STATE OF THE (DIS)UNION: This tilts toward what we've been talking about!

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2026

How far will they go, we've asked: On this somewhat disturbing day, we'll be away from our sprawling campus until mid-afternoon. That said:

How far will this administration be willing to go with respect to November's elections? We asked that question at the start of the week, and now this report has arrived in the Washington Post:

Trump, seeking executive power over elections, is urged to declare emergency

Pro-Trump activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly previewed a plan to mandate voter ID and ban mail ballots in November’s midterm elections, and the activists expect their draft will figure into Trump’s promised executive order on the issue. The White House declined to elaborate on Trump’s plans.

“Under the Constitution, it’s the legislatures and states that really control how a state conducts its elections, and the president doesn’t have any power to do that,” said Peter Ticktin, a Florida lawyer who is advocating for the draft executive order. Ticktin attended the New York Military Academy with Trump and was part of his legal team that filed an unsuccessful 2022 lawsuit accusing Democrats of conspiring to damage him with allegations that his 2016 campaign colluded with Russia.

“But here we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes,” Ticktin went on. “That causes a national emergency where the president has to be able to deal with it.”

The emergency would empower the president to ban mail ballots and voting machines as the vectors of foreign interference, Ticktin argued.

The idea of claiming emergency executive powers based on allegations of foreign interference attaches new significance to the administration’s actions to reinvestigate the 2020 election. Trump has never accepted defeat, while never finding evidence of widespread fraud. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is leading a review of election security that officials said focuses on foreign influence.

And so on from there. 

How serious is this proposal? Does it represent something resembling an actual White House inclination? Is Pete Ticktin the real deal? Is he possibly just a flake?

We can't answer those questions. The Post's Isaac Arnsdorf goes on at some length, offering background information, but he doesn't seem to know at this point.

That said, we regard this as a deeply dangerous time. Ticklin may just be floating a dreamor then again, possibly not.

We ourselves are heading off to the medical mission today. We may resume these ruminations by mid-afternoon.

For those lacking access to the full report in the Washington Post, here's the overview from Mediaite, written by Isaac Schorr:

Trump Reportedly Mulling Plan to Declare ‘National Emergency’ Paving Way for Major Power Grab

The Washington Post reported that activists are working with the White House on an executive order to declare a “national emergency” over America’s elections and pave the way for a power grab.

“Pro-Trump activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting,” reported the Post‘s Isaac Arnsdorf. “President Donald Trump has repeatedly previewed a plan to mandate voter ID and ban mail ballots in November’s midterm elections, and the activists expect their draft will figure into Trump’s promised executive order on the issue.”

Peter Ticktin, a MAGA activist in favor of the executive order, told the Post that “we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes,” and that “the president has to be able to deal with it,” including by banning mail-in ballots and certain voting machines.

That headline and lede seem a bit overstated. At any rate, the report continues from there.


THURSDAY: The state of the union is towel-snapping...

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2026

...with Blue American silence thrown in: Thinking back to this morning's report, the most remarkable part of this mess is the fact that Blue America has so totally agreed to roll over and accept it.

Through whatever batch of internal wiring, there will always be someone like Greg Gutfeldsomeone who's eager to give angry voice to his misogyny-agency complaints. (We've suggested that his owners ought to get him some help.)

Every so often, someone like Jesse Watters will come alongsomeone inclined to voice such silly clatter as this about the State of the Union event:

WATTERS (2/25/26): It's also a great format for the president because the Republicans are just better looking. All of the cutaways to these Democratsit's sad. It is a sad look. Our cabinet is more attractive. The Trump family is more attractive. I'm sorryit's just the truth.

Also, Trump loves awards. It's become an award show now. You get a Medal of Freedom, you get a Medal of Honor. This person got a tax refund, she got fertility drugs.

It's like him hosting an awards show now, which is great, and that is why it's so fun...

"The Republicans are just better looking." Yes, that's what he said. 

Regarding the "fun" of the current State of the Union format, there's a great deal more to be said.

Performers like these have come alongand Fox News saw an opening. Through their mélange of apparent misogyny, "insult comedy" and utterly silly chatter, Watters and Gutfeld now drive three of the four most watched programs in American "cable news." 

(The other most-watched show also belongs to Fox, as you can see in the list below.)

