It's My Mind

Karmelo Anthony Verdict: No Riots, Just Facts

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Wed, 10 Jun 2026 23:30:00 -0500

Ben Shapiro’s latest episode examines the recent conviction of Karmelo Anthony and what it says about changing race relations in the U.S. A case that might have triggered widespread unrest in past years unfolded with relative calm. Here’s a clear breakdown of the facts and why this feels different.

The Case in Plain Terms

On April 2, 2025, at a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas, 17-year-old Karmelo Anthony (now 19) fatally stabbed 17-year-old Austin Metcalf. Both were student-athletes—Anthony from Centennial High, Metcalf from Memorial High. A rain delay sent athletes seeking shelter under team tents.

Witness accounts indicate Metcalf and his twin brother asked Anthony to leave their school’s tent. Words were exchanged, followed by light pushing. Anthony reportedly said something like “Touch me and see what happens.” He then pulled a knife from his backpack and stabbed Metcalf in the chest. Metcalf was unarmed. Anthony claimed self-defense.

On June 9, 2026, a Collin County jury convicted Anthony of murder after brief deliberation. He received a 35-year sentence (eligible for parole after about 17 years). The self-defense claim was rejected.

The Racial Narrative That Didn’t Take Hold

Anthony’s family and supporters tried to frame the incident through a racial lens early on, portraying him as a victim of racism or provocation. Some online fundraisers featured racially charged comments celebrating the act. Yet this narrative didn’t catch fire nationally. There were no major riots, widespread protests, or intense legacy media coverage.

Shapiro contrasts this with earlier cases:

Trayvon Martin (2013): Presidential comments amplified tensions.
Michael Brown/Ferguson (2014): The debunked “Hands up, don’t shoot” story fueled riots.
George Floyd (2020): Massive unrest followed amid systemic racism claims.

In those situations, leadership and media often leaned into racial polarization. This time, the response was muted.

Why the Difference Now?

Shapiro points to leadership. While politics often follows culture, culture can also respond to strong political signals. The current emphasis on equal justice, merit, and colorblind application of the law appears to have dampened the drive for race-based unrest. Americans increasingly view clear-cut murder as deserving punishment—regardless of race.

The “everything is racist” approach seems to have lost much of its power. With straightforward facts (unarmed victim, knife used after a confrontation, swift arrest and conviction), it’s harder to build a narrative justifying chaos.

Broader Takeaways

No one celebrates tragedy. Two young lives were upended—one ended, one derailed by a terrible decision. But justice delivered without national meltdown marks real progress.

Watch the full episode here [VIDEO]

Relevant Links

What do you think? Has the national conversation on race begun to shift? Share your thoughts in the comments.

Spencer Pratt vs. LA Reality

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Tue, 9 Jun 2026 23:17:21 -0500

Spencer Pratt held second place behind incumbent Mayor Karen Bass for most of the week after the June 2 primary. He lost that lead on Monday as more ballots were counted, with far-left City Council-member Nithya Raman surging ahead to claim the runoff spot.

(I like Council-member over the rather clunky Alderperson we sometimes hear in Chicago — yuck!)

Let’s be clear: Raman isn’t just a Democrat. She’s a Democratic Socialist. While I believe today’s Democratic Party have lost their minds, there’s an important distinction here. We’re not talking about your average, everyday Democrat.

From what I’ve seen, Pratt ran on straightforward common sense and actually fixing LA’s problems. I only started following this race closely in the last month — right in the weeks leading up to Tuesday’s primary. Realistically, was he going to win the mayor’s office? No. But his performance sent a clear message.

In 2022, Los Angeles voters chose incumbent Mayor Karen Bass over billionaire real estate developer Rick Caruso. Caruso didn’t run again this cycle, which opened the door for Pratt. The Jersey Shore reality TV star may be best known for his bold persona, but his campaign reflected real anger over the city’s leadership — especially after the devastating wildfires, when Mayor Bass was overseas in Africa.

I have to share this raw IG video from Doug Ellin, the creator and producer of the HBO series Entourage. He posted it just a week before the election. Ellin is clearly fed up and tired of being gaslit by local media. He openly laments how LA voters chose Bass over Caruso four years ago.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Doug Ellin (@mrdougellin)

Final Primary Results Snapshot (as of the latest count): Karen Bass advanced easily in first place. Nithya Raman overtook Pratt for second and will face Bass in the November runoff.

Mayoral Results via L.A. Times

Full Details — LA Times: Nithya Raman advances to face Mayor Karen Bass (paywall warning)

In other news, former Fox News host Steve Hilton (Republican) advanced to the general election in November, facing off against former Biden Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra. I had to share this article about Hilton’s victory from the BBC: BBC coverage.The Department of Justice is also looking at the irregularities of the California election. It might not change the results of the mayoral race, but hopefully it helps end corrupt practices in future elections.

In my view, Election Day should end on Election Day. They shouldn’t still be counting ballots days or weeks later. Pratt even called out the number of votes that eroded his second-place standing over the weekend: 43,000 votes that were “harvested” from LA’s homeless population.

"A net swing of more than 43,000 votes since Tuesday.."

43,000, huh? Where have I seen that number before...?

Probably nothing. 🤷 https://t.co/W2E3k6PHyR pic.twitter.com/ZfzHCy9enb
— Spencer Pratt (@spencerpratt) June 8, 2026

The Democrats were all about democracy. Isn't that what they've been talking about since 2021?

Helen Andrews on The Great Feminization

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Mon, 8 Jun 2026 01:51:16 -0500

Helen Andrews is a freelance writer and author whose 2025 essay "The Great Feminization" (published in Compact Magazine) offers a provocative explanation for the rise of wokeness. In a roughly 35-minute UnHerd interview with Freddie Sayers, uploaded around the same time, Andrews lays out her case clearly and compellingly.

Andrews makes a direct connection with the unrest of summer 2020. When George Floyd’s death in May 2020 sparked a bystander video that went viral, those pre-existing dynamics met a national spark. The result was what Andrews calls “the eruption of insanity in 2020”: rapid nationwide protests (many peaceful but others turning into riots with widespread looting, arson, and roughly $1–2 billion in damage), corporate and institutional capitulations, accelerated DEI pledges, statue removals, speech codes, and a wave of cancellations. Institutions prioritized signaling care, avoiding internal conflict, and enforcing group cohesion—hallmarks of the feminized style—over rigorous debate about trade-offs, data on policing/crime, or long-term consequences.

In short, feminization didn’t cause Floyd’s death or the initial outrage, but it shaped the style and scale of the response: fast-moving empathy-driven solidarity, intolerance for dissent framed as harm, and symbolism over practical outcomes. Andrews sees 2020 not as the root but as a preview—“just a small taste”—of how these norms play out at scale once institutions are sufficiently feminized.

This framing helps explain why the unrest and institutional reactions felt so uniform and emotionally charged across elite sectors, even as core problems in places like Chicago’s South Side (crime, family breakdown, education) saw little real improvement from the performative wave. It’s a demographic and cultural lens rather than purely partisan or ideological.

