I'm an Independent

As a Black man living in Chicago, most people assume I’ll always vote Democrat. That assumption has never sat right with me. I lean Republican and right-of-center these days, but I’m not married to any party. If the right Democrat emerges—one focused on results over ideology—I’m open to crossing the aisle. Right now, though, it feels like the Democratic Party has drifted far from the concerns of everyday Americans.

To me, the modern Democratic Party is no longer the party of the working class or low-income families. It has become consumed with cultural debates—endless focus on LGBTQ+ inclusivity, questioning the definition of a woman, and prioritizing symbolic gestures over practical outcomes.

Look at the cities run by progressive Democrats for decades:

• Chicago, my home, struggles with crime, failing schools, and fiscal chaos under one-party rule.
• New York City now has a mayor who campaigned heavily on socialism and fare-free buses.
• San Francisco—a beautiful city I’ve always wanted to visit—now grapples with rampant homelessness, open drug markets, and a recent push for reparations that feels more performative than solvable.

These aren’t just anecdotes. They reflect a party that often seems more interested in ideological purity than in governing effectively.

That disconnect played a big role in my 2024 vote for Donald Trump. The Biden-Harris administration, in my view, spent more energy on DEI initiatives and global symbolism than on delivering concrete results for Americans—controlling inflation, securing the border, or keeping cities safe. I wanted leaders willing to govern, not just signal virtue. To me, Republicans—at least at the national level in that election—appeared more focused on measurable outcomes.

That said, Republicans are far from perfect. Here in Illinois, I voted twice for Governor Bruce Rauner… and I’m glad to never have to do that again. The point is simple: neither Republicans or Democrats has a monopoly on competence.

Looking ahead in Illinois, Governor J.B. Pritzker is running for a third term in 2026. Unlike Rauner, Pritzker has actually governed—he’s kept the state running, made decisions, and pushed his agenda through. But I disagree with much of that agenda. The recent law allowing assisted suicide is one example among many progressive policies enacted since 2019 that I find deeply troubling.

Could I vote for Pritzker if no strong alternative emerges? It’s possible, though unlikely. His ongoing public feud with President Trump might hurt him with some voters, but Illinois is deep blue—whether that feud matters will depend on turnout and whether voters prioritize competence over tribal loyalty.

Created by AI

I’m also open to a credible third-party or independent candidate, even if their chances are slim in this state. At the end of the day, my vote goes to whoever I believe can best do the job—whether that’s president, governor, mayor, or state legislator.

Bottom line, I don’t owe blind loyalty to Republicans or Democrats. Expecting Black voters to automatically support Democrats just because of history or identity feels outdated and condescending. I’ll support policies and people that make sense—strong economy, safe streets, good schools, personal responsibility, and common-sense governance.

If I ever run for office myself (unlikely, but never say never), I know that it's a must to pick a formal lane. Until then, I remain an independent thinker who votes for the person, not the party.

What about you? Are you locked into one party, or do you judge candidates individually? Drop your thoughts in the comments—I’d love to hear where others stand as we head into another election year.

Nick Shirley on PBD Podcast

 I wanted to share this PBD Podcast from New Years Eve 2025 feating Nick Shirley. He's gained significant attention for his independent journalism on the whole Somali fraud in Minnesota. This story has largely been shared primarily through the conservative personalities I've followed especially through the PBD Podcast.

I'll share more thoughts after this video, hopefully you'll be able to watch this 16 min. portion of Shirley's recent podcast. Feel free to watch the whole podcast here, it would be worth it. [VIDEO]

Matt Walsh: U.S. Capitol Removes Robert E. Lee Statue And Replaces Him With THIS?!

 Matt Walsh is someone I generally agree with on quite a few issues and I'm going to beg to differ with his profanity laced argument.

Barbara Rose Johns' statue will replace Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee at the US Capitol thanks to her role during the Civil Rights Movement with regards to protesting poor conditions at her Virginia school. I think Walsh acknowledges this, however, is dismissive compared to the accomplishments of Gen. Lee.

Now I do believe this change is something that would've likely happened under Democratic control of the US Congress and certainly in the racially charged environment of 2020 - after the death of George Floyd. Now I learned in this article that Gen. Lee's statue was removed in 2020 - as I thought.

It seems the Republicans and the Trump administration are doing everything they can to undo any changes under the guise of wokeness. This could be a sign of wokeness.

Now for Gen. Lee, people will naturally stop at the fact that he fought on the side of the Confederacy in the Civil War. The story I might remember from my history class in school was that he was very unwilling to fight against his native state of Virginia once they had seceded from the Union. 

He had formerly served in the United States Army and if I recall he lead U.S. forces against the rebellion of John Brown at Harper's Ferry.

