The New York Times published a deeply disturbing article about the e billionaires who are pumping huge sums into the 2026 midterm elections and about dark money vehicles some use to hide their influence.

I am giving you free access to the articles: no pay walls.

This one shows who they are: “Meet the Megadonors.” Most are Republicans, tech entrepreneurs, and crypto kings.

This one focuses on the dark money that is pouring into state elections to support issues and candidates.

It wasn’t always like this.

In 2002, Senator John McCain of Arizona (R) and Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin (D) sponsored the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, commonly called the McCain–Feingold Act.

Its central purpose was to reduce the influence of large, unregulated political contributions.

It banned national political parties from raising or spending unlimited “soft money.” It restricted corporations and labor unions from financing certain broadcast political advertisements immediately before elections.it I ncreased disclosure requirements, and it raised some limits on direct contributions to candidates. 

McCain-Feingold passed the Senate 60-40 and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

The Supreme Court initially upheld most of it.

In 2003, McConnell v. FEC, the Supreme Court upheld the central provisions—including the restrictions on soft money and electioneering communications. 

Then the Court gradually dismantled important parts.

In 2007, in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, the Supreme Court restricted the government’s ability to regulate certain issue advertisements.

In 2008, the Supreme Court (in Davis v. FEC) struck down the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment,” which raised the limits of campaign funding for individuals running against a wealthy, self-financing candidate. That attempt to level the financial playing field was eliminated by the Court.

And then came the big decision that ripped the teeth out of campaign finance reform: Citizens United.

In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that corporations and unions have First Amendment protection to spend unlimited amounts independently to influence elections. This invalidated a major part of McCain–Feingold. 

Citizens United, together with subsequent cases, helped produce the modern system of unlimited independent expenditures and Super PACs.

We are now in the era of Citizens United, the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that negated most limits on political spending.

Why did the U.S. Supreme Court swerve sharply against campaign finance reform?

John Roberts was appointed to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 2005 by President George W. Bush. He formed a 5-4 majority with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito,

Scott Dworkin has a terrific blog on Substack, where he often has news that you can’t find anywhere else. The following is one of those wonderful stories:

The Drag Queen Who Beat the Texas Government

The state of Texas spent three years trying to turn drag performer Brigitte Bandit into a criminal. Senate Bill 12 threatened any bar that booked performers like Bandit with a $10,000 fine, with performers possibly facing a year in jail.

In March of 2023 Bandit testified against that bill inside the state’s Capitol, wearing a dress that listed names of children killed in the Uvalde mass shooting. Lawmakers were arguing about drag queens, she said later, while kids were being killed in Texas schools.

After her testimony, Bandit sued—along with other Pride groups and businesses—Ken Paxton, three cities, and three district attorneys. A few months later, the whole thing went to trial in a Houston federal courtroom. For three years, Texas had said this law was about protecting children. Now it had to prove a child had been harmed.

It couldn’t. Attorney General Ken Paxton called an expert witness, a doctor brought in to talk about what explicit material does to kids. Under oath, that doctor said he had never seen anyone seriously hurt by a drag show. Not one of the seven government offices that were sued over this law offered any other evidence.

That December, Bandit was sent a package from Nashville, Tennessee—a gift from the one and only Dolly Parton. It was a custom guitar covered in rhinestones, signed by Dolly to Brigitte.

Texas appealed and won, and this spring the ban came back to life. Bandit was right back where she started.

But on Tuesday, Judge David Hittner struck the law down again and barred Paxton from enforcing it. A judge put on the bench by Ronald Reagan.

This Saturday night in Austin, Bandit brings out the guitar.

This story appeared last week, so Brigitte Bandit has already performed.

A few words about Reagan-appointed Judge David Hittner, as reported by The Texas Tribune.

In his ruling striking down the 2023 law for the second time, Judge Hittner said that the ban was overly broad and clearly unconstitutional:

The ruling described SB 12 as overly broad in its definitions of performance and nudity, stating that provocative cosplay at conventions, swimming athletes or Dolly Parton and Elvis impersonators could potentially be penalized under the law.

“The vast majority of the law’s numerous applications violate the First Amendment because all the performances that it has an actual impact on are constitutionally protected and are targeted for prohibition based on content and viewpoint,” Hittner wrote…

“Finally, for those who find such activities as described in this case offensive, the solution is relatively simple … just don’t go,” he wrote.

