The world is not just about snuggling with housebroken puppies and rainbows out your window and riding unicorns bareback. The real world can be terrifying. Just ask former First Lady Michelle Obama.

She’s trembling with terror like a princess in a fairy tale being chased by Baba Yaga. And this terror of hers has infected the American news media with even more terror. Which brings us to the Michelle Obama Prophecy.

First, please understand that Michelle is terribly afraid that former President Donald Trump will recapture the White House. Her husband’s “Big Guy,” also known as China Joe Biden is haplessly watching his job approval ratings plummet especially in the swing states that will take other Democrat politicians down with him.

So they’re afraid, the media is afraid, and Michelle is pushing the panic button.

“I am terrified about what could possibly happen,” Ms. Obama said of this year’s presidential election on a podcast. And China Joe’s failing popularity numbers on key policy issues from the wide-open border to inflation to street crime are causing Democrat politicians to fret and as their leftist corprate media mouthpieces soil themselves.

Listen: The Chicago Way w/John Kass & Jeff Carlin: RCP’s Tom Bevan looks at DeSantis’ campaign blunders, the ‘Veep primary’ in New Hampshire, and what about M.O.? – John Kass (johnkassnews.com)

I’m worried too, and though I am definitely not a Democrat, I do worry, since the Obamas are world-class cynical phonies capable of anything. And now the JoBama administration is going on its third term, the panic at the potential loss of a fourth term may cause them to grab for five terms, completely trashing the Constitution.

But are the Democrats really terrified about trashing the Constitution in their never-ending power grab? No. Would Michelle opt to protect the Constitution and risk her own ambition? No.

“Because our leaders matter,” said the ‘terrified’ Michelle. “Who we select, who speaks for us, who holds that bully pulpit — it affects us in ways that sometimes I think people take for granted,” she said when asked to name some of her greatest fears.

Terrified, Michelle? I’m terrified that you are taking me for granted. You don’t speak for me, bless your heart.

The Obamas never say anything by accident. Words are their weapons. Joe Biden is sinking in the polls. And they have to do something, because China Joe is their meat puppet and they compelled him to accept Cackling Kamala as vice president.

Michelle understands raw clout as the daughter of a Chicago Democratic Machine precinct captain. But is she really terrified? Oh, please.

Don’t be such a chumbolone.

You’d think she’d be fearful of the Democrats losing the border to the control of the brutal Mexican drug cartels that smuggle in truckloads of fentanyl, the Chinese-made poison finished in Mexico that has killed 100,000 young Americans in the past year.

But she’s not. Biden and the Democrats lost the border to the cartels and the American people know it.

Or perhaps Michelle would be terrified that her crime-ridden hometown of Chicago overrun with illegal migrants—draining taxpayer resources for police, housing and schools for minority Chicago residents—prompting black Chicago voters to blame the one man completely responsible, Barack Obama’s ally and former Vice President Joe Biden. But the Obamas don’t have to worry about being crowded out by illegals. They live in Martha’s Vineyard, where illegal migrants were booted out.

You think Michelle would be terrified that Hillary Clinton is now linking herself to Barbie, which is enough to make Bill—and me and every other American male–stab his eyes out with a spork. Clinton’s latest hashtag, #HillaryBarbie, is revolting. Hillary you lost 2016 when you called half the country “deplorables.” It wasn’t the Russians that cost you, sweetie. It was you.

And you might think she’d be worried about power corrupting people, the way she herself was corrupted, torturing a ravenously hungry Oprah with hints of delicious White House pie, without offering Oprah any. How cruel. Even Gayle noticed.

“And oddly enough, Michelle mentioned that the White House cooks made the best pie in the world. But she didn’t offer Oprah or Gayle any…It made both Oprah and Gayle very uncomfortable, which may have been the idea. Oprah struck back by asking Michelle whether she and the president were still fighting a lot. Taken aback by such a personal question, Michelle stumbled, then finally managed to say that the marital arguing had been a ‘growth point’ in their relationship.”

