We have arrived at what are sometimes called the dog days of summer. Historically, the dog days were the period following the heliacal rising of the star Sirius, which Greek and Roman astrology connected with heat, drought, sudden thunderstorms, lethargy, fever, mad dogs, and bad luck. They are now considered to be the hottest, most uncomfortable part of summer in the Northern Hemisphere.  In 1963, Nate King Cole sang about “Those Lazy Hazy Crazy Days Of Summer.” During those less complicated days of the 1960’s, we could look forward to “those days of soda and pretzels and beer.” We knew nothing of fructose, or grams of sugar or carbohydrates in those days.  Yeah, less complicated.  But I digress. Nowadays, instead of the soda and pretzels and beer, all we’re getting are feverish mad dogs.  We used to call these deranged mongrels liberals, but liberalism connotes a certain measure of tolerance which they do not possess, so I suppose it’s fitting that these lunatics now call themselves progressives.  We’ve covered this ground before in these pages, but to recap, progressives (hereinafter, “Progs”), are afflicted with delusions of rectitude, which leave them with an unshakable certitude that they are always right.  These delusions, when combined with the natural paranoia of the Progs, turn anyone who dares to disagree with a Prog into a dangerous extremist who must be destroyed.  Don’t get me wrong, the Progs are crazy all twelve months of the year, but this Summer they seem even crazier than usual.  I wish it was only the heat.  The Anti-Trump fever on the Left has reached epidemic proportions.  Leftist mad dogs, egged on by Maxine Waters, the leader of the mad dog pack, have vowed to harass anyone who works for or with the Trump Administration.  Sarah Sanders and her children were confronted and chased from two different restaurants in Virginia.  Her crime?  Trying to feed her children.  The Progs have decreed that Sanders deserves a life sentence.  Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi was run out of a movie theater by Prog protesters who threatened her.  It’s a sickness.  Senator McConnell was harassed outside his home by the same band of feverish mad dogs.  You don’t even have to work for the government to be a target.  The other day, two conservative media people,  Candace Owens (an African-American woman) and Charlie Kirk, were having a quiet breakfast in a Philadelphia restaurant.  A crowd of filthy Antifa thugs appeared, blowing whistles, blaring bullhorns, chanting stupidly, and threw water on Mr. Kirk.  The police, mostly black officers, responded, and were denounced, along with Ms. Owens, as white supremecists.  As I said, it’s a sickness.  The Progs say Trump is a tyrant, who is destroying the Constitution.  Their solution?  Cancel the Second Amendment, and destroy the First Amendment, by stifling speech they don’t agree with on college campuses and even on the internet.  The virulence of the summertime mad dog fever is  no more evident than on the issue of immigration.  As late as 2014,  Il Duce Obama no less (and there is no less), was advising would-be immigrants not to enter the U.S. illegally.  Prominent Democrats, the Clintons included, were in favor of secure borders.  Not anymore.  The Anti-Trump fever has pushed the Dems so far left that now, every elected Democrat must support getting rid of ICE, or face the wrath of the fevered Left.  The notion that our immigration problems can be solved by opening the borders and ending all immigration enforcement would be crazy enough if it was coming only from some fringe group of nuts.  But the fever has spread to federal judges, one of whom last week ordered the Trump Administration to reinstitute the unconstitutional Obama DACA program.  DACA is not a law, so a judge is ordering the chief executive to take executive action, which violates the separation of powers.  Apparently this judge thinks two unconstitutional acts make a legal act.  Sick.  The fever has sparked more and more violent protests, which are approaching civil war proportions.  