For the record, these aren't just the most-watched shows; they're most watched programs by far. Over at Mediaite, Sean James delivers the mail, starting with the basics:

Fox News Romps Over Cable Competition in February, Scores 35% More Viewers Than CNN and MS NOW Combined 

,,,Fox News once again smoked its competition in February.

New Nielsen data obtained by Mediaite shows Fox News averaged 34% more primetime viewers and 35% more total day viewers than CNN and MS NOW combined this month.

Fox News averaged 2.61 million primetime viewers between Monday and Sunday—compared to 1.94 million for both CNN and MS NOW—and that figure jumped to 3.07 million viewers when just looking at primetime viewership during the week. 

Those early numbers for February show Fox News programs with 35% more viewers than the other two cables combined! When it comes to viewership for the most-watched weeknight shows, the five top shows look like this:

Average viewers, nightly cable news programs:
The Five: 4.00 million
Jesse Watters Primetime: 3.44 million
Special Report with Bret Baier: 3.10 million
Gutfeld!: 3.04 million
The Ingraham Angle: 2.90 million

All five shows are from Fox News. Hannity is a smidgeon behind Laura Ingraham at #6. 

At MS NOW, The Rachel Maddow Show checks in with 2.38 million viewers, but the program airs just once a week. At MS NOW, Lawrence O'Donnell has the most-watched full week program (1.47 million). 

At CNN, Anderson Cooper tops the list (908,000).

With respect to programs like The Five, Watters Primetime and Gutfeld!, no serious person could seriously claim that they're actual "news" shows. We'd call them propaganda messaging programs, with plenty of clowning mixed in.

There's more to say about these matters, but for today we're tired. That said:

The state of the union is very poor in the cable news department. At Fox, the state of the union is fawning and clowning and plenty of insults, with the New York Times' silence thrown in.


STATE OF THE (DIS)UNION: She's "not unattractive," Gutfeld says!

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2026

Fox News [HEART] the State of the Union: Yesterday, shortly after 5 p.m., Jesse Watters was explaining why he loves the annual State of the Union address.

He's been described as "the silliest child" in the history of American TV news. Now, he began to lay out his thinking:

WATTERS (2/25/26): I love State of the Union Trump. I think it's better than Rally Trump, better than Sit Down Interview Trump, even better than "[Gutfeld!] Show Trump."

This guy owns this format. Because there's a physical division right in the middle of the chamber. So he creates a moment, then exploits the moment to get a reaction from the Democrats and the reaction proves his point. He accentuates it so deliciously that the Democrats are baited into going where they don't want to go...

In Watters' view, the sitting president "exploits" the situation, deliciously baiting the Democrats! More on that another day. We thought that first word choice was apt.

Before he was done, the thoughtful analyst further explained his (current) love for the time-honored State of the Union formatand yes, he made these "silly boy" comments:

WATTERS: It's also a great format for the president because the Republicans are just better looking. All of the cutaways to these Democratsit's sad. It is a sad look. Our cabinet is more attractive. The Trump family is more attractive. I'm sorryit's just the truth. 

Also, Trump loves awards. It's become an award show now. You get a Medal of Freedom, you get a Medal of Honor. This person got a tax refund, she got fertility drugs.

It's like him hosting an awards show now which is great, and that is why it's so fun...

No, we haven't made that up. According to Watters, the annual address is a lot of fun because it's like "an award show now." Also, the format is great for President Trump because Republicans "are just better looking."

Yes, he actually said that! In fairness, let this be said:

On The Five but also on Jesse Watters Primetime, Watters slides in and out of a slithery performance style. Routinely, he transitions from attempts at straight analysis into an undisguised, self-deprecating "simpleton" comic persona. 

That comic persona is part of his standard approach. But to our eye, he was completely serious in his comments about which cabinet, family and political party is just plain "better looking."

As you know, this analysis was being offered on our rapidly failing nation's most watched "cable news" program. (This afternoon, we'll run through the latest viewership numbers.)

To our eye, the silly lad seemed completely sincere as he told four million viewers that Republicans are just better looking"more attractive"than Dems. During this same pathetic segment, Greg Gutfeld mused about the physical appearance of Rep. Ilhan Omar, who we would score as highly telegenic, based on conventional norms:

GUTFELD: I have to point outIlhan Omar. She repulses me, and I'm trying to figure out why, because she's not unattractive.

