Politics

The phrase “lowest common denominator” is commonly used by the public, but what people actually mean is — the smallest integer greater than one that divides evenly into all members of a set. In everyday language, it describes reducing anything to the lowest level shared by the group.

Education is all about the LCD

Public education now operates on exactly this principle. In any classroom, resources are disproportionately poured into the single lowest-performing student, dwarfing the attention and instruction given to everyone else.

Unfortunately, “lowest common denominator” describes how the educational industry treats educating students. In any classroom, there is one student lower than all the rest, who receives the bulk of the educational resources.

The amount of resources that goes into supporting that one student will dwarf the resources that go into the rest of the classroom.

We Cut Off the Right Hand Tail

When my children were in first grade, they were part of the gifted and talented program. Students were selected by the G&T teacher to be part of the program. They were proud to be part of it.

While it was only a few hours per week, they were stretched in ways that they did not see in the normal classroom.

My son was part of the G&T program, even though he had communication issues. The teacher recognized his abilities. He shone in the program.

Within a year of my children becoming part of the G&T program, they had renamed it because “other children felt excluded” and it “had lowered their self-esteem.”

The teacher was moved to teaching something else and the new program accepted anybody who was “gifted” or “talented,” where those terms were very inclusive.

The kid in the second grade that couldn’t read CVC words but drew “pretty pictures” was a gifted artist and if he wanted, he was part of the gifted and talented program.

Over the time my children were in elementary school, the resources allocated by the school system to smart children were reduced to near zero. All gifted programs were funded and run by volunteers.

The resources that went to the “low achievers” continued to grow.

Diluting Resources for the Many

When “No Child Left Behind” was in the spotlight, I knew what it meant. It meant that every child would get the resources needed to assist that child in getting the best education possible for that child.

That is what I believed until a teacher explained how it was being implemented.

The requirements were that the schools “pass” as many students as possible. This translated, at the lowest levels, to teachers being told they couldn’t give low grades to students, that they couldn’t fail students, or in the education industry vocabulary, hold back a child.

Since the schools were being graded on how many students graduated, the standards to graduate fell.

At some point, we started the integration process. Whereas before, we had classrooms for those needing special education, now we have integrated classrooms.

This is a boon for many students. There were bad things happening to students that were labeled “Special Ed.” before this happened. The stories of smart kids with speech or reading disabilities being treated as if they were stupid.

Integrated classrooms solved this. In a Special Ed. classroom there was nothing to stretch the boundaries of smart kids, so they all looked equally disabled.

They told my son not to take math

My oldest son has a learning disability. At an Individual Education Plan (IEP) meeting we were discussing his classes for the next year.

Every female “educator” at that table suggested that he not take math classes, because math was “hard.” Math was easy for my son. His disability was in communications. Still is.

He was smart enough to convince his teachers he was reading 3 grade levels below his actual grade level because he liked to read The Magic Tree House books. And they wouldn’t let him read those if he was reading at grade level.

His teachers never noticed him become less skilled until he was where he wanted to be.

The point being that these educators didn’t know their student and they didn’t know what he was capable of accomplishing, even though they were the experts in the room.

My son took resources from the rest of that classroom, until they stopped treating him as disabled and started treating him as capable.

Today’s education industry is built around servicing, their term, “special needs” students. The rest of the students can fend for themselves.

A Million for Special Ed., None for Gifted

I’ve been told it costs over $200,000 to send a student out of district. Our local district spends more than a million dollars a year on sending “special needs” students out of district to schools that can handle them.

That’s less than 10 students who consume 5% or more of the school budget. That does not include the overhead of all the administrative stuff that goes into servicing them.

In some ways, I prefer that they be sent to a real special education school. It improves the educational perspective of the students that are still here.

Now, the school system could group those kids by needs and abilities. They don’t. Instead, they spread them across all the classrooms. Every class has one or more special needs students in it.

