The protest "Renaissance Fair" comparison really nails it! My brother and his wife went to one of these protests, like they always do, and sent me a couple of pics. Looking happy in their hippie garb and with their clever signs demanding "Hands Off!" I made the mistake of pointing out that we're 37 trillion in debt and wanted to know what his solution to this truly existential problem might be. He angrily replied you don't do it by cutting government jobs and gutting social security or fucking around with tariffs. Ok, I say, but what exactly is YOUR plan? It went downhill from there. It is correct to say they are all acting but I'm not sure of the roles they imagine themselves playing.
Teachers work for local governments, which is where (along with state governments) the Constitution says the bulk of the power should be. We need to end the Dept. of Ed because I think after that, teacher's unions won't be as powerful and teachers can teach more and no longer indoctrinate.
Both of what Roberta and Richard are concerned about is true. Getting rid of Department of Education is quite important. And, addressing the large number of School Boards who seem much further left than the average of parents or taxpayers will be critical with more local control. Why argue about which is more important? Our education system will not be fixed unless they both are successfully addressed. And do not forget that State governments that play a role, as well as city governments. There is much to do here. As long as everything is getting attention, and we all have an overall shared goal, it doesn’t matter which is more important.
Let’s each figure out how to make best progress to a good outcome:
Children who are literate
Children proficient in math
Children with critical thinking skills
Children who can work well on teams
Children who interact well with each other and people not exactly like them
Children who are well versed in history, civics, science
Children who have the foundation to live a successful life: personal health, ability to manage money, ability to live independently
In summary, we want our children to be well educated. I’m sure my, off the top of my head, list can be improved, but I remember learning these things in school starting in 1957. And our son got most of this in his school years starting in 1992. Things have deteriorated so badly since then.
Red states tend to receive more federal money than they contribute in federal taxes:
1. Lower average incomes → Residents pay less in federal income taxes.
2. Higher rates of poverty or rural populations → Qualify for more federal aid (e.g., Medicaid, SNAP).
3. Military presence → Red states often have large military bases or defense contracts.
4. Agricultural subsidies → Many red states benefit heavily from farming-related support.
Example (pre-2025 data, trends hold relatively steady) by state Fed $ received per $1 paid in taxes
Mississippi $2.13
Kentucky $2.00
West Virginia $2.15
New Mexico $2.16
New Jersey $0.74
Massachusetts $0.82
California ~$1.00 or less
Red states typically benefit more in terms of federal dollars received vs. paid, even though they often advocate for smaller federal government. It’s one of those classic political paradoxes.
I want the whole thing, across all states, greatly reduced; reduce housing, food stamps, education, medical, and warfare. It’s already a combination of socialism and communism. I prefer individual merit and freedom; not governmental controlled cradle to grave custodianship. And I am increasingly on the minority since socialism usually doesn’t end until they run out of other people’s earnings.
Unfortunately I think the majority of people probably prefer security over freedom. True freedom requires personal responsibility. Hey! That’s a lot of work. It’s a lot easier for politicians to promise security.
100% true about socialism. Eventually everyone is equally miserable and poor because there is only so much they can distribute among the population. But there is a line (not sure if it is a fine line) between socialism and providing support to those in need. Personal responsibility is important, and seeing generations living of welfare or SSI infuriates me. At the same time, there is not a single developed civilized country that does not care about its elderly and disable, and widows and children left without support. A roof over their heads, and basic food and medical care is something that I would provide to those who are not able to provide for themselves. I think we can be in the center of political spectrum and even to the right of it and still have empathy.
For sure plenty of MAGA, RINOS and Democrats would take a hit as their dependence on government subsidies (eg education, shelter, food stamps, welfare, health, employment) was impacted. And so they would have to be weaned off of other people’s money overtime but substantially and methodically so. They would be at risk of suffering but between charities and their own willingness to start working and savings, we/they would improve. It wouldn’t be cold Turkey. But frankly, all Socialism based economies fail eventually as they run out of other people’s money.
That certainly makes more sense than what Trump's cold turkey approach. The stock market looks to be headed for another loss, to add to the huge ones seen Thurs & Friday.
It includes Social Security (FICA + FICA Med) - those are not Federal Dollars. Those are citizen dollars held by the government.
It includes, as you mentioned, military - which is, in effect, a purchase of services, so the federal government is receiving in exchange for federal dollars. The hidden part of that is the states that host those bases, or have federally owned land, cannot derive real estate tax from those acres. That's a penalty.
I looked at entitlements only about 10 years ago, and 17 of the top 20 recipients, per capita, were blue cities. I doubt that has changed.
The "left" is simply playing their usual game of using deception to cause civil unrest, Gabe.
The liberal "left of center" is simply following along without doing their homework.
