Whatever you think about Donald Trump and the life issue, just know that his latest machinations are not about this upcoming election.Case in point: How many of the $300 million ads that the Democrats plan on running to remind every single woman about who appointed the justices responsible for overturning Roe v. Wade were canceled because Trump took the life issue out of the party platform? The answer is none. I mean, how much of normie America even reads the party platform? Again, zero is the answer. So, the idea that Republicans can somehow insulate themselves from what Democrats are going to say between now and November about the guy who did more than any elected federal official in my lifetime to protect life is ridiculous.MAGA thinks it has 2024 in the bag, and MAGA is probably right (at least, let’s hope it is). And if it is, long live the king.And while my opinion of Team GOP has a default setting below subterranean, I don’t believe Republicans are so dumb that they don’t realize that. So, what gives?When I was coming of age politically and listening to Rush Limbaugh daily, I remember hearing him play clips of Roger Stone with his then-wife, Ann, trying to get all the pro-life language taken out of the Republican Party platform. Now, fast-forward about 35 years, and look who is one of Trump’s closest political confidants today. None other than Roger Stone.If we put the Wonder Woman lasso of truth around them, Trump and his political machine would likely admit they are trying to franchise the Republican Party, moving away from the many disparate coalitions within today’s GOP and toward a fealty more akin to that owed to a king.Are there still disparate factions in a king’s court? Yes. Are there different agendas and ambitions? Absolutely. But they’re all united in loyalty to whom? The king. They will learn to share power within that court if they want the continued access and approval they need from the king.This is how the Democratic Party has operated for generations. If you ask someone why they are a Democrat, they would typically cite an identity, such as being a single woman, gay, black, or a teacher. If you ask someone why they are a Republican, they’d typically mention values or principles, like being pro-life, believing in a strong national defense, or wanting limited government. The Republicans were the ideologically driven party, while the Democrats were the coalition-based party.That is how you got fire-breathing black ministers and butch lesbians like Rosie O’Donnell to vote for the same candidates. Because they all realized that the government is king and to get the access they need from the king, they had better set their principles aside and work together as a coalition.It is in precisely that manner the Trump empire is attempting to remake the Republican Party. Doesn’t matter much what people like pro-rainbow jihad Elise Stefanik believe about anything as long as they are willing to slobber for Trump, because there is really no agenda beyond the king himself.Kings like to leave a legacy. And since the Trump family is forevermore boxed out of the market when it comes to many of their business interests, because, you know, they’re almost Hitler and stuff, then politics will have to fill the gaping void.Trump is 78 years old, and even if none of his children ever want to run for office themselves, what he’s now establishing is the long-live-the-king endorsement that will be required from the family he leaves behind to rule his empire. His daughter-in-law runs the Republican National Committee now, for crying out loud! The party is being franchised and remade in Trump’s image. The Trumps are poised to become the GOP’s Kennedys.It’s definitely not just about this election. Heck, it wasn’t long ago I thought this election was about putting Trump in jail, but here we are. MAGA thinks it has 2024 in the bag, and MAGA is probably right (at least let’s hope it is).And if it is, long live the king.But if MAGA is tragically wrong and unable to evict the dementia patient and his demonic horde from the White House, then the excommunications will begin on November 6 and continue until morale improves.