What is the Confederacy known for, well generally they were the former slaves states of the United States of America - many of those states had left the Union. Well in today's society reflexively we believe the Confederate states are no different the the worst regimes of history. They're very racist they hate people who aren't white.

Now if you want my nuanced view - probably not all that nuanced - the Unions defeated the Confederacy. Slavery ended although America still had a race issue once the seceding states were folded back into this nation. We still had to deal with Jim Crow, segregation, etc. We may still be grappling with racial issues, however, we're a long way from where we were 60 or 70 years ago

I'm glad that Ms. Johns for her activism and who later married (actually she's Mrs. Powell and became a librarian who died of cancer in 1991 is getting her recognition now. Yes, it may not be as significant as Robert E. Lee and yet very significant in recent times. 

Here's Walsh's video [VIDEO]

With this said, I may agree with Walsh on one thing. If this is about being "woke" and leaving out that he believes she's unremarkable, then we can talk about how the left has no historical heroes.

The great historical heroes or the icons of history are problematic. Let's leave out that he mentions race - the white men of history. Perhaps some men who are historically significant are aggressive, eccentric, or perhaps hold problematic political views.

Whatever contributions to our nation, we need to recognize their accomplishments. We can recognize the bad, however, we also need to recognize their roles in our history.

Perhaps there was a much better way to recognize Barbara Rose Johns Powell than this woke posturing. For her being so young and being part of a Civil Rights action she should be recognized and known for her contributions.

Campaign 2026: Texas U.S. Senate

 I want to discuss the entrance of Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett in the Texas US Senate race. 

She's one of many prominent Democrats often noted by conservative commentators and even President Trump. She's dismissed as not being very bright - in spite of the fact that she holds a law degree.

And while many on the right might dismiss this ad one thing I may add to this discussion is that whenever someone talks about you, one could read that as praise. Perhaps that was what Ms. Crockett was going for in her ad as she seeks another elected office. [VIDEO]

I suppose there is no issue with this ad on my end as she introduces herself to the voting public in Texas - she's said to be running against incumbent Texas Republican US Sen. Ted Cruz. She can play quotes of President Trump and treat this as praise. She's showing her opposition to the President.

On the other hand I do believe Bill O'Reilly as he opined on this ad, he doesn't view her as a legit problem solver. Matt Walsh discusses this ad and he sees her as nothing more than an influencer. She's not in Congress and likely won't go to the Senate to really do anything.

Stranger things can happen and I won't even pretend to know the voting habits of Texans. I'm thinking unless she can show why she'll better represent Texas in the United States Senate, her campaign won't likely grain traction. And she'll be out of Congress if she's committed to this run.

The floor is open to anyone that is able to say that Jasmine Crocket would make a great US Senator and also to know why she's should be elected to the Senate.

Tucker talks with Milo Yiannopoulos

 

[VIDEO] From a recent podcast Tucker Carlson discusses with Milo Yiannopoulos a question that's largely forbidden in the West. A question that was bluntly asked well over a decade ago on a Ugandan TV show, "Why are you gay?"

The ensuing discussion between the aforementioned two men in 2025 was interesting and very eye-opening.

Allow me to warn you that an epithet will be mentioned numerous times during this almost two and a half hour interview.

President Trump on 60 Minutes

 Just so you know CBS News (60 Minutes is produced by CBS News) has been undergoing changes under Bari Weiss. I do wonder how much this iconic TV news magazine is affected by this new direction.

I'm showing the one hour plus extended, most importantly unedited, interview of Pres. Trump with Norah O'Donnell that aired last night on 60 Minutes. [VIDEO]

They covered a lot of ground. The immigration actions, sending Nat'l Guard to American cities, the ongoing War Dept campaign against drug smuggling from Venezuela, potential American nuclear weapons testing, foreign policy with regards to the Middle East in addition to China & Russia, etc.

And Trump isn't afraid to take on his predecessors Joe Biden and Barack Obama. They even talked about his  attempt to take care of "Obamacare".

And let's not forget about this gov't shutdown that's gone on for well over a month. It forced the President to scramble to insure our military servicemembers still continue to get paid.

The extended interview I trust more than the edited one that aired last night I saw most of the 28 minutes of that edited interview.

Just bear in mind Pres. Trump won a settlement with CBS over their rather skewered interview in 2024 with then Vice President Kamala Harris. It almost makes me wonder if Weiss was brought in to repair the damage from that.

Trump 2028?

Available at Trump Store

Trump knows he can't run again even if he had the interest. The Guardian:

Donald Trump said “it’s too bad” he is not allowed to run for a third term, conceding the constitutional reality even as he expressed interest in continuing to serve.

“If you read it, it’s pretty clear,” Trump told reporters on board Air Force One from Japan to South Korea on Wednesday. “I’m not allowed to run. It’s too bad.”

