• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower



From 15 Days to Two Years

The date of March 16, 2020 isn’t just a day that will live in infamy—it marked the beginning of the largest crime against humanity since the last world war.

By Julie Kelly at American Greatness:

March 14, 2022

On Saturday morning, my daughter in college texted me: “I got sent home two years ago today. Feels like a dream.” After I responded, she sent an uncharacteristically brief reply:


To say the least. In March 2020, once-free citizens around the world surrendered their liberty and livelihoods in a futile attempt to “stop” a virus. The most technologically advanced civilization in the history of mankind quickly adopted medieval fixes that bordered on quackery, sold by snake oil salesmen in the credentialied class and news media, codified through executive fiat by elected leaders of both parties.

“Just 15 days,” we were told on March 16, 2020, “to slow the spread.” Do your part to promote the “common good”—the historical rallying cry of every wannabe despot—or be branded a heartless heretic. And it worked, far better than the original architects probably anticipated.

On the same day my daughter left her college dormitory in upstate New York, not to return to a normal campus life for two years, I posted this on Twitter:

This is what the Left wants. They want people stripped of wealth, isolated, and terrified. They want sources of joy—church, sporting events, vacations, large social gatherings—eliminated. This is how they get control. And it’s far scarier than any virus.

To say that was a very unpopular view at the time would be an understatement. But having covered the climate change movement for years, I recognized a familiar approach to the spread of COVID-19 hysteria: use flawed data to whip up a public frenzy and shut down all debate in fealty to “science!”

Any disagreement over the data, no matter how unreliable or untested the data happened to be—and in the early months, the only available data came from China—made you a “science denier,” or worse.

This time around, sadly, the hysteria wasn’t pushed solely by lefty environmental activists but also by President Donald Trump, Republican governors, and “conservative” influencers throughout the media. Once that buy-in was made, all hope was lost.

Trump’s catastrophic decision to acquiesce to the demands of Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx—the former a charlatan, the latter a dunce—and shut down the country two years ago this week was by far the worst moment in his presidency and rivals the worst moment in any presidency. As usual, however, Trump’s first instinct (the one he suppressed to appease those demanding we honor The Science™) was the right one. The cure should not be worse than the disease, he fretted. He knew it, but he listened to the quacks anyway.

The cure, of course, got worse. Emboldened by their success in forcing Trump to authorize the first 15-day shutdown, the then-adored Fauci and Birx took it a step further. With two dubious projection models in hand, the pair went to the White House at the end of March 2020 and convinced Trump to extend the lockdowns another month.

The decision sealed his electoral fate; the booming economy he helped build entered a death spiral.

Which is why the Left will try this again. Pandemic lockdowns produced all sorts of benefits for Democrats, including outcomes the environmental movement had been dreaming about for five decades: fossil fuel use plummeted as airline and vehicle traffic screeched to a halt; meat prices soared; commercial buildings in large energy-consuming cities sat vacant. 

Lockdowns, one international energy group cheered, resulted in a new worldwide low of CO2 emissions in 2020. “The decline in emissions . . . is without precedent in human history—broadly speaking, this is the equivalent of removing all of the European Union’s emissions from the global total.”

And just as those figures started to rebound, the Russia-Ukraine war presented an ideal opportunity to institute a soft form of lockdowns; with gas prices rapidly rising to historical highs, Americans are voluntarily limiting their own energy use.

The Biden regime fully admits the conflict will accelerate plans to move the country’s energy independence from gas and oil to wind and solar, achieving Biden’s pledge to cut carbon emissions in half by 2030. The Build Back Better plan, intended to “reset” U.S. priorities post-pandemic, devotes at least $550 billion for “a once-in-a-generation investments in clean energy and infrastructure that can help tackle the climate crisis.”

Aside from advancing long-time climate goals, the lockdowns contributed to an even bigger score for Biden and the Democrats in 2020: stealing the presidential election.

In May 2020, the CDC issued guidance that gave a scientific imprimatur to Democrats’ long-desired changes to voting laws including lax use of absentee ballots. A record number of mail-in ballots, millions of which were unlawfully handled before Election Day, resulted in Trump’s purported defeat.