Key Points from the Interview

Core Thesis on Group Dynamics: Andrews explains that the most important sex difference is attitude toward conflict. Men tend to engage openly and directly, while women more often use covert undermining, social ostracism, or exclusion. This feminine style dominates in majority-female environments and explains cancel culture as a way of shutting down disagreement rather than living with it.
Larry Summers Example: She highlights the 2005 resignation of Harvard President Larry Summers as an early case study. Female faculty and administrators prioritized emotional sympathy and perceived harm over evidence and open inquiry when Summers discussed sex differences in STEM aptitude.
Feminized Legal System: Andrews warns that a majority-female legal profession risks shifting from objective “rule of law” (evidence, due process) to emotional sympathy and feelings-based outcomes, threatening impartial justice.
Not Pure Meritocracy: The surge of women into these fields wasn’t solely the result of women outperforming men on merit. It involved “social engineering” — policies, quotas, and hostile environment laws that effectively made it “illegal for women to lose,” creating protected advantages.
Institutional Changes: Once institutions tip female, priorities shift toward empathy over rationality, safety over risk, cohesion over competition, and consensus-seeking. This alters everything from newsrooms and academia to corporate HR culture.
Reversibility: Andrews discusses whether (and how) feminization can or should be reversed. She argues for balance rather than exclusion. Institutions need both masculine (debate, risk, results) and feminine (care, cohesion) strengths to function effectively.

This interview is worth your time if you’re trying to make sense of the cultural shifts we’ve lived through. What do you think — does Andrews’ demographic lens explain more than traditional ideological explanations?

Read Andrews' essay "The Great Feminization" here

You can watch the roughly 35 mins interview here [VIDEO]

Lions vs. Scavengers: Understanding Who Really Hates the West (A PragerU Take with Ben Shapiro)

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Fri, 5 Jun 2026 22:59:53 -0500

The future of Western civilization feels like it's on the edge. Radical protests keep disrupting cities, vandalizing neighborhoods, and taking over college campuses. But it's not random chaos—it's the same groups switching causes like flags on a pole: radical Muslims, LGBTQ+ activists, communists, anarchists, and environmentalists.

These alliances often make no sense on the surface. "Queers for Palestine" exists, even though the realities in places like Palestine directly contradict the values they claim to support. So what holds this unlikely coalition together?

The Core Divide: Lions vs. Scavengers

According to Ben Shapiro in this PragerU video, the uniting force is simple: a deep hatred of the West and a drive to tear it down. He calls them scavengers—those who consume and destroy more than they create. On the other side stand the lions: the builders, producers, and defenders of Western civilization who contribute more than they take.

Think entrepreneurs like Elon Musk, factory workers, and everyday neighbors grinding to build a better life for their kids. These are the people keeping society afloat.

Who Are the Scavengers?

Shapiro breaks them down into types:

Looters: They feel entitled to the fruits of others' labor. Instead of creating value, they take through heavy taxation, redistribution, or even outright theft. Groups like Black Lives Matter or Antifa often get cited here.
Lechers: Those who reject traditional Judeo-Christian morality, seeing it as oppressive. Examples include pushing boundary-breaking content, like sexualized drag queen story hours for kids.
Barbarians: People from failed cultures who blame the West entirely and demand it be dismantled as payback. Shapiro points to figures like Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro, who turned Venezuela from South America's richest country into economic ruin.

Scavengers share common personality traits too:

Vengeful — They view their lives and society as ruined and want to wreck everything.
Alienated — Even with every privilege, they see themselves as outsiders.
Underappreciated — Pseudo-intellectuals and artists convinced their genius goes unrecognized.
Bored — Often from middle or upper classes with no real struggles, they chase meaning in revolution.

Why They Target the West

Scavengers attack the pillars that make the West strong: free minds, free markets, public virtue, and the rule of law. These stand in the way of their control and utopian fantasies. In the end, their coalition will likely fracture because they share no positive vision—only destruction.

The question Shapiro leaves us with: Will the lions step up with the strength and courage to defend what's been built?

My Take (Chicago/South Side Lens)

Watching this video hit close to home. Years ago, I worked with a guy who fit parts of Shapiro’s scavenger description. He wasn’t some fire-breathing anti-West radical. He didn’t seem to hate America on a deep ideological level. But he had this constant narrative that America is fundamentally unfair and rigged against people like us. Race was his go-to card whenever current events came up—always framing issues through that lens, rarely acknowledging personal responsibility, hard work, or the real progress that’s been made.

Some of his strongest angst targeted capitalism itself, often aimed at “rich white men.” Yet he’d still want to rub elbows with the very people he railed against, chasing opportunities while complaining about how unfair the system was. It was a contradictory mix that almost rubbed off on me at the time—easy to get pulled into the grievance mindset if you’re not careful.

That experience showed me how scavenger thinking shows up in everyday life—not just in loud campus protests or big-city activism, but in regular workplaces too.

We need more people focused on building, preserving, and creating rather than just consuming and criticizing. That’s the mindset that actually moves things forward.

What do you think? Have you encountered similar “scavenger” mindsets in your own life? Drop comments below, share on social, and let’s discuss.

Watch the full 5 min. video here: [VIDEO]

Post was formatted and edited with the help of AI.

Bill O'Reilly on California's Political Shift: Signs of Change in the Golden State?

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 4 Jun 2026 16:16:54 -0500

Bill O'Reilly recently broke down the latest developments in California politics on his No Spin News. The segment covers primary election results and what they might mean for the state's future.

Watch the full No Spin News clip here [VIDEO]

Key Highlights from the Clip

O'Reilly discusses the challenges with vote counting in California elections.
He notes the hype around certain races and provides his straightforward take on the outcomes.
The analysis touches on broader implications for California governance and national politics.

Spotlight on San Francisco

"San Francisco mayor 'dials back progressive nonsense': Bill O'Reilly" [VIDEO]

In this clip, Bill O'Reilly highlights the severe issues plaguing San Francisco—such as rampant homelessness, open drug use, crime, and visible decline. He contrasts the city's former glory with its current state, attributing much of the downturn to extreme progressive policies. However, he offers a note of cautious optimism: Mayor Daniel Lurie (a Democrat elected in 2024) is beginning to roll back some of the "progressive nonsense," with early signs of improvement in public safety and cleanliness. O'Reilly points to grassroots efforts and a coalition of residents pushing for practical solutions as reasons for hope that a "new day" could be dawning in the city by the bay.

Instagram Clip: Bill O'Reilly on San Francisco (Instagram Reel) – Short promo-style clip highlighting the decline and special coverage of the city's challenges.

What do you think?

Is California (and San Francisco in particular) finally shifting toward more practical governance, or are these early changes too little, too late? Share your thoughts in the comments.

The Fall of Scott Pelley: Old Guard vs. New Leadership at CBS News

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Wed, 3 Jun 2026 23:59:50 -0500

Big changes are shaking up one of television’s most iconic news programs. Veteran 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley was fired this week after a heated clash with new management. The story, covered sharply in this PBD Podcast video (“Bought His Own Hype”), highlights the tension between legacy journalists and the fresh direction CBS News is taking under Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss.

Here you can watch the clip from the PBD Podcast [VIDEO]

Pelley, a longtime face of 60 Minutes with decades at CBS, reportedly confronted the new executive producer during a staff meeting. He criticized recent firings, questioned leadership’s qualifications, and accused the new regime of “murdering” the storied newsmagazine. Hours later, he was out—terminated for cause.