It’s reassuring to know that Texas has some rational Republican justices. Hurrah for Judge David Hittner!

SB 12 as adopted in law contains no language explicitly referencing drag performances, however a previous version while in the Legislature specifically included references to drag. Hittner noted in today’s ruling that opponents of drag performances are not obligated to attend them.

If you don’t like drag shows, just don’t go.

If you don’t like certain books, don’t read them.

If you object to abortions, don’t have one.

Corey DeAngelis hates public schools. He has spent his professional life attacking and demeaning them. I tried to identify the source of his contempt for these great engines of democracy, but was unsuccessful.

Corey graduated from the University of Texas at San Antonio, then received a Ph.D. in education policy at the University of Arkansas’ Department of Educational Reform. This is a program funded by the Walton Foundation, dedicated to the proposition that public schools are illegitimate and the government should give every family vouchers to escape them. Gene Glass, one of the giants of education research, described this program as one of the strangest in academia, because of its decided slant towards school choice.

Corey attended public schools in San Antonio. When he started high school, he applied and was accepted to a public magnet school on the campus of his zoned high school.

DeAngelis attended Communications Arts High School (CommArts), a magnet school operated by Northside ISD. It was founded in 1995 and was located inside the William Howard Taft High School campus. CommArts had high admissions standards, small classes, and an enrollment of about 500. Taft accepted all students and enrolled about 2,800 students.

Having enjoyed the privileges and perks of an elite public school, Corey must have been contemptuous of the large public school he avoided.

Taft was not a failing school. It accepted everyone, so of course its student body included all kinds of youth, including students who were low-performing, students with disabilities, students who were rebellious. The magnet school Corey attended screened out students who did not have high test scores or high grades and were not highly motivated. 100% of its students graduated from high school.

His life experience might have made him a supporter of public school choice, but he somehow evolved into a far-right hater of public schools who is certain that students would be better off if they received a voucher for religious schools, private schools, homeschooling, or anything else.

Corey doesn’t care that some religious schools teach racism, have no certified teachers, and are unaccountable for meeting any state standards. He doesn’t care that some homeschoolers are poorly educated. He doesn’t care that a sizable number of students attend for-profit charters that care more about profits than learning.

In this article, which appeared in The Washington Post, he argues that public schools are unconstitutional, despite having been treasured by most Americans for two centuries, and despite the Founding Fathers having included provision for them in the Northwest Ordinance of 1785 (also called the Land Ordinance of 1785), which set aside land specifically for a public school in every town in the newly created states.

The Land Ordinance of May 20, 1785 established the federal township survey system: each township was divided into 36 one-square-mile sections, and Section 16 (640 acres) was reserved “for the maintenance of public schools within the said township.”

The specific provision of land for public schools should end any doubt about their constitutionality, unless you think that today’s far-right zealots know more about the Constitution than the men who wrote it.

As a graduate of Houston public schools, none of them selective, I strongly reject the claim that public schools are inherently evil. Unlike Corey, I will always be grateful to the public schools that educated me: Montrose Elementary School (six years, including kindergarten); Sutton Elementary School (one year); Albert Sidney Johnson Junior High School (three years); and San Jacinto High School (4 years). They gave me a solid foundation in every subject; i became friends with a wide variety of students; I had some spectacular teachers; and I was able to gain admission to an elite women’s college.

Think about it. Ninety percent of Americans went to public schools, and most graduated from public schools. These are the very people who turned the United States into a successful nation. If you spit on public schools, you are spitting on the engine of American success. That’s crazy.

DeAngelis writes:

In 2021, Columbia University law professor Philip Hamburger argued that the U.S. public school system violates the First Amendment. “Education,” he wrote, “consists mostly in speech, and parents have a right under the First Amendment to exercise authority over what their children hear.” Forcing families to accept government messaging — or pay a steep price to escape it — amounts to unconstitutional pressure.

A lawsuit filed in Nebraska on Aug. 13 brings that argument into court — and could open a path toward universal school choice.

Justin Jacobsen and Timothy and Joanna Menter, parents in the Lincoln Public Schools district, are suing state and local officials in Lancaster County District Court. Represented by the New Civil Liberties Alliance, they are challenging Nebraska’s combination of compulsory education and public-school-only funding.