With heavy losses expected in November, Democrats will try election-related lockdowns again. The weeks leading up to Election Day happen to coincide with the annual flu season, so Democrats, including incumbent governors in tight races, will likely attempt the winning 2020 formula once more.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, the only leader to express regret for authorizing shutdowns in his state—under pressure at the time by the Trump White House—questioned whether “the science [will] change because you have a midterm election coming up,” noting that Democrats didn’t reverse their COVID panic until they saw dismal polling results.

But will the public fall for it? Given what we’ve witnessed over the past two years, unfortunately, the answer might be “yes.” Millions of our countrymen have revealed themselves to be miserable sociopaths gratified by human suffering, especially that of children. These ghouls still rage at the sight of unmasked kindergarteners and college football stadiums filled with joyous students.

A healthy, or rather, unhealthy, portion of the American public will gladly do this all over again. They now mourn the fact that life is slowly returning to normal, continuing to wear two face masks in a sign of defiance and solidarity with their fellow nutcases. For its part, the Biden regime is keeping the re-entry door to lockdowns open just enough to blow it wide open again months from now if necessary; the useless face mask mandate on airplanes and mass transit, for example, has been extended until at least April 18.

Pfizer just announced a fourth shot will be necessary for vaccinated people and an annual booster will be recommended for all Americans as we “learn to live with it,” CEO Albert Bourla (a veterinarian by training) said in a weekend interview. The executive who delayed release of positive news about the vaccine until after the 2020 election also boasted about Big Pharma’s newfound popularity. “What we see now after we were able to step up and provide solutions, a significant uplift on the reputation of the industry,” Bourla told Margaret Brennan on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday. “That’s a fact, we can see it with polls.”

It’s only a matter of time until these power-hungry frauds are back at the lockdown trough.

Our children, on the other hand, will live with some form of post-traumatic stress. Mid-March will roll around every year, and they, like my daughters, will be reminded of all that was needlessly and irrevocably lost because the adults morally responsible for protecting them instead abandoned them.

Report Adabout:blank

Despite how rich or popular the lockdowns made Albert Bourla or how pleased millions of Americans were at the sight of mass misery, the reality is that lockdowns did immense damage across the globe that may never be fully calculated. The date of March 16, 2020 isn’t just a day that will live in infamy—it marked the beginning of the largest crime against humanity since the last world war.

And the perpetrators aren’t finished yet.

Saudi’s Don’t Trust That Biden Guy Either!

WSJ: A Sino-Saudi attack on the dollar?

ED MORRISSEY Mar 15, 2022 at HotAir:

(AP Photo/Cliff Owen)

Earlier today, I noted that the Saudis have signaled unhappiness with the Biden administration’s pursuit of a deal with Iran by opening up to China. The Wall Street Journal reports that the Saudis may have a bigger signal in mind than first thought. Rather than stick to the dollar for its oil exports, the Saudis have begun negotiating with Beijing on a deal that would allow China to use its yuan instead — an opening gambit that could put a big dent in the dollar’s standing as a reserve currency:

Saudi Arabia is in active talks with Beijing to price some of its oil sales to China in yuan, people familiar with the matter said, a move that would dent the U.S. dollar’s dominance of the global petroleum market and mark another shift by the world’s top crude exporter toward Asia.

The talks with China over yuan-priced oil contracts have been off and on for six years but have accelerated this year as the Saudis have grown increasingly unhappy with decades-old U.S. security commitments to defend the kingdom, the people said.

The Saudis are angry over the U.S.’s lack of support for their intervention in the Yemen civil war, and over the Biden administration’s attempt to strike a deal with Iran over its nuclear program. Saudi officials have said they were shocked by the precipitous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan last year.

China buys more than 25% of the oil that Saudi Arabia exports. If priced in yuan, those sales would boost the standing of China’s currency. The Saudis are also considering including yuan-denominated futures contracts, known as the petroyuan, in the pricing model of Saudi Arabian Oil Co. , known as Aramco.

It would be a profound shift for Saudi Arabia to price even some of its roughly 6.2 million barrels of day of crude exports in anything other than dollars. The majority of global oil sales—around 80%—are done in dollars, and the Saudis have traded oil exclusively in dollars since 1974, in a deal with the Nixon administration that included security guarantees for the kingdom.

