After President Trump was reelected in 2024 some commentators were of the opinion that so-called Woke culture had been dealt a death blow.  They predicted an end to DEI programs, calls to defund the police, and all the Trans nonsense that had been running rampant.  We’ve since discovered that those commentators were wrong.

According to AOC (All Out Crazy), Woke hasn’t gone away, it’s just evolving.  In August, AOC announced that the Woke movement was changing, when she commented that, “Woke 1 was crazy.”  She took some heat for this statement from the crazies on her side of the aisle, because they took her comment as a rebuke.  The lapdog media took the comment as an announcement that the Left was going to moderate its positions to get back into the mainstream.

The notion that the far Left needs to come back toward the center of the political spectrum is at the heart of the battle going on in the Democrat Party between two equally repugnant factions; the crazy socialists, and the Democrat establishment.

When AOC announced the advent of Woke 2, the establishment Dems had hopes.  They knew that what was expected was not a real moderation of policies, but the old tried and true Democrat formula.  “Pretend to be moderate, get elected, and then go full bat shit crazy.”  But alas, the establishment Democrat liars didn’t get all that they wanted.

AOC described Woke 2 as a move away from virtue signaling, and a move toward more productive policies that would “mark wins for black people dealing with oppression, trans people, and working class people.”  And I bet you thought they were doing away with virtue signaling, didn’t you?

AOC is in a delicate position right now.  She’s both the head cheerleader of the Socialist Squad, and a serious candidate for elevation to the Democrat leadership.  Chuck Schumer is a dead man walking.  He’s trying to keep his job by walking a tightrope between the establishment Democrats and the Squad crazies, an almost impossible task.  Meanwhile, AOC and other Socialist maniacs are itching to mount a primary challenge for his Senate seat.  Indeed, the only thing holding AOC back is indecision whether she wants to run for the Senate or the presidency.

It turns out when AOC spoke of Woke 2, she was just hedging her bets.  She, much like Schumer, is walking that fine line between the DSA nuts, of which she is a founding member, and the establishment Democrats who she needs to cultivate if she’s going to move up in the Party.

The truth is, whether you call it Woke 1, Woke 2, or by any other name, the Woke bull crap really hasn’t changed.  If anything, Woke 2 may be twice as malignant as Woke 1.  The Woke 2 crowd indeed are evolving.  They’re evolving into better liars than they were during Woke 1.  Simply put, no policies have changed.  The DSA kooks simply have learned to pretend to be more moderate.

Don’t doubt me, there’s proof.  Woke 1 was ushered in by the death of a career criminal, George Floyd.  His death gave rise to the BLM riots, and the push for men in women’s sports.  It spawned the totally concocted Trans movement, based on the notion that people with a mental disorder, who represent maybe .001% of the population, were being discriminated against.  It launched the “defund the police” movement, and anti-ICE protests.

Now we have Woke 2.  Has anything changed?  No.  Woke 1 was sparked by the death of a career criminal.  Woke 1 embraced criminals and villified the police.  Under Woke 2, the police are still under attack.  Woke 1 valued illegal aliens over U.S. citizens.  Remember the fuss over illegal alien criminal Kilmar Abgrego?  As this is written, Woke kooks are protesting on behalf of another illegal alien career criminal, Oscar Begal, who was wounded by ICE after he rammed two government vehicles.  No change there.

Woke 2 supports “black people dealing with oppression, and working class people.”  But who’s oppressing them?  The first round of Trump tax cuts resulted in unprecedented wage gains for lower income people.  The second round removed taxes on tips, overtime, and social security, resulting in historically high median household incomes.  Every Democrat in Congress, including all the adherents to Woke 1 and Woke 2 voted against both tax cuts.  Woke 2 preaches about “affordability,” while its solution to that problem is raising your taxes by $5 trillion.  Now, that’s affordable.

If black folks are being oppressed by substandard schools and poor housing conditions, who’s responsible for that oppression?  Democrats have been running all the big cities (and running them into the ground) for at least six decades.  Inner city schools get the most government funding from State and federal sources.  That money is needed, but what are the Woke Democrats doing with it?  They’re responsible for running the schools that spend the most money and yet produce millions of students who can’t read or do math.

