It’s Wednesday, July 20th, 2016…but before we begin, two big reasons America has had it with Progressivism’s MSM mouthpieces.  First, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke gives the Communist News Network’s Don Lemon the oral bitch-slapping of the century:

Next, what can only be described as an utter inanity from Sally Kohn:

Silly Sally; the RMS Titanic hitting an iceberg was an “accident”.  Like 9/11, Benghazi was a deliberate attack by Islamic terrorists against the sovereign soil of the United States.  Not to mention one both Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton failed to either prevent or intercede.

Both Kohn and Lemon demonstrate The Left’s unwillingness, or inability, to recognize they no longer control the news.  Unlike the days when Uncle Walter could deliberately misrepresent the reality of ’68 Tet Offensive, and almost single-handedly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, the truth is out there for anyone willing to ignore the MSM’s blatant bias and uncover the truth for themselves.  And that includes a number of the talking heads on FOX, as well as numerous front-page “reporters” from the WSJ. 

As the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan correctly noted:

Put another way:

And as Ronaldus Maximus so eloquently observed:

Though after a time, and that time is now, opinions and feelings born of deliberate ignorance of facts available to anyone with a computer, an internet connection and half a brain become unworthy of consideration…

Now, here’s The Gouge!

At the top of today’s order, courtesy of City Journal via George Lawlor, the latest from Heather Mac Donald, which deserves to be featured in full:

The Fire Spreads

Three cops dead in Baton Rouge, and the analogies to the 1960s deepen.

 

“Perhaps it will turn out that the latest assassination of police officers, this time in Baton Rouge, is unrelated to the hatred fomented by the Black Lives Matter movement. Perhaps the gunmen were members of militia groups aggrieved by federal overreach, say. But the overwhelming odds are that this most recent assault on law and order, taking the lives of three officers and wounding at least three more, is the direct outcome of the political and media frenzy that followed the police shootings of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge and Philando Castile in Falcon Heights, Minnesota, less than two weeks ago.  That frenzy further amplified the dangerously false narrative that racist police officers are the greatest threat facing young black men today.

President Barack Obama bears direct responsibility for the lethal spread of that narrative. In a speech from Poland just hours before five officers were assassinated in Dallas on July 7, Obama misled the nation about policing and race, charging officers nationwide with preying on blacks because of the color of their skin. Obama rolled out a litany of junk statistics to prove that the criminal justice system is racist. Blacks were arrested at twice the rate of whites, he complained, and get sentences almost 10 percent longer than whites for the same crime. Missing from Obama’s address was any mention of the massive racial differences in criminal offending and criminal records that fully account for arrest rates and sentence lengths. (Blacks, for example, commit homicide at eight times the rate of whites and Hispanics combined, and at about 11 to 12 times the rate of whites alone.) Instead, Obama chalked up the disparities to “biases, some conscious and unconscious that have to be rooted out . . .  across our criminal justice system.”

Then five Dallas officers were gunned down out of race hatred and cop hatred. Did Obama shelve his incendiary rhetoric and express his unqualified support for law enforcement? No, he doubled down, insulting law enforcement yet again even as it was grieving for its fallen comrades. In a memorial service for the Dallas officers, Obama rebuked all of America for its “bigotry,” but paid special attention to alleged police bigotry:

When African-Americans from all walks of life, from different communities across the country, voice a growing despair over what they perceive to be unequal treatment, when study after study shows that whites and people of color experience the criminal justice system differently. So that if you’re black, you’re more likely to be pulled over or searched or arrested; more likely to get longer sentences; more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime. When mothers and fathers raised their kids right, and have the talk about how to respond if stopped by a police officer—yes, sir; no, sir—but still fear that something terrible may happen when their child walks out the door; still fear that kids being stupid and not quite doing things right might end in tragedy.

When all this takes place, more than 50 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, we cannot simply turn away and dismiss those in peaceful protest as troublemakers or paranoid.

The irresponsible zealotry of this rebuke was stunning. Obama was fully on notice that the hatred of cops was reaching homicidal levels. And yet his commitment to prosecuting his crusade against phantom police racism trumped considerations of prudence and safety, on the one hand, and decent respect for the fallen, on the other. Of course, Obama also uttered the mandatory praise for officers who “do an incredibly hard and dangerous job fairly and professionally,” and he warned against “paint[ing] all police as biased, or bigoted.” This was self-indulgent hypocrisy. A passing denunciation of stereotyping hardly compensates for the insane accusation that black parents rightly fear that any time “their child walks out the door,” that child could be killed by a cop.