The misinformation tactic works very well in this context, because the "left" has been sowing their mindless and mind-numbing hatred for years. We now refer to the inchoate expressions of spittle-flecked hatred as "TDS."
There is nothing wrong with being critical of President Trump and his policies, but that requires critical thinking. Critical thinking requires verifying assertions by referring to source material.
TDS requires a purely contrarian attitude, an "everything he says is a lie, absolutely every last little thing" approach.
Yes. As you stated, "a purely contrarian attitude", which seems very closely akin to the juvenile mental affliction known as "Oppositional Defiant Disorder", described in the professionally used DSM-IV manual.
Thanks for the reference, I hadn't realized that they'd entered ODD into the DSM. I must confess to having been exasperated back when child psychologists first named it. At the time, they were just really getting going with pathologizing anything and everything outlying on the behavioral distribution curve.
I'll check the DSM entry and see what they've done with it.
Even without a clinical diagnosis, your point stands; the behavior is juvenile, and I really hadn't looked at from that perspective before.
This is the theme, Mr. Collins; "angrily," always "angrily."
It isn't the anger itself that is meaningful, it's the instant elevation to incoherent emotion, emphasis on "incoherent."
For a few, the emotional escalation is a rather pitiful incontinence. For most, it's just a tactic meant to avoid honest negotiation.
Anyone who has ever dealt with a serial liar, understands doubling-down as a power-struggle tactic; facts are irrelevant when the aim is to use deception as a means of exerting control over others.
Good point about the instant elevation of anger. It reminds me of the scene in Invasion of the Body Snatchers where Donald Sutherland snarls and points at someone when he realizes they are not a Pod Person (aka Useful Idiot).
I’ve been shunned by sister who mentioned going. I thought it was an opportunity to tell her I voted for the other guy. She said she does not want to talk politics with me. But now it seems she doesn’t want to talk about anything at all since “our sister relationship is off track”.
A geat one as always. Looks like drama requires a mind lost? I saw a clip of a young protestor guy with a poster that read "Kings and Tyrants". When asked by a reporter what he had against Trump he said Trump is destroying "our democracy". Asked to be specific his brain disconnected but he got out f.... a few times and said he was against kings and tyrants. To waste your time like that really means you are unwell. It seems indeed like the work of a virus.
I'm not a big fan of "explaining" Democrats to themselves, and especially not a fan of lecturing them. In fact, those are two of my biggest character flaws. I daily have to remind myself that I can't possibly understand why they act the way they do, because they have a completely foreign set of values to mine.
As an example, I once saw a Democratic protest sign that read, "Abortion is a human right".
Such thinking absolutely stumps me. It stops me cold. There is no path I can follow backwards from that sign to anything rational, there's nothing to hang on to and have a conversation about. You can't have an argument with a contradiction.
So, unfortunately, we are faced with a fairly sizable number of our fellow citizens, neighbors, friends, and family who are willing to live in a state of active contradiction. There they go, waving their placards, heading to the nearest car dealership to state their unhappiness, yelling "la-la-la-i-can't-hear-you" while they plug their ears.
What can be said to them?
Nothing, really.
So I don't see a lot of hope in getting through to them and engaging in a conversation. On very rare occasions you can find someone on the Left who will get down to specifics (after much prompting and insisting) and then you can have a factual discussion. But otherwise, they are not interested. They are *invested*.
Their beliefs are unfalsfiable: there is no conceivable negative evidence. They themselves intuitively understand that, and so are completely indifferent to evidence.
During the "politi-wars" in Austin around 1970, my father actually had someone say that to him. Even I knew that there was no chance my father could convince the guy, who was arriving at a political meeting, to switch sides from "conservative Demo" to "liberal Demo". But he did it anyway. He was very "socially bold".
A lot of the elderly looking pudgy folks at these demoncrat protest rallies seems to be lonely hearts seeking a hook up. Have to admit, never thought I'd see the day Dims rally to protect Wall Street interests.
If you choose to invest in market, you have to be able to understand it's fluctuation. I'm invested myself, I totally get the bigger picture, and what would happen if Trump DIDN'T intervene. Previous policies have resulted in US careening toward bankruptcy, global instability, & CCP dominance . Economic collapse is what Trump is avoiding w his global strategic policies. Peace & stability are his goal. His policies are aimed at restructuring US debt, driving down unsustainable US deficits, weakening our enemies & bringing back US prosperity by reshoring. Markets will come roaring back, no worries about that. I predict Christmas 2025 will be fabulous.
