Joe Biden tells reporters he doesn’t need an Obama endorsement while aboard his ‘No Malarkey’ bus

David P. Goldman:

“…There is only one effective way to come to terms with China’s rising economic power and global assertiveness, and that is to strengthen the United States. I have long argued for a return to Reagan-style investments in basic R&D driven by frontier defense technologies in order to counter China’s drive for technological leadership. As former House Speaker Newt Gringrich argues in his new book Trump vs. China, “It is not China’s fault that in 2017, 89% of Baltimore eighth graders couldn’t pass their math exam. . . . It is not China’s fault that too few Americans in K-12 and in college study math and science to fill the graduate schools with future American scientists. . . . It is not China’s fault the way our defense bureaucracy functions serves to create exactly the ‘military-industrial complex’ that President Dwight Eisenhower warned about.”

Gingrich warns, “There is every reason to believe that China is catching up rapidly and may outpace us. This is because of us not because of them.” In the grand scheme of things, the Hong Kong business is a distraction, magnified by the same foreign policy establishment that distracted us with endless wars. Hong Kong provides no real leverage, and our attempts to exercise leverage well might bring disaster on the people of Hong Kong. The U.S. needs to get down to the grim and urgent business of competing with China for technological preeminence…”

Original

Theodore Dalrymple:

“…The public discussion in Britain in the wake of Khan’s terrorist attack reveals three superstitions that, thanks to the activities of criminologists, sociologists, psychologists, and others, are now deeply ingrained in the public mind.

The first superstition is that terrorists are ill and are both in need of and susceptible to “rehabilitation,” as if there existed some kind of moral physiotherapy that would strengthen their moral fiber, or a psychological vaccine that would immunize them against terrorist inclinations. The second is that, once terrorists have undergone these technical processes or treatments, it can be known for certain that the treatments have worked, and that some means exist to assess whether the terrorists still harbor violent desires and intentions. The third is that there exists a way of monitoring terrorists after their release that will prevent them from carrying out attacks, should they somehow slip through the net.

All three superstitions are false, though they have provided much lucrative employment for the tertiary-educated and have contributed greatly to Britain’s deterioration from a comparatively well-ordered society to a society with one of the West’s highest rates of serious crime. Their broad public acceptance is evident in the remarks of Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who, after the attack, said that terrorists should undergo rehabilitation rather than serve full prison sentences. Meanwhile, the father of the slain young criminologist said that he would not want his son’s death to be “used as a pretext for more draconian sentences.”

Decadence can go little further. I recall a passage from Chesterton’s essay, “The Suicide of Thought”:

The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good. It is full of wild and wasted virtues . . . The vices are indeed let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone.

Original

Interesting analysis of current events by John Solomon.

John Solomon:

“…Trump currently appears to be testing Russia’s and Turkey’s commitment to degrade and defeat ISIS and other terrorist groups remaining in Syria, while maintaining the new but fragile peace deal with the Kurds.

There are still more than 10,000 jihadists in northwest Syria, where Al Baghdadi was hiding. If Vladimir Putin and Erdogan want to risk their blood and treasure to take them out, that could save America lives and money. Why not put Turkey, Russia and Iraq to the test in battling the rest of the terrorists?

With the territorial defeat of the ‘caliphate’ and the killing of Baghdadi, ISIS and other terrorists in Syria are now orphans. Former backers of various jihadi factions in the Gulf and elsewhere aren’t getting behind these armed thugs any longer. The money is drying up, and the terrorist dead enders are increasingly isolated in the northwest city of Idlib, which is facing an imminent day of reckoning with Syrian and Russian forces.

If Putin and Erdogan fail to defeat these ISIS and Al Qaeda leftovers, Trump still holds the option to re-deploy U.S. troops, positioned nearby in Iraq and elsewhere to finish the job.

The U.S. can also stop Erdogan if he is tempted to usurp some of those battle-tested jihadists for his own sectarian agenda, as some fear.

Second, Trump is watching closely whether Putin delivers a peace deal between Syria and Turkey. This is happening, and barely covered in the press. If Turkey and Syria bury the hatchet, the 3.6 million Syrian refugees in Turkey could eventually return to their original homes — while letting Russia foot the bill for needed security. This step, while not a done deal, would be monumental toward ending the war, and should be welcomed by the international community.