But when it came to the Obamas, the media was not critical in the least. There is nothing so malleable as white liberal elitist journalists afraid of being called racists. So they sucked up and liked it. It was as if they were addicted to smoking Hopium, and I said so repeatedly, the Jacobin frenzy turned to hatred. But I get it. Hopium smokers just hate it when you mention that they’re addicted.

You know what should be terrifying Michelle Obama? That the Obama legacy is a dumpster fire.

I don’t put too much stock in polls or Michelle Obama fairy tales written by fawning Hopium-smoking and corrupt corporate media that treated Barack Obama as a gentle forest creature from the Narnia stories.

I remember the Obamas as silky phonies who rode corruption (and Tony Rezko) and they rode Oprah and the rest of the media up the ladder and ignored the city that needed them.

And I remember that last November in the mid-term elections, and that promise of a big red Republican wave that didn’t happen. The big red wave broke on abortion and disappeared. But that’s politics.

Black Democrats in particular feel betrayed and as their children are evicted from schools and parks they make angry noises about bolting from the Democrat Party which will only get worse once cities like Chicago build tent cities to house the illegals and cut deeply into social service budgets to appease them.

Millions of illegal immigrants have flooded across Biden’s non-existent border—10,000 a day—overwhelming the cities with demands for housing and services and bringing a torrent of narcotics.

All this has given new life to the Michelle Obama prophecy.

My friend Tom Bevan–co-founder and president of Real Clear Politics–first uttered the Michelle prophecy years ago, about the time I was mocking myself with the notion I should run for mayor of Chicago as a portly Greek Spartacus. I bet Bevan a steak dinner. We talked about his prophecy this week when he was a guest on the Chicago Way podcast with Jeff Carlin and me. I hope you click on the link here and listen.

He thinks if she seeks the Democratic nomination, and Barack gives her the green light, no Democrat can stop her. You couldn’t stop a Gorgon with a little hand mirror either. A Michelle candidacy would unleash the flesh eating harpies, also known as the AWFULs (Angry White Female Leftist Suburbanites) and no amount of Holy Water could protect us.

I think that if Michelle secures the nomination, she should select former Harvard president Claudine “The Plagiarist” Gay as the White House press secretary.

I think I just might have to make a reservation at a superb Chicago steakhouse.

Biden is failing, especially in the key swing states.

“We had a poll come out in Michigan the other day and he’s down like eight points,” said Bevan. “And these are scary, scary numbers for Democrats, and the longer they continue the more I think you will hear about Michelle Obama. And the reason you’ll continue to hear about her because she’s the only answer to the question of ‘Who else?’”

Biden can drool all over his ties and look vaguely into space but they couldn’t dare replace him because that would mean the ascension of Kamala Harris to the presidency, and that would mean the end of the world. But a Michelle Obama could obliterate Kamala’s idiotic ambition as an identity politics totem, because Michelle could take her off the board and the Democrat political logic still holds.

Michpelle’s Black Queen takes Kamala’s Black Queen of All Word Salads.

“Because, you know, Gavin Newsom doesn’t do it, JB Pritzker doesn’t do it,” Bevan said. “There’s nobody else, and it’s certainly not Kamala Harris. And that’s the problem. Michelle Obama is the only one who could come in and be coronated in Chicago in July or whatever the convention’s gonna be. And every Democrat around the country would be like, Yep, I get it. I’m on board’. There would be no, you know, even Kamala’s folks would have to be like, yeah, you know, ‘OK, fine.’ Because any other answer gonna have hurt feelings and you’re going to have a tear in the Democrat coalition just weeks before the presidential election. That is gonna be a real problem for for Democrats getting out their voters and so she’s the answer guys.”

And no one could stop her with the broken corporate media so besotted and in love with the Obamas.

To keep my sanity I think I’ll find a Hopium pipe and fill a bowl, curl up and hope China Joe hangs on until November.