She has an unusual amount and kind of anger. She has no right to that level of rage in the United States of America, the country who gave her corrupt ass a new life...She should be kissing the ground she walks on rather than spitting on it.

Her anger also reminds me of the radical who, given power, would destroy you. She would show no mercy for you if you were below her. Like, the look on her face is somebody who would step on your face instead of giving you a hand, and that is not the kind of person we should have in our leadership. It's not the type of person we should have in this country...

For the record, we've often said that this angry, incel-adjacent man seems to need some help. We've also said that he deserves that help. and his employer should provide it. 

That said:

Like the young native-born Nebraska men in Willa Cather's My Antonia, Gutfeld has noticed the fact that this immigrant (refugee) woman is actually "not unattractive." (Text from Cather below.) That said, he's puzzled by his reaction to the Minnesota congressional rep.

Despite the fact that she's "not unattractive," he says he finds her repulsive--and he says he wants to find out why. As it turns out, he bases his assessment on "the look on her face"the face he almost admits to find attractiveand after he shares his fearful fantasies with four million or more Red American viewers, he reaches his final assessment: 

Rep. Omar is not the type of person we should have in this country. 

Let us say this about that: 

Rep. Omar isn't exactly "in our [dissolving nation's] leadership." She is in the United States House of Representatives, and that's because she keeps getting elected to that position, by people who are still allowed to reside in Young Master Gutfeld's country.

We refer to the voters in Minnesota's Fifth Congressional Districta suburban district whose population was recently listed as shown below by the Cook Political Report:

Minnesota Fifth Congressional District
White: 59.9%
Black: 17.1%
Hispanic: 10.1 %
Asian: 6.1%
Two or more races: 5.2%

The district keeps electing Rep. Omar with 74 percent of the vote. That said, the largest demographic group in the district is Gutfeld's own "color." According to the leading authority on the district, Somalis make up three (3) percent of the district's population.

Putting it a different way, there seem to be a lot of people who don't see the look on Omar's face which this corporate messaging agent sees. To his credit, he says he wants to find out why he sees what these others don't. 

Just for the record, this $9 million per year corporate employee is rarely shy about letting his Omar-related demons emerge. A few minutes earlier, he had already made the comment shown below as he offered his own dumbed-down remarks about why he loved Tuesday night's State of the Union address: 

GUTFELD: It's almost two hours long, this thing. I felt like Trump is like a maître d' at a restaurant who is so proud of the specials that he's going to go through them whether you like it or not:

"I've got the veal scallopini, I got the lobster thermidor, I got the quail surf and turf. If you need to lose some weight, we got the Cobb saladand for Ilhan, we've got some goat on the menu.

PANEL: [Appreciative laughter]

That was before he told the world how repulsive he finds Rep. Omar, even though she's "not unattractive."

Question:

Will he ever go to that Fifth Congressional District to ask the people who were once his fellow citizens about the look they see on Rep. Omar's face?  We'll guess that the answer is no. Sadly, this is the way the possibility of union ends, not with a bang but with a strangely frightened confession, amounting perhaps to a type of a whimper

It's the look he sees on Omar's faceon a face which is not unattractive! Five hours later, he drove his own Gutfeld! show along, as he quite routinely does, with the frequently debunked claim that Rep. Omar once married her brother, but also with a typical jibe about smelly Somali food.

This is who and what he currently is. Fox pays him to behave this way.

The stooges around him happily laughed. The baldly secessionist Fox News Channel makes its money by hiring and paying the kinds of people who are inclined to play such games.

We have no major opinion about Rep. Omar, who's one among 435. We do know that several of the world's top female models have been woman of Somali ancestry, starting with Imam herself.

Somali women have often been judged to be unusually beautiful. With apologies to Rep. Omar, Brother Gutfeld may be struggling with what he doesn't want to see on that perhaps attractive face. 

We hoped to talk today about some of the astonishing claims the president made at that State of the Union address. The (familiar) misstatement referenced in this Mediaite report was especially astounding, as it long has been. 

In fairness, we've long suggested that the sitting president does in fact seem to be some (serious) version of what used to be called "mentally ill." (Many around him strike us in a similar way.)