The worst school I attended had 30 students per class. There were 6 classes at my grade level, labeled “A” through “F”. Classes moved as a group from classroom to classroom.

This is a poor way to get the best outcomes. Not all “smart” kids are smart in all things. But it is the way the school system had set it up. Which was good news for me.

That’s because I was in class A. And in class A we were taking the hardest math, science, English, French, and history in the school.

While our math class was preparing us for higher math, class F was also attending math classes, where they were learning to do money math. That’s right, they were learning to add, subtract, and have a clue as to how much they spent.

The saddest thing? Class F students were still failing at a higher rate than Class A.

But for one class a day, our teachers were able to teach. I believe they lived for that small joy.

No Child Left Behind was meant to provide reasonable services to those with learning needs outside the norm. Instead it has become a nightmare of teaching to the lowest in the classroom and not caring about the highest; they’ll do alright on their own.

I’m sure that many of you have heard this dilemma asked. As a baby, Hitler was innocent. He remained innocent through his youth, through World War I, and beyond.

At some point, he became evil.

I would not kill baby Hitler. My world is what it is today because of WWII. Would it be better if Hitler had never been the leader of Germany? I don’t know, and neither do you.

We know the results, and we are where we are today because of our history, good and bad.

In 1989 or so I was interviewing with Cray Research. They gave me two options: I could work at an Army site, or I could work at NASA Langley.

I knew where Langley, VA, was. It was in the heart of the swamp. I couldn’t afford to live in that area, and I would hate the city life. Everything about living in Langley, VA, sucked for me.

I accepted the job offer for the Army site. It turned out that I got to work on the bleeding edge of computer graphics. I got to do stuff with amazing computers. I found a mentor that taught me more than I had learned in years. It took me through two bad marriages and into a great one.

It turns out that NASA Langley is located in Newport News, VA. About 20 miles from where I graduated from high school. It was in a part of the country I love. If I had known that NASA Langley was not located in Langley, VA, I would have taken that offer.

Would I change that decision if I could? No.

This is my world.

We live with the consequences of choices—both the ones we make and the ones we refuse to make. Today the same people who claim they would kill baby Hitler are screaming that Trump had no right to stop the Iranian regime before it could build its own final solution.

We hear from the better educated elites about how horrible it is that Trump attacked Iran without permission or provocation.

Let’s get some facts very clear. Iran has been at war with the United States since 1979. When the “students” deposed the Shah, they installed the current theocracy—at least until last week. They declared, “Death to America”. They declared war on us.

Except for the time when Iran and Iraq were busy killing each other’s child soldiers, Iran has been actively attacking the United States.

The bombing of the USS Cole? Iran. The mining of the Strait of Hormuz? Iran. The mine almost sinking the USS Samuel B. Roberts in the Persian Gulf? Iran. The first bombing of the World Trade Center? Iran. The arming of Hamas and Hezbollah? Iran.

If you look at any Muslim terrorist action, you can trace it back to Iran. (And if you aren’t covering for the the media’s beloved Obama, you can see the money he sent them funding those operations.)

Now I called them “students,” because in 1979 that was how they were labeled by the lying media. They were communist-trained revolutionaries—the same militant radical instigators we find on US college campuses today.

Over the last 3 months, somewhere between 20,000 and 40,000 people were murdered in Iran by the regime. This makes Chicago’s murder rate pale in comparison. And it wasn’t black on black violence.

The media mostly ignored it. They ignored women risking their lives by baring their hair. They ignored it when the Revolutionary Guard fired into the crowds.

They ignored the deaths of those screaming, begging, and pleading for freedom. For the United States to help.

This is compared to how upset they are over 160-some being killed by an Iranian missile falling on a girl’s school. Or six servicemen losing their lives for the cause of freedom.

Trump killed baby Hitler. He decapitated the Iranian regime before they could detonate a nuclear device on Israel or on US soil.

It was the right thing to do.

Because this is history being made, not history being changed.

As some astute readers might have noted, Jimmy Carter is, in my not so humble opinion, the worst president to ever serve.