John Kass

As Joe Biden’s political viability implodes, the exasperated Left has yet a new narrative: front-runner Trump and his extremist/semi-fascist/Ultra MAGA 160 million are out for “revenge” and “retribution—and that Trump might well become a “dictator” and “trample” the Constitution. Ok, let’s examine what a supposed dictator Trump might do if he were to be elected this November?

1) Will he hide the fact that in 2024 he attempted to hire a foreign ex-spy to work with Russian sources to create a fake anti-Biden dossier (while sneakily hiding his payments behind three paywalls), seed it with the media, and hatch lies that Biden was a “Putin poodle” and “Russian asset”?

2) Would a Trump president weaponize a vengeful FBI to begin contracting with X and Facebook to suppress stories he feels will hurt MAGA candidates? Would his FBI alter FISA warrants to go after his leftwing opponents? Would he and his FBI henchmen have leftwing newspapers blacklisted from X?

3) Would Trump’s future Secretary of State round up 51 right-wing ex-CIA “authorities” to swear and lie on the eve of the balloting that the Russians created the Stormy Daniels nondisclosure agreement?

4) Maybe Trump will get his DOJ to go easy on any future accusations of tax fraud on behalf of his sons by weaponizing the IRS.

5) Maybe Trump will dictatorially cancel student loan debt on the eve of the 2026 midterms. Or would he dare by fiat drain the strategic petroleum reserve merely for Republican advantage in the midterms?

6) Maybe a dictator Trump might appoint a special counsel to investigate the entire Biden family. Would his legal coun.sel consult with local and state Republican prosecutors to coordinate 90 or so more indictments against ex-president Joe Biden? Will he order the FBI to sweep down on one of the Biden residences to hunt for more missing classified files that Biden removed as a senator and vice president?

7) Will he postfacto declare the 2020 riots to be an armed “insurrection” and retroactively start trying, convicting, and jailing the some 14,000 who were arrested and released—on charges of rioting, looting, arson, murder, and assault, in addition to “illegal parading” and conspiracy to burn a federal courthouse, a city police precinct, a historic church? Would dictator Trump keep in preventative detention indefinitely those arrested in 2020 for rioting and violent protest?

8) Maybe dictator Trump will refuse to discuss all medical questions concerning his 78-year age.

9) Will Trump minions in the media and military start talking about rooting out “leftwing rage”, or Antifa and BLM “domestic terrorists” from the military ranks? Would Trump order the Pentagon to discharge any soldier who refused to get one of his Operation Warp Speed COVID mRNA boosters?

10) Will dictator Trump protect some 500 “sanctuary cities” from ignoring federal laws—as they nullify the endangered species list or federal gun registrations statutes?

11) Would dictator Trump’s America destroy the southern border deliberately and invite in 10 million illegal aliens from countries he thought would ensure new conservative voters?

12 ) Would dictator Trump’s America start seeing red-states removing the names of Democratic candidates from the ballot?

13) Would dictator Trump start jailing ex-Biden officials who refused Republican congressional subpoenas?

14) Would dictator Trump’s America turn over $50 billion in weapons and supplies to terrorists like the Taliban?

15) Would dictator Trump’s America see an epidemic of big-city lawlessness, as conservative prosecutors deliberately let out felons convicted of smash and grab and car-jacking, and exempted theft and shoplifting from punishment?

16) Would dictator Trump start shaking down foreign governments to send $30 million into the Trump family coffers?

17) Would dictator Trump camp out at Mar-a-Lago for 3-4 days a week, and turn the presidency into a pastime job? So what exactly would a “dictator” Trump do that our “civil libertarian” Joe Biden already has not done?

Victor Davis Hanson

Pollster Scott Rasmussen conducted two separate surveys, each covering 1,000 “Members of the Elites.” The results are remarkable, not to say shocking. But the starting point is, who was defined as “elite” for purposes of these surveys?

The Elites are defined as those having a postgraduate degree, a household income of more than $150,000 annually, and living in a zip code with more than 10,000 people per square mile. Approximately 1% of the total U.S. population meets these criteria.

