Trimming the opposition, one election at a time



I’ve often reflected on Donald Trump’s charge that massive fraud occurred during the 2020 presidential election. While I’m not convinced the opposition cheated enough to change the outcome, I do agree with J.R. Dunn at American Thinker, who argues, “We’re not going to debate whether cheating in fact occurred in 2020 — the only ones who dispute that at this point are the bought, the braindead, and the comatose.”

My acceptance of this view stems largely from the behavior of Democratic Party operatives since 2020. They have used highly questionable tactics to influence election outcomes, including flooding the country with millions of illegal immigrants brought here as potential Democratic voters. In fact, Democrats have already started registering some of these new arrivals, who, grateful for benefits like living expenses, medical care, food, and shelter, are likely to vote in their favor.

The ruling left’s ideal outcome would involve the complete elimination of genuine opposition, leaving only allies or powerless coalition partners.

In states controlled by Democrats or those they are close to controlling, such as my home state of Pennsylvania, voter ID requirements are being removed. This change aims to enable individuals who shouldn’t have voting rights to cast ballots. Similarly, in 2020, ballots were widely mailed to addresses where registered voters once lived but may no longer reside. Democratic operatives likely visited these addresses to fill out ballots, while unguarded drop boxes in Democratic areas were reportedly filled with pro-Biden ballots late at night.

Recently, the Department of Justice has attempted to prevent Republican governors from removing noncitizens from voter rolls, as seen in a widely publicized case in Virginia. Congressional Democrats also strongly oppose limiting voting to only citizens, aligning with the party’s support for massive illegal immigration — essentially importing future Democratic voters.

These practices recall the “salami tactics” communist operatives used in Eastern Europe after World War II, which allowed them to gain power through seemingly constitutional means. Instead of the deep state and corporate media, as in today’s context, communists like Matyas Rakosi in Hungary and Klement Gottwald in Czechoslovakia relied on the Red Army to break up their democratic opposition.

Some of these gradualist tactics, pioneered by communist takeover strategists, echo what our Democratic Party and similar woke leftist parties in Europe are already doing. Much like today’s Democrats, the communists worked relentlessly to delegitimize any party to their right, including agrarian groups, nationalists, and even social democrats, labeling them as fascists and Nazis.

Much like slicing a salami, the political spectrum was gradually narrowed to the communists and their willing collaborators. These collaborators bear a striking resemblance to today's neoconservatives, who now seek favor with Kamala Harris and Tim Walz while denouncing Trump and MAGA Republicans as neo-Nazis.

The totalitarian left has long perfected the art of marginalizing opposition. During their rise to power, the communists welcomed bourgeois progressives, the Eastern and Central European equivalents of figures like George Will, Ken Adelman, John Bolton, Robert Kagan, and Dick and Liz Cheney. Applying “salami tactics,” they outlawed noncompliant parties and, where possible, jailed their leaders as “fascists.” This approach mirrors how today’s media and Democrats treat MAGA Republicans, whom President Biden recently denounced as “garbage.” The ruling left’s ideal outcome would involve the complete elimination of genuine opposition, leaving only allies or powerless coalition partners.

A future Democratic administration led by Harris and Walz could closely resemble the old communist model. The Democrats have already proposed measures like packing the Supreme Court with loyalists, granting statehood to the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico to secure additional Senate seats, and federalizing elections while removing voter ID requirements — all under the guise of “saving our democracy.”

Meanwhile, Harris, Walz, and sympathetic media outlets express concern about allowing “disinformation” to circulate without government oversight. The totalitarian left, whether in the modern West or the former Soviet bloc, has always sought to throttle unwanted dissent.

That said, our homegrown version of leftist totalitarianism looks a lot kinkier than what the communists established. Unlike puritanical communist rule, our post-democratic regime is already abolishing gender distinctions, pushing gender-altering surgery for minors, and glorifying homosexual relations. This new form of the totalitarian left would be less about government ownership of resources than reconstructing social and moral behavior and rewarding parasitic capitalists who support those in power.

Although history never repeats itself exactly, troubling trends often have an unfortunate tendency to rhyme.

Kamala’s record proves she is steeped in Marxism



Is Kamala Harris a Marxist? When Donald Trump called her one at their debate last month, it initially unleashed a wave of censure from the bicoastal bien-pensants. The media soon moved on, but the question remains — and is too important to let pass.

Having authored a book called “NextGen Marxism,” and after examining Harris’ vast public record, our verdict is that she is indeed a follower of Marxist dictums, whether she has stirring posters of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Mao in her living room or not.