It is possible that the Dallas killers and the Baton Rouge killers had not heard Obama’s most recent speeches on criminal-justice racism, or even the many that preceded them. But even if the cop murderers had not encountered Obama’s exact words, the influence of his rhetoric on the hatred in the streets is absolute. Obama’s imprimatur on the Black Lives Matter demagoguery gives it enormous additional thrust and legitimacy, echoing throughout public discourse into the most isolated corners of the inner city.

The media bear equal responsibility for the ongoing carnage. The press immediately slotted the shootings of Sterling and Castile into the racist-cop paradigm, though the facts about what the officers saw and whether the victims were in fact reaching for their guns were unknown. The New York Times went into cop-calumny overdrive, with an editorial entitled “When Will the Killing Stop?” and a series of back-to-back op-eds decrying the brutal oppression of blacks in America. One of those op-eds, by an assistant professor at Purdue University, bemoaned that blacks were up against a world “where too many people have their fingers on the triggers of guns aimed directly at black people.” The professor was presumably not referring to the thugs who shot a three-year-old boy in Chicago on Father’s Day this year, leaving him paralyzed for life, or who shot a five-year-old girl, a seven-year-old boy, and an 11-year-old boy in Chicago on the Fourth of July. She was probably also not referring to Le’Vonte King Jason, a two-year-old boy killed on July 8 in Minneapolis, a few miles away and two days after Philando Castile was shot by police during a traffic stop. Jason was in a car driven by his father that was peppered with bullets in a drive-by shooting; the gunfire hit his 15-month-old sister as well. Except for a local columnist, the press ignored Jason’s funeral, in contrast to the media scrum that inundated Castile’s funeral on the same day.

Even before this latest attack on the police, officers across the country have been reeling under the prejudice directed against them. A police trainer meeting with officers on July 7, hours before the Dallas carnage, reported to me that the cops were “out of their minds that the default [in the Castile and Sterling shootings] is racism, without one iota of fact.” Officers have already been backing off of proactive policing under the constant charge that they are racist for making pedestrian stops and enforcing public-order laws in black neighborhoods. In June, I spoke with police officers in Dallas about the 75 percent increase in homicides the city has experienced this year. The officers chalked it up to de-policing. “Officers are now leery of doing their job,” a cop who runs warrants in the high-crime Five Points area told me. “Why make stops in the first place?” This summer of blue bloodshed will deter officers from discretionary policing even more. Expect violent crime, already on the rise since the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in summer 2014, to spike further. (And expect its impact to fall most heavily on inner-city Blacks!)

Between the Dallas assassinations and today’s, officers have been shot at and ambushed in Tennessee, Missouri, Georgia, and Washington, D.C. Authorities have been circumspect in identifying the reasons behind those shootings—unlike the alacrity with which racial motives are assigned to cops when they shoot someone in the line of duty— and the incidents have been brushed under the rug. But we are quickly reaching the worst days of the nightmare 1960s, when it seemed that the very foundation of society was breaking apart. The difference between the 1960s and today is that the hatred of law enforcement and of whites is being stoked by the highest reaches of the establishment. Universities sometimes seem like little else than factories of desperately ginned-up racial grievance.  That the cop killer in Dallas and apparently in Baton Rouge as well came out of the military is an indication that the happy talk about how the military is an engine of racial reconciliation is naïve. The country has been pretending that the main source of racism today comes from whites. Anyone who has spent time in the inner city and even more middle-class black precincts—such as college campuses—knows differently.

It may be too late to stop this fire from spreading. But Obama has one more chance to try to put it out. He failed that opportunity in his remarks hours after the Baton Rouge carnage, delivering instead an anodyne call to heal “our divisions” and discard “inflammatory rhetoric thrown around to advance an agenda.”  Implication: Blame for “inflammatory rhetoric” is equally shared by those who attack cops and those who defend them.  Sorry, Mr. President, those who tell the truth about crime and policing are not part of the problem and they bear no responsibility for the massacre of cops.  The killing of cops is furthered exclusively by those peddling a false narrative that cops harbor lethal bias toward blacks.  Obama should call for the Black Lives Matter movement to fold its tent—and he himself should start telling the truth about inner-city crime.

