Author Archive: Ed Driscoll

TWENTY MINUTES INTO THE FUTURE: Want to know how a socialist mayor would govern New York City? Ask Chicago.

A major city. A heated mayoral election. A familiar dilemma: a moderate, business-friendly Democrat versus a democratic socialist. New Yorkers, take it from Chicago — we’ve seen this movie before, and the ending isn’t pretty.

New Yorkers will cast their ballots Tuesday in New York’s mayoral primary, where 11 candidates are vying to win the Democratic primary in America’s largest city. Frontrunner and former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is in a tight race against New York state assembly member Zohran Mamdani.

Mamdani wants to freeze rents, open city-owned grocery stores, provide bus service for “free,” tax corporations and the 1%, and increase the minimum wage to $30, among other left-wing positions that differ greatly from Cuomo. Most of Mamdani’s ideas are shared (at least in principle) by Mayor Brandon Johnson, and many of them are popular in blue cities. But experience has taught us here that far-left candidates do not make for effective or popular municipal executives in today’s stressful economy.

Johnson tried to float a $300 million tax hike — and failed. He tried to pass a “mansion tax” that would’ve hiked the real estate transfer tax — and failed. He’s built too few affordable housing units for too much money. He’s isolated himself from many of the state and federal officials he hopes will come to his financial rescue, and he’s done egregious special favors for the people who got him elected — namely, pushing an incredibly costly new contract with the Chicago Teachers Union. He forced out a highly competent schools chief who wouldn’t cow to his desire to borrow recklessly. His city is broke, but he wants to spend more. The list goes on.

Johnson’s approval rating cratered in his second year — a reflection of how quickly progressive promises collapsed under the weight of governance and Chicago’s financial reality. What sounded good in theory has translated into dysfunction, driven by fiscal missteps and political inexperience.

Johnson is one of the most progressive mayors in the U.S., but Mamdani, inarguably, is yet more radical.

America’s Governor is also going twenty minutes into the future:

UPDATE: NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani is poster child for ‘luxury beliefs.’

a term I coined years ago — means opinions that confer status on the upper class at little to no cost for them, while inflicting serious cost on the lower classes. And the very people who back Mamdani are the ones who most resemble him: affluent, overeducated, and eager to prove their virtue at someone else’s expense.

As is often true of those who embrace luxury beliefs, Mamdani purports to care most about the working class. He says he wants free buses, government-run grocery stores, and a freeze on rent increases.

But his platform would hurt the working classes a lot more than it would help them.

Take, for example, Mamdani’s plan to freeze rents. Without raising rents, many landlords cannot afford to maintain their buildings, which leads to apartments becoming rundown or empty. This is one reason why, ironically, cities with rent control policies have the lowest levels of affordable housing — a policy that hurts working-class families most.

Then there’s Mamdani’s push for free public buses, a plan that would cost $630 million a year. An analysis by the Transportation Research Board found that “some public transit systems that have experimented with or implemented a fare-free policy have been overwhelmed … by the presence of disruptive passengers, including loud teenagers and vagrants.” This, too, would make life harder for low-income New Yorkers who depend on public transit every day.

Mamdani has also been a supporter of the “defund the police” movement. But a recent poll from the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, found that a majority (54 per cent) of New York City voters say they want to see more police officers across New York. Only 17 per cent say they want to see fewer, while 21 per cent say they want to keep the existing number as it is. Meanwhile, the poorest Americans — those who earn $25,000 or less a year — are three times more likely to be victims of robbery, aggravated assault and sexual assault, according to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics.

As Kevin Williamson warned a decade ago, “the thing about [Mike] Bloomberg is, he’s a busy body and a nanny and self-regarding and sanctimonious and unbearable, and Jesus, are we going to miss him when he’s gone, because Bloomberg, for all of this faults and his weird little psychosis about bacon and salt and soft drinks and sugar and all the rest of it, and smoking, especially, basically kept what was best about the Giuliani administration.”

Gooder and harder, Fun City.

