Letter to the Editor: Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio are Ineligble to be President

 

(Response to The Election 2028 Prospects As of Now)

Dear Mr. Schaper:

Your current article on Republican and Democrat prospects for 2028 bring up an important issue for the GOP. Neither Rubio nor Cruz are eligible for the presidency. 

Secretary Rubio was born to Cuban-citizen parents. Senator Cruz was born in Canada to a Cuban-citizen father. The Constitution requires those in the highest office to be "natural-born" citizens as opposed to just "citizens", the requirement for members of Congress.

If either man becomes the Republican nominee, the Democrats would need but a single swing-state supreme court to rule him ineligible for the ballot. In 2024, Democrats used a similar effort to keep President Trump off of state ballots in Colorado. So there's precedent. 

The Constitution was ignored by both political parties in 2008 and 2012 when the son of a British subject ran for high office. In 2020, Kamala Harris was elected vice president even though both parents were citizens of foreign countries.

Scholarship and history show that the Framers understood the term "natural-born citizen" to mean a person born on U.S. soil to parents who were U.S. citizens at the time of the child's birth. Legal challenges in 2008, 2012, and 2020 were turned back by the U.S. Supreme Court on technicalities. Justice Thomas has indicated the court is loathe to take up this hot button issue and definitively rule on the intentions of the Framers.

Perhaps, one day we'll select presidential candidates through a search for the best people for the job. Political parties tend to crown candidates based not on merit but rather on current popularity or, in some cases, a sense of entitlement. Hopefully, in the future, the only angst for a voter will be having to select a candidate from among several eminently qualified people.

Best,

Harold Winard

Wharton, New Jersey

The Election 2028 Presidential Prospects as of Now

 

The 2026 elections are almost upon us. You all know what that means: before the end of the year, Presidential candidates will be throwing their hat in the ring for 2028. 

The tradition is all but ingrained at this stage. When the Republican Party collapsed across the board in 2006 due to President George W. Bush’s deep unpopularity plus massive scandals in the House and US Senate, Republican contenders began scrambling to get ahead of the mess: define themselves early while distancing themselves from the GOP mess at the time.

US Senator John McCain got sandbagged with the 2008 nomination, in part because he was the next in line, having lost to Bush in 2000. Former US Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Florida Governor Jeb Bush were considering a bid, but they wisely avoided an election that would only compound Republican losses.

Presuming Republicans will exceed political projections in 2026, perhaps even hold on to the House and the US Senate, they may face a rougher 2028. After all, Republicans expected to do very well in 2022; they barely won the House, but we want a resounding victory across the board in 2024. They should expect a similar turnaround against them

Republican calculations also depend on what the Democrats plan for their standard-bearer. Will the DNC establishment and the liberal ground-game organizers resolve (i.e., neutralize) their socialism problem? Will they mitigate their anti-Zionist crazies? Or will they have to find a way to create a two-state solution within their party so that pro-Palestinian elements will coexist peacefully with the still-extant pro-Israel Democratic caucus? I doubt they will find peace, since the pro-terrorist elements are gaining, and they show no sign of slacking or moderating their abusive disdain for Israel, Jews, and the Western tradition.

Granted, the Arab-Israel foreign policy divide has emerged within some Republican circles, but it's not a severe divide among the electorate. The nominees will have to make their case, and the more isolationist faction can cause trouble.

The 2028 Republican line-up will face the biggest challenge: Who succeeds Trump? The New York real estate mogul turned Top Five President in US History is a once-in-a-lifetime figure, impossible to imitate. His platform of lower immigration, cultural restoration, and populist confirmation has reshaped the Republican brand. The next GOP presidential candidate must embrace this new MAGA message while connecting with disaffected suburbs and dissident Republicans repelled by Trump’s brashness and bombast.

Vice President JD Vance is the frontrunner. Critics will charge that he has a thin resume, but the vice-presidential office is about as useful as a warm picture of spit, and John Adams found it to be one of the most useless offices devised by man. Not Vance’s fault that he hasn’t done much.

His main strength is communication, which matters most for a national office. He helped message MAGA to the country in 2024, and he articulates working-class angst against a government and corporate complex determined to put power and profit ahead of the people. However, he is advocating more government spending and overreach, including a federal program for stay-at-home parents. Most handouts? He has frequently praised the economic interventionism of US Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Socialism-lite is still socialism, JD. His ongoing friendship with Woke Right anti-Zionist carnival barker Tucker Carlson will trouble his presidential bid.

Republicans should not settle for a JD Coronation, an outcome so unbecoming of a Republican Party that has become more grassroots-oriented. Vance either needs to shift his stance on free enterprise issues and make a clear, clean break from the podcastistan Woke Right, or he's going to face some major headwinds in the 2028 primary, a divide that will hobble the conservative cause going into the general election.

For all the JD Vance liabilities above, Republicans should be looking for someone else to take up Trump’s mantle.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has generated a growing following. established himself as an effective executive, a true on-the-ground administrator who gets things done, advancing a true America First agenda without anti-Zionist rantings. His stance on economic issues might be more tolerable to the free-market elements within the GOP, and his record on stopping illegal immigration is impeccable.

My first pick remains retiring Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. He not only messages the MAGA, but he makes it manifest and marketable across the country. He has a keen vision and attention to ideas, programs, policies, and personnel. The only problem is that a lot of MAGA will never forgive him for challenging King Trump, and governors have a hard time breaking out of their statewide followings. Florida is the new standard for conservative political prowess, but it doesn't guarantee DeSantis a chance. Then again, before Trump, two of the last three Republican presidents, who served two terms as president, had been governors. Perhaps DeSantis needs to invest in a PR program and follow the pathways laid out by Reagan and George W. Bush to make himself known in the national discussion. No doubt he will run for President in 2028. Then again, his best bet may be angling for a VP slot with Vance or Rubio.