Yes, I've been invested in the market for exactly 40 years, so I'm well aware of its ups and downs. I'm also aware that Trump has been president for all 3 of the quickest 10% drops in stock-market value in U.S. history during my lifetime:
June 12, 1950 to June 29, 1950 (17 calendar days)—Harry S. Truman
Sept. 23, 1955 to Oct. 11, 1955 (18 calendar days)—Dwight D. Eisenhower
Feb. 19, 2025 to March 11, 2025 (20 calendar days)—Donald Trump
... and 8 of the 10 largest single day drops in the Dows history. The trajectory of markets (which reflect corporate and economic strength to a large degree) looks quite different under Biden vs Trump v.2 thus far.
And yes, I would agree re his policies (although who knows what his real reasons are or if he's thought them through relative to current times) but do you honestly think markets and all will be fabulous by xmas 25? I realize they kinda have to be to avoid a midterm blue wave and Trump crowing "stollen election" yet again (as opposed to other preferred terms - fake news, Russia, Russia Russia). What are clear barriers to achieving this will be truncated global markets both within America and abroad. Within, what companies will be willing to restore given current instability? For manufacturers that take the plunge, when will they be up and running? What will consumers have to pay given higher staff costs and other costs across the board? What impact will robotics and AI have? Outside of America, you're aware of boycotts of American made goods globally? Trump has caused much havoc and stress what with declining household wealth and such. American exceptionalism and selfishness and eliteness has never seemed so "it's all about me, me, me!" vs the price to pay for being the world's most dominating entity. Trump sure seems to have handed China a golden opportunity.
Trump has proven time and again that maga will contentedly jump off any cliff to which Trump leads them, but the rest of us... not so much.
There is a silver lining to all of this that Trump was gloating about this weekend while Rome burned. Trump won the golf tournament - his own tournament at his own club!
Nice article. Though, I think it's inaccurate to refer to the Democrats the left these days. There isn't a lot of evidence they embody left values anymore, project left ideals or enact left policies. Are they liberal? Who knows. And if they are, then it's an interesting train of thought to go down and see just how far they've come from a place that certainly once was the left, but is now something unidentifiable, confusing, and if I'm going to judge it, morally reprehensible. It's the core theme of my latest piece:
With liberals like these, who needs conservatives?
I use the word "leftist", which I first heard Ben Shapiro say in a talk at a university about 3 to 6 years ago (I have a hard time, with time, since the time warp of COVID). He said that "liberals are different from leftists" and explained that the current crazies are leftists and not "classical liberals".
You were correct the first time in that Liberal is different from Left and indeed also Libertarian. Liberal was meant to be objectivity in argument; Left is supposed to mean wanting change from status quo, and Libertarian is about a political position of minimum government interference. The Left is not really Liberal because they lack objectivity in rationale argument and instead typically resort to ad hominem attacks (eg TDS) or fallacies (eg if you vote Trump then democracy dies, etc).
Liberals/left/whatever have the opportunity now (some would say imperative) to revert to calm and effective language in our punditry and our dinner table conversations alike. It is also the only direction to move in when you concede the temperature of the language used in the Democrats' campaign – maxxed out for years – can only be turned down. Will level heads see that a calm, rational takedown of Trump would have been a slam dunk? I'm not confident.
starting in 2000 the "left" allied with the jihadi right and shifted the overton window so far away from liberal values that only true-believers could still use "liberal" with a straight face (as in Buruma 2003: "it is a litmus test of liberal credentials to support the palestinian cause" at a point when the palestinians were engaged in a genocidal suicide terror campaign against the most liberal state in the ME).
Well, I do know that JFK, the guy who was at one time the heart and soul of the democrat party, would be considered by today's democrats as a "rabidly far-, far-, far-, far-right winger fascist".
Okay, no more maligning conservatives. The neo-cons of old have been out of power for a long while now. All wise conservatives held their noses when they voted for the Bushes, if they voted for them at all. I did vote for Bush Jr. the second time (after voting for a local "constitutional conservative" candidate the first time -I don't live in a swing state, by any stretch of the imagination, so my vote isn't crucial), because the first time, Democrats were screaming about "Gore got the popular vote", to which I rolled by eyes because that's not how it works. So, I voted for Bush Jr. the second time, to give him another "popular vote", even though a straight-up popular vote campaign is run differently and people vote differently (like I did the second time).
Oh, it’s definitely the Drama Club. Like you, I’m a former Democrat and for the longest time I’ve been thinking “no more theater kids” in politics on either side. It’s humiliating
I’ve long wondered who paid for AOC’s beautiful and well tailored “wardrobe” when she was auditioning for her first role in office .I mean she was just a part time bartender and actress back then.
I loved watching the final scene of "Splendor in the Grass" again. That's a film that should be seen in a big theatre. It's a wide-screen film with great cinematography, from Boris Kaufman who was born in Russia before the revolution. The film also has a great score, by David Amran.
It would be better, though, with you in that final scene, instead of Natalie Wood.
More Red Guard than Drama Club, I fear. There was a lot of performance art back then but the kids were basically being manipulated. At least they knew who Mao was
Sasha, I'm beginning to think the only way to stop this train is from the ground up.