UPDATE (10:30 PM):

FAKE NEWS FAIL: CNN Exposed for Bad Iran Strike Reporting.

That’s the same Natasha Bertrand who “exposed” the Hunter Biden laptop “Russian disinformation” story, which was, like the CNN piece here, fake news. CNN claims:

The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment that was described by four people briefed on it.

The four people are not named, of course. One wonders if they’re the same leakers who broke the “Hunter’s laptop is Russian disinformation” story to CNN, to this same reporter. Sometimes, coincidences are just coincidences — but here?

Brit Hume adds: “That CNN report on this left out the part about this intelligence report being considered ‘low confidence.’ Imagine that.”

At his Substack, Erick Erickson writes, “What do you think is more likely? The attack did not set back Iran or anti-Trump bureaucrats are trying to make a successful attack look bad to discredit the President and the military.”

Joe Concha quips, “Surprised CNN just didn’t go with 51 intelligence officers for old times sake…

Heh, indeed — 0r maybe 57 for a nice Manchurian Candidate callback:

Related: UN Nuclear Watchdog Chief: ‘Night and Day’ Difference Between Iran’s Nuclear Capabilities Before and After US Strikes. ‘It is clear that there is one Iran—before June 13, nuclear Iran—and one now,’ says IAEA’s Rafael Grossi.

UPDATE: This is CNN:

MORE: Pooh-Poohing the Iran Bombing.

All right, let’s talk about the leaked intel assessment on the bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites. CNN reported one US intelligence assessment concluded that Iran’s nuclear program has only been set back a few months. The New York Times soon followed with a nearly identical piece.

There are no specifics in either piece. We don’t know—and we it’s clear the reporters do not know—which sites they are relaying quotes about. And there’s a strange, or maybe not so strange, unwillingness to note that the assessment in question, from the Defense Intelligence Agency, was made with “low confidence”—which is code for “we don’t really know what happened so we’re going to guess, kind of.”

But here is one assertion in the Times report: “The strikes badly damaged the electrical system at Fordo, which is housed deep inside a mountain to shield it from attacks, officials said. It is not clear how long it will take Iran to gain access to the underground buildings and then repair the electrical systems and reinstall equipment that was moved.”

If the Times is reporting that detail accurately, then Fordow is done for. The power sources are down and no one can get inside the facility. So it is accurate to say the site was not completely destroyed physically, but that doesn’t mean it is functional or operational. The facility is hundreds of meters deep. Among other things, there’s no air in there.

Exit quote: “Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons has been made more dangerous for them, vastly more expensive, and more difficult by significant margins. And any progress at all will have to evade Israel’s watchful eye.”

But have we heard from Joe Scarborough on how things are going at Fordow?

GREAT MOMENTS IN PR: Disney Has a New $200 Million Movie About to Come Out So It Must Be Time for One of Its Overpaid Woke Communist Non-Talents to Open His Mouth Again.

Pedro Pascal has launched a new attack on JK Rowling – defending his description of her as a ‘heinous loser’ as he declared how ‘bullies’ made him feel ‘f***ing sick’.

The Game Of Thrones and Gladiator II actor has doubled down on his criticisms of the Harry Potter author over her gender-critical opinions in a new interview.

Pascal, 50, whose sister Lux recently came out as a transgender woman, initially made the scathing ‘heinous loser’ remark in April on Instagram.

He was responding to activist Tariq Ra’ouf who was calling for a boycott of any future Harry Potter projects due to Rowling’s outspoken stance on trans issues.

The British writer, 59, had celebrated a ruling by London’s Supreme Court determining that, specifically within the terms of Britain’s Equality act, ‘woman’ meant a biological female and not gender.

* * * * * * * *

You have the right to exist. You do not have the right to use government or corporate force to compel free people to accept your deranged, delusionary view of the word.

So if I understand this: People who do not play around with your brother’s delusions are attempting to “erase” him from existence — and you certainly don’t want such bigots’ money, do you? So you certainly are telling them not to see your movies, right?