His utter spinelessness on the world stage led to the Middle East exploding with violence. His inability to trust the military lead to the deaths of soldiers in a sandstorm in Iran.

His sanctimonious platitudes let the Muslim world know that the United States was morally weak and unwilling to stand up for what was right.

His actions after the “students” took the US Embassy the first time led to the marines being disarmed when the “students” attacked and took the Embassy and held US citizens hostage for over a year.

I hope he is frying in Hell for what he did to my country and the world.

Side note, the day after the students took the Embassy the second time the skies over my home were free of navy aircraft for the first time ever. A couple of weeks later, one of my friends, a Tomcat driver, explained to me that he had been flying around us and for those two weeks was in flying on the other side of the ocean. The military was ready to take action within 24 hours of the Embassy being taken. Their commander in chief decided to sit with his thumb where the sun doesn’t shine.

Since that day, every Muslim terrorist attack can be traced back to that time of weakness. Reagan made them back down but everybody on the world stage knows that when there is a Democrat sitting in the Oval Office, the United States is weak.

Yesterday Iran got to Find Out. The president of the United States, using the authority given to him by Congress, acting with the Israelis, took out the Iranian regime.

Thank you Trump.

This is my red hat. It is based on historical finds and considerations about those finds in places like Hedeby and Birka. I don’t wear it very often, because I only play at being a Viking (Scandinavian Völva from 10th century Unst) a couple of times a year, and at least one of those times it’s much to warm to wear a naalbound hat designed to get you through a night 100 miles into the Arctic Circle. This hat is incredibly thick. It doesn’t get wet, as it’s made of hand spun sheep wool. It smells a bit of lanolin, and it’s warm. In 10th century Unst, this would have been THE hat to wear at the winter holy days, because it was bright, warm, and naalbound (sort of a Viking form of knitting with one needle and a thumb). While we don’t know whether hats were popular or not (because most of what we know about the Vikings is gathered from pot scrapings, weathered carvings, grave finds, and stories written many years after the Vikings we’re talking about ceased to exist), the few writings from medieval times and the carvings we have do seem to indicate that this would have been worn. It’s definitely something that’s come down in German and Scandinavian heritage (hence the garden gnomes and the Tomten, who are sort of like garden gnomes but more demi-god and tricksy).

I wore my red hat this past weekend. It’s one of the two events I wear my Viking garb at, and it was cold at night (down in the low 20s). I was all dressed in wool, cooking happily over a fire, making meals from a Norse cookbook called Vikingars Gästabud, which is a modern book based on archaeological finds. I made green soup, and a beef stew, and a chicken stew, and barley porridge (called grot). It was a delicious weekend, though a bit smokey.

I enjoy wearing the hat. It makes me look like a garden gnome, I’ll be honest. I’m good with that. It’s fun, and it’s historical, and it starts conversations that I love having.

This year it did something else, as well. I’m a lot less happy about it.

Apparently, there are folks in Minnesota who are now wearing head gear very similar to mine, and using it as a “victory hat” of sorts. They’re protesting ICE while wearing these hats. I’m guessing it hearkens back to the red hats worn by the French during their revolution, but I really don’t know. During the course of the weekend, I had five or six people (separately) come up to me and give me a thumb’s up and call out anti ICE slogans of various types. One lady went so far as to trap me in the bathroom line and explain to me that it was AWESOME I was wearing a hat to show that I was rebelling. I explained to her about ten times that I was wearing a historically accurate Scandinavian hat, but she persisted. Like they do.

All that led to this morning’s conversation with Chris, wherein I lost my shit entirely. I found myself saying, quite loudly and irately, “My culture is not your costume!” I know that’s a leftist screed, but it’s true in this case. I love seeing kids dressing up as stuff at Halloween, or to cosplay, but being TOLD the reason for wearing what I was wearing was extremely offensive. Yes, both sides of my ancestry go back to Scandinavian “Vikings” and it’s something I’m proud of. I don’t want to give up my hat!

