According to the ol’ Google-machine, a cat’s reflexes are roughly 10 to 15 times faster than a human’s. Their reaction time is five times faster than we can blink.
But to us, they have short lives. If you love cats, you’ll need to buy more than one, because every dozen or so years, they die.
Perhaps cats don’t see it that way. Maybe, because their reaction time is so fast, everything else seems to happen so v-e-r-y, v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y.
If cats experience time 10 times more slowly than we do, does that mean a cat that’s “only” lived 15 years has actually experienced 150?
Einstein wrote about this. At least, I think he did: I’m kinda-sorta knowledgeable about theoretical physics because I find it fascinating and watch lots of lectures, but there’s a hard ceiling on how much I can understand.
Never learned the math, so I can’t follow the formulas and equations. If a scientist can explain something in story form, I’ve got a pretty good mind for it, but alas, not everything in science is suitable for storytelling.
That’s the limit of my perspective. What’s yours?
From a human’s perspective, cats live short lives. My wife and I have been together for 25 years, and we’ve already been through two of ‘em (R.I.P. Jinx, who was found as a malnourished kitten in a garbage dump, and Leeloo). We live to be 80+; our cats and dogs die at 10 or 12. Doesn’t seem fair.
But maybe, from its perspective, the life of a 15-year-old housecat feels decades longer than the world’s oldest human.
Perspective is a tricky thing. Ask any Jedi:
Luke Skywalker: You told me Vader betrayed and murdered my father.
Ob-Wan Kenobi: Your father was seduced by the dark side of the Force. He ceased to be Anakin Skywalker and became Darth Vader. When that happened, the good man who was your father was destroyed. So what I told you was true… from a certain point of view.
Luke Skywalker: A certain point of view?!
Ob-Wan Kenobi: Luke, you’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.
From the Democrats’ point of view, Donald Trump is “literally Hitler,” an existential threat to democracy, a pedo/rapist with ties to Epstein, and — by far — the worst president in American history. He’s a Nazi, a fascist, a liar, and a plunderer.
So yeah, I think we can safely say they hate him.
And obviously, Donald Trump hates ‘em right back:
US President Donald Trump posts on Truth Social: "Robert Mueller just died. Good, I’m glad he’s dead. He can no longer hurt innocent people! President DONALD J. TRUMP" pic.twitter.com/BWFBXknLaj
— ANI (@ANI) March 21, 2026
Naturally, the Democrats were aghast.
From Politico: Democrats Pile on Trump for Post Celebrating Mueller’s Death
Democrats are skewering President Donald Trump after he proclaimed on Saturday that he was glad former special counsel Robert Mueller had died.
“Every day, this president shows his basic indecency and unfitness for office,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) wrote on X in response to Trump’s statement.
The diatribe, in which Trump said he was “glad he’s dead” because he “can no longer hurt innocent people,” drew fierce condemnation from Democrats.
“The cruelty is the point,” Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote on X. “Trump’s goal is to distract you from rising gas prices, his aimless war, ICE abuses, and the Epstein files. Don’t give him what he wants. And may Robert Mueller, a US Marine and lifelong public servant, rest in peace.”
Mueller and the president, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) wrote on X Saturday, “represent polar opposites of what a public servant should be.”
Look, I’m not pro-hate. I’m a much bigger fan of its opposite: love. (Love is WAY better than hate — and often leads to back rubs, sandwiches, and cuddling.)
But why are the Democrats so surprised that the guy that THEY hate also hates them?
In a way, I get it. One time in college, I got “rejected” by a girl I wasn’t interested in, which kind of hurt my feelings: She just blurted it out randomly. (I had to fight the impulse to argue that I certainly WAS good enough to date someone I didn’t want to date, just to prove a point.)
Rejection feels bad. So does hate.
Even when it’s redirected.
Donald Trump is the most influential, historically significant Republican since Abraham Lincoln. No president has ever been more beloved by his party. For over a decade, he’s been the straw that stirs the drink.
But I don’t think we would’ve turned to Trump if the Dems didn’t hate us, too.
It’s been happening for decades — Rush Limbaugh used to rift on how conservatives were smeared as racists, misogynists, homophobes, and xenophobes in the early 1990s — but under the Obama years, the Dems’ hatred of conservatives escalated. And then, during the reign of Joe Biden, things got so bad, Elon Musk bought Twitter (now X) to preserve free speech, because liberals were banning conservatives from social media.
Conservative opinions, after all, were considered — what else — “hate speech.”
It’s been studied scientifically: Democrats hate Republicans far more than Republicans hate Democrats. For whatever reason, the Dems have become a party of hate.
And hate isn’t neutral. It’s probably the most destructive emotion on the planet. Hateful people are dangerous people.
Just ask Charlie Kirk.
The GOP hired Donald Trump to solve a specific problem: The party that hates us is hellbent on accumulating power — and then lording that power over us. From the tax code to the border to social media to elementary school bathrooms, the Dems were dead serious about “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
Because it’s not just Trump and conservatives that they hate. They also hate what America represents.
And Donald Trump is dead serious about hating them right back:
Is hate always a sin? In the Bible, God expresses both love and hate. (Interestingly, the phrase “hate the sin and love the sinner” isn’t in Scriptures and was popularized, at least in part, by the world’s most famous Hindu.)Here’s a list of Bible passages where God hates sin.
On the surface, it creates a moral paradox, because “love thy neighbor” and “turn the other cheek” aren't compatible with hate. Almost instinctively, hate feels dirty, gross, and ungodly. But on the other hand, if God is perfect, then by definition, certain actions are worthy of hate.
Is it a sin… not to hate sin?
In the eyes of many conservatives — including yours truly — George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, Mitt Romney, and the entire class of establishment Republicans failed to recognize the nature of their enemies. Even as the Dems dealt from the bottom of the desk — conniving, betraying, and stabbing us in the back — the Republican establishment still trusted the Democrats to act in good faith. Time and time again, we were burned.
Had they hated more and trusted less, their political careers would’ve probably been more successful.
There’s another Bible passage: “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”
True story: Once in Sunday School, I got kicked out of class for asking the teacher what would happen if a blind guy ran around poking out eyeballs, or if a toothless guy knocked out someone’s teeth. (I thought it was a clever question.) But obviously, “an eye for an eye” is a call for proportionality: The punishment must fit the crime.
Which means, the response must be proportional to the sin.
In our imperfect world, Donald Trump was the proportional response to the Democratic Party. He’s the living, breathing embodiment of “an eye for an eye.”
However much the Dems hate us, he turns around and hates them right back.
Would it be better if Trump was a “happy warrior,” like Ronald Reagan? Or, just as Reagan was perfect for his time, is Donald Trump what’s necessary for ours?
In 1964, Ayn Rand wrote the book The Virtue of Selfishness. Perhaps hate has its virtues, too.
PRediction: The Iran War won’t end this week or next. We’ve got one chance to shatter the government, kill the mullahs, break the will of the Iranian police, and optimize the Iranian people’s probability for a successful rebellion.
The mullahs aren’t close to throwing in the towel. Not yet. At this point, they’ve got nothing to lose by clinging on ‘til the bitter end.
Which means, we’ve got nothing to lose by pounding in ‘em into cornmeal.
The worst thing we could do is end the war too quickly. Once war begins, it’s our responsibility to finish it — and to do so on our terms.
PRojection: The problem is, the longer it goes, the more political pressure Trump will face to call it a day, declare victory, and bring our troops back home.
As of this writing, the lead story on the Drudge Report is a link to a CBS News poll about the war, with Drudge’s (editorialized) headerline: “Poll: 92% Want Iran War Over ASAP.”
And that’s true. The poll does say that.
Course, the poll also reports that, when asked, “What’s important for the U.S. to do regarding Iran?” a huge majority — 80% — said, “Make sure Iran’s people are safe and free.” Another 73% said, “Permanently stop Iran’s nuclear programs.” And 68% said, “Stop Iran from threatening other countries.”
Furthermore, a majority of Americans — 53% — said ending the conflict with Iran’s current leadership in power is “not acceptable.”
Are these answers contradictory? Yeah, kind of: We don’t like this war and want it to end.
But before it ends, we want to win.
PRaise: To Elon Musk:
I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 21, 2026
Because the Dems refuse to fund TSA, millions of Americans are waiting in God-awful lines. Travel is almost impossible. (Family anecdote: My 19-year-old was gonna fly in for spring break last week, but his flight was canceled. So he had to take a 22-hour Amtrack train trip, where he got pink eye.) The same Democrats who decry Israel’s “collective punishment” of the Palestinians are inflicting collective punishment on the American people.
And the TSA agents, whose starting salary is just $34,500, are caught in the middle.
Beginning Monday, ICE agents will be at airports. It will be interesting to see if that changes the Dems’ political calculations.
Either way, congrats to Musk for stepping up. He’s not always right, but he’s always a patriot.
PRedators: Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott was supposed to marry Sarah Jane Ramos on April 10, in Lake Como, Italy. As the most eligible bachelor in the Lone Star State, his nuptials were big news.
And then the wedding was abruptly called off. According to TMZ, the not-so-happy couple had a huge argument at their bachelor/bachelorette party in the Bahamas. (Which means, of course, that it must’ve been a SPECTACULAR bachelor party!)
Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott was reportedly given an ultimatum by his former fiancée before the two called off their wedding a month before it was set to take place.
Sarah Jane Ramos had a "serious conversation" with Prescott in January about being monogamous for the sake of their family before the situation allegedly exploded during their joint bachelor and bachelorette parties, Page Six reported Wednesday.
Yeah. It’s usually a good idea to agree on monogamy before tying the knot. Being faithful is vaguely important. Usually bodes well for the longevity of the marriage.
And once again, Dak walks away without a ring.