Trannies are insulting Rowling by saying she looks like a tranny.

What an own-goal sort of insult.

Exit quote: “Hey everyone be sure to rush out and see The Fabulous Four. It’s a real family film.”

MUST WATCH: VA Secretary Collins Destroys Lying Democratic Senator During Hearing.

Need a little afternoon pick-me-up? Look no further than this clip of United States Secretary of Veterans Affairs Doug Collins absolutely destroying Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) at a Senate hearing this morning, and for good reason.

Collins testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee on Tuesday, and when it was Murray’s turn to talk, she tried to play a game of “gotcha” on the topic of the VA discriminating against certain people. Her source? The Guardian, a liberal rag published in the United Kingdom that has one of the worst cases of TDS you’ll ever witness.

* * * * * * * *

* * * * * * * *

This is the way.

THURSTON, WE HAVE A PROBLEM:

And by “bombing away” the infrastructure where that bomb is built: Five Takes on Bombing Iran.

(Classical reference in headline.)

SHE’S READY FOR HER NEXT CLOSEUP, MR. DEMILLE: Rachel Zegler reveals psychiatrist, anxiety meds helped her deal with Snow White backlash.

The 24-year-old actress opened up about the controversy and how she moved past it in an interview with i-D magazine published on Monday, June 23.

“My f–king psychiatrist has seen me through all of it,” Zegler explained, noting that her medical doctor constantly reminded her that “what you’re going through isn’t normal.”

“That sentence did such wonders for me in multiple situations in my life,” she said.

The “Y2K” actress also revealed that she started taking anxiety medication.

Zegler said the decision was “truly a game changer” because “I just wasn’t functioning” and “I wanted to function in a way that made me feel confident in the way I was moving through the world.”

Besides her psychiatrist and anxiety meds, the “West Side Story” star also cited her “mindset” as one of the things that helped her overcome the backlash she received.

“I think a victim mindset is a choice, and I don’t choose it,” she explained“I also don’t choose nastiness in the face of it. I don’t choose negativity in the face of it.”

Whatever Zegler’s been prescribed, it’s a helluva drug:

And as Ed Morrissey tweets, “Did her PR crisis firm come up with the idea to pass her off as a head case? Because if so, I suspect she needs a new PR crisis firm, unless the plan really is to further convince producers and directors of her toxicity.”

IMDB lists no upcoming movies she’s attached to, but: Rachel Zegler Reportedly In Talks To Portray Iconic Sound Of Music Role. The role originated by Julie Andrews, specifically:

Rachel Zegler is reportedly in talks to play the main role in The Sound of Music. Zegler is known as a skilled actor on both the stage and screen. On the film side of things, she got her start playing the role of Maria in Steven Spielberg’s adaptation of West Side Story. This year, she returned to the musical genre when she played the titular princess in Disney’s live-action Snow White. Though the film itself was subject to some harsh critique, Zegler’s role was consistently praised. On stage, she made her Broadway debut in 2024 in a production of Romeo & Juliet.

As per Deadline, Zegler is now reportedly in talks to play the protagonist in The Sound of Music. According to the source, the Snow White actor is in conversation to play the role of Maria von Trapp, a part originated by Julie Andrews, in a stage production of the series at Lincoln Center in New York City. It was noted by the source, however, that Zegler’s Sound of Music role is not yet confirmed.

And thus Hollywood comes full circle. One of the themes of Peter Biskind’s seminal 1998 look at the fall of Old Hollywood, Easy Riders, Raging Bulls, was that the last of the industry moguls blew through massive amounts of money, and hastened their demise, by attempting to recreate the enormous box office success of The Sound of Music, with failed musical after failed musical (Doctor Dolittle, Finian’s Rainbow, Paint Your Wagon, et al), even after the post-JFK, Vietnam War-era public signaled that they were done with the genre. With post-pandemic Hollywood trying — and usually failing quite badly — to get back on its feet again, no wonder they’re attempting to chase the dragon once again. But given Zegler’s toxic views on Israel, which side will she be rooting for in the potential remake?

