For the most part, we’re not talking about 4 out of 10 students at Stanford rolling from class to class in wheelchairs or suffering from uncontrollable seizure disorders. Almost all of these “disabilities” have been certified by mental health professionals—psychologists, mostly. In 2 out of 3 cases, the supposed “disability” is ADHD, but there’s also PTSD, chronic fatigue syndrome, episodic acute depression, bipolar disorder, test anxiety, and neurodivergence, and that’s the short list.

Subscribe now

From this point on, please keep two things in mind: two things I’ve said in previous installments of this Substack:

1. Reliable, peer-reviewed studies consistently find that psychologists cannot reliably differentiate between people who are faking psychological disorders and those who are not. That means psychologists should not be allowed to serve as expert witnesses (unless they are testifying to the bogus nature of psychological testing, diagnoses, and “treatment”). It also means psychologists should not be allowed to certify “disorders.”

2. Psychological diagnoses are inherently bogus because they are based largely, if not completely, on self-report. An individual is diagnosed with acute depression because he tells a psychologist he feels sad and worthless and is having suicidal thoughts. Another individual is diagnosed with adult ADHD because he tells a psychologist he is easily distracted and does not meet deadlines.

In short, psychological diagnoses are impossible to verify. Depression, ADHD, et cetera, do not show up in X-Rays, MRIs, EEGs, blood tests, biopsies, or urine samples. Psychological diagnoses are nothing but VERBAL CONSTRUCTS…nothing but WORDS. The point is, because they lack any objective means of validation and are based largely on self-report, disability diagnoses have ZERO scientific credibility (true of EVERY psychological diagnosis, actually) and ARE EASY-PEASY TO OBTAIN.

If someone tells a psychologist he has symptoms of [pick a psychological diagnosis] there is almost 100 percent likelihood the psychologist will assign him that diagnosis. In effect, one obtains a psychological diagnosis by paying a psychologist to write a report saying he “has” whatever “it” is. That evaluation and report cost may be twenty-five hundred dollars in Red Oak, Iowa, and ten thousand in Des Moines.

Even though they have zero scientific validity, psychological diagnoses are included under the Americans with Disabilities Act; thus, schools and employers MUST extend “accommodations” to those who obtain them. The bottom line: Anyone who can memorize the defining symptoms of a psychological diagnosis (found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) and has enough money to pay a psychologist his fee can obtain a “disability.”

In a college setting these accommodations include taking tests only in the late morning hours (when said individual says he’s most alert), taking tests alone (social and test anxiety), taking “dumbed-down” versions of tests (learning disability), having more time to take dumbed-down tests in otherwise empty rooms in the late morning (ADHD, et cetera), and being able to take any test two or three times until a grade of B or better is obtained (ADHD and episodes of crippling depression due to chronic feelings of low self-worth).

After using “accommodations” to graduate from college with honors, a psychologically “disabled” person is not required to reveal his “disability” (aka, sociopathy) to a potential employer. After being hired, he simply gives the psychologist’s bogus report to the HR director. At that point, said individual cannot be terminated for any reason pertinent to his “disability” and must be given workplace accommodations. He ends up doing half the work he was hired to do, cannot be terminated for that reason, and makes the same amount of money he’d make if he did what he was hired to do. In the alternative diagnostic handbook I’ve authored, which describes Phony Baloney Scamya Disorder (PBSD), which I will verify in anyone who pays me twenty-five thousand dollars in unmarked, non-sequential bills of twenty dollars or less.

Not everyone with a psychological diagnosis is a sociopath, but my educated guess is that most people who use psychological diagnoses to obtain accommodations at school or in the workplace do so qualify. They know they’re scamming the system; they know their scams put other people at an unfair disadvantage; and they don’t care. That’s a description of sociopathy. It’s also a description of “perpetrating fraud,” which is a crime. That means psychologists who give these bogus diagnoses (and believe me, they know what they’re doing) are aiding and abetting criminality.

In fact, I believe the entire profession of psychology is a criminal enterprise. (And let me remind the reader, until I voluntarily surrendered my license in 2022, I HAD BEEN A PSYCHOLOGIST SINCE 1979!) Psychologists routinely engage in deceptive business practices, an accusation I’m willing to defend in a public forum (see last paragraph).

I’m also willing to provide consultation and testimony, FREE, to any state attorney general who desires to prosecute his state’s psychology board for violations of the RICO Act and perpetrating fraud on the general public.

All psychology boards should be dismantled, all psychologists should be de-licensed (i.e., stop letting psychology boards create arbitrary monopolies and let the free market do its thing), and ALL “accommodations” for psychological diagnoses should be eliminated.

Any psychologist who wants to debate me in person on any of the above can simply send an email to john@rosemond.com. My only caveat: I (and only I) get to invite media, including Mark Levin, Megyn Kelly, and Joe Rogan.

1. “Are you sure you have ADHD? You don’t look like it.”

2. “Everybody struggles with that.”

3. “You’re way too dramatic.”

4. “You have so much potential if you’d just try harder.”

5. “Can’t you stop fidgeting for one minute?”

No wonder TIME, once a feature on every American coffee table, is now generally regarded as irrelevant.

My favorite thing to say to people who claim to “have” ADHD is, “Let’s face it, you’re just a worthless loser. If you want to call that ADHD, so be it. Personally, having been around you for a while, I think you’re just lazy, irresponsible, and self-centered.”

Not really. I’ve never said that to anyone. I’ve wanted to say it; however, if I interpret the Bible correctly, it is as sinful as actually saying it. I hope the Bible is wrong about that one little thing. But, I digress. By the way, frequent digressions are a symptom of haarumph, uh, never mind. Forget I said any of that.

First, no one has ADHD. It doesn’t matter that the professional who assigns an ADHD diagnosis, the fellow or fellowess who says, “You [or your child] have ADHD,” possesses three PhDs, an MD, and is a member of MENSA; the diagnosis has ZERO scientific or objective validity. ADHD does not show up in blood tests, x-rays, MRIs, biopsies, or toenail trimmings. It is nothing but a CONCEPT, and it is impossible to HAVE a concept. By the way, every word of the previous four sentences is unequivocally true of EVERY psychological diagnosis.

The online Oxford Languages Dictionary defines the word concept as “an abstract idea; a general notion.” As such, saying, “I have ADHD” is the linguistic equivalent of saying, “I have Republicanism” or “I have existentialism” or “I have theism.”

A person can only be said to HAVE something that can be verifiably detected by one or more of the five senses or extensions of them, like microscopes. You can HAVE leukemia, diabetes, and a set of keys in your pocket. You cannot HAVE ADHD.

Subscribe now

HAVE I MADE MYSELF PERFECTLY CLEAR? YES! I HAVE! NONETHELESS, SOME PEOPLE TELL ME THAT WHAT I’VE JUST SAID IS CONFUSING, WHICH MEANS THEY MUST HAVE HAARUMPH, UH, NEVER MIND.

“So, John,” someone rejoins, “you’re saying ADHD doesn’t exist. It’s a fiction.”

That is precisely correct. However – and this is uber-important – the behaviors that define a diagnosis of ADHD are real. They cannot be denied. Those behaviors include, most prominently, impulsivity, distractibility, consistent task incompletion, and forgetfulness.

Indeed, there are significant numbers of individuals – children and adults – who can be described as impulsive, distractible, etc.

But while a certain cluster of behaviors might, in some cases, indicate an underlying biological condition that someone HAS, that is not the case for ADHD. No reliable biological correlate for ADHD has ever been confirmed.

A physician recently informed me that certain brain scans have detected differences in the brains of people assigned the ADHD diagnosis. That means NOTHING. It is a well-known FACT that repetitive behavior induces changes in the brain. The brain of the average professional golfer, for example, “looks” different than the brain of a, say, bullfighter. It is entirely reasonable to accept that the brains of individuals who exhibit ADHD behavior “look” different from the brains of individuals who have no problems with impulsivity or attention.

Someone might ask, “Given that you don’t believe ADHD behaviors can be explained in terms of biology, do you have any theories as to how they develop in the first place?”

In fact, I do. I have a theory that makes PERFECT SENSE; furthermore, it aligns with the principle of Occam’s Razor, which proposes that the simplest explanation for any phenomenon is the most accurate.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, America underwent a radical paradigm shift concerning child-rearing practice, resulting in the ubiquity of what I call “Postmodern Psychological Parenting.” There is virtually no overlap whatsoever between PPP – which is based on psychological theory – and the approach to child-rearing that preceded it – which is based on biblical principle.

Hundreds of individuals who taught in the lower grades in the 1950s have testified to me that they encountered very few children who exhibited ADHD behavior, which explains why it was not unusual back then to find one teacher in complete control of a classroom of as many as fifty children (the size of my first-grade class).

ADHD behaviors – impulsivity, distractibility, etc. – are typical of toddlers, which is why the term “terrible twos” has been in general use since at least 1950.