What Happened? The Clash in Detail

According to reports and the Valuetainment breakdown, Pelley lashed out at the changes sweeping through 60 Minutes. Several producers and correspondents had already been let go as part of a broader overhaul. Pelley didn’t hold back, calling out the new executive producer’s background and the overall direction.

The Valuetainment take frames this as a classic “bought his own hype” moment—an old-school star who may have underestimated how serious the new leadership was about reform. Instead of adapting, Pelley went public with his frustrations in front of the team. The result? A swift exit letter citing incompetence and unprofessionalism in the new context.

Enter Bari Weiss: Reforming (or “Ruining”) CBS?

This isn’t just about one firing. It’s part of the larger transformation at CBS News since Bari Weiss took over as Editor-in-Chief in late 2025. After Paramount Skydance’s acquisition, Weiss—founder of The Free Press and a vocal critic of legacy media bias—was brought in to shake things up.

Weiss has no traditional broadcast TV experience, which has drawn skepticism from insiders. But she’s been clear about her mission: make CBS News more competitive, less predictable, and better suited for the 21st century. That has meant staff cuts, new hires, adding commentators, and rethinking shows like 60 Minutes.

Critics on the left call it a rightward shift or a “hostile takeover.” Supporters see it as necessary medicine for a network that had grown complacent and one-sided. The Pelley incident puts that tension on full display—old guard resisting change versus new leadership demanding accountability.

Why This Matters

60 Minutes built its reputation on tough, in-depth journalism. Many worry that rapid changes risk diluting that legacy. Others argue the program needed fresh energy to survive in a fragmented media landscape where trust in traditional news has eroded.

The Valuetainment video does a good job capturing the drama without pulling punches. It questions whether Pelley’s outburst was principled resistance or ego-driven entitlement. Meanwhile, Weiss addressed the staff, calling the firing “unfortunate” but standing by the need for a new direction.

What do you think? Is this a much-needed reset for CBS, or are we losing institutional knowledge and journalistic independence? Drop your takes below.

Relevant Links

New York Times: Scott Pelley Accuses CBS News Boss of ‘Murdering’ ‘60 Minutes’
NYT: Bari Weiss Speaks on Scott Pelley’s Firing
Variety: Bari Weiss Defends Firing Scott Pelley
CBS News Coverage of the Firing
Background on Bari Weiss at CBS (for context on her role and appointment)

Trump on Pod Force One: Candid Talk with Miranda Devine

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Wed, 3 Jun 2026 11:30:00 -0500

In a wide-ranging interview in the Roosevelt Room, President Donald Trump sat down with Miranda Devine for her Pod Force One podcast and spoke openly about several pressing issues.

The Heated Call with Benjamin Netanyahu

One of the most striking moments came when Trump confirmed reports about a recent phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He acknowledged using strong language, telling Devine he said something along the lines of, “Bibi, are you effing crazy? What are you f'n doing?”

Trump explained that he was “a little bit perturbed” by Netanyahu’s continued military actions against Lebanon and Hezbollah. He pushed for restraint to avoid complicating broader regional negotiations, particularly around Iran. At the same time, Trump emphasized that he and Netanyahu still work well together overall. He described himself as a “wartime president” and Netanyahu as a “wartime prime minister,” noting they have a strong relationship despite the blunt exchange. Trump also pushed back against claims that Netanyahu had tricked him into any actions regarding Iran, calling such suggestions nonsense pushed by political opponents.

Why Ben Shapiro Left L.A. – And Why the Rest of Us Should Pay Attention

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Tue, 2 Jun 2026 00:05:50 -0500

Ben Shapiro just dropped a sharp, no-holds-barred video breaking down the mess that is modern Los Angeles. If you've ever wondered how one of America's most iconic cities turned into a cautionary tale, this clip nails it.

The Core Problem: Leadership Failure on Homelessness

Shapiro doesn't pull punches. He slams current leaders like Karen Bass and Nithya Raman for their handling of LA's homelessness crisis. Decades of progressive policies, massive spending, and feel-good rhetoric haven't fixed the streets — they've made them worse. Tents, trash, and human suffering now define parts of what was once a world-class city.

The numbers are staggering, the results embarrassing. Billions poured in, yet visible decline continues. Shapiro highlights how this isn't just a policy failure — it's a leadership one.

Enter Spencer Pratt: Using AI to Expose Reality

One of the most interesting angles? Reality TV star Spencer Pratt jumping into the mayoral race with viral AI-generated campaign ads. These ads cut through the noise by starkly showing the city's decay. No sugarcoating. Just raw visuals that force viewers to confront what's happened to Los Angeles.

Pratt's approach is refreshing in its directness. In a city drowning in spin, using modern tools like AI to tell uncomfortable truths stands out.

Shapiro's Personal Take

As someone who left L.A., Shapiro speaks from experience. The video blends analysis with a clear message: when leaders prioritize ideology over results, cities suffer. Crime, disorder, and declining quality of life aren't inevitable — they're choices.

This isn't just about one city. It's a warning for anywhere following the same playbook.

Watch the full clip here: [VIDEO]

What do you think — can LA turn it around, or is this the new normal for blue cities? Drop your thoughts below.

This post was edited with AI for improved clarity and readability.

From Reality TV Villain to Serious LA Mayoral Contender: Spencer Pratt on Joe Rogan

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Mon, 1 Jun 2026 11:30:00 -0500

Spencer Pratt, the former The Hills star once known as reality TV’s ultimate villain, joined Joe Rogan for a candid, no-holds-barred conversation back on April 15, 2026. In the episode (JRE #2483), Pratt explains why he’s running for Mayor of Los Angeles, shares the personal tragedy that pushed him into politics, and delivers sharp criticism of the city’s current leadership. With the LA mayoral primary election happening tomorrow, June 2, this discussion feels more relevant than ever.

Watch the Full Podcast Here [VIDEO]

From Celebrity to Candidate

Pratt never intended to run for office. The decision came after he lost his own home — and his parents’ home — in the Palisades fires. After spending months investigating what went wrong, he became convinced that negligence and mismanagement at City Hall played a major role. Seeing no strong challengers step up, he moved from posting frustrations online to entering the race himself.
Sharp Criticism of Mayor Karen Bass

Pratt holds incumbent Mayor Karen Bass directly responsible for many of LA’s ongoing struggles. He argues that under her leadership, the homelessness crisis has worsened despite large amounts of spending. Pratt points out that official statistics often mask the reality — people are moved from streets only to end up in worse conditions, sometimes with tragic outcomes.

He also criticizes Bass’s administration for fire preparedness failures, including drained reservoirs, ignored brush clearance, and budget decisions that left the city vulnerable. These issues turned a personal loss into a political mission.

Taking on the Democratic Socialist Challenger

Pratt doesn’t spare Nithya Raman, the progressive City Council member and Democratic Socialist who is also a major contender in the race. As someone deeply involved in homelessness policy, Raman represents the approach Pratt believes has failed. He argues that socialist-leaning policies on the council — including those influenced by Raman and other DSA-aligned members — have led to massive spending with little accountability and minimal results on the streets.

