow for election, and voters judged the best route. Within the past year, many high-profile Democrats have replaced maps with megaphones and words that would make World War II-era merchant marines proud, remaining confident that their volume equaled clarity, while anger equaled authenticity. Although rhetorical shifts such as these grab attention for a single moment, the speakers never learned the lesson that attention without persuasion turns into nothing but a noisy treadmill. Profanity signals emotion, and emotion sells in an algorithmic marketplace. Strategists, using lessons learned from trials long ago, know that a jolt of outrage can feel like action, an addictive sensation during tight news cycles, especially when news cycles are particularly tense, as when a party struggles to articulate fixes for inflation, border security, urban disorder, and classroom decline. Microphones amplify syllables because a governing coalition needs sentences that add up to a plan. {snip} Final Thoughts Words serve as our political currency; spend them wisely to purchase trust, organize confidence, and build coalitions that are built to survive the next storm. Recklessly spend, and you end up broke, chasing virality because governing results never arrive. Many Democrats proudly wear profanity like a varsity letter, sure that a little attitude replaces answers. Voters paying mortgages, filling lunch boxes, and navigating violent city blocks beg for results instead of dirty speeches. Governments can't cuss a budget into balance, schools can't curse reading scores to rise, and borders aren't secured by spicing up nouns and verbs. https://pjmedia.com/david-manney/2025/08/10/profanity-wont-save-a-party-thats-out-of-coherent-arguments-n4942570

Barack Obama and the Predictable Coup by Jeannie DeAngelis The most intriguing part of the storm surrounding Barack Obama’s involvement in the effort to remove Donald J. Trump from office is that some people still refuse to believe the allegations. There are certain Americans who continue to deny any claims concerning Barack Obama’s negative impact on the country. Perhaps it’s that grin and laid back attitude. Or perhaps it’s his rhetorical skill set or his ability to croon Al Green tunes, or maybe it is just his knack for evoking racial remorse that causes half the nation to make excuses for Barack Obama’s troubling track record. Whatever the reason, the Obama façade is in the process of crumbling, and many Americans are admitting that people don’t change unless they agree to recognize their issues. Ergo, Barack Obama has not changed and will not change. Surpassing even the opinions of the majority, for twenty years, the former president has displayed a level of smugness that suggests he believes he alone knows what is best for America. His sense of superiority is unmistakable, and with that kind of confidence, it’s understandable that the former community organizer would feel justified in pursuing whatever goals he deems necessary to reform America’s core ideals. Add to that his apparent self-importance and the disdain he’s shown toward things like our founding document, and toward grandmothers praying outside abortion facilities, and toward Donald Trump — and it all begins to make sense. Despite his rhetoric about “We the people” and creating a “more perfect union,” Obama’s divisive policies have fostered the us-versus-them mentality that America now struggles with every day. From Henry Gates to Trayvon Martin, throughout his political career, Obama seized every opportunity to deepen racial divides in a country that for over two centuries had worked together to address complex issues. Obama is committed and has consistently shaped government policy to punish any group or belief system he despises. In weaponized, politicized Obama circles, rest assured that the shadowy figure leading the anti-American crusade has always been the one at the top. However, because of the racial tensions he escalated and his ability to manipulate the nation’s mindset with words, the man who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for the “diplomatic accomplishment” of being half-black has, until now, been shielded from the scrutiny he deserved for his deceitfulness, corruption, ineptitude, and ruthlessness. An unknown author once wrote, “A toxic person only changes his victims, never himself.” https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/08/barack_obama_and_the_predictable_coup.html

Erasing the Failure: Trump Taking Back Border Wall Material That Biden Abandoned By Bob Hoge Upon taking office in January 2021, former President Joe Biden wasted no time in opening the border to any and all comers. In one of his first moves as commander in chief, he ridiculed Donald Trump’s efforts to build a wall and simply abandoned millions of dollars of equipment and supplies that had been intended to fortify our southern boundary. Now Trump wants it back: https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2025/08/10/erasing-the-failure-trump-taking-back-border-wall-material-that-biden-abandoned-n2192666

Democrats Learn What Consequences Are, and They Aren't Happy About It One of the more underappreciated aspects of the 2024 election is just how confident most Democrats were that they would win it. It seems like an eternity ago, but there was a time when the American left was all but certain Kamala Harris would be the next president. Who can remember the months-long proclamation of "joy" being a central theme of her campaign? Or "Brat summer," suggesting Harris had made inroads with pop culture that simply couldn't be defeated. I still remember having to repeatedly debunk reports on election day of massive turnout in Philadelphia that had supposedly sealed the deal for the then-vice president. That attitude was nothing new, though. Between 2021 and 2024, no action was taken by the Democratic Party that factored in the possibility that Donald Trump might be president again one day. Assuming that he'd surely be done this time, they didn't even consider the possible alternative outcomes of their crusade. But then he won, and like a child who angrily wonders how the hot stove burned him, the Democrats are now very unhappy that Trump is governing in light of their actions. I'm going to go ahead and skip the sugar-coating that some try to do regarding this topic. Is Donald Trump seeking retribution for how the Democratic Party weaponized the American judicial system to try to throw him in prison for the rest of his life? Yes. Yes, he is. Here's the best summation of the situation I've seen. You see, in life, when you do things, those things often produce specific repercussions. We call those "consequences," and you don't get to call a timeout from them the moment they arrive. Democrats seem to be under the impression that they can set new standards only to revert when those new standards devour them. Take the recent battle over redistricting, which has seen over 50 left-wing Texas legislators flee their state to stop the passing of a new congressional map that would eliminate five Democrat-held seats. For decades, the Democratic Party has used state power to draw some of the most gerrymandered maps in the nation. Some examples include Illinois, Maryland, California, New York, Massachusetts, and New Mexico. But when Texas Republicans decided they wanted to stop playing the game with their hands tied behind their back, Democrats screamed bloody murder. The same is happening regarding Trump's quest to hold people accountable for the political weaponization of the government. When Joe Biden used a special counsel to try to jail the current president on extremely specious legal grounds, that was spun as "no one is above the law." When Trump responds to that breaking of norms by investigating those who perpetrated it, suddenly it's a "threat to democracy." When Department of Justice officials and FBI agents used their power to hatch a conspiracy to try to take down the Democrats' primary political rival, they were just "doing their job." When Trump fires those leaders and agents as a result of their own decisions to politicize their offices, that's claimed to be "politicization." But really, what did Democrats think was going to happen? At what point in Trump's political career has he shown a penchant for letting things go? https://redstate.com/bonchie/2025/08/10/democrats-learn-what-consequences-are-and-they-arent-happy-n2192651

