Category Archives: Comedy & Humor

WATCH: UPDATED (8/1): Humor Alert: When Democrats And Pelosi’s Republican Poodles Weep; There Is Mirth In the Vance-Mercer Studio

Comedy & Humor, Conservatism, Crime, Criminal Injustice, Culture, Democracy, Democrats, Elections, libertarianism, Paleolibertarianism, Republicans

WATCH: David and I discuss the ins-and-outs of the Jan. 6 Committee, also the Democrats’ September 11: Menstrual America Vs. MAGA America.

When Democrats and Pelosi’s Republican Poodles Weep; There is Mirth in the Vance-Mercer Studio:

The harder the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi’s Republican poodles wept—the greater was the mirth in the David Vance and ilana Mercer studio. Our superstar of a producer was in stitches, too. Good times.

UPDATE (8/1/021): Humor Alert: I never watch my own videos. So did I REALLY ask David, of, if Speaker Pelosi has a drinking problem? A viewer insist I did. David agrees.

Must something manifestly hilarious be marked with a “Humor Alert” before people allow laughter? Maybe Brits and their South African former subjects have a different sense of humor? This appended comment is way funny, too. Learn Brit humor:

UPDATE III (4/9): NEW COLUMN: The Wussification Of The West: Will We Ban Shakespeare For Othello And Shylock?

Argument, Comedy & Humor, Conservatism, Education, English, Free Speech, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Literature, Race, Racism, The West

The The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content.–ilana

NEW COLUMN IS either “The Wussification Of The West: Will We Ban Shakespeare For Othello And Shylock?” Or, “How Tucker Could Have Crushed His Dr. Seuss Segment,” currently on WND.COM, the Unz

How Tucker Could Have Crushed His Dr. Seuss Segment” is on CNS.News, too.

And American Renaissance, where the conversation is lively.

And, the great American Greatness, the voice of next-generation conservatism.

Watch a video version of this column on YouTube.

And excerpt:

… Tucker’s mistake was his contents-driven defense of these kiddie books:

“Dr. Seuss was not a racist. He was an evangelist against bigotry,” pleaded Tucker. “He wrote an entire shelf of books against racism, and not in a subtle way. They were clearly, explicitly against racism. That was the whole point of writing them, to teach children not to be racist.”


Even if Dr. Seuss was the pedagogic, sanctimonious bore Tucker makes him out to be—actual racism in the targeted literature should be a peripheral issue, or no issue at all.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content.

Whether he intended it or not, the premise of Tucker’s defense of Dr. Seuss is that if we do detect “legitimate” racism in literature—there is a case for banning it. (Now, Tucker might not have meant it that way, but, this is what the structure of his argument portends.)

By contrast, freedom makes the case for an unfettered free market in ideas, good and bad. Freedom argues for politically impolite books to be published and read freely.

Banning books, moreover, assumes a lack of choice and agency among individual human beings. It’s also predicated on a higher authority that decides for the rest of us which cultural products are fit for our consumption.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing not over the contents of Mein Kampf or McElligot’s Pool, but for their publication irrespective of their content.

Which is why I say freedom’s argument is an argument from process, and not content.

Mein Kampf, and any offensive literature, needs to be available in a free society to free men and women who want it. And not because of history; so that we don’t forget it or repeat it (blah, blah, blah, as I heard it enunciated by Seattle’s radio mouth, Jason Rantz, the other day).

Alas, in the face of the cancellation of people and publications, cancelled conservatives just keep these logically weak and, frankly, loser mea culpas coming. Like the Argument from Hitler, which is a kind of “WhatAboutism”:

“Amazon and eBay sell Mein Kampf, why not Dr. Seuss? I want what Hitler got, Amazon and eBay. Me too. Boo-hoo.”

Tweeted “Musil Protégé”: “Conservatives [inadvertently] condone presentism. As Audrey says in Whit Stillman’s Metropolitan: ‘Has it ever occurred to you that our world judged by the standards of Jane Austen’s time would (look ridiculous)?’”

Most great literature doesn’t meet the sub-intelligent standards of the woke illiterati, who control the intellectual means of production—the schools (primary, secondary, tertiary), the press, publishing houses, think tanks, Deep Tech and the Deep State. …

NEW COLUMN IS either “The Wussification Of The West: Will We Ban Shakespeare For Othello And Shylock?” Or, “How Tucker Could Have Crushed His Dr. Seuss Segment,” currently on WND.COM, the Unz Review and

How Tucker Could Have Crushed His Dr. Seuss Segment” is on CNS.News and American Renaissance as well.

Watch a video version of this column on YouTube.

UPDATE II (3/16): Facebook
Ray McClendon:

I’m a big Tucker fan too Ilana. Your article pointing out his arguments along with others who made the same argument give rise to mixed emotions. On the one hand, he (and they) are not wrong. There is some validity to their logic. After all, truth is often multifaceted. Plus, we’re all on the same side fighting side by side as allies in a common cause. On the other hand, you perform a great service when you point out there are far more substantive, powerful, and relevant arguments to be made, reminding me of that axiom, “Great minds may think alike, but greater minds think alone.” It’s why you’ve always been in a class by yourself. Thank you…

Ilana Mercer

No! I point to he fact that the argument from racism is irreverent if one is arguing classical liberal freedoms. Tucker, whom I love, was arguing from the leftist premise. The End. No argument. You can both love Tucker, and agree he presented a weak case for freedom. I do. That’s not wrong.