The Homelessness “Industrial Complex”

A central theme in the Rogan interview is LA’s broken homelessness system. Pratt describes it as a cartel-like operation where billions of taxpayer dollars flow to NGOs with almost no tracking or measurable outcomes. His proposed solutions include:

Full transparency and tracking of every dollar
IRS-level audits to uncover fraud
Enforcing laws like SB43 for mental health holds
Cracking down on open drug use and public disorder

He cites examples from other cities that have seen improvements through stronger enforcement as proof that change is possible.

Fire Failures and the Path Forward

Pratt details how poor planning and ignored warnings turned preventable tragedies into disasters. As an outsider candidate, he positions himself as a voice for practical fixes: cleaning up streets, restoring safety for families, increasing transparency, and holding council members accountable in their districts.

A Critical Day for California: June 2

Tomorrow, June 2, 2026, stands as a pivotal election day across California thanks to the statewide jungle (top-two) primary system. In addition to the competitive LA mayoral race, voters will also weigh in on the governor’s race — one of the state’s most important contests. With a crowded Democratic field, one or two Republicans (such as Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco) have a realistic shot at advancing to the November general election. This could open the door to breaking decades of one-party rule in the state.

As someone who doesn’t live in California, I’m staying neutral on the specific candidates. That said, I’d like to see outcomes that bring more balance and fresh accountability after years of single-party dominance on issues like homelessness, public safety, and government efficiency.

Whether you’re voting in LA or statewide, June 2 offers a meaningful opportunity to influence the direction of both the city and the state.

The full episode is packed with unfiltered insights and Rogan’s engaging style. If you’re concerned about LA’s direction — or California’s — it’s well worth watching.

Tomorrow is Election Day — June 2. This could be a turning point for both the city and the state. What do you think: Can outsiders like Pratt (and strong contenders in the governor’s race) break through, or are the problems too deep? Share your thoughts below.

This post was created with the assistance of A.I.

What are you favorite podcasts?

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Sat, 30 May 2026 23:30:00 -0500

I remember when podcasts first started gaining traction about 20 years ago. Back then, it was usually just someone plugging a microphone into their computer and talking about whatever they wanted. It felt like producing your own radio show — and you could do it for five minutes or five hours.

It’s wild how much the medium has evolved. Podcasting is now a massive industry.

Source: MusicRadar.com

My go-to podcasts right now are PBD Podcast and Timcast IRL. I’ve also started tuning into Bill O’Reilly’s new show, We’ll Do It Live — especially after his recent interview with former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. That one earned a solid spot on my must-listen list.

Sean Hannity’s Hang Out is another I should follow more closely. He even filled in once as a guest host on PBD’s show.

A few honorable mentions:

The Adam Carolla Show — always entertaining, especially if you want unfiltered takes on what’s happening in California. He was directly impacted by the 2025 wildfires.
The Joe Rogan Experience — I don’t catch it as often as I should, but his interview with Donald Trump in 2024 was excellent. He consistently lands fascinating guests.
Larry Elder — I’ve been following him since his Moral Court days and his long run in talk radio. His show used to air here in Chicago on WLS-AM. I really respect how he combines strong opinions with facts.

Looking back, my media habits have changed significantly in recent years. I barely watch traditional TV anymore — especially since Fox News canceled Tucker Carlson (who definitely belongs on this list too). I don’t follow the news the way I used to. These days, podcasts keep me plugged into current events far better than cable news currently.

Newspapers feel almost extinct. I used to regularly check the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times back when I first started this blog. Now I rarely do.

Question for you all: What podcasts do you listen to on a regular basis?

Does "Suicidal Empathy" Explain Our Soft-on-Crime Policies?

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Fri, 29 May 2026 13:55:50 -0500

Empathy is a virtue — the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. But when it's misdirected, excessive, or untethered from reason and consequences, it can become suicidal empathy.

As evolutionary psychologist Gad Saad explains in his PragerU video (and upcoming book Suicidal Empathy: Dying to Be Kind), civilizations don't always die by murder. Per historian Arnold Toynbee, they often die by suicide — from within, through well-intentioned but self-destructive choices.

Watch Saad's full take here [VIDEO]

Does this explain the past decade — especially since 2020 — when many cities and states elected prosecutors and officials who chose to be extremely soft on crime?

Look at the results:

"Teen takeovers" — flash mob robberies, carjackings, and chaotic violence in places like Chicago, where groups of unruly youths exploit weak enforcement. Victims suffer, businesses close, and communities deteriorate.
Selective prosecution — cases where crimes seem downplayed or ignored based on the perpetrator's race, background, or narrative fit (while others are pursued aggressively).
Sanctuary policies — cities and states that continue welcoming all immigrants, including known criminals, under the banner of compassion, straining resources, increasing crime in some areas, and eroding public safety.

These aren't isolated failures. Saad points to real-world examples of suicidal empathy in action:

Open borders and mass migration: Angela Merkel's 2015 decision to welcome over a million migrants into Germany (and much of Europe's follow-on) was framed as compassionate. A decade later: spikes in rape, murder, and social breakdown. Empathy for newcomers often overshadowed concern for citizens' safety and cultural cohesion.
Defund the Police: After George Floyd's death, emotionally charged narratives led cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Philadelphia to slash police budgets. Data didn't support claims of systemic murder of innocents, but policy followed the empathy wave anyway. The biggest victims? The very low-income and minority communities these policies claimed to help.

When empathy becomes "stage four" — hyper-focused on the perpetrator's circumstances, feelings, or victimhood while ignoring victims, data, and long-term societal health — society pays the price.

The core question: Are these trends (soft-on-crime prosecutors, revolving-door justice, identity-based leniency, sanctuary defiance) symptoms of suicidal empathy? Prioritizing displays of kindness and tolerance over borders, law and order, and civilizational survival?

Saad argues this isn't sustainable. Empathy evolved to help kin and small groups survive — not to blindly enable dysfunction or import chaos at scale. Without balance — reason, accountability, and self-preservation — it becomes a parasitic force.

The good news? Suicide is a choice. The West still has time to course-correct, but the window is closing.

What do you think? Is this misapplied empathy, or something else?

Note: This post was written with the assistance of AI.

What's going on with the Iran War?

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 28 May 2026 23:24:54 -0500

This blog used to be known for covering the news of the day so here's one development that's been discussed today regarding the Iran War. They've been talking about a deal and hopefully an eventual cessation of hostilities.

BBC:

The US and Iran still need to work out several sticking points before an agreement on the war can be reached, Vice-President JD Vance has said.

Asked by the BBC if President Donald Trump was close to signing a deal, Vance said it was too early to say "when or if" the two sides would finalise an agreement.

The deal would reportedly extend the ceasefire for 60 days and launch talks on the future of Iran's nuclear programme.

Earlier on Thursday, US officials told the BBC that the two countries had agreed a framework of a deal, pending the approval of Trump and Iran's leadership.

But Iran's semi-official Tasnim news agency reported the deal had not been finalised or confirmed.

Basically we wiped out their military, we killed the top tier of their leadership (remember in the initial airstrikes Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei was killed). Reports are the new Supreme Leader also Khamenei is incapacitated - when his appointment was announced all they showed as his head on a cardboard body, he wasn't even there to show himself as the newly appointed Supreme Leader.