In Portland, Oregon, on June 19th, a violent mob of anarchist protestors, including the hooded bastards of Antifa, surrounded the Portland ICE office, trapping workers inside the building.  Portland’s leftist mayor ordered police to stay away, letting the protestors run wild.  Signs called ICE agents Nazis and white supremecists, and  accused them of running concentration camps.  The nuts demanded open borders, they harassed ICE agents, even following them home.  The anarchists set up a filthy encampment in the 90 to 100 degree heat, which soon became a bio-hazard.  Drug use was rampant.  They took down and defaced the American flag and raised anarchist and communist flags over the federal building.  The mob threatened local residents and business people in the area.  The siege went on for 12 days, closing down ICE operations.  All this time, the Portland police did nothing.  Portland’s mayor even encouraged them, “To all demonstrators: I urge you to keep up this effort.”  The siege ended, only after federal police officers from Homeland Security arrived and took back the building.  The mob denounced black police officers as “traitors” and “house niggers,” and threatened that they knew where they lived.  This shows that Antifa isn’t against fascism, but is in charge of it.  I’m sorry, but Trump hatred is one thing, and civil war is something else.  That’s right, I said it, civil war.  If you doubt me, remember John Brown.  He seized a federal building in Harpers Ferry.  They hanged him.  We don’t hang people anymore, but a bunch of these anarchist bastards ought to see the inside of prisons.  They occasionally arrest some of the Antifa goons, even in Berkeley California.  Arrest photos were posted, prompting cries that it might endanger the very hooded bastards responsible for the violence.  Sickness.  Having seen the photos.  I now understand why these bastards wear hoods over their faces.

If these are the faces of the new Democrat Party, they’re gonna need thicker hoods.

As part of the never-ending fairy tale – Once Upon A Time, nine years before he decided to run for President, the Russians gathered embarrassing information about Donald Trump, hacked into Democrat computers to help Trump, got Trump elected President by “hacking the election,” (whatever that means), and now are able to control Trump, or maybe Trump is a willing agent of the Kremlin … and the Leftists whined, bitched and moaned miserably ever after.  The facts that the FBI, the CIA, the Justice Department, the State Department, the Treasury Department, the DIA, the Director of National Intelligence, the Congress, the entire media, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller, in more than two years of investigation, have found no evidence of Trump collusion with Russians, and the fact that Mueller has twice indicted Russians, and twice announced that there was no evidence of any criminal involvement by any American, and the fact that Trump has increased sanctions on Russia and is trying to drive a wedge between Russia and Germany that would cost Russia billions of dollars, do not change the tune of the loony Left – “Oh Trump colluded,” they tell us, “we just need to wait for Mueller (whose people have leaked anything and everything they thought would damage Trump) to find Trump guilty.”  Just about every week, the Left announces another “Aha!” moment, as in, “Aha, we have Trump now!”  But they never do.  Rush Limbaugh said it best.  Every time they try to take Trump down and fail, they inoculate him against the next attack, they get weaker, and Trump gets stronger.  The latest Aha! concerns Donald Trump’s former lawyer, fixer, or whatever, Michael Cohen.  Cohen was the focus of a previous Aha!, over his payment of money to that paragon of All-American motherhood, porn star Stormy Daniels, who took money not to disclose an alleged affair with Trump, which she later disclosed anyway, and for some reason is still litigating.  The new Cohen Aha! is over talk of a payment to keep a former Playboy model quiet about another alleged affair, which allegedly happened in 2006, 10 years before the 2016 election.  