I propose that traditional child-rearing “cured” toddlerhood by the third birthday or thereabouts, and post-1960s PPP fails to reliably do so, resulting in significant numbers of four-, five-, and six-year-old children coming to school still exhibiting pronounced toddler behavioral and emotional characteristics – impulsivity, distractibility, etc.

With every passing year, those behaviors become ever more resistant to “treatment.” Add in the fact that the “treatments” in question assume ADHD is something it is not, and we have a growing national disaster on our hands.

Copyright 2026, John K. Rosemond

1. How do physicians determine that an individual is host to some disease process—diabetes, for example?

2. How do mental health professionals determine that an individual is suffering from a certain mental health problem—depression, for example?

To the first question, physicians render diagnoses based on objective and therefore verifiable evidence—analyses of blood and other bodily fluids, x-rays, and other forms of body scan, visual evidence, and measures of physical processes such as heart rate, blood pressure, and brainwave activity.

To the second question, psychologists and other mental health professionals render diagnoses based on THE VERBAL REPORT OF THE INDIVIDUAL IN QUESTION. For example, psychologist Brian Tomfoolery assigns a diagnosis of clinical depression to Molly Weatherfeather based SOLELY on Ms. Weatherfeather telling him, “I feel sad all the time and don’t understand why.”

What objective, verifiable means does Tomfoolery use to determine that Weatherfeather is depressed? None. Ms. Weatherfeather’s testimony concerning herself is subjective and non-verifiable.

Dr. Tomfoolery has diagnosed another client, Billy Bobness, as schizophrenic because said client has told him aliens who look human—one of whom happens to be his 80-year-old mother—are controlling his thoughts with radio waves.

Again, Tomfoolery diagnoses schizophrenia based SOLELY on the client’s testimony concerning himself. How does Tomfoolery KNOW Mr. Bobness is telling the truth? He doesn’t. Evidently, Tomfoolery thinks crazy people—people who, mind you, have pervasive difficulty separating fact from imagination—are dependable when it comes to describing themselves.

The diagnostic methodology of the mental health professions is akin to a physician asking a patient, “What brings you here today?” and the patient answering, “I have cancer of the liver,” and the physician saying, “Cancer of the liver it is, then, so I’ll set you up for chemotherapy. Next!”

Here’s a fascinating FACT: Reliable research has discovered that mental health professionals cannot reliably determine when a person is faking symptoms. That is why mental health professionals should NEVER be utilized as expert witnesses in courtroom proceedings. Expert in what? Making guesses and sounding erudite while doing so?

You can’t fake diabetes, cancer, a broken bone, acne, bunions, atrial fibrillation, leprosy, smallpox, measles, or the plague.

Neither Weatherfeather’s report that she feels sad all the time nor Bobness’ report that aliens are controlling his thoughts can be verified by any objective means. Therefore, both reports are essentially meaningless.

But the absurdity of psychological diagnoses hardly ends there because Tomfoolery tells both Weatherfeather and Bobness that they have biochemical imbalances. Mind you, Tomfoolery has not performed or ordered physical examinations of either client. How does he then know they suffer the effects of biochemical wackiness? He doesn’t. He is lying, but unlike most liars, he does not know he is lying. For one thing, nearly 100 percent of his colleagues believe in the biochemical imbalance myth (when the FACT is that no one has ever quantified said imbalance, meaning it is a theoretical construct and nothing more).

Tomfoolery compounds his errors by prescribing drugs he claims will correct an imbalance that NO ONE HAS EVER PROVEN EXISTS.

Concerning psychiatric drugs, is it not SUPREMELY FASCINATING that after at least thirty years of claiming that depression (which, remember, cannot be determined by any objective means) is caused by TOO LITTLE serotonin, researchers are now claiming they have evidence that depression is caused by TOO MUCH serotonin? Oops. Do I smell the acrid odor of a class-action lawsuit in the making?

One of these days, a state’s attorneys general will charge the professions of psychology and psychiatry with deceptive business practices and gross violations of the RICO Act, and he will win in court (no doubt about it), and WE, THE PEOPLE, will be done with what is arguably THE GREATEST SCAM EVER PERPETRATED ON THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

And good riddance it will be.

Copyright 2026, John K. Rosemond

Share

Zohran appeals to the self-obsessed snowflakes who conflate freedom with free stuff, like free transportation, free child care, free food, free housing and free social media accounts.

Thus far, several days into his mayorality, Zohran’s most famous ism is, “We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism.”

And the gathered began squealing and high-fiving one another as if they actually understood his meaning.

The first collectivist was Nimrod who, according to legend, directed the building of the Tower of Babel, a project that, you will recall, went nowhere. God has made it clear that He does not approve of collectivism. Since Nimrod, infamous collectivists include Josef Stalin, Chairman Mao and Fidel Castro…narcissistic, homicidal maniacs whose collectivist schemes were responsible for the deaths of uber-millions.

American public schools no longer teach the horrors of collectivism (the truth triggers, doncha know?), which is why Zohran Mamdani, the latest incarnation of Ming the Merciless, is able to get away with proposing that socialism is chicken soup for the soul.

The fact that Zohran was elected is indubitable proof that New York City, USA, is already in the throes of collectivism, as in, collective stupidism.

First and foremost, there is no such thing as a free economy. For the band to play, someone has to cough up the gig fee, the problem being that New York is losing population, and fast. In the last five years, close to 500,000 folks have packed up and left New York for warmer, less collectivist climes like South Carolina and Florida. The folks who are moving out are precisely those who can afford to do so; that is, the very folks who can pay the band.

So, when Zohran Mamdani raises taxes, as he must, to pay for his warm and fuzzy collectivist schemes, more New Yorkers will move to ruggedly individualistic places like, say, Alabama.

Leaving behind a once-great city that is collectively broke and whose citizens are collectively miserable.

Copyright 2026, John K. Rosemond

Share

The government has now been shut down for over a week. So far, I have had no trouble doing anything I need or want to do, no trouble obtaining what I need. My bank accepts my deposits and their ATM machine gives me money upon request. During the shutdown, my investment account has grown. Most important, my dog…Hanna, a 4-year-old solid white Toy Schnauzer…still loves me.

So, will someone please tell me why I should be worried about the shutdown? Full disclosure: I’m probably most accurately termed a libertarian. I believe in the limits the Founders put on the federal government. I don’t believe the feds should be doing anything besides negotiating treaties and providing for the common defense. To me, the federal government’s budget should be cut by at least 66.7 percent.

The federal income tax should be abolished. The citizen should pay taxes to the locality and state in which he resides. The state in which he resides should pay the feds for defense. Like, uh, period. Can you say, “The Tenth Amendment”?

As for “No Kings Day,” during which people with time on their hands and various psychiatric disorders told Trump, in no uncertain terms, that he can’t be the king, please allow me to go on record saying that I THINK KING TRUMP IS A DARN GOOD IDEA. I’d rather Trump be king than Biden or Harris or Hillary be president.

Trump is obviously suited to being king. After all, he acts like he already is the king and, as with the shutdown, him acting like he’s a king hasn’t made anything about my life anything other than better. If you think your life is worse under King Trump, you either haven’t been taking your medication or you are incapable of rational thought. Both maybe.

Subscribe now

Some people think Trump will refuse to give up the White House at the end of his term. They’re all in a snit about him suspending the 2028 election, suspending the Constitution, and ruling like some tinpot dictator.

That would be better than electing a Democrat as president. What harm would Trump do if he had the final say on everything? That if you play golf with him, you lose, no matter your score?

I mean, c’mon people! Open your eyeballs! Trump’s been in office for going on nine months and some people are worse off but most folks are better off. He’s stopped construction on most rip-off wind and solar farms. I say build mini-reactors…like, EVERYWHERE! How many nuclear aircraft carriers have melted down since the USS Enterprise was launched in 1961? None! The Enterprise was powered by eight mini-reactors, none of which went looney tunes during their fifty years of operation! But mention the term nuclear power to a Greta Thunberg wannabe and watch them melt down, pun intended.

Anyway, back to King Trump. Le Roi Donaldo has accomplished more in nine months than most presidents – Democrat or Republican – have accomplished in two terms. He’s sealed the border. He’s isolating Maduro. We’ll see how long Maduro’s generalissimos support him as the petro-cocaine economy of Venezuela dries up. He’s stopped cognitively disordered males from competing in female sports. Chevrolet has abandoned their plans for producing nothing but EVs. And perhaps best of all, people are beginning to realize that Jeeps are pieces of trash.

How’d I suddenly veer off into cars, anyway?

Once upon my lifetime, America had two political parties consisting of patriots. They merely disagreed on how to go about doing things and the order in which they should be done. Today, we have two political parties, one of which is populated by people who want to shred the Constitution and allow males to participate in female sports. The Donald is trying to restore sanity to an America that went off the rails during the Time of the Unknown President.