Nebraska law requires parents to enroll children in a “public, private, denominational or parochial school” or to home-school them. Noncompliance is a Class 3 misdemeanor punishable by up to three months in jail and a $500 fine.

Yet the state offers educational benefits — roughly $19,000 per student statewide in 2024-25, and about $17,400 in Lincoln — only to families that enroll their children in public schools, thus accepting the government’s preferred viewpoints. Nebraska ranks near the bottom nationally on school-choice indexes and provides no scholarships, tax credits or charter schools. (Gov. Jim Pillen has opted Nebraska into the new federal tax credit scholarship program, effective Jan. 1, 2027).

Families that opt out of the public system shoulder the full cost of their children’s education themselves. Average private school tuition in Nebraska runs about $7,800 a year. The resulting penalty, over a K-12 career, exceeds $100,000.

The Menters now home-school their school-age children after pulling the two oldest out of Lincoln Public Schools. The Jacobsen family home-schools one child, sends the two youngest to a private religious school and has another trying public high school. It would send all four to private schools if it could direct its tax dollars to the education providers of its choice.

Both families withdrew most of their children because remaining in public schools meant adopting educational speech they reject. The Menters’ elementary school displayed a classroom door sticker promoting alternative sexuality and transgender ideologies and pressed climate-change views the parents found fear-based. The Jacobsens’ school taught transgender ideology; the children were also exposed to divisive narratives suggesting certain races were victims and others were oppressors because of their skin color.

The parents’ complaint rests on three theories. First, the combination of a criminal education mandate and funding limited to government viewpoints directly abridges parents’ free-speech rights under the First Amendment. Education is inherently speech, and parents hold the primary right to speak or to choose who speaks on their behalf. Second, the same facts violate the Nebraska Constitution’s free speech clause, which state courts treat as mirroring the federal guarantee. Third, the arrangement creates an unconstitutional condition: that is, the state may not condition a valuable public benefit on the surrender of a constitutional right.

This combination of a compulsory mandate and exclusive public school funding is viewpoint discrimination, not a neutral funding decision. Nebraska mandates educational speech, then funds only the government’s perspective and withholds support from any other. That arrangement fails strict scrutiny. The state has no compelling interest in government-run education specifically, as opposed to education generally, and less-restrictive alternatives exist. The government could still fund education with taxpayer dollars, for example, while allowing the money to follow the child to the school or program that aligns with the family’s values.

The lawsuit does not ask the court to invent a new system or order the legislature to adopt any particular program. It seeks only a declaration that the current structure is unconstitutional as applied to these plaintiffs, an injunction against continuing the unconstitutional conditions, and prospective damages from the city of Lincoln and Lancaster County equal to the per-pupil value of local benefits directed to Lincoln Public Schools, continuing until the violation ends or each child graduates from high school, earns a GED or turns 19. The plaintiffs do not challenge the content of any specific curriculum — the claim is structural, concerning funding and compulsion.

Universal school choice resolves the constitutional problem while preserving public support for education. Nebraska can keep its compulsory-education laws and continue to provide education with taxpayer funding. The difference is that families, not the state, would direct that money to the schools or programs that best align with their values — public, private, religious or home-based. Funding would follow the child rather than force every family to be indoctrinated in a single government viewpoint.

This approach respects free speech. Parents who prefer the public system’s messaging can remain there. Parents who do not can exit without financial penalty. Every child still receives an education funded by the public, and no family is compelled to underwrite or accept speech it rejects for its own children. Force gives way to freedom.

The Nebraska case makes plain that the status quo cannot stand. Universal school choice is the path that honors both education and the Constitution.

Corey DeAngelis is a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a senior fellow at Americans for Fair Treatment. He also worked for Betsy DeVos’s American Federation for Children. He is known as an evangelist for vouchers.

A few years ago, I came across this 1979 special performance by Dolly Parton and Carol Burnett. Watch them interact. They are wonderful. As they talk, they write a song, then invite the audience to join in. It is funny, warm, and happy. I think I have watched it 10 times.

“No One Picks Like a Nashville Picker Picks.”

It’s wonderful to watch two stars at the top of their game.

RFK Jr. has said that there is a link between circumcision and autism but a new study says he is wrong.