There is one other presidential wild card: US Senator Ted Cruz. He run his course; he had his chance in 2016, and I think that the MAGA movement swept him aside. Cruz is an excellent essential fighter in the US Senate. If he doesn't want to be a Supreme Court justice, he should settle for a leadership position in the upper chamber or consider statewide office in Texas, perhaps even running for governor once Greg Abbott retires. With ten years gone, Cruz has no viable means to exceed his results after his considerable yet unsuccessful 2016 bid for president. And this is coming from a guy who supported him in that contentious primary! 

Now let’s look at the potential Democratic presidential contenders. They face some soul-searching (if there’s a soul to search for).  Democratic pundits suggest the following are in the running for chief executive: AOC, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, California Governor Gavin Newsom, who has made no pretensions of hiding his ambitions, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and former transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg. 

They face a raucous, divided liberal caucus. The Bernie Bros and their progressive peers are out for blood. They've been screwed for the last 10 years, and they demand not just a seat at a table, but the chairman’s corner. If they can't get their progressive pick, they will insist on claiming final dibs on who carries the Democratic Party banner. Clinton-era campaign manager James Carville can complain all he wants, but the DSA is here to stay, having infiltrated the inner workings of his party. The current DNC roster is pulled in so many directions and is desperate to placate the anti-Zionist elements in the National Conference, which proves that the DSA militants are determined to have their say. 

This divide presents a golden opportunity for a 2028 GOP win.

Republicans must resolve foreign policy differences and reassert commitments to free enterprise and cultural restoration. If they channel Trump without the bluster and focus on the DSA cluster of craziness, they can carry the MAGA agenda for years to come.

The Log Cabin “Republicans” are Democrats in “Conservative” Drag

 

In a previous article, I “snatched the wig” (look it up) off the Log Cabin Republicans, exposing that they were not moving away from transgender advocacy out of some sense of righteousness or goodwill for the public – or the country.

They have reworked themselves, like a drag queen putting on a MAGA hat, to seem less crazy, more conservative, more in line with cultural currents that are rejecting the transgenderism cult just to protect their homosexual advocacy (Read, moral disintegration).

Their move against the T is not a principled reform, but CYA (cover your a--) of the highest order.

A drag queen wearing a MAGA hat is still a drag queen.

And drag queens, or any other form of family-destroying anarchy, is not conservative. In fact, there is nothing conservative about a movement claiming to promote homosexuality as a static identity deserving of the same rights and privileges as other identity groups.

The Log Cabin “Republicans” are democrats in “Conservative” drag, and we should stop pretending otherwise.

Despite all the evidence, the Log Cabin “Republicans” protest that they are a conservative movement, but that they want to provide a place for homosexual Republicans (?) to speak out for their brand of identity politics while fighting for other conservative priorities.

Putting aside their ongoing promotion of anti-natural law and natural-rights sexual deviancy, let’s confront and dismantle the lie that the Log Cabin “Republicans” are a conservative group in every other way.

To rebuff any rebuttals, let’s establish that they do claim to be conservative.

Hemminger writes in his “No More T” Op-ed:

Fifty years ago next year, Log Cabin Republicans was founded on a simple conviction: that gay Americans who believe in limited government, individual liberty, and equality deserve equal protection under the law and a voice inside the Republican Party. From the start, Log Cabin Republicans grounded its advocacy in constitutional principles — equal protection, limited government, and individual freedom.

Are the Log Cabin GOP really committed to limited government, individual liberty, and equal protection under the law?

That phrase “under the law” covers a lot of devilish subtleties. For the last ten years, the Democratic Party has attempted to pass the so-called “Equality Act” in Congress, which would further corrupt the Civil Rights Act corpus of legislation to include homosexual conduct and cross-dressing as civil rights. Log Cabin pundits are all in on the “Equality Act.”

Expansion of protected classes in Civil Rights jurisprudence ensures the growth of government overreach. While we should all resist invidious discrimination, the federal government’s crude “Civil Rights Acts” enforcement, including forced quotas and affirmative action, has frustrated liberty without combatting bigotry. Before his assassination, Charlie Kirk argued for repealing the Civil Rights Act. Free enterprise, freedom to choose, and capitalism (true limited government) provide the best protections for consumers. Conservatives have long understood this. However, the Log Cabin “Republicans” are all in favor of big government “non-discrimination” interventions. They have no problem with violating freedom of association as well as freedom of speech and freedom of commerce, i.e., pursuit (not guarantee) of happiness.

Other rights which conservatives care about include the right of children to be raised in natural families, as well as the committed protection of public order for their future. The Log Cabin “Republicans” not only support redefinition of marriage, but support homosexual couples taking children away from their natural parents. How is it “limited government” when homosexual activists (Republican as well as Democrat) use the state to punish churches, charities, and small businesses for not celebrating their homosexual activities as a matter of preference or conscience?

The Log Cabin “Republicans” support a nationwide ban on “conversion” therapy for minors. In other words, they traffic in the lies of the Left, propagandizing that reparative or restorative therapy harms individuals, including children. Father Richard Sullins of the Ruth Institute has expertly debunked these claims. Recently, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Chiles v. Salazar that states cannot prevent therapists from providing restorative therapy to children on the grounds of freedom of speech.

Not only do the Log Cabin statist oppose key principles protected by the United States Constitution, but they can’t even get with the times legally!

