Veteran EA commenter Steve Witherspoon reads this steaming pile of cripplingly-biased progressive delusions so I don’t have to, but the most recent example of Humphrey’s smug doltery was too much to bear. As a result of Steve bringing it to my attention (again), the site put me in mind of yesterday’s post about how professionals—strictly speaking, those who eschew worldly pleasures in order to do good for the public, civilization and the human race—ought to have a baseline, minimal level of intelligence to qualify for roles that must be filled by trustworthy people. Stupid, ignorant people are not trustworthy. That’s the concept in a metaphorical nutshell.
It’s possible, even likely, that Gregory Humphrey hasn’t always been stupid, but his self-description makes it clear that he has been the victim of Left-infused bias for a very long time, so it would be remarkable if his brain hadn’t atrophied as a result. He describes himself as “a book author…podcaster… political blogger…historian…former radio broadcaster…and former Admin. Asst. WI State Assembly, Gay American.” No field has jumped the political shark any worse than historians, gays of Humphrey’s generation are almost all alienated from the Right because of its stubborn refusal to reject the ancient justification for regarding them as “sinful,” and well, you know, Wisconsin. To be fair, I should probably give Greg a pass for being made stupid by bias, except that in his full-throated advocacy of woke insanity, he is making other people stupid. I can’t forgive that.
Ethics Alarms 
I stopped perusing his hyper-partisan drivel long ago, and have never looked back.
Were you a regular reader (thank your lucky stars you’re not), EA would have its own, extensive Caffeinated Politics file.
He even thought it was a GREAT IDEA for the Miami FL Studio Kids Little River preschool to paint white toddlers with Black Face., and was surprised that the uninformed parents had a problem with it.
I can’t find the link (Steve?) but he showed up here once to slobber his unintelligible Lefty vitriol, and the estimable Humble Talent (as only he can) highfreakin’lariously cut him a new one.
Heh; HT’s probably still picking pieces of Deke’s bony @$$ out of his boots.
PWS
Heh; HT’s probably still picking pieces of Deke’s bony @$$ out of his boots.
Really pretty pinkish slippers more likely 😉.
OK what is new here? Same tired old talking points with the same tired old “arguments”. I am not going to call out Gregory Humphrey for being stupid or unethical, just being a true believer quoting from his catechism.
I think that Gregory Humphrey as a gay man needs to look at the calendar / clock and wake up. The root cause of the violence of this week is not the availability of guns, but radical Islamism. And Islam takes a dim view of homosexuality. Iran executes gay men. In Gaza gays were thrown of high buildings, when they still had high buildings. A he should remember the massacre at the Pulse nightclub (gay) in 2016, when a Muslim killed 49 people. Maybe he should arm himself. Maybe he should reframe gun control as hitting what you aim at.
And given that the hard left as useful idiots often cooperate with Muslims (Queers for Palestine, Mamdani) he may also consider whether today it is still wise for a gay man to ally with the hard left.
Shit, we already have this in NY. As soon as the SCOTUS ruled on Bruen, Hochul and the other state legislators doubled down. What we have now is worse.
GOA (Gun Owners of America) vs Hochul: Overturn NYS gun legislation passed in defiance of Constitution.
Status: A Preliminary Injunction was granted by the District Court. The injunction was appealed to the Second Circuit Court, which upheld the preliminary injunction in part, and overturned it in part. We are now asking the Supreme Court to review the Second Circuit Court’s decision.
This will probably have a bearing on the case: In early 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court appeared likely to strike down a Hawaii law, known as the “vampire rule,” which prohibited carrying firearms on private property open to the public without express permission. This follows 2024 rulings upholding other state “place to keep” laws, setting up a major test on concealed carry restrictions.
A SCOTUS decision is expected this summer.
Anyone that would like to follow the conversation that Humphrey and I had, here’s a link.
Also; it appears that Humphrey may have chosen to censored my last comment in that conversation, it’s either that or it’s still stuck in a moderation black hole or it was sent to spam. Humphrey has regularly censored my comments and I have absolutely no idea what his criteria for censoring a comment is.
For posterity sake, here is a screenshot of my last comment…
FYI; it appears that Humphrey has swallowed the narratives presented by the very extreme anti-American anti-Constitution political left and he actively demonizes the 2nd Amendment as being racist; plus, this is how he demonizes 77-83 million gun owners and supporters of the 2nd Amendment: severely uneducated rubes, clueless, knuckle-draggers, amoral, soulless, unconscionable clowns, have dwarfed reasoning, and insane. Yes, those are actual quotes I’ve found from Humphrey’s anti-gun blog posts, there’s likely more I haven’t found, yet.
We should all remember how the anti-gun advocacy “logic” functions; we have an anti-firearm movement (anti 2nd Amendment movement) that wants to ban or severely limit availability of firearms to 100% of We the People based on the illegal use of 0.000148% of existing firearms – this is absurdly illogical. Their rationalization mantra is “if it saves one life”.
It appears to me that Humphrey is one of those “rights for me but not for thee” very extreme progressives.
UPDATE: Humphrey posted the comment I shared above and posted a reply.
It’s not a better rabbit hole, Steve, and he really is an idiot. The Supreme Court is empowered to interpret the Constitution, it has ruled on this issue, and nobody else’s “interpretation” can be “proper” by definition. Second, his prior restraint of an enumerated right wouldn’t be constitutional under ANY interpretation. You can’t legislate conditions to exercise a right. You can legislate just and reasobale reasons to withhold a right, like a felony conviction, but the government can’t be empowered to say “you don’t have that right unless we say so, period.” He doesn’t understand any of this, refuses to accept what he doesn’t understand, and thus isn’t capable of a good faith debate. Don’t waste your time.
”Guns already in the possession of people will also need to be registered.”
What about the unregistered guns in the hands of criminals? He is never going to get around the fact that someone is going to disobey the law.
Then, there may be the non-criminal gun enthusiasts that engage in civil disobedience. How will they ever be found?
-Jut