Her outlook is Marxist. Donald Trump wasn’t wrong.

Being a Marxist is not a matter of being a card-carrying member of the Communist Party but more about subscribing to a specific set of ideas that form a worldview.

When Richard Nixon said in the 1970s, “We are all Keynesians now,” he did not mean that he had joined the Bloomsbury Group. He meant that he and many other important policymakers had bought in to deficit spending, higher taxes, and other demand-side practices informed by the theories of economist John Maynard Keynes.

Keynesianism was heavy in the air at the time. It was everywhere in the policy swirl of the 1970s. Importantly, one could believe in its prescriptions and implement them without ever having heard of Lord Keynes.

It was Keynes himself who wrote:

The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.

That, we argue, is the state of Marxism today. Its ideas are so heavy in the air that one can be a committed Marxist without ever having read a word of “Das Kapital.”

What Marx said and how 21st-century Marxists echo him

It helps to camouflage Marxism, so many of the old nostrums of the 1848 “Communist Manifesto” have undergone an evolution or are sufficiently hidden. For example, few Marxists now expect the proletariat to rise up in bloody revolution. In fact, most Marxists have abandoned the worker and expect revolutions to be instituted by stealth — by taking over the cultural institutions and changing society’s narrative.

These were changes introduced in the West in the middle of the last century, after bloody revolutions failed in Germany and Italy in the era between the first and second world wars.

Marxism’s most salient features remain, however. Today’s Marxists still need to suppress the views of those who oppose completely transforming society. The family, that great bulwark against instability, must be destroyed outright or see its ability to raise children severely curbed. Marx was clear on these things, calling in the “Manifesto” for “despotic inroads” when people didn’t go along with his plans and for the “abolition of the family.”

Above all, the entirety of human interaction is still to be viewed as an epic struggle between the oppressed and his oppressor, just as Marx wrote in the first page of the "Manifesto":

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.

This was the heart of Marxism back then, and it remains so today.

One belief that follows from this worldview is that law enforcement, and especially the police, exist to keep the boot of the ruling class on the neck of the subjugated. So the police must be defunded, or better yet disbanded.

As Marx put it in the first volume of “Das Kapital” in 1867, the state “employs the police to accelerate the accumulation of capital by increasing the degree of exploitation of labor.” Later, in 1875’s “Critique of the Gotha Program,” he wrote that the state was a structure of “police-guarded military despotism.”

All Marxists since then, from Vladimir Lenin to Angela Davis and Patrisse Cullors, have understood that abolishing the police is the fastest way to foster societal chaos and impose their blueprint for revolution.

A second belief that follows from the reduction of all human activity to a Manichean struggle is that the goal is total, structural, systemic change, or “a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large,” as the “Manifesto” itself put it. The proletariat, to Marx, “has to bear all the burdens of society without enjoying its advantages” and therefore had the “consciousness of the necessity of a fundamental revolution, the communist consciousness,” as Marx and Engels wrote in “The German Ideology” in 1845. That was the point of violent revolution — to dismantle everything in place. Thus, the forces of all authority, not just the forces of order, must be sufficiently weakened or overcome.

The only difference today is that now the locus of oppression is placed no longer in economic class but in racial and sexual categories deemed to be marginalized. It is therefore from these racial and sexual subordinate categories that the spark for change will come.

The Marxist founders of Black Lives Matter — Marxists not just because they call themselves “Marxist” but because for years they were given extensive training in Marxism, Leninism, etc. — seek Marx’s systemic or total change in the name of their subjugated groups, because we have “systemic racism.”

A third belief that follows is that citizens should be treated differently depending on their category. Equal rights, enshrined in our founding documents, are anathema. “Equity” is the goal.

Again, this is all undiluted Marxism. Marx was very clear in his “Critique of the Gotha Program” that men of different talents would enjoy different outcomes, so “to avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.”

Marxists today reject equal rights by shifting focus from class to race. Kimberlé Crenshaw, a leading thinker in the Marxist critical race theory field, argued in a 1988 essay that “belief in color-blindness and equal process would make no sense at all in a society in which identifiable groups had actually been treated differently historically.” Their ultimate goal remains the suppression of equal rights.

What Kamala says

Kamala Harris echoes these core ideas. While Joe Biden adopted wokeness for strategic reasons, often stumbling through its language — George Will once likened Biden’s use of woke terms to “tone-deaf Joe fumbling with a foreign language: progressive-speak” — Harris has a more precise ideological stance, even if she lacks clarity in her policy positions.