It seems old Michael Cohen, who keeps saying he was just doing legal work, acted like anything but a lawyer, when he secretly recorded a meeting he had with Trump weeks before the election, in which meeting, the two discussed a payment, to one Karen McDougal.  It was Aha! again, and they were off and running.  Cohen was going to flip on Trump, he’d tell all, and Trump was finished.  Mueller would have his proof of collusion, and Trump would have to resign, or be impeached.  Except, they were wrong again.  First, Mueller isn’t even handling the Cohen probe; if it had anything to do with Trump collusion, he would be.  Private conversations between lawyer and client about legal business are privileged.  Recording, and then releasing such a secret recording is an ethical faux pas, which can get a lawyer disbarred, I don’t know anything about the Fixer Code of Ethics.  Cohen hired Clinton henchman Lanny Davis to represent him.  Davis leaked the recording to CNN.  As Flounder once said, “Oh boy!  This is great!”  But Rudy Giuliani waived Trump’s privilege, and the recording was released.  The media salivated over whether it was Trump or Cohen who was in favor of paying McDougal by cash or check.  The recording mentions setting up a corporation. That certainly sounds suspicious.  The transaction the two were discussing was perfectly legal, and was to be carried out in a perfectly legal fashion, but never actually took place.  No money ever changed hands, so what’s the Aha! all about?  Nothing, as it turns out.  This hasn’t stopped the media from doing its best (worst?) to bash Trump.  A typical story by a typical “impartial journalist” came from Virginia Heffernan of LA Times.  She entitled her dazzling work of journalistic impartiality, Michael Cohen’s Recordings Might Be The Kompromat We’ve Been Waiting For.  Kompromat is the Russian word for compromising information, to be used to blackmail Trump.  First of all, if Trump couldn’t be torpedoed by the scurrilous crap the Left has been throwing at him since 2015, no stale Russian crap is going to hurt him.  Secondly, speaking for normal Americans, “we” are not waiting for Kompromat, only the media morons inside the Left-wing media bubble are still waiting for it.  The impartial Ms. Heffernan is the same “journalist” who has referred to former President Barack Obama as “our true father” and has equated Trump to “a stepfather who was going to rape us.”  So her credentials are impeccable.  Heffernan is 49 years old so she ought to remember that her “true grandfather,”  Bill Clinton, actually was a rapist.  Another Heffernan Trump bash was Our Pardon-Giving President Perverts the Pardon, where she preached, “Who gets pardoned shouldn’t be about who you know.”  Ms. Heffernan is also old enough to remember “Tricky Dick” Bill Clinton’s pardon of Mark Rich.  Rich made $2 billion by illegally selling oil to Iran, South Africa, Cuba and North Korea, fled to escape prosecution for racketeering and tax evasion, and was on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted List.  After several million dollars of political and other contributions to the Clintons, he was pardoned.  I guess it’s OK to pardon perverts for a price.  In her Cohen story, Heffernan describes Trump and Cohen as follows: “The two goons reportedly discussed how to suppress the First Amendment rights of Trump’s alleged former extramarital girlfriend” …  “you can approach the president’s perfidy through the indictments of Russian military intelligence commanders for undermining American democracy.”  Again, anyone remember Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky?  Oh right, that was “only sex.”  Heffernan blasts Cohen’s work for a company tied to Russia as “influence peddling.”  That the Clinton Foundation took over $2 million from Russia’s Uranium One company, and took $23.5 million from the Russian Skolkovo initiative, a group about which the FBI issued “an extraordinary warning” to U.S. tech companies, concluding that the “true motives” of the Russian partners, who were backed by President Vladimir Putin’s government, were to obtain “classified, sensitive, and emerging technology from the companies.”  But, of course, as impartial “journalists” we can trust Hillary, and we’ve already decided that Trump is guilty.