RIP: ’60s teen idol Bobby Sherman dead at 81.

Bobby Sherman, the ’60s teen idol and actor, died Tuesday morning at the age of 81.

His wife, Brigitte Poublon, confirmed Sherman’s death to Fox News Digital.

Crafted with the help of friend John Stamos, Poublon shared the news of Sherman’s death on social media.

“It is with the heaviest heart that I share the passing of my beloved husband, Bobby Sherman,” Stamos wrote on Instagram on behalf of Poublon. “Bobby left this world holding my hand—just as he held up our life with love, courage, and unwavering grace through all 29 beautiful years of marriage.”

* * * * * * * *

Throughout his career, he also appeared on shows like “Fantasy Island,” “The Love Boat” and “Frasier,” his last credited appearance in 1997.

After an appearance on the TV show “Emergency!” in 1974, Sherman decided to change career paths and eventually leave entertainment to be a technical reserve police officer with the Los Angeles Police Department.

According to the Los Angeles Police Reserve Foundation’s Facebook page, Sherman was also an EMT and in 1999 was named LAPD Reserve Officer of the Year.

Poublon said Sherman “gave his all” to public service, adding it was a “labor of love” for him.

In the early 1970s, Sherman and his manager Ward Sylvester purchased a former United Airlines Boeing 720 and transformed it into the “Starship,” which ferried “Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, Deep Purple, The Allman Brothers, The Bee Gees, Elton John, Peter Frampton and Alice Cooper” to their US concerts throughout  the 1970s. “Most of the Starship’s nouveau-riche rockers thought the plane was the ne plus ultra of decadence and luxury. And for the times, it probably was. A four-engined variant of the Boeing 707 renovated at a cost of $200,000, the Starship leased for a ­staggering $2,500-per-flight hour and was a potent symbol of rock’n’roll primacy.”

DAMNING WITH FAINT PRAISE: Scarborough Shocks Viewers with Rare Defense of Trump’s Iran Strike: ‘Any President Would’ve Done It.’

Hell may have just frozen over.

In a rare moment of clarity from the liberal media, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough left viewers stunned on Monday when he offered a surprising defense of President Donald Trump’s bold and strategic strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Known for his relentless criticism of Trump, Scarborough broke ranks with the left-wing echo chamber by acknowledging the strength and effectiveness of the president’s Operation Midnight Hammer.

During Monday’s broadcast of “Morning Joe,” Scarborough said he was not “championing either side,” but defended Trump’s strikes on Iran’s nuclear program. He argued that any president, including Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush, would have felt compelled to act given Iran’s looming nuclear threat.

“I find it hard to believe that Bush 41, Bush 43, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, you know, go down the list, any president wouldn’t have felt compelled to take that strike,” he said. “What would Monday look like if he hadn’t have moved? If Iran wasn’t already at 60 percent [enrichment of uranium] and an ability to create nuclear weapons in a short matter of time, right?”

Right. As Jeffrey Blehar writes: Trump’s Iran Strike Shows Precisely Why Elections Matter.

This is an unalloyed victory for the forces of sanity and civilization. To those who point to the inevitability of unforeseen “blowback,” I will remind you that Iran and its proxies have been engaging in low-level conflict with America for well over a decade now — who do you think was funding and training the people killing our boys in Iraq and Afghanistan all those years? — and now it is free to try its hand at more of the same, if it wishes, this time without a looming nuclear threat to back it up. America has come out ahead on this in concrete, measurable, and hugely valuable geostrategic ways.

Most importantly of all, none of this would have happened if Kamala Harris were president. Think about that for a moment; think about the road not taken. One can only speculate about hypotheticals, but . . . c’mon now. Look into your heart, you know it to be true. Imagine a President Harris, sitting uneasily atop a Democratic coalition barely held together at the seams: Would she have encouraged Netanyahu in his initial campaign against Iranian military and nuclear assets? Would she have provided the final air support and ordnance necessary to get the job done? With people such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, David Hogg, and Zohran Mamdani calling the shots among large segments of her base?