We'll get to that another day. For now, let's return to the Nebraska of the late 19th century, keeping Herr Gutfeld in mind:

Last Saturday, we discussed the pleasure Willa Cather's narrator took as he saw his community's "immigrant girls" rise to become the mistresses of Nebraska's largest farms. 

To our mind, another part of the chapter in question described an even more fascinating matterthe way the native-born boys of the fictional Black Hawk lacked the courage to act on their attraction to those physically beautiful, spiritually vibrant Bohemian and Danish girls.

Cather's narrator was named Jim Burden. (He's a gender-shifted version of Cather herself.) This morning, Burden speaks again:
My Antonia: Book Two, Chapter IX
There was a curious social situation in Black Hawk. All the young men felt the attraction of the fine, well-set-up country girls who had come to town to earn a living, and, in nearly every case, to help the father struggle out of debt, or to make it possible for the younger children of the family to go to school.

Those girls had grown up in the first bitter-hard times, and had got little schooling themselves. But the younger brothers and sisters, for whom they made such sacrifices and who have had ‘advantages,’ never seem to me, when I meet them now, half as interesting or as well educated. The older girls, who helped to break up the wild sod, learned so much from life, from poverty, from their mothers and grandmothers; they had all, like Ántonia, been early awakened and made observant by coming at a tender age from an old country to a new.

I can remember a score of these country girls who were in service in Black Hawk during the few years I lived there, and I can remember something unusual and engaging about each of them. Physically they were almost a race apart, and out-of-door work had given them a vigor which, when they got over their first shyness on coming to town, developed into a positive carriage and freedom of movement, and made them conspicuous among Black Hawk women.

[...]

The Black Hawk boys looked forward to marrying Black Hawk girls, and living in a brand-new little house with best chairs that must not be sat upon, and hand-painted china that must not be used. But sometimes a young fellow would look up from his ledger, or out through the grating of his father’s bank, and let his eyes follow Lena Lingard, as she passed the window with her slow, undulating walk, or Tiny Soderball, tripping by in her short skirt and striped stockings.

The country girls were considered a menace to the social order. Their beauty shone out too boldly against a conventional background. But anxious mothers need have felt no alarm. They mistook the mettle of their sons. The respect for respectability was stronger than any desire in Black Hawk youth.

Our young man of position was like the son of a royal house; the boy who swept out his office or drove his delivery wagon might frolic with the jolly country girls, but he himself must sit all evening in a plush parlor where conversation dragged so perceptibly that the father often came in and made blundering efforts to warm up the atmosphere. On his way home from his dull call, he would perhaps meet Tony and Lena, coming along the sidewalk whispering to each other, or the three Bohemian Marys in their long plush coats and caps, comporting themselves with a dignity that only made their eventful histories the more piquant. If he went to the hotel to see a travelling man on business, there was Tiny, arching her shoulders at him like a kitten. If he went into the laundry to get his collars, there were the four Danish girls, smiling up from their ironing-boards, with their white throats and their pink cheeks.

[We skip past an individual story]

Sylvester dallied about Lena until he began to make mistakes in his work; had to stay at the bank until after dark to make his books balance. He was daft about her, and everyone knew it. To escape from his predicament he ran away with a widow six years older than himself, who owned a half-section. This remedy worked, apparently. He never looked at Lena again, nor lifted his eyes as he ceremoniously tipped his hat when he happened to meet her on the sidewalk.

So that was what they were like, I thought, these white-handed, high-collared clerks and bookkeepers! I used to glare at young Lovett from a distance and only wished I had some way of showing my contempt for him.
We don't recommend feeling or showing contempt for those young men. Instead, we advise you to pity the native-born boys who could see the vibrant beauty of the immigrant girls but were unable to act.

We thought of this favorite passage as Gutfeld mused last night. We advise you to pity the rapidly failing union which has fellows like these on the air as we Blues avert our gaze.

He attacks the smelly food she eats. He freely attacks her alleged "corrupt ass." He endlessly plays the incest card. He's oddly repulsed by her face.

Still coming: At long last, has he no shame?

Also, the 1962 U.S. Soviet meet, plus last weekend's hockey game


WEDNESDAY: Aliyah Rahman, in D.C.!

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2026

Marimar Martinez as well: We plan to return to the State of the Union addressmainly, to the state of the union itselfstarting tomorrow morning. 

Within the next few days, we even plan to take you to the so-called "Greatest Track Meet of All Time"the legendary US-Soviet Union meet, held right there, over two days, in jam-packed Stanford Stadium. 

Thanks to one of our all-time best friends, we sat there, "just a kid like you," all through the course of that weekend. We were cheering the Americans onthough as it turned out, the most memorable and important part of that meet occurred after the whole thing was over. 

In recent days, inane tribal warfare on "cable news" brought that event back to mind.

(Good God! Bob Hayes and Wilma Rudolph won the men's and women's 100! Those are legendary names in the annals of American sports. Rudolph's name is sacred.)

A great deal remains to be said about the dangerous state of our union. Today, we stumbled upon yesterday's report from The Mirror about two women who came to D.C. this week.

We wrote about Aliya Rahman in real time, back when she was ripped from her car and hauled away, in extremely rough fashion, by the boys who weren't in blue. 

Rahman came to the District this week. Headline included, The Mirror's report starts as shown:

Disabled Minneapolis woman dragged from car by ICE reveals disturbing details of injuries

A woman who was dragged from her car by ICE agents in Minneapolis said she suffered severe damage in her shoulders.

Aliya Rahman was driving to an appointment at a traumatic brain injury clinic on January 13 when she was pulled from her car by ICE agents. Rahman, who has autism, found herself caught in a traffic jam and explained to agents who told her to move her car that she was unable to process their instructions. She was dragged from her vehicle, with footage of the incident quickly circulating online.

Rahman will accompany Minnesota Rep Ilhan Omar at the State of the Union address on Tuesday night. Rahman spoke to MS Now ahead of the event, and described the fallout from the violent incident last month.

“I have spent the last month learning the names of the tendons in my shoulder, because both of my shoulders are torncartilage and tendons. But what I haven't learned is the names of the people who did this to me,” Rahman said.

And so on from there. As the videotape made clear, her treatment was extremely rough on the day in question.

Rahman came to D.C. this week. So did Marimar Martinez, who somehow managed to survive despite being shot five times:

Marimar Martinez, a 30-year-old U.S. citizen who was shot five times by Border Patrol agents last October, will also be in attendance at the event on Tuesday night.

Martinez graciously accepted the invitation to accompany Illinois Rep Jesús “Chuy” García, writing in a statement, “I look forward to attending the State of the Union and hope the country can look at what happened to me and other victims of DHS’s unlawful behavior as a basis to call their elected representatives and demand accountability.” 

So reported The Mirror. For the record, after Martinez was shot five times, the apparent lying began, given voice by the agent who shot her.

Martinez was shot five times; somehow, she survived. Rahman was ripped from her carto appearances, she was stuck in trafficand hauled off through the streets.

We saw The Mirror's report a day too late, but these events should not be forgotten. We leave you with the question we offered this morning:

How far will this administration possibly be willing to go in November of this year? To be honest, none of us has any idea how to answer that question. 

We're living in a dangerous time. There's no way to answer that question.

Fuller disclosure: Valeriy Brumel was on the scene at Stanford too.  Fosbury hadn't yet invented the flop. 

Brumel set a new world record. According to this later report, the ovation went on for five minutes.

STATE OF THE (DIS)UNION: The state of the union is tribal!

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2026

What's going to happen this fall? After last night's public event, our own assessment would have to be this:

The state of the union is tribal.

More precisely, the state of the union is deeply tribal. Indeed, "if we've learned anything from history"there's little reason to assume that we havethis deeply tribal state of affairs is also deeply dangerous. 

Despite instant reassurance from today's Morning Joe, we invite you to ponder this:

We the people have no idea what will happen this fall. We have no way of knowing how far the current administration will perhaps be willing to go.

We have no way of knowing if anything resembling normal elections will take place in November. If it seems like large segments of the population have been scared away from the polls, we have no way of knowing how Blue America will (or should) react.

Also, incipient war with Iran? We have no way to know about that!

Having made those observations, let's return to the current state of the union. The current state of the union is tribal, but it goes well beyond that.

The state of the union also seems to be delusionaland for those who believe in medical science, we mean, in some cases, that in the clinical sense.

The state of the union seems to involve the types of syndrome which were once known as "mental illness." 

(According to the leading authority, that language has fallen into disfavor within the global medical realm. The nature of the problem remains.)

The standard groaning misstatements were present last night, with one side of the famous chamber lustily cheering them on. We'll have more on this in the next few days, though we'd have to say that the widespread dislocation afflicts our own Blue America too.

Does the president believe the things he says? That has never been clear to us, one way or the other. 

But then, there's the counter reaction from our own Blue American elites. Mediaite presents a report on the instant reaction to last night's event from our own tribe's "cable news" entity:

‘Violence Porn’: Maddow Says Trump ‘Luxuriated’ In Describing the ‘Goriest Things’ In History of The SOTU 

Rachel Maddow called out President Donald Trump for “violent pornographic riffing” in his State of the Union address, claiming his speech “luxuriated” in gory details of brutal events.

Maddow characterized the president’s demeanor during the address on Tuesday as “wound up and weird,” playing a clip from early on in the speech to characterize her point. The MS NOW host called Trump’s repeated claims of a thriving economy “lies,” telling viewers that the president’s pacing was an important area of focus.

“The president didn’t seem very invested in the lies that he was telling about the economy, but he did list a whole bunch of them right off the bat. But as I say, some of the takeaway there, I think, is mostly going to be his pace and his freneticism,” she said.

And so on from there.

For the record, it's true! The president was weirdly frenetic at the start of last night's address. Just a guess:

He's accustomed to his performance style at his rallies, where he's free to make any claim which enters his head. He's also accustomed to his performance style at his Oval Office / Air Force One press events, where he simply insults any reporter who poses an unwanted question. 

Given the setting, he was perhaps a bit unsure of himself at the start of last night's address—but before long, he was back in the saddle again. As Maddow later noted, the "freneticism" disappeared.

That said:

When Maddow refers to the president's "lies," she assumes he knows that his wildly inaccurate statements are false. Medical realities being what they are, we can't say that we ourselves are totally sure about that. 

But as she continuedMediaite presents healthy chunks of text and tapewe'd say that Maddow majorly missed the point of the president's enduring appeal within the streets of our flailing nation's Red America.

On this morning's Morning Joe, at exactly 6:03 a.m., Joe Scarborough, who's very sharp, offered the standard dodge about those "gory" matters. We Blues! We've fallen in line behind the sorts of (well-intentioned) people who call their podcasts names like this:

The Best People

The best people! In such ways, we reinforce everything that's ever been said about ourselvesand we help freeze the president's support in place. 

We Blues! We exult in the way his approvals seem to have dropped below 40 percent. But that's enough to maintain the state of play which may lead to disaster this fall. 

(As we've noted in the past, we exist in a state of undeclared secession. You see that in the way one half of the chamber applauded each of the president's obvious howlers last night. We've reached a state of undeclared tribal warfaretribal war all the way down.)

Regarding the gore, let's say this:

We Blues care about some of those who have lost their lives in the nation's streets. We don't care about some of the others, about those who have been sexually assaulted and then brutally killed. 

We don't care about those otherwise honored dead; indeed, we invent dodges to whisk them away. That's part of the nature of tribal division, but we've made our disinterest clear.

(Full disclosure: Correctly, Maddow noted an unusual misstatement by the president about the vicious killing of Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte last summer. It's true! The young refugee wasn't killed by someone "who came in through open borders"but Maddow glided past an obvious point. That killing represents a second way we Blues stand accused all through Red America. In those precincts, we stand somewhat credibly accused of perhaps being "soft on crime.")

The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but we Blues are fallible humans too. We're skilled at reassuring the choir, less adept at understanding the ways we may appear to tens of millions of Others. 

It's been quite a few years since we first blurted this:

It's all anthropology now!

We meant there would be no happy ending to this dangerous state of affairs, no easy resolution delivered to us by our rational / empathetic qualities. Years later, the state of this struggling nation is dangerously, deeply tribal.

We've suggested that you "pity the child," but how far will the sitting president perhaps be willing to go? Urged on by the Millers, the Vances, the Hegseths and Gabbards, how far might the gentleman take it?

None of us has the slightest idea, and we aren't even willing to travel the roads which give us the chance to ask!

This afternoon: Lawrence and Gutfeld and Noem oh my! Studies in human behaviors

Tomorrow: A hockey game versus the dead! How well do we understand others?