This week we examine the latest insanity emanating from that shining light of progressivism on the left coast, Hollywood.  That’s right, the Hollywood nuts from the land of fruits and nuts are at it again, and this time, they may have hit upon a species of so-called “political correctness” which, if enforced, could end the careers of the most successful actors in the movie business.  There have been many styles of movie-making over the years, including cinema verite’,  which tries to tell a story in a realistic, documentary fashion.  Likewise, there have been many theories of acting.  Lee Strasberg taught and described method acting as “what all actors have always done whenever they acted well.”  Strasberg trained actors to use their imagination, senses and emotions to conceive their characters with unique and original behaviors.  In short, the actor was to “become” the character he or she was portraying.  Some actors took the concept to extremes, however.  In the movie Marathon Man, Dustin Hoffman played a man on the run from a Nazi dentist, portrayed by Lawrence Olivier.  In one scene, Hoffman is exhausted, having been awake for 3 days.  He told Olivier that, to give a realistic performance, he actually stayed awake for 3 days, to which Olivier responded, “You don’t have to stay awake for 3 days, just act.”  But I digress.  The latest Hollywood insanity seeks to do away with method acting, in favor of what I call Identity Cinema.  That is, the notion that, if the movie character possesses some physical, emotional or cultural characteristic, then the actor portraying that character must possess the same characteristic.  For example, a character with one leg can be portrayed only by an amputee.  If this sounds nuts, because it automatically excludes thousands of actors from taking roles which require, well, acting, it’s only because it is nuts.  The current flap concerns popular actress Scarlett Johansson.  Johansson was set to star in Rub & Tug, portraying a trans-gender man who ran a string of massage parlors that were fronts for prostitution in the 1970s and 1980s.  High art, no doubt.  But not so fast.  Johansson was accused of trying to take acting jobs away from a marginalized group.  She apparently is now a second offender, having taken heat in 2016 for being cast as a Japanese character in the film Ghost in the Shell.  There was a time, not so very long ago, when it would have been considered progressive, empowering even, for a woman portray a man, but in these days of run away identity politics, even a woman can’t play a transgender man.  Moreover, nowadays, even a so-called “cis-gender” male, also known as an anatomically correct male, can’t play such a role.  Johansson folded.  It’s apparently an ethical issue, “In light of recent ethical questions raised surrounding my casting as Dante Tex Gill, I have decided to respectfully withdraw my participation in the project.  Our cultural understanding of transgender people continues to advance, and I’ve learned a lot from the community since making my first statement about my casting and realize it was insensitive.  I have great admiration and love for the trans community and am grateful that the conversation regarding inclusivity in Hollywood continues.”  Scarlett Johansson may feel good about herself, but she is creating a precedent that threatens to keep talented actors from playing challenging roles, simply because playing such roles entails acting, not just playing yourself, which is crazy, since the ultimate goal of acting is to convincingly portray someone or something you are not.  Such a mandate would have erased many of the most compelling acting performances in Hollywood history.  Let’s review.  Concerns about cultural appropriation would do away with:  The Good Earth – Luise Rainer wasn’t Chinese; Captains Courageous – Spencer Tracy wasn’t Portuguese; Gunga Din, Sam Jaffe wasn’t Indian; The King and I – Yul Brynner wasn’t Siamese; Breakfast at Tiffany’s – Mickey Rooney wasn’t Japanese; and Gandhi -Ben Kingsley wasn’t Indian.  How about physical challenges?  That would remove: The Hunchback of Notre Dame – Charles Laughton wasn’t deformed; Richard III – Lawrence Olivier didn’t have scoliosis; The Miracle Worker – Anne Bancroft had no vision problems, and Patty Duke wasn’t blind or deaf; Julia – Vanessa Redgrave wasn’t an amputee; My Left Foot – Daniel Day Lewis didn’t have cerebral palsy; Philadelphia – Tom Hanks wasn’t gay or HIV positive; Forrest Gump – Gary Sinese wasn’t an amputee; Ray – Jamie Fox isn’t blind; and The King’s Speech – Colin Firth had no speech impediment.  Then there are those with mental and emotional challenges.  Erase: The Three Faces of Eve – Joanne Woodward didn’t have multiple personalities; One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest – Jack Nicholson probably isn’t insane; Rain Man – Dustin Hoffman isn’t autistic; Silence of the Lambs – Anthony Hopkins isn’t psychotic; Forrest Gump again – Tom Hanks can’t play a man with a sub-normal IQ; As Good As It Gets – Jack Nicholson isn’t Obsessive/Compulsive.  Sexual Preference differences take away many memorable performances: Tootsie – Dustin Hoffman (a repeat offender) isn’t a cross-dresser; Kiss of the Spider Woman – William Hurt isn’t transgender; Philadelphia – Tom Hanks isn’t gay; Mrs. Doubtfire – Robin Williams isn’t a cross-dresser; and Milk – Sean Penn isn’t gay.  But why stop there?  What about animal roles?  King Kong wasn’t played by a real gorilla in any of the movies.  And what about human-being Doug Jones in The Shape of Water?  Shouldn’t they have found an actor, preferably from a marginalized group, who resembled the Creature from the Black Lagoon?  About the only actor in Hollywood who won’t be affected by this insanity is Robert DeNiro.  He  always plays a violent, sociopathic, criminal, foul-mouthed cafone.  Consider Bloody Mama, Godfather II, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Angel Heart, The Untouchables, Goodfellas, Cape Fear, A Bronx Tale, Heat, Casino, Analyze This, Analyze That, Dirty Grandpa, and The Wizard of Lies.  If actors can only play what they are, DeNiro’s good to go.  The bottom line is that progressive Hollywood is doing for entertainment what progressive politicians are doing for the rest of America, destroying traditions and defying reason to pander to a fringe group, and leaving us poorer for the experience.  Hurrah for Hollywood.