Which means he won’t; nor will Hillary, as Cortney O’Brien reports at Townhall.com:

“This madness has to stop,” she said. “Killing police officers is a terrible crime. If you take aim at them, you take aim at all of us.”

It is “profoundly wrong,” she said. “We can’t ignore that away.” We have to make it right, she suggested, with “end-to-end reform.” In particular, she called out the Ferguson police force as one in need of serious accountability.

Ah, yes…Ferguson, MO; THE start of the Black Lives Matter lie!  There’s just one problem:

As our friend Paul Burnett observed, it all started when the Obamanation Administration was young:

When the “Beer Summit” took place due to Obama saying police “acted stupidly” it was the first time a sitting U.S. President had publicly commented (and that wholly inaccurately!) on a local police issue. It was only the first of many more cases of meddling and the empowerment of anti-police criminals who now had a powerful speaker for their anarchist causes. He is the true catalyst in all of these issues.

All of which proves contemporary Progressivism is the true successor to the patent prevaricative propaganda of the Third Reich:

In a related item, writing at NRO, David French recognizes…

The Left’s Repulsive Rationalization of Violence against Police

There is no excuse for violence against police. It’s time progressive intellectuals said so.

 

“In the hours and days after terrorist massacres of police, one cannot justify violence and remain a member of polite society. (One can only remain a Dimocrat!) Indeed, polite progressive society is even now engaged in the project of propping up Black Lives Matter — of spoon-feeding its activists opportunities to declare that they reject violence in all its forms even as their protests continue to be marked by violence and calls for violence. Anything good and peaceful? That’s Black Lives Matter. Anything violent or destructive? That’s not, even when it’s perpetrated at Black Lives Matter rallies, by people professing the same ideals as Black Lives Matter.

Worse yet, there’s a subset of radicals that refuses to completely disavow violence even when given the opportunity. The trick is to find a way to use the violence without exactly condoning it. How can one condemn it and exploit it?

…For men such as Ford and Coates, violence is extraordinarily useful. It provides them with a megaphone through which to make their case against the police — just so long as they don’t cross that ever-so-fine line between predicting unrest and excusing violence. (In other words, they’re moral and physical cowards!) No one should forget that their “predictions” rely on the exact same reasoning used by those who not only justify violence but commit violent acts.

In this way, a man such as Coates operates much like, say, the leaders of the political or propaganda arms of violent revolutionary movements — the Sinn Fein to the rioters’ IRA. Whenever there’s a violent act, Coates or someone like him is there to patiently explain the reason for the violence, making the rioters’ (or even the murderers’) case for them while offering rote, half-hearted denunciations of the violence itself.

They perpetuate lies about police, and in perpetuating the lies they spread ever-wider the justification for the acts of violence they claim to abhor. Imagine a self-proclaimed pacifist laying out the reasons for a declaration of war and you’ve captured the “respectable” radical in action.

Black Lives Matters rallies often feature activists chanting, “No justice! No peace!” For some marchers, the chant serves as a self-serving prediction. For others, it’s a direct threat against the state. For Coates, Ford, and their ilk it’s an opportunity. It allows them to hold America hostage with another man’s gun.“

All of which, as we noted above, makes both Coates, Ford and their ilk both moral and physical cowards.

Next up, meet the inevitable end-product of generations of Progressive’s deliberate dumbing-down of public education:

Taco Bell Fires Employee Who Wouldn’t Serve Police

 

Unlike the disrespect-born-of-ignorance demonstrated by the duskier denizens of Phenix City (which was in the ’40’s and ’50’s, largely thanks to its proximity to Ft. Benning, known as the Sin City of the Southeast United States!), we shall continue to shower members of America’s Military, representatives of her First Responders and occupants of our nation’s inner-cities with random acts of kindness whenever and wherever possible…and urge you to do the same!

Meanwhile, back at the ranch with the presumptive leader of The Gang Who Still Can’t Shoot Straight, at the same time as the WSJ‘s Bill McGurn makes…

The Case for Donald Trump

The alternative is President Hillary Rodham Clinton.

 

“What’s the best case for Donald Trump?

The question comes in the week Republicans here will formally nominate him for president, and the answer is not complicated. Indiana Gov. Mike Pence gave it as his reason for signing on as Mr. Trump’s VP: The alternative is President Hillary Clinton.

