IamCraig.com Rotating Header Image

May, 2026:

Stephen Colbert takes a final bow, as Cuba is about to do

Stephen Colbert with his 2011 Peabody

Stephen Colbert with his 2011 Peabody.

I watch very little TV (except the news), and what I do watch is because of other influence(r)s. I won’t miss Stephen Colbert‘s show one bit, but what Americans don’t realise they’ll miss is the freedom to say negative things or at least make jokes about about their leaders. How thin-skinned do you have to be, despite the fact that you are the “leader of the free world”, to use your power to make a guy (and his staff) unemployed, and then to boast about it on your Lying Social feed?!

Mark my words, Americans, you will regret this day (last Thursday). Nobody can predict what will happen tomorrow, but trump continues to chip away at freedoms you’ve taken for granted for so long, that you won’t even recognise what you’ve lost when they’re taken away because it happened to someone else, someone you don’t like. If Colbert’s mocking and calling into question certain of trump’s actions, as he did with Biden and Obama before him, don’t amount to anything in two years (November 2028), then why get so exorcised about it now? Your own constitution will achieve what all of his wannabe assassins have failed to achieve … so far. His presidency will end as scheduled and you’ll carry on.

Or will it and will you? That’s the thing we can’t predict for now. Look for action on this after your midterms, especially if they don’t go his way. You haven’t seen anything yet.

While we’re on the subject of your president’s abuses of power, I’m no supporter of Cuba. Fidel Castro’s soldiers fought against my father in Rhodesia in the 1970s. But that was half a century ago. Since then I’ve travelled to Cuba (along with a bunch of Americans on a Canadian flight), and had a long and very interesting conversation with one of those former soldiers. Despite the lies of “little” Marco Rubio, Cuba is not a “national security threat” to the US, at least, not as far as I understand that term. They possibly could be to Florida, but I’m pretty sure nobody in Washington State (or Alaska) is quaking in their boots at the very mention of the place. No, you’re very obviously going to pull a Venezuela and go in and arrest Raul Castro … because you can.

Hey, if you really have balls and want to show the American people how tough (and stupid) you are, go to Moscow and arrest vladimir putin. Piece of cake. You’ll be in and out in five minutes.


Updated, 2026-05-25: Removed someone’s name.

The impossibility of “debating” with right-wing zealots … or zealots of any kind

I’m a little depressed today. In the “old days” — I don’t even know when that was, but it was before today, before donald trump came to office — I used to have friends whose political opinions I didn’t know. I might have a general idea that Bob was a bit of a conservative and Jane leaned towards being a liberal (or vice versa) — both starting with lower-case letters you’ll note — but I didn’t know who they voted for. And it didn’t matter; Bob and Jane and I got along, laughed at each other’s jokes, partied, drank and had dinners together, liked each other’s kids, and dealt with the foibles of the day’s government, all of the things that people who like each other do together.

That seems to have changed overnight. Well, I suppose not really overnight if it can be traced back to donald trump’s presidency in 2016 (a decade ago), but it’s one of those things that you can seemingly trace back to a particular event. Maybe it goes back even farther than that to the dawn of the Internet in the late 1960s (or the dawn on the commercial Internet in the late 80’s or 90’s), or maybe to the dawn of Twitter twenty years ago, or maybe the establishment of Speakers’ Corner at Hyde Park in London in the 19th century. Those (except for the latter) were perhaps seminal moments when the vast, unwashed public suddenly gained access to a medium where they could do exactly what I’m doing now, spout(ing) their/my opinion(s).

That’s why the crazy guy you knew when you were a kid — who everybody could avoid because you all knew where his (or her) house was — now has a Twitter account and a few million “followers”, and he and they are considered a legitimate force despite the fact that they’re all just as crazy as that one guy down the street was years ago! And now, any of your friends with just slightly weak minds who are susceptible to crazy ideas because they don’t have the mental capacity think about them critically, feel emboldened enough to come out of the woodwork because, apparently, their crazy idea is shared by many others crazy people as well! I don’t blame them, because if that applied to me I’d feel empowered too, and less ashamed that, despite even our relatively small numbers, people were paying attention to us.

(As I write this, it is a nice day outside and a woman walks past my house wearing socks on her hands and a big hat. This has been happening for a few days now.)

So what does this have to do with The Donald? Why drag him into this mess? Am I not just proving that I blame everything on donald trump, even things that can’t reasonably be connected to him? Isn’t that just a little bit crazy? Maybe everyone should avoid my house too! I suffer from “good old days-ism” just as much as anybody, and I’ve only been around for about six decades, but people older than me (say, ten decades) can probably remember a time just like what I’m referring to, from which we can conclude this has happened before. So even though the dawn of donald trump is the one event of the four possibilities I’ve presented that I associate with what is happening now, I have other reasons.

I have (or had) two long-time friends who, it turns out, are supporters of donald trump. No problem; as I said earlier, I can be friends with people of different political stripes. I already complained about them (I took a break from the news) — without identifying them, of course — and disengaged from discussing politics with them. Discussions with my gay Irish friend ended on 12 November 2024 with his declaration, “Not my biggest positive statement [about how he was happy with the US’s new VP], just a bonus 😋”, and neither of us have so much as enquired about the weather in the other’s part of the world since.

On Friday, 15 November, my MAGA Canadian friend (who now lives in Texas, but grew up in Alberta) was in town and we had breakfast. When we met years ago I had no idea and didn’t need to have any idea she had conservative leanings; I have since learned that about her, but, as is usually the case, it had no bearing on our relationship until recently. Against my better judgement, I brought up politics … probably to point out that trump’s war on Iran that he declared “won” a few days later was still on and choking the world after almost three months. As was to be expected, she disagreed, and quickly pointed out that the price of gas/petrol was apparently as high under Biden as it is now under trump. (Feel free to fact-check that, but I’ve never seen prices as high as they are now in Bellingham, Washington.) Then she brought up how Fauci was a demon who created COVID, how schools are usurping parental authority, and sent me links to “support” those conclusions. However, she’s confused between “testimony” and “evidence”.

In the first case she sent me a link to an hour-and-a-half Youtube video of James Erdman III (apparently a CIA whistleblower) testifying before a Congressional hearing “alleg[ing] [a] COVID-19 coverup”. I replied, “I’m not going to watch over an hour and a half of some guy being grilled by the senate. If you have a link to a neutral website where they summarise his testimony I’ll read that.” Allegations are a dime-a-dozen, but talking about them doesn’t actually turn them into proven facts — which are much harder to come by, for obvious reasons. I explained the difference to her between “testimony” and “evidence”, and said that I was not interested in testimony, just proven evidence, if you’ll excuse my redundancy. She didn’t come up with any, or even an explanation for how the courts running a child’s life are better than a school district. I told her that what she believed in were considered to be conspiracy theories by 99% of the population. She again disagreed, and then took the opportunity to make the extraordinary claim that, “The news in Canada is so biased and censored” … ignoring the fact that I’ve lived on three continents and get my news from multiple sources in multiple countries, all of which I have sought out on the basis that they perform good journalism, which means they report facts regardless of whether their audience agrees with them or not.

Her claim that Canadian news is censored is bullshit, and comes from the fact that all she watches is Fox News, all day every day, who (when or if they even mention Canada) tell her to believe Canada censors the news. And she grew up here!

I know it’s only a sample of exactly two, but at this point I’m convinced that anybody who disagrees with my point of view, which is two MAGA supporters, are sensitive flowers who cannot and do not know how to support their points of view with fact-based arguments. While I agree with some of their conservative points of view, I definitely disagree with most of them, especially that donald trump isn’t a bad president and a is danger to world peace.

Convince me I’m wrong, but back up your allegations with evidence, not just your testimony/assertion. Comments are below.

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

It’s just hilarious …

… that JD Vance can stand up in front of the world and claim, “We’re not in a forever war,” three months into American’s supposed three-day war on Iran! This is why MAGA Americans continue to believe that the war is over, because all they watch is Fox News, which dutifully parrots any utterance by the trump regime and Dear Leader trump! As long as the regime in Iran is in power and the Strait of Hormuz, an “international waterway”, is blocked, controlled or managed by Iran, the war is still on and trump is losing!

So sad, too bad, you should have thought it through.

The Brits need to make up their minds

It’s almost as if the Brits have adopted the American electoral system.

They haven’t officially, of course, but I’ve never seen the consternation that has overtaken the country now, in 2026, after their local elections. Not living in the UK I have to admit that I am not intimately familiar with their overall system; for example, in Canada our party system doesn’t carry across levels of government. Here in BC, our provincial “Liberal” party (since renamed “BC United” and not even having a website any more) is right wing, and not even associated with the federal Liberal Party of Canada. And on the municipal level, parties are formed — as near as I can tell — based on local issues, and they come and go at the drop of a hat. One might know that Joe Blow is a “liberal” or a “conservative” based on his (or her) political positions or who supports them, or even their having previously represented a particular party at some time in the past, but on the municipal level they don’t run under one national banner or another. On the other hand, in the UK they do.

So I can see that if one party or another loses a lot of seats, that (of course) reflects badly on the party itself, at all levels. Which makes me wonder why parties at the national level associate themselves with municipal parties of dog catchers, etc., which make me wonder about the wisdom of such a system. I don’t pretend to be a political scientist, and I don’t even play one on TV, but there must be a historical reason for such a system that I missed while I was passed out in class. (The topic didn’t interest me when I was a kid.)

Anyway, I see little of Starmer except when he’s being a decent international leader on the TV news (that’s infinitely more than I can say about trump!), so it’s a little surprising for me. It’s particularly surprising since the Conservative Party just went through six (!) leaders since 2016, and the Labour Party should have used that as an example of how not to run a party. However, the Brits seem determined to play musical leaders, no matter which party we’re talking about.

Should I then support Reform UK (kinda the successor to UKIP), who have apparently been major beneficiaries of the largesse of the UK public? Not really. Nigel Farage has been a leader in search of a party, which is no different than a party in search of a leader. And really, the voting public can’t complain if they are so fickle that they toss out party leaders as quickly as the calendar turns. If they don’t have the patience to let a prime minister serve out his four- or five-year term, they don’t deserve to have a prime minster for his/her full term. If Farage ever makes it into the prime minister’s post, one wonders if the British public will let him last. That said, even without being prime minister, he’s fucked Britain by bringing about Brexit!

A relative in Scotland claims that Starmer “is not popular as [he is] very woke”. But if he is “very woke”, are not Labour supporters also “very woke”? And would they not continue to support a “very woke” prime minister? This is the whole problem with that very word; what, exactly, is “woke”? I’ll save that question for another day, but I will say that there is a happy medium on the “woke” scale, it’s just that users of the word seem to assume that there isn’t; you’re “woke”, or your thought process is pure.

We’ve all be bombed back to the Stone Ages by trump

I had given up on giving donald trump free air time. You just can’t keep up with all of his outrages. One minute he’s killing American citizens who disagree with him, exercising their Second Amendment right to “keep and bear Arms”, and the next minute he’s telling the Iranians that they had better behave, according to his un-stated rules, and not execute their citizens. (Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!) Of course we all know now what his implied threat was, as his gunboats steamed towards the Iranian coast. But he was all 100% bluster, because he already knew that he was going to take action against Iran, but he only had enough balls to bomb them; the lily-livered American government doesn’t have the cajones to put boots on the ground, and really put their money where their mouths are.

And so today the Iranian citizens — the blameless men, women and children in the street — are all worse off, getting “bombed back to the Stone Ages”, while trump boasts that he has effected “regime change” because he (and the Israelis) has killed some of their leaders, while the regime — “the organisation that is the governing authority of a political unit” — is still well in place keeping the populace down.