Here’s another problem: they claim to have ended their transgender advocacy, yet look at their goals within the Decriminalization section under the “Issues” tab of their website:

• International decriminalization of homosexuality.
• International decriminalization of gender identity/expression for trans people.
• Eradication of the death penalty as a means of punishment for LGB people.
• Sanctions against any country which, to any extent, criminalizes LGB people.
• Recognition, in the granting of requests for asylum, of the plight of LGB people who are persecuted and threatened with execution.

They still advocate for defending “Gender identity/expression for trans people.” I thought they were abandoning T advocacy?

On LCR’s arrogant, woke liberal leanings are further proof of their big-government, read Democratic sensibilities. They want to pressure other countries to normalize homosexuality. Who do they think they are? The United Nations (another abortive liberal hegemon). What right do they have to intervene in the domestic affairs of other countries, whose citizens want to protect the integrity of the family and the well-being of their children? Senegal, Ghana, Kazakhstan, etc. have the sovereign right to oppose homosexuality and cross-dressing in their domains. They have witnessed the moral collapse in the West following the permission and promotion of the LGBT agenda, and they want none of it in their countries.

For the record, how do the Log Cabin globalists intend to enforce LGBT decriminalization? By government force, naturally; hence, big government. So much for Live and Let Live!

In addition to pushing anti-conservative protections for LGBT behaviors in other countries, they expect the United States to take in every person who claims persecution for LGBT status. Should we welcome such “refugees” into our country? This is an open-borders agenda, one which will exacerbate the size and scope of the American bureaucracy while doing nothing to help American citizens.

If these platform planks aren’t enough to prove the true liberal leanings of this fake Republican enterprise, consider their current leadership. They just appointed former Congresswoman and Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer as their national secretary. DeRemer voted like a liberal Republican during her one-term tenure, even though her election ensured, for the first time in decades, that the Oregon Congressional delegation had two Republicans. She supported the PRO Act, which would have made it more difficult to leave a union, effectively negating state right-to-work laws.

As Secretary of Labor, Chavez-DeRemer faced criticism because of her anti-worker freedom record. Towards the end of her tenure, she faced civil rights complaints (how about that?!). Then she was forced out over misconduct with staff.

Another Log Cabin Leader, RINO former state senator Richard Tisei, co-sponsored the Massachusetts “Bathroom Bill” of 2016, which not only allowed confused men into women’s spaces, but also authorized massive legal sanctions against anyone who resisted these obscene, invasive policies. This is Big Government at its worst.

Log Cabin Republicans are a big-government liberal organization, or “trans-Republicans” at best. It’s all the more reason they should be disbanded entirely, or at least stop calling themselves “Republicans.” Better yet, they should just “sashay away.”

Ryan Reynolds is Wrong: The 80s Were Awesome, Man!

Ryan Reynolds has issues. Deadpool gave a deadpan opinion, whining about his childhood.

Every human being has issues they should be facing in their time. One would think that the last issue on his mind would be his thoughts on the 1980s.

Yet he insisted:

“The 80s was a brutal, brutal time for people. It was a fucking mess, and people forget that. It was a tremendous strife. Socio-political tensions everywhere. We were still pretty fresh off a Cuban Missile Crisis, which was only 15-20 years before. It’s a tumultuous period, but you look back at it now, and you’re like, ‘Oh, yeah. ‘Top Gun.’ Cocaine!’ Like, ‘No!’ It was really scary.”

I don’t know what planet he’s from. The 1980s rocked!--historic, epic, unprecedented, world-changing, even time-changing.

Forgive me a little bit of vanity, but the 1980s were great because I was born one week before the electors cast their ballots for Ronald Reagan. Good times were on their way!

The Great Communicator helped launch a conservative, free-enterprise-minded, right-wing restoration that swept the globe. Along with the UK’s Margaret “The Iron Lady” Thatcher and Canada’s Brian Mulroney, and even the first non-Italian pope in centuries, Pope John Paul II, a Zeitgeist of conservatism restored and reinvigorated a world stuck in stagflation, discouraged by dictators in Africa and South America, and, worst of all, menaced by the rogue Soviet Union, a lingering communist dystopia that instigated wars, undermined free countries, and pushed a megalomaniacal ideology responsible for the international slaughtering hundreds of millions.

Communism was the #1 bad guy, the Mr. Hand/Joker/Terminator/Predator/Hans Gruber of the 1980s. Despite communism’s ongoing economic and cultural collapse, academics were sadly, cynically convinced that there was no hope of ending communistic encroachment around the world. Even professors as sober and respectable as Arnold Toynbee, who wrote one of the most comprehensive reviews of history, resigned themselves to the idea that the Soviet Union would survive, and that free societies would decline and fail.

At the end of the decade, on a beautiful November evening, the world witnessed the collapse of the most insidious symbol of the Soviet Union and its vile economic and cultural tyranny: the Berlin Wall, signaling the demise of global communism. The West won. We won! At eight years old, I knew exactly what it meant. To see young men and women celebrating, dancing on that evil partition, breaking off pieces of that concrete monstrosity, popping off champagne, and reuniting with family members they had not seen for decades, I knew that this was an earth-shattering time, and a time of nothing but good.

Of course, I would be remiss to ignore the Pan-European Picnic that emerged in Eastern Europe, including Hungary, where men and women yearning for freedom began crossing into Austria, violating Soviet strictures. The breakdown of those border fences was the beginning of Soviet Communism’s timely end.