This is the reality of choice in a two-party democracy. Still, many have a hard time accepting it. So even as Mr. Trump handily dispatched 16 more-experienced rivals, his shortcomings and unfitness for office have become a staple of conservative fare.

Yes, Mr. Trump elevates insult over argument. Yes, he is vague and contradictory about the details of his own proposals. And yes, he often speaks aloud before thinking things through. It’s all fair game. Even so, in this election Mr. Trump is not running against himself. Though you might not know it from much of the commentary and coverage, he is running against Mrs. Clinton.

On so many issues—free trade, the claim that Mexico will pay for a border wall, his suspiciously recent embrace of the pro-life cause—Mr. Trump gives reasons for pause. But he still isn’t Mrs. Clinton. That’s crucial, because much of the argument for keeping Mr. Trump out of the Oval Office at all costs requires glossing over the damage a second Clinton presidency would do…”

…the great Victor Davis Hanson offers…

Ten Reasons Why Trump COULD Win

With four more months until Election Day, be prepared for chills and spills.

 

“Hillary Clinton has outspent Donald Trump in unprecedented fashion. Her endorsements bury Trump’s. The Obama administration is doing its best to restore her viability. The media are outdoing their 2008 liberal prejudices. And yet in John Connally delegate fashion, Clinton’s vast expenditures of $100 million plus have so far earned her only a tiny, if any, lead in most recent polls. If each point of approval is calibrated by dollars spent, Trump’s fly-by-night campaign is ahead.

Nor has Trump matched Clinton’s organization or voter-registration efforts. He certainly has blown off gifts from a number of Clinton gaffes and misfortunes, usually by gratuitously riffing on off-topic irrelevancies, from the Trump University lawsuit to the genocidal Saddam Hussein’s supposedly redeeming anti-terrorist qualities. Pollsters, gamers, insiders — everyone, really — have written his political epitaph for over a year. Rarely have conservative voices at mainstream-media outlets vowed not to support the Republican nominee. And yet the longer he stays viable, the more likely it is that Trump has a real chance at winning the presidency, which may already be a veritable 50/50 proposition. So why is the supposedly impossible at least now imaginable?

“…Finally, it is suicidal to descend into the muck to battle Trump. Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz all tried and failed, despite the fact that they had every moral justification in hitting back in like kind. Elizabeth Warren is trying to be an anti-Trump street-fighter; but her incoherent venom suggests that Harvard Law professors should stick to academic jousting in the faculty lounge.

Brawlers know the rules of the street far better than establishmentarians. The Senate is not The Apprentice, and politics is not New York real estate. Ask the trash-talking Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg if she came out on top in dueling with Trump — or whether she virtually destroyed a quarter-century’s reputation in minutes and ended up no better than an elderly version of Rosie O’Donnell in a Supreme Court Justice costume. Hillary is stepping up her crude attacks on Trump. But as in the past, such hits are more likely to make the Trump mode suddenly seem normal, and to make Trump a target of those who claim they are more sober and judicious but in extremis prove no more measured than Trump himself.

We have a long way to go till November 8, and the odds are still with Hillary’s establishment money, influence, power, and media. There will be dozens of Trump meltdowns and gaffes to come and always more slams at “crooked” Hillary. And never count out what narcissists like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama — or Vladimir Putin — might do, or Obama’s Chicago-like warping of the electoral process. Nonetheless, for a variety of reasons, an unlikely Donald Trump has become a liberal’s worst nightmare, not so much for what he says or represents, but because he still could win — and win in a way, along with the Congress and the prospect of a new Supreme Court, that we have not witnessed in 80 years.“

One thing’s for certain: if you don’t vote, she wins!  Any questions?!?

Turning now to International News of Note, from Inquisitr.com via Drudge, the question is…

Did Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Stage Friday Night’s Failed Military Coup?

 

“…Now, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is a massively divisive figure in Turkey. A devout Islamist in his early political career, he has pretended to fuse moderate Islamism with values of freedom and liberty lately, making him a darling of the West, which believes that he is essential if Turkey is to remain stable in these trying times. With the threat of ISIL looming across the border from Iraq, no one in the West wants Turkey to become unstable and give in to the fanatic militants because that would mean that the war in the Middle East would officially spill over to Europe. So it was no wonder that Western leaders were expressing their solidarity with Erdoğan soon after he had proclaimed that a handful of military personnel were committing “treason” and were bringing about a “stain on democracy.”