I just wonder how long the Iranian Revolutionary Guard will continue fighting?

California Sheriff Chad Bianco on the PBD Podcast

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 28 May 2026 13:26:50 -0500

I used A.I. to pull some significant points from this morning's podcast

Straight Talk from California’s Law-and-Order Governor Candidate

Source: LA Times

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco joined Patrick Bet-David on the PBD Podcast (#808) for a candid discussion about California’s 2026 gubernatorial race. As a Republican candidate with a strong law enforcement background, Bianco pulled no punches on the state’s crises, his primary rivals, and the failures of Democratic leadership—particularly under Governor Gavin Newsom.

The Republican Primary and Steve Hilton

Bianco addressed Donald Trump’s endorsement of Steve Hilton. While respectful on a personal level, he warned it could harm Republican chances in California due to “Trump derangement syndrome.” He positioned himself as the experienced, grassroots-supported law enforcement leader versus Hilton as a later-entering media personality. Bianco refused to drop out, calling many polls unreliable “push polls” influenced by big money, and argued he’s the stronger general-election candidate on crime, borders, and accountability.

Views on Democratic Candidates

Bianco offered nuanced takes rather than blanket criticism:

Katie Porter: Cordial in front of cameras but “not very nice” behind the scenes—more combative in private.
San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan: Seen as somewhat more pragmatic (e.g., on homelessness), but Bianco believes he entered too late with big-money backing.
Tom Steyer: Highlighted as emblematic of big-money influence shaping polls and the Democratic race.
Antonio Villaraigosa: Described as “doing fine” personally and financially, with less urgency to stay in the race.
Xavier Becerra: No detailed personal mentions; focus remained on broader party failures.

Strong Criticism of Gavin Newsom

Bianco delivered harsh assessments of Newsom’s leadership, giving him an overall grade of “F” and stating there’s “not one single thing” he has done well for California. He accused Newsom and the Democratic supermajority of destroying affordability, public safety, and quality of life through waste, over-regulation, high taxes, and failed policies.

Bianco explicitly called Newsom a “very disingenuous, dishonest narcissist” while acknowledging his skill as a politician and talker. On homelessness, he called Newsom’s claims of progress (e.g., slight drops in visible numbers) an “absolute scam.” He argued billions spent have produced little results due to fraud, lack of accountability, and “money laundering” via nonprofits, while Newsom refuses to adequately fund Prop 36 initiatives for treatment and enforcement.

Bianco also questioned why Newsom never put forward a clear heir apparent. He attributed this directly to Newsom’s narcissism and ego — “Nobody’s as good as him. Nobody compares to him. Just ask him.” As a result, Newsom “didn’t bring anybody up behind him,” leaving the Democratic field in “shambles” with no unified successor. This reflected failed leadership and contributed to the fractured Democratic primary.

He emphasized that Newsom’s approach enables addiction and mental illness rather than addressing root causes, contributing to cartel-driven fentanyl deaths, crime, and declining livability. He noted zero direct interaction with Newsom as sheriff, underscoring a disconnect from frontline realities.

Homelessness, Corruption, and Policy Failures

Bianco stressed homelessness is driven primarily by addiction, mental illness, and permissive policies—not just housing. He called for reversing Prop 47, fully implementing Prop 36, stronger enforcement, treatment, and accountability to cut waste. He criticized one-party Democratic rule for systemic corruption, cartel influence in trafficking, and policies that raise costs while eroding safety.

Broader Vision

Bianco presented himself as an authentic, consistent conservative focused on practical solutions: prioritizing public safety, slashing waste and regulations, lowering taxes and living costs, securing borders, and restoring opportunity so Californians stop fleeing the state. He believes independents and disillusioned Democrats are open to this message after witnessing the results of progressive governance.

The episode paints Bianco as a no-nonsense sheriff ready to bring law-and-order accountability to Sacramento. With the June 2026 primary approaching, his campaign frames the race as a battle to reverse decades of decline.

Full episode available on YouTube, you can watch it here.

California voters: Research all candidates thoroughly.

Steve Hilton vs. Sheriff Chad Bianco: Who’s the Better Choice to Run California?

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 28 May 2026 06:00:00 -0500

Last week PBD hosted Republican Steve Hilton one of the two leading candidates for California governor. This week, we get the other prominent Republican in the mix: Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.

With the June 2, 2026 jungle primary fast approaching, this race is heating up. I’m embedding the full interview with Sheriff Bianco below. If you’re up early or following the blog, this is a good one to watch when it drops. [VIDEO]

I’ll be watching the episode shortly after it goes live and will share my detailed thoughts in a follow-up post or update. In the meantime, here are a few initial questions I’m bringing into this interview:

Can a longtime law enforcement leader like Sheriff Bianco bring the tough, law-and-order approach California desperately needs on crime, homelessness, and public safety?
Does Steve Hilton’s experience as a policy thinker (and his background in British politics under David Cameron) give him an edge on fixing California’s deeper structural and economic problems?
Which candidate is more likely to actually win a general election against a Democrat in one of America’s most blue states?

I’m particularly interested in whether Bianco leans hard into the “law-and-order governor” message. California voters have grown increasingly frustrated with soft-on-crime policies, but will that frustration be enough in a jungle primary?

What do you think? Are you a California resident? Which of these two Republicans do you prefer — and why? Drop your thoughts in the comments.

I’ll update this post or publish a full breakdown once I’ve watched Sheriff Bianco’s interview.

Newt Gingrich on Pod Force One discussing Trump, Iran, Bill Clinton's impeachment and breaking the modern left

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 28 May 2026 00:00:25 -0500

Note: This post was written with the assistance of AI.

In a recent episode of Miranda Devine’s Pod Force One, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich delivered a characteristically sharp and historically grounded analysis of where American politics stands in mid-2026. With Donald Trump back in the White House and the nation engaged in conflict with Iran, Gingrich laid out a high-stakes vision for the upcoming midterms and the deeper ideological battle facing the country.

Here are the core insights from Gingrich’s appearance, condensed and organized for clarity.

Trump’s Opportunity to Reshape Politics

Gingrich sees Trump as a rare transformative leader with the vision, moral courage, and disruptive style needed to fundamentally shift American politics. He argues that Republicans should focus less on celebrating past wins and more on bold promises for the next two years. Voters, he notes, reward what you will do—not what you’ve already done.

The strategic goal? Deliver a decisive midterm victory that could “break the left” for a generation, similar to historical realignments where one side so thoroughly routed the other that it reshaped the political landscape for decades.

Gingrich believes the modern Democratic Party is vulnerable—too woke and too detached from mainstream America, echoing the George McGovern-era collapse in 1972. He urges Trump to pivot fully into campaign mode by early July, nationalizing the election around clear contrasts: border security, crime in blue cities, protection of women’s sports, and opposition to radical policies like taxpayer-funded returns of deported criminals.

Cultural issues remain powerful wedges. Gingrich highlights overwhelming public opposition (often 80%+) to males competing in women’s sports and the broader pattern of “suicidal empathy” that prioritizes offenders over public safety.