To ask the question out loud is to answer it: no. For that reason alone, it is no exaggeration to say that the shape of the world perceptibly turned for the better on the outcome of last November’s election. You can draw a straight line between Donald Trump’s winning the 2024 race and Iran’s nuclear weapons program now being best described as a series of variably sized craters. If you supported Donald Trump and voted for him in 2024, you should feel proud of it today: Saturday is the most obvious evidence yet of why your vote mattered. (And if you voted for Donald Trump because you mistakenly thought him to be a whimpering, limp-tailed isolationist? Well, your dismay pleases me as well.)

Jonathan Tobin adds: Would anyone but Trump have done it?

There have always been reasons for American presidents to avoid taking action on Iran.

Key among them has been an unwillingness to acknowledge Iran’s goal or what it would mean if Tehran obtained a nuclear weapon or was allowed, as it appeared to be already the case in recent years, to become a threshold nuclear power.

Many in the American intelligence community clung to the belief that “Supreme Leader” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s purported ban on Iran’s building a nuclear weapon was a genuine policy decision. Though it was proven false by the regime’s nuclear files obtained by Israel’s Mossad in 2018, those determined to give Tehran a pass—like current Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard—have continued to wrongly insist that its nuclear project is not a threat.

Others thought that dealing with the problem could also be postponed. That was the position of the George W. Bush administration, which was already embroiled in quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Obama went even further and negotiated a nuclear deal that not only postponed a reckoning on the issue, but essentially guaranteed that Iran would get a weapon once the sunset provisions in the 2015 accord expired by 2030. More than that, Obama and his former staffers who ran foreign policy during the Biden administration went even further and imagined that Tehran was open to a rapprochement with the West and believed that it should replace Israel and Saudi Arabia as the lynchpin of U.S. policy in the region.

Flashback: Ben Rhodes: Obama Admin Threw Israel Under Bus at U.N. to Pressure Jewish State.

OLD AND BUSTED: Democracy Dies in Darkness.

The New Hotness?

Related: Leftists Demanded Police Body Cams. Now They Regret It.

UPDATE: The Washington Post ends toxic narrative that cops are hunting black men.

The fatal flaw in the Post’s project – and in the broader progressive framing of policing – is its refusal to confront the correlation between crime and police presence. The hard truth is that urban minority communities tend to have higher rates of violent crime. That’s not because of skin color. That’s because of systemic issues like broken families, failing schools and economic neglect – many of them the legacy of progressive policies, by the way.

But when crime is high, police presence follows. It must. And when police presence is high, so too is the probability of interaction, arrest, and – yes – conflict. This isn’t racism. It’s math.

The idea that this basic dynamic can be reduced to a racial morality play – black victim versus white oppressor – is not only wrong, it’s dangerous. It cultivates fear. It discourages cooperation with law enforcement. It teaches young black men that any contact with a cop is a threat to their life, instead of an opportunity for protection, resolution, or correction.

And it has consequences. In cities across America, police officers have scaled back traffic stops, foot patrols and street-level enforcement, not because they don’t care – but because they’re being watched like predators and punished like criminals for doing their jobs. That vacuum doesn’t lead to peace. It leads to unchecked violence.

Look at the statistics the media ignore: in recent years, spikes in homicide, carjackings and armed robbery have hit minority communities the hardest. Children are gunned down on their front porches. Elderly women are assaulted in broad daylight. And where are the think pieces on that? Where’s the Washington Post database for the victims of post-police America?

Flashback: White Progressives Shocked to Learn Black and Latino Voters Don’t Share Their Radical ‘defund the Police’ Views.

MICHAEL WALSH: Unconditional Surrender.