Medpage reported:

A study of U.S. children found no evidence linking neonatal male circumcision with autism spectrum disorder, prospective data from the ECHO cohort showed.

Among nearly 2,800 boys in 14 ECHO sites, 6% of those who were circumcised had autism compared with 9% of uncircumcised males, according to Monica McGrath, ScD, MHS, of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, and co-authors.

After adjusting for confounders, circumcision was not associated with an autism diagnosis (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.59-1.17), McGrath and colleagues reported in JAMA Pediatricsopens in a new tab or window.

Stratifying data by region, preterm birth, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission yielded either an inverse or no association. Circumcision also was not associated with autism-related traits or behaviors.

Only 4% of circumcised boys received acetaminophen (Tylenol) during the procedure and 7% had acetaminophen in the 30 days after birth, the researchers said. Most infants received nerve blocks (72%), oral glucose/sucrose (59%), or anesthetic cream (12%).

“These findings may provide reassurance for families who are considering or have elected circumcision for their son,” McGrath told MedPage Today.

In September 2025, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. claimedopens in a new tab or window that circumcised boys were twice as likely to develop autism as those not circumcised because they were given acetaminophen. The remarks came weeks after the White House warned pregnant women not to take acetaminophen over an unproven link with autism.

“We started hearing from friends, family, and colleagues in the fall of 2025 after media coverage of administration comments about a possible male circumcision-autism connection that referenced studies that were published over a decade ago,” McGrath said. “We knew the ECHO cohort had relevant data to help investigate this question.”

About half of newborn males in the U.S.are circumcised in the hospital within 28 days, but analyses of autism risk in circumcised boys are scarce. “There have been two poorly conducted studies that suggest a connection between circumcision and autism,” observed David Mandell, ScD, of the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine in Philadelphia, who wasn’t involved with the research.

The blogger who identifies as “Accountabaloney” wrote to report on his/her political fortunes in a deep red county in Florida. It’s no secret that the blogger is a Democrat, but gets re-elected as a strong supporter of public schools. Trump, DeSantis, and the Florida legislature love charter schools, vouchers, homeschooling, and other alternatives, but Accountabaloney wins as a forthright supporter of teachers and public schools.

Accountabaloney writes:

In case you didn’t know, in my “spare time” I am an elected member of the Monroe County School Board and, unless expressly stated, the views stated here reflect my own opinions and should not be construed to represent the views of the Monroe County School Board.


I have been told that I am a unicorn: a registered Democrat who has repeatedly won countywide in an increasingly Republican county.

I was first elected to the Monroe County School Board without opposition in 2018. By then, I was already well known in my district as a passionate advocate for our public schools. Before filing to run, I reached out to virtually everyone I thought might be interested in the seat, told them I planned to run and asked for their support. One by one, I received it. In the end, no one filed to run against me.

In 2022, that support was tested at the ballot box. I faced a well-financed, politically savvy Republican opponent who had been recruited and endorsed by Moms for Liberty and Gov. Ron DeSantis.

I didn’t respond by running away from public education or by trying to out-partisan my opponent. I ran on my record and on my belief that strong public schools are essential to strong communities.

I won.

This year, the partisan question became even more explicit.

My opponent prominently displayed the word “CONSERVATIVE” on her campaign signs and made her political and religious identity an important part of her campaign. She attended churches encouraging voters to support a candidate who shared their Conservative Christian values and promoted publicly funded homeschooling and tuition vouchers. She even accused me of “hiding behind the nonpartisan label.”

But nonpartisan wasn’t a label I chose. Florida school board elections are nonpartisan by law.

And I wasn’t hiding.

People knew I was a Democrat.

So rather than fight an election over partisan identity, I made a different bet. I trusted voters to care more about what I stood for than the letter next to my name in other elections.

And I made what I stood for unmistakable.

I ran unabashedly for public education.

I talked about our successful schools and the extraordinary people who work in them. I talked about putting great teachers in every classroom—and paying and supporting them well enough that they can afford to stay. I talked about expanding opportunities for students through the arts, athletics, career and technical education, advanced academics, dual enrollment and field trips.

I talked about responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars and protecting classrooms when budgets get tight.

Most of all, I refused to accept the premise that our public schools are failing institutions from which children need to escape. I talked about them as valuable community institutions worth protecting, investing in and making even better.