Reflections on Clinton’s Impeachment

One of the most interesting moments came when Gingrich revisited the 1998 impeachment of Bill Clinton, which he led as Speaker. Today, he calls it a strategic mistake.

While the underlying issue—Clinton’s perjury in a sexual harassment lawsuit—was serious and later cost Clinton his Arkansas law license, the public fight became consumed by the salacious Lewinsky scandal. This allowed Democrats to rally around Clinton and paint Republicans as obsessed with personal morality rather than the rule of law. Gingrich’s reflection carries a clear lesson for today: framing and narrative discipline matter enormously in political warfare.

The High Stakes in the Conflict with Iran

Gingrich defended Trump’s decision to confront Iran directly rather than delay action for political convenience. The Iranian regime, he notes, remains ideologically committed to “Death to America,” with a hardened core of supporters who have decades of experience surviving conflict.

Success hinges on the home front. Gingrich emphasizes that gas prices must come down—ideally toward $3–$3.25 per gallon—for the public to sustain support. Trump’s approach of targeted pressure, air power, and giving the regime chances to de-escalate reflects realism about both military realities and domestic political tolerance.

Every day the current Iranian dictatorship survives is a continuing threat to global stability through nuclear ambitions and terrorism. Gingrich portrays Trump’s willingness to engage directly as a necessary break from past passive policies.

The Existential Fight Against the Modern LeftAt its core, Gingrich frames the current moment as a zero-sum ideological struggle. The modern Left, in his view, operates on bad information, prioritizes fringe social experiments over practical governance, and has captured key institutions (media, universities, courts).

He believes a strong Republican showing—driven by Trump’s ability to name uncomfortable realities—could discredit and disorganize this movement for years. The path forward requires relentless focus on where the Left’s positions diverge sharply from most Americans: open borders, crime policies, and radical gender ideology.

Trump’s strength, according to Gingrich, lies in forcing these contradictions into the open and refusing to play by the old, polite rules that allowed the Left to dominate cultural narratives.

Final Takeaway

Gingrich’s message is optimistic but conditional. Trump has the tools and the moment to deliver a lasting realignment, but success depends on managing the Iran conflict effectively, keeping economic pain (especially energy prices) under control, and maintaining sharp contrasts on cultural and security issues.

For those following the 2026 midterms and America’s broader trajectory, Gingrich’s analysis offers a historian’s long view combined with a strategist’s tactical eye. The coming months will test whether Trump can convert disruption into durable political victory—and whether the modern Left can survive a sustained reckoning with public opinion.

This podcast is well worth a full listen for anyone interested in where the next phase of American politics is headed. You can check it out below. [VIDEO]

What are your thoughts on Gingrich’s assessment? Do you agree that this is a potential breaking point for the modern Left? Drop your comments below.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey Has Learned Nothing in 6 Years

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Wed, 27 May 2026 00:10:41 -0500

Since Memorial Day just passed, I wanted to share this post from Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. While the nation honored our fallen service members, he chose to remember George Floyd instead.

Today, we remember George Floyd, who was murdered by a former Minneapolis police officer six years ago.

That moment changed our city forever.
— Mayor Jacob Frey (@MayorFrey) May 25, 2026

His city was torn apart by the riots following Floyd's death in 2020. Six years later, Frey still prioritizes this narrative over Memorial Day.This isn't surprising. In January 2026, Minneapolis made national news again for resisting federal ICE operations to arrest criminal illegal immigrants. Activists descended on the city, causing chaos and clashing with law enforcement — the same patterns we saw in 2020.

Frey has clearly learned nothing in the last six years. It's a shame.

For the record: I believe the evidence shows Derek Chauvin was railroaded. Floyd had serious heart disease, fentanyl, and methamphetamine in his system. The former Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo himself acknowledged under testimony that Chauvin's knee was on Floyd's shoulder blade area for part of the time, not purely on the neck as widely portrayed. Yet the political pressure was overwhelming, and justice took a backseat.

2020 was a bizarre, destructive year whose effects still linger. Posts like Frey's remind us that some public officials still can't (or won't) face uncomfortable truths.

Mayor Frey kneeling and weeping at George Floyd's casket in 2020 [VIDEO]

Here's a photo of former Minneapolis Police Chief Arradondo kneeling at the hearse which carried Floyd's casket.

Source: ABC News

Stossel on America's 250th birthday

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Tue, 26 May 2026 12:41:26 -0500

I hope everyone had a restful Memorial Day weekend. Unfortunately, here in Chicago, it was anything but peaceful for many residents. The now-familiar “teen takeovers” returned, bringing chaos, violence, and disruption to parts of the city. These incidents highlight deeper issues that our local leaders need to address seriously — not just with more police presence, but with stronger accountability and cultural changes.

[VIDEO] Today, I wanted to share something more uplifting and thought-provoking as we move forward. This powerful video from John Stossel explores what truly makes America great — especially timely as the United States prepares to celebrate its 250th birthday this year (the Semiquincentennial).

In the video, Stossel and his guests — including Ron Paul, Steve Forbes, and others — dive into how liberty, strong property rights, and limited government turned a young nation into the freest and most prosperous in history. Ben Franklin’s famous warning rings especially true today: “We have a republic, if we can keep it.”

PBD Podcast: Steve Hilton candidate for California Governor

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 21 May 2026 23:28:46 -0500

Steve Hilton is one of two prominent Republican candidates for Governor of California, alongside Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco. With the jungle primary set for June 2, 2026, there had been serious discussion on the right about the possibility of two Republicans advancing to the November general election.

On the PBD Podcast this week, Hilton broke down the latest polling — showing him narrowly leading or tied near the top — and warned about the real risk that two Democrats could squeeze into the top two spots. That outcome would shield lame-duck Governor Gavin Newsom from full accountability for the state’s failures. He even suggested Sheriff Bianco should consider dropping out to consolidate the Republican vote and prevent a Democrat-only general election.

Hilton is an unusual figure in this race. A former Fox News host of The Next Revolution, he previously served as a top political strategist and aide to former UK Prime Minister David Cameron. He moved to the United States in 2012 and became a citizen. He has cited a major falling out with Cameron over immigration policy — an issue the UK continues to grapple with.

Now a recent immigrant from England, Hilton is running to lead the Golden State. California has elected an Austrian-born movie star with a thick accent as Governor — so why not a sharp-minded Englishman with a concrete plan to fix the mess? I could get behind that.

Here's the podcast in question [VIDEO]

With few exceptions, I don't trust most Democrats to fix California's deep problems. Figures like former LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan have real executive experience, but candidates like the temperamental Katie Porter, out-of-touch billionaire Tom Steyer, and former Biden HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra don’t inspire confidence. Too often, California Democrats protect each other rather than challenge Newsom’s failed record after years of unchecked one-party rule.

In the podcast, Hilton highlighted how unions — especially teachers’ unions — effectively run the state, leading to sky-high spending with terrible results: nearly $28,000 per student but some of the worst test scores in the country. He also pointed to $425 billion in fraud, waste, and abuse, crushing regulations, businesses fleeing, and energy policies that drive up costs for everyone.

California is a great state with incredible potential. I've only visited a few times, but it used to be the ultimate American dream destination. Today, people are flocking to Texas, Florida, Tennessee, and North Carolina instead.