Feminists always talk about "agency." There's a limit to how much agency young girls can be expected to take, since they're still governed mainly by their parents and their school administrators and teachers -- and especially their peers; but somehow they have to step up and seize it for themselves.
Girls in highschool and college sports must begin to resist: Refuse to participate in contests where there are transexual females.
This can start by a team (containing only real girls) simply refusing to play against a team that has a transexual. Or in individual sports, do like the fencer.
From there, the even bolder step is for team members to stop participating in the sport if a transgender joins their team.
Should this happen, boys teams from the school should join the boycott... refusing to participate in their games and practices.
This is a big ask for teenagers, but I fear unless this step is taken, the tranny trane will continue.
It's up to the students. Who among them is willing to step forward and lead the resistance movement in their school, to weather the opposition from their parents, their teachers, and even their peers?
Sasha, great job on such a fine article. You really captured the performative aspect of the left, mouthing words they haven’t thought, frantically glancing around for support and encouragement. They have no plan, no policy goals, no agenda. They are rudderless and adrift at sea, reduced to sound bites, slogans and bumper stickers because they have up intelligent thought early in the Obama years, or before, defending Clinton.
It’s just like during Trump one when you saw these performances like AOC at the supposed fence or detention when they were separating families and she’s on her knee in her pristine white clothes like an angel of mercy just hilarious
And just think when you go to the theater or whatever city it is, I can’t believe now it’s all old people and they accept all of this mindlessly no matter what the theme of the show is
I saw a post yesterday and it was a guy holding up a sign in the reporter asked I see the sign. Can you explain what it is and what does it mean when the guy couldn’t even give an answer without taking a piece of paper out of his pocket, opening it and reading verbatim from what it actually meant some obscure term it was it’s just all something to do whether they get paid or have plenty of Social Security to keep them going it’s just hilarious every time I listen to one of your pieces I’m always amazed by the things that had to come together to get you to this point and just the set of circumstances that woke you up on your drive across country to see that there is real out there not this bubble that you’ve now seen
That last video, with Knopfler and Harris (two of my favorites) was a sad contrast. The heartfelt Goodbye of Knopfler and Harris plays against the shrill, insensitive, selfish squeals of the dying progressive movement.
Ha! Wifey and I are GenX and we raised three GenZers who made fun of the cidiots everyday.
How? We love and respect women.
There were like 20 Boomers 'protesting' in our smaller town on Saturday, I did the Breitbart thing and walked up to them and asked why they were there and who's paying them. Crickets.
Yes! And that’s really good news because they don’t breed well at all. Tough to have kids when couples are either gay, trans, narcissistic or all three.
The protest "Renaissance Fair" comparison really nails it! My brother and his wife went to one of these protests, like they always do, and sent me a couple of pics. Looking happy in their hippie garb and with their clever signs demanding "Hands Off!" I made the mistake of pointing out that we're 37 trillion in debt and wanted to know what his solution to this truly existential problem might be. He angrily replied you don't do it by cutting government jobs and gutting social security or fucking around with tariffs. Ok, I say, but what exactly is YOUR plan? It went downhill from there. It is correct to say they are all acting but I'm not sure of the roles they imagine themselves playing.
....the role of 'useful idiots'.
They confuse "Hero" with "Idiot".
They depend on the government for their income don’t they? Like teachers or something?
Teachers work for local governments, which is where (along with state governments) the Constitution says the bulk of the power should be. We need to end the Dept. of Ed because I think after that, teacher's unions won't be as powerful and teachers can teach more and no longer indoctrinate.
Except in Chicago where the teachers union has more power than the mayor
EdD. Is pretty insignificant. Problem is state and local
Nope. Outside the system, you don’t see the influence, the pressure to conform, the gradual harm to the students - but it is palpable on the inside.
DOE must be deleted before any real change can begin.
I am inside the system or was before I retired. School districts are deeply toxic.
Both of what Roberta and Richard are concerned about is true. Getting rid of Department of Education is quite important. And, addressing the large number of School Boards who seem much further left than the average of parents or taxpayers will be critical with more local control. Why argue about which is more important? Our education system will not be fixed unless they both are successfully addressed. And do not forget that State governments that play a role, as well as city governments. There is much to do here. As long as everything is getting attention, and we all have an overall shared goal, it doesn’t matter which is more important.
Let’s each figure out how to make best progress to a good outcome:
Children who are literate
Children proficient in math
Children with critical thinking skills
Children who can work well on teams
Children who interact well with each other and people not exactly like them
Children who are well versed in history, civics, science
Children who have the foundation to live a successful life: personal health, ability to manage money, ability to live independently
In summary, we want our children to be well educated. I’m sure my, off the top of my head, list can be improved, but I remember learning these things in school starting in 1957. And our son got most of this in his school years starting in 1992. Things have deteriorated so badly since then.
