The Real Danger to America

Once again, we’ve become the United States of Hysteria. The two Supreme Court rulings last week will not affect society much (as I will explain), but the outcry from the left-wing cadres is instructive and very important for alert Americans to understand.

By ruling New York State’s restrictions on law-abiding citizens carrying handguns unconstitutional, the Supreme Court simply did what the Constitution states: allow Americans to “bear” arms.

The leftist view that legal self-protection will lead to more mass murder is actually foolish. Almost everyone in Vermont is allowed to carry a gun, and there are few murders there. That’s because Vermont doesn’t attract many violent criminals as it lacks an extensive drug market.

Again, thugs who purchase guns illegally are responsible for the overwhelming number of gun crimes.  Oh, and banning weapons will not stop insane loons from killing, as the recent mass murder in Norway demonstrates.

Got it, Joe Biden?

The abortion ruling is a bit more problematic. Even though the procedure will remain largely available in the USA, some states will attempt to eliminate most abortions now that Roe v. Wade is no longer federal law. Other states like New York and California will continue to allow abortion anytime for any reason – something even ultra-liberal countries in Europe reject because late-term abortion is barbaric.

But there is a public safety component here that pro-life Americans should consider. If a woman is in danger of physical harm by birthing a baby, that woman should have legal protection. Any state that denies that is violating the “equal protection” statute. Men cannot birth babies.

Thus, in medically dangerous pregnancies, doctors and the individual women should make the decision, not the state government.

Most Americans agree with that analysis; the polls prove it. So, I hope all states uphold the constitutional law and are legally challenged if they do not.

There is no question that the Democrats are using guns and abortion to advance party politics. Instead of respecting citizens who believe that killing the unborn is wrong, Nancy Pelosi and her acolytes demean and defame them.

Same thing with honest, law-abiding Americans who want firearms to protect themselves from harm. That view and the person who holds it is condemned by the far left. In progressive precincts, there is absolutely no tolerance for opposing points of view.

And where are those “precincts?” Here’s a partial list: Hollywood, especially the Disney Corporation. Ivy League colleges and most other higher-learning institutions. Much of the corporate media, including legacy newspapers in New York, Los Angeles, Washington DC, Boston, and almost everywhere.

In addition, Democrats in the House and Senate are terrified of progressives and do their bidding, as does the Oval Office.

That’s quite an assemblage of intolerance, is it not? Try being pro-life in Hollywood or at Yale. You’ll be attacked and shunned.

That’s the big takeaway from the Supreme Court reaction this week. And, by the way, intolerance should be unconstitutional.

But it’s not.

What Do “Men Give Birth” and “Defund the Police” Have in Common?

Unless you are brainwashed, you regard the statements “men give birth” and “defund the police” as absurd.

Why, then, do leftists (as opposed to liberals and conservatives) say these things and even believe them?

I think there are two — related — explanations.

One is that the Left seeks to tear down every normative institution. If men give birth, “man” and “woman” no longer mean anything. “Men give birth” means the end of the male-female distinction, the most basic distinction in the human race. Racial distinctions pale in comparison. So do national distinctions.

Marxists support the obliteration of the male-female distinction because the only distinction that matters to Marxists is that of class.

The other explanation is that the endgame of leftism is chaos. It is related to the first explanation, since the obliteration of all distinctions is chaos. Distinctions mean order. Having no distinctions means chaos.

I came to realize the significance of distinctions when writing my commentary on the first five books of the Bible (“The Rational Bible”). The Bible’s moral order is dependent on distinctions. Among them are:

Man and God

Good and evil

Human and animal

Holy and profane

Parent and child

Man and woman

Beautiful and ugly

Distinctions are so important to the Judeo-Christian moral order and weltanschauung that making distinctions is what God did for the Six Days. While they are known as the Six Days of Creation, the fact is that after creating the “heavens and the earth,” God does little creating. After Genesis 1:1 the only things God creates are the animals listed in 1:21 and the human being (1:27).

So, then, what did God do for the remainder of the Six Days? He created order out of chaos.

That’s why the second verse of Genesis may well be the second-most important verse in the Bible (Genesis 1:1 is the most important because if you don’t accept its premise, none of what follows matters): “And all was null and void,” meaning all was chaos.

Chaos is the natural state of the world. The transformation of chaos into order necessitated God.

Order is composed of distinctions. Natural order was dependent on the distinction between night and day and land and sea, and moral and social order was dependent upon the distinctions listed above. And while they are all dependent upon God, the Bible describes only one of them as “created” by God — the human being as male and female.

The Left seeks to obliterate these biblical distinctions:

The Left denies the distinction between man and God. As Marx said, “Man is God.” The idea that there is a transcendent Being to which man owes moral obedience is anathema to the Left. Man is to answer only to himself (and ultimately to a left-wing state).

The Left denies the distinction between good and evil. On the Left, there is no objective morality. Good and evil are subjective, determined by the individual and the community.

The Left denies the distinction between human and animal. According to the largest animal rights organization, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), for example, there is no moral difference between a chicken and a human being. They are equally valuable — so much so that, according to PETA, there is no moral difference between a barbecued chicken in America and a cremated Jew in the Holocaust.

The Left denies the difference between the beautiful and the ugly in art. That explains the ugly music and architecture and the meaningless art the art world, led by the Left, has produced for a century.

And now the Left denies the difference between man and woman.

What is this all about? It is all about rejecting the divine order which made civilization possible and returning to chaos. That why “men give birth” is related to “defund the police.” Both lead to chaos.

If you ask those who claim that men give birth or who seek to defund the police, “Do you believe in chaos?” most won’t know what you’re talking about. On a conscious level, chaos is not what the Left seeks.

But it is what the Left creates. The war against Western civilization is a war against distinctions and order. That’s why the Left loathes talk about Judeo-Christian and biblical values. These values represent the divine moral and social distinctions and subsequent order that constitute Western civilization.

That’s why “men give birth” and “defund the police” are related. Both represent disorder.

Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest books, published by Regnery, are “The Rational Passover Haggadah” (March 2022) and “The Rational Bible,” a commentary on the book of Genesis (May 2019). His film, “No Safe Spaces,” was released to home entertainment nationwide on September 15, 2020. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at


Last Updated: Monday, Jun 20, 2022 20:54:46 -0700

Democrats’ Boosting of “Stop the Steal” Republicans in Colorado

A lot of Republicans may remember a little something called “Operation Chaos”, a political strategy radio-host Rush Limbaugh promoted on his show during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary (after John McCain had effectively secured the Republican nomination). It was a call to action, of sorts, to encourage Republican voters in the remaining primary states to temporarily cross over to the Democratic side of the aisle to vote for Hillary Clinton, whose campaign was fledgling against her inner-party rival, Barack Obama.

It was the first time I’d heard the term “party raiding” (though it had been around for some time), the act of one party interfering in another party’s primary. Limbaugh’s goal was was basically to drag out the Democratic race longer, force campaigns to exhaust more of their funding, and build further tension within the party. In other words, it was to weaken the Democratic party going into the general election.

I wasn’t keen on the idea, but relative to how party raiding has evolved and expanded over the years (on both sides of the aisle), the Limbaugh stunt now feels like little more than a love-tap. Today, such efforts have become serious, heavily-funded operations. And in this year’s midterms, the Democrats aren’t taking any prisoners.

The party and left-wing groups have been engaged in a national strategy, in a tough election year for the Democrats, to aid extremist candidates running in GOP primaries. Their hope is that those candidates will win their nominations, which in turn will give the Democrats easier opponents to run against in November’s general election.

It’s a risky game, but thus far, there’s reason to believe their efforts have been successful.

In the Pennsylvania governor’s race, for example, Republican Doug Mastriano (a Stop the Steal, Trump-endorsed candidate who marched at the Capitol on January 6, has a history of melting down during media interviews, and has compared President Biden to Hitler) won his primary race in a crowded field after Democratic nominee Josh Shapiro and his allies spent twice as much money on pro-Mastriano ads as Mastriano’s own campaign.

Right now, there’s a full-court press in Colorado, the state I call home. Registered Republican voters are receiving multiple full-sized mailings every day promoting the nuttiest GOP candidates on the June 28 primary ballot. And just about all of them are coming from left-wing super PACs or the Colorado Democratic Party.

I can speak to this first hand. Though I dropped my Republican affiliation in 2016, my wife never did, and our mailbox is full of these ads, addressed to her, whenever I flip open the lid.

National Review’s Dan McLaughlin has been doing some good reporting on these liberal groups’ efforts to assist Republican U.S. Senate candidate Ron Hanks, another Stop the Steal protest attendee who kicked off his campaign with an ad depicting a Dominion voting machine literally being blown up. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been poured into pro-Hanks mailings, with millions spent on TV advertising. Some of the ads attack Hanks’ primary opponent, Joe O’Dea (a more traditional Republican who the Democrats see as a general-election threat to incumbent senator Michael Bennet), including with factually false claims. Others are actually disguised as anti-Hanks ads, “criticizing” Hanks with phrasing that actually very much appeals to today’s Republican base, like declarations that he’s “too much like Trump”, “too conservative”, and “doesn’t believe Joe Biden is the legitimate president”.

Below is one such ad that arrived the other day. Remember, these aren’t being sent to just any voters. They’re being sent exclusively to registered Republicans ahead of their primary.

Some of the mailings are even illegal, failing to disclose who exactly paid for them, and labeled with seemingly objective phrasing like “Colorado Voter Guide”, “Congressional Voting Guide” and “U.S. Senate Voter Guide”.

Here’s one below, with false claims like Hanks being endorsed by the Colorado Republican Party.

The O’Dea campaign isn’t taking the unlawfulness sitting down. They’ve filed for an injunction in federal court over the ads, and have sent complaints to Colorado’s attorney general and several district attorneys in the state.

But Hanks isn’t the only Colorado Republican who’s receiving major aid from the Democrats. The Dems have also been pouring money into the gubernatorial primary, as well as the race for Colorado’s brand new 8th congressional district. In each case, they’re propping up the Trumpiest, Stop the Steal candidates on the ballot, with image after image of Trump himself:

The Lori Saine mailing above, that notably places “Trump” before “Country”, was paid for by “314 Action Fund”, a left-wing organization committed to helping Democratic candidates. Other pro-Saine mailings, including those of the illegal variety described above, have been relentlessly pushing her Trump bonafides:

Perhaps the deepest irony in all of this, and why I earlier called it a “risky game”, is that in promoting and funding these types of candidates, the left is increasing the chances of more Stop the Steal politicians ending up in powerful public positions. If these individuals win their nominations in a “red wave” year (like the one everyone’s predicting for the midterms), they could well end up winning their general elections as well, which flies in the face of Democrats’ loudly stated concerns, since January 6, that such people are a very real threat to American democracy.

If they are indeed that big of a threat to the country and our elections, why on earth are the Democrats helping them?

The answer, again, is for short-term political gain. And if it backfires, the left will partially be to blame for what comes next.



On a personal note, I’m excited to announce that my latest thriller novel, Restitution, has taken Gold in the Literary Titan Book Awards. You can learn more about (and purchase) the book here.

It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

The title of this column is cribbed from a 1963 comedy film starring Spencer Tracy. Big hit. Greed was the subject matter.

In June 2022, folks are also very mad, but not in the insane sense. They are flat-out angry.

The Biden administration’s incompetent handling of the economy is hurting just about everyone in the marketplace. Inflation, falling stocks, and bonds eroding real estate values – disaster across the economic board.

The title of this column is cribbed from a 1963 comedy film starring Spencer Tracy. Big hit. Greed was the subject matter.

In June 2022, folks are also very mad, but not in the insane sense. They are flat-out angry.

The Biden administration’s incompetent handling of the economy is hurting just about everyone in the marketplace. Inflation, falling stocks, and bonds eroding real estate values – disaster across the economic board.

I predicted this would happen weeks before the 2020 vote. Joe Biden is not smart enough to lead this country. Simple analysis but true.

Last week, the President granted a rare interview to the press. There was a strict time limit on it. Associated Press reporter Josh Boak had precisely 30 minutes. That’s about it for Mr. Biden’s attention span.

Boak got little out of the President as his answers were predictable and trite. Despite that, the reporter chose not to challenge, which is now the standard operating procedure for the establishment press. Gone are the days of confronting Trump with a variety of unverified allegations. Now, it’s “whatever you say, Mr. Biden.” No matter how dopey it is.

Joe Biden told the Associated Press that Covid, Putin, and the Republicans are responsible for America’s mess.

Of course, the follow-up question should have been that President Trump had to deal with Covid, Putin, and Republicans, and the economy was stable when he left.

But that kind of question is waaaaayyy too much for the AP.

Mr. Biden also said this: “People are really, really down. They’re really down.”

He went on to say Covid is largely responsible for the downness.

This kind of malarkey is now a standard issue. However, the “down” description is interesting and wrong at the same time.

What Mr. Biden doesn’t accept is that the American people are not “down”; they’re furious At Joe Biden.

Counting “shrinkflation,” where consumers get less for whatever they buy, the inflation rate is running about 11 percent. And we are all doing the math.

The next number is about 60 percent of Americans believe Biden is doing a terrible job.

That means the Democrats are in deep trouble, and the progressive movement, largely responsible for Biden’s horrible policies, is collapsing. Good. These progressives seek to destroy the most successful country in history. There is no compromising with them.

Biden, himself will not run again and may even resign for “health reasons.” I could be wrong but file my predictions.

In the meantime, soldier on. We, the people, made a huge mistake in 2020, but we’re strong enough to recover.

So don’t get mad; get even. Let’s turn on the incompetents and subversives. We may be down, but we’re not out.

No more Joe Biden’s.

GOP Resistance to the Jan. 6 Hearings Is Looking Increasingly Silly

We’re into week two of the January 6th Committee hearings, and we continue to hear revealing testimony and accounts that paint an increasingly damning picture of Donald Trump’s extraordinary efforts, following his 2020 election loss, to remain in power and convince millions of Americans that their country’s democracy had been stolen.

Unsurprisingly, the political left has been giving these findings maximum exposure, while the political right has largely framed them (and the committee itself) as simultaneously illegitimate, hyper-partisan, and irrelevant to the things Americans really care about.

I’m far from the first person to make this comparison, but it really does remind me of the Benghazi hearings… only in reverse.

The “illegitimacy” argument was used a lot by the Democrats back then. They claimed that there had already been plenty of investigations into the Benghazi attacks, and every question on the topic had already been satisfactorily answered and substantiated.

Their stance was effectively, “There’s nothing more to see here; it’s time to move on.”

It wasn’t true then, and it isn’t true now.

The charge that the January 6 Committee is “hyper-partisan”, which today’s Republicans have coupled closely with their illegitimacy argument, would actually seem to carry more weight (at least on paper) than when the Democrats evoked it years ago. After all, there were five House Democrats on the Republican-led Benghazi committee, making up roughly 40% of its seats (which is pretty decent representation). But on the Democratic-led January 6 Committee, only two of its nine members are Republicans. That’s barely over 20%.

However, the problem with that narrative, as I touched on in last week’s column, is that Republicans were given the opportunity to be part of a 50/50, 9/11-style, truly bipartisan January 6 commission (an opportunity they both asked and successfully negotiated for), and then decided to kill it when it came time to vote for its approval.

Next came the first iteration of the select committee, in which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered five of thirteen seats to the GOP; this was in addition to her already having selected Republican Liz Cheney for one seat, amounting to roughly the same party make-up as the Benghazi committee. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, like he did the first time, initially agreed to the terms. But when Pelosi rejected two of his picks, Jim Jordan and Jim Banks (both prominent participants in Trump’s “Stop the Steal” efforts), McCarthy pulled his other three Republicans and vowed not to appoint any others. At that point, Pelosi decreased the size of the committee to nine, added Republican Adam Kinzinger (who accepted the role against McCarthy’s wishes), and that’s why the committee is so politically lopsided.

In other words, the GOP chose this.

Do Democrats hope the committee’s findings will hurt the Republicans? Without doubt. But the same was true of Republicans when it came to Benghazi. That didn’t mean the select committee on Benghazi shouldn’t have happened. I certainly think it should have.

As for the notion that the efforts of the committee are detached from the top concerns of most Americans — especially kitchen-table issues like crushing inflation and gas prices, it’s safe to say that’s true. And that’s why it’s perhaps the right’s worst argument, despite being parroted so often.

Think about it for a minute…

There are currently 535 members of the U.S. Congress. Only 9 of them have been serving on the January 6 Committee. And the work those nine have done has in no way kept them from voting on any legislation related to inflation or anything else at the top of Americans’ list of concerns.

It’s fine to slam Congress or a political party for not doing enough to deal with more immediate societal concerns, but to point a finger at a 9-person committee working on a separate issue, and pretending their work is somehow hampering action on other issues, is patently absurd.

I mean, if you follow the logic of Jim Jordan’s tweet, the national debt (which he preached about all the time when he was still playing a fiscal hawk) also isn’t worth any time or attention. After all, most Americans don’t care about it, despite it arguably being the most predictable, consequential, and catastrophic threat our nation faces. So why take it seriously, right?

Wrong. It should be taken seriously, and so should a U.S. president trying to steal an election, selling millions of Americans on a devastating lie, and causing a deadly insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Lastly, if the fear of the GOP is that the hearings will only serve to hurt their electoral prospects in the midterms, perhaps they should pay more attention to the polls. Most Republicans may not be able to bring themselves to kick the former president to the curb, but most Americans are more than willing to take their political frustrations out on the current guy (and his party).

As of the time I’m writing this, President Biden’s approval rating is below 40% in the RCP average, and Republicans are leading the Democrats in the generic congressional vote by the same amount they did a month ago. The GOP will easily win back the House, and probably the Senate this year. And it’s a near certainty that the inflation problem won’t get significantly better before November, which is bad for the country, but good for the party out of power.

Besides that, a number of Republicans, including Mike Pence and his staff, are coming out of these hearings looking pretty darned good. Democrats on the committee have even publicly hailed Pence and company for their patriotism. Despite many on the right insisting that the committee’s goal was to rake the entire GOP over the coals, that clearly hasn’t been the case. Trump and other particularly egregious actors (like Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and John Eastman) are being thoroughly exposed, but my guess is that there won’t be a whole lot of time spent on run-of-the-mill “stop the steal” types in congress, beyond Liz Cheney calling out their dishonor last week.

Fox News’s Brit Hume even argued the other day that the committee’s efforts might ultimately do the Republican Party a “great service”, because he thinks “a great many Republicans think they can’t win with Trump at the head of the ticket again.”

It’s an interesting point, and if things play out that way, it would be impossible to miss the irony of Liz Cheney sacrificing her political career to finally free her party of the man who has caused it and the country such terrible institutional damage.