Woke 1 was for defunding the police and abolishing ICE.  That hasn’t changed with Woke 2.  We’re told Woke 2 began with the election of Mamdani in New York.  He’s gutted police budgets, and he continues to protect illegal aliens, to the detriment of the citizens who elected him.

As the midterm elections approach, the Woke 2 crowd has tried to fake moderation in order to get DSA maniacs elected to office.  Fakes like Abul El Sayed in Michigan keep talking about affordability, which is a real problem.  Prices are more than 20% higher than they were in 2021 due to Joe Biden’s 9% inflation rate.  That rate is down to 3% now, but people are justifiably upset.  Fuel costs, which were higher under Biden without any wars, are elevated now due to the Iran war and the Russia-Ukraine war, that has affected diesel fuel prices.

El Sayed and other Democrats promise to do something about affordability.  It’s an appealing promise, but like most things Democrat it’s all promise and no substance.  They rail against the very inflation that they created.  Inflation occurs from one and only one source – excessive government spending.  And the Woke 2 Democrat solution to the affordability problem is what?  Even more excessive government spending.  What could go wrong?

The DSA’s pet project is “Medicare for All,” a/k/a, single-payer healthcare.  If enacted, it would end all private health insurance, and would have Americans waiting months for medical care, like they do in Canada.  Not bad enough?  Here’s the topper.  The Woke 2 “affordability” Democrats haven’t mentioned that it would cost close to $5 trillion a year.  That’s on top of the trillions they want to spend on other socialist fever dreams, and on top of the nearly $40 trillion debt we’ve already run up.

If you’ve noticed that the Woke 2 plans are inherently contradictory, you’re right, but sadly, given the constant media drumbeat of leftist lies, their policies don’t have to make sense, they just need to sound good, and “everything’s free” sure sounds good.

I wish I could assure you the Woke 2 nuts won’t get away with their deceptions, but I can’t.  All I can do is leave you with the words of that noted philosopher, Donald John Trump, who presciently noted that, “Everything Woke goes to shit.”

The other day I was going through an edition of The Wall Street Journal when I came across this headline on an op-ed, Washington Needs the Tax-Reform Spirit of 86′.  I thought, “Wow, finally somebody is beginning to make sense.  It’s about time.”  And then I saw who had written the piece – Rahm Emmanuel.

That gave me pause.  I smelled rat, but I didn’t automatically conclude that it was a scam.  Then I read the article.  It indeed was a rat, and a lying, thieving, smelly Democrat rat to boot.  On reflection though, falling for the headline was my own fault.  I forgot, you see, that that Democrats and Republicans both might speak the English language, but that the vocabulary words may have different meanings.

For a Republican, “tax reform” means finding a way to lower the tax burdens faced by Americans.  Many Red States have done so, by keeping their governments running without imposing State income taxes on their citizens.  For Democrats, on the other hand, “tax reform” means something very different.  The phrase contains two of the Democrats’ favorite words.  “Tax” and “reform.”

First there’s the Democrats’ favorite word, “tax.”  They truly never met a tax they didn’t like and want to increase.  Next we’ll consider the word “reform.  This word is one of those non-threatening sounding generic terms, which suggests a change in policy which will benefit the citizen.  However, in Democrat speak, “reform” is just another Trojan Horse term, designed to disguise the real intent, which is now and ever has been to raise taxes and spend even more money.  Democrats have many words, all of which support more taxing and more spending.

For instance, in the sane world, “investing” means saving money and watching it grow.  Whereas, for a Democrat, “investing” means spending, as in, “We are investing $8 billion to allow Somalis to open daycare centers in Minnesota.”  You know how that one ended.

Rahm Emmanuel, of course, was employing the Democrat definition of “reform.”  His article celebrated the 1986 tax reforms, only to the extent that they included the closing of some tax loopholes.  Emmanuel  complains that the tax code contains too many deductions and deferrals, which he says are “costly and encourage the wrong behavior.”  I’ll translate.  As far as Democrats are concerned, keeping more of the money you earn is the wrong behavior.

Emmanuel has an puzzling take on the tax code in general, which he says, “has evolved from an instrument designed to create wealth to one designed to preserve it.”  I’m not sure what that means.  The government neither creates wealth nor does it accumulate wealth.  If it’s working properly, the government creates an atmosphere which is conducive to the creation of wealth by entrepreneurs.  Once that wealth has been created, the tax code is designed to separate the earners from a goodly portion of it.