[In the wake of 9/11] we know from history what other, more secure and confident, cultures would have done. The imperial Romans would have gone full delenda est on Saudi Arabia, razed its cities, destroyed the Kaaba, leveled the mosques, occupied the oil fields, seized its wealth, executed its leaders, and sold the populace into slavery; they knew an existential struggle when they were in one. Constantine would not have stopped until Greco-Roman writ applied without resistance across his realm. Bohemond would immediately have known the holy warriors for what they were: dedicated, merciless enemies in a religious war in which there could be only one victor, and helpfully converted their mosques back into churches as he put them to the sword.

Napoleon would have as handily defeated them as he did the Egyptian mamelukes—former slaves who had risen to power over the centuries—and added their territory to his empire, sending scholars and scientists to preserve and protect the ruins and artifacts and where possible restore the preexisting nations and faiths that had been overwhelmed by the Islamic conquest, especially in Persia, a once-great nation that has not been the same since the Arab conquest in 654 A.D. Americans, however, have never had a taste for empire.

True, the U.S. successfully rehabilitated Germany and Japan as allies, in large part by Americanizing them via its pervasive popular, even vulgar, culture. But that was only possible after both nations had been convincingly beaten. As for Russia, the Cold War foe, it is still feeling the effects of its loss of manpower during the Great Patriotic War, the collapse of its moral structure under atheistic Communism, its reliance on abortion as birth control, its corresponding declining birth rate, and a host of other ills brought on by its self-imposed, prolonged absence from Western civilization during most of the last century. Once an enemy, Russia is now simply an adversary, and not a particularly potent one at that.

The Dar al-Harb, however, is still out there, itching for a fight.

Read the whole thing.

(Bumped.)

WHATEVER GETS YOU THROUGH THE NIGHT: Hahahahaha: Scott Jennings Bursts Out Laughing When Obama Aide Claims He Was an ‘Anti-War’ President.

“For the record, in his last year in office alone, Obama dropped more than 25,000 bombs on seven Middle East countries.”

And worked ceaselessly to aid Iran in building theirs:

More from Stacey Matthews, aka Sister Toldjah: “They can stomach many things, but losing to Trump — especially on issues as consequential as this one, is not one of them, hence the pearl clutching, handwringing, and gaslighting about the nuclear site strikes and the ceasefire deal. It simply does not compute with them that it’s Trump, not Obama and not Biden, who is the actual anti-war, peace through strength president in this scenario, bless their hearts.”

WELL, IT WAS NICE WHILE IT LASTED:

 

BURIED LEDE: Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran Confirms Trump Ceasefire Going into Effect.

Was he inspired by the crazed general before the final scenes of the recent German remake of All Quiet on the Western Front?

WELL YES, IT’S SPELLED ŠXʷMƏΘKʷƏY̓ƏMSƏM STREET, BUT IT’S PRONOUNCED THROATWOBBLER MANGROVE: You’ll never believe what the wokies in Canada just renamed this street to be more inclusive of indigenous people.

So the City of Vancouver, Canada, just got super woke and changed the name of a street that was previously called “Trutch St,” to…

Well, just watch the video, because I can’t do this.

As Rod Dreher notes:

From the comments to the tweet that Dreher links to: “It’s good to see him wearing the eyeglasses of his people.”

Classical reference in headline:

 

OLD AND BUSTED: Queers for Palestine.

The New Hotness?

TYLER O’NEIL: Former Harris Lawyer Now Works for a President She Called ‘Unfit to Hold Office.’

Biden’s National Security Council now works in President Donald Trump’s administration as an ostensibly non-political staffer in the Department of Defense, even though she wrote an op-ed calling Trump “unfit to hold office.”

While presidents appoint more than 3,000 people for political positions, the federal government directly employs roughly 2.3 million people, most of whom serve in ostensibly nonpolitical, career positions. The Office of Personnel Management tracks when political appointees transition to career positions—a process often referred to as “burrowing in” to the bureaucracy—and Samantha Goldstein did so in 2023.

“Drain the swamp” was a popular catchphrase during Trump’s first term, and it remains just as important today.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER:

Trump is speaking to the mullahs like dad grounding a petulant child. But what happens now that he’s called out their (likely) face-saving strategy?