Ten thousand people per square mile represents a high-density urban environment. But in that context, $150,000 a year is no princely salary. Nationwide, it takes far more–around $650,000 annually–to be in the top 1% in income. A person who lives in a big city and earns $150,000 is not, in any financial sense, elite.

So the key element in Rasmussen’s formula is having a postgraduate degree. Basically, what we are surveying here is people with graduate degrees who live in cities, the large majority of whom don’t make a great deal of money. Many in that group are probably women, although Rasmussen says the survey results were “lightly weighted” by gender, age and race. Rasmussen also defined a subcategory of “Ivy League elites,” consisting of graduates of one of the eight Ivy League schools, plus Northwestern, Duke, Stanford and the University of Chicago.

These “elites,” so defined, are living in another world than the rest of us. They are extraordinarily loyal to the regime; 84% of them approve of Joe Biden’s performance as president. I wouldn’t have thought you could get that high an approval rating if you sampled the Democratic National Committee. And 70% of the “elites” trust the government to do the right thing most of the time; that rises to 89% among those who are “the most politically active members of the elite.”

These elites even trust journalists: 79% have a favorable opinion of them, as do 84% of the “Ivy League elite.”

When it comes to policy, these people are crazy. Forty-seven percent say that America suffers from too much freedom, compared with only 21% who think we have too much government control. Among the Ivy League elite, 55% say America is too free, with only 15% saying we have too much government.

So how do the elites want to limit our excessive freedom? A shocking 77% say they favor the “strict rationing of gas, meat and electricity.” That basically means living in a poor, totalitarian state like the USSR. And by 89% to 10%, the Ivy League elites want to see “strict rationing” of these most basic commodities.

These “elites” are fascists. Large majorities want to ban gas stoves (69%), gasoline powered cars (72%), non-essential air travel (55%), SUVs (58%) and air conditioning (53%). The Ivy League elites are even worse: the corresponding numbers are 80% for gas stoves, 81% for gasoline powered cars, 70% for non-essential air travel, 66% for SUVs, and 68% want to ban air conditioning. There is no polite way to put it: they are fascists.

There is more at the link. The people whom Rasmussen has identified are obviously dangerous to our democracy. If they take over, we are finished. More study needs to be done to figure out who, exactly, they are, so we can root them out and negate their influence. In the meantime, some moderate measures probably need to be taken. Like abolishing the Ivy League.

John Hinderiker

A pitfall of the fallen human mind is how narratives shape our perception of the world, even outweighing facts and common sense. For example, nuclear power is one of the safest ways to generate electricity. According to the Our World in Data report, nuclear is 99.8% safer than coal in terms of deaths per unit of power. Yet because of three dramatic accidents and the press surrounding them — Three Mile Island in 1979, Chernobyl in 1986, and Fukushima in 2011 — nuclear power is widely perceived as extraordinarily dangerous and in need of claustrophobic regulation.

Similarly, a narrative pushed by many in the press aims at rendering something else radioactive: homeschooling. As a Washington Post analysis found late last year, homeschooling is America’s fastest growing form of education. Around 2.7 million students are homeschooled in America today, up by about a million since before the pandemic. For Washington Post reporters, this is scary.

One article described homeschooling as a “largely unregulated practice once confined to the ideological fringe,” whose rise in popularity is leading critics “to sound alarms.” In it, an emeritus Harvard Law professor ominously warned, “Policymakers should think, ‘Wow—this is a lot of kids.’ We should worry about whether they’re learning anything.’”

A school board member from Florida echoed their concern: “Many of these parents don’t have any understanding of education. The price will be very big to us, and to society. But that won’t show up for a few years.”

In a Washington Post story from December 2, Peter Jamison recounted the tragic death of an 11-year-old California boy named Roman Lopez, from severe neglect and abuse. Though, as in most such cases, the story involved a broken and blended family — a factor children’s rights activist Katy Faust points out is a consistent risk — according to The Washington Post, the thing to blame was that Lopez’s stepmom said she was homeschooling him.