In a 2020 video, she explained why she favors the term “equity” over “equality.” We have retained her linguistic tics:

So, there’s a big difference between equality and equity. Equality suggests, “Oh, everybody should get the same amount.” The problem with that — not everybody’s starting out from the same place. If we all get the same amount, but you started out back there, and I started out over here — we could get the same amount, but you’re still going to be that far back behind me. It’s about giving people the resources and the support they need, so that everyone can be on equal footing, and then compete on equal footing. Equitable treatment means we all end up at the same place.

The video showed two men, one white, one black, climbing a mountain, the white one doing so with ease and the black one struggling. This underscores that she wants government and the private sector to give benefits based on racial characteristics. In 2022, she said help after the devastation caused by Hurricane Ian should be needs- and color-based.

“It is our lowest-income communities and our communities of color that are most impacted by these extreme conditions and impacted by issues that are not of their own making. And so we have to address this in a way that is about giving resources based on equity,” she said. Harris has been consistent on all these points, as this video compilation makes clear.

Harris strongly supports Black Lives Matter and its push to change America’s system. “Black Lives Matter has changed the environment in such a substantial and beautiful way,” she told interviewer Ebro Darden on June 9, 2020, as the George Floyd riots enveloped cities. “Their activism has allowed people who are inside the system, who want to change it, to not be alone in trying to change it.”

Harris emphasized that BLM's value lies in how the organization influenced those in power to agree to systemic change. She praised BLM organizers as “leaders who have forced people to understand from the outside the change that needs to happen on the inside, so that people who are on the inside can actually have more leverage against so many obstacles and status quo within that system that doesn’t want to see any change.”

Her observation was notable, as BLM’s biggest success wasn’t the chaos it caused but its ability to pressure cultural leaders into accepting that America suffers from “systemic racism” and demands change.

Harris, like Marx, sees systemic change as essential — Marx for class struggle, Harris for racial struggle. “Our country has a long history of slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, segregation, and discrimination. The injustices of the past live on in our institutions today. We need systemic change. Black Americans are fed up,” she tweeted on May 29, 2020, during the height of the violence.

In early June of that same year, she addressed the Senate, expressing strong support for the actions of BLM. She described the movement as one led by “people who might appear from the outside to have little in common, who are marching together to demand an end to the black blood that is staining the sidewalks of our country. They are marching together to move closer, and closer at least to justice, and that gives me hope. It truly gives me hope.”

Unsurprisingly, Harris also asked Americans to contribute money to the Minnesota Freedom Fund, an organization that posted bail for those who tore Minneapolis apart.

“If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota,” she tweeted just days after the death of George Floyd, as the city and many others burned.

The apple rarely falls far

She may deny it now, but Harris also clearly backs defund-the-police efforts. She told an interviewer in 2020, “When you have many cities that have more than one-third of their entire city budget focused on policing, we know that’s not the smart way and the best way or the right way to achieve safety. For too long the status quo thinking has been you get more safety by putting more cops on the streets — well, that’s wrong.”

Kamala Harris has also opposed giving parents the freedom to stop the indoctrination of children on matters of race and sex at school, saying in Houston this year to the American Federation of Teachers, “And while you … teach students about our nation’s past, these extremists attack the freedom to learn and acknowledge our nation’s true and full history, including book bans. … They pass so-called ‘Don’t Say Gay’ laws.” Her administration targeted parents protesting at school boards as “domestic terrorists.”

Harris also wants to restrict the freedom of social media companies to share diverse viewpoints. She told Jake Tapper that these platforms “are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation, and it has to stop.”

It’s impossible to say for sure if Harris got her views from her parents, Donald Harris and Shyamala Gopalan — so radical that they met in the early 1960s at the same Afro-American Association in Berkeley where Black Panther founders Bobby Seale and Huey Newton met. But the record of “red diaper babies” is that the apple rarely falls far from the tree.

What’s undisputable is that she has soaked in the weltanschauung and absorbed it. It’s now a part of her. Her outlook is Marxist. Donald Trump wasn’t wrong.

The Cringe of All Media: Simping Stern hosts Kamala lovefest



You're the putative King of All Media, and you have Vice President Kamala Harris in your studio.

What do you ask first? So many options!

'I plan on waking up on November 6 with Madam President,' the governor said before Kimmel silently cried, 'Cleanup on aisle 4!'

If you said, “Do you nap?” give yourself a gold star.

That was literally Howard Stern’s first question when the veep's softball interview tour stopped by his studio. Never mind that Harris can’t even navigate easy interviews, supplying Team Trump with more commercial fodder than any campaign could crave.