This isn’t an energy problem, so it can’t be fixed by rapidly increasing American production — at least not directly. This is a diplomatic and strategic issue, one that Joe Biden’s pursuit of a renewed JCPOA deal with Iran has exacerbated, if not almost entirely created. The Obama administration also bent toward Tehran at the expense of the regional Sunni states, but the Saudis et al benefited from Donald Trump’s rejection of the JCPOA and a focus on US alliances on that side of the regional ledger.

That’s the strategic outlook from the Saudis. The strategic outlook from China is just as obvious, although an attack on the dollar would be risky for Beijing. They hold a lot of US currency in reserve, after all, and that is one way they use to manipulate the yuan. Andy Kessler predicted over the weekend that such a move might come from China and Russia, and gave WSJ a rundown of the stakes involved:

Today countries still keep America’s virtual Benjamins in their virtual bank vaults—modern banking’s gold. China has more than $1 trillion in Treasurys. Russia has about $100 billion in dollars of about $500 billion in their increasingly frozen foreign exchange.

But why do these countries keep dollars? What backs the currency? The conventional answer is the “full faith and credit” of the U.S. government. Ha, that and $3.65 will get you a Starbucks grande latte, though not in Moscow anymore. What really backs the dollar is the future tax-generating ability of America’s growing productive economy and a defense structure to defend that economy’s strength. Without that, there’s no horizontal-binding duct tape.

South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and especially Russia learned this the hard way during currency crisis of the late 1990s. They didn’t keep enough foreign reserves to protect their own currencies after overextending credit and bank loans denominated in dollars came due. Argentina, Venezuela and Zimbabwe learned this too.

That’s a risk that China runs now in any serious attack on the dollar’s status as a reserve currency, Kessler notes:

Whatever China holds in Russian rubles has lost more than 40% of its value in mere weeks. Ouch. If Russia or other countries hold yuan, they risk a similar devaluation if, say, China gets squeezed by sanctions for invading Taiwan. China and Russia should be wary of the mutual delusion of backing only by the ruble and the yuan. And I hope Russia does load up on crypto, the decline of which may make the ’90s currency crisis seem like a picnic.

As Ben Franklin might tell today’s U.S. leaders, “You have the reserve currency status, if you can keep it.” What to do? The Federal Reserve should solidify the dollar by raising interest rates pronto.

China could decide that the strategic value of dismantling Bretton Woods outweighs the damage they could do to themselves in the short run. As for the Saudis, they might end up noting that China has been facilitating the Iran deal, as noted by Putin’s interlocutor in the talks Mikhail Ulyanov. This could just be a shot across Biden’s bow to deflect the White House from a very bad deal with the mullahs of Tehran.

One other way to strengthen the dollar, apart from Kessler’s suggestions, would be to rapidly increase oil output and push more exports onto the global markets. The extra oil would perhaps push the Saudis back by undercutting their sales price and might mean less benefit to China, even if they do succeed in transitioning their imports from dollars to yuan. However, we all know what to expect from the White House and its progressive allies on this front, do we not? Sigh ….

“Tell Me That Doesn’t Sound Like Justin Trudeau, Jacinda Ardem, Or Joe Biden!”

March 15, 2022

Chernobyl and the Lies of COVID

By J.B. Shurk at American Thinker:

The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (officially the Vladimir Lenin Nuclear Power Plant) in Ukraine lies just outside the abandoned town of Pripyat, about sixty miles north of Kyiv and ten miles from the southern border of Belarus.  It is the site of the catastrophic 1986 nuclear accident that took the lives of hundreds from acute radiation syndrome, left unknown thousands with cancer, and poisoned the surrounding environment.  It cost nearly a hundred billion dollars to contain, required over a half-million recovery workers to decontaminate the area, and killed or disabled a third of the Russians, Belarusians, Ukrainians, Latvians, Estonians, and others involved in that cleanup.  Those workers, as well as the surrounding populations, have all experienced increased rates of miscarriages, cancer, and life-threatening ailments.  Had so many not sacrificed themselves to contain the fallout, however, Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and much of Germany could have become uninhabitable for more than a century.