How about the stirring demise of Nicolae Ceaușescu of Romania? The people started fighting back, first by defending a church whose pastor had been speaking out against that evil dictator. And from that rebellion, the whole nation arose against an evil dictator, who was summarily tried, convicted, and executed on Christmas Day!

The 1980s were awesome, a tumultuous but terrific time when human beings would rise against tyranny and stand for truth and liberty once again.

Politics aside, the 1980s gave us some great culture.

The Goonies: Never say die! Ragtag boys saved their family home with an immense treasure. Men today celebrate that story, including the upset victory of Ke Huy Quan at the 2023 Academy Awards, which would never have happened without his Goonies breakout role.

Indiana Jones! The Last Crusade was not the last, but it was the best. What a great way to end the decade.

Star Wars Trilogy. Hello! The world learned in shock and wonder how the evil tyrant and fascist of the universe was actually the father of the freedom fighter. You can’t make this stuff up! It’s just so good. Star Wars set the stage for the political imagination of Western freedom overturning Communist tyranny, too!

Pretty in Pink, The Breakfast Club, 16 Candles: movies told us about the Gen-Xers becoming aware of themselves in a very turbulent, moving, powerful time. The 1980s were a very self-conscious era, but deservedly so. People were building, planning, and witnessing unprecedented cultural, political, and technological change. From Timothy Hutton in Ordinary People to Pee-Wee Herman to Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure (and Michael Keaton’s Batman), the 1980s witnessed the troubled, the geeks, the slackers overcome loss, pass the test, right the wrongs, win the day (and even win the girl), but still make it to the mall on time.

Speaking of the mall … Mall culture exploded in the 80s, a symbol of American fun, ease, and success even with excess. Lucky me in Torrance, CA, where I could eat and play at the largest shopping mall in the United States! From Aladdin’s Castle to McDonald’s indoors (which had all the cool statues and the bright colors), the 80s were a fun time!

How about the technology? We think that the Information Revolution exploded in 2007 with the iPhone and Twitter. Roll it back to the 80s, my dude. Just watching Wall Street showed everybody could start having TVs in your hand and record things with the press of a button. The technology was too expensive for everyday people, but the ideas were becoming reality. That’s the beauty of the free market! Great ideas start as luxuries for the rich, then become necessities for the rest of us, in part because innovation (i.e. greed) makes them affordable.

How about video games? From the Video Game Crash of 1983 emerged savvy licensing from Nintendo, then Sega, and eventually Atari got back in the game. We all know Mario, Luigi, Princess Toadstool (and don’t forget Link from the Legend of Zelda series!), and we still watch movies about them today.

The 1980s gave us blow-up images, big hairstyles, the bright (maybe tacky!) clothes, the chic that shook the world. And the ‘80s retro-futuristic art! We are seeing a revival of that neon futuristic style, complete with crisp colors and black backgrounds, with digitized flora and fauna. You don’t revive a style that reminds you of a bad time. George Clinton fused funk, rock, and art altogether! Do fries go with that shake? You bet!

And speaking of the music …

Let’s talk about my favorite, ELO, which was breaking out from its 70s send-off. How about Twisted Sister? Rod Stewart, the B-52s, the Cars; Madonna, plus Bonnie Tyler and her total eclipse over our hearts? From the hair bands to the Bangles, everyone was rocking (or walking like Egyptians). Who was one essential artist of the 80s? Weird Al Yankovic! He parodied the 1980s and made us love it all the more. Future generations are still rocking out to the 1980s and ripping off their rhythm and style, like The Weeknd’s Blinding Lights.

Ryan Reynolds is wrong. He may have struggled through a troubled childhood, but the 80s were an awesome decade, a seminal period of time that defined possibility, opportunity, and celebration for our time and all time.

The Maywood Academy High School Melee, Eight Years Later

 

Social media is flooded with confrontation videos: high school kids fighting each other, grown men beating each other up in parking lots and shopping malls, and event altercations

What happens when the fights take over the classroom, but the combatants are a teacher and student? Students across the country want to instigate trouble with their teachers, just to catch their reactions on video and spread the shame on social media.

One specific video went viral eight years ago, and it’s been making the rounds again this past month.

The date of the initial altercation: November 2^nd, 2018.

The location: Maywood Academy High School, a traditional high school in the troubled, bankrupt, failing Los Angeles Unified School District.

What happened: Music teacher Marston Riley was teaching at Maywood Academy High School when a 14-year-old student became argumentative, disrespectful, and belligerent, refusing to wear his uniform, then coming back in the classroom when the teacher had told him to leave.

The child wanted to start a fight. One of the students was rolling his smartphone camera to capture the confrontation. After repeated attempts to deal with the student, Mr. Riley snapped, took a swing at the minor, and a massive brawl erupted. The fight turned the entire music room upside down as students fled for safety to avoid the fight between the enraged teacher and the insolent student.

The teacher was escorted off the property later that day, never to return.

He was later charged with misdemeanor assault, to which he pled “not guilty.”

A year and a half later, just before the federal and state governments started shutting down schools and other public spaces over the COVID-19 outbreak, Riley went public to give his side of the story.

CBS reports:

"What they showed was me hitting the student," he said. "They didn't show anything before that.

"When I got to that student, particularly, he didn't have his uniform," he said. "When I asked him for it, he became belligerent.

"He hit me with a basketball, so I decided I needed to call security one more time. Once he finished talking, then I just turned and walked away, and called security. And, again all that happened before the cameras started rolling — in other words, what everybody saw was the second time he came into the classroom. He got worse and worse. The less I did, the worse he got, and it finally came to an altercation."

"I tried to avoid it," he said. "I took what I took, and I didn't want it to go there, but it went there. If he wanted to avoid something like that, you don't leave and then come back."