Third, many in the U.S. government and outside may see this dynamic as an unacceptable concession to Assad, Iran, and Putin. But the Trump administration quietly has grabbed some powerful leverage by having U.S. troops secure the lucrative but tattered Syrian oil fields.

Syrian oil will only increase in value for future negotiations with Putin. It assures that Assad, and Iran, will continue to be boxed in by U.S. power until there is a Syrian political process that resolves Assad’s future and Iran’s use of Syrian space to threaten Israel.

Fourth, with all these moves Trump has sparked Syria’s neighbors and other regional states to work out their own issues rather than wait for U.S. intervention. Not all of these countries are ones we like, such as Iran and Syria. But the regional shuttles are flying, and Trump set them in motion.

One such deal occurred last month when the Saudis brokered a peace deal between Yemen’s official government and rebels fighting in the civil war in that country. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo hailed the deal on Twitter.

Fifth, Trump can continue to count on support from Israel, whose regular bombing of Iranian and Hezbollah targets in Syria also provides a needed stick. The U.S. doesn’t just have the armed Kurdish groups as an asset in Syria, we have Israel, America’s closest regional ally, as our partner too.

Sixth, an even bigger prize looms on the horizon: a better nuclear deal with Iran. This goal is important to Israel, as well as our partners in the region and around the world, and it has gained new urgency with Tehran’s announcement it has new advanced centrifuges to accelerate uranium enrichment.

There are other reasons why now is the time to move on Iran. The economic sanctions that Trump imposed on Tehran are having a devastating impact; the IMF projects Iran’s economic growth will contract by a stunning 9.5% this year.

Likewise, events in the region, especially in Lebanon, where a secular, anti-Iran trend is taking hold, opens the door to more comprehensive peace, which could address Israel’s concerns about the missile and terrorist threat from Hezbollah.

A carrot and stick approach that gets at the core issue, disarming Hezbollah and supporting reform minded technocratic leaders, would be best to settle Israel’s security needs long-term. Trump has the rare window to seize the moment with a big deal rather than interim steps like conditioning aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces

Nearby, a new government in Jerusalem, perhaps absent the hawkish Benjamin Netanyahu, may be more willing to engage in a fresh approach to Iran. No one doubts Trump’s commitment to Israel. This was not the case with the previous administration, and a key reason why the Iran nuclear deal and its peace plans ultimately failed.

Trump and Israel also have allies willing to help bring Iran to the negotiating table. A weakened Iran is still a proud country, but Putin, who also keeps in contact with Israel, can help. If Russia shows good faith on the Turkey-Syrian front, it could earn that seat at the table with Americans, Europeans, Israelis and Iranians.

French President Emmanuel Macron is already working the back channels, fashioning a credit lifeline of $15 billion for Iran — if it will engage in a better nuclear deal, help end Yemen’s civil war, and support regional and maritime security in the Persian Gulf.

Those are a lot of “ifs” … but none much different than when Reagan boldly dared Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall. Few could imagine in June 1987 the Soviet collapse would so soon follow. But it did.

Time will tell if the Trump chess game can yield similar historic dividends in the Middle East and open the door to shrinking America’s war swollen budget deficits.

So far, Trump has maneuvered the complicated pieces — Russia, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Iran – into a place where peace and security may be closer than ever.

Now he needs a team that embraces his bold approach to end endless conflict in the Middle East, rather than undercut it with leaks and tired thinking.

Such a journey begins by eliminating the false narratives that are obscuring the potential breakthroughs in the region…”

Original

Joe Biden flubs the facts on Kim Jong Un while on his Malarkey Tour in Iowa

Hallmark Channel Under Assault by Race Hustlers and LGBTQ Cult, ‘Too White’

U.S. Reports First Month in 70 Years as Net Exporter of Oil

David Harsanyi:

“…Impeachment is a political process. And judging the process strictly on political grounds, the impeachment of President Trump hasn’t been a success for Democrats.

After all, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Adam Schiff haven’t gotten any closer to convincing a single Senate Republican to remove the president. It’s highly probable that a Senate trial run by Republicans, with new witnesses and evidence, would further corrode the Democrats’ case.