The voters responded.

I received 64 percent of the vote and won every precinct in Monroe County—including precincts that had voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump just two years earlier.

The voters didn’t suddenly become Democrats.

They knew I was a Democrat, and they voted for me anyway.

They chose a public education advocate for School Board.

And that makes me wonder whether the real lesson of this election has much to do with unicorns at all.

For years, education politics has been dominated by the language of “school choice”—vouchers, education savings accounts, publicly funded homeschooling and the growing movement of public dollars into private education. Advocates for public schools have too often allowed themselves to be put on the defensive, as though supporting the public system that educates the overwhelming majority of American children is somehow the politically risky position.

Maybe we have that backward.

My election certainly doesn’t prove that every person who voted for me opposes vouchers or publicly funded homeschooling. Elections aren’t referenda on a single issue. Many people who strongly support public schools also support a parent’s right to choose another option for their own child.

But there is an important difference between respecting individual choice and abandoning our collective commitment to public education.

And perhaps candidates have underestimated how many voters understand that distinction.

Supporting public schools is popular.

Supporting teachers is popular.

Giving children more opportunities is popular.

Believing every community should have an excellent public school is popular.

Those aren’t Democratic values or Republican values. They are community values.

So perhaps I’m not a unicorn after all.

Perhaps candidates don’t need to attack school choice to win the education debate.

Perhaps they simply need to stop being afraid to champion public schools.

The cruelest of Trump’s policies is his determination to deport millions of immigrants. Stephen Miller, the man without a heart, wants to deport one million immigrants every year. The new head of the Department of Himrland Security, Markwayne Mullen, wants to meet that goal. So now the numbers of people detained has risen sharply, but most of them have never committed a violent crime.

Remember when Trump said he would deport “the worst of the worst”? Remember when he said he would expel the rapists and murderers?

I remember. You probably remember too.

Some are married to American citizens. Some are waiting for their green card to arrive.

That’s who he is deporting. Most of those detained have never committed a violent crime. Most are hardworking people who are contributing to society. Most are running small businesses or working on farms or in construction or landscaping. They need to get their papers, and they want them, but there is no path to legal citizenship.

Some of the deportees have lived here for twenty years or more.

No matter. The door to American citizenship is closed, except for white South Africans. For those whose skin is not white, go away.

Albert Sun and Alison McCann of The New York Times reported:

surge in immigration arrests this summer has swept up thousands of people who had not previously been the focus of President Trump’s mass deportation campaign. They included people married to U.S. citizens, people who had entered legally and were pursuing an asylum claim, and others with a temporary legal status that the administration pushed to revoke.

The red line on the bottom are those with violent convictions. The soaring green line on top are people with no convictions.

A majority of the immigrants arrested in July were people who were accused of violating civil immigration laws but who had not been charged with or convicted of a crime, an analysis of newly released federal data shows. The share with a past violent criminal conviction fell to less than 4 percent.

Overall, immigration arrests rose to record highs with 43,000 ICE arrests in June and 49,000 in July. Two fatal shootings involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, in Texas and Maine, drew outrage but did not meaningfully slow the pace of arrests.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said that the administration was keeping its promises to arrest and deport criminals and that anyone in the country illegally was a target for enforcement.

The new data contains details on every ICE arrest through Aug. 5 and offers the fullest picture yet of how the agency’s activities have shifted since public backlash forced a retreat from the aggressive tactics seen in Minneapolis early this year. It was obtained by the Deportation Data Project, an academic group, through a public records lawsuit and analyzed by The New York Times.

After his confirmation this spring, the secretary of homeland security, Markwayne Mullin, promised quieter but more effective enforcement. ICE now appears closer than ever to meeting a recent goal of 2,000 daily arrests.

“They have more officers, more money, more detention space, more local partners and better systems,” said Claire Trickler-McNulty, a former senior ICE official. “And they’re finally putting all the pieces together to build out this deportation machine.”

A wider focus 

Immigration arrests are near all-time highs in almost every state. Even sparsely populated Montana and Vermont saw spikes, with arrest rates more than doubling.

But the surge was strongest in Florida and Texas, two states with large unauthorized immigrant populations and leaders friendly to the Trump administration’s crackdown.

The golden door is closed.