JEREMY LOOKS TO SUPER-SIZE HIS ESTATE IN THE NEW SEASON OF CLARKSON’S FARM!

VDH: Ten Iranian Questions.

2. But what happens now? Won’t Iran release its terrorist cells in the U.S., or attack U.S. bases nearby with missiles and drones, or unleash missiles at the Gulf oil fields, or mine the Straits of Hormuz, or unleash a new unforeseen volley of missiles at Israel?

Those scenarios are endless.

But this mission was not a 1991 or 2003 bombing as a preliminary to a ground invasion. Nor was it a pile-on 2011 Libyan bombing campaign designed for regime change. It had a limited agenda—the destruction of Iran’s nuclear fortresses—and it apparently succeeded. Iran would be wise to seek a ceasefire and negotiate for the regime’s survival. Pundits claim Iran must do something to restore its reputation. But the more it acts and fails, the greater its humiliation.

U.S. naval power will soon stop any Iranian naval attacks in the Straits of Hormuz. If Iran sends missiles into the Gulf oil fields, it will lose their own.

If they hit American bases, they will likely get a response quite unlike the aftermath lull of the killing of Gen. Soleimani. If they have a hidden massive missile arsenal to unleash on Israel, Israel will respond in kind.

Which likely explains this:

KURT SCHLICHTER: Trump’s Attack on Iran Will Not Destroy the America First Movement.

We keep hearing from people who insist that they weren’t voting to bomb Iran when they voted for Donald Trump, but I was totally voting to bomb Iran when I voted for Donald Trump. I knew that Donald Trump wasn’t going to be a pathetic pushover like Barack Obama, the soft new fish of world politics who sold himself for cigarettes and security on the cell block. I was a high school freshman when these creeps first dared to put their stinking paws on Americans after invading our embassy. America never avenged that or the deaths at Desert One. In the decades that followed, Iran’s legacy of terrorism, torture, and murder has run the tally to well over 1,000 dead Americans. That atrocities from Beirut to Khobar Towers to the explosively formed projectiles in Iraq have gone unavenged until now – and it is only partially avenged as it stands – is a disgrace. Third World potentates should shiver in cold horror at the thought of our unmerciful vengeance should they ever presume to harass an American.

This isn’t “Iraq 2: Electric Boogaloo.” When people complain that Donald Trump promised us no new wars – you can see that the memo for that went out to the Democrats, and when you agree with the Official Democrat Talking Points™, you need to check yourself before you wreck yourself – they are missing the point. This is not a new war. We’ve been at war with these fanatical creeps for half a century, and it’s long overdue that we finally struck back.

But, of course, the people who think like me are only a part of the America First coalition – the polling suggests we are a very big part. Still, a significant part of the American First coalition, including friends of mine who I greatly respect, disagree, and deserve a hearing when they feel strongly about something. They think differently about this issue. And you know what? They’re not crazy to do so.

Read the whole thing. Trump has been remarkably consistent on preventing Iran from developing the bomb:

CHANGE: BBC bosses back Martine Croxall over ‘pregnant people’ correction.

BBC bosses have backed a television presenter who corrected the phrase “pregnant people” to “women” while broadcasting live, in what has been welcomed as a rejection of gender-neutral language.

Martine Croxall, 56, was citing a study about protecting vulnerable people in hot weather and, after reading out the report’s phrasing, immediately rolled her eyes and changed the wording to “women”.

“Malcolm Mistry, who was involved in the research, says that the aged, pregnant people … women … and those with pre-existing health conditions need to take precautions,” she said.

JK Rowling was among those to support the presenter, calling Croxall “her new favourite BBC presenter” on X, and the former Wimbledon champion Martina Navratilova also backed her.

Croxall added: “A huge thank you to everyone who has chosen to follow me today for whatever reason. It’s been quite a ride.”

She has gained almost 50,000 followers on the social media platform since the incident on Sunday afternoon.

It looks like the boys in Room 102 will have a slow day today after all: