Political Pistachio
By Douglas V. Gibbs
As the Supreme Court prepares to rule in Watson v. Republican National Committee, most Americans see just another legal battle over election rules. What they’re missing is a profound constitutional moment that strikes at the very heart of our federal system and the integrity of our elections.
At stake is whether states like Mississippi and California can continue counting mail-in ballots that arrive days after Election Day, effectively transforming a single decisive day into weeks of uncertainty. The answer lies not in clever legal arguments or policy preferences, but in the constitutional design our Founders created to prevent precisely this kind of electoral chaos.
I learned this lesson firsthand in 1984 while serving in the U.S. Navy at Naval Air Station Meridian, Mississippi. As a California resident voting absentee, I had to apply for my ballot. No mass mailings. No automatic distribution. The instructions were clear: mail it early enough to arrive by Election Day, or it wouldn’t count. This wasn’t voter suppression; it was common sense election administration that protected both access and integrity.
Today’s California bears no resemblance to that era. Now, ballots are mailed to everyone, with a seven-day grace period for those postmarked by Election Day. This transformation didn’t happen through constitutional amendment or congressional authorization – it happened through state administrative fiat that directly conflicts with federal law.
One of the most heated debates at the 1787 Constitutional Convention was whether the federal legislature should be able to “negative” (veto) state laws. The delegates repeatedly rejected this broad power, fearing an overbearing federal government. Yet they made one crucial exception: in Article I, Section 4, while they granted the States the authority to prescribe the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives,” the also authorized Congress the authority to “by Law make or alter such Regulations.”
Why this exception? Because the Founders knew that states might abuse their election administration privileges to manipulate federal elections. They anticipated exactly what we’re seeing today – states creating rules that give advantage to some voters over others, that extend elections beyond their intended conclusion, and that sow doubt and confusion into the electoral process.
The federal Election Day statutes weren’t written in a vacuum. They exist because states historically abused their election administration authority, prompting Congress to establish clear, uniform standards. Like warning labels on products, these laws exist because bad behavior and corruption made them necessary.
The Constitution establishes a clear hierarchy when it comes to constitutional authorized powers: Article I, Section 4 gives Congress authority over federal elections; Article VI makes federal laws the “supreme Law of the Land.” When Congress established a uniform Election Day, it exercised its constitutional authority, and states must comply – not because the courts say so, but because the Constitution says so.
The question in Watson v. RNC isn’t complicated: Does “the day for the election” mean ballots must be both cast and received by that day, or merely cast by that day? The historical context and congressional intent are clear: Election Day was meant to be a single, decisive moment when Americans choose their representatives, not the beginning of a weeks-long counting period.
The proper role of the Court here isn’t to create new law or expand federal power but to recognize constitutional reality. When the Supreme Court rules (as expected) against Mississippi’s grace period, it won’t be making new policy. It will be acknowledging that Congress already exercised its constitutionally enumerated power to establish uniform election timing.
This approach avoids the constitutional problems of judicial review that has allowed federal power to expand beyond its proper limits. The Court would simply be performing its legitimate function: recognizing that federal law, not state law, governs federal elections.
Today’s debate about “voter suppression” versus “voter responsibility” reflects a deeper cultural shift away from civic virtue. Expecting voters to ensure their ballots arrive on time isn’t suppression. It’s responsible participation in our electoral processes. The Founders would have viewed such requirements as consistent with republican self-government.
We’ve become so intent on rewarding irresponsibility that we’ve forgotten basic truths: if you don’t want your vote compromised, don’t put yourself in a position where it might be. Strict Election Day deadlines, absentee ballots only for those who request them, precinct-based counting, and voter ID aren’t unreasonable. They’re common-sense measures that protect everyone’s vote by protecting the integrity of the entire system.
A Supreme Court ruling aligned with the Constitution and Election Day deadlines as established by federal law would be a step toward restoring constitutional balance. But it’s only one step. True election integrity requires returning to the principles our Founders established: federal standards for federal elections, state administration within those bounds, and civic responsibility from voters.
The stability of self-government demands processes that are transparent, timely, and trustworthy. Prolonged ballot counting undermines this, inviting the very doubts that weaken our republic. “The day for the election” carries a precision that grace periods blur, turning a singular civic moment into an ambiguous process open to contestation.
Whatever the outcome in Watson v. RNC, the case offers an opportunity to reaffirm foundational election principles. Americans deserve elections resolved on Election Day itself, preserving the solemnity and certainty that undergird our constitutional republic.
The Founders gave us the tools to prevent election chaos. It’s time we used them again.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” – Benjamin Franklin
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” – John Adams
“A well-instructed people alone can be permanently a free people.” – James Madison
“Politics is downstream from culture.” – Andrew Breitbart
“When people stop talking, that’s when you get violence. That’s when civil war happens, because you start to think the other side is so evil, and they lose their humanity.” – Charlie Kirk
Over the weekend, as a part of America’s 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, President Trump hosted a UFC Freedom 250 event in Washington D.C. While I was unable to watch it live, I watched most of it later, including the incredible bout for the lightweight UFC championship. The event was held at the Ellipse, with thousands of people present. It was a grand event, fun to watch, and when Justin Gaethje exclaimed after his victory, “I’m an American,” and then provided his words of support for America and those who have fought to maintain our liberty, it filled me with a lot of patriotic pride. It was a good thing to see.
Often, there is more going on than we know, however. Behind the scenes, merely days before the event, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies disrupted a terror plot that had been planned, which was designed to cause mass-casualties at the UFC event near the White House. Twenty-three people have been identified as a part of the potential network of plotters, with five people so far in custody. The alleged plan was to use explosive-laden drones to hit buildings near the event, create a panicked evacuation, and then steer the fleeing crowds toward a pre-staged sniper team. Then, the plan was to send a “second wave” to the White House gate to storm the property.
The FBI first learned of the terrorist plot on June 10, and acted rapidly. The United States Secret Service worked closely with the FBI during the investigation. One suspect told investigators the goal was to target “capitalist elites,” “billionaires,” or any politicians who has received donations from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The investigation spanned across multiple states and 12 FBI field offices. Former FBI agent Jason Pack told Fox News Digital that the alleged scheme appeared to have moved beyond online rhetoric and into operational planning.
Vice President J.D. Vance said of the threat, “this is very, very dark stuff…This is what happens when people turn the rhetoric up so loud that disagreeing with somebody is a cause for violence. We got to tell everybody to tone it down… I think a lot of my Democratic colleagues in Washington have got to look themselves in the mirror and say, why is so much of this political violence coming from our side of the spectrum?”
Anti-Capitalist, communist-driven operations within our country is nothing new. The Soviets began infiltrating back in the 1930s. The attempts to dismantle our constitutional order has been an ongoing process, but I do admit it seems to be reaching a crescendo in recent decades. The effects of the movement has become apparent in things like the rise of candidates like Graham Platner, AOC’s billionaire bashing, and Bernie Sanders’ rise to the top of the Democratic Party and his call for the government to begin seizing wealth of successful companies. Americans have become angry because deception and lies have become such a norm among those who we elect to represent us – and that means on both sides of the aisle. It brings to mind Republican Representative Rob Wittman of Virginia who recently, to avoid questions he could have easily answered, faked a phone call as he walked along the sidewalk near The Capitol as a podcast reporter launched questions at him.
We have been convinced that the system is rigged, and in many ways it is. So we lash out against large corporations, even if it means ruining our economies. Those critical of “big oil” are screaming to get rid of Chevron Oil from their town in Richmond, California, even though the oil giant’s presence creates jobs and millions of dollars in tax revenue. Collectivism has convinced many young Americans that the community is more important than any individual, and big evil corporations and anyone else who has reached a high level of success is a “threat to democracy.” So they celebrated Luigi Mangione’s murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, considering it a shot across the bow against giant privately-owned corporations, and hoping his “extreme emotional disturbance” can be grounds for keeping him out of prison and being sent to a psychiatric facility, instead.
It’s a wave of communism-inspired thinking that is permeating the American landscape. It’s an anti-American wave of thinking that has become a common malady among leftist extremists, socialists and Islamists. It’s the punk you remember from high school who walked around with his chest stuck out, ready to fight if anyone ever crossed him because he was right, everyone else in the world was wrong, even if the facts said otherwise. They believe they must oppress to protect us from oppression. They must silence us because they claim we seek to silence them. They have moralized their way into politics, claiming they are there to save those discriminated against from liberty by offering class warfare, class resentment and government dependency.
The detest God, liberty, and anything else they believe might be connected or willing to defend American exceptionalism. The system is unacceptable, so it must be torn completely down. Discovery, innovation and growth is bad, to these people, because it allows success and wealth which they deem as antithetical to the rights and happiness of the oppressed. It must all be torn down, destroyed so that a new world of equity and inclusion can be built – you know, after those who disagree are eliminated.
In this new world boys can be girls and girls can be boys, and they will even defend transgender sports when a man who says he’s a woman sexually assaults a female competitor during a wrestling match. They demand that you celebrate their WOKE and sexually deviant beliefs, by their demand, and if you dare have an opinion otherwise, you will be punished. The baker who refuses to bake a gay cake will be put out of business, and a baseball player that writes a Bible verse on his baseball cap after being forced to wear a Gay “Pride” hat will be given verbal warnings and could be fined or suspended for repeated “unauthorized writing” on their uniforms in violation of uniform regulations. In other words, celebrate what we tell you to celebrate, and keep your own opinions silent.
And if a young man (Karmelo Anthony) murders another (Austin Metcalf), based on the alleged virtue of the oppressed versus white privilege argument, the black man who murdered the white man in cold blood with a knife while his victim had no weapon on him and provided no imminent threat to the safety of the killer must be considered “self-defense” – otherwise, the whole thing is racist and unfair. Protests emerged, with some articulating there must be a violent response. Even members of Congress, threatening violating Separation of Powers, screamed about the 35 years in prison sentence dealt to Anthony after the jury gave their verdict – claiming that the jury selection produced an all-white jury (which it didn’t) and that somehow Congress should be able to interfere with our judicial system. Such is the madness that identity politics has brought upon our culture.
Violent responses to things are the norm, anymore. Just look at New York’s “fans” after the Knicks recently won the NBA Championship. Look at the anti-ICE protests like what we saw at Delaney Hall in New Jersey. The attempted assassinations against President Trump. The execution by a gunman of Charlie Kirk. Antifa radicals clashing with police chanting “Charlie Kirk deserved to die” at a TPUSA Women’s Leadership Summit.
What have we become?
It is true that the violence and domestic terrorism on the rise in America is a direct result of leftist Democrats spewing violent rhetoric, but the rhetoric and violence is a deeper symptom of something even more alarming. It is the result of our culture abandoning its moral foundation and becoming, as Benjamin Franklin put it, “corrupt and vicious.”
The Democrats have been calling their opposition “Nazis,” “Fascists,” and “White Supremacists,” with the Southern Poverty Law Center doubling down on the rhetoric while secretly feeding the “enemy” funding and support and targeting Christians and Turning Point USA (Charlie Kirk) while running cover for groups like Antifa. They do it because they need an enemy to accuse. They require a scapegoat. And they are willing to do whatever it takes to keep that power so that the game can continue to be played based on their rules. That’s why they drag out the vote in places like California – they need to make sure their candidate wins at all costs. And if you question it, California has even incriminated investigating election fraud.
It truly is, as many pundits have pointed out, a culture war and a war for our minds.
Franklin’s warning was not merely a philosophical observation but a prophetic statement about the very conditions we now witness in America. When virtue erodes, liberty cannot be sustained by constitutional structures alone. The second half of Franklin’s quote (As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters) is precisely what we’re experiencing today – a society that has abandoned its moral foundation and now finds itself increasingly subject to a desire of more government control disguised as progressive governance.
The rot began when we allowed secularism to displace Christianity and our moral compass to be pushed aside by WOKE politics so that it could instead dominate the culture. Our founders recognized that freedom and self-governance requires adherence to the rule of law, and adherence to the rule of law requires virtue. Without the internal constraints of religious morality, external constraints become necessary. This is why we are watching the expansion of an ever-expanding regulatory state, the expansion of the surveillance apparatus, and the cancellation of those who dissent from the new orthodoxy.
The evidence of our moral decay surrounds us. We have gotten to the point that we normalize violence as political expression. These are not isolated incidents but symptoms of a society that has lost its moral bearings – the very kind of society that Franklin described as “corrupt and vicious.”
The solution is not more legislation or stronger enforcement but a return to the Christian moral framework that once undergirded American society. This means restoring the family as the fundamental unit of society, teaching children biblical values rather than critical race theory, and rebuilding communities around churches rather than political ideologies. It means recognizing that true freedom is not the license to do whatever we want but the liberty to do what we ought according to God’s moral law.
Without this moral restoration, America will continue its slide toward totalitarianism. The left’s vision of equity and inclusion is not an alternative to tyranny but its most insidious form – where conformity is enforced not by jackbooted thugs but by social media mobs, where dissent is punished not by imprisonment but by cancellation, where control is exercised not through overt oppression but through the subtle manipulation of language and thought.
The choice before us is stark: either reclaim our Christian heritage and the virtue it engenders, or accept the masters that Franklin warned would inevitably rule a corrupt and vicious people. The future of American freedom hangs in the balance, and it will be determined not by elections or court decisions but by whether we can restore the moral character of our people.
We can’t get our political house in order until we get our cultural house in order.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Today is the 811th anniversary of the sealing of the Magna Carta, signed by King John at Runnymede on June 15, 1215. The “Great Charter” returned the British System to its Saxon foundation, proclaiming that everyone, including the monarch, is subject to the law and possesses natural rights including the right to due process. Its influence on individual liberty and America’s journey to its Declaration of Independence and Constitution is critical – a legacy that still influences America to this day.
The American experiment in liberty did not emerge from a vacuum. It stands upon the Magna Carta’s foundation of English constitutional development that began long before our Founding Fathers gathered in Philadelphia. To understand American freedom, we must first understand its English ancestry – particularly the pivotal role of the Magna Carta.
Before the Norman Conquest of 1066, England had developed a system of governance that contained crucial elements of limited government. The Saxon kings ruled with the consent of their nobles through the Witenagemot – an assembly of wise men that served as a check on monarchical power. This tradition established that royal authority was not absolute but existed within established customs and required consultation.
The Saxons understood something fundamental: power must be constrained and distributed in a balanced manner in order to secure liberty. This principle would echo through centuries of English constitutional development and ultimately find its most complete expression in our American system.
On June 15, 1215 rebellious barons forced King John to seal the Magna Carta. This document did not create new liberties so much as it enumerated and formalized existing ones – for they believed that all rights came from the Creator – and among those ideas was that even the king was subject to the law.
Two clauses stand out for their profound influence on American freedom:
Clause 39: “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned…except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.”
Clause 40: “To no one will we deny or delay right or justice.”
These principles – due process of law and the right to a fair trial – would become cornerstones of American constitutionalism. The Magna Carta established the revolutionary concept that government exists under the rule of law, not above it.
The Magna Carta’s influence persisted through centuries of English history, reaching another critical moment in 1688 with the Glorious Revolution. When Parliament invited William and Mary to assume the throne, they required acceptance of the English Declaration of Rights – a document that explicitly drew upon Magna Carta principles.
The Declaration of Rights reasserted limitations on monarchical power and affirmed parliamentary supremacy. It codified concepts like regular parliaments, free elections, and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment – all with clear echoes in the Magna Carta. This document would directly influence our own Bill of Rights.
When American colonists declared their independence in 1776, they were not inventing new principles of liberty but claiming their rights as Englishmen. The Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776) and the Declaration of Independence incorporated Magna Carta principles, particularly regarding due process and the right to trial by jury.
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to our Constitution, recognizing the natural right of due process of law, are direct descendants of Magna Carta clause 39. Our system of checks and balances reflects the same spirit that animated the Magna Carta – the idea that governmental power must be limited to secure individual liberty.
The U.S. Constitution created a more elaborate framework than the Magna Carta, but both share the fundamental premise that governmental authority derives from the consent of the governed and exists within legal constraints. The American system of separation of powers and checks and balances represents the most complete institutionalization of the Magna Carta’s principle that even rulers must be subject to the rule of law.
American freedom is not an accident of history but the culmination of an 800-year journey that began with the Magna Carta. From Saxon customs to the Great Charter, from the Glorious Revolution to our own Constitution, liberty has advanced through the recognition that government must be limited to secure individual rights.
As Americans, we are heirs to this constitutional tradition. When we defend our Constitution, we are not merely defending a document but the culmination of centuries of struggle to establish that government exists to serve the people, not rule over them. The Magna Carta began this journey; our generation must continue it.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
by Douglas V. Gibbs (Author)
Buy God in the Constitution NOW
As with the Old Testament Book of Esther, the word “God” may not be in the Constitution, but His presence is truly there. We are reminded that God is at work behind the scenes even when not explicitly mentioned. The Founding Fathers were men of Faith and made constant reference to God in their writings. They believed in God-given Natural Rights and that the emergence of America was endowed by a higher power. The Constitution was a part of their supernatural assignment, and in the Preamble they offered it with words that revealed they did so believing that the document had been constructed with God’s Favor.
This book by Douglas V. Gibbs explains the godly foundation our American System possesses, details about God’s presence in the text of the Constitution, the influences of biblical principles on early Americans, and how the current generation has inherited the responsibility of preserving our God-given liberty.
Doug seeks to correct the faulty theory that the Founding Fathers sought a secular foundation, and uses historical context to explain the Christian roots of America’s launch. He clearly demonstrates the Founder’s moral and Christian convictions, and presents his argument in an accurate and easy-to-understand style.
“Impossible to put down. A great educational read.”
Virginia G.
By Douglas V. Gibbs
After years of Islam infiltrating regions across the globe, with terrorism on the rise, and the Left sycophantically bowing submissively to Islam, Barack Obama offered Iran a tribute. That’s what the pallet of cash was when the Obama Iran Deal went into place. Those of us who were not neck deep in leftist political swamp-slime understood exactly what was going on. Iran was being paid a massive amount of cash to promise to be nice (similar to protection money paid to gangs) from which they would fund building a nuclear bomb anyway so that they could participate in their apocalyptic vision of a 12th Imam scenario which includes mass death and chaos for the sake of the rise of a prophetic global Islamic caliphate. My friend, Tim “Loki” Kerlin, exclaimed as that time approached that the only way to stop the madness was to eliminate the ideology behind the madness.
A few weeks ago I sat in the backyard of a friend of mine overlooking an incredible view of a massive lake, with mountains in the distance. The friend I was visiting has been a supporter of what I do for many years, assisting in the funding of my radio programming. He was born in Iran, and as a young man he came to the United States in 1982 – three years after the Islamic Revolution that changed Iran from an American ally to a staunch enemy drenched with the blood of Islamic revolutionary rage. Once he was in America he became a Christian, married his college girlfriend, and established a thriving private business. Now, he’s retiring, and as he sat in the chair telling me about his recent heart surgery, the topic changed to Iran.
“Don’t get me wrong,” he said. “I love Trump. But he’s being too soft on Iran. The only way to solve the problem is to kill every member of the Islamic Regime. Every leader. Every one of them.” This is the same man who told me years ago that the Persians hate the Arabs for bringing Islam to Iran. He still has his whole family in Iran, and when he visits, he doesn’t even dare tell his own mother that he became a Christian for fear of being turned in to the authorities.
Japan didn’t surrender during World War II until we dropped two atomic bombs. They didn’t truly become an ally until General Douglas McArthur made sure that their ruling system was dismantled and a free market economic system truly took hold in that country.
Germany didn’t surrender until their country had been leveled, flattened into fields of rubble, and the entire leadership was surrounded in Berlin with no escape.
The reality is when the bad guys are on the march, the only way to stop the infestation of their destructive totalitarian ideology is to eradicate it. And if even a small memory remains, eventually its evil will try to rise again.
Because Bush’s War in Iraq went horribly wrong after it was all over, the term “regime change” has become something to fear as doomed to fail. Just because a dictator is dead, it doesn’t mean the ideology is dead, or that someone just as bad, or worse, may step in and grab the reins. Islam reminds me of progressivism, communism, and the Borg from Star Trek. It’s a system that requires group-think, and the danger will remain until the governing creed of Islam’s authoritarianism disguised as a religion remains intact.
Our sensibilities shudder when we think about it. No human being loves war, or wants to see people killed for any reason. The thought of someone saying, “Kill them all!” is reserved to fictional war stories, our thoughts about mentally damaged minds who have PTSD so badly they can’t see the horror in what they are saying, and Biblical passages we consider to be quite challenging when viewed through the eyes of modern sensibilities. But, the reality is the only way to end the horror is to, for lack of a better way of saying it, completely and thoroughly end the horror. All of it.
The conquest of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership represents one of those challenging moments in history. When Israel entered the Promised Land, God commanded the destruction of the Canaanite peoples, including women, children, and even animals. Joshua 6:21 records: “And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, ox and sheep and donkey, with the edge of sword.”
The command was a necessary one, for the Canaanite idolatry was so exceptionally corrupt, involving practices like child sacrifice and ritual prostitution associated with their deities Baal, Moloch, and Astaroth that these practices had corrupted the entire culture to such an extent that God deemed complete destruction necessary.
God had shown patience toward these nations for over 400 years, allowing them time to repent before Israel’s conquest. The destruction served dual purposes: it was both judgment against the Canaanites’ extreme wickedness and protection for Israel from being drawn into these corrupt practices.
The concept of herem (the Hebrew term translated as “utterly destroy”) is central here. This wasn’t merely warfare but a religious act where everything was “devoted to God” – either through destruction or consecration. Israel was meant to be a witness nation to surrounding peoples, demonstrating the character of the one true God. To fulfill this mission, they needed to remain spiritually pure, which required eliminating all corrupting influences.
The failure to completely eliminate the Canaanite influence later proved problematic. The incomplete conquest eventually led to Israel’s spiritual downfall during the period of the Judges, when they were repeatedly drawn into Canaanite religious practices.
In many ways these same battles exist today, placing modern Christians upon a spiritual battlefield against “the spiritual powers of wickedness in the heavenlies” (Ephesians 6:12). Just as Israel needed to completely remove physical threats to maintain spiritual purity, believers must actively eliminate spiritual influences that could compromise their faith. As the old saying goes, “while we may live in the world, we must not be of the world.” As J. Vernon McGee pointed out, if you have one foot on a galloping horse that is of God, and one foot on a galloping horse that is of the world, eventually they will part ways, and you will need to make a decision.
When President Trump talked about the potential of utter destruction of Iran, I believe the threat was sincere because we are dealing with an ideology that believes prophetically it cannot be destroyed and that mass chaos is the recipe to bring about their glorious end-of-the-world scenario that results in the rise of a worldwide caliphate. They believe in the “will of Allah,” so unless you can convince them that it is outside the will of Allah to continue to fight (for the moment) they will not stand down. Fear of utter destruction is pretty much the only thing that will bring them to the negotiating table, and even then they see it as temporary. All they have to do is wait, dig-in, and regroup once the leadership of their enemy changes. Trump’s term will eventually end, and the presence of people who think like him will eventually end. Once they have another Biden or Obama in office, then they can resume their atrocities.
I believe that President Trump understands that stark truth, and that is why recently to the horror of those who hated the Iraq War scenario, and what happened afterward, he used the term “regime change.”
While regime change was a complete disaster in Iraq under Bush, and Libya under Obama, regime change was necessary in Germany, Italy and Japan after World War II. And based on Trump’s assessments, the term “regime change” for Iran is an appropriate way to approach the problem.
With the successful military campaign so far in Iran, the leadership is so up against a wall, they are finally claiming they are willing to negotiate and sign an agreement. They can’t be trusted, their whole ideology is about deception, but for the time-being the deal Trump is presenting will have to do. The good news is that when they try to renege on the deal even a little bit, as long as Trump is in office, there will be an appropriate response.
If we wish for the deal to last beyond Trump, there must be a full and complete regime change. There must be an eradication of the Mullahs’ rule in Iran. The regime must be completely gone. As in the Land of Canaan, if even a small piece of that old hard-line Islamic way of thinking remains, Iran will rise up as a problem again at some point in the future.
It won’t completely eliminate Islam’s sick and twisted ideology spreading as it is, but it could take out some of the bite that Islam has with its number one source of funding for terrorism broken like an obedient stallion.
We must not be fooled, however. Victory is not achieved unless there is a complete and thorough eradication of the ruling ideology. Not merely the removal of some of the rulers who enforce it, or some of the religious leaders who believe in it. All of them – as my friend originally from Iran explained.
As with the complete de-Nazification of Germany after World War II, and the complete change in style of government away from a ruling emperor in Japan with a full injection of a free market system, Iran’s leadership must be completely dismantled, Islam must be removed from any part of the ruling structure, and a purely free market economic system must be instilled in Iran. I am not talking about the Bush Doctrine of “spreading democracy.” I am talking about the eradication of a regime that is harmful not just to the region, and dangerous to the world, but an unconditional surrender that comprehensively dismantles every aspect of the former ruling ideology and the full removal of all of the ruling class. Pull the weed out by the root, with nothing remaining intact, otherwise the root will grow back, and grow even larger than before.
In Iran, the same thorough removal of the former regime is beyond necessary, and to be honest after trials convicting them of atrocities against mankind (that likely won’t happen), these leaders should be executed in a manner similar to the top leaders of the Japanese regime after the war crimes trial that followed their surrender.
History is a clear windowpane to the truth. Be it biblical times or defeating 20th Century totalitarian regimes, to ensure victory and safety from the rise of the regime again at some time in the future, the remedy is completely eradicating the regime, and its ideology.
We are dealing with an ideology in Iran that believes America is the Great Satan, and Israel is the Little Satan. The anti-American fervor of hard-line Islamic religiosity has been the basis of Iran’s ruling class, and it mirrors Nazism in ways most of us don’t even understand. Leaving any of the leadership that believes in that ideology alive and in place in Iran would be a grave mistake. The Iranian regime has been a nationwide system of organized terrorism and has been engaging in war against The West for nearly fifty years. It is a cancer rooted deeply in the Iranian structure. Cutting out most of the cancer does not get rid of the cancer. Believing that the remaining cancer understands it must behave does not eliminate the threat. As long as the
mullahs and their IRGC has any footing whatsoever in Iran the threat remains. The deal must not allow the ideology to remain in place in Iran. The lying and deceiving ideology of the Islamic regime must be eliminated, or it will rise again to be a threat because it doesn’t matter how good the deal is – they don’t honor deals. They know only one thing – death and destruction of anyone who dares to believe differently than they do.
Eradicate all of it. Every last crumb. Otherwise, the war is not over, it is far from over, and Islam will come back in the region more vicious than it was before Trump began bombing them.
And this time, if they do rise again, they will not only be merciless against The West and Israel, but anyone or any country, even their Arab neighbors, who dared to come against them during this current war in the Middle East while soaking the ground with the blood for their own countrymen for daring to protest against them in the first place.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
In America, we are supposed to be Americans first, united not by the color of our skin or the land of our ancestors, but by our shared commitment to liberty, justice, and the rule of law. Yet something has gone terribly wrong in our national discourse. The Karmelo Anthony case is not just about a tragic confrontation between two teenagers at a Texas track meet; it’s a stark illustration of how identity politics has infected our sense of justice, replaced reason with rhetoric, and turned tragedy into political theater.
Let’s be clear about what happened on that fateful day in April 2025. Karmelo Anthony entered a tent belonging to another school’s team at a track meet where he didn’t belong. When asked to leave by Austin Metcalf and others, Anthony refused. With his hand in his bag, he warned, “Touch me and see what happens.” When Metcalf pushed him toward the exit, Anthony produced a knife and plunged it into Metcalf’s chest, piercing his heart and creating a gaping, two-and-a-half-inch wound that proved fatal. This wasn’t self-defense; it was an escalation from verbal confrontation to lethal force in seconds.
The jury agreed, convicting Anthony of murder and sentencing him to 35 years in prison, a sentence I personally consider shockingly lenient given the circumstances. Yet instead of accepting this verdict as justice served, Anthony’s defenders immediately framed it as racism. They claimed an “all-white jury” convicted him (despite the fact that three jurors were racial minorities and four Black men testified against Anthony’s self-defense claim). They screamed about systemic oppression and racial injustice. They even made absurd claims about the knife, with Representative Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) suggesting the 3.5-inch blade was somehow too small to be considered a deadly weapon.
This reaction reveals a deeper sickness in our political culture. Marxism operates by creating class warfare to bring about revolution, and its modern American variant has simply replaced economic class with racial identity. The Progressive Democratic Party has divided America into competing groups, setting them against each other in a perpetual Hegelian dialectic of oppressor versus oppressed. In this framework, facts don’t matter – only narratives do. Justice isn’t about what actually happened, but which identity categories the participants belong to.
The cry of racism has become automatic, reflexive, and often disconnected from reality. Certain communities have been convinced that the American constitutional system represents some form of oppression rather than the greatest vehicle for human freedom ever devised. The excuse of historical wrongs like slavery is used to justify present-day grievances, despite the Constitution’s explicit rejection of “corruption of blood” and its evolution toward equal protection under the law.
The biblical principle that the sins of the father should not be passed down to the son has been replaced by a secular doctrine of inherited guilt and victimhood. Martin Luther King’s vision of a nation where people are judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin has been supplanted by an obsession with racial categorization and group identity.
This ideology has consequences. As The Federalist’s Eddie Scarry rightly observed, at the heart of the Black Lives Matter movement is the “lazy, destructive assertion that ‘black and brown’ people are oppressed by whites and therefore minorities, particularly blacks, are entitled to exhibit antisocial behavior with impunity.” This creates a mindset where bringing a knife to a school event and using it against someone who shoves you can be framed as justified resistance rather than criminal violence.
The reactions to Anthony’s conviction have been telling. Outside the courthouse, protesters screamed racial epithets and called for more violence. One woman reportedly said Anthony “should’ve killed Austin’s twin brother HUNTER as well,” with others in the crowd agreeing. This isn’t about justice. It’s about historical revenge, societal power, and racial animus. As David Strom noted in Hot Air, “They don’t support Anthony because they think he was innocent; they support him because they know he is guilty, and approve what he did.”
The double standards are glaring. As The Liberty Daily pointed out, reverse the skin colors in this scenario and the response would be completely different. “If it was Austin Metcalf that stabbed Karmelo Anthony over a shove, they would be calling for Metcalf’s head. They would be calling Metcalf a coward and a psychopath.” This reveals the fundamental dishonesty at the heart of identity politics; it’s not about principle, but about power.
Even Democratic lawmakers have joined the chorus, with Representative Christian Menefee claiming an “all-White jury” delivered the verdict and Representative Troy Carter suggesting Anthony “certainly appears to have been being attacked and defended himself.” These statements ignore the evidence and the actual composition of the jury to advance a predetermined racial narrative.
What we’re witnessing is the corruption of justice by ideology. Separation of Powers specifically leaves judicial duties to the courts, not an ideological mob of desk-jockeys from Congress. A jury was provided, and a conviction was reached. But the grievance industry, fueled by organizations like the SPLC and movements like BLM, profits from racial division. They create narratives of oppression that justify violence and excuse criminal behavior and call for the mob to take over when the results don’t agree with them. Hate pays, and it’s not expensive to gin up when you have a media ecosystem eager to amplify every perceived injustice.
This doesn’t mean there aren’t real problems in our society or that we should ignore genuine instances of racism. But we must distinguish between legitimate concerns and manufactured outrage. We must recognize that not every conflict between people of different races is about race. Sometimes, it’s simply about right and wrong.
The Karmelo Anthony case should have been straightforward: a teenager made a series of terrible choices that led to another teenager’s death, and he was held accountable for those choices. Instead, it became another battleground in America’s ongoing culture wars; a symbol for competing narratives about race, justice, and identity.
Until we reject the poison of identity politics and return to a shared understanding of justice based on facts rather than feelings, on individual responsibility rather than group grievances, we will continue to see more cases like this. We will see more tragedies transformed into political spectacles, more communities divided along racial lines, and more young people taught to see themselves as perpetual victims or perpetual oppressors rather than as individuals responsible for their own actions.
The solution isn’t more division or more identity politics. It’s a return to the American ideal that we are one We the People of the United States, united by shared values and committed to equal justice under the law. Until we reclaim that ideal, we will continue to reap what identity politics has sown: bitterness, division, and a system warped by ideology rather than guided by reason.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary