InstaPunk Returns

The Mark Hamill thing. A matter of puzzlement to many people. I have an idea about what’s going on with him, which I’ll explain because I’m thinking most people are just chalking it up to projected career disappointments. Which is part of it but not all of it. I know that the language issues surrounding the topics I’ll be touching on are prohibitive, since words no longer mean what they used to, but I’m just laying it out here and everyone is free to take it or leave it as they choose. There’s an easy answer and a deeper answer. The easy answer is just scratching the surface but should show the value of common sense in a long-distance analysis like this. Easy? For Hamill, Trump is a stand-in for Harrison Ford. Looked them up. Ford is 6’1”. Hamill’s bio claims 5’9” or 5’10” though  the claim is challenged by those who say he’s more like 5’7” give or take. It’s not political, the Trump hatred. Not really. The TDS mania that pervades Hollywood was an attractive nuisance just waiting f...

I’ve been at sixes and sevens about this post since I knew I had to do it. Even had a hard time picking the leadoff graphic. This one does convey the idea of questioning the decision by a great man of senior years. But this one introduces the notion that Philip Glass’s principled stand is one that has been sponsored by indolent dilettantes who didn’t give a fig about the Kennedy Center during the decades in which it has been literally falling down. Falling down. Along with all the forms of high art the Kennedy’s were trying to inspire with a facility for culturally significant performances by the nation’s most gifted artists. Interesting and ironic that they choose the 87 years Philip Glass to deliver their most stinging blow against the unspeakable privately financed renovation of the crumbling building and its wayward preoccupation with niche artistes. Am I getting ahead of myself here? Did you miss the story when it broke? Lawrence O’Donnell, the left’s fantasy Dean of Jeffersonian ...

Judge Tiffany Baker-Carper Why would I lead off a story about a controversial judge with a picture of her all dolled up for a social occasion? To get it out of the way. Yes, she’s a good-looking, shapely young woman. That’s not the issue, which is not personal but systemic on the face of it. If she made a grave misjudgment because the situation was over her head, the first appropriate question is not what kind of terrible person is she, but rather why was she on the bench in the first place?  Here’s the story as reported yesterday by the Gateway Pundit: FTA: <<The pedophile, Daniel Spencer, was convicted in April 2025 of traveling to meet a minor for sex following an undercover sting operation. Despite the State Attorney’s Office recommending he be held without bond pending sentencing, Judge Baker-Carper allowed Spencer to remain free, citing his lack of violent criminal history and prior compliance while on bond. Weeks later, on May 19, 2025, Spencer and his wife, Chloe Spen...