The 2026 Election, 25th Edition. The casting the vote edition.

 I have now voted.

October 13, 2026.

I went down to the old county courthouse and caste my votes.  I've now weighed in for 2026.

In some ways, it wasn't easy for me.  I knew who I wanted to vote for, but I was a bit tortured between not voting for Chuck Gray and Harriet Hageman and leaving my ballot blank, or for casting a vote for one of their opponents.

I did the latter.

The situation facing the country is just too dire.  We are, effectively, in the 1932 German election where the choices are boiling down to a desperate few.  Or, perhaps, we're in the June and November 1946 French election where the Catholic Christian Democrats were in a coalition with the Communists, which shows how dire the situation was in the Fourth Republic.  The choice now is to vote against a rising force of bloody fascism and acknowledge that the opponents retain some real taints, or to allow the country to do down the Via dei Fori Imperiali.

It's that dire.

The last few days made up my mind for me.  A government that makes an open spectacle of execution and then sides with Vladimir Putin.

I'm not going there, and I cannot tolerate going there.

Nien, Non, No.

In two years I'll reassess.  Chances are that at least one of the candidates I voted for I won't vote for again.

So, how did I vote?

Let's look at the state elections, that was easy.

Governor:¹

Eric Barlow.  He's the only real choice, and he's a good one.  Rebecca Bextel thinks she's a conservative, but she's a Dixiecrat through and through. She needs to go home to Sweet Home Alabama, where she is literally from.  Kenneth Casner is an overdone, baked in the sun, left out to dry, joke of a candidate.  He symbolizes the pathetic state the Wyoming Democratic Party is in.  The Democrats used to have some fine candidates, and it wasn't all that long ago that they were in the Governor's chair.  Casner? Give me a break.

Barlow's election will be the death of the Wyoming Freedom Caucus, whose Bittereinders are already retreating to the Constitution Party Redoubt.

Good riddance to them.

So, here, I voted for a straight Republican ticket.

The other state races.

Other than Governor, we had a host of uncontested or barely contested races in which incumbents sought reelection. Fortunately for all of us, they are all really good candidates.

The one contested one is Superintendent of Public Instruction.  In that race Ana Cordova, a Democrat, contests with Steve Harshman, a Republican.

There's' no doubt that Harshman, an local educator of long and respected standing, is an excellent choice. Still, I thought about voting for Cordova, a young educator with an impressive background.  Harshman is 62 or 63, Cordova much younger.  I suspect that Harshman might look at running for Governor, but he'll be 72 years old at least before he can, given that Barlow will win two terms.

Again, here, on state races, I voted a straight Republican ticket.

The property tax initiatives

There is a Freedom Caucus ballot initiative to cut residential property taxes in half, which benefits the carpetbagger class.  It would but local governments like a fish, but hey, hey, the carpetbaggers have already educated their children and live behind walls, so they'll be okay.

I actually had a county commissioner explain this one to me in detail.  Rank and file property owners voting for it, given the other deductions a property owner is eligible for, are screwing themselves.

I voted against it.

Frankly, I'd impose a tax, if I could, on the property of the carpetbaggers, which drives up property values for anyone else. Raise your kids in California? Well, you weren't here while we were enduring the ups and downs of the Wyoming economy and now you can pay for it. Stay in California if you don't like it. Even if you do, stay in CAlifornia.

Anyway you look at it, I'm not for giving the Bextels and Biens an advantage in taxes at our expense.

Representation in Washington D.C.

It was this set of choices that were difficult for me.

There was never any question that I would never vote for Chuck Gray.  I never have, and I never will. Chuck needs to go back to Los Angeles and work for a good twenty years at a convenience store in Watts so he knows who real people are.  Likewise, there was never any question I'd vote for my law school near contemporary Harriet Hageman, whose evolution from farm girl, polo shirt wearing, cute student to dressed in black lawyer for the rich and powerful is a disappointing memory of a very long career.

She didn't have to turn out like this.  If she'd gone to work for one of the real civil firms in the state, she would not have.

No, the question was whether I'd vote for Kinney, Johnson, or Byrd or nobody at all.

In the end, given the dire situation, I voted for the Democratic candidates.

Now, I'll note that I think Byrd is an excellent candidate. Better than Hageman in every way, save perhaps for two ways.  

Gray symbolizes everything wrong with the GOP in Wyoming except that instead of being a carpetbagger from the Confederacy, he's a carpetbagger from Los Angeles, and a pathetic one. California conservatism was real conservatism.  Gray's father was an admirer of Reagan, not Strom Thurmond.  Gray is an example of how Sun Yat-Sen tragically gave us Mao Tse-Tung.  A movement gone preversely wrong, although Reagan's embrace of the fowl Dixiecrats made that predictable.  And Gray, about whom we know very little, is still young enough that he can be forced into evading the fate of Donald Trump, a rich kid who publicly putrefies to the detriment of us all.

Gray's only platform is that he loves Donald Trump more than Trump loves Trump, that he's a latter day opponent of wind energy, for what appears to be opportunistic, and that as a 36 year old man whose not married and not known to have a publicly acknowledged interest in any identified female, he's opposed to transvestites in women's sports.

Seems like populist bullshit.

Gray would support Trump in anything, which in the next two years is going to be extremely dangerous.  I could not vote for him.

Which left me voting for Kinney.  

Kinney is a moderate left Democrat, and I'm not. I'm sure she's for "choice" or "reproductive rights', which infanticide, and I am not.  I suspect this would be Byrd's position as well  Should she be elected, in two years I'm voting for whichever rational Republican emerges.  If a better GOP candidate emerges for the Senate, abortion would be my defining issue there as well, in six years.  The next two years are the key, however. The Democrats are going to take the House and its necessary they do so.  Giving Chuck Gray a titanic dope slap, or better yet send him crying in his knee pants back to Los Angeles, is necessary.

As for the Hageman/Byrd contest, Byrd would make a really good Senator.  If the Democrats take the Senate, we couldn't be better represented.  He has the same, I assume, pro choice problem, but my guess is that isn't deep with Byrd, but I base that on nothing other than instinct.  He would be a real voice for Wyoming and we're going to need one, should the Democrats take the Senate, and leave John Barrasso wandering around the halls of Congress giving deep stares at John Thune, or whomever.

Do I think the Democrats can take these races?  Frankly, no.  But if they do well, that sends a message to at least Hageman, who probably would moderate her positions.  Gray, if elected, will face a challenger in 2028 and be sent packing.

So here I voted a straight Democratic ticket.