Mary Trump, niece of Donald Trump, notes that Trump behavior in increasingly unhinged, narcissistic, and frankly, ridiculous. Yet no one in his inner circle will tell him the truth. No one will tell him that he has humiliated America in the eyes of the world. Mary is a psychologist and the son of Trump’s older brother. She judges him by his actions and his words, not his braggadocio’

She writes:

Donald rushed the White House press corps into the Oval Office saying he had a big announcement, which is that, effective immediately, he is going to be changing the name of Lake Ontario to Lake America.

One of his flunkies, when asked, “Do you have anything to say about it, Ben?” said, “Yes, sir,” before explaining that this was a straightforward but important executive order. It directs Secretary Burgum and the Department of the Interior to update the Geographic Names Information System to reflect that the lake once known as Lake Ontario will from this time forward be known as Lake America. According to him, this is a lake that has most of its volume in the United States and the deepest parts of the lake sit in United States territory, so this will reflect that this is an American lake. Thankfully, all of the necessary papers and documents were filed to make this official.

In case you were thinking, “Oh, well, okay, maybe he’s finally done renaming bodies of water,” you would be wrong.

This is what Donald said:

The lake change, Lake of America, was something I’ve been thinking about for a long time, actually. As you know, we took something called the Gulf of Mexico. We changed it, and now it’s very routinely the Gulf of America. So if you think about it, we have a Gulf and we have a lake. Now all we need is an ocean. So maybe we’ll have to change the name of the Atlantic and/or the Pacific. Maybe we’ll change them both.

That’s the President of the United States of America who currently has us involved in an illegal, unconstitutional war of choice, who is currently engaged in an unprovoked trade war with our closest ally and second largest trading partner, which will wreak havoc on both the economies of Canada and the United States of America, creating even more hardship for Americans given the fact that the economy, thanks to Donald’s completely stupid economic policies and the aforementioned war of choice, is in shambles.

American farmers are going bankrupt by the score, up to 77 per day. America is divided. America’s reputation across the world is cratering. America is a shadow of its once relatively respectable self, all because of that man and the fascist Republican Party that continues to enable him.

And it’s not because they don’t know what’s going on. They can see clearly that he is in serious, serious cognitive decline. There is overwhelming evidence of this.

They see clearly his toddler like levels of self involvement, his delusions of godhood, and his grasping need for attention. They see that his only priority is his wealth, his power, his megalomania, and yet Republicans continue to go along with his demands, which are increasingly insane, detached from reality, and utterly humiliating.

It’s not an accident, or maybe it is an accident, but it’s a convenient one, that by renaming Lake Ontario to Lake America, the acronym for the Great Lakes, Superior, Huron, America, Michigan, and Erie, is now SHAME.

And I have begun to wonder if America will ever, ever be able to get out from under the weight of the shame Donald Trump and the Republicans have heaped upon us.

It is clear to any sentient being who isn’t lying to him or herself that Donald is increasingly unfit, increasingly just a prisoner to his psychopathologies. And now so too are we because not only has there been no pushback, he continues to be enabled. He continues to be told that he can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants to, because he’s him.

As you may have heard, Donald had wanted to close the Kennedy Center for two years because it needed such extensive renovations, according to him. Howard Lutnick is claiming that Donald is the only person in the world great enough to renovate the Kennedy Center. He also said that when the renovation project started, Donald, the great master builder, should be the project manager because being President is just another part time job.

We’ve also learned recently that Donald wants to make the midterms about himself. So here’s what holier than thou, sick of it Speaker of the House Mike Johnson had to say about it.

This is what Mike Johnson said:

The president is going to look right into the camera and say, I am on the ballot, okay? Because even though his name isn’t, it’s his administration, his legacy.

No, that isn’t how any of this works.

By continuing to enable him, by continuing to spread the wild, unhinged, untethered from reality narratives, Donald is trapped with it. They continue to act as if it is normal for a president at war to spend his time giving tours of the White House construction projects, to spend millions of dollars renovating a reflecting pool and then arresting people because the job was done so incompetently it made him look bad.

This is the President of the United States spending his time changing the names of bodies of water. First the Gulf of Mexico becomes the Gulf of America. Now Lake Ontario becomes Lake America. And apparently, having secured a gulf and a lake, Donald is considering moving on to the Atlantic and Pacific oceans because, as he explained, “Now all we need is an ocean.”