I wish he’d get rid of that scowl. Otherwise, long live King Trump!

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond

Share

My readers, being the astute folks they are, will have picked up on the WSJ’s subtle turn of phrase: “designated male at birth.”

So, according to one of the few newspapers still operating whose editorial pages reflect a conservative point of view, people are the gender they are because that is how they were “designated” at birth. Synonyms for designated include chosen, elected, assigned, and appointed.

In other words, the WSJ is implying that gender is arbitrarily determined at birth. One is elected or assigned to a gender—by a committee? —as opposed to having been either male or female from the moment of conception.

Perhaps, however, the wording “designated male at birth” was Sand’s and not the WSJ’s. In that event—which I suspect is the case—Sand has given himself wiggle room on the issue of people who are biologically male at and from conception competing in women’s sports. When, as governor of Iowa (let’s hope not), he reveals his true self and signs a bill allowing Iowans who are male to play competitively against females, he can say that since August of 2025, he has been enlightened to the fact that gender designations made at birth can be and are sometimes wrong.

Subscribe now

Sand repeatedly refers to himself as a “uniter.” On an Iowa radio talk show, he answered a question about his motives by quoting Jesus: “Blessed are the peacemakers.” Really? Rob Sand is a peacemaker, blessed unto the Lord? Rob Sand, blessed be his name, is a “uniter” (another term he uses to describe himself)?

I don’t think so. Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds is quoted in the same WSJ article as saying Sand is “the most partisan auditor” in Iowa’s history, that he attempted to obstruct everything she tried to accomplish.

I think Sand is a snake. For example, he claims to be Christian—he regularly attends a Lutheran church and often quotes Judeo-Christian scripture—yet believes in “abortion rights.” (By the way, procedures don’t have rights. Only people can have rights, but the term “abortion rights” means the person of the human gestating in his mother’s womb has no rights at all.) The mere fact that increasing numbers of people who claim to be Christians also believe the murder of an unborn child is a morally justifiable event is evidence that the claim to be a believer in Jesus is fast becoming meaningless.

Sand is quoted as saying, “Jesus is for the little guy…. And the Democratic Party is for the little guy.”

Except when the “little guy” in question has been alive for less than nine months.

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond

Teen Girl Discovers New Gender: Trans-trans!

John, you are so right about everything in this column! Since the “transgender” craze became a cause du jour in the media, I have met several people who claim to have a transgender child (or children). In my little corner of the world, my observation is that these claims are totally about attention-seeking, virtue signaling, and really bad parenting. I have also observed—again, in my limited experience—that none of the “transgenders” nor their parents are political conservatives. No surprises there, eh?

The first parent I ever encountered who made this claim about her child (it always seems to be the mother who is “oh so proud” of her “brave” child for deciding s/he is the opposite sex) is a woman I have known for many years. The mother in question was (and still is) a spoiled brat. She was never satisfied with what she had, always wanting more and wanting it RIGHT NOW! She eventually got married and had two children, a boy and a girl. Her son was gifted in many ways and had lots of friends. As such, he got a lot of positive attention, including being accepted to a prestige university and being awarded a full scholarship.

The daughter grew up in her brother’s shadow. When she was 15, she was dumped by a boy and suddenly announced she was male and wished to be called by a masculine version of her actual name. At first, her parents just laughed it off, but she was quite insistent, and eventually, the school got involved. The principal told the parents in no uncertain terms that their daughter was now their son (because she said so). He told the parents (again, in no uncertain terms) they had to climb aboard the crazy train and demanded they contact a “trans-friendly” psychologist for family therapy. The therapist told the parents—again, in no uncertain terms—that they had to accept their daughter for “who she was” and cut themselves off from friends and relatives who refused to accept the child’s crazy claim.

Thus did the daughter get the attention and affirmation she so desperately craved. This nutso fantasy went on for three years. Then, in her senior year of high school, she met a boy she was attracted to, and voila! She was no longer a boy! She began dressing and acting like a girl again and went back to her given name.

Thank God nobody cooperated in giving this vulnerable child “gender reassignment” drugs and surgery during her visit to Bizarro World.

UPDATE ON VANITY PLATES: In a recent post, I asked readers to answer the question, “What is the meaning of a vanity plate if no one but the vehicle’s owner knows what it means?” The answers were hilarious—ALL of ‘em—and spot on with my take, which is that the people in question are unfulfilled narcissists who bask in the attention of being asked, “What does that mean?” They are so smart! Oh, and by the way, a full disclosure: The front plate on my F-250 Turbo Diesel (an environmental disaster, on purpose) reads John 3:16. The back plate reads IMLVIS. Figure that out.

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond

Share Parenting With Love and Leadership

Sotomayor wrote, “The Court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims.”

Thus does Sotomayor present us with five possibilities concerning herself:

1. She will go to any length, no matter how absurd, to shoehorn her progressivism into the wording of the Constitution.

2. She does not understand that a person who claims to be a gender other than the gender defined by his/her DNA and listed on his/her birth certificate is either mentally ill or lying. In either case, his/her claim is not protected by the Constitution.

3. If 2, above, is true, then Sotomayor is intellectually challenged and therefore not qualified to serve on the Supreme Court.

4. If 2, above, is not true, then Sotomayor is a liar and knows she is lying and is not, therefore, qualified to serve on the Supreme Court.

5. If 1, above, is true, then Sonia Sotomayor is not qualified to serve on the Supreme Court and by appointing her, Barack Obama sought primarily to undermine the Constitution that he had sworn to defend.

I recently told a self-identified progressive, who seemed to be having difficulty answering my question, “What is a progressive?” that the answer is, “Progressives believe new ideas are, with rare exception, better than old ideas.” She denied the truth of that, which I fully expected, in which case any further “conversation” would have been meaningless.

Conservatives believe there is no new philosophy or principle of living to be discovered. It’s quite simple, really: to wit, human beings are born with an inclination to do bad things, and no individual human being can be trusted until he accepts that he was born bad and can’t, therefore, be trusted.

Every human being falls somewhere on “the spectrum.” No, not the spectrum invented by mental health professionals for the sole purpose of creating a new income stream, but the narcissistic spectrum.

On their first day in the Garden, at the instant of partaking of the forbidden tree, Adam and Eve’s point of view shifted from God-centric to self-centric. That’s what is meant by “And their eyes were opened.” (That’s not what your pastor is likely to tell you, by the way, but trust me here.) And self-centricity has ruled us ever since. Self-centricity spawns humanism, which spawns moral relativism, which eventually spawns the belief that it is possible for a person to “transition” from one gender to another.

Anyway, some folks are low on the spectrum, some group around the middle, and then there are those who are raging narcissists of the sort represented by the Jeffrey Epsteins of the world. The word usually used to describe someone who is 7 or above on the 10-point narcissism spectrum is “sociopath.” By the way, one sure-fire trait of narcissism is accusing other people of narcissism. In psychology, it’s known as “projecting.”

People who claim to be the gender not indicated by an analysis of their DNA are either out of their ever-loving minds or they are raging sociopaths. My experience tells me most of them are the latter. The “transgender” ranks are populated by people who possess an overriding need for attention. They can only obtain the amount of attention they need by positioning themselves at the center of a soap opera, a drama, of their own making.

Every person reading this knows someone of the sort I’m talking about…a person who seems to thrive on victimhood of one sort or another. He was raised by bad parents; therefore, he cannot be held fully responsible for any stupid or sociopathic thing he does. He has a biochemical imbalance (so says a psychologist who did nothing but talk to him); therefore, he cannot be held fully responsible for any stupid or sociopathic thing he does. He has PTSD from being bullied as a child (so says a psychologist blah blah blah); therefore, blah blah blah.

Or, the current sociopathy du jour, he/she has been trapped in the wrong body his/her entire life; therefore, he/she blah blah blah.

Let me be clear:

a. There is no such thing as a person who is “transgender.” It is not possible to change one’s gender by any means. Not with surgery, not with chemicals, not with psychotherapy, and certainly not by public proclamation.

b. A person who believes the previous statement is incorrect is not qualified to hold ANY public office.

c. Sonia Sotomayor believes (a), above, is incorrect.

d. Therefore, Sonia Sotomayor should be removed from office and assigned to curate indigenous flora in Antarctica.

Okay, so here’s the QUESTION OF THE WEEK: What is the point of a vanity plate that only the driver understands? The person who gives the best answer (send by July 1 to john@rosemond.com) receives a FREE, no-strings-attached, copy of my latest and greatest book, The Bible Parenting Code.

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond

Share Parenting With Love and Leadership

First, I love you, man! You and I have a lot in common, including that numerous people have told me we look like siblings. Perhaps our genealogies intersect at some point.

The primary thing we have in common is we are both paradigm-busters. You, in government; me, in what is oxymoronically known as mental health.

For going on fifty years, I have been a lone voice in my profession, psychology. I began my paradigm-busting in 1976 when I began writing a nationally syndicated newspaper column on what is called “parenting” (I harbor pathological loathing for the term). When I retired the column in 2023, it held the distinction of being the longest-running syndicated column to be written continuously by the same individual in American newspaper history. Not shabby.

I retired the column, but I am not retired. I continue to write, but everything I produce is now self-published on the Internet.

I am a psychologist, but I do not believe in psychology; furthermore, I do not promote ANYTHING psychology has said about children and their upbringing. Psychology has been a wrecking ball in America – especially the family – and I have dedicated my career to doing whatever possible to rectify that.

Objective, research-based evidence of the general efficacy of any psychological therapy is seriously lacking. I don’t believe psychologists should be recognized as expert witnesses in legal matters. I do not believe psychologists should be allowed in America’s schools. I do not believe psychologists should be eligible for insurance reimbursement. I don’t think 99.9 percent of psychologists (and that is probably a conservative figure) know what they are doing.

I am 100 percent convinced that the profession of psychology is guilty of deceptive business practices and should be investigated by the DOJ for violations of the RICO Act. State psychology licensing boards should be disbanded, and psychology should be de-listed as a restricted profession. Psychology is a farce. Take it from a psychologist. (Obviously, I am not well-liked by my colleagues, which pleases me to no end.)

The pseudo-profession of psychology adheres to no meaningful practice standards. It’s theories and therapies are not confirmed by research. Psychological diagnoses have no objective reality. The ubiquitous “biochemical imbalance” is a fiction. Psychological tests are bogus. The medications being used to supposedly “treat” mental and emotional dysfunction do not reliably outperform placebos. I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point, so I’ll stop there.

Psychology is a pseudo-science that has caused more problems than its practitioners know how to solve. The American family is the primary victim of the general fraudulence of psychology (and America’s mental health industry in total).

In the 1970s, when I was in graduate school, America’s mental health industry persuaded parents to buy into an ongoing progressive parenting experiment that has brought about a ten-fold deterioration of child mental health. Today’s parents and teachers are dealing with emotional and behavioral issues that were virtually unheard of when you and I were children: e.g., tantrums in public places, belligerent disrespect and defiance, children assaulting parents and teachers, et cetera.

Ironically, when, concerning any individual child, those problems reach a certain level, parents and schools turn for help to members of the very profession that caused the problems in the first place. Invariably, those mental health professionals engage child and family in a wholly deceitful process of testing (fraudulent), diagnosing (unscientific), and medicating (criminal). It should be obvious to any astute observer that this process isn’t accomplishing anything of value other than lining the pockets and purses of the people who engineer it.

Making America Great Again begins with the American family, and making the American family great again begins with the retro-rehabilitation of American childrearing. That must involve restoring absolute parent authority, restoring commonsense and biblical principle to childrearing practice, and communicating to children, lovingly but unequivocally, that they are second-class citizens with no voting rights until they emancipate.

I am writing to propose that you appoint me to head the newly-created Department of Family Renewal (DOFR). Like Elon, I will take no salary. Consider me a Volunteer for America, the greatest country in human history, now led by one of the greatest presidents in its history. And yes, I’m buttering you up, but I am not engaging in hyperbole.

With great admiration and confidence in your unique abilities and gifts,

John K. Rosemond – Family Psychologist, Author, Speaker, Husband (56 years), Father, Grandfather

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond

Too bad about the missing page. Surely you’ve heard by now that a page was mysteriously missing from convicted felon the Donald’s inaugural address. You may have noticed him pausing about mid-way through the speech for a couple of seconds and glancing over at Biden, who was grinning from ear to ear, thinking he was attending his birthday party.

Subscribe now

But do not despair because the Don of Donalds, convicted felon, sent me a copy of the entire speech, including the missing page, a few days prior to his inauguration.

And he has authorized me to release the transcript of the missing page. It reads:

“As of today, I am putting a stop to the misbehavior of America’s brat brigade…children, that is. Not my children, mind you. My children are standing behind me. Do you see them squirming in their seats? Whining things like, “When are we leaving,” throwing tantrums, hitting each other? No, you don’t. And that, right there, is an example of how all children, regardless of age, should behave. Like my children. Okay, kids, you can leave now. Go home, go to your rooms, and wait for me to get there and spank the livin’ daylights out of you. Just kidding. I’m a kidder.

“Today, this afternoon, before five o’clock Eastern Time, I am signing an executive order instructing parents to diminish their children’s status in the family. Like any other organization, a family cannot function properly unless the right people are in charge, and the only right people to be in charge in the American family are the parents, one male, one female.

(PAUSE FOR STANDING OVATION AND LOTS OF WOO-WOO!)

“As anyone with commonsense—and remember, my administration is all about common sense—knows that children are not qualified to run a family. Why, then, are they obviously in charge in so many families? Good question. I always ask good questions. Because beginning some fifty-five years ago, around the same time the Beatles broke up because of the terrorist Yoko, psychologists and other mental health morons told parents that the parent-child relationship should be conducted as if it were a relationship between equals. They called it the ‘democratic family.’

“Little did parents know that if you treat a child like an equal it’s only a matter of time before the child is your superior. Or thinks he is, and acts like he is, and punishes you if you do not cooperate. Many of you out there are being punished by your children every day. That’s going to stop, and IT’S GOING TO STOP TODAY!

(PAUSE FOR STANDING OVATION AND LOTS OF WOO-WOO!)

“Parents bending over at the waist when they speak to their children, like they are serfs and the children are potentates…that is going to STOP!

(CONTINUE STANDING OVATION)

“Parents buying their children everything they want…that is going to STOP!

“Children not lifting a finger around the house…that is going to STOP!

(STANDING OVATION GROWS LOUDER, BUT BIDEN, HARRIS, THE CLINTONS, AND HUSSEIN OBAMA REMAIN SITTING, LOOKING LIKE THEY’RE HAVING NO FUN AT ALL)

“Children receiving smart phones before they can pay for them themselves…that is going to STOP!

“Parents ending instructions to children with the word ‘okay?’…that is going to STOP!

“Children disturbing the general peace by throwing tantrums…that is going to STOP!

“And that’s just the short list. It is time that the world stops laughing at the behavior of American children. We are going to make American parenting great again! We are going to make American children obedient again! That’s M…A…C…O…A, MACOA!

(CROWD BEGINS CHANTING, “MACOA! MACOA! MACOA!...)

“Yes, folks, believe it or not, children are going to be subservient again! Obedient again! Respectful again! And bullies will be forced to cage fight my friend, Elon, who has a black belt in Irish Martial Arts!

(STANDING OVATION BEGINS TO GET OUT OF HAND…BIDEN AND KAMALA GET INTO A FIST FIGHT, THE CLINTONS, WELL, THEY BEGIN ACTING LIKE THE CLINTONS)

“Immediately after this speech, I am ordering the Department of Homeland Security to establish boot camps for misbehaving children, where they will be sent and remain until they are rehabilitated. The director of this boot camp operation is Nurse Ratched! There she is! Nurse Mildred Ratched, stand up! A week with Ratched and your kids will be calling you ma’am and sir again! That’s right! I’m a convicted felon! I know Ratched well! Believe me, she can do the job!

“As of tonight at midnight, our new national motto will be ‘Let Ratched Ratchet Your Kids!’

(CROWD GOES ABSOLUTELY WILD, LIKE JANUARY 6 ONLY WORSE)

“And I’m appointing John Rosemond to the newly-created office of Parenting Czar!”

(EVERYONE GOES BONKERS, JUMPING UP AND DOWN FOR JOY, BOPPING ONE ANOTHER OVER THE HEAD WITH NERF BATS, WOMEN SHRIEKING, MEN FAINTING…)

And that’s where the teleprompter kicked back in, right around the point where the Don of Donald’s, convicted felon, begin talking about putting the entire Democrat contingent, sitting to the Donald’s left, on trial for remaining seated during all but one standing ovation.

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond, Parenting Czar to the United States of America

Share Parenting With Love and Leadership

“He was a good, kind, and decent man,” seems to be the general narrative.

“He was a committed Christian,” say many Christians, both committed and faux.

Okay, well, there are obviously folks out there who vote for the nicest candidate, the one most likely to give ten dollars to the beggars one finds prowling at the top of freeway exits. I’m not one of them. I’m much more inclined to vote for the guy who rolls his window down and shouts, “GET A JOB!”

I happen to be a born-again believer in the Lordship of Christ Jesus, but whether a political candidate is a bona fide Christian is not uppermost in my list of qualifications. It’s not irrelevant, mind you; it is, however, secondary to “Believes the Second Amendment is as valid today as it was in 1789” and “Believes the First Amendment was written to protect unpopular and even offensive speech.” The Founding Fathers believed in separating church and state, and so do I. Voting is a political act. I vote primarily on the basis of political, not religious, considerations (albeit the latter holds sway over certain issues).