To this end, Emmanuel supports the only solution to government finance that Democrats ever come up with, raise taxes.  He favors ending “the practice of wealthy families borrowing against their equity to cover their expenses tax free.”  I suppose he means by this home equity loans, which, if I have to say this, aren’t needed by the very wealthy.  Home equity loans help the middle class to make necessary repairs, and to finance home improvements that otherwise wouldn’t be made.  These expenditures benefit the economy by creating jobs for builders and repairmen, and by increasing home values, which in turn benefits local governments, which levy property taxes based on property values.

Emmanuel also opposes the stepped-up basis rules that allow estate beneficiaries to value bequests as of the date of death of the decedent, and not the value when acquired.  Emmanuel complains this “allows them to pass fortunes from one generation to the next free from capital gains taxes.”  Such a change wouldn’t hurt billionaires, who have enough lawyers to preserve their assets, but would ruin family farms and other small businesses, which would have to be liquidated to fork over 20% (Emmanuel prefers 28%) of their value.  And not just businesses would be affected.  Consider a New Jersey decedent, who bought of home 45 or 50 years previously for $50,000, and which home is valued at $1 million today (yes, that’s quite possible).  At Emmanuel’s favored 28% rate, the heirs would be handed a bill for more than $250,000.

In addition, Emmanuel wants to require U.S. corporations to pay more taxes, which would result in the creation of fewer jobs and higher prices for consumers, because that’s how corporations fund their tax bills.  And this from the people complaining about affordability.  He then complains, once again about the carried interest rule, which President Trump was prepared to put an end to in his tax plan, but which Congress  refuses to vote for.  They don’t want to anger their donors, after all.

If you’re wondering just what all this tax raising nonsense has to do with the Reagan tax cuts of the 1980’s, join the club.  It seems Emmanuel invoked the Spirit of ’86 simply in an attempt to mislead the historically ignorant, which means most of the electorate, to believe Republican Ronald Reagan’s reforms were tax increases.  That couldn’t be any further from the truth.

To recap, the Reagan Tax Reforms reduced a top tax rate of 70% to 28%.  This reduction came along with the closing of some loopholes, to be sure, but the result was that, by the end of the 1980’s, income tax revenue collected by the federal government doubled.

In the wake of the Reagan tax cuts, the wealthy, you know, those hated “rich” who Democrats keep telling us need to pay their “fair share,” have paid a higher percentage of income taxes.  Today, the top 1% of earners pay over 40% of the income taxes, the top 10% pay 70%, and the bottom 50% of earners pay only 3%.  Yet, despite these facts, we’re still subjected to the “rich must pay their fair share” meme, while no Democrat ever has, or ever will, tell us how much “their fair share” is.

Rahm Emmanuel’s op-ed went so far as to dare to suggest that spending cuts will be necessary, or as he put it, “We’ll have to make hard choices.”  Of course, the only thing he suggested cutting was the entire budget for ICE Detention Centers, which, of course, won’t be needed once Democrats reopen the borders to illegal invaders and grant citizenship to the untold millions who have yet to be deported.

Emmanuel tells us that his “reforms,” a/k/a tax increases, will greatly simplify the filing of tax returns.  I fear that this is true.  I’ve long suspected that Democrats favor a 2 line tax return form.  Line 1 – Enter your income.  Line 2 – Remit the amount on Line 1.  So much for the Spirit of 86′.  As for Rahm Emmanuel, his spirit may be willing, but his facts are weak.

Shocking news, isn’t it?  For the record, that’s not my opinion, but the conclusion from a 25 page open letter that was sent to all Americans by Iran’s IRGC, the vicious thugs who actually run Iran.

I read all 25 pages of the letter so you don’t have to.  In truth, it really didn’t have to be 25 pages long.  I can sum it up very briefly.  Iran is a peace loving country, whose people enjoy freedom and liberty, and the U.S. is an evil, blood-thirsty nation, which oppresses its underprivileged, and preys on the rest of the world.  And, oh yes, we support Israel too.

The letter succinctly states the reason why Iran won and the U.S. lost the war.  The Iranian people are righteous and pure, their Koran (or Quran) is a superior doctrine and God is on their side.  Whew!  There really is no worse fanatic than a religious fanatic.