First of all, let me state that, of all the people I don’t want in possession of nuclear weapons, it’s an autocratic, theocratic (of any religion!) regime, so good on you donald trump for finally doing something about it. But for the last 47 years, people have been doing something about it! Just because you have a different idea of what should be done, doesn’t mean your idea is better. As could have been expected and probably was expected by people who have been closer to and more involved in this situation than you have been over the last half century, America is back in a completely foreseeable position, and the Iranians don’t really care. They spent a decade at war with Iraq and know what it means to have their entire society neck-deep in war. Been there, done that. You, on the other hand, haven’t been neck-deep in war for 80 years (you were born after World War II), and even then you (America) showed up late after the Europeans had been doing all the heavy lifting for a few years. That’s why some of us can’t believe you’re complaining about Europe not wanting anything to do with your war/tantrum after only a couple of months, when you didn’t even have the courtesy to consult them or your Middle-East allies.

But trump can’t think past five minutes from now. He goes on about the fact that he’s “the first American president” to put his money (although he doesn’t have any) where his mouth is and actually do something, by pulling out his guns and sending the boys and girls (barely adults) of the American military as cannon fodder to their deaths. Except, that’s not quite true because, as I said, the lily livers in the American government (foremost among them tough-talking Pete Hegseth) didn’t send anyone into the fray of battle, as they eventually did in World Wars I and II; they just sent a few airmen in their air-conditioned cockpits to press a few switches to drop a few bombs. Granted, he’s been successful so far, with “only” 15 American combatants killed, and 538 wounded. Congratulations! There’s “only” 15 lives been lost; I’m sure those families don’t mind you killing their loved ones, not to mention the thousands you’ve killed in Iran, Lebanon and elsewhere.

This little “excursion” — which sounds a lot like putin’s “special military operation” — has been going on since February, over two months now. I go back again to my statement that trump can’t think five minutes into the future (he has the attention span of a gnat); the consideration that he can’t think five minutes ahead, never mind two months, might be why no American president has ever decided to use military force on Iran! Imagine that! Here we are, two months in, and we’re two months into one of America’s notorious quagmires (after he swore off foreign wars), and donald trump has, effectively, bombed all of us back from the Space Age to the Stone Age. Although I’ve been thinking about this post since at least January — to use myself as an example of being affected by trump’s short-sightedness, despite the fact that I am nowhere near Iran and not (thankfully) an American citizen — I was just forced to cancel a short trip to Ireland for a school reunion. I’m pretty bummed about it, because they only happen once a decade, but I don’t want to be stuck in Ireland for an indefinite period of time, which has a chance of happening if you take as long to resolve the Iran war as your country took to skedaddle from Afghanistan. (That’d be two decades, for those of you who had forgotten.)

There’s so much to cover here, but I’ll try and summarise to some extent, in sort of chronological order:

  1. NATO: It’s so obvious to all of us that attended history classes, that you were out back smoking with the boys while you were supposed to be in class with us. NATO is a ***DEFENSIVE*** alliance; they are not there to do your bidding whenever you feel like attacking someone you don’t like! There is no obligation on the part of any NATO member to join in on one of your unilateral American operations (which the Iranians have called “adventurism”), especially when you haven’t even had the courtesy to talk to them about it in advance! They didn’t “fail” your dumbass test! They didn’t even know about your test any more than someone watching the news already did! Claiming after the fact that it was a test that they failed miserably is the most asinine and juvenile statement ever made by a so-called “world leader”.
  2. Also for those of us who have at least perused a few of the pages (and even pictures) is history books can see the startling similarity between the Communist “Red Scare” (led by the American Joseph McCarthy) and today’s Islamophobia (led by donald trump), the “least racist person in the world”. There is not an Islamist behind every tree or under every bed.
  3. Enough with the “card” analogies. Yes, you can hold as many Uno cards as you want; nobody wants to play with you.
  4. We’re not impressed with how many agreements you tore up to get yourself into a worse situation than you were in before you started bombing Iran. I mean, really, that statement tells us more than anything. A couple of months ago the Strait of Hormuz was open, and now it is closed, and you have no workable plan to reverse that situation … because, as I said before, you can’t think five minutes ahead.

The only good I can see coming from this situation is that all the poor people in America, that you allegedly love so much, are not going to be happy with $6-a-gallon gas when it comes time to vote in your midterm elections.