Just know that Stern followed up his fawning interview with President Joe Biden a few months back with another cringe-fest weeks before Election Day.

Howard, it’s time to hand over your crown …

Walz-y move

Harris’ ace VP pick isn’t much better.

Gov. Tim Walz sailed through his softball question barrage from Jimmy Kimmel this week, the host practically waving a flannel shirt in the air to remind us that Walz is just reg’lar folk.

And then Walz pulled a Walz.

“I plan on waking up on November 6 with Madam President,” the governor said before Kimmel silently cried, “Cleanup on aisle 4!”

Final 'Boss'

Amazon Freevee is “Sorry Not Sorry” about ending its “Who’s the Boss?” reunion plans.

The streamer flirted with an update on the ABC sitcom starring Tony Danza and a young Alyssa Milano. The actress is much better known these days for her far-left bona fides and hosting the “Sorry Not Sorry” podcast.

Maybe her becoming a hard-left radical who alienates large swaths of the country factored into the decision …

Feig fumbles 'Jackpot'

If Judd Apatow once ruled as Hollywood’s King of Comedy, Paul Feig was its crown prince.

Feig co-produced “Freaks and Geeks” with Apatow and later directed “Spy,” “Bridesmaids” and “The Heat.” He also directed episodes of “The Office,” ”Parks and Recreation” and “30 Rock.”

Not too shabby.

And then he foisted the “Lady Ghostbusters” debacle on an unsuspecting public in 2016.

Did Feig misplace his funny bone? Has anybody seen it?

He expanded his genre focus after that debacle (“A Simple Favor,” “The School for Good and Evil”) before returning to comedy with this year’s “Jackpot!”

That Prime Video original might be the worst comedy of the year. Years, to be exact.

So the news that he’s directing “The Housemaid,” a thriller starring Sydney Sweeney, brings a sigh of relief. There’s nothing funny about Feig’s comedy tailspin …

Warner Bros. to Phillips: Joker's on you

Todd Phillips, meet the Warner Bros. bus backing over you.

Phillips’ “Joker” earned the studio north of $1 billion back in 2019. That gave Phillips all the creative freedom necessary to make a musical sequel.

Yes, “Joker: Folie a Deux” is a musical about a murderous mental patient and his new gal pal (Lady Gaga).

The film, naturally, is tanking stateside. Now, according to World of Reel, studio suits are using industry mags to blame Phillips for the debacle.

They’re not wrong, per se, but using studio leaks to malign an artist who swung for the fences and missed feels wrong. But it’s oh, so right for kind, tolerant Hollywood …

'SNL' dunks on Dems

Is “Saturday Night Live” regretting its transformation into MSNBC light? The show’s bipartisan approach to political satire evaporated during the Obama years. It's only gotten worse since then.

The show mostly ignored President Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline and VP Kamala Harris’ word salad recipes.

Yet the first two “SNL” episodes of the new season, its 50th, suggest the show may be trying to channel its earlier incarnation.

Over the weekend, Jim Gaffigan played Gov. Tim Walz as, well, a knucklehead. The show even had Gaffigan, a raging anti-Trumper off screen, reciting Walz’s “friends with school shooters” line from the recent VP debate.

Maya Rudolph’s Kamala Harris is shown drowning her sorrows in wine, a possible nod either to those who think she’s a cool wine mom or that her incoherency is tied to the bottle.

It’s even more noteworthy because we’re mere weeks from Election Day and “SNL” has been a reliable part of the Democrats’ machine for more than a decade.

Even a far-left sketch show may not be able to resist the grossly incompetent Harris-Walz ticket.

Glenn Beck GOES OFF on Kamala Harris and her radical VP pick Tim Walz



After weeks of speculation, Vice President Kamala Harris has chosen Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her 2024 vice presidential candidate — and Glenn Beck is not impressed.

“This is the governor that is Bernie Sanders' favorite governor. Kamala is more left than Bernie Sanders,” Glenn says. “So you have two radicals.”

“One from California who was in charge of crime in California. How’s that working out for California? And the other one is the leftist from the home state of Ilhan Omar and little Somalia. How’s that working out for you?” Glenn asks.

Walz was the governor of Minnesota when the George Floyd riots were taking place, and the result of the actions he took during that time — or didn’t take — was a disaster.

“His major cities burned to the ground during BLM, and he did nothing,” Glenn says, adding, “I’m sure he supported Kamala when she was saying we have to bail these innocent people out who are lighting fires.”