In extreme cases, “God told me to do it,” is a form of schizophrenia.  Successful insanity defenses often are made by criminal defendants whose crimes were motivated by voices telling them to kill.  When you’re convinced it’s the voice of God telling you to kill, that makes you even more dangerous.  When you’re convinced that God commands you to kill, and you’re running a government that’s trying to develop nuclear weapons, that makes you Iran’s IRGC.

The letter was intended to influence Americans to reject Trump and all Republicans in the upcoming elections.  At its core, the letter either is a tissue of blatant lies, or overwhelming evidence of that the people running Iran are suffering from mass delusions.

The letter restated the same time worn slogans that Iran has been mouthing for decades.  For instance, while Iran is a nation of peace, all the evil in the world is being caused by the United States (Big Satan) and Israel (Little Satan).  Nothing new there.  But the letter also contained a number of paranoid delusions, outright lies, and startling revelations.

For instance, “Iran has never started a war.”  We could debate this one.  Never “declared war” maybe, but they’ve been funding Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and others for decades, and supplying the weapons and explosives that have killed untold thousands in the Middle East.

“Iran’s nuclear program was peaceful.”  Right.  A nation sitting on a sea of oil needed to enrich uranium to make electricity.  Sure.  They needed to enrich it to 6 times the purity needed to make electricity, and they needed to use nuclear weapons scientists to do all this.

“Iran does no violence to its civilians.”  Except, of course, the 40,000 or so protestors who they slaughtered in the streets, and the teenagers they keep hanging for daring to dissent.

“Iran has stopped the flow of oil from the Straight of Hormuz.”  In fact, oil shipments are back to pre-war levels, with as much as 19 million barrels a day being shipped, but who’s counting?

“Iran kept all its promises in the peace agreement with the U.S.”  Well, I guess except for the facts that, after they signed the agreement and promised to open the Straight, they mined it, and shot missiles and drones at ships trying to transit it, and oh yes, there was that little problem of firing ballistic missiles at all their Gulf State neighbors.

“American and Israeli bombing was ineffective,” and “Iran destroyed U.S. and Israeli aircraft.”  Okay.  Iran had a navy, but not anymore.  Iran had a ruling military council and an Ayatollah in February, until they all met that morning for brunch, and now they’re dead.  Iran had war planes, but not anymore.  Iran had operating nuclear facilities, but not anymore.  Iran had a fleet of fast attack boats, but they were sunk.  Iran had air defenses, but they were destroyed.  Iran had fleets of tankers to ship their oil, but we kept them from sailing.  Iran had thousands of missiles and drones, and now they’re gone too.  Iran’s economy is in ruins, inflation is out of control, it can’t pay its troops, and its people are starving.  Well, I guess you have to take the good with the bad.  If Iran won, I’d hate to see what losing looks like.

Meanwhile, according to the IRGC, “the U.S. economy is on the precipice of collapse.”  In fact, third quarter growth in the U.S. was 2.2%, and a 5% growth rate is expected in the fourth quarter.

Here’s a startling revelation.  Did you know that “Iran destroyed 350 U.S. facilities at regional U.S. bases, putting 18 U.S. military bases out of commission?”  You’d have thought CNN or MSNOW would have reported that.

Iran won because “U.S. troops are disallusioned because they don’t understand why they’re fighting.”  Meanwhile, “Iran has achieved national solidarity.”  Sure, there’s national solidarity because the IRGC massacred 40,000 protestors, in order to encourage the survivors to comply.

Part of the letter was dedicated to bashing the U.S.  “The U.S. has 4% of the population, but 20% of the prisoners.”  Oh, the injustice!  Iran has many fewer prisoners because they don’t waste money locking them up, preferring just to kill their real or imagined offenders.

“In the U.S., police kill 1,300 people a year.”  The true figure is 1,200, but no matter.  The same website that provided the 1,200 number also says Iranian police kill 7,000 Iranians a year.  The U.S. has 4 times the population of Iran, so do the math.

The letter then explained why Iranians keep chanting “Death to America.”  It seems they really don’t hate all the American people, just “the diabolical ruling elites.”  So, they don’t want to kill us all, only our leaders.  That’s comforting.  And they can’t mean just Trump and company, because they’ve been chanting that same shit for 50 years now.