But I also don’t want to be mistaken for someone rioting or causing problems. Is my hat going to get leftists riled up and assuming I’m one of them? Worse, is it going to get conservatives upset, thinking I’m with the Left? Why the hell can’t I just wear my hat in peace?

I want the anti-ICE people to stop wearing my hat. I want them to stop using my symbols for their hatred and rancor. It’s not right!

But of course… they have a right to do what they want. So I have to decide whether to stop wearing it, at least until this trend is over. Because I do not want to be associated with those rioters at all. Not for one second. I was horrified this weekend. 🙁

On a nicer side, I made it into the Gardner news again:

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1Dn4BktgU9/

https://www.thegardnernews.com/picture-gallery/lifestyle/things-to-do/2026/02/16/northfolk-night-market-is-an-annual-winter-festival-that-features/88684515007/

It is ICE cold in my office as I write. Our basement is unheated and has zero insulation, and it leaks like a sieve. This makes the floors cold.

My big goal for the coming spring is to get some insulation into the basement.

But that’s not the type of ICE Cold I’m talking about here.

Up in the insurrectionist state of Minnesota, we had another FAFO moment.

A man who was carrying decided to interject himself with ICE agents. He got physical with them. Five agents were trying to detain or arrest him before he was shot and killed.

He was carrying his firearm in the small of his back. The video I’ve seen shows the gun in his hand before shots were fired.

He’s dead because he FA’d and found out.

Our AG and the director of the FBI both made public statements to the effect that bringing a gun to a protest means you are intending violence and is illegal and can get you shot.

I do not give up my Second Amendment protected rights when I choose to exercise my First Amendment protected rights.

Exercising a right does not even rise to “suspicion.” Merely exercising your rights does not ever give the state the authority to detain you. There must be more.

My friend from Canada was talking about guns and mentioned that carrying them into a bank was illegal. That it was a good way to end up in jail.

He was shocked to learn that I carry every time I enter a bank.

In short, Kash and Pam can go to hell for even thinking that The People must forgo their Second Amendment rights before they can exercise their First Amendment rights.

We have all had the unfortunate issue of having to deal with ignorant and incompetent people. For most of us, this is frustrating.

One of my personal weaknesses is the more I respect someone, the harder it is for me to accept incompetence or ignorance from them.

But what is “ignorance”?

Ignorance is not dumb. It is not stupid. Ignorance is not knowing.

Ally is a cookbook author. She is about to publish her third cookbook. We couldn’t be more proud of her and her accomplishments.

Over the Christmas holidays, she decided to try baking, something she isn’t good at yet.

She pulled out one of our older cookbooks, from the early 1950s, and followed the recipe, or she thought she did. The recipe called for 3 cups of flour, sifted.

Being good at English, she read that to mean, “Measure out three cups of flour, then sift it.” What it actually meant was, “Sift a few cups of flour, then measure out 3 cups of that sifted flour.”

The reason is density. Just like we measure gunpowders by weight, we should measure flour by weight. The density of the powders or flour can change; the mass does not. 1950s cookbooks created flour with a known density by sifting it.

Ally didn’t know this; she was ignorant of this. She is not stupid; she just did not know.

Ignorance is correctable; you can learn what you are ignorant about or decide it is beyond you. Even if it is beyond you, you will know that it is beyond you.

There are many things I’m ignorant about. I’m told I’m unusual because I don’t stay ignorant about subjects that are even remotely interesting to me. And according to some, I quickly become competent in areas that I was ignorant about just a short time ago.

This makes it difficult for me to claim ignorance about subjects. I consider myself ignorant about processing animal hides. Yet I know more about it than most people. I’ve yet to succeed at tanning a hide, but I know I don’t know. I know it is not beyond me; I know that I can become educated in the subject and become reasonably competent in the subject.

Recently it was pointed out to me, in this blog, that I was ignorant in reading or understanding technical drawings. I have no formal training and I need to do more. I’m doing my best without doing a deep dive.