Chernobyl is back in the news because Russian troops have taken control of the area during their invasion of Ukraine.  The International Atomic Energy Agency and European nations throughout the continent are understandably nervous about this predicament, but this essay is not about those concerns.  It is about the lessons Western governments should have learned from that nearly apocalyptic event but instead ignored during the last two years of COVID mania.  

As details concerning the Chernobyl disaster became available after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the West reached the inescapable conclusion that the tragedy could have occurred only in a closed-off socialist system in which the State preserves its authority by maintaining a false image of always being correct and never being wrong.  The lessons were clear:

(1) When “science” must be State-sanctioned, then the objectivity required to foresee and correct problems disappears. 

(2) When dissent and conflicting analysis are treated as “misinformation” or “disinformation,” then truth is routinely treated as a lie.  

(3) When concerns for national security and a culture of official State secrets dominate all government operations, then censorship of facts and viewpoints prevents timely problem-solving. 

Institutional lies have life-and-death consequences.  The Chernobyl nuclear explosion was both a consequence of government lies and a blaring warning against closed socialist systems, “official truths,” and State-controlled censorship.  Still, the West disregarded all of this during COVID and followed the Soviets’ example.

HBO aired a five-part miniseries on Chernobyl in 2019, and the well-done effort to catalog the fateful events leading up to the nuclear blast masterfully exposes how State lies and State secrets lead to profound human tragedy.  As the series moves back and forth from conversations among engineers at the power plant to high-level discussions among political apparatchiks advising Soviet president Gorbachev, nearly everyone involved is incapable of processing the overwhelming evidence that a nuclear explosion had occurred because doing so would mean that the “system” had failed horrendously.  It was easier to embrace the lie that everything was fine than to acknowledge that the Soviet model was capable of error.  

When a dissenting scientist repeatedly expresses his belief that a reactor meltdown and explosion has occurred, the power plant’s director calls his analysis “disgraceful.”  “I understand you’ve been saying dangerous things,” he scolds the professor, before accusing him of spreading outright “disinformation.”  At another point during the series, as the team on the ground struggles to dispose of radioactive graphite, only to learn that the Soviet government has intentionally lied about the seriousness of the incident to the Germans providing equipment inadequate for the monumental task at hand, an exasperated party member (who already knows he will one day die from exposure) sardonically moans, “The official position of the State is that a global nuclear catastrophe is not possible in the Soviet Union.”  

It is impossible to watch this show, released over six months before people first heard about COVID, without concluding that it was a remarkably prescient description of Western governments’ reactions to the pandemic.  What has been the most terrifying aspect of these last two years of unconscionable lockdowns, mandates, maskings, and forced injections?  It was not the COVID-19 virus or the illness and death it has caused.  It was Western governments’ near-unanimous declarations that the State is always correct in its assessments of scientific problems and that the application of force against citizens is justified.  

When the pandemic was beginning and health officials declared cloth masks ineffective, State science was above reproach.  When health authorities changed their minds months later and declared cloth masks mandatory, State science was still above reproach.  Now that once again the weight of evidence has proved that masks did next to nothing to mediate the spread of disease, the State science has flipped but still claims a record of infallibility.  More and more evidence is proving that lockdowns and reckless government spending did nothing but destroy small businesses, family savings, and national economies.  Still, those who resisted house arrest, financial destitution, or other State-ordered threats to liberty were labeled criminals or worse, domestic terrorists.  Just as with Chernobyl, protecting the authority of the State by hiding its (often ridiculous) lies has been more important than saving actual lives.

When dissenting scientists repeatedly tried to warn about the harm lockdowns would have on childhood development, timely cancer treatment, drug, and alcohol dependency, and rates of suicide, their concerns were dismissed as contrary to the mission of the State.  When dissenting scientists questioned the need for widespread dissemination of synthetic mRNA “vaccines” when evidence for the enduring effectiveness of natural immunity was increasingly strong, they were labeled “anti-vaxxers” and “science deniers” deserving of scorn.  When dissenting scientists warned about using mRNA “vaccines” without first performing critical long-term studies on their potential side-effects, they were de-platformed from government-controlled social media, censored on YouTube and Facebook, and scrubbed from internet search engines.  Yet an awful lot of what has been labeled as “misinformation” or “disinformation” by the West’s state-corporate globalist cartel these last two years has proven to be either likely or one hundred percent true.  For those COVID- or “vaccine”-related issues that remain uncertain, the CDC, the FDA, or individual pharmaceutical companies have taken it upon themselves to hide or bury the information from public view.  Still to this day, the question of whether COVID-19 was developed in a Chinese lab funded by American taxpayers has been shrouded by Intelligence Community obfuscation.  Were there any doubt before, it is indisputable that state secrets — Soviet or Western — always come before public health.