In a continuing attempt to justify his own existence, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, last week announced the indictment of 12 Russians, all members of the Russia’s Glavnoye Razvedyvatel’noye Upravleniye, also known as the GRU.  The GRU is Russia’s foreign Military Intelligence organization.  It combines aspects of our CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency.  The GRU is responsible for spying on foreign nations, and conducting operations such as murdering people in foreign countries, training terrorists, and lately, enlisting Russia’s most talented computer hackers to conduct cyber warfare for Mother Russia, much as the Chinese employ thousands of computer experts in its “hacker army.”  So Mueller indicted 12 Russians, and the Left experienced another “thrill down its leg,” hoping against hope that Mueller finally had exposed Donald Trump’s collusion with Russia.  To coin a phrase, “keep hope alive” Democrats, this indictment doesn’t do that.  Since all you’ve heard from the media is “12 Russians indicted,” you’re probably not aware that Mueller’s indictment is really an indictment of the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC.  I, on the other hand, actually read the indictment, and since I’ve read, and for that matter drafted, hundreds of indictments in my career, let me boil it down for you.  The indictment contains 11 counts or charges.  Two of them allege conspiracies to commit crimes against the United States, 8 allege identity fraud, and the remaining count alleges money laundering.  In a nutshell, what is alleged is that the Russians used, and/or stole, the identities of Americans to hack into computer networks of political organizations, in order to steal information, and used bitcoin transactions to fund their activities.  The indictment proves things which we already knew, the Russians tried to interfere with our election, just like the always do, their goal was to destabilize our government (at which they have succeeded), and they tried to influence the outcome of the election (at which they failed).  Mueller already told us that in his previous indictment of Russian internet companies.  What the media isn’t giving you are the dirty details of the indictment, and they are not flattering to Democrats.  Mueller’s indictment says almost nothing about the Trump campaign.  Read it if you don’t believe me.  What it does say in its 29 pages, is that the Russians stole documents from an unnamed Republican Party official in 2015, and that in mid-August 2016, the hackers wrote to an unnamed person “in regular contact with the Trump campaign” about documents the hackers had posted on the internet.  Now, I don’t know what that is supposed to mean.  If the unnamed person is Roger Stone, he was fired, or quit, the campaign on August 6, 2016, in which case, so what?  And if the information already was public, once again, so what?  The Russians tried to hack into the RNC.  They failed, because the RNC had internet security.  The Russians did hack into the computers of the Hillary campaign, including her chairman John Podesta’s, the computers at the DNC, and at the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee.  They stole email user names and passwords of campaign officials and of Democrat donors, and implanted malware programs by means of spearfishing campaigns (getting users to open email attachments), you know, like money from a Nigerian prince.  This permitted the Russians to record every keystroke of the computers and to copy all data on them.  Podesta opened one of the email attachments, allowing his emails to be stolen.  The Russians probably disguised the attachment as a dividend statement for Podesta’s Russian energy stock.  Hillary’s officials had close ties to Russia, as reported in F on F in May and July of 2017 –   John Podesta served on the Board of Directors of, and held 75,000 shares of stock, of a Russian energy company connected to Vladimir Putin; brother Tony Podesta, a lobbyist, took $170,000 from Russian bankers to end U.S. sanctions against Russia.  The Russian hacking into the Dems started as early as March 2016.  In June 2016, the Dems realized they had been robbed.  Instead of calling the FBI, they hired a company to clean the malware from their computer networks.  The company pronounced the networks clean, but the Russians were still controlling the computers until at least October 2016.  So what has Mueller proven?  The RNC was prudent.  The DNC and the Clinton campaign were incompetent, grossly negligent and reckless.  Then, when they finally realized their stupidity, they hired an equally incompetent company to fix their problems.  Given these alarming facts, doesn’t it make you wonder why Mueller is investigating Trump?  The indictment is irrelevant, because these 12 Russians never will be brought before a U.S.  court. You could actually view the indictment itself as an improper intrusion into U.S. foreign policy.  Ordinarily, we don’t indict foreign intelligence officers, for good reason.  We conduct intelligence operations abroad, and don’t want our CIA operatives prosecuted in another country.  Indeed, the U.S. has interfered in foreign elections much more brazenly than these Russian hackers.  Retired CIA agent Steven L. Hall confirms that the U.S. “absolutely” has carried out such election influence operations historically,” and says, “I hope we keep doing it.”  We gave bags of money to favored politicians in Italy.  We interfered in elections and overthrew governments in Central America, South America and the Middle East.  President Bill Clinton was involved in overt and covert American efforts to help Boris Yeltsin win re-election as President of Russia in 1996, to prevent a communist victory. (Maybe the hacking of Hillary was payback).  Il Duce Barack Obama blatantly interfered in the 2015 Israeli election of Benjamin Netanyahu, by having the State Department send $350,000 to the party of his opponent.  That’s worse than Russian computer hacking, and that’s why, if intelligence officers are to be indicted, that decision should be made by the President, not by some rogue prosecutor, unaccountable to anyone.  If Israel indicted Obama for his interference, should we extradite him for trial?  No.  Foreign cyber warfare should be combated in kind.  How about hacking into the Russian transport system and turning off the trolley cars as a warning to “cut it out”?  The CIA actually proposed a cyber response to Obama in 2016.  Ever the proponent of “leading from behind” (or is it resembling a behind?) Obama chose to do nothing.  He didn’t want to taint Hillary’s election victory, but she lost, so Russian interference is a convenient way to taint Trump.  We’ll never get to hear the 12 indicted Russians plead, “Nyet Guilty,” but lying Democrats will use Obama’s neglect to pronounce “Trump guilty.”

The recent resignation of Justice Anthony Kennedy gave President Trump a second opportunity to choose a new member of the Supreme Court.  Right on cue, the Left has activated its crazy machine and the nuts are running amok forecasting impending doom.  Such a thing happens whenever a Republican president gets to choose a new Justice, but add the fact that the president is Donald Trump and the nuts are that much more manic.  No sooner had Kennedy announced his resignation, than the latter day Jeremiahs of the Left began their weeping.  Supposed legal expert Jeffrey Toobin of CNN kicked off the doom parade, “Abortion illegal; doctors prosecuted; gay people barred from restaurants, hotels, stores; African-Americans out of elite schools; gun control banned in 50 states; the end of the regulatory state.”  Right Jeffrey, but you forgot “people stampeded and cattle raped.” Anyhow, since when was the regulatory state a good thing?  Nina Totenberg of NPR decried, “the end of the world as we know it.”  New Jersey Senator, aspiring presidential candidate, and mental midget Corey Booker pondered, “Do we want to go back 50 years?”  I’ve got to give you that one Corey, going back 50 years puts us in the Warren Court, the most liberal Supreme Court we ever had.  Don’t want that.  Former Virginia Governor and Democrat hack Terry McAuliffe predicted that a conservative Justice will, “threaten the lives of millions of Americans.”  Terry isn’t concerned about the more than 40 million lives lost to abortions since Roe v. Wade, or the 4,300 Americans killed each year by illegal aliens.  That erstwhile pundit Nancy Pelosi offered that, “civilization as we know it is at risk.”  She’s not wrong about that.  This latest Left-wing hysteria stems from one’s vision of the role of the Supreme Court.  Leftists see the Court as a super-legislature to advance their positions regardless of election results.  