NO IRS ANTI-FRAUD STRATEGY: Hard to believe the federal tax agency would lack a coherent strategy to combat and prevent tax fraud, but the Government Accountability Office (GAO) says they couldn’t find such a strategy.

SARAH HOYT’S SHOCKED FACE IS ENJOYING AN EXTENDED SABBATICAL: Minneapolis audit finds ‘violence interrupter’ program vulnerable to fraud, favoritism, and political influence. “According to a recent 60-page report from the Minneapolis City Auditor’s Office, government investigators concluded that the city’s Neighborhood Safety Department fails to properly oversee the millions of dollars it pays nonprofit groups to patrol certain high-crime areas in place of police.”

MORE LIKE THIS, PLEASE:

Barely four months left in office, and he’s still executing.

MONITOR YOUR HEALTH: KardiaMobile. #CommissionEarned

SOME SMALL MEASURE OF SANITY: Federal Judge Strikes Down New York’s $75 Billion Climate Superfund.

A federal judge has struck down New York’s Climate Change Superfund Act, blocking the state from collecting $75 billion from fossil fuel companies to pay for projects addressing concerns the state attributed to climate change.

The Justice Department on Sept. 28 hailed the ruling as a “significant step in … protecting American energy from state overreach.” U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel issued a judgment against the law on Sept. 25 after stating two days earlier that it intruded on federal authority in multiple ways, including by regulating greenhouse gas emissions that cross state lines.

The law would have required large companies involved in fossil fuel extraction or crude oil refining to pay into a state fund over 25 years. Each company’s share would have been based on greenhouse gas emissions attributed to its products from 2000 through 2024. New York intended to use the money for infrastructure and other projects to help communities address issues the state blames on climate change.

The way I read it, the superfund was more of slush fund based on junk science.

I’M SURE THE VIEWS ARE PHENOMENAL, BUT DON’T BREATHE IN FROM A CLOUD CITY BALCONY:

HEY, BIG SPENDER: Russia raises 2027 military spending by 27%, budget documents show. “The documents showed that in 2026 the government will increase its net borrowing plan by 26% to 5 trillion roubles and spend 459 billion roubles — about 11% of the liquid part of its National Wealth Fund — to reduce the deficit. It also cut the oil and gas revenue estimate for 2026 to 7.6 trillion roubles from 8.9 trillion roubles previously.”

WHAT???

From the replies: “Wow. I never understood that bluff — Fox rolling over on that settlement when it appeared that Dominion had unclean hands.”

And here’s the direct link to Byrne’s piece, which is probably the finest thing you’ll read all day.

FAIL, BRITANNIA: The RAF Fairford Follies, Day Three.

With the news seemingly so dire, and reports that Fairford and other joint UK-US bases had been on heightened alert in the preceding days because of increased radical chatter, everyone wondered why Prime Minister Andy Burnham hadn’t called a Cobra meeting yet, which is their crisis management committee.

That’s where we left off.

When at last it was announced the PM was going to…

“…chair a COBRA meeting this afternoon about the RAF Fairford suspected bomb plot…”

…that word was overshadowed by everyone’s collective gasps of disbelief, as the five explosive and terrorist bomb plot suspects were suddenly turned loose on bail.

Full story, unbelievable as it is, at the link.

BRADLEY THOMPSON: Marriage Nihilism.

It is often said of postmodern “marriage” that it does not affect the marriages of heterosexual couples. As The Boston Globe asked in an oft-cited editorial defending same-sex marriage, “How would gay civil marriage affect your lives, liberties, or opportunities, or your own marriages?” This is the million-dollar question that has left conservatives and Christians stammering for an answer. This simple and seemingly commonsense question is no doubt important, but it is also a disingenuous and trivial evasion of the nature and point of marriage.