“Home education was an easy way to avoid the scrutiny of teachers, principals, guidance counselors,” suggests Jamison. Yet, he admits,

“Little research exists on the link between homeschooling and child abuse. The few studies conducted in recent years have not shown that home-schooled children are at significantly greater risk of mistreatment than those who attend public, private or charter schools.”

And the Post wasn’t finished. Nine days later, the Post devoted an article aimed at debunking the work of homeschool researcher and advocate Brian Ray, who has long argued that homeschoolers outperform their public-schooled peers. With little content to criticize Ray’s methodology, the Post devoted space to quoting anti-home-schooling activists and Ray’s aggrieved adult daughter.

And then, three days after Christmas, the Post ran another article by Peter Jamison on the growing fear among home-schooling families that state funding in the form of vouchers will come with increased government oversight. Leaving little doubt where he stands on the issue of state oversight, he threw in a story about a network of Nazi homeschoolers in Ohio.

These articles reveal not only the biases of Washington Post reporters and their willingness to use scare stories in place of data but also expose crucial questions they are unwilling to ask, as well as assumptions about the role of parents and the state when it comes to education.

To simultaneously note how home schooling has exploded in popularity but, in almost every article, refuse to ask why the popularity, is at best, a stunning lack of curiosity. If asked, I suspect the parents of the over two-and-a-half million home-schoolers in America, would say something about endless school closures during COVID, ideological indoctrination in public school classrooms, the fact that standardized test scores are at a 30-year low, and that administrators and school boards act and, at times, articulate that they know better, and parents should butt out.

Perhaps many parents concluded they could do a better job teaching their kids. Perhaps they didn’t think they should “butt out.” Perhaps they are not comfortable with the lack of oversight in classrooms and over teachers and school boards. Perhaps, they are skeptical of the “experts” who are “sounding alarms” about homeschooling while ignoring the massive failures of the current state-run system.

Ultimately, The Washington Post’s breathless attacks on homeschooling reveal an unquestioned assumption that children belong primarily to the state and not to parents. The rise in homeschooling, Christian schooling, parent-run charter schools, and other innovations show that more and more families are rejecting that assumption. In doing so, they are acknowledging the biblical expectation that parents, not the state, are ultimately responsible for teaching and raising children.

If the press wants to keep giving homeschooling the nuclear power treatment, they should also develop some curiosity about why so many parents are choosing, often at great sacrifice, to take their children’s education back into their own hands. And they should ask what that says about the status quo.

Christian Post

Democratic Reps. Ted Lieu and Adam Schiff of California are pushing a bill to ban the sale and use of glue traps to catch rodents.

“Glue traps are ruthless, inhumane, and can be dangerous to the health of humans and their pets,” Lieu said, according to a press release. “There are numerous other ways to trap small animals that don’t prolong their suffering. As a proud member of the Animal Protection Caucus, I’m pleased to introduce this bill to stop the needless suffering of these animals.”

The press release indicates that Schiff is an original cosponsor. He is currently running for U.S. Senate.

People responded to a post about the proposal on social media.

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and agree to receive content that may sometimes include advertisements. You may opt out at any time.

“Democrats won’t secure the border or stop the human trafficking of the Mexican drug cartels, but they will propose laws to protect literal rats,” Sean Davis tweeted.

“It’s very comforting to know that our politicians are focused on protecting the well being and dignity of rats,” Matt Walsh wrote.

“Man that’s okay with brutally murdering babies is now concerned with how we kill rodents, calling it ‘inhumane,'” someone tweeted, along with a clown face emoji.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, supports the proposal.

“PETA thanks Rep. Ted Lieu for his compassion and leadership in introducing the Glue Trap Prohibition Act of 2024,” PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman said, according to Lieu’s press release. “This crucial legislation can help protect vulnerable species of wildlife and save tens of thousands of small animals each year from being injured, permanently disabled, and killed by dehydration, injury or starvation in these primitive, cruel traps.”

Blaze Media

https://rumble.com/v47oevo-tucker-carlson-america-is-being-invaded-and-no-one-is-doing-anything-about-.html