The power of the camera mitigates the confusion from “He said, She said,” or “Teacher said, student said.” Riley had every right to give his side, but the public can still draw their own conclusions.

I don’t doubt the teacher’s narration. Multiple accounts confirmed that the student refused to comply and cooperate. Far too many in the public do not understand that teachers face an egregious level of disrespect from students, and on a routine basis. Students have quickly learned over the last ten years that they have more power than the teachers, and the administrators are more afraid of the race card and civil rights lawsuits than ensuring the safety and well-being of the students—and the teachers!

Riley was facing a near-certain conviction in court if the jurors saw the video. Yet such an outcome is mere conjecture, since the LA County District Attorney dropped the case, most likely in response to a plea agreement, since Riley completed a ten-week anger management course.

I will give my judgment of the whole scenario:

First, Mr. Riley was wrong to hit the kid. The kids deserved a rap on the mouth, but not at the teacher’s hand, and not in the classroom. The teacher’s impulsive physical response did not resolve the situation. In general, children should receive repeated smacks on the bottom with a paddle in my view, for repeated insolence. Regarding the Maywood Academy situation, though, Riley went about it all wrong how he did it, where, and with all the children adversely affected. None of that was good.

Having said the above, I also believe that it was right and just that Riley was not convicted of anything. The LA County District Attorney’s staff stated that they took the teacher’s age into consideration, as well as the fact that he had no prior record of wrongdoing. I would have added that compassion and commiseration would have affected a potential jury—if they had heard about all the prior issues with the student—and they would have acquitted the teacher. I would have! Teachers are human beings, and as I have shared above, they are subjected to a constant barrage of pressures, posturing, and outright punk-like behavior from students—and parents! Of course Riley tried to hit the kid! Who would stand and endure such abuse, and endure such constant disrespect over and over?

It’s no surprise that then and now, the public generated considerable comment and conversation around the Riley-Maywood Academy incident. In the end, all things worked out for Mr. Riley’s good: he retired before he faced professional sanction, he received incredible love and support from the community, and he retired and moved onto other projects.

One would think that resolution would have ended the discussion eight years ago.

On Friday, July 3, 2026, the Oddcrimes Instagram account replayed the confrontation, as though the teacher and student had only recently come to blows.  The Instagram post provides a decent summary, but this phrase stands out:

The incident quickly sparked a nationwide debate, with many community members and former students rallying behind Riley by raising nearly $200,000 to help cover his legal expenses.

The social media account took the teacher’s side, and rightly so. The focus on the national scope of the controversy matters, as well. Indeed, the conversation around the controversy consumed many on social media at the time, but the discussion has resumed in the last few months. The public has likely long forgotten this, but in spite of the incendiary nature of the video, the teacher received considerably outpouring of support.

 

Here’s X account @parkersity_9 reposting the video on August 26^th, 2026, with the following description:

This high school Teacher was Arrested after he Beat The Dog Brakes Off a 14 Year Old Student in an Epic Squabble in the Classroom 

This account does not pick a side, although the post glibly relates that the student received a massive humbling at the hands of the (understandably) irate teacher.

The conversation about the consequences of teacher abuse and student disrespect must continue, but administrators and elected officials need to provide results. If public education has any hope of avoiding future cuts, declining enrollment, and diminishing trust, schools need to make respect in the classroom a top priority once again. Students must face rigorous and immediate discipline for the lack of respect towards teachers—and other students, for that matter. Otherwise, there will be more Marston Rileys who lose their temper and take matters into their own hands to maintain order in their classrooms.

Ten Major History Books to Read

10 history books to understand the last 1000 years:

1) The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History by Alexander Mikaberidze

( napoleonic europe 1789–1815 ) pic.twitter.com/eKXZuBxgKe

— BookNote (@BookNoteApp) September 5, 2026

Only Reform Can Restore the UK

 

The United Kingdom is more disunited than ever.

The United Kingdom has suffered liberal to socialist government, and back again, over the last twenty years.

The 1990s Labour government hadn’t reached peak woke yet. Instead, they were clearly committed to a fainting phrase of capitalism while increasing reckless spending, government overreach, and undermining the rights and liberties of UK citizens.

Mass immigration burgeoned as a problem under Tony Blair, and has gotten worse with each subsequent government.

The so-called Conservatives, starting with David Cameron, continued the slide towards decadent secular liberalism, from climate alarmism to same-sex marriage, increased abortions, and more immigration (legal and illegal).

Today, UK citizens have no government looking out for them. The major parties have become a uni-party punch-and-Judy show of incompetence, corruption, and communism. Gilbert and Sullivan’s “Utopia Unlimited” would have run a better state.

Enter Nigel Farage. If historians have any integrity, they will recognize and feature him as one of the most outstanding patriots in English history. He may not have fought side by side with the Roundheads against Charles I; he may not have served in World Wars 1 and 2; but he has spearheaded an untiring, inspiring movement to save his country and restore his countrymen.

Since the early 1990s, he lobbied for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. The naysayers on both sides of the political spectrum laughed him off, convinced that the United Kingdom's entry and placement in the European Union was untouchable.

Then came June 2016, and the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU. The fight didn't stop there, however, because Parliament refused to enact the will of the people. Farage stepped aside to support London mayor Boris Johnson's premiership, and he finally got Brexit done.

Further to Farage's credit, he didn't stop after the Brexit win. Johnson did get the UK out of the EU, but he hastened socialist degradation, relegated secularism, and increased Chinese communist party influence. In the end, the “Johnson Conservatives” were just as guilty as their premier predecessors and the liberal government before them of undermining their own country.