UPDATE III (4/9): When Adult humor is allowed:

Ed Powell:
“You are my favorite African-American.”
“That’s good ‘adult humor’. I am an African-American Jew.”
“@ILANAMERCER, LOL, Hitler wouldn’t have known what the hell to do with you.”
“I think he would.”

NEW COLUMN: A Christmas Story Before Nerf Guns Became a No-No

Christianity, Comedy & Humor, Family, Feminism, Film, Founding Fathers, Kids, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim

NEW COLUMN, “A Christmas Story Before Nerf Guns Became a No-No,” is on American Greatness.

An excerpt:

Described by a critic as “one of those rare movies you can say is perfect in every way,” “A Christmas Story,” directed by Bob Clark, debuted in 1983. Set in the 1940s, the film depicts a series of family vignettes through the eyes of 9-year-old Ralphie Parker, who yearns for that gift of all gifts: The Daisy Red Ryder BB gun.

This was boyhood before the Nerf gun and “bang-bang you’re dead” were banned; family life prior to “One Dad Two Dads Brown Dad Blue Dads,” and Christmas before Saint Nicholas was denounced for his whiteness, and “Merry Christmas” condemned for its exclusiveness.

If children could choose the family into which they were born, most would opt for the kind depicted in “A Christmas Story,” where mom is a happy homemaker, dad a devoted working stiff, and between them, they have zero repertoire of progressive psychobabble to rub together.

Although clearly adored, Ralphie is not encouraged to share his feelings at every turn. Nor is he, in the spirit of gender-neutral parenting, circa 2020, urged to act out like a girl if he’s feeling … girlie.

Instead, Ralphie is taught restraint and self-control. And horrors: The little boy even has his mouth washed out with soap and water for uttering the “F” expletive. “My personal preference was for Lux,” reveals Ralphie, “but I found Palmolive had a nice piquant, after-dinner flavor—heady but with just a touch of mellow smoothness.” Ralphie is, of course, guilt-tripped with stories about starving Biafrans when he refuses to finish his food.

The parenting practiced so successfully by Mr. and Mrs. Parker fails every progressive commandment. By today’s standards, the delightful, un-precocious protagonist of “A Christmas Story” would be doomed to a lifetime on the therapist’s chaise lounge—and certainly to daily doses of Ritalin …

NEW COLUMN, “A Christmas Story Before Nerf Guns Became a No-No,” is on American Greatness.

Merry Christmas.

No Offense ‘Caged Kids,’ But Your Parents Probably Don’t Want To Get You Back (Humor Alert)

Comedy & Humor, Democrats, Donald Trump, Family, IMMIGRATION, Literature

Without question and with deep conviction, the moron media repeat the storyline about kids being ripped from their parents’ arms, and caged on entering the US illegally (by a president who—OMG!—enforced US immigration law, for the benefit of the American People):

Federal court filings made this week by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Justice Department say that the parents of some 545 migrant children who are currently in the United States have not been found. These parents were separated from their children at the U.S. border by border officials under President Trump’s zero tolerance policy from 2017 to 2018, and the filing says the parents are now unreachable.

Kids are not what they are cut out to be (joke alert #1).

And these particular kids? I don’t know. I’ve searched the Internet for images of tender toddlers caged. All I found are images of large, hirsute young adults, who look like they can stand on their own feet, maybe even join a gang.

Besides, what kind of parent can’t call a US government agency to locate his kid? An incompetent parent or, joke alert #2 for the mirthless, a parent who is not too keen on getting that “kid” back, a sentiment I understand. Completely. They don’t make kids the way they used to.

In “Why Are Unfit Parents Fit To Become Americans?” it was pointed out that “bad parents will continue to deploy children as human shields to gain entry into the US”; and that “it’s unfortunate that children are born into disorganized, chaotic families. But a child is either the responsibility of his parents or of the state.”

The judicial trend of the state as parens patriae has seen the family usurped by the state as the primary socialization agent. The state-as-parent is the purview of progressives, not conservatives.

This question was posed: “Parents who put kids is such precarious a predicament are unfit. Why, then, are unfit parents fit to become Americans?”

I’m with the Mexican parents. You win some, you lose some–kids, that is (joke alert #3).

Once upon a time, American writers shared this sense of humor (wow; I am apologizing for wit). Remember the classic short story by William Sydney Porter, aka O. Henry’s (1862-1910)?

My all-time favorite fictional kid has to be the kid in the “The Ransom of Red Chief.”

Not only is “The Ransom of Red Chief” an American classic (written by a Southerner, of course)—it hearkens back to a time when kids had character; kid character.

Basically, the kidnapped kid, “Red Chief,” is so imaginatively naughty—never evil or wicked—that his traumatized kidnappers end up paying his wealthy grandad to take him back.

Grandad just sits back and waits. He knows the score.

* Image via Associated Press