But the irony is that Erdoğan is also massively hated by members of the Turkish armed forces because of his recent approval of a spate of Islamist policies and laws which have brought Turkey back on the brink of becoming a religious state. He has been overtly criticized for his relentless crackdown on dissent. Over the last year alone, several journalists have allegedly been imprisoned and tortured, and some have even disappeared from the face of the earth, simply for criticizing Erdoğan for his despotic rule. He has become a ruthless autocrat, plain and simple, and international calls from human rights organizations asking for a thorough investigation into his role in making modern Turkey an authoritarian state have gathered pace.

…According to some journalists and other security experts familiar with the political situation in Turkey, Erdoğan could have staged the military coup himself. It is not an altogether implausible theory. Having been pushed against the wall for his inhuman treatment of journalists and political activists, the Turkish president was fast losing support among progressive circles. He was increasingly being asked to be accountable for his actions and could even have faced prosecution in the future. But, with the failed military coup, now Erdoğan has got a free hand to whip up frenzy in the name of countering insurgency and threats, plus he has managed to gain sympathy from Western leaders in a single stroke of genius.

A Turkish Redditor summed up this theory perfectly when he wrote the following:

“I feel compelled to say, however, that I don’t believe this new coup was an actual coup.”

“If it was a real coup officially organized by the Turkish military, it would have been swiftly and successfully completed before anyone issued any official statement. By the time a General went on TV to announce the military had taken over, they’d have every member of parliament and every cabinet official in jail.”

“If it was a rogue-coup organized by a small group of officers, then the rest of the military would have clamped down on it very quickly. Yet they did not. They pretty much operated completely unopposed, equipped with tanks and helicopters and fighter jets. Yet despite being unopposed, they made zero attempts to arrest cabinet and parliament members and zero attempts to communicate with the public at large. They basically just kinda marched out there with all that military hardware to do…NOTHING. They raided a bunch of news stations for theatrics, and then quietly got arrested by a severely under-equipped civilian police force that they could have almost effortlessly steamrolled through. Sorry, but I ain’t buying this story.”

“What this really looks like is an orchestrated ploy by Erdogan himself. A staged fake-coup that was meant to fail from the beginning, with some casualties for an air of authenticity, allowing him to garner some sympathy and consolidate even more power. Now you just watch in the coming weeks and months. You’re going to see Erdogan start imprisoning and executing anyone who dares criticize him. Journalists and civilians who had nothing to do with the military or any plot of coup will face his wrath. New laws will transfer even more power to the executive, completely eroding whatever little checks and balances we have left.”

Reuters filed this related report:

Turkey government seemed to have list of arrests prepared: EU’s Hahn

 

The swift rounding up of judges and others after a failed coup in Turkey indicated the government had prepared a list beforehand, the EU commissioner dealing with Turkey’s membership bid, Johannes Hahn, said on Monday.

Following a failed coup attempt on Saturday, Turkish authorities on Sunday rounded up nearly 3,000 suspected military plotters, ranging from top commanders to foot soldiers, and the same number of judges and prosecutors. “It looks at least as if something has been prepared. The lists are available, which indicates it was prepared and to be used at a certain stage,” Hahn said.

“I’m very concerned. It is exactly what we feared.”

Talk about Islamofascists of a feather…

…flocking together; with a soon-to-be-thankfully-extinct German variant of the dodo in between!

Which brings us to the latest from the Religion of Pieces‘ French chapter:

Mother and three daughters stabbed ‘for being inappropriately dressed’

 

“A woman and her three daughters have been stabbed in a French resort for being ‘scantily dressed’. An eight-year-old girl was left fighting for her life after the attack in the Garde-Colombe in the Hautes-Alpes region of Southern France. The man is believed to have attacked the three girls outside the family’s apartment before entering the building and attacking the mother.

Jean-Marc Duprat, a deputy mayor for the town of Laragne-Monteglin in the Hautes-Alpes region said the suspect, who is not related to them, was upset they were wearing shorts and T-shirts. He’s believed to have met the family earlier in the week and was staying next door. The girls are believed to be aged 8, 12 and 14 while their mother is 46. The knifeman is alleged to have fled the scene by car before being arrested.