In came Reform UK, Farage’s flagship party to … reform British politics forever. In two years, Farage and team have already gained six seats in Parliament (including crossovers from the useless Tories), including Farage himself, finally winning his Clacton-on-Sea constituency after decades of failed efforts.

Reform is the real right-wing alternative for the British people. The Tories are proven traitors, having campaigned on conservative platforms and priorities, only to renege on them time and again.

His party’s impressive victories across city and county elections in 2026 have further established that  Reform that is the restoring agent needed. All of the spirit and revolution of The Roundheads and the glorious revolutionaries who cherish UK freedoms, prosperity, and dignity will find their greatest expression in Farage's Reform.

Now Farage is facing a challenge from the right. Former Reform MP Rupert Lowe had some personal problems and controversies, and Farage kicked him out to avoid the drag on the Reform agenda. Putting pride and personal vendetta over country, Lowe launched a protest party: Restore Britain. To his credit, Lowe takes stronger positions on cultural issues, and he is less politically correct. Elon Musk has sided with Lowe and against Farage, as well!

Farage is an astute party boss, and he recognizes that politics is the art of the possible. Perhaps he's not as outspoken on radical Islam as he needs to be, although he is taking more steps to confront the radicalism. His pragmatic approach to illegal immigration (We can’t deport every illegal immigrant because it’s impossible) is not the right take, however. He can follow President Trump’s program, getting rid of the worst, cutting off the government money for the rest, and they will flee voluntarily. Farage’s platform for reforming bureaucracy and cutting spending may not be as aggressive as many would like, but you have to start with a real plan and a character and commitment to accomplish it.

As a political outsider hoping for the most conservative leadership in Britain, I was open to supporting Rupert Lowe. He tells the truth without a filter. He has not distanced himself from Tommy Robinson. He unabashedly recognizes the problems with Islam.

After the Manchester by-election in June 2026, mayor-turned-prime-minister Andy Burnham won the seat. Recognizing that Restore Britian could frustrate Reform’s efforts, Farage reached out to Rupert Lowe and his supporters: "What do you want?"

Answering the question, Lowe listed a series of requirements for the Restore Britain ticket to fold into Reform.

·         Mass Deportations: Deport every illegal migrant—including women and children—and enforce tougher rules on legal migration.

·         Cultural Bans: Implement bans on the burqa, cousin marriage, and halal and kosher slaughter.

·         Death Penalty: Hold a national referendum on restoring the death penalty.

·         Austerity and Welfare Cuts: Make larger spending cuts and reform welfare.

·         Cabinet Restrictions: Exclude all former Conservative ministers from a future Reform government.

 

Most of Lowe’s demands are focused on forcing Farage to take a tougher stance on issues he cares about. Farage can solve the death penalty controversy by putting the question to a vote before Parliament once he’s prime minister. If Parliament says no, that’s on them.

Two other issues were non-starters. Farage cannot remove Reform members who have abandoned the Conservative Party. Other pundits have also faulted Farage for inviting former Tories into his coalition. However, those former “Conservatives” were true conservatives who opposed their own party leaders by standing on principles, pushing back against the largesse and large failures of their decisions; and they remained in Parliament following the 2024 Tory Shellacking. Successful political parties depend on loyalty and trust. Also, Farage needs to attract disaffected Tory voters.

Then there’s the dust-up over kosher practices. The United Kingdom’s heritage is not under attack from Jews. What is Lowe thinking? The Kosher controversy suggests that Farage did the right thing by removing Lowe.

If UK voters want to save their country, they need to pick Reform and reject Restore. The latest by-election in a Kent constituency proves the dire necessity for this change.  Mike Goodwin provided a sound analysis and clear warning in his recent Substack post. Restore Britain harmed Reform, so that Farage’s team lost what should have been an easy-win local election. Kent is strong Brexit territory, and the main location where the boatloads of illegal immigrants breach British soil and sovereignty. 

Restore Britain is not only restoring Britain, but rather restoring left-wing chances for maintaining power and exacerbating the destruction of the UK. Reform UK has lost other by-elections because of Lowe’s protest vote.

Reform is the only principled patriotic right-wing opposition, and the best hope for restoring Britain is Nigel Farage as prime minister. Liberal pundits have mocked Farage as a wannabe Trump, but his astute political maneuvering and cultural sense can win over the British public better than Lowe’s grumbling or the Tories’ long record of failure. Farage, the consummate political operator, needs to emphasize not only the repeated betrayals of the Tories, but the current problems created by Restore Britain. Farage should co-opt some of the issues from Lowe’s camp, then double down on why voters should ignore him. 

Anti-Tribute to Milo Yiannopoulos

 

And thus the whirligig of time brings in his revenges. William Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, Act V, Scene 1

Milo Yiannopoulos, the Gamer Gate reporter who exposed the left’s attempt to push feminism, LGBT and diversity into gaming; the Breitbart enfant terrible who called himself a “virtuous troll” among corporate media types; the campus lecturer bête noire, the jokester who mocked the wokesters before become a woke joke himself; the gay “conservative” who became a straight far-right (?) influencer; the celebrity-turned-obscurity who turned everyone off,  the wannabe podcaster who grifted where he could; the flimsy buddy to white nationalists who betrayed them when their association stopped paying the bills; Kanye’ Wests former PR guy who failed at his own PR, the guy who was “super-hot back in 2015, 2016 and kind of disappeared” according to Ben Shapiro; the male version of Sue Mengers, bad taste but lacking class, connections, common decency, or relevance; and a chief cheerleader for deporting all illegals (and the above-mentioned Shapiro, disturbingly enough), has been deported.

Good riddance!

Milo Yiannopoulos was the troll whose trolling finally took its toll, and justifiably so. Falling from social media grace in 2017, he repeatedly tried to get back in front of the cameras, like Norma Desmond long past her prime. He resorted to slandering conservative social media commentators, engaging in the most outlandish conspiracy theories, then teaming up with the most sordid people, all for a buck.

Then the universe hit back, and boy, the irony is delicious.

Trump has excised MTG, Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson, and Candace Owens by repudiating their latest anti-Trump antics. Despite their deep dishonesty and lack of integrity, they are American citizens, so they are entitled to their opinions, and we are entitled to ignore them.

Milo was an interesting case. He was the avant-garde of MAGA at the time: provocative and contradictory, unafraid to say the things that couldn’t be said (about Islam, feminism, immigration, etc.). The problem with being a troll, however, is that other trolls muscle in on the audience, and there comes a point where real consequences meet the virtual reality of relentless Internet fandom.

The UK national overstayed his VISA, received multiple summons to appear in federal immigration court, yet blew them off as if they didn’t matter. Then, when checking in at a Louisiana airport, ICE nabbed him, booked him, and shipped him out the next day.

That’s what I call efficiency. This glorious outcome is the latest form of conservative correctional justice, as well, with another useless “woke right” wannabe getting the boot.

How did he become anything in the first place? Milo burst onto the conservative scene with Breitbart News in 2015. He had previously made a name for himself exposing the attempts to turn video games into left-wing feminist drek. He should have stuck with that line of journalism and stayed in the UK. Instead, he came to America looking for work, and Breitbart took him up through a friendly contact, Raheem Kassem. That Breitbart alumnus has since issued an apology to the world for having brought him into the American conservative media space.

We forgive you, Raheem!

Like a Diva who lost her voice but didn’t care, Milo relished the job, then tried to push Raheem out of his job! Milo insisted on his own news section, then made himself the star, and even scored interviews with mainstream media types – ABC, FOX, even Bill Maher—which brought him to the forefront.

He tried to make “gay conservative” a thing, which is a troll and a joke in itself. He bashed homosexuals while living as a homosexual. What is this? Some kind of sick joke? He made himself the star at a press conference following the Pulse Nightclub shooting in 2016, urging the public to support Trump to stop radical Islam and mass immigration.

In 2017, he spouted off some very weird, nay, disturbing comments about pedophilia, in which he claimed that such abusive relationships “help those young boys discover who they are and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable sort of rock, where they can't speak to their parents."

WHAT?!

Understandably, he was forced out following the expected fallout. He had big money backing from the Mercers, major book deals from Simon & Schuster, and a growing media following, even after he was banned from social media. He had once crowed at his detractors: “How to Beat Me (Spoiler: You Won’t).”

Then he was beaten, undone by his own comments, and he announced his resignation from Breitbart. He attributed his flippant remarks to unresolved child abuse issues in his life and his poor choice of words.  However, Milo had claimed on Joe Rogan’s podcast that he was not abused as a child; then he declared he had been abused as a child. What’s going on here? Trolling is only funny when you are taking down the arrogant and abusive. It’s not funny to mock victims, and it loses its edge when you have to change your story for your audience. That makes you just as complicit as the rich and powerful whom you claim to troll.

Trying to find his way back into the limelight, he turned on President Trump, then attempted to destroy his re-election bid by bringing vile white nationalist Nick Fuentes to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.

 

Then Milo started mocking everyone else in the conservative movement, people who did not deserve such railing. He repeatedly demeaned Charlie Kirk’s beloved widow (Here’s a sample of his abuses here, here, and here.) He celebrated Dennis Prager’s terrible accident, which has left him paralyzed.

Ultimately, Milo turned on Trump and others because he found it lucrative. The social media space has created a place for people to profit off of anti-American doom-and-gloom, calling yourself “America First” while trashing everything about America.

To their recent credit, Citizen Free Press slammed Milo when he blathered another ridiculous claim, this time alleging President Trump had not been nearly assassinated in Butler, PA in July 2024, but that it was all coordinated fraud. Citizen Free Press posted the link with a heading to this effect: “Milo attempting to be relevant.”

Exactly.

Dinesh D’Souza chose to debate the dumb (I warned him about this in a previous article) and hosted Milo for an interview. The waning troll just spouted off empty inanities, declaring that Candace Owens was the best—and that Ericka Kirk is a horrible human being. No, Milo is the horrible human being, jumping on one fringe bandwagon to the next, desperate for likes, views, and shares, and willing to tear down anyone for anything.

Milo’s much-needed and welcome departure is a huge win for all of us, including the Trump Administration.

Milo’s removal proves ICE is no respecter of persons. Conservative, progressive, or just plain stupid: if you are an illegal alien, you’re gone. Trump isn’t just targeting the “criminal illegal aliens,” but his administration is getting rid of as many illegals as possible. Finally, Milo’s removal provides a boost to Trump’s reputation, since he’s not allowing illegal scofflaws to blow off court hearings and federal orders.

Nothing but wins here. The troll finally got trolled, and we can all celebrate.

Tenth Amendment Center: It was Gun Control

 

IT WAS GUN CONTROL Sept 1, 1774: The Powder Alarm and the Road to Independence  (article | podcast) **NEW BOOK AVAILABLE: REVOLUTION BETRAYED

Despite the fact that it proved to be mostly a false alarm, the “Powder Alarm” of Sept 1-2, 1774 showed the colonists that the British were serious - and willing to use gun control efforts to subjugate them.  Sounds familiar, doesn't it? The event showed that the American Revolutionaries meant business, too. In response, thousands of people armed up and started streaming towards Boston to fight off the aggressors in what became a precursor to Lexington and Concord just a few months later. Of course, they don’t really teach this in the government-run propaganda centers/schools. PLAN TO DISARM In the aftermath of the Boston Tea Party, the British Parliament passed the “Coercive Acts.” Among other moves, the British closed the port of Boston and revoked Massachusetts’ charter, bringing the colony under the total control of the British government.  These actions further inflamed tensions between the British and the American colonists. Many colonists saw this as a further attempt to strip them of their right to self-rule and force them into submission. As noted by American History Central, “The people of Massachusetts began to plan for the worst. Many of the towns throughout the colony were in the habit of storing weapons and ammunition in storehouses throughout the colony, including the Provincial Powder House on Quarry Hill in Charlestown. Slowly, and quietly, the towns started removing their weapons and ammunition from the storehouses.” General Gage, the military governor of Massachusetts, felt the best way to deal with this and keep the peace would be to disarm the colonists as much as possible.  Yes, that’s just what empires have always done.  On Aug 27, William Brattle, the leader of the provincial militia, snitched in a letter to Gage to let him know the colonists were taking their powder, and that only “the King’s supply” remained. Gage, of course, determined that the remaining powder had to be taken and brought to Boston for “safekeeping.”  It was Gun Control: The Powder Alarm and the Road to Independence Article Here: https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2024/09/01/before-lexington-and-concord-the-british-gun-grab-that-nearly-sparked-the-revolution/ Podcast Here: https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2023/09/it-was-gun-control-the-powder-alarm-and-the-road-to-independence/ THE REDCOATS ARE COMING! On Sept 1, Gage sent sheriff David Phips, along with a force of 250+ Redcoats, with orders to remove the powder - and Brattle handed him the keys. Most of the troops returned to Boston, but a small detachment marched to Cambridge and seized two artillery pieces assigned to the Middlesex County militia. But with that many troops assembled in Boston common and sailing up the Mytick river at 4 or 5am - it’s not surprising that rumors of an all-out war started to spread like wildfire. There were multiple reports of the British killing a number of people, Boston getting bombarded by warships, and more. Rev Ezra Stiles was informed that 6 men were killed. Silas Deane heard a mob descended on Brattle’s house, and troops opened fire with “a large number wounded.” Rev. Stephen Williams heard that Boston “was demolished.” And within days, news traveled to Philadelphia, where John Adams was given what he called a confused but alarming account of a potential “bombardment of Boston.” Despite the fact that these all turned out to be rumors only - at least for the time being - how the people responded was nothing short of remarkable.  ARMED RESPONSE Immediately, as many as 5000 - and upwards of 20,000 people armed up and started streaming towards Boston from as far away as Connecticut. One traveler in Shrewsbury reported that in the space of 15 minutes, 50 men had gathered, equipped themselves, sent out messengers to surrounding towns, and left for Boston. Within 24 hours, several thousand Massachusetts farmers marched in Cambridge demanding that Attorney General Jonathan Sewall, council members Samuel Danforth and Joseph Lee - and Sheriff David Phips - resign or apologize for the actions they took. They then moved to Lt. Gov. Thomas Oliver’s home and threatened him into signing a resignation. Brattle - the snitch - was forced to flee. It quickly became clear that the rumors of a hot war were false. As the facts overtook the rumors, the colonial militias returned home. NEW BOOK: REVOLUTION BETRAYED America Rebuilt the System the Founders Fought a War to Secede From This is the story of what the Revolution actually was, told through the voices of Adams, Jefferson, Paine, Otis, Dickinson, and many others. Plus the thinkers who shaped them - and a clear-eyed reckoning with how completely it has been thrown away. The redcoats never left. They just stopped wearing red. GET IT HERE MORE GUN CONTROL But the threat of more British gun control was still very much on their minds and they were right to worry. The King then banned the importation of all arms and ammunition without a permit. And guess what - no one was ever issued a permit. Lord Dartmouth, the Royal Sec. of State for America - suggested more aggressive measures. He urged Gage to “Upon no account suffer the Inhabitants of at least the Town of Boston to assemble themselves in arms on any pretence whatever, either of town guard or Militia duty.” Another letter to Gage was even more aggressive: “all cannon, small arms, and other military stores of every kind, that may be either in any magazine, or secreted for the purpose of aiding the rebellion, should also be seized and secreted” We know what happened - and with a goal of confiscation, the British marched on Lexington and Concord in April 1775. 📖 Read it in your browser → HERE 🎙️ Watch or listen to the podcast → HERE As we commemorate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence this year, this article and podcast are a big part of how we’re ramping up our efforts to teach more and more people what the government-run “education” system never teaches. And if you’ve enjoyed this quick history lesson, you’re going to love our new book! Revolution Betrayed: America Rebuilt the System the Founders Fought a War to Secede From Please consider picking up a copy today HERE *** We’re also commemorating our own anniversary this year: June, 2026 marked 20 years of teaching people the true principles behind the American Revolution and the Constitution. And we’re gearing up for much more. But we can’t do it alone. Your membership support is crucial to keep these timeless lessons alive. JOIN US TODAY! Prefer to make a one-time donation? Pitch in here: https://donate.stripe.com/fZecNzggUaDG3LydR0 You can also mail a check to: Tenth Amendment Center 4000 Barranca Parkway, Suite 250 PMB 705 Irvine, CA 92604