Walz’s inability to be an authority figure during his reign as governor is deeply concerning to Glenn, as there’s no way his horrific track record qualifies him to be vice president of the United States.

“This is the party that’s going to ‘save democracy,’” he mocks. “I question the sanity of people. I think we have gone insane. I think we will be viewed by historians as a group of people that got so wrapped up in other gods, the gods of their party, that nothing mattered.”

Meanwhile, Glenn notes, the left was up in arms when Donald Trump was quoted saying that he could go out into the middle of a street in New York, shoot someone, and still be loved.

“Look at what’s happened to your country. Look what’s happened to your savings. Look what’s happened to your 401k. Look what’s being taught to your children. Look at the future of your children. Look at your community and what’s happened with crime. Look at your border, tell me about what’s happened to you personally, and you don’t care,” Glenn passionately exclaims.

“And you don’t care. You just go right along with it. You’re insane,” he adds.


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The radically progressive history of Tim Walz captured in 10 events



When Liz Wheeler heard the news that Kamala Harris had announced Tim Walz, the radical leftist governor of Minnesota, as her running mate, she called “an emergency press conference” into session.

It was important to her to be “the first out of the gate” in informing the American people, especially independent and swing-state voters, of “who exactly Tim Walz is and why Kamala Harris picked him.”

Harris’ selection has come as a surprise to many because Josh Shapiro, the governor of the critical swing state of Pennsylvania, was the logical choice, considering he’s a Jewish Democrat who would have appealed to Democratic voters who oppose the pro-Hamas wing of the party.

But according to Liz, Shapiro being Jewish is the reason she didn’t pick him.

“Kamala Harris passed over Josh Shapiro because he's Jewish — not because she has personal animosity towards Jews (I have no idea if she does or not), but politically she is kowtowing to the pro-Hamas wing of the Democratic Party,” she explains, adding that Harris “would rather lose the traditional Democrat Jewish vote than face backlash from these terror sympathizers,” which is why she ended up choosing Tim Walz.

On top of that, Harris also “supports [Walz’s] radical policies,” says Liz, noting that behind the seemingly innocuous facade of a “fuddy-duddy, middle-aged white man” lies a long list of insidious progressive policies.

“We are going to go through his history and his record to tell you everything you need to know about Tim Walz,” says Liz.

- YouTubeyoutu.be

1. “Tim Walz was the governor of Minnesota during the 2020 Summer of Rage” when BLM “savaged Minneapolis” in the name of justice for George Floyd. Walz “allowed Black Lives Matter rioters to burn buildings, to loot black-owned businesses,” and “instead of sending the National Guard in, he delayed for a whole day,” resulting in “utter carnage in the city — crime, looting, arson, assault.”

2. Walz “was one of those ones who was embracing [the defund the police] mindset.” He attested that “policing is a white supremacist idea” that “harms black communities.”

3. “Tim Walz called Donald Trump and his supporters fascists ... after the attempted assassination of Donald Trump.”

4. “Tim Walz encouraged illegal aliens to use a ladder to climb over Trump's border wall” — to “disregard the rule of law in the United States of America [and] invade our border.”

5. “In the state of Minnesota, there are no restrictions on abortion — none. You can kill an unborn baby in the womb from the moment of conception until the moment that baby is completely through the mother's birth canal.” Further, in Minnesota, there are “no born-alive protections” for babies born alive after failed abortion procedures, meaning those infant survivors can be killed postnatally. This has all been championed by Tim Walz.

6. “Tim Walz also made the state of Minnesota a transgender sanctuary state,” meaning that a public “school can transition your child socially without telling you as a parent, and then that child can get access to puberty-blocking medication, cross-sex hormone therapy, and genital-mutilation surgery as a teenager.”

7. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Walz “locked people down” rigidly, preventing people from going practically anywhere. He also “forced [the people of Minnesota] to wear a mask,” including young children. “He forced elderly people to die alone in hospitals,” and perhaps worst of all, he “promoted a hotline that people could call to tattle to the government about anybody who violated the COVID lockdown.”

8. “He changed the Minnesota state flag to look more like Somalia.”

9. Walz is quoted saying, “One man’s socialism is another man’s neighborliness.”

10. “Tim Walz signed a bill into law that gave illegal aliens drivers' licenses ... rewarding people who violated our law with a benefit of our society” and “[making] it easier for illegal aliens to commit voter fraud.”

“This man is dangerous. This man is an absolute radical,” says Liz.

To learn more about Tim Walz, including the scandal where he was pulled over for a DUI and then lied that he was deaf, watch the clip above.

Want more from Liz Wheeler?

To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.