I agree. But Fed money and directives have done much more harm than good and spur much of the local shenanigans.
I hope you are correct.
Red states tend to receive more federal money than they contribute in federal taxes:
1. Lower average incomes → Residents pay less in federal income taxes.
2. Higher rates of poverty or rural populations → Qualify for more federal aid (e.g., Medicaid, SNAP).
3. Military presence → Red states often have large military bases or defense contracts.
4. Agricultural subsidies → Many red states benefit heavily from farming-related support.
Example (pre-2025 data, trends hold relatively steady) by state Fed $ received per $1 paid in taxes
Mississippi $2.13
Kentucky $2.00
West Virginia $2.15
New Mexico $2.16
New Jersey $0.74
Massachusetts $0.82
California ~$1.00 or less
Red states typically benefit more in terms of federal dollars received vs. paid, even though they often advocate for smaller federal government. It’s one of those classic political paradoxes.
I want the whole thing, across all states, greatly reduced; reduce housing, food stamps, education, medical, and warfare. It’s already a combination of socialism and communism. I prefer individual merit and freedom; not governmental controlled cradle to grave custodianship. And I am increasingly on the minority since socialism usually doesn’t end until they run out of other people’s earnings.
Unfortunately I think the majority of people probably prefer security over freedom. True freedom requires personal responsibility. Hey! That’s a lot of work. It’s a lot easier for politicians to promise security.
100% true about socialism. Eventually everyone is equally miserable and poor because there is only so much they can distribute among the population. But there is a line (not sure if it is a fine line) between socialism and providing support to those in need. Personal responsibility is important, and seeing generations living of welfare or SSI infuriates me. At the same time, there is not a single developed civilized country that does not care about its elderly and disable, and widows and children left without support. A roof over their heads, and basic food and medical care is something that I would provide to those who are not able to provide for themselves. I think we can be in the center of political spectrum and even to the right of it and still have empathy.
Interesting... if that were enacted, would maga on balance be voting against their own best interests in some ways?
For sure plenty of MAGA, RINOS and Democrats would take a hit as their dependence on government subsidies (eg education, shelter, food stamps, welfare, health, employment) was impacted. And so they would have to be weaned off of other people’s money overtime but substantially and methodically so. They would be at risk of suffering but between charities and their own willingness to start working and savings, we/they would improve. It wouldn’t be cold Turkey. But frankly, all Socialism based economies fail eventually as they run out of other people’s money.
That certainly makes more sense than what Trump's cold turkey approach. The stock market looks to be headed for another loss, to add to the huge ones seen Thurs & Friday.
"Federal Dollars Received" is the WRONG measure.
It includes Social Security (FICA + FICA Med) - those are not Federal Dollars. Those are citizen dollars held by the government.
It includes, as you mentioned, military - which is, in effect, a purchase of services, so the federal government is receiving in exchange for federal dollars. The hidden part of that is the states that host those bases, or have federally owned land, cannot derive real estate tax from those acres. That's a penalty.
I looked at entitlements only about 10 years ago, and 17 of the top 20 recipients, per capita, were blue cities. I doubt that has changed.
From what I’ve read, there is no plan to gut social security, except maybe from a few fringe types. Why does the left keep yelling about it?
I think we are going to take social security benefits away from dead people and illegal aliens.
Ah, that sounds much more logical and sensible. Of course the left will twist it around to suit their agenda.
The "left" is simply playing their usual game of using deception to cause civil unrest, Gabe.
The liberal "left of center" is simply following along without doing their homework.
The misinformation tactic works very well in this context, because the "left" has been sowing their mindless and mind-numbing hatred for years. We now refer to the inchoate expressions of spittle-flecked hatred as "TDS."
There is nothing wrong with being critical of President Trump and his policies, but that requires critical thinking. Critical thinking requires verifying assertions by referring to source material.
TDS requires a purely contrarian attitude, an "everything he says is a lie, absolutely every last little thing" approach.
Yes. As you stated, "a purely contrarian attitude", which seems very closely akin to the juvenile mental affliction known as "Oppositional Defiant Disorder", described in the professionally used DSM-IV manual.
Thanks for the reference, I hadn't realized that they'd entered ODD into the DSM. I must confess to having been exasperated back when child psychologists first named it. At the time, they were just really getting going with pathologizing anything and everything outlying on the behavioral distribution curve.
I'll check the DSM entry and see what they've done with it.
Even without a clinical diagnosis, your point stands; the behavior is juvenile, and I really hadn't looked at from that perspective before.
they are given scripts when they get off the buses. all about being inflammatory.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/geofenced-every-event-democrats-caught-staging-another-inorganic-color-revolution?utm_source=daily_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4438
They have used that same script since Reagan
Gaslighting!
Because they lie.
"He angrily replied"
This is the theme, Mr. Collins; "angrily," always "angrily."
It isn't the anger itself that is meaningful, it's the instant elevation to incoherent emotion, emphasis on "incoherent."
For a few, the emotional escalation is a rather pitiful incontinence. For most, it's just a tactic meant to avoid honest negotiation.
Anyone who has ever dealt with a serial liar, understands doubling-down as a power-struggle tactic; facts are irrelevant when the aim is to use deception as a means of exerting control over others.
Good point about the instant elevation of anger. It reminds me of the scene in Invasion of the Body Snatchers where Donald Sutherland snarls and points at someone when he realizes they are not a Pod Person (aka Useful Idiot).
I liked the Old Hippy comparisons too.
Very funny!
Maybe they've explicitly told us the roles they are playing: We are the make-believe Resistance! Righteous freedom fighters against fascists!
I’ve been shunned by sister who mentioned going. I thought it was an opportunity to tell her I voted for the other guy. She said she does not want to talk politics with me. But now it seems she doesn’t want to talk about anything at all since “our sister relationship is off track”.
It's crazy. I'm in the same boat with my family. You are required to hate Trump without equivocation.
A geat one as always. Looks like drama requires a mind lost? I saw a clip of a young protestor guy with a poster that read "Kings and Tyrants". When asked by a reporter what he had against Trump he said Trump is destroying "our democracy". Asked to be specific his brain disconnected but he got out f.... a few times and said he was against kings and tyrants. To waste your time like that really means you are unwell. It seems indeed like the work of a virus.
Exactly the same experience with my ex.
Ditto
Triple
King Richard the Lion Hearted!
I'm not a big fan of "explaining" Democrats to themselves, and especially not a fan of lecturing them. In fact, those are two of my biggest character flaws. I daily have to remind myself that I can't possibly understand why they act the way they do, because they have a completely foreign set of values to mine.
As an example, I once saw a Democratic protest sign that read, "Abortion is a human right".
Such thinking absolutely stumps me. It stops me cold. There is no path I can follow backwards from that sign to anything rational, there's nothing to hang on to and have a conversation about. You can't have an argument with a contradiction.
So, unfortunately, we are faced with a fairly sizable number of our fellow citizens, neighbors, friends, and family who are willing to live in a state of active contradiction. There they go, waving their placards, heading to the nearest car dealership to state their unhappiness, yelling "la-la-la-i-can't-hear-you" while they plug their ears.
What can be said to them?
Nothing, really.
So I don't see a lot of hope in getting through to them and engaging in a conversation. On very rare occasions you can find someone on the Left who will get down to specifics (after much prompting and insisting) and then you can have a factual discussion. But otherwise, they are not interested. They are *invested*.
Their beliefs are unfalsfiable: there is no conceivable negative evidence. They themselves intuitively understand that, and so are completely indifferent to evidence.
We have a saying that describes their mentality: "My mind's made up: don't confuse me with the facts".
During the "politi-wars" in Austin around 1970, my father actually had someone say that to him. Even I knew that there was no chance my father could convince the guy, who was arriving at a political meeting, to switch sides from "conservative Demo" to "liberal Demo". But he did it anyway. He was very "socially bold".
When is it a Baby?
Apparently,,,with them,,,NEVER
A lot of the elderly looking pudgy folks at these demoncrat protest rallies seems to be lonely hearts seeking a hook up. Have to admit, never thought I'd see the day Dims rally to protect Wall Street interests.
Hey, that worked back in the 60s. Not sure how it works with 57 genders.
I only trust Heinz 57 Varieties ketchup.
pudgy.
looked like pugs to me
Elderly looking pudgy folks could be low income earning retirees living in part on their 401k and other stock market investments.
If you choose to invest in market, you have to be able to understand it's fluctuation. I'm invested myself, I totally get the bigger picture, and what would happen if Trump DIDN'T intervene. Previous policies have resulted in US careening toward bankruptcy, global instability, & CCP dominance . Economic collapse is what Trump is avoiding w his global strategic policies. Peace & stability are his goal. His policies are aimed at restructuring US debt, driving down unsustainable US deficits, weakening our enemies & bringing back US prosperity by reshoring. Markets will come roaring back, no worries about that. I predict Christmas 2025 will be fabulous.