The local races

I haven't said much about these.

My City of Casper ward race featured a guy with a business background facing a young women with fishing tackle on her face.  I'm not voting for fishing tackle.

The county commission race featured one incumbent, Dallas Laird, one former commissioner who was later assessor, who was not great in either role, Matt Keating, one former Casper mayor, Ray Pacheco, one Evansville former mayor, Candace Machado, and somebody else.

I had to vote for three.

I voted for Keating, Pacheco, and Machado. Two Republicans and one Democrat.

On this race, I frankly voted against Laird, who is as old as dirt.  He's been in local politics since Sitting Bull was in grammar school and it was time for him to go.  Besides, he came into office promising to do something about the county selling the hospital to Banner health, which was by then impossible to do anything about, and he didn't do anything about it. He never could have, once something is sold, it's sold. As a lawyer, he knew that, or should have known that.

I'm not keen on that sort of misrepresentation.

Pacheco I have reservations about, but he tries to please people in the best way, so I'm okay with him.

Machado is a gadfly, but down at the county, which is sort of a geezer reservoir in transition, I figure that might be a good thing.

Governor Gordon wrote an op ed opposing the property tax initiative.

(OPINION) Why passing Prop. 1 would have a devastating impact on Wyoming

As noted, I voted against this initiative which would have the impact of mostly benefitting people with really high dollar residences.

This entire cutting property tax movement strongly resembles something that was done in California some decades ago and really hurt it.  It's notable that it's strong in the Freedom Caucus camp, which is heavily populated by carpetbaggers.  They don't have the same connections to their communities that real Wyomingites do. A prime mover in the initiative was failed Gubernatorial candidate Brent Bien whom, as we've noted, spent most of his adult life sucking on the Federal Government's tit which means he didn't have to worry about local services and education like the rest of us did and do.  The element of Solidarity seems to be completely lacking in the populist far right

And that, frankly, is not a very Wyomingite or Western way of looking at things.

cont:

FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION: Why Passing Prop. 1 Would Have A Devastating Impact On Wyoming Byline: Governor Mark Gordon Word Count: 799 On December 10, 1869 our first Territorial Legislature approved, “An act to provide a territorial and county revenue.”  In doing this Wyoming modelled the Framer’s ideal of local control, of decisions and responsibilities kept at the local level where citizens can have a direct impact on how those decisions are shaped and financed.  Wyoming voters are faced with the proposition on this November’s ballot to reduce the property tax in our state by 50%.  This initiative, called Proposition One is the first step in what could be a further call to completely dismantle a system of taxation Wyoming has relied upon since before statehood. The reduction by 50% would have an immediate and devastating effect on the services most Wyoming citizens rely upon in their communities. Property taxes are not always ideal. But they do provide a direct mechanism for citizens - not politicians - to decide on and pay for the services they desire and benefit from.  Wyoming saw rapid increases in residential valuations and those increases have been hard to bear for some.  Accordingly, the legislature, with my support over the past few sessions, enacted meaningful property tax relief while preserving citizens’ rights to determine what and how best to fund the services they see as essential.   Nevertheless, property tax as a mechanism for building and maintaining our communities is not improper. It is the cost that has become burdensome. Tax reform is fundamentally different from destroying a tax base or relying on the legislature to fund essential services. Some things are universal - safe neighborhoods depend on services such as firefighting, emergency responses, good schools, and maintained roads.  All of these are essential to Wyoming’s long term strength and vitality.  They make our communities places where families can stay, businesses can grow, and the next generation can build a future they can call home. Local control is a conservative principle - it means that decisions about community needs should rest as close as possible to those people who live there, who pay the taxes there, and who can hold their local elected officials accountable.  How responsible do we find Congress these days? Our communities need both the authority and the financial ability to meet those needs. Every property owner having “skin in the game” helps to assure the citizenry pays attention and demands accountability at the local - very most responsive - level.  In my time in office, in successive budgets, I have seen the legislature continuously reduce its commitment to towns and counties, to make them fight harder for Cheyenne’s attention.  Property tax does not go to the state - it stays at the local level. Reducing and/or eliminating an essential obligation’s funding does not eliminate it, and remarkably this ill conceived Proposition lacks any plan to cover those costs other than counting on the fickleness of future legislatures.  Wyoming families deserve affordable taxes and a disciplined government, and during my terms as your governor you have gotten both. We cut government, streamlined regulations, provided tax relief, and ensured a healthy and strong state. We did not cut the legs out from under communities and counties.  They also deserve ambulances when they call, firefighters when their homes are threatened, safe roads to work and school. They expect meaningful taxpayer relief that maintains strong communities.  "The Wyoming people have already benefited from powerful property tax relief like the 25% homeowner exemption or the 50% long-term homeowners exemption among other relief measures." Cutting just to cut is not a responsible way forward for Wyoming. Wyoming can, has, and will continue to help reduce tax bills to homeowners, but smaller local revenue does not make essential services less expensive.  Fuel, emergency equipment, road repairs, and the people who protect our communities still cost money.  All but our most wealthy local governments are feeling the same pain we are in paying for fuel, the same decisions on what we can afford.  For the past half century, Wyoming has worked to protect her communities from the booms and busts of a commodity economy. It has been good work and we have all benefitted from those who laid solid groundwork.  If the only answer for the loss of locally derived revenues that fund essential services like educating our children, should Proposition One pass, is for the state to “backfill” local communities from limited funds depending on favorable markets, we must also prepare ourselves for hard times ahead and remind ourselves, dependency on state government in Cheyenne weakens our local communities opportunity  to set their own destiny.   Protecting the essentials means protecting Wyoming’s capacity to govern itself.  We must never walk away from that fundamental, conservative principle. If you care about the essential services in your communities, join Jennie and I in voting No on Proposition One.  For more information: Amy Edmonds, Communications Director, amy.edmonds@wyo.gov

Footnotes:

1.  As always, I'm going with the conventional color conventions. Blue is conservative, red left of center.  This is how it is the world over.

Orange, well I used that for a distributist sort of view.  It's the color of Christian Democracy.

Last edition.

The 2026 Election, 24th Edition. Voting for Gray and Hageman is morally unconscionable. So what to do?

Labels: 1860 Election, 2020s, 2026, 2026 Election, Catholic, Christianity, Chuck Gray, Conservatism, Cornell Rape, Eric Barlow, Harriet Hageman, James Byrd, Kenneth Casner, Kristallnacht, Lisa Kinney, Populism, Rebecca Bextel, religion

Additional Labels:

The 2026 Election, 25th Edition. The casting the vote edition. More Labels.

Labels: 2028 Election, Abortion, Brent Bien, Christian Democrats, Clerico-fascism, Communism, Fascism, French Fourth Republic, Lies, Populism, Republican Party, Solidarity, Subsidiarity, Wyoming Freedom Caucus

The 2026 Election, 24th Edition. Voting for Gray and Hageman is morally unconscionable. So what to do?

 

Kristallnacht in 1938.  A lot of people who had voted for the Nazis had been stampeded there by the assertion that it was the Nazis or the Communists, both of which were populist parties.  The smiling couple probably wasn't smiling by 1945, assuming that they were both alive.

The first rule of logic:  Chesterton's Fence:

There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."

Chesterton, The Thing. 

The second rule of logic:  Hanlon's Razor

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

It's tempting to say that this will be an election like no other, and indeed, I think it is in many ways.  In terms of American elections, it's the most important election, even though it's a midterm election, since the the Election of 1860.  It's the election that will determine if Trump continues to rule as an insane dictator, or if the nation can begin to turn the path towards constitutional democracy.¹

Things like this make this a critical election:

On the Cornell rapes:

Letitia James is a corrupt person…And I feel badly for whoever she's looking at because they won’t get a fair shake.

He later called James a "dog".

I'm an actual conservative.  I am not a populist.  Conservatives believe that man if flawed and that we should be careful to conserve things that have worked or are part of culture until we know what the reason for casting it aside would really be.

The sixth rule of logic: Yeoman's Gate:

Before you go through a gate to get to the other side of a fence, completely figure out, to the extent you can, where the path goes.

Conservatives believe that man is fallen and that our natures and the nature of the world, in its pure form, is dictated by an outside existential, that being God to most conservatives, and nature to some.  We don't cast away easily, and we believe the Natural Law ultimately controls most things.

Conservatism has been killed by Donald Trump.

The most significant force around Trump is that of populism.  Populism believes that the "will of the people" is endowed with some sort of magic virtue. The question is, who are the people?  It's never all the people.  Populists always regard themselves as "the people" and other people as the enemy of the people.  They're easily lead by demagogues  At one time they followed Bernie Sanders around like puppies, now they follow Donald Trump.  The besotted populists believe that the will of the people is magically transmitted to Trump who is always right.  

Trump is a dangerously sick man.

Trump has never been an admirable one.  We could go into it, but people who claim he's "Godly" are rank idiots.  Indeed, a significant portion of Trump supporters at this point are the absolute bottom of the bell curve.  He's deeply immoral and is committing the United States to deeply immoral acts. Fortunately, the bloom is off the rose at this point, and it appears highly likely that the GOP, which has fallen down on its duties in Congress, will be tossed out.  Due to weirdness of Trump's cabinet, we'll have to endure Trump for two more years, probably.

The problem for real conservatives, however, and particularly for Catholics, or indeed for Catholics whether they are conservative or not, is how to vote.

In the Catholic Tradition, responsible citizenship is a virtue, and participation in political life is a moral obligation.

Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, No. 13.

In Wyoming, some of the choices will be easy.  Eric Barlow, the Republican, is the easy choice over Democrat Ken Casner or Dixiecrat Rebecca Bextel.  It's not even close.  Effectively, the races for Governor, Secretary of State, and Superintendent of Public Education are over, and will all go to good Republican candidates.

But the candidates for the House and Senate are a nightmare.

Chuck Gray is a co-religious about whom the public knows nothing.  A far right right winger born with a silver spoon in his mouth he washed up in Wyoming as his daddy, who doesn't live here, has a radio station here.  He barely won the primary for Secretary of State, after having been an abrasive personality in the legislature, by running on lies.  Since the moment of his taking office in that position, he's been running for something else, and the House of Representatives fell to him when Harriet Hageman decided to run for retiring Cynthia Lummis' position.  

Gray has been a horrible Secretary of State and he'll be a horrible Congressman.  His campaign was basically that he loves Trump more than Trump loves Trump.  Trump is a horror.  This is a good reason not to vote for Gray, as if any additional reasons were needed.  If he wins, and he's likely to, he'll be worthless as a junior member a minority party who knows nothing about the state he's supposed to represent.

The Democrat is Lisa Kinney.  I just heard her speak, and she speaks very well.  She didn't have the chance to get into specifics, but they can be guessed at.  I'd be surprised at best if she wasn't "pro Choice", which is pro infanticide.

The Libertarian is Shaun Johnson.  I heard him speak too but he also didn't really have the chance to get into specifics.  The one interesting thing I heard him say is that he wouldn't caucus with the Republicans or the Democrats.

I don't think that Johnson has any chance.  I think Kinney has an off chance.

I suspect that if Kinney wins, Christensen will run against her in 2028 and likely take the seat.  I think he's planning on running.

The choice this year, therefore, is between Kinney and Gray.  Voting for Kinney is saying no to Trump insanity. Voting for Gray is saying yes to Trump insanity.  That's about it.

At the Senate level the Democrats have a really good candidate, James Byrd.  The Republicans have a really horrible candidate, Harriet Hageman, who stabbed Liz Cheney, a former friend of hers, in the back so that she could crawl over her dead political body to go to Washington, where reportedly she already owned a house.  If she was voted out, she'd never come back.  She's shown contempt for her own state on public lands while there, making her potentially an even worse candidate than Gray.  

She received a lot of votes in the primary, in spite of being such a horrible candidate.  It'll take a lot for Byrd to overcome it.

So here's where we are at.  We cannot vote for Gray or Hageman.  Voting for them is voting for the insanity of Donald Trump and the ongoing destruction of the American democracy.  Can we morally vote for Kinney and Byrd, or do we not vote at all on those races.  Not voting on them may very well be like voting for Gray and Hageman. It's an interesting, and paramount, moral question.

Footnotes

1. And save the "we're a republic not a democracy" crap. That's brainless twaddle.  Our Constitution creates a democratic republic and people who say that should have their right to vote, drive a car, or speak a sentence revoked.

Last edition:

The 2026 Election, 23rd Edition. Stein's Law meets the GOP. The hints of a mutiny edition.

Labels: 2020s, 2026, 2026 Election, Ashley Hinson, Chris Christie, Constitution Party, Donald Trump, inflation, Iowa, John Barrasso, Populism, Rebecca Bextel, Republican Party, Stein Law, Texas, Weird, Yeoman's Tenth Rule of Logic

Ascendant Ignorance in the Age of Donald Trump. Ignoramus Watch Part 4. Dr. Hegseth countermands George Washington edition.