Goodbye to DEI, crushed by the weight of its own hypocrisies by Victor Davis Hanson President Donald Trump’s executive orders banning diversity, equity and inclusion-related racial and gender preferencing have ostensibly doomed the DEI industry. But DEI was already on its last legs. Half of all Americans no longer approve of racial, ethnic or gender preferences. DEI had enjoyed a surge following the death of George Floyd and the subsequent 120 days of nonstop rioting, arson, assaults, killings and attacks on law enforcement during the summer of 2020. In those chaotic years, DEI was seen as the answer to racial tensions. {snip} Yet almost immediately, contradictions and hypocrisies undermined DEI. First, how does one define “diverse” in an increasingly multiracial, intermarried, assimilated and integrated society? DNA badges? The old one-drop rule of the antebellum South? Superficial appearance? To establish racial or ethnic proof of being one-sixteenth, one-fourth, or one-half “non-white,” employers, corporations and universities would have to become racially obsessed genealogists. Yet refusing to become racial auditors also would allow racial and ethnic fraudsters — like Sen. Elizabeth Warren and the would-be mayor of New York, Zohran Mamdani — to go unchecked. Warren falsely claimed Native American heritage to leverage a Harvard professorship. Mamdani, an immigrant son of wealthy Indian immigrants from Uganda, tried to game his way into college by claiming he was African American. Second, in 21st-century America, class became increasingly divergent from race. Mamdani, who promises to tax “affluent” and “whiter” neighborhoods at higher rates, is himself the child of Indian immigrants, the most affluent ethnic group in America. Why would the children of Barack Obama, Joy Reid or LeBron James need any special preferences, given the multimillionaire status of their parents? In other words, one’s superficial appearance no longer necessarily determines one’s income or wealth, nor defines “privilege” or lack thereof. Third, DEI is often tied to questions of “reparations.” The current white majority supposedly owes other particular groups financial or entitlement compensation for the sins of the past. Yet in today’s multiracial and multiethnic society, in which over 50 million residents were not born in the United States and many have only recently arrived, what are the particular historical or past grievances that would earn anyone special treatment? What injustices can recent arrivals from southern Mexico, South Korea or Chad claim, knowing little about, and experiencing no firsthand bias from, Americans, the United States, or its history? Is the DEI logic that when a Guatemalan steps one foot across the southern border, she is suddenly classified as a victim of white oppression and therefore entitled to preferences in hiring or employment? Fourth, does the word “minority” still carry any currency? In today’s California, the demography breaks down as 40% Latino, 34% white, 16% Asian American or Pacific Islander, 6% black, and 3% Other — with no significant majority and fewer whites than the Latino “minority.” Are Latinos the new de facto “majority” and “whites” just one of the four other “minorities?” Do the other minorities, then, have grievances against Latinos, given that they are the dominant population in the state? Fifth, when does DEI “proportional representation” apply, and when does it not? Are whites “overrepresented” among the nation’s university faculties, reportedly 75% white, when they comprise only about 70% of the population? Or, are whites “underrepresented” as college students, making up just 55% of them, and thus in need of DEI action to bump up their numbers? Black athletes are vastly overrepresented in lucrative and prestigious professional sports. To correct such asymmetries, should Asians and Hispanics be given mandated quotas for quarterback or point-guard positions to ensure proper athletic “diversity, equity and inclusion”? Sixth, DEI determines good and bad prejudices, as well as correct and incorrect biases. “Affinity” segregationist graduations — black, Hispanic, Asian and gay — are considered “affirming”. But would a similar affinity graduation ceremony for European-Americans or Jews be considered “racist”? Is a Latino-themed, de facto segregated house on a California campus considered “enlightened,” while a European-American dorm would be condemned as incendiary? In truth, DEI long ago became corrupt, falling apart under the weight of its own paradoxes and hypocrisies. It is a perniciously divisive idea — unable to define who qualifies for preference or why, who is overrepresented or not, or when bias is acceptable or unjust. And it is past time that it goes away. https://nypost.com/2025/08/10/opinion/goodbye-to-dei-crushed-by-the-weight-of-its-own-hypocrisies/