This is happening while America is at war. It is happening while farmers are going bankrupt. It is happening while we are engaged in a trade war with Canada. It is happening while the economy is in shambles and America’s reputation around the world continues to crater.

Yet the people surrounding Donald continue to treat his increasingly bizarre demands as if they are perfectly normal acts of presidential leadership. Nobody apparently has the courage to tell him that changing the name of Lake Ontario is not an important presidential accomplishment, just as nobody seems willing to tell him that being President of the United States is not a part time job that leaves plenty of room for managing the renovation of the Kennedy Center.

Instead, they flatter him. They indulge him. They tell him that he is the only person in the world capable of doing things that have absolutely nothing to do with the job the American people elected him to perform.

As long as we have people like Mike Johnson and everybody else in Donald’s inner circle trying to normalize this deviance, we are all part of this psychopathological system that will lead inevitably to our destruction.

To which I say, is there not one sane adult who knows where this is going to lead? Is there not one person in the Trump regime who can send up the signal flare to the rest of us that some of them are willing to start speaking out against this insanity?

Because this isn’t simply about renaming Lake Ontario. It isn’t simply about whether Donald decides tomorrow that the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean needs to have America stamped across its name, too. It is about the fact that there seems to be nobody around him willing to say no. There is nobody willing to stop indulging his grasping need for attention, his delusions of godhood, his megalomania, and his increasingly insane demands.

The Republican Party sees what the rest of us see. They know what is happening. They see the same behavior. They hear the same words. They watch him make the same increasingly detached demands, and rather than push back, they continue enabling him. They continue pretending that this is normal because Donald is Donald and therefore, apparently, he gets to do whatever he wants whenever he wants.

And that is how we get here. We have a President of the United States involved in an illegal and unconstitutional war of choice, an unprovoked trade war with one of our closest allies, and an economy that is creating extraordinary hardship for Americans, while he summons the White House press corps to announce that Lake Ontario is now Lake America.

And everybody around him plays along.

Donald said that now that America has a gulf and a lake, all we need is an ocean. Maybe he’ll change the Atlantic. Maybe he’ll change the Pacific. Maybe he’ll change both.

Meanwhile, the Great Lakes are now, conveniently enough, Superior, Huron, America, Michigan, and Erie.

SHAME.

That may be the most appropriate thing Donald has named yet.

This is unsustainable. He is unsustainable. And the sooner somebody is willing to stand up against the depredations that continue to be made against the American people by Donald and those who are perpetuating this, the better.

John Merrow interviewed Dolly Parton about her program called the Imagination Library. she loved to read and she wanted to inspire the same love of reading in children.

She began sending free books to the children in her county in Tennessee. Some of their families couldn’t afford to buy a book. No matter their family income, every child received a free book with their name on it, once a month for five years.

Dolly became known as “the book lady,” a title she cherished. She wanted to do good in the world, and she did. Her book program expands to children across Tennessee, then across the United States, then to other countries.

By the time of her death, she had given away close to 300 million books. She loved being “the book lady.”

She didn’t do it for fame or praise. She did it because she wanted every child to learn to read and to love reading.

As I have previously written, it’s hard to think of any sort of philanthropy carried out by other people of great wealth.

Now that Trump is in full megalomania mode, the possibilities are endless.

As threatened, Trump has issued an executive order renaming Lake Ontario, the smallest of the Great Lakes. Now it will be “Lake America.”

He previously renamed the Gulf of Mexico, calling it “the Gulf of America.”

He said:

“If you think about it, we have a gulf and we have a lake, now all we need is an ocean,” Trump said during the signing ceremony, comparing the move to his administration’s renaming of the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. “So maybe we’ll have to change the name of the Atlantic and/or the Pacific.”

The Atlantic Ocean? The Trump East Ocean.

The Pacific Ocean, The Trump West Ocean.

Or why not name them for his children? The Donald Trump, Jr. Ocean. The Eric Trump Ocean.

But what’s left for Ivanka? The Indian Ocean?

As for Tiffany and Barron? Name the Swiss Alps for Tiffany, and the Danube for Barron. Or the Rhine.

The possibilities are endless.

All glory to the Trump family. Until 2029.