Glenn Beck’s radio broadcast on Wednesday morning had some heartfelt and thoughtful discussion of the most controversial aspect (for Republicans) of Donald Trump’s recently released platform: abortion.It got me thinking about that issue again, not that I had ever really ignored it. You can’t. To say that the abortion quandary goes to the heart of our values is both a cliché and an understatement. Its paramount importance is unquestionably true.Trump’s policy makes sense for the world at large in these times. Any other approach would likely do more harm to the cause than good by giving its enemies a club.The discussion arose that morning because reports indicated Trump has rejected the call for a federal abortion ban that appeared in previous GOP platforms, including his own in 2020. Instead, he would “let the states decide,” an approach that aligns with the Supreme Court’s decision of overturning Roe v. Wade, for which he has taken justifiable credit.I am one of those who has become increasingly pro-life over the years for reasons that are both moral (“Some things that you’re liable to read in the Bible are necessarily so”) and scientific. A life with unique DNA obviously begins at conception (when else?), and, due to ongoing research, the amount of time that unique human being takes to be sentient in the womb, to experience pain and who knows what else, is shorter and shorter — eventually, it seems, a matter of weeks.And yet, I must put an asterisk against my name regarding abortion.As with an incalculable number of others, male and female, I have never, to my knowledge, had to face the question of an abortion in my own life. Although I know several who have, I have not been involved as the sometimes de trop (to 1960s-era feminists and some contemporaries as well) male sperm donor.Everything I think about abortion is, to some degree, theoretical, as are, I submit, the opinions of those millions of others who have not had to deal with the experience directly.Some of my theoretical thoughts, however, make me shudder.For example, what if a daughter of mine had been brutally raped by one or more of the October 7 Hamas terrorist psychopaths and became pregnant? How would I feel about her going to term and having the baby? Much more importantly, how could I even begin to counsel her against abortion if she naturally abhorred having progeny from such a monster with all that that might entail?Yes, I’m aware that is a rather dramatic example, but dramatic as it is, it is plausible — right now.If you are one of those who favor that overall abortion ban, I absolutely respect you on a moral basis. We are all children of God.But I must ask if you have ever faced anything remotely like that example? Are you sure what you would do if you had to?I must admit, I am not sure at all.Arguments about the possibility of nurture overriding nature, whether the next Mother Teresa or someone curing cancer could arise from such a “union” seem puerile and, to me at least, more than a little bit hypocritical in this and similar instances.And if you think my example is too specialized, I would remind you that, barring the ideology, it is not too distant from a rape occurring today anywhere in our country, in an urban alleyway or a distant field.Further, there’s that life-of-the-mother question. It’s a dicey one, since confidence in our medical community to make the correct and just decision has unfortunately dwindled since COVID. (Maybe we took too much for granted.)Nevertheless, it’s an epochal choice that, when confronted, has results that, putting it mildly, may not always conform to our hopes. In fact, it can be a ticket to disaster for all concerned, no matter what side of the ledger we are on, pro-life or that weird construction, pro-choice.It’s almost impossible, at least for me, to know how I would react if confronted by the dilemma. God-willing, I won’t be.So, I have an asterisk next to my pro-life name. I would ask others in my position of fortunate ignorance to think about themselves in that regard.I would add two things.First, I wouldn’t be surprised if Donald Trump’s thinking was like mine. Although electoral politics always plays a role — he’s a politician, in case you haven’t noticed — his policy makes sense for the world at large in these times. Any other approach would likely do more harm to the cause than good by giving its enemies a club, specious as that weapon would be.Second, I have always suspected that the real battle over abortion should not take place in the realm of government. I am now more convinced of that than ever. In that sense, I am a (definitely small l) libertarian. Whether to abort is an issue of the heart and the soul, of the individual’s faith or lack thereof, not of legislation that in the end does little more than paper over the real feelings of people on this monumental question.Editor’s note: Prize-winning novelist and Oscar-nominated screenwriter Roger L. Simon will be starting the American Refugees Substack this August with his wife, screenwriter (“Dick”) and journalist, Sheryl Longin.

Calls for government regulators to intervene in the emerging market are misguided.

The empathizer-in-chief and savior of democracy has become, in a matter of about two weeks, a clueless and selfish threat to all that Democrats hold dear.

Ensuring that injured parties can obtain relief from meritless federal agency rules, regardless of how long ago the rules were issued, is a crucial victory.

What lessons can we draw from his 1987 exit from the presidential race?

Assessing the films that help us see and think.

There are compelling indications of both the need for a corporate-culture change and the prospects for it.

Plus: NATO at 75.

The Bleeding Won't Stop: Biden Insiders Reportedly Melting Down, See 'No Path to Victory'