So, I don’t care whether Jimmy Carter was or was not a committed Christian, but if I was pressed on the matter, I’d say he was not. More important (to moi), he was a Democrat. Period. End of story.

Notwithstanding my apathy concerning Carter’s religiosity, it blew my mind (hyperbole, but you get the picture) that Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood, one of Nashville’s power couples, played and sang John Lennon’s most well-known song, “Imagine,” at Carter’s funeral. At least Mr. Brooks had the good sense to not wear his black cowboy hat in church.

The song’s lyrics reflect, promote, champion—all apply—atheism and socialism. The actual lyrics can be found here, but allow me to merely give the reader a taste: “Imagine there’s no heaven…no hell…no countries…no religion…no possessions; Imagine all the people, living for today…sharing all the world….”

Share Parenting With Love and Leadership

Allow me to translate: Imagine we all live under the thumb of a totalitarian communist government that forbids freedom of religion and the accumulation of wealth, promotes hedonism, and where there is no hope that anything better awaits us.”

Apparently, Carter REQUESTED that Lennon’s ode to Karl Marx, Charles Darwin, and Sigmund Freud be played at his funeral. Oh, and by the way, lest the reader think Carter didn’t really know what the song celebrates, it was at Carter’s request that Brooks and Yearwood sang “Imagine” two years ago, at Rosalynn Carter’s funeral. It was obviously one of his favorite songs, another being “La Bayamesa,” the National Anthem of Cuba.

Just kidding.

Can we all agree that it is impossible to reconcile Carter’s love of and requests for “Imagine” with an authentic biblical worldview? Three possibilities present themselves:

1. Carter was one of those “progressive” Christians who believe that the dudes who wrote the Bible were writing for the audience of their day, and that none of them believed in DEI or BLM.

2. Carter was a closet Marxist.

3. Carter attended a Christian church because that’s what everyone does in small-town Georgia.

The evidence suggests all three statements may be true of Saint Jimmy.

Because Saint Jimmy obviously believed the Bible was a “living” document, subject to period review and revision by human beings, I have taken the liberty of altering the lyrics of “Imagine” to more accurately reflect Carter’s legacy:

Imagine no inflation

It’s easy if you try

No gasoline lines

We’re all free to drive, drive, drive

Imagine everybody

Votes Republican

Hoo hah!

Just imagine keeping

almost all of what you earn,

No hostages to bring home

Our inner cities do not burn

Yeah, imagine every living soul

Votes for Donald Trump!

Boy Howdy!

They say I’m a farmer

Peanuts are my game

But if you buy my peanuts

I’ll tax you just the same

(Fade out)

In closing, perhaps the best thing Carter did in his lifetime was start Habitat for Humanity, a great American charity. Carter had a good heart, for sure. Nonetheless, we can all give thanks for the fact that he only served as POTUS for one term. Once was damage enough.

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond

Subscribe now

I went to bed on Election Day after watching a couple of episodes of Dark Winds. Willie and I don’t have and haven’t had the cable for over ten years. We don’t use social media at all, but I do occasionally watch music videos on YouTube. Anyway, when we went to bed, I had no idea how the election stood. I didn’t know that Trump had already been declared the victor in my home state, which was a harbinger, for sure.

I woke up around 4:00 to Willie getting up and leaving the room. Our three-year-old Toy Schauzer, Hanna, who sleeps between us – up close to Willie, usually – lifted her head to watch Willie leave, then went back to sleep. I just lay there, trying to mentally prepare myself for worst-case.

About fifteen minutes later, Willie came back, walked around to my side of the bed and said, “Bo, he won.”

I’m Bo to friends and family and have been since the day I was born.

I played golf yesterday with about seventy other guys in the local Christian Men’s Golf Association. We play Captain’s Choice. My foursome came in at seven under par, which wasn’t good enough for a win, but we had a great time, four guys who didn’t know one another but if laughing a lot is any indication, meshed immediately. I don’t take golf seriously (I had a 3 handicap when I was sixteen, BTW, and played that same year in the Future Masters, but those days are long gone); therefore, I enjoy it.

This morning, I got up before Willie, showered, shaved, blah, blah, blah, and then went downstairs to where Willie was listening to music in the den. I walked in as Tammy Wynette began singing one of the greatest songs ever written: “Stand By Your Man.” The thing about Tammy – one of the greatest female voices ever – is that she puts herself right in the middle of every song she sings.

Then, James Taylor singing “Handy Man,” which I fell in love with when it first came out in 1960, by Jimmy Jones. It’s since been covered by Otis Blackwell, Conway Twitty, and Del Shannon, but the James Taylor version is the winner. It’s not as good as the original, mind you, but it’s only a hair’s breadth away.

Next came Johnny Tillotson singing “Send Me the Pillow That You Dream On.” That era produced some great pop singers, most of whom are fading from cultural memory, Tillotson being one of them. Tillotson’s signature song is “Poetry In Motion,” which Janet Bixler and I danced to in 1961.

Then, Charlie Rich and “Spanish Eyes.” I’ve been a Charlie Rich fan ever since hearing Jerry Lee Lewis do a cover of his “Who Will the Next Fool Be” on what I consider to be one of the top three live albums ever recorded: The Greatest Live Show On Earth, recorded in Birmingham, Alabama, in the summer of 1963. It’s since been absorbed into an album that contains other live performances – mostly in Germany – but if share a passion for old-school rock ‘n’ roll, it’s worth listening to, believe me. In my ‘umble estimation, it’s every bit as good as Get Your Ya-Yas Out.

Then, Lee Ann Womack singing “I Hope You Dance.” OMG! I immediately went to her website to see if she was touring, but it seems I’m gonna have to wait. What a voice! Her phrasing is impeccable!

Then, Glen Campbell singing “By the Time I Get to Phoenix,” written by the inimitable Jimmy Webb. Again, impeccable phrasing, which distinguishes a good singer from a fabulous singer.

And then, Alexa went back to Lee Ann and played several more of her songs for us, and Willie and I knew that everything was all right again in America.

Now, if we can just hold on to it.

Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond

Subscribe now

The song “Imagine” by John Lennon is generally cited as the defining anthem of the peace and love movement of the late ‘60s and early ‘70s, but as insipid and mawkish as Lennon’s opus magnus is, no song has ever matched the corn contained in “Share the Land,” other than maybe “How Much Is That Doggie In the Window?”

Written by Burton Cummings of The Guess Who and released in 1970, “Share the Land” reached Number 10 on the Billboard charts. The refrain says it all:

Maybe I’ll be there to shake your hand

Maybe I’ll be there to share the land

They’ll be giving away

When we all live together (we’re talkin’ ‘bout together now)

First, what’s with that “maybe” thing? Like, maybe he’s NOT going to share the land? This is some practical joke? Okay, let’s just ignore the equivocation.

Later in the song a young couple is walking by a river, talking and laughing, and everyone is living together in harmony, mutual understanding, charity, and respect. Moments later, EVERYONE is walking by the river, and Mr. Cummings tells the listener that they’re “walkin’, singin’, talkin’, smilin’, laughin’, diggin’ each other.” Trust me, they’re all high as kites, which is the state necessary to believing there really is free lunch and laughing at everything.

“Share the Land” came on Sirius Classic Vinyl today, October 29, 2024, around 1:30 pm Eastern Time. I knew, right there and then, I was being called by a Superior Power to set the record straight concerning the rivalry between “Imagine” and “Share the Land” for Stupidest Song Since ‘Tell Laura I Love Her.”

The lyrics of “Share the Land” epitomize the satanic lunacy that underprops every liberal brain sneeze. Did I mention I was a campus radical, an organizer-activist of the left, and that the first Republican I voted for after coming to my senses was Bush the Elder in 1992?

In 1991, I had experienced the inimitability of meeting Hillary and Bill – just me and them and the manager of a B-and-B in the same room together – and realized, when the episode was over, that I had just encountered two of the most peculiar people on the planet – raging narcissists, both, each in his/her own unique way. Bill with an insatiable need to be admired; Hillary with an insatiable need to control everything going on within thirteen billion light-years of her. She was imperial, but obviously mad in both senses of the term. Bill, on the other hand, was a snake. All that in less than 60 seconds. Well, that and the fact that the night before, they argued until 3:00 AM, which I heard because only a paper-thin wall separated my room from theirs. Just trust me. Anyway, that encounter caused me to never again vote for a Demoncrat.

Because I was a radical liberal atheist idiot at one time and for quite some time, I understand the liberal mind. And because I know the liberal mind, I know it is impossible to have a conversation about anything meaningful with a liberal. First, they won’t have intellectually honest conversations with anyone who is not a liberal.