Nothing the West has done in response to COVID distinguishes it from the Soviets’ handling of the preventable Chernobyl tragedy.  After brute force was used against citizens from Australia and New Zealand to Austria and Democrat-controlled cities in the U.S., Canada’s recent “emergency” declaration and bank account confiscation against protesting citizens proved just how Sovietized the West has become.  The worst part is that everything done against us has been repeatedly defended as for our own good

As an old communist in the Chernobyl miniseries exclaims before a rousing ovation: “The State tells us it wants to prevent a panic.  Listen well!  It’s true, when the people see the police, they will be afraid.  But it is my experience that when the people ask questions that are not in their own best interest, they should simply be told to keep their minds on their labor and leave matters of the State to the State.  We seal off the city.  No one leaves.  And cut the phone lines.  Contain the spread of misinformation.  That is how we keep the people from undermining the fruits of their own labor.” 

Tell me that doesn’t sound just like Justin Trudeau, Jacinda Ardern, or Joe Biden.

That Hero Of Our American Day, President Ronald Reagan Reviewed….

MARCH 15, 2022 BY STEVEN HAYWARD at PowerLine:


Stan Evans, about whom a certain new book is just days away, was an early fan of Ronald Reagan, arguing as early as March of 1968 that Reagan—rather than Nixon (whom Evans disliked)—should be the GOP nominee.

But it wasn’t simply Reagan’s conservatism that attracted his favor. He noticed Reagan’s broad appeal in California, and thought it could be extended to new constituencies on the national level, as indeed it did in the fullness of time when Reagan attracted the votes of millions of “Reagan Democrats” in the 1980s.

Here’s what he wrote in March 1968:

The rise of California Governor Ronald Reagan as a major national figure constitutes one of the most remarkable stories in the annals of American politics. . . The evidence suggests that, more than any other public figure, he expresses and embodies a powerful new tendency in our politics. . . The evidence further shows that the currents running beneath the surface could rejuvenate the Republican Party and change the shape of American politics. It suggests that, if Ronald Reagan or someone like him were to be the GOP nominee in 1968, powerful new forces could be brought into the Republican fold, reviving a party which has long needed a fresh infusion of strength.

This went hand-in-glove with Evans’s view that conservatism ought to have greater appeal to the Democratic-leaning “working class.” In this respect Evans anticipated Trump’s breakthrough in 2016, though Trump’s success can also be seen partly as a return of the “Reagan Democrat.” But that begs the question: why did the Reagan Democrats disappear after Reagan, and only return with Trump? Evans would have said it was the return of pre-Reagan establishment-type Republicans with names that rhyme with Tush.

Reminder that I’ll be live online today at 2 pm eastern at AEI to talk about the book.

P.S. Richard Reinsch’s fine review of the book is noted in our Picks section, but if it rotates off you can find it here.

Note: Some Democrats were rather slipping to the extreme left as Americans already in the late 1970s. I had been active in the Party until this President arrived as a candidate in 1980. Ronald Reagan made me the Republican I still am today….I haven’t yet made a mistake….well a big one until the ones today who are playing games while America rots from it lefties….ghr

BIDEN WORLD: “Most bizarrely, nearly $2 billion was sent to county governments that do not even exist”.



An email from the House Budget Committee this morning forwards a copy of Rep. Jason Smith’s Washington Examiner column “One year later: Why Biden’s ‘American Rescue’ failed.” It makes a good companion to my translation of Biden’s remarks in the adjacent post. Rep. Smith zooms in on the details as he has learned them to date:

During the debate on the House floor, the Democratic chairman of the House Budget Committee said, “There’s no money wasted in this legislation.” He could not have been more wrong. In fact, billions of dollars have been wasted or mismanaged by state and local governments. As millions of people were left standing on the sidelines because of COVID-19 lockdown policies, state and local politicians saw an opportunity to use billions of federal tax dollars to pay for pet projects they had been promising voters for years, completely unrelated to COVID.