The president’s comments, which continue his on-again, off-again musings about a third term, came a day after the House speaker, Mike Johnson, said it would be impossible for Trump to stay in the White House. “I don’t see a path for that,” the Republican told reporters at the US Capitol on Tuesday.

Johnson, who has built his career by drawing closer to Trump, said he discussed the issue with the president and thought he understood. “He and I have talked about the constrictions of the constitution,” he said.

The speaker described how the constitution’s 22nd amendment does not allow for a third presidential term, and changing that with a new amendment would be a cumbersome, years-long process of winning over both states and members of Congress.

Johnson dismissed worries about a potential third term as “hair on fire” by the president’s critics. “He has a good time with that, trolling the Democrats,” Johnson said.

I knew it, he's trolling the Democrats. It's a great troll!  

In all seriousness, I'd be OK with tweaking the 22nd Amendment. Get your two terms, sit out for four years and for another term or two later. Out of all of our former Presidents Obama is the youngest, it's perfect for him should he really want to run again.

Not that I want him to, just saying.

As for Trump while I wouldn't mind another term for him, rightfully we'd have to be concerned about the fact that in 2028 he would be well over 80 years old at this point. He's already surpassed the previous occupant and IMHO he definitely didn't seem up to it. He was nothing more than a figure head.

O'Reilly: Reaction to Trump's Gaza Victory

 The big news over the weekend. The ceasefire in Gaza Strip between the Israelis & Hamas. It looks like Trump will have his dream of turning that part of the world into a resort. And of course the hostages come home and no more bombing and terrorism.

Check out Bill O'Reilly's take [VIDEO]

You know the peace has been broken before so I'm in trust but verify mode. However, time will tell if this sticks. The President has shown a willingness to retaliate decisively if he must.

Michael Knowles and the trans-widow

 

[VIDEO] Knowles interviews Tracy Shannon who was married to a man who had issues with cross-dressing and eventually opted to transition to become a woman. This interview is very shocking.

How the husband (who essentially became the wife) conducted himself around his children. And I got to say he cross-dressed, transition to be a woman, and even subjected his children to his various partners other than his wife was definitely a very toxic situation.

And the wife, it seems she was shamed into accepting her husband's gender transition. A counselor (who according to Ms. Shannon now advocated for the gender transition of children) basically called her "close-minded" because she had an issue with her husband's transition. In her words whatever life they had the husband effectively threw it all away for their gender transition.

I find this a very sad story. Now the description talks about transgender ideology and I don't know if this is about that. My hot take on this was this was a troubled man who allowed his transition to ruin his relationship with his wife and children.

School superintendent resigns after being detained by ICE

 Before sharing the recent news video from Des Moines, Iowa regarding the schools superintendent there.

I was shocked to hear he attempted to flee and was detained by ICE. It turns out he was not an American citizen, and it caused me to wonder how could this happen in of all places Iowa.

From what I've see so far it appears that soon to be former Superintendent Ian Roberts lied about his immigration status. And perhaps the folks at the Des Moines Public Schools had failed to adequately vet Mr. Roberts. This article from the Des Moines Register says the Des Moines schools had used an outside firm to vet him.

And reading that article further he seemed to have not be forthcoming about where he actually got his degrees. He misrepresented his doctoral degree at Maryland's Morgan State University although he later got his doctorate at a private for-profit university.

I just got to say this whole story was a mess. This is what happened yesterday in Des Moines. From the start we hear students had walked out in support of Mr. Roberts via this report from KCCI. Roberts had submitted his resignation. [VIDEO]

I have to say, the immigration issue is a charged issue right now. There's no middle ground here so perhaps I shouldn't be too surprised if there are people who want to support Mr. Roberts.

However, where I stop at is the fact that he misrepresented his citizenship and his academic record. That really bothers me and I wonder if the people who are supporting him actually realize how he arrived in this position.

My position is to point the finger at him as much as I would at the school district who hired him.

A Life After Layoff: Can You REALLY Get Fired Because Of Social Media?

 

[VIDEO] I'm sharing this video with you for practical advise. Yes you have freedom of speech, however, as we see in the recent murder of Charlie Kirk if you express joy over his death and do so on the internet you might be at risk of losing your job. A company might be concerned about the perception of their employees happy over something like this.

Real talk, I'm not too happy to see people lose their jobs over this. At the same time I would argue for decency. If you have nothing nice to say about anyone its best to say nothing. We've lost that.

When someone we don't agree with dies, that shouldn't be cause for losing a job. The example "TikTok" we see in the above video got me very upset because they indicated they had joy over a man's death. That's not the behavior of a reasonable human being.

With that said while I'm not happy that they lost their job over something they said online, I'm also glad that company will no longer employ someone who's shown their true character. My only hope is that they realize what got them in trouble and conduct themselves differently in the future.

Shouldn't we all!