Then there were some really big lies.  CNN and MSNOW dropped the ball again.  Did you know the U.S. is engaging in domestic terrorism in Iran?”  This includes, according to the IRGC, “bombings, kidnappings, mass assassinations, hijackings, torture, and the killings of 20,000 Iranians.”  And they don’t mean in the war, because the same letter tells us 3,600 Iranians were killed in the war.  Oh, and also, “the U.S. helped Saddam Hussein attack Iran in the 1980’s,” and “the U.S. created ISIS.”  Okay.  ISIS was a spinoff from al-Qaeda, the group responsible for 911, and the U.S. created those terrorists.  Sounds reasonable.

The IRGC has a solution, though.  Americans must “rise up” and remove Trump and Republicans from office in the next elections.  They don’t come right out and say vote for Democrats, but the message is clear.  “Americans should vote to close all U.S. military bases.”  Only Democrats support that.  They praised the No Kings protestors (Democrats).  And they called on college professors, young voters and black voters to rid American of Trump.  In other words, Democrats, Democrats, and Democrats.

I’d like to think that Iran’s attempt to influence our elections will backfire on Democrats, but who knows?  The sad truth is that many in the groups targeted by Iran are just as delusional as the IRGC.  The other day, a poll reported that 59% of Democrats favor a military coup.  Somebody should explain to them that, after the close down the Pentagon, that won’t be possible.

In the HBO series Game of Thrones, after an extended period of temperate weather, the denizens of the northern provinces are warned that, “Winter is coming.”  This prospect is terrifying for the inhabitants, as it presages a long stint of bitter cold, privation, and even sudden death at the hands of the evil Night King, and his army of murderous White Walkers.

The series is, of course, a work of fiction, but the atmosphere of fear engendered by the words, “Winter is coming,” is being duplicated in the left leaning newsrooms of a number of media outlets.  However, instead of “Winter is coming,” leftist so-called journalists have become terrified by the possibility that “Balance is coming.”

Media company mergers and acquisitions have sparked much of the turmoil among the leftist media types.  It’s no secret that journalists in general and broadcast news reporters in particular tend to be liberal.  That’s been the case for decades.  However, in the past, the media maintained a sense of journalistic ethics, and at least tried to present both sides of the issues.

Along the way, the reporters and talking heads underwent a distinct shift in their perceived role.  They transformed from the role of simply reporting the news, somewhat impartially, to managing the news to fit their political preferences.

In some ways, this was nothing new.  Many newspapers openly displayed liberal or conservative political biases.  However, in those times, every liberal paper, like The New York Times, was balanced by a paper such as Colonel McCormick’s conservative Chicago Tribune.  In other words, there was a more or else even playing field.

Over time, the balance disappeared.  I think the main reason that journalists grew more liberal is because our educational system, for the past hundred years, has been hijacked by so-called progressives.

John Dewey was the leading progressive educator of the early 20th Century.  He wrapped his philosophy in the guise of teaching children to value democracy, while pursuing his stated plan to “fundamentally transform the United States.”  Sound familiar?

Dewey was opposed to promoting individual liberty, in favor of collectivism, praising the Communist system of the Soviet Union.  He championed sending children to kindergarten, not to begin their educations at an earlier age, but to remove them from the influence of their parents a year sooner.

As progressiveism took over education, the faculties of colleges and universities progressively became more liberal.  In time, higher education became the plaything of the Left.  Schools of journalism attracted the most liberal teachers and students.

And so it was that budding journalists saw themselves, not simply as reporters of the news, but as crusaders, whose job it was to advance their own political agendas.  And because journalists live in a bubble, in which they interact and communicate largely with others in their profession, they quickly contracted the progressive mental disorder, Delusions of Rectitude, wherein they believe, not only that they’re always right, but that whatever they believe represents the mainstream of American political thought.

It was under this delusion that the irresistible force of a self-assured and self-important media came onto a collision course with the immovable object known as Donald John Trump.  A clash between the two was inevitable, especially because Trump entered the fray determined to violate what had been a well established rule – “Don’t get into an argument with people who buy ink by the barrel.”

That rule went out the window the day Trump came down the escalator in 2015.  Since that time, Trump has not missed any opportunity to call a spade a spade, or to call the fake news the fake news.