Liberals will pretend that Senate Republicans are members of a reactionary Trump cult, but if there had been incontrovertible proof of “bribery,” a number of them would be compelled to act differently. No such evidence was provided.

Adding an obstruction article, based on the Mueller report, would only make the proceedings even more intractably partisan. Yet the recent push to force White House counsel Don McGahn to testify suggests Democrats could be headed in that direction…”

Original

Click over for a good debunking of the latest lefty nonsense.

Frank Miele:

“…“Almost everything the left says these days is projection. They accuse you of exactly what they’re doing.”

With that in mind, it is time to look at the latest leftist trope against conservatives and see just how it fits Democrats themselves. This time it is the virulent accusation that Trump supporters are members of a cult — all 63 million of us!

It’s hard to know who started it for sure, but over the last month, the “cult” meme has been repeated by no less than CNN’s Brian Stelter, Dan Rather, Anthony Scaramucci, and the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank. Possibly that’s because a former cult member cashed in with a book called “The Cult of Trump.” Steve Hassan, a onetime “Moonie” who escaped the Unification Church’s clutches in the 1970s, sees President Trump as typical of cult leaders, and shared his fears with Stelter on the latter’s comically named “Reliable Sources” show…”

Original

 

Thaddeus G. McCotter:

“…As a proud debunker of the apocalyptic climate scam, it’s only natural that the climate cult has a plethora of biodegradable slings and arrows to hurl at my person. Among their most common claims is that I use “straw man” arguments to describe the climate cult’s destructive agenda. Yet, no sooner is this straw man accusation leveled that some new fanaticism unwittingly provides me vindication.

For example: “Earth Needs Fewer People to Beat the Climate Crisis, Scientists Say” by Eric Roston in the “Climate Changed” (get it?) section of Bloomberg News (which I believe was founded by a billionaire former Republican mayor who oddly expects Democratic presidential primary voters to embrace his candidacy rather than confiscate his property).

In an “emergency declaration,” more than 11,000 of the climate cult’s high priests of politicized science pledged your lives, your fortunes, your sacred honor, and your genitalia to impose immediate, radical changes in how human beings acquire energy and food, and reproduce.

After noting that 40 years ago “scientists from 50 nations converged on Geneva to discuss what was then called the ‘CO2-climate problem’” and “predicted global warming would eventually become a major environmental challenge,” (but failing to note the earlier false alarms that the planet was heading into a “another ice age”) apparently “the scientists got to work, building a strategy on how to attack the problem and laying the groundwork for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s preeminent body of climate scientists. Their goal was to get ahead of the problem before it was too late.”

So who screwed the pooch?

You did.

Here comes our first clue: “But after a fast start, the fossil fuel industry, politics and the prioritization of economic growth over planetary health slowed them down.” (Emphasis mine.) Such is the cost of a venal concern for people over planet.

While some compassionate folks consider allowing their fellow human beings to pursue their happiness and avoid starving to death or dying from exposure to be a moral good, such is the road to global warming hell and it’s paved with good intentions, like preferring not to see people die. Small wonder, then, the 11,000 Malthusian “experts” in their BioScience jeremiad warn: better to gain the world and lose some souls in the process…”

Original

Liz Peek:

“…Democrats are frantic. For decades, they have taken the black vote for granted. Today, there are signs that empty promises and radical leftist social policies are leaving black voters behind. Worse, polling shows that President Trump is picking up support from black voters. Having tarred the president as a racist and bigot, liberals cannot imagine that even one African American could possibly choose to support him. They are in denial, and it could cost them the 2020 election.

Democratic candidates are promising the moon to win over black voters. Reparations, massive support for historically black colleges, bail reform — everything is on the table. But there are signs that the candidate racking up the most consequential wins with minority voters is Trump.

Nothing — nothing — could be more threatening to Democratic prospects in 2020…”

Original

Bloomberg News Will Not Investigate Democratic Candidates, Only Trump

You can’t make this stuff up.

Dem Disaster Looms as Trump Goes ‘Bigly’ With Blacks

Roger L. Simon:

“…While the media remains obsessed with an increasingly pointless impeachment by the House and the even more dubious removal of the president by the Senate, political news of genuine electoral importance has slipped in under the rug. According to two new polls, Trump has now gained popularity with African-Americans— and the numbers are significant, even “bigly.”

Watch the chyrons