On a superficial level, a same-sex “marriage” would not affect my marriage for the same reasons that none of the various forms of postmodern marriage (e.g., polygamous, polyamorous, bigamous, incestuous, pedophilic, or interspecies) would affect my marriage. If two men want to marry, if a man and five women want to marry, if ten men and women want to marry each other, or if a woman wants to marry a dolphin, none of these unions will have any effect on my marriage in the same way that no other heterosexual marriage affects mine. Why not? On one level, all these relationships are private matters that do not have any bearing on my marriage, which is also a private matter. The simple truth of the matter is that there are only two people in the entire world who could affect my marriage: I am one and the other is my wife.

On a deeper and more fundamental level, same-sex marriage will unquestionably affect my liberties and opportunities in innumerable ways; it will affect my marriage indirectly and in meaningful ways; and it will certainly affect the way future generations experience marriage. The postmodern view of “marriage” will impose a variety of “negative externalities” on society and therefore actually harm the institution of marriage—and my marriage with it.

By democratizing and disconnecting marriage from its metaphysical roots, the postmodern view of marriage will inject a major dose of subjectivism, egalitarianism, and moral relativism into America’s marriage culture. It is grounded in the subjectivist premise that marriage is simply about individual wants, feelings, and needs, on the egalitarian premise that marriage is about companionship and all companionships are equal, and on the relativist principle that we cannot rank, distinguish, or judge one form of romantic union from another. The postmodern view makes different things the same and it makes unequal things equal.

Read the whole thing.

PINK FLOYD GHOST BAND TO TOUR: Roger Waters and his son reveal dates for Pink Floyd tribute 2027 tour after finding singer.

Roger Waters and his son, Harry Waters, have revealed the dates for Pink Floyd’s tribute band tour next year, as well as who will be stepping into the shoes of the singer.

The Legacy – A Pink Floyd Show tour has been in the works in Waters’ world for some time, enlisting the help of his son’s band to perform the iconic rock group’s greatest hits.

However, the rock legend took to his X account in April this year, in search of a singer to match the inimitable vocals of his heyday, as he said: “Harry’s band is missing one thing. The voice I had when I was young.”

Subsequently, having sifted through around 3,000 applications, Waters has settled on Clifton David Broadbridge, a Canadian singer living in Nashville, to take on the massive role of impersonating the former Pink Floyd frontman.

A description of the Legacy show, according to Consequence, reads, “Roger Waters Presents LEGACY – A Pink Floyd Show is an all-new live production celebrating the defining music and visual world of Pink Floyd’s golden era from 1971-1979.”

It adds, “Created under the direction of Roger Waters with a band led by his son Harry Waters, a longtime touring musician, pianist and composer, LEGACY features a world-class 10-piece band performing the ground breaking songs from The Dark Side of the Moon, Wish You Were Here, Animals and The Wall.”

The description also says the show will be “spanning more than two hours, LEGACY reaches deep into Pink Floyd’s catalog and celebrates the music that defined a generation, music that is just as relevant today.”

As more and more elderly rockers like Roger Waters, age 83, shuffle ever closer to the proverbial Great Gig in the Sky, this is the future of boomer-era rock, or the lack thereof. Concerts with massively expensive ticket prices to see what were called in the Big Band days “ghost bands” with only one or two original members – or in this case, the son of an original member. (Or worse, the dreaded holographic recreations of ancient bands.) Steven Hyden wrote in his 2018 book, Twilight of the Gods, that for “classic rock” the brand is everything, and increasingly, the brand will be all that survives.

KAROL MARKOWICZ: Ms Rachel said, ‘I am political.’ Parents should take her at her word.

Wearing a pink headband and talking in a sing-songy voice, Ms. Rachel’s “Songs for Littles” is a phenomenon among toddlers. She’s the new Mr. Rogers, according to some, a safe place to park your children while you do the dishes or laundry.

The reality is that Rachel Griffin Accurso, who plays the character of Ms. Rachel, should not be trusted with your kids.

She’s become a prominent anti-Israel activist, but that’s just one part of her overall political messaging. If you’re letting your child watch Ms. Rachel because her anti-Israel comments don’t bother you, it’s important to understand that those comments are part of a larger grouping of far-left opinions.

Don’t let her near your kids or grandkids.