And for their part, the leftist media has accepted the challenge, and has made destroying Trump item one on their agendas.  It has been reported that the mainstream media outlets’ coverage of Trump for the past 11 years has been more than 96% negative.  As a result, media coverage of the White House, and White House comments on the media have devolved into alternating charges of “You lie!” “No, you lie!”

Last week it got to the point where Trump barred fake news outlets such as CNN, MSNOW, and the like from the White House Press Room.  Unsurprisingly, the outlets squealed like stuck pigs, and lawsuits have been filed.  In record time, the outlets found a compliant judge, who was eager to insert his nose where it doesn’t belong, and he reversed the ban.

It’s funny that the media is quick to yell First Amendment when they’re the ones who are talking, while at the same time supporting extremist leftist tyrants who seek to limit the right of free speech for those who disagree with them.

It’s not a First Amendment violation.  The media outlets are still free to stand outside the White House, and defame the President all day long.  The President’s just not going to furnish them a comfortable room from which to do it.  Meanwhile, given an opportunity, Trump can prove his “fake news” claims.  Here’s a list recently posted of fake news stories pushed by CNN.

The CNN employees are extra nervous nowadays because the Paramount takeover of Warner Brothers is about to go through.  This deal will create a media behemoth that will control CBS News and CNN, in addition to Hollywood studios Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros., streaming services HBO Max and Paramount+.

When Paramount took over CBS, they installed Bari Weiss in the News division.  Weiss is no conservative.  Her stated mission was to appeal to the 70% in the political center versus catering to the far left or far right.  A good idea if you’re running a business.  She moved the division toward a more even handed presentation of the news, no doubt as a result of the fact that CBS had just settled a lawsuit brought by Trump for millions of dollars.

The idea of a more balanced view of the news led to numerous firings and resignations, especially from the 60 Minutes staff.  One outgoing producer complained, “We’ve been told to aim our reporting at a particular part of the political spectrum.  Honestly, I don’t know how to do that.”  I believe her.  Loony leftists don’t know how even to consider that there might be two sides to every issue.

And now Paramount is coming for the CNN staff, and the mood at CNN is said to be funereal.  CNN staffers are worried over Paramount boss David Ellison’s connections to Trump — as well as that of Ellison’s father, Larry, who is a huge Trump donor.  This could mean, oh perish the thought, that balance is coming to CNN.  Not that!  Oh the humanity!

Will Paramount permit balanced, or even somewhat favorable coverage of the Night King, Donald Trump?  Will it permit the Night King’s White Walkers to appear on the air in fair interviews?  And perhaps worst of all, will the network be forced to conduct presidential debates honestly, without weighing in for the Democrat candidate?

I expect restructuring, but no drastic changes.  Then again, if the coverage of Trump could ratchet down to 75% negative coverage, that would be an improvement.

Recorded history goes back 8,000 years or more.  In the span during which humans have written down what they were thinking, there’s been no shortage of of predictions that the world was about to end.  The earliest known prediction of doom was found on a Mesopotamian tablet dating to 2800 B.C.

Doomsday predictions are found in nearly all cultures.  The Norse had their God Ragnarok, the Greeks their Moros and Cassandra.  And end of world predictions weren’t limited to Pagans.  The Old Testament tells of Noah and the Flood.  The New Testament has the Book of Revelation.  It’s not a pretty picture.

Humans created calendars, and the calendars themselves gave rise to doomsday predictions.  Some thought the world would end when we reached 1000 A.D.  A thousand years later, humans had learned nothing from the past, and we had the Y2K hysteria, where serious people thought the computers would kill us all.

And let’s not forget the Mayan calendar prediction.  The Mayan calendar cycle ended December 12, 2012.  Some said that was the end of times.  It wasn’t.  More likely the Mayans were wiped out before they could issue the second edition.

We’ve been told so often that the world was about to end that doomsday predictions have inspired jokes.  My favorite is the sample headlines from different newspapers.  The New York Times – World to End Tomorrow – story and analysis on page B11.  The Wall Street Journal – World Ends Tomorrow, markets to close early.  USA Today – It’s Over!  The Washington Post – World Ends Tomorrow, women and minorities hardest hit.

I think the eternal obsession with predicting the end of times stems from human nature itself.  We are curious and nosy beings who don’t want to miss anything, and if the world ended, we wouldn’t.

