Commentary

As I contemplated the subjects I could comment on, of course I thought of Nancy Pelosi’s partisan commission on January 6, 2021.  Is anyone paying any attention to it, I thought. 

After watching less than a half hour listening to the pathetic testimony by those who were supposed to be guarding the Capitol, I was convinced. No.

“We are going to be guided solely by the facts,” said Democrat Rep. Bennie Thompson in his opening remarks. “Our only charge is to follow the facts where they lead us.”  Really? 

‘We know that seven people lost their lives, that more than 140 police officers suffered injuries,” he said, apparently ignoring his charge to follow the facts.

Actually, only one fatality occurred during the attack, the shooting death of Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt by a yet to be named Capitol police officer.  No one succumbed later of injuries sustained during the assault.

Three other Trump supporters died of natural causes, according to the medical examiner.  Two police officers committed suicide in the days after the attack.

Thompson still refers to the death of Officer Duane Sicknick as a riot casualty, though his death days later was ruled unrelated to the event.

Then, after reading the opening paragraph of the morning edition of Bright, a product of The Federalist, written by Inez Feltscher Stepman, a senior policy analyst at the Independent Women’s Forum and a contributor to The Federalist, my mind was made up. I wouldn’t waste your time with details.

“I’m loathe to even talk about this partisan commission as I’m convinced that no one outside the Beltway cares,” she opens. “Many of the witnesses have direct ties to the two previous impeachments brought against then President Trump.”

I’ll leave you with the comments by Pat Buchanan in Townhall.  While referring to January 6, he said it was “a shameful disgrace.  But January 6, was not 9/11 or Oklahoma City or Pearl Harbor, or the Pulses Night Club or the Las Vegas massacre.”

Continuing, he asks, “why are Pelosi and the regime media doing everything to keep January 6, alive?  As of today, January 6, is the biggest and last best stick the Democrats have for retaining control of Congress in 2022. 

“For if that election is not about the worst day for the GOP of the Trump years, it is going to be about the successes and failures of the first two Biden years.

“The Democrat establishment and its media arm have a vital interest in hyping January 6, and not letting go of it. (It’s) their last best hope for holding power after November 8, 2022.”

CHANGING SUBECTS – I have been a conservative commentator for the past 21 years, initially with my op-eds, but through this blog for the past seven years.  Yet, a headline, “A Guide to Conservative Commentators,” in the Spectator still caught my eye.  What am I missing, I thought?

“So you want to be a conservative commentator.  Welcome aboard,” wrote Ben Sixsmith. “But before you start, you need to think about what kind of conservative commentator you want to be.”  I never gave much thought that there were different kinds.

“I know what you’re thinking,” he said, “you’re a traditional conservative, or a neoconservative, or a libertarian.”

“The map of conservative commentary is richer and more complicated than that – containing archetypes that are not reducible to ideology alone,” Sixsmith writes,  “there are all kinds of subcultural phenomena there that you have to navigate as you build your brand.”

“Shall we begin?” he wrote, as he explained 12 different types, each with a name of its own, like “The Absolute Wonker,” “The Cocktail Drinker,” “The Dad,” and “The Manly Man.” 

It wasn’t until I read all of the descriptions that I realized I had been taken in, and as I returned to page one, I noted the word, “HUMOR,” centered in a six-point font over the headline.

It just goes to show you – know what you are reading.

Now, more than ever … may God continue to bless the United States of America.