For example, President Biden’s home state of Delaware is spending $40 million of “emergency COVID-19 funding” to build libraries, New Jersey is spending $15 million on a sports complex, and Syracuse, New York, is pushing $2 million to plant trees. The city of Philadelphia has proposed spending $18 million to literally hand out free money via a universal basic income pilot program.

It gets worse. Stimulus checks as large as $1,400 were sent to Japanese citizens living in Japan. Checks went to convicted prisoners, including the Boston Marathon bomber. Michigan is spending $400 million to upgrade state parks and trails, a city in Connecticut is spending almost $1 million to build 40 luxury apartments, and Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, is spending nearly $17 million to build a golf course with a two-story clubhouse and driving range.

Most bizarrely, nearly $2 billion was sent to county governments that do not even exist.

That is just a sample of what we have discovered at the House Budget Committee, and surely, the list goes on.

Whole thing here.


March 14, 2022

Democrat leadership has devalued America beyond recognition

By Terry Paulding at American Thinker:

Elections have consequences. How many times have you heard that? It’s certainly true. The world has been watching our country tilt to the dark side, which set things in motion that have consequences far beyond our own society. I see what is happening in Ukraine, at least in part, as the result of our dishonest left’s manipulation, leading to the emasculation and degradation of our once well-ordered society.

I was reminded of this while reading this article on Zero Hedge about what’s happening in Ukraine. It makes a bunch of points (i.e., that the West is wrong in its understanding of events there and wrong in its approach, and that we are heading for a global realignment, etc.) but only one has stuck with me. Although this point is addressed obliquely, it’s still clear: We Americans have lost our right to claim the moral high ground—and along with it, our ability to influence others positively. As to that, the essay has a point.

People worldwide can see right through our BS, unhampered by the filter of our own media’s propaganda. Just as we watch the bombing in Ukraine, Russians watched the Russiagate witch-hunt against Trump, the manipulation of “facts” to fit the story, and the way we used their country in the process. They see our gaslighting, canceling, and censorship of anyone who doesn’t toe the current party line, and they also can see our collapsing military, which is preoccupied with all the wrong things.

The world watched us taking our own people as political prisoners, locking them in the dungeon, and throwing away the key. They saw that happen after watching our cities violently burn, with those perpetrators suffering no consequences. Slowly, we’ve shifted from being viewed by the world as the arrogant paragon of a virtuous life, to simply arrogant fools. Recent events in Poland, when our Vice President struggled to make simple, declarative phrases, have reinforced negative impressions completely.

Unless we change, this idiocy will be our downfall as a country. The stage is set for our tumble to happen rather quickly. Vacant leadership, rampant inflation, a lack of energy production, and a collapsed supply chain will combine with the consequences of the COVID scam, the climate scam, Russia gate, our open border, the violence of BLM and Antifa, to ensure our downfall.

Ukrainians certainly have no reason to have faith in us. We’ve provided zero actual leadership to help them deal with the Russian invasion. They are aware of our manipulation of their own national leadership during the Obama years, especially Biden’s role. They’ve watched us turn our national border into a joke while pretending to help defend theirs as sacrosanct. They know our words have no clout behind them. They’ve observed us over time, seeing our “equity” scam play out, how it pits Americans against one another in increasingly violent ways. They’ve watched as half our country, probably more, has lost faith in our government. I’m guessing they see and disapprove of our extreme national gender dysphoria as well—certainly, multiple “genders” is an alien concept to them, as it ought to be to anyone with a working mind.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine should have been stopped before it started. If we’d been capable of taking our once-strong leadership role with our European allies, we would have seen the huge threat to Putin if Ukraine joined NATO right on Russia’s border and retreated on that point rather than pushed it. In great part because of our lack of perceptive and sure leadership, thousands of people are being killed and displaced.