Weaponized Ignorance

This is when a person is willfully ignorant. It takes an effort to be willfully ignorant, but for some, it is easier than actually thinking about what they are doing or saying.

When a person is willfully ignorant, refuses to learn, yet continues to opine on matters in which they are ignorant, then they have weaponized their ignorance.

The left is calling for laws and regulations to force “bad” law enforcement officers to not wear masks and to have their identification prominently displayed.

According to them, if they aren’t doing anything wrong, then there is no reason to be masked.

They are willfully ignorant of what happens when an agent is unmasked. They are doxed, and then bad things do happen to some of them.

The wife and I are watching a BritBox show called Blue Lights which takes place in Dublin, Ireland. Our introduction to one of the lead characters is when she is checking her car for bombs. As far as I know, this is true. They know that they will be targeted if the “bad guys” learn where they live and who they are.

These ignorant malcontents know what will happen if our officers are unmasked: they will be attacked. If not physically, then socially.

The left calls detentions and arrests by ICE and other federal law enforcement “Kidnappings”. They know that these are not kidnappings. Or they are willfully ignorant.

They scream about “due process” without ever realizing that these criminals have been given due process. Ten minutes of research would enable them to learn that there are immigration courts that do nothing but oversee migration cases. These courts can, and do, issue final removal orders and warrants.

They are screaming at ICE officers that they aren’t real cops and don’t have arrest powers. Of course they have arrest powers. Do even a bit of research, and you will find that most federal agencies have some sort of internal police force with arrest powers.

And being ignorant allows them to scream “Why!?” like a two-year-old toddler being put down for a nap. They would know why if they bothered to learn about the subject they are opining on.

Listen to Ketanji Brown Jackson asking questions from the Supreme Court bench, “I don’t understand.” “Explain it to me.” And most famously:

• Blackburn: Can you provide a definition for the word “woman”?
• Jackson: Can I provide a definition?
• Blackburn; Mhmm, yeah.
• Jacson: No, I can’t. Not in this context. I’m not a biologist.

Willfully ignorant.

Weaponized Incompetence

This is a step further than willful ignorance. This is when a person refuses to learn something so they don’t have to do it.

The husband who refuses to learn how to cook anything, forcing his wife to cook every meal or to eat out. My dad didn’t know how to cook; from the time Mom died until he was in care, he ate very poorly, mostly hotdogs. This was his choice.

This is the person who tosses the colored in with the whites, leading to the whites not being white anymore. Who is going to ask that person to do the laundry, knowing that their incompetence could destroy entire loads of clothing?

In the same way, what husband or boyfriend doesn’t panic when he sees his wife with a hammer and saw?

Hey, we were all ignorant and incompetent once. I have a picture of my brother and me cutting a piece of wood with saws. I’m using Grandpa’s panel saw, not a bad choice. My brother is using a hacksaw with 24 or more teeth per inch. Today I know that my brother would have been lucky to get a 1/4 inch into a piece of hardwood with that saw.

Now hold me to the same standard. I had a 16 tpi blade on my horizontal bandsaw. It would cut anything, but slow? Oh my goodness. I was using it because the rules say to have at least 2 teeth engaged in the cut at all times, and I was using it to cut 1/8-inch stock. I’ve upgraded to an 8 tpi blade. I can’t cut 1/8-inch stock the narrow way, but I can lay it down, and it cuts just as fast, if not faster. And I can actually cut larger stock at 3 or 4 times the speed of that other blade.

A leftist can’t safely handle a gun. Because they are incompetent, you and I have to store our firearms where they are useless to us but a child can’t access them.

The intentional ignorance and incompetence is draining. It hurts to watch them. It hurts to listen to them. They are so ignorant that they don’t know what they don’t know, but they are damn sure they are right and I am wrong.

It has been more than 24 hours since a paid agitator received the “Find Out” part of “FAFO”. Some things have become clear.