Some doomsday predictions stemmed from ignorance.  Others were motivated by religious zeal.  However all such predictions share a common element.  By predicting imminent death, the purveyors seek to exert control over the living.  It’s been the same old story.  “Your life may suck today, but I can promise you paradise, if of course, you do exactly what I tell you to do right now.”

The point is, in order for good to triumph over evil there has to be a convenient boogeyman to scare the sheep into putting themselves in the hands of the wolves.  There has been no shortage of villains.

People predicted that industrialization would destroy jobs and cast most into poverty.  The opposite was true.  The advent of automobiles was feared as a threat to the horse trade.  Today, no one’s looking to trade his Honda in for a horse, and activists are trying to get rid of what few horses remain.

During the Cold War, we were told the Russians would end the world.  In the wake of the Cuban Missile Crisis, my father installed a short-lived, ridiculous bomb shelter in the basement.

When the Iron Curtain fell, the Communists realized that they required a new means of taking over the world.  Overnight, the Communist Reds turned Green, and the ideological world takeover was replaced with crippling ecological restrictions designed to accomplish the same purpose.

The Green nuts used various messages.  “Save the whales.”  Until their windmills killed the whales.  “Save the planet.” As though the only species capable of destroying all life on Earth had the ability to save it.  At the first Earth Day in 1970, “experts” predicted worldwide famine and mass extinction by the year 2000.  Wrong!  Then, “Global warming,” until it became apparent that their foundational data had been falsified.  Then it became, “Climate Change.”

And climate change is blamed for everything.  Too hot?  Climate change.  Too cold?  Climate change.  Had a hurricane?  Climate change.  This year, so far, no named hurricanes have appeared.  What’s to blame?  Climate change.  They also blame El Nino, which for my money is, El Bullshit.

Each new predicted apocalypse employs the same time honored prescription.  “Submit to our demands.  It’s for your own good.  And if you refuse, good luck.  The world will come to an end.”  Bernie Sanders and AOC promised us 6 years ago that the world would end in 6 years.  Obviously, they’re not singing the same song now.

The Covid pandemic was yet another opportunity for the Left to control the populace.  Stand six feet apart or you’ll die.  Wear a mask or you’ll die.  Take these vaccines or you’ll die.  We now know they made all of it up, just so they could dictate people’s lives.

The latest doomsday craze is over Artificial Intelligence.  It will destroy jobs, they warn.  It will replace human beings with robots, they warn.  And, scariest of all, AI will become a monster that destroys the entire world.  Lately, Democrats have begun to preach against AI and data centers.  It’s just a magician’s trick  Misdirection.

They preach affordability, despite the fact that their own policies created the affordability problem.  They still want to defund the police, erase the borders, spend us into bankruptcy, and elect quasi-terrorist radicals, but those issues won’t sell, so it’s now “AI will bring about the end of the world.”  Sound familiar?

There even are supposedly responsible people from the AI industry who are preaching doom, and begging for government regulation, a/k/a/ government protection.  What they really want is protection from lawsuits and antitrust claims, in other words, a monopoly.

Picture that.  An all powerful monopoly controlling access to all the information ever amassed in world history.  An informational conglomerate, immune from lawsuits or the antitrust laws, and free to peddle to the unsuspecting recipients of their services any shit they desire to peddle, which then must be accepted as “the truth.”  What possibly could go wrong?

We don’t have to wonder about that, because we lived it in 2020 and beyond.  The social media tycoons banded together, with the aid of the FBI and other governmental miscreants to silence a sitting president in the run up to an election, banning him from communicating with his own constituents.  They tried to impose speech codes, arbitrarily deciding what was “misinformation.”

Personal liberty ends when the government gets to decide what’s true or false.  Would be leftist dictators understand this.  They don’t want to do away with AI, they want it to do their bidding.  And so, once again it’s doom and gloom.  “The end of the world is nigh.”

One reasonable voice spoke out against this latest doomsday prediction.  “If you are designing AI systems that you truly fear will destroy the world, just stop.”  No.  The robots are not about to take over the world, or to destroy it.

Leave those stories for Hollywood to tell.  Once set in motion, how can Man ever stop these insidious machines from killing us all?  I have the perfect solution.  Base the AI machinery in Cuba.  This way, if things get out of hand, all we need to do is wait for the next island-wide power failure.  Then, we just pull the plug.