 

April 22, 2026

During the Revolutionary War, George Washington ordered his troops inoculated against Small Pox.

This week Pete Hegseth lifted the requirement that troops be inoculated for influenza for "religious" reasons.

The current GOP is heavily anti scientific.

Opposition to vaccinations has been in American history largely a thing of smaller Christian and non Christian sects which are fairly anti scientific, as opposed to the majority of Christians who have no objection to vaccination.  However, when the far right of the country started to turn weird, listening to such medical lights as boob model Jenny McCarthy, that began to change a bit. Covid really made it worse as a significant portion of the country turned anti vax under the leadership of Donald Trump, who got the vaccine, but who recommended some really lethal approaches to the crisis as well.

Troops who don't get inoculated ought to just be given dishonorable or less than honorable discharges.  That's what should have occurred to those who refused the Covid vaccine.

April 24, 2026

The war department stands ready for what comes next. Locked and loaded. May God continue to breast—bless our warriors each and every day and on each and every mission.

Hegseth. 

Breast?

Okay, I get that it's a slip of the tongue, um, well, but it's an odd one.

May 12, 2026

The Aryan Nation, the Nazis, and the KKK are not far-right organizations.  Those are far-left organizations, and they always have been. The KKK was created and started by the Democrats in the United States to prevent blacks from being able to participate in the political arena, if you will. So, I'm going to say they've never been associated with the right, they've always been associated with the left.

Harriet Hageman.

Hageman's no dummy and she knows this is crap, or has drank so much of the Kool Aide she'll spout stuff that's absurd.

Every one of these organizations is from the far right and any claim to the contrary is patently absurd.  The claim about the Nazis, which I've seen before, comes from the party's very early, and frankly pre Hitler, days  and its name, the National Socialist Party.  The absurdity of that claim fails to realize that "socialism" in the context of nationalist parties doesn't necessarily mean Marxism, but "for society".  In the case of the Nazis, way early on their did espouse Socialism but by the time they'd come to power they'd abandoned it in favor of autarky and the early socialist in the party were sidelined or expelled.

And the claim about the KKK being founded by the Democrats and therefore left wing completely ignores that originally the Republican Party was the left wing party, and the Democrats were a right wing party.  The Democrats didn't evolve into the political left until the 20th Century and in the American South remained the conservative party into the 1980s.  Hageman herself is old enough to have voted in Reagan's first run for the Oval Office and therefore should be well aware of that.

This is totally reprehensible.

Cont:

Reporter: What extent are Americans’ financial situation motivating you to make a deal?

Trump: Not even a little bit. I don't think about Americans’ financial situation.

May 13, 2026

So it turns out that Trump's advisors uniformly told him not to launch the war against Iran, but he did anyway, and the advisors, not wanting to be blamed for his stupidity, leaked.  He wants them prosecuted for treason, and sycophant Todd Blanche is looking to to it.

The real crime here is Trump's, who launched an illegal war.  With no declaration of war, every single Iranian killed in it has been the victim of some sort of crime, and every American who has died has been the victim of some sort of crime ultimately attributable to Trump as well.

Blanche is pathetic.  When this is over, and it will be, his careers should be flushed down the toilet.

And then there's this:

PabloReports: Ted Cruz called you a parasite and disparaged your work as a bartender.

AOC: I think it’s funny that he’s been taking a government paycheck for 23 years but has the audacity to criticize someone who has come from a family that had to work their way up and earn their place here.

This is really becoming a Republican specialty around here.  We get retired servicemen who come in after sucking on the government tit for 30 years, retire, and then start sucking on the other government tit, and then run for office on the "I hate the government" ticket.

In that sense, the Democrat running against Collins in Maine is really refreshing.  He's given a speech about his combat service and then noted how he can't figure out how that's relevant to being a Senator.  It isn't.  

Recently I saw somebody post something in favor of Brent Bien here in Wyoming, noting that he's served in combat or dangerous conditions all over the world, and how that will make him ready to lead.  Yeah, lead troops, not a state government. 

We have a whole host of candidates from the He Man Government Haters Club running locally.  They have a right to run, but while they're doing it, they shouldn't be draining their mommy.  It's hypocritical.

June 22, 2026

Unqualified for her office Jeanine Pirro, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said her office would prosecute individuals caught vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

That would mean prosecuting Donald Trump, which should be done for a variety of reasons.

June 24, 2026

The ideology of the Mooslims is slightly different than the ideology of the Catholics. We have the Catholics and the Mooslims. Slightly different. But Venezuela has been great and Iran has been great.

Donald Trump.

Insulting in the extreme.

The ideology of Catholics, of which I am one, is the ideology of Christianity, as Catholicism is the first and original Christian religion  It's more than "slightly different" than Islam.

This provides a good reason for those Catholics who support Trump to really question what they are doing.

June 26, 2026

Under President Trump the U.S. unemployment rate is at a historic low of just 4.3%. It was at a dismal rate of 3.4% under Biden.

Karoline Leavitt.

What the crap?

June 27, 2026

The new special edition passports with a glowering Supreme Leader Trump's image in them features the words, "Welcome!  But be good".

Apparently some moron didn't realize that these were passports, not visas.

Related thread:

August 7, 2026

After an embarrassing display of conspiratorial lunacy, in which Rand Paul notably played a part, a panel of Republican dimwits voted to send a measure to the Senate floor to hold Dr. Fauci in contempt of Congress for refusing to answer their moronic questions.

The basic truth of the matter is that the GOP has become completely scientific and dimwit conspiratorial in nature.  Basically, Flat Earthers, really.  I'm sure the whole panel will hold an investigation soon on whether we really went to the moon, and decide we didn't.

Not really on ignorance, but on the perversion that surrounds everything Trump, Republicans have been more or less silent on Rep. Max Miller after having a fit about Graham Platner.  Miller has been accused of abusing his wife by pouring boiling water on her and breaking the collar bone of his daughter.  Even his father in law, who is in the Senate, has been reluctant to criticizes him.

That's your party of family values.

August 20, 2026

We have a spike in oil prices that I don't really understand

Scott Bessent.

Seriously?

September 16, 2026

Trust in vaccines for deadly childhood diseases including measles has fallen according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll found.  Measles is on the uptake.

People who don't vaccinate their children for measles are, quite frankly, criminally stupid.

September 20, 2026

Yeah, sure the military asked for that. . .

September 24, 2026

"We almost have to go back to, what did medicine look like to the pioneer days in America?"

Republican Minnesota state auditor candidate, Dr. Scott Jensen.

Eee gads.

Oh, but it gets better, Sen. "Coach" Tommy Tuberville was holding forth on the Senate floor yesterday about the dangers of transvestitism and furries in commercial avaiation.

It’s possible that the pilot flying your plane could have a deranged fetish of dressing up like an animal.

 U.S. Sen. Tommy Tuberville.

Maybe a Star Wars convention was in town?

Posted under fair use exception.

Tuberville says stuff all the time that's flat out stupid. How he was ever elected is a mystery, but frankly, he raises questions about Arkansas because of his routine idiotic comments.

Somebody else who routinely raised eyebrows before he was appointed to the government is Dr. OZ, who yesterday stated:

More than a third of people on Obamacare have never used the insurance policy once. If you were gonna pay your hard-earned money to buy insurance, would you ever use it? The answer is yes.

What an idiotic statement that was.  You never want to have to use your insurance. Did Dr. Oz go into the office everyday thinking "golly, I hope I get to turn something in on my malpractice insurance today!"

Cont:

Sen. Jim Justice held a huge birthday party for his dog on Capitol Hill, wheeling it in with a small covered wagon.

It's like the last days of the Roman Empire.

Justice is a West Virginian Republican.

So, we had John Barrasso calling the Democrats "weird" last weekend. . . 

September 25, 2026

Tommy Tuberville doubles down on stupid.

Tommy just causes me to unfairly bring to mind all the stereotypes I have about football coaches, a game I don't really like.

Last edition:

Ascendant Ignorance in the Age of Donald Trump. Ignoramus Watch Part 3. The Quack Edition.

Labels: Ascendant Ignorance in the Age of Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Epstein Scandal, Health, Health and Human Services, Ignorance, Medicine, Playboy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., The Oprah Effect, Yeoman's Twentieth Law of Behavior

The 2026 Election, 22nd Edition. The Stupid on Stilts Edition.

From Greed, 1925.

We're making a fortune. So if the Republicans win, you win with us and you get $5,000. It will be called the Trump Dividend. Congratulations.

Donald Trump at the GOP Midterm Convention.

A person would have to be stupid on stilts to believe that promise, and a similar one has been extended before.

Seriously, what kind of a dumbass believes anything Trump promises at this point?

The fact that the GOP is having a "Midterm" convention is itself an example of outright desperation and hubris on the part of Trump.  Trump loves Trump and you must love Trump, so he's reminding you of Trump Love so that you love him and vote for the GOP candidates to show your mindless cult like love.

The fact of the matter is that everything associated with Trump is going badly and his approval ranking is sinking like a rock.  In Wyoming it's down to 54% and the impact of the tariffs on Canada haven't even hit yet, much.  The war hasn't ended, inflation is about to ramp back up, and Trump's own weirdness is now too weird for anyone to ignore. The result is that Democrats, who were slated to take back the House, now appear likely to take back the Senate as well.  Even in Wyoming there's some hint that the Senate may be in play and it's clear that a large number of people really aren't keen on Chuck Gray, who has been pretty quiet since the primary.

Indeed, I've seen a little lashing out at John Barrasso, who isn't running for anything.  Now days we mostly see Dr. John looking at Donald Trump as if he, Barrasso, is suffering from a severe case of constipation.  He may be, as he's kept his true views on everything, none of which we know, bottled up inside of himself for so long.  Anyhow, if people are mad at Barrasso, who seems to have forgotten which state he's from, it doesn't bode well for Hageman and Gray, although they are both clearly the favorites.

This does bring us to some questions that should be asked in the next two months, however.  Those being:

1.  Do you support the undeclared war against Iran, and if yes, how do you justify no declaration of war existing?

2.  On data centers, a big deal here in Wyoming, are you against them like seemingly the majority of Wyomingites are, or for them, like Donald Trump is?

3.  What is your position on public lands?

4. For people who go outside, there are clearly environmental matters to be concerned about. Do you have any concerns, and if no, just don't tell us "it's a big fib", as that's just telling us that you'll lie for votes.  What is your justification?

5.  Epstein files. Why aren't they being released.

6.  What is your real plan for balancing the budget and addressing the debt and show us that it works.

7.  Do you support ending the trade war with Canada?

A note, prior endorsements on running candidates are below in a separate thread as an Appendix, which is also linked in below..  I'm doing that in this edition so as to not clog up the first part of it too much.

September 11, 2026

Two events occured yesterday which should; 1) cause a sane nation to invoke the 25th Amendment and 2) cause every Republican running for office to have to answer where they stand or never be voted on again.

The first.

Trump sworn his acolytes in so that they will be able to be called up as Long Knives to attack the upcoming Republican defeat in November.

It's not the pledge to go out and vote.  Frankly, most MAGA isn't paying any attention this anyway.  

It's the pledge to cheat.

Things Trump says cannot any longer be dismissed.  People who think that one liner means nothing are ignoring recent history.  He intends to steal the election.  If he pulls that off, if he's still living and semi coherent, he intends to serve a third term.

The second was a truly bizarre video based on the Paul Harvey "God made farmers" video of years ago with a "God gave us Trump" theme.

This latches on to the extreme Evangelical leg of the MAGA stool.  It would make most Christians of any branch absolutely cringe, and to claim a Divine mission like this may be very well blasphemous.

The questions that should be asked, and of any Republican candidate?

1.  Will you support the results of the November election no matter what they are.  If there's any hedging at all, tell the person they don't have your support for anything whatsoever.

2. Do you believe that Trump has a Divine mission?  Any answer than an unqualified no should disqualify the candidate.

I can guarantee you that almost any GOP candidate, particularly if they don't know your view going into the question, will waffle and not give a straight answer.

Carrying on a bit, the religiosity of this midterm Republican convention is really something else.  Protestant ministers showed up to speak at it and Tim Scott sounded like an Evangelist.  At some point Protestants who are members of these communities really have to ask their pastors how they can reconcile their faith with a man who so clearly ignores Christianity. 

Closer to home, Harriet Hageman is ignoring calls for a debate with James Byrd and Byrd is calling her out on it.  His post from Facebook:

James Byrd for United States Senate

IF YOU WON'T FIGHT FOR WYOMING ON A DEBATE STAGE, WHO ARE YOU FIGHTING FOR?

Harriet Hageman won't stand on a stage. She won't return calls. She won't even respond. And now her silence is about to cancel the one chance Wyoming voters had to see both Senate candidates side by side.

You don't get to represent this state if you won't show up and defend what you believe in front of it. Silence isn't leadership. It's a candidate deciding Wyoming doesn't deserve a real conversation at all.

Tell Wyoming PBS: don't let her refusal to stand for what she believes in decide this for the rest of us.

Stand and fight.

That really is a chicken move by Hageman, but it seems to me she's taken that approach in the past as well.

In the past it struck me as arrogance.  She stopped debating as a wave of the hand type of move, although Grey Bull pulled down 25% of the vote in 2022 and Cameron 23% in 2024.  Here, it strikes me as fear.  Gray Bull was a good debater and still drew 25% in a year that heavily favored Hageman.  Now, with four years in, Hageman has an extremely exposed record.  She poked Wyoming voters in the eye on public lands and basically called them dumb.  In the category of dumb, her family's homestead burned to the ground but she still is a climate change denier.  She was endorsed by Trump and has yet to explain how Wyoming farmer and ranchers should view South American beef.  It's unfortunate that she lost to Mead, who was such a better candidate.

It's pretty questionable how she'd do in a debate against Byrd.  Byrd would likely best her, and what's more, he knows that.  So he's making her chicken move an issue.

Hageman ought to be held to account for hiding.

AN OPEN LETTER TO WYOMING PBS

August 11, 2026

To the Leadership of Wyoming PBS,

On August 10, our campaign was notified that Wyoming PBS would not be holding a primary debate for U.S. Senate, because our opponent declined the invitation to participate. A similar notice was given to Lisa Kinney, one of the Democratic candidates for Wyoming's U.S. House seat, whose opponent also declined. As a result, neither of Wyoming's federal Democratic primary races will be represented in a debate on Wyoming PBS this cycle.

I want the public to know directly: I did not refuse this invitation. I remain ready and willing to speak to Wyoming voters in this format, and if Wyoming PBS were to offer me the opportunity, I would be there.

We understand the position Wyoming PBS is in. Federal equal-time provisions limit what a broadcaster can do when only one candidate is willing to appear, so PBS can't simply offer a solo forum in place of a debate, and balancing that against the responsibility to keep voters informed is a hard job. We don't take issue with that constraint itself.

But we do take issue with the precedent this sets.

If one candidate declining is all it takes to cancel a debate outright, then any candidate who wants to dodge scrutiny now has a guaranteed way to do it. That's not a neutral policy. It rewards avoidance and punishes the candidate who actually showed up. It hands one side the power to decide, unilaterally, whether Wyoming voters get to see a debate at all. That is not how this is supposed to work.

When journalism requires the participation of good faith actors, rather than holding all individuals to account regardless of whether they participate, it will ultimately fail at its own goal of accountability. It is always easier to hide than to be held to account.

We've also noticed a related pattern: nominees who clear a primary and then simply skip general election debates too. Put these trends together, and debate participation stops being something candidates owe their constituents. It becomes optional for anyone who calculates they have more to lose than gain by showing up. That should worry Wyoming PBS as much as it worries us.

We are asking Wyoming PBS to make a public commitment that the U.S. House and Senate debates ahead of the Nov. 3, 2026 general election will occur, period. That commitment should hold true regardless of the participation of our opponents.

If a candidate refuses to show up, hold the debate anyway and leave their podium empty. Stations across the country already do this when a candidate declines. It lets voters still hear from the candidates who did show up, and it makes the absent candidate's choice visible instead of erasing the event altogether. Voters deserve to hear from all candidates in each race. Short of that, they deserve to see plainly which candidates showed up to answer for their records and which ones didn't. No candidate should get to use their own absence as a weapon to keep another candidate off the stage.

We'd also push Wyoming PBS to rethink its approach for future primary cycles. One candidate's refusal shouldn't be enough to cancel a debate outright, and that shouldn't hinge on how many candidates happen to be on a given party's ballot. A party fielding one or two contested candidates deserves the same debate access as a party fielding a dozen. Anything less penalizes voters for the size of their party's field, not for anything they did.

We appreciate the work Wyoming PBS does for this state, and we expect a response.

Sincerely,

James Byrd

Byrd for Wyoming See less

 

September 12, 2026

Opponents Blast Hageman, Gray For Skipping PBS Debates Ahead Of General Election

It turns out that neither Gray nor Hageman are willing to debate.

I'd have much less faith in Kinney being able to really do well in a debate against Gray, although she was a practicing lawyer and has been a legislator.  Additionally, Gray's default setting when he gets stressed is asshole.

Both Hageman and Gray's campaigns are defending their position to be chickens.  So are their diehard supporters.  But it isn't a good look.

September 16, 2026

Rod Miller: Proposition 1 And Rolling The Dice For Lives

Rod Miller voices his opinion about Proposition 1.

What the text of Prop 1 states is:

(xliii) A portion of property used as a primary residence as a homeowner’s exemption. The following shall apply to the homeowner's exemption:

(A) For property used as a primary residence, fifty percent (50%) of the assessed value of the primary property is exempt from property taxation as a homeowner's exemption. Not more than one (1) homeowner’s exemption shall apply to the same property in any year and no owner shall claim more than one (1) homeowner’s exemption in any year including property that is improved by a residence that houses more than one (1) family. To claim a homeowner’s exemption the person shall have been a resident of this state for not less than one (1) year prior to claiming an exemption under this paragraph and shall have resided in the applicable primary residence for at least six (6) months of the immediately preceding tax year. To claim a homeowner’s exemption, the owner of the property shall submit a sworn claim to the county assessor not later than the fourth Monday in May on forms provided by the department of revenue demonstrating that the person is the owner of the property, and that the property is the person's primary residence. False claims are punishable as provided by W.S. 6-5-303.

Basically this proposition was a Wyoming Freedom Caucus "I just moved here with lots of money from California, bought a McMansion or a 40 acre dirt farm, drove up everyone's property taxes, and I don't like it".  The proposition would gut local communities income like a fish, which most of these people don't care about as they truly hate the government and don't care about educating children, for instance, as they prefer ignorance.

We're voting no on Prop 1.

Indeed, this is the one thing we've actually answered a poll on. The poll was clearly supposed to be in favor prop 1 and the pollster, pretty clearly calling from some place in the South, didn't really know how to react to my answers to the questions.

Speaking of speaking, where's Harriet and Chuck on doing a debate?

Speaking of those two, there are questions as we proceed along that they should be made to answer.

Harriet, now that her home county is on fire again, should be forced to answer if she's willing to basically burn everything down to support the lie that climate warming isn't real.  We all know it's real. She no doubt knows it's real.  Why the fib?

Both should be made to answer if they support the illegal war against Iran and why?

And what about those diesel prices, eh?

On other matters, there's some rumors going around that Bill Allemand, the far right wing Freedom Caucus candidate who barely survived a primary challenge, may bail out of office.  Apparently he may run through the election, according to one version of it, and then bail out some time after that.  Without the Freedom Caucus crew in Cheyenne there's nobody to tell him what to do, and it would appear, generally, he needs somebody to tell him what to do and he knows that.  He's not going to have any friends any longer in Cheyenne either.

If he bails out now, he probably throws that race to the Libertarian running in the district, although there is a Democrat running as well.  He likely won't do that now and I'm not exactly sure what happens if he does.  The logical thing would be that the other GOP candidate from the primary would replace him through a party process.  If he drops out after the fall election, and if he wins it, the party would pick three names and send them to the County Commissioners who would pick the new legislator.

That, in fact, is how Chuck Gray first took office.

September 17, 2026

The propeller hat Dixiecrats in the GOP are at war with their own party.  Unfortunately for that party, they are also in control of a lot of county, and the state, committees.

Hence some of those organizations basically backing the losing campaign of carpetbagger Rebecca Bextel.

Sheridan County GOP Posts, Then Removes, Statement Backing Bextel Over Barlow

Tom Lubnau: The Wyoming GOP Aims A Gun At Its Own Foot

The party is really hypocritical.  This past year it endorsed candidates in the primary for the first time and basically told GOP voters who they had to vote for.  It endorsed Hageman, Gray, and Bien.   Bien came in third in the Governor's race and they've been pouting ever since.

Barlow, who won the Governor's race, swamped his opponents, taking 45% of the vote, but sad Dixiecrats note that 45% is not 50%, and therefore, they argue, he's not the legitimate candidate.  That logic is pretty flawed as he certainly is under Wyoming's law, and his only real rival in the campaign was Trump endorsed Degenfelder, who took 30%.  Dixiecrat darling Bien took 24% and sad Confederates note that if you add Degenfelder and Bien together, that's more than 50%.

It is, but it assumes that Degenfelder voters would have voted for Bien if she hadn't been running. The opposite is probably true.  The 1/3 bottom of the bell curve probably would have voted for Trump knighted Degenfelder if Bien hadn't been running, but Degenfelder voters in large part would likely have gone for Barlow if Bien hadn't thrown his gray kepi into the ring.  If anyone had an argument here, therefore, it would be Degenfelder.

Neither Bien or Degenfelder, who hope to dig out of their holes rather than convert them into political graves have said anything about the results being illegitimate but upset WFC members have a bit, for Bien.  They tried to get a write in campaign going for him and at least locally one badly defeated WFC  member still is.  Others, including some committee members, are backing Bextel, who will lose massively in November.

The Constitution Party itself, which support a strict reading of a double secret constitution only they know about, is open enough itself to admit that it's hoping that Bextel can pull down 10% of the vote so that it can be a "major" party.  Under Wyoming's law on primaries, which I believe to be unconstitutional, that would make the party the very model of a modern major party.

That result might occur and it might actually be a good thing, although anyone voting for Bextel, as noted, fits into the bottom end of the bell curve.  What it would do, however, is give propeller hat wearing Dixiecrats a place to actually go, and they should go there. They are not Republicans.

Lubnau notes that upset Dixiecrats in GOP committees positions oddly don't make the same argument about Freedom Caucus darling Chuck Gray, who only pulled down 25% of the vote.  While Barlow isn't threatened by Bextel, Gray actually may be by Libertarian Johnson and Democrat Kinney.  I wouldn't have given Kinney any chance at all, but Gray's refusing to debate her is actually elevating her status.

On Sheridan County, while some on its GOP committee may be crying in their Bomber Mountain Amber Ale, the results were the same as they were statewide.  Barlow swamped his competition and while Bien did come in second there, he only barely beat out Degenfelder.  Again, those Degenfelder votes would have most likely gone to Barlow.  And Gray only barely beat out Biteman and Christensen there.

One final thing to note. Teton County, where Bextel has hung her kepi, and Sheridan County, are the homes to a lot of rich carpetbaggers.  These people tend to vote their own economic interests, and not paying taxes and telling the peasants to go **** *** are in that category.  Like the rank and file in Confederate Gray in the 1860s, a lot of that rank and file (which here includes a lot of carpetbaggers) tend to be dim enough to follow the dictates of their oligarchic masters.  We're seeing that, and frankly just a lot of real bottom of the bell curve ignorance, at work on these topics.

On other topics, Postmaster General David Steiner wants to quit his job, according to insiders.

He should as he's serving a madman.

The Post Office has been in the news recently as Trump keeps ordering it to impose impossible regulations on mail in voting, which Trump himself uses, as part of Trump's effort to interfere with and steal the November election. The Supreme Court won't let him so he's having a major tantrum.

cont:

Holy smokes. . Rebecca Bextel has released a campaign video.  Buckhorn Bar t-shirt aside (after a certain age, no matter how doe eyed you may be, you can't pull that off), she sounds like the biggest Alabama hick ever.  Her accent is so thick it's really impressive.  Trying to use the tag line "you don't have to be smart to be governor", she unintentionally sounds to native Westerners as Southern hick, which is admittedly a stereotype, given that's how Westerners tend to view Southerners.  Southerners probably are unaware of that.  

Bextel has lived in Wyoming for 20 years, which  means that she's hardly lived here any time at all.  And she lives in Teton County, which Deep Wyoming regards as California.

Anyhow, in terms of actual intelligence, Barlow is a veterinarian, one of the most difficult degrees to obtain.  Bextel has a degree from the University of Alabama, although I don't know in what.

Becky also tried to sound tough in a recent Chamber of Commerce appearance by claiming she had "bigger balls" than her opponent.

Pretty insightful, really.  She had to demean her status as a woman in order to have merit in her own eyes.

The Dixiecrats.  Just go home.

September 18, 2026

Harriet Hageman wrote a guest column in the Cowboy State Daily regarding birth right citizenship.

Guest Column: Birth Tourism Is Diluting American Citizenship. Here’s What Trump Should Do

Hageman won't debate her opponents and probably for good reason.  She's arrogantly supported a bill that would have set public lands up to be privatized and essentially called Wyomingites' opposing it stupid.  She claimed to be a "Constitutional Conservative" but has done nothing about Trump running roughshod over the Constitution, including waging an illegal war that's driving up prices for everyone in the state.  She has nothing to campaign on and American's short attention span doesn't allow for a "I'm not Liz Cheney" as a platform.  With Trump down to a 54% approval rating in Wyoming, "I love Trump" is starting not to sell so well either.  So she's taking a page out of the Desperate GOP Playbook, that being hordes of foreigners are coming here to have babies, or in this particular case, hordes of Chinese are coming to have babies.

Well, in reality, for the first time in fifty years the US had negative migration last year. That is, more people are leaving the US than entering it.  The US has been teetering on the edge of rapid decline for years, but Trump has floored the accelerator on that, with the help of Republicans in Congress, and the country looks like a joke.  China, the nation which Harriet maintains is trying to plant vast hordes of babies into our country, is the clearly up and coming nation.

The truth of the matter is that this problem, if there was one, has pretty much jumped the shark.  While I'm really skeptical of it being a crisis, right wing demographers right now are arguing the opposite problem, that being that the US population is actually starting to decline, that decline accelerated by the country having become unwelcoming to foreigners.  The solution is supposed to be for (white) Americans to get busy, so to speak.

That interestingly cuts in an opposite direction for a person like Hageman, and it really stands in contrast to Cheney.  Cheney, now 60 years of age, is a Gen Xer and the mother of five children.  Hageman (age 63) is technically a Baby Boomer (perhaps more accurately a Gen. Jonser) with no children whatsoever.  Both are lawyers, but Hageman looks a lot more like a feminist in every fashion.  Indeed, as I slightly knew here, and knew her friends better, I was quite surprised early on when she emerged as a Conservative.

I'm well aware, of course, that these sorts of questions aren't even supposed to be raised in polite society, but we no longer live in a polite society and people like Hageman are part of the reason why we do not. So the questions are fair game.

Anyhow, Hageman may have some accomplishments but I don't know what they are, and whatever they are, they to not appear to be large enough to justify voting for her.  Mostly she's been a Trump loyalist right up until recently, and an opponent of public lands.  She's complicit in the failures of the Trump Administration by doing nothing, or actively supporting them, and she's detrimental to the interest of Wyoming.

Time, therefore, to drag out the Hordes Of Chinese Babies Have Landed on Our Shores line.

September 19, 2026

Why does this not surprise me?

Rebecca Bextel Says Legal Battle With Wyoming Game And Fish Is Political

Wealthy carpetbagger acts like a wealthy carpetbagger in Lincoln County.

Rebecca Bextel Says Legal Battle With Wyoming Game And Fish Is Political

Go back to Alabama where you belong, Becky.

September 21, 2026

Outrageous.

Harriet Hageman goes after Conservation Easements.

Wyoming sportsmen, and frankly everybody, cannot support the candidacy of Harriet Hageman.  She's in the public lands hater category.

She just introduced this bill.

119th CONGRESS 1st Session

H. R. 2773

To provide that the Secretary of the Interior may not enter into certain conservation easements with a term of more than 30 years, and for other purposes.

---

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

April 9, 2025

Ms. Hageman (for herself and Ms. Fedorchak) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

---

A BILL

To provide that the Secretary of the Interior may not enter into certain conservation easements with a term of more than 30 years, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. Short title.

This Act may be cited as the “Landowner Easement Rights Act”.

SEC. 2. Limitation on conservation easement terms.

After the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary may not enter into a conservation easement with a term of more than 30 years.

SEC. 3. Renegotiation of conservation easements.

At the request of an owner of land that is subject to an eligible conservation easement, the Secretary shall—

(1) not later the 6 months after the Secretary receives the request from the landowner, provide to the landowner—

(A) a detailed map of the easement; and

(B) notice of the current fair market value of the easement as determined by the Secretary; and

(2) renegotiate the terms of the eligible conservation easement, including—

(A) a term not longer than 30 years; and

(B) payment by the Secretary to the landowner in an amount equal to the fair market value of the easement, as determined by the Secretary under paragraph (1)(B), minus the amount paid by the Secretary for the eligible conservation easement being renegotiated (adjusted for inflation); or

(3) allow the landowner to buy back the eligible conservation easement or a portion of the eligible conservation easement at fair market value, as determined by the Secretary.

SEC. 4. Notice to landowners.

The Secretary shall notify the owner of the land subject to that conservation easement of the owner’s right to submit a request under section 3—

(1) not later than 3 months before the conservation easement becomes an eligible conservation easement described in section 5(2)(A); and

(2) not later than 1 year before the conservation easement becomes an eligible conservation easement described in section 5(2)(B).

SEC. 5. Definitions.

In this Act:

(1) CONSERVATION EASEMENT.—The term “conservation easement”—

(A) means a voluntary, legal agreement between a landowner and the Secretary that limits use of the land in order to protect its conservation values; and

(B) does not include agreements—

(i) with Indian Tribes; or for

(ii) related to utilities.

(2) ELIGIBLE CONSERVATION EASEMENT.—The term “eligible conservation easement” means a conservation easement that—

(A) has been in effect for longer than 30 years; or

(B) was put into effect before 1977 without the creation of an official corresponding map.

(3) SECRETARY.—The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of the Interior.

This just guts conservation easements that the Federal Government participates in.  It make the easement no easement at all.

Why on earth did people vote for Hageman in the primary?

With this outrage, we will close out this edition.

Prior related recent threads:

Something is going on, and I'm not the only one sensing it.

Labels: 2020s, 2026, Adam Kinzinger, Canada, Donald Trump, Evangelical, Food, Immigration, inflation, Taxes, The Second Trump Administration, The Trump Trade War with Canada, Trump Trade Wars, United States

Appendices:

The 2026 Election, 22nd Edition. The Stupid on Stilts Edition. Appendix 1.

Last edition:

The 2026 Election, 21st Edition. The Contest in the General Election.

Labels: Bill Allemand, Constitution Party, Democratic Party, Economics, Industry, Joe Porambo, Karlee Provenza, Keenan Morgan, Libertarian, Ogden Driskill, Republican Party, Rod Miller, Tamara Trujillo, Wyoming (Natrona County)2026 Election, Ana Cordova, Brent Bien, Bryan McCarty, Chuck Gray, Eric Barlow, Harriet Hageman, James Byrd, Kenneth Casner, Kevin Christensen, Rebecca Bextel, Robert Short, Shaun Johnson, Steve Harshman, Wyoming

Additional Labels

The 2026 Election, 22nd Edition. The Stupid on Stilts Edition. More Labels.