What most Americans want is a place where the quality of life doesn’t "bankrupt" them. High taxes, sky-high housing costs, job shortages, and barriers to starting a business have made California punishing for many. Add in the cultural rot of extreme progressivism and one-party rule, and the results speak for themselves.

If I lived there, I’d be voting for Hilton or Bianco — or the Democrat mayors in the race who actually deliver results. Hilton’s vision of no income tax on the first $100k, a flatter tax system, slashing bureaucracy, and unlocking energy and housing makes common sense. Californians deserve better than declining opportunity, unaffordability, and rising crime.

The same goes for Los Angeles, where the mayoral race is also critical. Many Angelenos appear fed up with Karen Bass. It’s time for real change on the West Coast.

(This post was refined with help from AI)

Matt Walsh takes on the real history of Civil Rights

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Fri, 8 May 2026 12:04:05 -0500

As always I will withhold judgement until seeing this. Matt Walsh is known for his rather sarcastic take on controversial issues such as trans-ideology, anti-racism, and of course often on the news of the day. I'm curious what direction he'll take on the Civil Rights movement.

Here's a trailer [VIDEO]

Adam Carolla: Katie Porter Keeps EMBARRASSING Herself!

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 7 May 2026 00:01:30 -0500

I find the California Governor's race very interesting. We have a jungle primary (or top-two primary) which means of the candidates who are running in the primary only two - regardless of their party - will make it to the general election in November.

The polls so far show that two Republicans may be the top two in November Sheriff Chad Bianco and former British political strategist and former FOX News host Steve Hilton. And all the Democrats which include former Congressmember Katie Porter and formerly included former Congressmember Eric Swawell who was forced to withdraw and resign from Congress.

Katie Porter is the subject of the below video from Adam Carolla's podcast. There was an ad that made that made her look a bit more reasonable or relatable. However, she still does have the reputation of an explosive temper. Check out what Adam's talking about below [VIDEO]

Amazing CNN is broadcasting the California Governor's debate! Now more of us gets to see the Democrats go after each other and the two Republicans get by unscathed. And we see Katie Porter try to say don't question her temperament.

I've been watching a lot of the candidates go back and forth whether in interviews or in debates. There are a few Democrats that are saying some reasonable things. Especially the Mayor of San Jose Eric Mahan. Based on some of the things that he's saying I could trust him to actually run California.

I don't know about the odds of Hilton and Bianco to get in the top-two. And worse still California is so far off the rails if either of them gets elected they may immediately face a recall. I hope not though.

I hope everyday Californians are ready for normal. And that might mean they might have to shut out Democrats for a time.

And if I may add with the fall-out from the misadministration after the wildfires in California last year I think the LA Mayoral race could be interesting. A Republican named Spencer Pratt has been making some good noise in his race against the seemingly clueless incumbent Karen Bass though time will tell if the residents of the City of Angels ~~Brotherly Love~~ is ready for yet another Republican in over 30 years to take command of America's 2nd largest city.

I do hope Californians are ready for a real change in the nation's most populous state also.

District of Columbia Retrocession & Virginia Gerrymandering

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Sat, 25 Apr 2026 12:12:41 -0500

How about a history lesson?

Up until the 1840s, the District of Columbia was a perfect square. The Washington, D.C. that we know about today lies within the state of Maryland, however, the city/county of Alexandria, Virginia was the other part of the square. In 1846, was the retrocession of the Alexandria area - the Virginia portion of D.C. back to the State of Virginia.

Here's a map I found on Reddit about what D.C. would've looked like if the Retrocession had never happened.

Via Reddit

You may want to know why is this being brought up?

Well, I saw a video from a Dr. Steve Turley talking about this being a possible Pres. Trump move. What if the President figured out how to blunt the influence of the population of Northern Virginia by taking back what used to be the southern portion of D.C.

He could do this by executive order. However, I could see there being some very ugly legal challenges to that executive order. The main question that might need to be answered here is whether or not the 1846 retrocession was actually legal or even constitutional.

Was the Federal Gov't able to return the Virginia portion of D.C. back to that state? Is Alexandria really in fact under the jurisdiction of D.C. and this still a federal territory?

I've seen mainly opinion pieces on this in addition to this video so no real indication that the President is even considering this as a solution.

However another reason this is being brought up is the recent redistricting referendum in Virginia that was rejected by a state court. Here's what this article form Charlottesville Tomorrow says about the recent ruling

Judge Hurley agreed on all counts with the plaintiffs who brought the case — the National Republican Committee, and a few other GOP groups.

The most sweeping finding is that the General Assembly was not authorized to introduce the amendment during the 2024 Special Session. The joint resolutions calling the special session limited the General Assembly to business concerning budget and revenue, and a few other odds and ends — not constitutional amendments. That means, the judge said, the amendment was void from the start, which in legal terms means it doesn’t exist.

There are other findings, mostly involving timing and procedural issues that the judge ruled the General Assembly violated along the path to get the referendum in front of voters.

A separate, key finding is that the wording of the ballot question itself was “a flagrantly misleading question to the voters” that “does not accurately describe the proposed amendment as it was passed by the General Assembly.” Judge Hurley did not elaborate on what was misleading in his ruling.

That question, those of you who voted might recall, was:

Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia’s standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?

Once Attorney General Jones appeals the decision, a panel of judges on the court of appeals will review Hurley’s ruling.

We'll see if the recent Virgerrymandering effort gains any traction. However, this is a recent edition to a story going back a year in a number of states. Both Republican and Democrat states were adopting measures to do a mid-decade redistricting to ensure partisan advantage in their respective states. That's really what gerrymandering is.

In this case what's at stake in 2026 could just as easily be who controls the House of Representatives and in the many states who are trying to draw their maps accordingly, they want to ensure a majority of Republicans or Democrats. This is what politics has become these days.

Now to go back to Virginia. The new Gov. Abigail Spanberger has proven herself to be a progressive (or very left wing). One of her first acts as Governor was to severely discourage any cooperation with Federal Immigration Authorities. I understand she tried to paint herself as a moderate and only served to go left.

I had until recently always viewed Virginia as a red state and see that's not entirely true. The Old Dominion has voted Democrat in Presidential elections since 2008. And in the past decade the Governor's office have gone back and forth between Republicans and Democrats. In the last decade the Governorship had actually seen successive Democrats take office from Terry McAuliffe (McAwful thanks Rush Limbaugh) to Ralph Northam. Also remember Virginia Governors only serve one term, they can't succeed themselves so if they want another term they have to wait four years and run again. McAuliffe tried it and lost to the most recent Governor Glenn Youngkin.

Now that's not to say I'm really that upset with that. No party should run away with an election anywhere - red or blue states. Every election ought to be competitive, however, I know that's not the reality in a number of states around the country.

With that said, perhaps Virginia is a far more purple state than I realize. Also I got to look up the percentages of this referendum it was really close about 51.5% YES to 48.5% NO according to NPR. And looking at the map of Virginia most of the state appeared to have voted against it and many of the state's cities and population centers voted for it.

From NPR

That's the dynamics of many states it's like the places where a state's population is located often vote Democrat while the rest of the state especially if it's more rural vote Republican. That's the dynamic here in Illinois for sure.