First, she is not married. She was living with a female partner raising children.

Her job was to be a paid agitator. She had taken professional development courses to further her career as a paid agitator.

Her partner was also a paid agitator.

She attacked a federal law enforcement officer with a deadly weapon. As such he does not need to wait to be lethally hit or severely injured before acting to stop the threat.

But the lie has entered the gestalt of the left.

She was an innocent woman attempting to flee an encounter with evil Trump minions, afraid for her life, when she was murdered for no reason at all.

I remember the anger I felt when I saw the video of Saint George Floyd being murdered by a police officer in full view of the world.

I remember how I was glad I was not there. Not knowing how I would have reacted to a cop attempting murder. Would I have killed the cop to save the life of that black man?

And it was all a lie.

That didn’t stop massive riots, the burning of cities, and the death of multiple people. All because the left and the media couldn’t stop lying.

It is my belief that the only reason we are not seeing massive riots already is the temperature is too low. It is too cold for a good riot.

If the weather changes for the better, it is likely we will see riots. If it doesn’t, it would not surprise me even a little that the media keeps things at a low simmer until it is warm enough for the riots to happen.

DefCon 3 right now, people. As it warms up, DefCon 2.

Keep strapped, keep your head on a swivel, stay away from stupid places, stupid people. Nothing good happens after midnight.

Brown University is in Rhode Island, one of the anti-gun states. There are no guns allowed on campus.

It is a gun free zone within a gun free city within a gun free state. Yet all of those things failed.

To provide a sense of security, the college webpage has a section on security cameras. They list some 800 security cameras and where each is located and their field of view.

Which is precisely the sort of information a bad guy would want to know because it shows not only the areas that are under surveillance but also the blind spots. Which the shooter took advantage of.

Which brings up the experiment done by a news organization several years ago to “prove” that guns don’t save lives. They told the selected “protector” that they were the only person with a gun in the room. That there was going to be a mass shooting event, simulated, and they were to stop the shooter.

Everybody except for the protector was in on the experiment, unbeknownst to the protector. Many of the protectors bragged to their “student” neighbors about being the protector.

Of course, when the bad guy entered the room, the protector never successfully stopped them. The entire experiment was set up for failure.

This was compared to a similar experiment set up in Texas. In the Texas experiment, the protectors were chosen at random; the level of experience the different protectors had varied from none to significant. They used simunation (blue guns that shoot nasty little pellets).

What they found was that the total number of victims was reduced in all cases. That in some situations the attack was stopped shortly after it began. There were no false shootings.

One of the interesting sequences was when the bad guy came into the room with the good guy. The good guy put multiple rounds on target before being “killed”. During the debrief, they asked why he only took body shots after noticing the body armor.

His reply, “I’ve been shot with those things; I wasn’t going to shoot somebody in the face with them.”

The point of this rambling is that guns save lives. This was another example of a gun free zone creating a victim pending zone.

Keep your head on a swivel, things are not getting better.

We use rhetoric to move people. To inspire. To convince people to change. This is a part of the protected free speech codified in the First Amendment.

The courts, throughout the years, have leaned heavily on more speech to counter unpopular speech. Until they didn’t.

Like today, the courts have agendas, not always good agendas, not always in favor of The People. For a while, there were entire classes of speech that were illegal. Sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly.

The indirect path was “Criminal Syndicalism”.

In summary, a man called the local news and asked if they wanted to do a report on a Ku Klux Klan meeting. The reporter said yes, brought his cameraman, and they filmed the meeting. During the meeting, the man wore a hood and said lots of Klan-like things, burned a cross, all while open carrying. After the main event, the leader, still wearing his hood, gave a short speech, two paragraphs long. Part of the speech was a statement that they were going to march on Congress on the 4th of July and then split into two groups to march into Augustine, Florida, and Mississippi.

This was aired. Then a second rally was filmed with the same type of speech given, also aired.