I may be a cynic, but if I’m not mistaken, this all ties in with the naked globalist aim to diminish our world population by a billion or so. WW3 would certainly fit the bill. After all, the Great Reset requires far fewer inhabitants warming the earth. The globalists, of course, would survive, given their unlimited financial resources. For the rest of us, those of us not privileged to be “movers and shakers” in the world order, but the pawns—well, they don’t really care very much. If Russia uses a nuke, oh, well. They’ll be watching from a safe perch.

Once upon a time, long ago when I was young and the Cold War had us practicing duck and cover at school, we Americans were sure we held the high ground, and our free-market economy and thriving society demonstrated moral superiority over communism. The Russians—Soviets, then—had thuggish leaders who pounded their shoes on the table, unwieldy 5-year plans, empty store shelves, and a poor and downtrodden populace, collectivized and profoundly unmotivated. They were not allowed ownership or pride of accomplishment, existing under the thumb of an ever-richer dictatorial leadership they reviled.

We, on the other hand, had our free society—freedom of speech, an open invitation to better ourselves through hard work and personal achievement, and a system of law and order that was based on fairness, not who greased the most palms or gaslighted the most.


Biden pledges: We won’t fight a war against Russia in Ukraine

ALLAHPUNDIT Mar 14, 2022 at HotAir:

 Share  Tweet  

AP Photo/Alex Brandon

A leftover from Friday. Hawks are complaining about this statement on grounds that it implicitly invites Putin to grab any non-NATO country he likes and to pummel Ukraine into submission using whatever conventional means he can muster.


I take those points, but I read that tweet in the context of Russian saber-rattling about NATO weapons convoys. The implicit deal Biden is offering is that we won’t put boots on the ground so long as Russia doesn’t interfere with NATO’s efforts to supply the Ukrainians.

Which is a good deal for the U.S. if Putin accepts it. It’s a nod to deescalation during an uncertain moment. But it also reflects the sense that Russia won’t win this war so long as Ukraine remains well supplied. The Russian army can and will pound Ukrainian cities in the short term…



…but the Ukrainian army won’t break. The Russian army might. In fact, one way to look at the conflict is as a race between the two sides to keep their troops fed, fueled, and armed. Given the logistical nightmares the Russians have faced and the fact that it’s only week three and already Putin is begging China for weapons, there’s a good chance that Ukraine will win that race — so long as we can scare Putin into leaving NATO’s convoys alone.

Maybe we can’t. I argued yesterday that the more desperate Putin gets, paradoxically the more likely he might be to take a pot shot at NATO. But drawing a red line around the convoys with a pledge not to intervene militarily otherwise is a sound offer if you believe the Ukrainians can win on their own.

As for the idea that Biden is inviting Putin to grab Moldova or some other neighboring non-NATO country, is the Russian military capable of doing that right now? They have their hands so full in Ukraine that they’re looking for reinforcements from Syria and Belarus. No one knows how long the Russian war machine will be able to go on before it’s hampered by the country’s massive economic crisis. Some observers aren’t sure that Russia’s air force can even effectively target a NATO convoy inside Ukraine at the moment:



If Russia had rolled over Ukraine as easily as the Kremlin believed it would, the west would rightly be panicked about Putin trying to expand the war regionally to Moldova or Georgia. And maybe he will; it’s an open question whether he’s thinking rationally and what sort of information he has access to. But expanding the war now would further burden a shambolic Russian effort in Ukraine by stretching it thinner, complicating Russia’s already complex logistical problems.

Plus, how many more troops can they realistically stand to lose before their combat effectiveness begins to deteriorate?

The bodies of Russian soldiers killed in battle in Ukraine are filling up morgues in Belarus, local residents told RFE/RL.

Russian soldiers killed in battle are being brought by truck to the morgues and then sent back to Russia by train or plane, residents said.

Residents described the horror of seeing the bodies loaded on a train at Mazyr for transfer back to Russia.

“The number of bodies was unbelievably large. People at the Mazyr station were simply shocked by the number of bodies being put on the train,” a local resident in Mazyr told RFE/RL.

Maybe that’s propaganda, but for what it’s worth, the Telegraph is hearing the same thing. And it jibes with the reports of shocking numbers of Russian KIA coming out of western intelligence agencies.