I wonder what the turnout was for this result to be as close as it had been.

Either way could the reverse "retrocession" happen. Who knows? But the analysis I've heard about is Northern Virginia or the Virginia suburbs around D.C. are largely populated by federal gov't employees (perhaps they might be the so-called "Deep State"). How many of these Federal Employees aren't happy with the current P.O.T.U.S.?

Enough to vote in favor of blatant redistricting to elect more Congressional opposition to Donald Trump? As stated already this is what our politics has become currently.

Michael Franzese interviews Tommy Robinson

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 23:51:00 -0500

[VIDEO] Tommy Robinson is an activist making his rounds in conservative (right-wing) circles that has a lot to say about immigration and his thoughts on Islamic immigration. What he says seems infuriating, however, when you consider the whole idea of illegal immigration or unlimited immigration you might want to rethink what that entails.

Why does it seem like they want to fill up western nations with people who have little in common with the society? Could it be an invasion?

President Trump's address regarding the current Iranian campaign

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Thu, 2 Apr 2026 12:44:00 -0500

[VIDEO] An address he delivered last night at the White House heralding his accomplishments with the month long military action against the Islamic Republic of Iran and his main goal which is to prevent that regime from gaining nuclear weapons. I'm sure he wants this to come to a swift end, however, the regime change hasn't happened yet.

I have to see where things are with that regime, Trump had claimed they were seeking a ceasefire and that the Islamic Republic is coming to the table. This inspite of the fact that they claimed they will never negotiate.

I do wonder who's actually in charge over there.

O'Reilly on the recent 'No Kings' marches

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 13:14:00 -0500

I got a hint of these "No King's" rallies going through downtown Chicago over the weekend. Don't know how I view them, perhaps just another progressive march - and being heavily pushed by outlets such as CNN or MSNB....MS NOW, etc. And perhaps this is just another protest against President Donald Trump.

I see this Talking Points Memo from Bill O'Reilly he talks about this as you will see below. These rallies aren't organic, they're heavily funded by a variety of billionaires and you have to question if there is really a critical mass of people who are upset with President Trump. [VIDEO]

Bill O'Reilly is right. No solutions, no problem solving, just get Trump out. We don't want his solutions.

I could go back to 20 years ago, when this energy was directed toward George W. Bush, and rightfully Americans were asking questions about the military actions in Afghanistan and especially Iraq. However, the same kind of thing there, march for peace and then what else. Was the message peace or anti-war back then or was it just we "hate Bush".

How can anyone take these rallies very seriously?

The airstrikes on Iran

noreply@blogger.com (Levois) — Sun, 1 Mar 2026 01:26:00 -0600

After watching Elimination Chamber this evening and following the news primarily online in addition to TV news regarding the strikes on Iran. These strikes are substantial and see that amongst other gov't officials killed in Tehran, the strikes claimed the life of Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Khamenei.

All I can say to that is wow. I was watching the emergency PBD podcast this morning and the Iranian regime seemed to announce that the Ayatollah has planned to speak, however, later on Saturday the regime confirmed that the Supreme Leader was killed. I was looking for some official confirmation as President Trump said he was killed in these strikes, and the Israeli gov't said he was dead.

Now I see that there were some retaliatory strikes by Iran on American military targets in the Middle East and Israeli targets.

At this point the only thing I can ask is what now? Will the Islamic Republic of Iran survive these airstrikes? Will the people of Iran rise up against the regime as they had been since about December last year?

Does this mean that the Pahlavi dynasty will return?

Oh yeah a little history the Pahlavi family ran iran until 1979 when Iran was known as the Imperial State of Iran - Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was the King before he was overthrown in a revolution. In Pahlavi's place was the previous Supreme Leader of Iran the Ayatollah Khomeini. And we had well over 46 years of a very theocratic gov't that was considered a state sponsor of terrorism.

These airstrikes were as a result of stalled talks on Iran's nuclear program. The concern is that the theocratic regime would acquire nuclear weapons and use them. Last year in airstrikes US & Israeli had struck a severe blow to the Iranian nuclear program.

Either way most of the day on Saturday sees the emerging military operations over the skies of Iran and how long with this continue since the sitting executives of the gov't there had essentially been decapitated.

Here are President Trump's remarks on the airstrikes on Iran [VIDEO]

It's My Mind

Karmelo Anthony Verdict: No Riots, Just Facts

The Case in Plain Terms

The Racial Narrative That Didn’t Take Hold

Why the Difference Now?

Broader Takeaways

Relevant Links

Spencer Pratt vs. LA Reality

Helen Andrews on The Great Feminization

Lions vs. Scavengers: Understanding Who Really Hates the West (A PragerU Take with Ben Shapiro)

The Core Divide: Lions vs. Scavengers

Who Are the Scavengers?

Why They Target the West

My Take (Chicago/South Side Lens)

Bill O'Reilly on California's Political Shift: Signs of Change in the Golden State?

Key Highlights from the Clip

Spotlight on San Francisco

What do you think?

The Fall of Scott Pelley: Old Guard vs. New Leadership at CBS News

What Happened? The Clash in Detail

Enter Bari Weiss: Reforming (or “Ruining”) CBS?

Why This Matters

Relevant Links

Trump on Pod Force One: Candid Talk with Miranda Devine

The Heated Call with Benjamin Netanyahu

Other Key Topics

Why Ben Shapiro Left L.A. – And Why the Rest of Us Should Pay Attention

The Core Problem: Leadership Failure on Homelessness

Enter Spencer Pratt: Using AI to Expose Reality

Shapiro's Personal Take

From Reality TV Villain to Serious LA Mayoral Contender: Spencer Pratt on Joe Rogan

From Celebrity to Candidate

Taking on the Democratic Socialist Challenger

The Homelessness “Industrial Complex”

Fire Failures and the Path Forward

A Critical Day for California: June 2

What are you favorite podcasts?

Does "Suicidal Empathy" Explain Our Soft-on-Crime Policies?

What's going on with the Iran War?

California Sheriff Chad Bianco on the PBD Podcast

Straight Talk from California’s Law-and-Order Governor Candidate

The Republican Primary and Steve Hilton

Views on Democratic Candidates

Strong Criticism of Gavin Newsom

Homelessness, Corruption, and Policy Failures

Broader Vision

Steve Hilton vs. Sheriff Chad Bianco: Who’s the Better Choice to Run California?

Newt Gingrich on Pod Force One discussing Trump, Iran, Bill Clinton's impeachment and breaking the modern left

Trump’s Opportunity to Reshape Politics

Reflections on Clinton’s Impeachment

The High Stakes in the Conflict with Iran

Final Takeaway

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey Has Learned Nothing in 6 Years

Stossel on America's 250th birthday

PBD Podcast: Steve Hilton candidate for California Governor

Matt Walsh takes on the real history of Civil Rights

Adam Carolla: Katie Porter Keeps EMBARRASSING Herself!

District of Columbia Retrocession & Virginia Gerrymandering

Michael Franzese interviews Tommy Robinson

President Trump's address regarding the current Iranian campaign

O'Reilly on the recent 'No Kings' marches

The airstrikes on Iran