Yes, I've been invested in the market for exactly 40 years, so I'm well aware of its ups and downs. I'm also aware that Trump has been president for all 3 of the quickest 10% drops in stock-market value in U.S. history during my lifetime:
Feb. 19, 2020 to Feb. 27, 2020 (8 calendar days)—Donald Trump
Jan. 26, 2018 to Feb. 8, 2018 (13 calendar days)—Donald Trump
June 12, 1950 to June 29, 1950 (17 calendar days)—Harry S. Truman
Sept. 23, 1955 to Oct. 11, 1955 (18 calendar days)—Dwight D. Eisenhower
Feb. 19, 2025 to March 11, 2025 (20 calendar days)—Donald Trump
... and 8 of the 10 largest single day drops in the Dows history. The trajectory of markets (which reflect corporate and economic strength to a large degree) looks quite different under Biden vs Trump v.2 thus far.
And yes, I would agree re his policies (although who knows what his real reasons are or if he's thought them through relative to current times) but do you honestly think markets and all will be fabulous by xmas 25? I realize they kinda have to be to avoid a midterm blue wave and Trump crowing "stollen election" yet again (as opposed to other preferred terms - fake news, Russia, Russia Russia). What are clear barriers to achieving this will be truncated global markets both within America and abroad. Within, what companies will be willing to restore given current instability? For manufacturers that take the plunge, when will they be up and running? What will consumers have to pay given higher staff costs and other costs across the board? What impact will robotics and AI have? Outside of America, you're aware of boycotts of American made goods globally? Trump has caused much havoc and stress what with declining household wealth and such. American exceptionalism and selfishness and eliteness has never seemed so "it's all about me, me, me!" vs the price to pay for being the world's most dominating entity. Trump sure seems to have handed China a golden opportunity.
Trump has proven time and again that maga will contentedly jump off any cliff to which Trump leads them, but the rest of us... not so much.
There is a silver lining to all of this that Trump was gloating about this weekend while Rome burned. Trump won the golf tournament - his own tournament at his own club!
Cry harder. Talk to your mommy about your diaper rash issues, I hear it's quite painful, perhaps she can help.
Nice article. Though, I think it's inaccurate to refer to the Democrats the left these days. There isn't a lot of evidence they embody left values anymore, project left ideals or enact left policies. Are they liberal? Who knows. And if they are, then it's an interesting train of thought to go down and see just how far they've come from a place that certainly once was the left, but is now something unidentifiable, confusing, and if I'm going to judge it, morally reprehensible. It's the core theme of my latest piece:
With liberals like these, who needs conservatives?
https://typerider.substack.com/p/with-liberals-like-these-who-needs?r=2ywal
They are Left, not Liberal. There is a difference, a vast difference. Classical liberalism is what we should all strive for in our government.
I use the word "leftist", which I first heard Ben Shapiro say in a talk at a university about 3 to 6 years ago (I have a hard time, with time, since the time warp of COVID). He said that "liberals are different from leftists" and explained that the current crazies are leftists and not "classical liberals".
Leftists have co-opted the language for evil purposes, taking certain positive sounding political words for themselves - Progressive, liberal, etc.
To falsely portray themselves as being in favor of ‘progress’ and liberty, when that is not the case.
You mean libertarian (Classical purist individual freedom) and 1800s and what social liberalism of what America always known.
I hesitate to use libertarian, as most relate it to the current L party.
You were correct the first time in that Liberal is different from Left and indeed also Libertarian. Liberal was meant to be objectivity in argument; Left is supposed to mean wanting change from status quo, and Libertarian is about a political position of minimum government interference. The Left is not really Liberal because they lack objectivity in rationale argument and instead typically resort to ad hominem attacks (eg TDS) or fallacies (eg if you vote Trump then democracy dies, etc).
Liberals/left/whatever have the opportunity now (some would say imperative) to revert to calm and effective language in our punditry and our dinner table conversations alike. It is also the only direction to move in when you concede the temperature of the language used in the Democrats' campaign – maxxed out for years – can only be turned down. Will level heads see that a calm, rational takedown of Trump would have been a slam dunk? I'm not confident.
We know neither want calm discussions when not in power its all about anger and hatred.
Thats what classical liberalism is the purist form of individual freedom over all else.
Yes, the heart of this essay:
Are you a classic liberal?
Some mind-blowing facts that will shake your perceptions of the political spectrum.
https://parkerd.substack.com/p/are-you-a-classic-liberal
Someone I follow here who investigates the left, put together a very interesting sub stack breaking down the five factions within the party. https://karlyn.substack.com/p/democrats-are-not-the-same-as-communists?utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
starting in 2000 the "left" allied with the jihadi right and shifted the overton window so far away from liberal values that only true-believers could still use "liberal" with a straight face (as in Buruma 2003: "it is a litmus test of liberal credentials to support the palestinian cause" at a point when the palestinians were engaged in a genocidal suicide terror campaign against the most liberal state in the ME).
Well, I do know that JFK, the guy who was at one time the heart and soul of the democrat party, would be considered by today's democrats as a "rabidly far-, far-, far-, far-right winger fascist".
Bourgeois Bohemians?