This weekend I was talking about the war with pro-Trump relatives and they complained that Biden looked weak because Putin was “dictating terms” to us. How so, I asked? They couldn’t say. We’ve given the Ukrainians tons of anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons, we helped train their army, we’re sharing battlefield intelligence with them, and we dropped the economic equivalent of a 50-megaton nuke on them, leading to surreal developments like this:


The idea that Putin is pushing us around just because we’re not involved in a hot war is goofy. Eventually my relatives pointed to the MiGs that the White House has held up, which has become a sore point for hawks in Congress from both parties and which is fair enough. But I have yet to see any military expert argue that the MiGs would be a battlefield gamechanger for Ukraine or that they’d even be as effective in deterring Russian airstrikes as the surface-to-air missiles we’re supplying. It seems to me that the U.S. has momentarily found a “sweet spot” in supplying the Ukrainians, giving them enough to mount a highly effective defense without giving them so much as to draw a Russian reprisal that might touch off a world war. Every additional step we take in escalating risks pushing us out of that sweet spot. That might be worth doing if there’s a weapon out there that would change the direction of the war decisively in Ukraine’s favor, but if there isn’t then I can see the point of Biden’s tweet. He’s trying to firm up our position in the “sweet spot” by incentivizing Russia not to intercept our weapons shipments.

I’ll leave you with this fascinating thread by Kamil Galeev about why the Russian military looks so weak, which is long but worth your time. The short version: Putin and the “deep state” he commands prefer a weak, undertrained, demoralized military because a stronger military might threaten their hold on power. The kleptocracy has “coup-proofed” Russia by hollowing out its one conceivable rival for power. Normally Russia pays no price for that since it typically only faces small countries or ragtag forces like Syrian jihadis on the battlefield. In the case of Ukraine, though, Putin somehow got it into his head that a large-ish population with a military that’s been preparing for this fight would roll over for him, sparing his army from having to show what it’s truly made of. Oops.



Fifteen Minutes Of Dreamland For Thought!

Is Our Blessed America Beginning To Recover FROM LEFTY OBAMA DEMS?



Has there ever been a faster cycle of liberal non-sense to the “never mind” stage than the case of “Defund the Police?”

Of course, simply refunding the police is not sufficient when there is an all-out attack on the police for their practices, or DA’s who have decided to play catch-and-release. Should we be surprised that more and more police officers conclude it isn’t worth the trouble to arrest someone if they’re going to be back on the street in hours and have their charges dropped?

We shouldn’t be surprised, then, to see soaring complaints and formal investigations into police officers for not doing their jobs. The San Francisco Chronicle reported (by way of Reddit, since the Chron has a paywall) recently:

More S.F. residents share stories of police standing idly by as crimes unfold: ‘They didn’t want to be bothered’

Is property crime in some ways allowed in our city? Are police on an unofficial strike or work stoppage?

Now, a man police believe is the culprit is in jail — busted only because he allegedly went on to commit more vandalism days after the Wine Society mess. But the episode spotlighted an issue bigger than one arrest: a pattern of some officers on the San Francisco force seemingly uninterested in dealing with crime.

After reading the column about the parklet, Supervisor Hillary Ronen wrote a letter to Scott demanding answers. She told him she’d witnessed officers tell her constituents there’s no point in investigating or arresting a suspect because Boudin won’t prosecute anyway — an assertion the D.A. rejects, though he does strive to reduce incarceration.

The letter highlighted alarming data backing up many residents’ concerns that police have thrown up their hands. For example, last year the Department of Police Accountability opened 595 cases into alleged police wrongdoing; the largest share by far, 42.6%, related to “neglect of duty.” That percentage has ticked up steadily since 2016, when neglect of duty made up 32% of complaints.

Ronen’s letter stated that of all the crimes reported in San Francisco in 2021, just 8.1% led to an arrest, the lowest rate in a decade. Just 3.5% of reported property crimes yielded an arrest. And, of course, that doesn’t include all the crimes residents have stopped bothering to tell police about.“…

Just how did people think police officers would respond to a non-stop campaign to demonize them? (Note, however, that the real and unstated subtext of the WaPo story linked here is the power of police unions, which are no different in their effect than teachers unions and other public employee unions that should be curtailed or abolished.)