Maybe I’m naive, but I prefer Justices who judge the facts and law and make the right decision, regardless of the latest polling.  What a novel idea.  Both sides say they want an independent judiciary.  They do, but for different purposes.  Conservatives, or more specifically constitutional originalists,  see independent judges who will come to the right result, regardless of current public opinion.  This judge’s lodestar is the Constitution, not the latest poll or protest.  Leftists prize judicial independence which leaves the judges free from the strictures of the Constitution, to make or remake the law as they see fit.  Obama appointee Justice Sonia Sotomayor, has voiced this view, “Our society would be strait-jacketed were not for the courts, with the able assistance of the lawyers, constantly overhauling the law and adapting it to the realities of ever-changing social, industrial and political conditions.”  It makes you wonder whether she’s ever actually read the Constitution.  Legislatures, not courts or advocates, are responsible for making and changing the laws.  Another Obama appointee, Justice Elena Kagan believes the same thing, she constantly describes the Constitution as “abstract,” leaving her room to interpret it as poetry rather than statute.   Now, an abstract is something existing in thought or as an idea, but not having a physical or concrete existence.  Such a notion surely would  come as a shock to the Framers of the Constitution, who spent all that time in 1787 toiling to construct a work which it’s safe to say each and every one of them fervently believed did exist.  The poetry part of it is intriguing though, let’s give it a try – “If it’s changing the law for which you strive, then take a look at Article Five.”  There’s a rap even I can enjoy.  Kagan, Sotomayor and the other Leftists all subscribe to the “Living Constitution” theory, which views the Constitution as an ever-evolving document, to be pulled, shaped, altered or ignored as they see fit.  The originalists, who the Left regard as extremists, simply want cases decided based on the text of the Constitution as written.  What an extreme concept.  Justice Scalia used to say he preferred his Constitution dead.  I take a different view.  For me, the Constitution remains alive, not because we are free to alter it at will, but because its text is capable of being interpreted to resolve problems and issues never imagined by the Framers in 1787, or the authors of the Bill of Rights in 1791.  For instance, the 1791 text of the Fourth Amendment has been applied to searches of cell phones, GPS, the internet and infrared heat signature searches.  It is alive!  The Leftist hysteria ramped up again when the President nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the Court.  It actually began sooner than the announcement, with crazies marching with signs reading “Defeat X.”  After the announcement, they filled in the blank.  Kavanaugh is reputed to be a conservative, who will interpret the Constitution as written.  That’s clearly a threat.  You see, the Left can’t get their programs enacted into law, because the public and the Legislatures won’t support them.  Being superior beings, Leftists know that their way is right  regardless of what the voters or legislators want, and they rely on the courts to grant them whatever they want, for our own good, of course.  The idea that the Supreme Court may be controlled by judges, rather than by liberal partisans scares Hell out of the Left.  The last thing they want is a judge who considers the facts and the law and comes to the decision that the law demands, instead of the one the Left demands.  In their hysteria, the Left has begun to propose crazy solutions. One popular fantasy is that the Dems should “pack the Court,” that is, increase its size from 9 to 15 Justices, so that liberal partisans will always control it.  Perhaps it hasn’t dawned on these nuts that they control zero, not one part of the government, which could make changing the law a bit difficult.  And, as The Atlantic magazine has noted, Republicans might retaliate when they are in control.  Yeah, like now.  DNC deputy-chairman Keith Ellison has a solution for that too.  He’s proposed impeaching Justice Kavanaugh even before he’s been confirmed.  The nuts are getting nuttier, but look out, “Here Come the Judge!”