The leader was arrested, charged, and then convicted in a court of law. His appeal to the Ohio appeals court was granted, but they affirmed the lower court’s decision. The case then went to the Ohio Supreme Court, where they also affirmed the lower court’s opinion. Finally, the case was appealed to the Supreme Court on constitutional grounds.

In 1927 the Supreme Court upheld California’s Criminal Syndicalism Act, finding that advocating violent means to effect political and economic change involves such danger to the security of the State that the State may outlaw it. Whitney v. California, 275 U.S. 357 (1927), and Fiske v. Kansas, 274 U.S. 380 (1927), both gave this power to infringe on speech to the State.

Later Supreme Court cases, Dennis v. United States, 351 U.S. 494 (1951), for example, thoroughly discredited the Whitney opinion.

These later decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. —id. at 447.

In other words, the speech must incite violence or lawless actions imminently.. What imminently means is not clear and is the reason lawyers make big money.

This is the current case law (IANAL). It is what we judge protected speech by. Is the person inciting violence or the breaking of the law?

A statement of “Kill Bill!” when Bill is over there is clearly incitement. It is imminent, and it is a call for violence as well as a call for breaking the law. If Bill isn’t there, this might not be incitement because it is not imminent. In the same way as “Kill the one-horned, one-eyed, purple people eater” isn’t incitement because that entity isn’t real.

I am more than willing to say, “The only good communist is a dead communist.” I am not asking you to kill communists; I’m not even saying that I am willing to kill communists. It is simple rhetoric.

What if I go a step further, though? What if I were to say, “It is OK to kill communists.” This is still just this side of incitement. There is no imminent aspect, and there is no target.

And this is precisely what we have been hearing for years from the left: “It is OK to punch a Nazi. You should punch Nazis. If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, …, And you push back on them.” These are not incitement, as they sit. There is no target in the first two, and in the last, it is not a call for violence. Just simple verbal confrontation.

But these things do not exist in a vacuum. They live within a context.

When that same group assigns a label, they can then attack that label. When one part of a group is calling you a Nazi and the other part is calling for the death or merely the beating of Nazis, it does rise to the level of incitement.

This is the classic two-step incitement pattern that courts, linguists, and political psychologists have studied for decades. Step 1: Dehumanization/Labeling. Step 2: Invocation of the “Accepted Remedy”.

When the left and the media trumpet, over and over again, that Trump is issuing illegal orders, this becomes part of the context. The media pushes the “Bush-appointed Judge halts Trump’s order, finding that he is unlikely to win on the merits.” to the front page. The Supreme Court slapping down that selfsame judge might get a paragraph on page 6, right under the ad for hemorrhoid cream.

This is the context that the six senators have taken advantage of; they created a simple video reminding military personnel that they are bound to the constitution and that they are required to ignore “illegal orders”. They can dishonestly claim that they aren’t calling for the troops to ignore Trump’s orders, but within the context, that is exactly what they have done.

Trump’s statement, on the other hand, isn’t an attack or an incitement. He has accused those six senators of a crime and stated the penalties for that crime. Only if they are found guilty of that crime are they at risk for that most final punishment.

But Trump, being Trump, didn’t cite to the code. He didn’t explicitly state what law the senators broke. This leaves vast amounts of wiggle room. And Trump could be wrong. And he likely got the punishment wrong. Regardless, it doesn’t rise to the level of a threat and is protected speech.

And here is where we start to have issues. I know that Trump is a flawed human. Just as Reagan was a flawed man. They can be heroes of mine without being my gods. I might agree with 99% of what they say or do; that doesn’t mean I will agree with them every time.

The left doesn’t think that way. Their heroes don’t walk with us. Their heroes don’t have feet of clay. Their heroes float above us, giving us the wisdom of the ages. They have their Ministry of Truth, their own Minitrue, to keep their heroes halos shining brightly.

But there is a third part of the equation that we don’t talk about. That is the audience.