Okay, no more maligning conservatives. The neo-cons of old have been out of power for a long while now. All wise conservatives held their noses when they voted for the Bushes, if they voted for them at all. I did vote for Bush Jr. the second time (after voting for a local "constitutional conservative" candidate the first time -I don't live in a swing state, by any stretch of the imagination, so my vote isn't crucial), because the first time, Democrats were screaming about "Gore got the popular vote", to which I rolled by eyes because that's not how it works. So, I voted for Bush Jr. the second time, to give him another "popular vote", even though a straight-up popular vote campaign is run differently and people vote differently (like I did the second time).
Oh, it’s definitely the Drama Club. Like you, I’m a former Democrat and for the longest time I’ve been thinking “no more theater kids” in politics on either side. It’s humiliating
I’ve long wondered who paid for AOC’s beautiful and well tailored “wardrobe” when she was auditioning for her first role in office .I mean she was just a part time bartender and actress back then.
watch the movie "knock down the house" from 2019 to see how aoc got where she is today. she was cherry-picked and groomed for the role.
Thank you for this. I should have looked harder for answers.
Sasha, you are a gifted writer.
I loved watching the final scene of "Splendor in the Grass" again. That's a film that should be seen in a big theatre. It's a wide-screen film with great cinematography, from Boris Kaufman who was born in Russia before the revolution. The film also has a great score, by David Amran.
It would be better, though, with you in that final scene, instead of Natalie Wood.
Wut?!! Natalie Wood was awesomeness manifested!
True, but so is Sasha.
A great article Sasha.
Thank you.
Yes, Sasha.
Great to see you bringing your unique contribution—an encyclopedic knowledge of film—to the conversation.
Back in my TDS days, I used to love Cory Booker. Now I see he is just nuts.
And a confirmed bachelor. Just like Liberace and Paul Lynde. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
More Red Guard than Drama Club, I fear. There was a lot of performance art back then but the kids were basically being manipulated. At least they knew who Mao was
Sasha, I'm beginning to think the only way to stop this train is from the ground up.
Feminists always talk about "agency." There's a limit to how much agency young girls can be expected to take, since they're still governed mainly by their parents and their school administrators and teachers -- and especially their peers; but somehow they have to step up and seize it for themselves.
Girls in highschool and college sports must begin to resist: Refuse to participate in contests where there are transexual females.
This can start by a team (containing only real girls) simply refusing to play against a team that has a transexual. Or in individual sports, do like the fencer.
From there, the even bolder step is for team members to stop participating in the sport if a transgender joins their team.
Should this happen, boys teams from the school should join the boycott... refusing to participate in their games and practices.
This is a big ask for teenagers, but I fear unless this step is taken, the tranny trane will continue.
It's up to the students. Who among them is willing to step forward and lead the resistance movement in their school, to weather the opposition from their parents, their teachers, and even their peers?
It may be the only way out.
Brilliant, just sheer brilliance ... Your high school had no idea what they had in you ...
Sasha, great job on such a fine article. You really captured the performative aspect of the left, mouthing words they haven’t thought, frantically glancing around for support and encouragement. They have no plan, no policy goals, no agenda. They are rudderless and adrift at sea, reduced to sound bites, slogans and bumper stickers because they have up intelligent thought early in the Obama years, or before, defending Clinton.
It’s just like during Trump one when you saw these performances like AOC at the supposed fence or detention when they were separating families and she’s on her knee in her pristine white clothes like an angel of mercy just hilarious
And just think when you go to the theater or whatever city it is, I can’t believe now it’s all old people and they accept all of this mindlessly no matter what the theme of the show is
I saw a post yesterday and it was a guy holding up a sign in the reporter asked I see the sign. Can you explain what it is and what does it mean when the guy couldn’t even give an answer without taking a piece of paper out of his pocket, opening it and reading verbatim from what it actually meant some obscure term it was it’s just all something to do whether they get paid or have plenty of Social Security to keep them going it’s just hilarious every time I listen to one of your pieces I’m always amazed by the things that had to come together to get you to this point and just the set of circumstances that woke you up on your drive across country to see that there is real out there not this bubble that you’ve now seen
Thank you for not getting that part 🙏🏼
That last video, with Knopfler and Harris (two of my favorites) was a sad contrast. The heartfelt Goodbye of Knopfler and Harris plays against the shrill, insensitive, selfish squeals of the dying progressive movement.
Ha! Wifey and I are GenX and we raised three GenZers who made fun of the cidiots everyday.
How? We love and respect women.
There were like 20 Boomers 'protesting' in our smaller town on Saturday, I did the Breitbart thing and walked up to them and asked why they were there and who's paying them. Crickets.
Did all these libs intermarry?
Yes! And that’s really good news because they don’t breed well at all. Tough to have kids when couples are either gay, trans, narcissistic or all three.