Amaury Navarranne from the regional council said: ‘The religious motive of the attack is in no doubt’. Meanwhile prosecutors said details were still ‘very vague’ (Holy James Comey, Batman!) and investigations were continuing. French media says that the man is of Moroccan descent and is 37 years old. It is also reported that he is known by police for previous crimes…”

And this just in from the recently-deceased Afghani representative of the Religion of Pieces‘ Wuerzberg, Germany office:

Here’s the juice: all we can do at this point is either pull up a chair and watch…

…the world burn as it’s consumed by the conflagration set by The Dear Misleader, or vote to let The Donald hopefully ride to the rescue.  Oh,…and pray…unceasingly!

On The Lighter Side…

Finally, we’ll call it a day with yet another titillating tale torn from the pages of The Crime Blotter, in what James Taranto terms…

The Purloined Blather

 

“In her first major address before the nation on Monday night, Melania Trump appears to have plagiarized a number of lines from first lady Michelle Obama’s speech at the 2008 Democratic National Convention,” reports the Puffington Host. The similarities were spotted by self-described host, journalist, interior designer, DIY enthusiast, dope cook and carb-assassin Jarrett Hill. Here they are, as quoted by Puffington:

“From a young age, my parents impressed on me the values that you work hard for what you want in life; that your word is your bond and you do what you say and keep your promise; that you treat people with respect,” Trump told the thousands of Republican delegates and assembled media on Monday night in Cleveland.

In 2008, Mrs. Obama said, “You work hard for what you want in life; that your word is your bond and you do what you say you’re going to do; that you treat people with dignity and respect, even if you don’t know them, and even if you don’t agree with them.”

Trump’s spouse also lifted a line about children from Michelle Obama, saying, “We want our children in this nation to know that the only limit to your achievements is the strength of your dreams and your willingness to work for them.”

In 2008, Michelle Obama said, “We want our children—and all children in this nation—to know that the only limit to the height of your achievements is the reach of your dreams and your willingness to work for them.”

This certainly makes the Trump campaign look amateurish. On the other hand, it’s hard to take this terribly seriously.

For one thing, as we observed in 2008—when Sen. Barack Obama was accused of plagiarizing the work of Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts—plagiarism is a much smaller offense in politics than it is in journalism or academia, fields whose practitioners are paid for their words.

Politico’s Michael Crowley tweeted that “in hindsight it did seem odd when Melania talked about the challenges of being a black woman at Princeton.” That’s a joke, of course—Mrs. Trump did not steal Mrs. Obama’s biographical details, unlike Joe Biden and Neil Kinnock’s back in 1988.

And how do we know Mrs. Obama’s words were original? The “your word is your bond” passage sounds as if it might have been lifted from the Code of the American Library Association: “Your word is your bond. You do what you say you are going to do and it matters to you lots when projects do not come through the way they should.”

So give Mrs. Trump a break. Give Mrs. Obama one, too. It’s pretty much impossible to be original when you’re saying something so banal.

Magoo

P.S.  Attention to brief: here’s the straight dope from Hope ‘n Change via a phrase borrowed from Red in Platoon:

Hope n’ Change Cartoons   This isn’t my usual message about my blog – rather, it’s a personal and heartfelt message from me to you.

Recently, conservative cartoonist Glenn Foden passed away unexpectedly and far, far too young. Glenn was hugely talented, funny, wise, and a genuinely nice guy. And now his family can use our help. Glenn had a lovely daughter with special needs, and he really wanted to get her a service dog to help with all aspects of her life. It was a project he was working on at the time of his death. Now, there’s a beautiful dog available (and an even greater need than before), but Glenn’s family doesn’t have all the money necessary for the training a service dog needs. And this is where I’d love to have the Hope n’ Change family step up. Glenn’s wife, Teresa, has started a “GoFundMe” project to make this happen. I’ve already donated, and I’m hoping you might too. If you can spare even a dollar, it’s going to help. This is 100% legitimate, personally important to me, and frankly a really nice way to shine a little light in our all too troubled world. Whether you can donate or not, thank you for taking the time to read this message.  And again, here’s the link to the fundraising website. We miss you, Glenn. Stilton Jarlsberg Hope n’ Change Cartoons

We’re in for $200.  As we frequently featured Glenn’s work in The Daily Gouge, we humbly beseech you to consider contributing to his memory.