Media and academic dolts can't seem to find a solution to high gas prices ruining Democrat chances in midterm elections

I'm no political consultant, but maybe I could be?

We're just three weeks out from the midterms, and Democrat "strategies" could not be more misplaced.  Portland's streets are strewn with drug addicts, every bum in Manhattan could be an out-on-bail psychopath with a knife, Trump rallies draw larger crowds than the Commander-in-Thief's inauguration, and the eggs I like are $7 — but Joe is promising full-term abortions, Kamala's laughing, Beto wants to take our guns (again), and Mayor Pete is presumably still on maternity leave.

During times of intense economic and cultural woes, baby murder and anti-Americanism aren't the best policy positions to emphasize.  If you want to win elections, you can't campaign on infanticide and taxing CO2 emissions when people can't afford Thanksgiving or gas.  (These thoughts really shouldn't be that elusive, but these are the Democrats we're talking about...)

Now, just when you thought these cretins couldn't be more unaware, in rides Ken Klippenstein, a leftist writer for The Intercept.  In an article published on October 11, Klippenstein determined Saudi Arabia to be guilty of "election interference."  From his essay:

'The Saudis are working to get Trump reelected and for the MAGA Republicans to win the midterms,' Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow of the Brookings Institution, told The Intercept. 'Higher oil prices will undermine the Democrats.'

Oil prices affect not just the price at the pump but also the cost of virtually everything in our fossil fuel-dependent economy — and are a major driver of inflation. 'There's no doubt that the Saudi-led OPEC oil production cuts are a strategic effort to hurt Americans at the pump and undermine our work to tackle rising costs,' said Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., in an email.

But just wait, it gets better.  According to Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft:

This is his [Mohammed bin Salman] election interference. It forces Biden to make a choice: Will he protect America's democracy and Democratic lawmakers in Congress, or will he triple down on a flawed gamble that says that the U.S. has no choice but to acquiesce to Saudi Arabia to prevent Riyadh from aligning with Russia?

Hey, Mr. Parsi with the Ph.D., there's actually a third choice.  And I know it might be a little nuts, and sound too much like something a "MAGA Republican" would say, but you could just procure the oil from domestic sources, and then you wouldn't be reliant on foreign oil at all.  "America First" energy independence is actually a win all around: unemployment rates would fall because it would restore oil industry jobs; America wouldn't (directly) finance foreign despots, because there would be no need to purchase fuel from the oil barons; and it would immediately lower gas prices, which, given public sentiment, is crucial if the Democrats want to hold Congress.  If these dopes had any political acumen, why not take the wind from the Saudi sails of "election interference" and break open the dam on domestic oil production?

Seriously, though, what is wrong with the Democrats?  Yesterday marked exactly 21 months into our 48-month sentence under Biden and his troupe, and I want Trump back as bad as anyone, so let's hope they don't figure out the America First energy independence blueprint, at least not until after the midterms — and given their transcribed ideations, which indicate that their collective mind has a sub-65 I.Q., I'd say it seems like a pretty safe assumption.

Image: DonkeyHotey, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

If you experience technical problems, please write to