“I don’t talk about politics,” says the liberal to the conservative. He’s lying. He’ll talk about politics, but only when he’s in an echo chamber. When I try to get him to rationally explain his worldview, he doesn’t want to talk politics because he can’t rationally explain his worldview because his worldview is irrational.

“What is a progressive?” I once asked a reasonably intelligent fellow who had just announced he was one.

“Well,” he intoned after a few pregnant moments, during which he feigned what he thought sophisticated deliberation looks like, “we progressives are tolerant and very open-minded.”

Two days later, after asking me to explain my faith, he told me that believing in the bodily Resurrection of Christ Jesus was “nuts.”

“So, Jim,” I said, as calm as you please, “I’m curious…how do you square being tolerant and open-minded with thinking that the foundation of my faith is a fairy tale that only children and the insane would believe? Can you explain that for me?”

Well, of course he couldn’t! He stammered around for a bit, then made some lame excuse, and exited, stage left. Tolerant and open-minded my heine.

Anyway, back to “Share the Land.”

After expressing wonder at the corny, sappy, banality of the lyrics, my wife, Willie, asked, “Who is ‘They’?” (Full disclosure: When “Share the Land” comes on the music box in the car, we both begin singing along like we’re performing with the Stanislauski Opera Troupe. It’s great fun. Highly recommendable.)

Anyway, Willie was referring to the “They” who will be giving the land away. I think it’s high time we learned the answer to “Who are ‘They’?” After all, we have been waiting now for fifty-four years for the land to be given away. I think it’s time we held “They” accountable, don’t you?

“They” could be Biden. It occurs to me that the song may be prophetic in the tradition of Isaiah, so the idea that “They” is a person or persons on the current scene is not outrageous. After all, Biden tried to forgive billions in student loans. It’s possible that he was inspired by “Share the Land” – as in “Maybe I’ll be there to revoke your debt, maybe I’ll be there to buy you that Corvette” – meaning taxpayers like you and me would have been forced to pay the bad loans, one way or another, so Biden certainly qualifies as “They.”

And by the way, it is deceiving to say that student loans will be forgiven. The accurate way of putting it is to say the loans will be REASSIGNED…TO YOU AND ME AND OTHER HARD-WORKING AND RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE!!!

Please. I implore you, to vote Trump and then go down the ballot, voting only Republican. It is so very soul-cleansing. Take it from a guy who once thought “Share the Land” should be our National Anthem.

Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond

Subscribe now

The entire civilized world now knows that comedian “Tone-Deaf” Tony Hinchcliffe offended all humorless, self-important people when – at Trump’s recent re-imagining of the 1939 German-American Bund rally, starring himself as his role model, Adolph Hitler – he, Tone-Deaf Tony, described Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage.”

And the left went nuts. Predictably. Boringly. Tediously nuts.

I’ve been to Puerto Rico, once. It was a pleasant experience, mostly because my hosts controlled my itinerary. They took me to places where there was no garbage, like beautiful beaches and pink churches. I spoke at a private school in San Juan. It’s worth mentioning that my hosts, after agreeing to do so by contract, refused to pay my travel expenses. In more than forty years of public speaking, that is the one and only time that has happened. In Puerto Rico, the Floating Island of Many Fibbers.

I didn’t see piles of garbage in Puerto Rico, but I did see a village of people who were living in boxes constructed of cardboard and scrap lumber. I would imagine that Casitas El Junko is no longer there, but it is a lingering symbol of the vast gap between the haves and have-nots on that otherwise beautiful island.

About Tone-Deaf Tony, it appears we have forgotten that the definition of comedian is “an individual who causes people to laugh at themselves and other sacred cows.”

Comedians make fun of women, ethnic and racial groups, Democrats, Republicans, people who believe in climate change, people who don’t believe in climate change, people with mental health issues, various occupations, religious groups, and so on. That’s their job…to make us laugh at ourselves, whomever we may be and whatever we believe.

I’m a Caucasian cis-gendered male evangelical Christian conservative Republican who doesn’t care one whit when a comedian makes fun of Caucasians, cis-gendered males, evangelicals, or conservatives who vote straight-ticket Republican. Just don’t make fun of my wife or my dog.

Speaking as a mental health professional, one of the healthiest things a person can do is laugh at himself and the seriousness with which he takes himself. So, and for example, before Bill Maher backtracked, I thought he was funny. I laughed at his jokes, most of which targeted people like me – Caucasian, cis-blah, blah, blah people. Since his epiphany, I think he’s more interesting than he used to be, but not nearly as funny.

Some comedians are annoying, mind you. When a comedian panders to his audience – like, he mocks conservatives before an auditorium full of Hollywood clones – he’s annoying. But when the same comedian gets up in front of an audience hand-selected by George Clooney and Susan Sarandon and mocks the sacred cows of the left, he’s doing his job even if George and Susan can manage no more than a few grimaces.

The outrage from the Usual Suspects over Tone-Deaf Tony’s Puerto Rico jokes says little about Tony and a lot about them. The most significant thing it says about the Usual Suspects is they hate free speech and desperately desire to be appointed as the Final Arbiters of What Can and Cannot Be Said, Even When Sleep-Talking.

They hate free speech because they imagine themselves to be morally superior and free speech allows for speech that makes fun of everything and everyone they hold dear, which they cannot tolerate, and because they cannot tolerate the speech in question, they want to do away with it by law (which, by the way, is not the same as “lawfully”).

The morally superior among us believe their judgments should hold sway, always and concerning anything. They believe they are right and anyone who disagrees is, by definition, wrong. Therefore, and by definition, they are dangerous.

Tone-Deaf Tony is not dangerous. At worst, he is a mediocre comedian. Donald Trump is not dangerous. At worst, he is an unfiltered loudmouth in the tradition of the sort of males he grew up with in New Yawk. Trump’s bark is not matched by his bite. He has not said he is going to shred the Constitution, has he? No, and he won’t. If he is elected, Trump is going to RESTORE the Constitution. Do his enemies want to shred the Constitution? Yes, because the Constitution is the only thing that stands between themselves and their totalitarian dreams.

For the sake of Pete, wherever and whomever he is, vote Trump.

Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond

Subscribe now

Over the past few weeks, several well-known persons have publicly expressed their belief that Kamala Harris is, in the words of America’s poet-laureate, one Donald J. Trump, “stupid.”

National Review recently published an editorial calling Harris an “idiot.”

In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk called she-who-would-be-POTUS a “puppet.” With one notorious exception, puppets are as dumb as a block of wood.

I disagree with these assessments. Over the course of my legendary career, I administered at least one thousand IQ tests to both adults and children, in the course of which my ability to estimate a person’s intellectual acumen sharpened to the point of an ice pick. In Kamala’s case, after watching numerous speeches by and interviews of her I estimate her intelligence to be slightly above average. Like, around 110. Not impressive, but Stammering Joe’s I Q is no higher. Let me clarify: Stammering Joe’s IQ was no higher than 110 BEFORE he began stammering. I actually think the last POTUS with an IQ above 135 (superior) was James Madison.

Kamala’s strength is politics, and politics is saying one thing and meaning another. Politics is being so vague as to be able, later, to deny that what one seemed to be saying is not close to what one actually said.

Interviewer: “Ms. Harris, you’re on record as saying you won’t ban fracking. Are you willing, right now, to tell our audience that under no circumstances will you ban fracking, which made us energy-independent during the presidency of America’s fascist-in-residence?”

Harris: “I believe in the American middle class and this is a middle-class issue. I grew up with middle-class parents [fact-check failure] who believed in American values [they were both socialists to the core] and instilled in me, from an early age, the value of listening to both sides of a debate before forming an opinion [fact-check failure] and my opinion on this important issue is not unlike my opinion on other issues. I’ve had the benefit, over the years, of having wonderful tutors who taught me not to rush to judgment on anything and I’m not rushing to judgment here, either, but the people of Pennsylvania can always rely on me to defend their values and make sure their children receive a world-class education. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify that.”

Interviewer: “What is your position on abortion?”

Harris: “I love babies! Let me assure you and everyone who’s listening, I absolutely love babies! I was a baby once. I know babies. What more can I say?”

That is a reasonably accurate (albeit fictional) representation of Ms. Harris’ verbal gymnastics. That is not a stupid person.

What Kamala Harris lacks in the intellect department (sixty years ago, when academic standards were rigorous, she wouldn’t have gotten into law school), she makes up for in cleverness.

Clever people are dangerous. The serpent (Genesis 3), the most dangerous being ever, is introduced as “the most clever creature” in God’s creation. All clever people are descended from the master of lies.

I am a cynic, a skeptic. Detecting cleverness requires cynicism. Every single time Kamala speaks, my clever-detector begins howling and flashing blood red.

Kamala recently told an interviewer that the American people are “ready” for a female president of color. In other words, her ascendancy is a done deal, inevitable, written in the stars, so let’s just get on with it. If we’re ready, but she’s not elected, then white racism/superiority trumped readiness. A vote for Kamala is a means of personal atonement for sins committed before your grandfather from Slovakia was a twinkle in your Slovakian great-grandfather’s imagination. Certainly, you’re “ready” to atone for all that, aren’t you? Vote for Kamala!

Clever indeed. Of course, she’s going to ban fracking. Like every Demoncrat candidate for POTUS, Kamala has masters and her job is to please them, which is the purpose of every female of color who knows the side on which her bread is buttered. Kamala will throw open our border with Mexico and untold numbers of criminals and terrorists will stride proudly through, eager to link up with their sleeper cells. Kamala will raise taxes, making it that much more difficult for middle-class parents to send their kids to schools that actually teach children how to think. Kamala will further burden the middle class with Medicare-for-all. Kamala will abandon Israel to the monsters. Kamala will play softball with evil actors who are laughing at her because they’re playing with highly explosive hardballs.

Klever Kamala can be counted on to do exactly what she says she is not going to do because, by golly-by-gosh, Klever Kamala’s parents raised her right. No, left.

Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond

Share

Seems to me the issue is not whether the planet is warming—that’s a done deal—but what is causing it. Fossil fuel is the left’s designated boogeyman, and I must say, they’ve done an excellent job of persuading a significant number of the gullible that unless everyone junks their gas-guzzlers and buys EVs, we’re done for.

No reasonable individual, Democrat or Republican, would deny that EVs emit less carbon dioxide than comparable gasoline-powered vehicles. The further FACT, however—and needless to say, one that CNN and The New York Times aren’t telling their audiences—is that when carbon dioxide emissions from the PRODUCTION of EVs, and especially their batteries, is factored into the calculations, EVs produce MORE CO2 than the sort of throwbacks my wife and I drive (2016 Lexus SUV and 2005 Ford F-250 Turbo-Diesel).

The question becomes: If fossil-fueled vehicles are not the cause of global warming, then what is? The answer, which CNN, MSNBC, and The New York Times absolutely know, is increased SOLAR ACTIVITY. Scientists have determined that in addition to Earth, Jupiter, Mars, and Pluto are also warming, and it may well be that ALL of the planets in our solar system are doing likewise but the data is not yet definitive in that regard.

Subscribe now

It has been determined that Mars once had oceans, which means there was a time or were times in the past when Mars was considerably warmer than is currently the case. That strongly suggests that the entire solar system was warmer during those same times. The entire solar system did not and does not get hotter because of internal combustion engines. It does so because of increased solar activity, which occurs in cycles, one of which we are currently experiencing.

What this means is that transforming tillable land into gigantic fields of solar panels and windmills and forcing everyone to buy an EV is going to have zero effect on global warming.

The more immediate danger is that we are speeding toward an energy crisis. Current sources of energy are simply not going to keep up with rapidly accelerating need. The solution to that impending debacle is nuclear power. We need to rehab as many of the reactors we stupidly de-activated during the Age of Nuclear Hysteria as possible and build mini-reactors—slightly larger versions of the reactors that have been powering Navy ships for more than fifty years without meltdown—all over the place. And fast.

Who’s lying to us? If your ears and eyes and brain are functioning in tandem, you know the answer.

Vote Republican. I beg of you.

Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond

Since the utter devastation wreaked in western North Carolina by Hurricane Helene, our ersatz POTUS, “Basement Joe” Biden, has yet to be seen by the residents of that formerly beautiful area of the country. Now, the same communist media that had a field day when George W. Bush merely did a fly-over of the mess Katrina left behind in 2005, have murmured not a peep in response to Biden’s no-show. Isn’t that fascinating? What does it tell you?

Furthermore, people who are now homeless, jobless, emotionally if not physically shattered, and in some cases, kin-less because of Helene have been informed not to expect much from FEMA because it’s out of money, having dedicated their share of this year’s budget to MIGRANT ISSUES. Translate: FEMA blew its bucks on non-citizens who shouldn’t be here and now have nothing left to help bona fide U.S. citizens who have every right to be here and every right to expect government assistance.

Oh, I’m so sorry. Correction. I’m now informed that residents of my state WILL be receiving monetary relief. Kamala Harris, speaking not from western North Carolina, but from Augusta, Georgia, where Helene’s impact was negligible, comparatively speaking, has promised that every person/family that needs assistance because of Helene will be receiving (Lord knows when) a whopping $750 from the government that does not know how to govern. (She said this with a straight face, mind you.)

Seven hundred and fifty dollars! If you stood by and watched Helene turn your home into a pile of rubble, you, a U.S. citizen, are going to get a windfall of $750! Hoo-hah! If you have no home, no car, no truck, no money, and lost a close relative to the storm and they have yet to find the body, you are getting $750! Yes! No joke! If you live in an area where no grocery stores are open because they can’t receive supplies, no gas stations have gas, all the drug stores are closed, and your house, last you saw it, was floating down the French Broad River as it slowly came apart, and you had no flood insurance, you, you lucky devil you, are going to be getting $750! These days, that’s about the cost of a hamburger, hold the pickles, in Asheville, North Carolina, where I was born but which is now more aptly called “Asvl.” Those of you who had a child swept away in the raging waters, are going to be able to console yourself with—yes, you are hearing me correctly—let’s all say it together now--$750!!! Yowsah!

When are they going to receive this windfall? Before you take a stab at answering that, remember, the people in question are here in the USA legally, which means they shouldn’t be counting chickens while they wait for the money. Did you get the memo? Tax-paying citizens are being sent to the end of the queue.

The town of Lansing, North Carolina, which is more than 100 miles from Asvl, was experiencing an influx of new businesses started by hale and hearty entrepreneurs who were rehabbing previously abandoned buildings that sat about 100 yards from Big Bear Creek. Those buildings were flooded to their ceilings and will probably be condemned. Needless to say, no one had flood insurance.

Meanwhile, Basement Joe is watching Scooby-Doo reruns in his…do I even need to say it? And Kamala Harris, his reliable stand-in, is in Augusta, Georgia, where life pretty much goes on, promising people whose lives were utterly destroyed about 200 miles north of there…$750.

Tell ya what. Instead of coming to my birthday party (I just canceled Led Zeppelin anyway), go to samaritanspurse.org and donate what you can to help fund their 24/7 relief work in the six states that were slammed by what is being called a “1000-year storm.”

Franklin Graham for POTUS!

Really? C’mon! Kamala Harris, who is a living, perpetually giggling hand puppet for the special interests that support the Demoncrats, is going to defy the bosses and bossettas of the party’s radical left and let the evil frackers have their way with us? And she is not going to raise your income tax unless you make more than she will make as POTUS ($400,000 per annum). Because you, by virtue of following my writings (i.e., appreciation of my thought processes), are one of the smartest people in the world, you do not believe any of that scripted prevarication.

If Kamala was telling the truth, she would not be a Demoncrat. But she is a Demoncrat; therefore, she is not telling the truth. First, POTUS does not have the authority, unilaterally, to ban fracking. She knows that. Second, POTUS does not have the Constitutional authority to determine who pays what amount in taxes. She also knows that. So, when and if Kamala becomes POTUS, and a Demoncrat Congress bans fracking and ups your tax burden, she can simply say, “Gosh and golly gee willikers! If it had been up to me, well, you know, but it’s not up to me. Sorry. (Let the giggling commence!)”

And she will sign both bills because they will be included in bills that provide financial relief for some tear-jerking cause.

Have you heard? Jimmy Kimmel says Donald Trump is a liar! Like, Jimmy Kimmel! Wow! If Kimmel says so, then so do Fallon and Colbert and Stewart and Goldberg, and that settles it! Supposedly, Trump’s latest lie is that he’s even greater than Elvis. Well, yes, the Donald is greater than Elvis. That is not a lie. At the age of 42, Elvis died a bloated, irrelevant drug addict who could barely croak a tune. The Donald is 78 years old and still going strong, having never, by his own account, had a glass of beer, wine, or booze. Elvis had numerous hit records. He sold out more than 800 consecutive shows at the Las Vegas Hilton from 1969 to 1976. That’s impressive, but Trump created thousands of jobs before he was POTUS and his economic policies facilitated the creation of millions more. His net worth is 3.6 billion dollars. Trump has been President of the United States! Elvis was a rock star—arguably the greatest-ever voice in rock ‘n’ roll—but can we agree that rock star is not greater than POTUS?

I could go on. Trump is greater than Elvis ever was. No doubt about it. I’m greater than Elvis, even. But I’m not greater than Trump. Trump is not interested in making himself any greater. He wants to Make America Great Again!!!