When these talking heads, politicians, or party leaders speak, they are speaking to an audience. When some talking head says that “MAGA is falling apart,” they are not talking to you and me; they are talking to their audience. The fact that I hear their words doesn’t change who their audience is.

My parents were part of that leftist audience; they knew Trump 45 was bad. They knew it because they heard it from all the people they heard talking about Trump. I wasn’t a part of that audience. I heard the same words, I heard the same spin, I heard the same lie. I went looking for the truth, and found it wasn’t what I heard from “everybody”.

In the same way Trump talks to his audience. But there is a huge difference when he speaks to us. The media and talking heads all tell us what Trump really meant. They hear the same words and twist the message to meet their needs, not the needs of The People.

There is another, more significant difference. The audience of the left is prone to violence. The audience of the right is not.

The number of people in the left audience willing to do violent acts is huge. There are members of the right audience that want to react violently but not initiate that violence. The FAFO policy. Or as I learned from my parents and as I taught my kids, we don’t start fights; we end them.

Where I see conflicts forming is in my trust of those audiences. I trust the left to do violent things. I trust the right to be prepared and willing to provide FA, but not to initiate that violence. If you don’t have that trust, there are problems.

Unfortunately, that problem is about that crazy dude over there. There are crazies on both sides. If we care about optics, if we care about people, we don’t celebrate violence inflicted on others. This helps contain the smaller number of crazies on the right. The left glorifies their crazies.

Just look at the hero worship over a man who killed a CEO. That is simply evil.

Conclusion

I’m tired, and I believe that many on the right are tired of playing nice because the left will think badly of us. They already think badly of us. It doesn’t matter what we do; we will always be evil to them. For those in the middle that might look at the tired response of “Well F you right back” as being the same, we can’t roll over anymore. The only way forward is to fight back.

It doesn’t matter how many times they tell the same old lie, we still have to say “That is a lie.” It is long past time to stop being the doormat to the left.

So this gets complicated.

Article I establishes the legislative branch, Congress. Congress controls the purse. They decide how money is to be spent and what tax rates should be.

Once Congress allocates money, it is the responsibility of the Article II executive to spend the money.

The Article III judiciary is there to make sure that what Article I and Article II branches are within the boundaries of the Constitution.

Congress decided that they were not allocating money for non-essential work for the 2025-2026 budget year, which started October 1st.

This means that only essential money can be spent.

SNAP is not considered an essential expenditure. And before you get upset about this, the military is something in the Constitution, and they are not considered essential.

This means that The Executive, The President, ordered the United States Department of Agriculture to stop SNAP payments.

SNAP benefits are administered at the state level. The state gets money from the federal government, skims a bit off the top, and then sends the money to those with EBT cards. Note, having an EBT card doesn’t mean you are on SNAP. EBT cards are bought and sold all the time. Yes, that’s illegal.

A group went to a district court in Massachusetts. Why? Because it is a progressive hell hole.

They claimed that it was illegal for the president to turn off the SNAP spigot. The judge agreed and issued a temporary order requiring the Article II Executive to take money from a pot of money that Congress had allocated for something else and send it to the SNAP program.

The Article II Executive appealed to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, claiming that the Article III district court did not have the power or authority to order the Article II Executive to break the law and send money that Congress did not allocate to the SNAP program.

The First Circuit looked at the facts; the petitioner is the Trump administration, and they lose.

This ran out the clock. Even if a judicial order is illegal, you must follow it or face contempt charges.

The money was stolen from one program, sent to the USDA, which then sent it to the states. The states then sent it to the EBT cards.

The Article II Executive appealed the case to the Supreme Court on the emergency docket. KJB then issued an administrative stay. Yeah, even a broken clock is right once or twice a day.

The USDA then started the clawback process, demanding the money back.

The states said, “We don’t have it, we sent it out.”

The states should have clawed back all the unspent money on EBT cards.

Regardless, those states now owe the federal government all the money they spent.

The good news is that 8 Democrat Senators have voted for a CR through January.