The left’s playbook is Rules for Radicals, community organizer Saul Alinsky’s 1971 monograph on how to effect sweeping socialist change in a culture. Among other things, Alinsky advised that radical leftists accuse the opposition (Republicans and conservatives) of their own failings and be relentless at hammering away at it. Thus, the left’s mouthpieces—like Mr. Kimmel, mostly drawn from the entertainment industry—maintain a constant “Donald Trump is a liar” litany. Do you get it? Of course, you do, because by reading this Substack, you define yourself as one of the smartest people in the world. But just in case, let me make it perfectly clear: Kamala Harris is the Big Fat Liar. Her pants are on fire! Her nose is longer than a telephone wire!

And now, more of THE REAL DEAL, with your host, moi: According to the latest polls (September 26), Trump is leading Harris in Arizona and Georgia and is tied with her in North Carolina (where I live and cannot for the life of me figure out how the Republican candidate for Governor became the Republican candidate for governor…but that’s for another “Off the Cuff”).

Anyway, Praise God! We of the party with a sense of humor just might pull this thing out of the hat yet!

Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond

“I will be casting my vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz in the 2024 Presidential Election. I’m voting for @kamalaharris because she fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them. I think she is a steady-handed, gifted leader and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos. I was so heartened and impressed by her selection of running mate @timwalz, who has been standing up for LGBTQ+ rights, IVF, and a woman’s right to her own body for decades.”

Subscribe now

For anyone to call Kamala a “steady-handed, gifted leader” is puzzling, given that she has never demonstrated any leadership skills whatsoever. She’s obviously a puppet of people on the radical left who do, in fact, possess true leadership skills. She’s been told not to express any views that might reveal what she is going to sign off on if and when she takes possession of the phone and the pen.

Did she demonstrate admirable leadership qualities during her stint as Border Czar? No. Quite the contrary, in fact. She says she supported and still supports the disastrous, traitorous way her boss pulled us out of Afghanistan. Was that an example of leadership? No. She has said she supports Biden’s economic policies, which have been, again, a disaster. Leadership? No again. Does she possess what it takes to be Commander-in-Chief? No. I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: If Kamala wins, the four happiest people in the world will be Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un, and Ali Khomeini.

Taylor Swift says her most important concerns are LGBTQ+ rights, women having access to in-vitro fertilization, and women having ownership of their bodies (???). She believes it’s important that POTUS be calm and obviously believes frequent nervous laughter is a sign of calm. She is impressed by Tim Walz because he has a history of standing up for LGBTQ+ people and supports women being able to own their bodies.

I am not trying to be sarcastic. That’s Bill Maher’s forte. I’m merely repeating what Taylor Swift says are her reasons for endorsing Harris. Have I misrepresented Swift? No. Have I purposefully made fun of her? Not really, but I’m aware that my analysis of Swift’s endorsement sounds like I’m making fun of her. Truth is, I don’t know how NOT to make said endorsement sound ludicrous because, let’s face it, folks…IT IS PATENTLY LUDICROUS.

Let’s be real. The upcoming election is not about which candidate is more calm or less likely to try and snatch ownership of their bodies from women. As for the never-ending LGBTQ+ tempest in a teapot, I’m not aware of any rights those folks are being denied. Are you? No, you’re not because there ain’t none. And I don’t care, and neither should anyone, which candidate is more compassionate toward women who want IVF.

We’re talking about voting for the person who is best qualified to LEAD this country through the challenges America is certainly going to face in the next four years. Hear me clearly: IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THAT PERSON MEETS TAYLOR SWIFT’S RATHER NAÏVE LIST OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE JOB! LET’S ALL SAY HIS NAME: DONALD TRUMP!

Donald Trump has already demonstrated he has what it takes to LEAD! During his four years as POTUS, the bad actors in the world laid low. Trump presided over a great economic revival. He picked good advisors…generally. He selected Supreme Court judges who are committed to preserving the Constitution. His “yes” means “yes,” and his “no” means “no.” Does he lack a functional filter between his brain and his mouth? Duh! Let me go on the record as quoting Rhett Butler: “I don’t give a damn!” (I sometimes cringe too, by the way.)

Kamala Harris is a will-o’-the-wisp, an empty pantsuit. We’re seven weeks from Election Day and she has yet to answer a tough question or tell us, in no uncertain terms, what her intentions are concerning the economy, national defense, Israel, Ukraine, China’s takeover in the South China Sea, the fact that Iran is about a day away from possessing a nuclear weapon, or the fact that Kim may already possess a nuclear weapon.

The only thing she’s openly touting is her intention to see to it that 3 million new homes will be built, homes that low- to middle-income people will be able to afford. That sounds good and certainly in keeping with the American Dream, but history tells us that Democrats don’t do anything for one group without riding roughshod over the rights of people in another group. The YIMBY (Yes, In My Back Yard!) movement has already broadcast its intention to overturn zoning laws and HOA regulations, meaning that during a Kamala Harris administration, someone with a home valued at $450,000 may wake up one morning to the sounds of heavy equipment clearing the lot next door for a $125,000 home that will effectively cut their equity in half.

Her endorsement made perfectly clear Taylor Swift’s lack of critical thinking skills. The excitement that followed her endorsement made perfectly clear that too many Americans are woefully ignorant of the issues that define the upcoming election. That’s bad. Really, really bad.

Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond

Leave a comment

Today, which is Monday, the 9^th of September in the year of Our Lord 2024, I am in the grip of an urge to write about Election Aera. Look it up. You may have noticed that in most states, there is no longer Election Day. Instead, there is early voting that begins on various days in various places. Because of early voting, we now have Election Aera.

“We should vote when we get back home to New Bern,” Willie told me today.

“Right. We shall.”

There is no point in us waiting because NOTHING on or within ten billion light years of planet Earth is capable of convincing me or Willie to vote for a Democrat for anything, even street sweeper. I was a Democrat once. I stopped being one in 1992, when it dawned on me, belatedly, that the Dems of 1992 were not the Dems of 1960, which is when I began developing an understanding of the difference between the two parties and, like my parents and grandparents and great-grandparents before me, said to myself, “Self, you are hereby a Democrat.”

Mind you, the Republican Party began slipping off its tracks in 1988, but the Trumpster rode in on his glorious red, white, and blue stallion, MAGA, to the rescue in 2016 or Willie and I would be expats by now. The people on both sides of the aisle who think they have been chosen by God to manage America hate Trump. They hate him because he speaks truth.

Anyway, I’m voting for Trump for the third time this year and I hope you will join me.

During today’s conversation, Willie raised an interesting point: Democrats are vehemently opposed to requiring people to show a valid government-issued ID to vote. Why? Simple. Because requiring a government-issued ID to vote means they, the Dems, will no longer be able to artificially inflate the number of votes cast for Democrat candidates.

Oh, the rascals say, they’re opposed to requiring government IDs to vote because it’s racist, but that’s not the reason. That’s just their favorite drum, which they beat as often and hard as they can. The real reason is because requiring government IDs to vote will mean that dead people won’t vote, a whole lotta people who are in this country illegally won’t vote, fictional characters from Jane Austen novels won’t vote, minors won’t vote, most felons won’t vote, and people who don’t have the mental competency to know who they’re voting for won’t vote…and fewer Democratic candidates will be elected to public office.

Four years ago, a few months prior to Election Aera, 2020, I overheard a Democrat talking on the phone to someone. He expressed great concern that the Republican Party was going to try to “suppress” the vote. The word “suppress” is a Democrat euphemism for preventing black people from voting. You’ve surely heard that Republicans don’t want black people to vote. Ha, ha, ha and a Great Big LOL. In 2016 and 2020, a greater percentage of black voters cast their votes for the Republican candidate for POTUS than, I think, ever. Democrats are losing their voodoo over black and Latino voters. Blacks and Latinos are waking up to the scam and coming over to the Party that has always represented their best interests.

Republicans don’t monkey with the vote. Democrats have been monkeying with the vote since Reconstruction. Literacy tests were invented by the Democrat Party. The Ku Klux Klan was an arm of the Democrat Party. In the last two presidential elections, the Democrat Party was responsible for certain voters in certain Northeastern states being prevented from voting by members of the Black Panther Party. The reason Richard Nixon was illegally denied the presidency in 1960 was because the Democrat mayor of Chicago monkeyed with the vote in Cook County. After being elected, John F. Kennedy incurred the wrath of the Democrat Party bosses because he would not carry out their orders. You may recall what happened to him, and you may recall that he was succeeded by a long-time Democrat Party Big Boss.

Anyway, don’t believe what you hear from the talking heads on the Left. As Jesus said of the serpent (aka, Satan), lying is their stock-in-trade. They’ve been lying for so long now, they don’t even know when they’re lying.

When you go to your local neighborhood polling place during this Election Aera, remember one thing: If Kamala Harris is elected POTUS, the four happiest people on the planet will be Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, and Ali Khamenei.

Also remember that even Bill Maher is coming to his senses, finally. That may qualify as a miracle.

Remember those things and mark your ballot appropriately.

And now, back to parenting. What an odd word, that.

Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond

Share