• 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

Civil Note from Chaotic UK Regarding the Brexit Mess!

There will still be an election in the UK, and Brexit will still happen

I feel I have to lay these things out for overseas audiences, because a casual glance at the headlines might give you the impression that the United Kingdom is in the throes of some terrible crisis. The New York Times and the Washington Post, in particular, now run hilarious articles on an almost daily basis about how dreadful everything suddenly is “because of Brexit.”

Yes, there is a crisis in Parliament, but, outside Westminster, things are ticking along very nicely. In the three years since the referendum, Britain has attracted more foreign investment than any country in the world except China. Our stock exchange is surging. There are more EU nationals working in the U.K. than ever, belying the Times’ idiotic claims of a faltering economy, let alone rising xenophobia.

What of the shenanigans at Westminster? Well, one thing that I can state definitively is that they are not a “Brexit crisis.” Brexit, as you must have noticed, has not happened. What we are seeing is the opposite of a Brexit crisis, an “un-Brexit crisis,” a crisis caused by the refusal of MPs to do what they promised to do when they last stood for election.

As I write, the opposition parties are seeking to overturn the referendum result. They don’t exactly phrase it like that, of course. Instead, they say that they don’t want to leave without a deal. But they know perfectly well that if you rule out a “no-deal Brexit,” you rule out Brexit itself. If “no-deal” is off the table, then all Brussels has to do to keep Britain in the European Union is continue to offer intolerable terms.

On Wednesday afternoon, MPs passed a motion obliging the government to seek as many extensions as the EU wanted. Boris Johnson, the prime minister, responded by calling for a general election. Whereupon Labour, which has been demanding an immediate poll for two years, suddenly went cold on the idea. Under legislation passed in 2010, two-thirds of MPs must agree to an early dissolution of Parliament. On Wednesday evening, Labour and the other opposition parties, looking at the opinion polls, voted against such a dissolution.

Yes, you read that correctly. The parties that have spent the past month accusing Johnson of mounting some sort of coup just voted to prevent him from subjecting his tenure to a national vote.

The House of Commons has thus put itself in a ridiculous position. Pro-EU MPs have voted to keep in office a government they have calculatedly undermined. They have done so for the sole purpose of overturning a referendum result which they had previously promised to uphold. That, my friends, is our political crisis in a nutshell.

Now the good news. Voters are not idiots. They can see what is going on. Sooner or later, probably sooner, there will have to be a general election. The Conservatives have, in effect, deselected 21 of their MPs, including several former ministers, for voting with Labour to prevent Brexit. Although that purge has horrified commentators, most of whom are in awe of the Europhile grandees, it is a necessary prelude to an election campaign that will turn on Brexit. The Tories could hardly fight an election promising to leave the EU while several of their candidates refused to accept that policy. Though the pundits are fainting like affronted matrons, voters appreciate Johnson’s strength of purpose.

In the meantime, the loss of those 21 votes has deprived the government of its majority, making an election before the end of the year almost inevitable.

No one can say how it will turn out, obviously, though the betting markets and the money markets are both predicting a Conservative majority. Such a majority would at last allow Britain to square up to the EU without being undermined.

When British MPs defy public opinion, they often quote Edmund Burke’s 1774 speech to the voters of Bristol, in which he explained that he was their representative, not their delegate. The MPs rarely go on to mention that Bristol booted Burke out at the next election.

My guess is that something similar will happen when polling day comes. Even many remain voters balk at the idea of dragging the argument out any further. I’m going to stick my neck out here: Boris is going to win.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/there-will-still-be-an-election-in-the-uk-and-brexit-will-still-happen

PIERS MORGAN: The real big baby is Sadiq 

PIERS MORGAN: The real big baby in London this week is Mayor Khan – a petty little pipsqueak who’d shamefully rather mock and humiliate the President of Britain’s greatest ally than honor the D-Day heroes of both our nations

This week, we commemorate the 75th Anniversary of the D-Day landings, the largest seaborne invasion in history.

It was the crucial turning point in the war with Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, one that began the liberation of German-occupied France and laid the foundations of the Allied victory on the Western Front.

The D-Day landings: There were at least 10,000 Allied casualties, with 4,414 confirmed dead

The D-Day landings: There were at least 10,000 Allied casualties, with 4,414 confirmed dead

It was also the moment that most perfectly exemplified and cemented the special relationship between Britain and America, the two nations that provided the vast majority of those who fought the ferocious battle on the beaches.

There were at least 10,000 Allied casualties, with 4,414 confirmed dead.

They, along with everyone who took part in D-Day, will be remembered in a special ceremony in Portsmouth on the south coast of England on Wednesday, attended by the Queen, President Trump and 300 veterans.

That is why Trump has come to Britain for a three-day state visit.

He’s not here as a private individual.

He’s here as the democratically elected President of the United States, still Britain’s greatest ally.

As such, he represents the 320 million citizens of the U.S. including many who have personal family connections to the D-Day landings and World War 2.

Trump is in the UK on a state visit where he and Flotus are being hosted by the Queen

Trump is in the UK on a state visit where he and Flotus are being hosted by the Queen

So how has Mayor of London, England’s capital city, responded to this trip?

The answer is with quite staggeringly offensive rudeness.

Sadiq Khan, who’s been Mayor for three years, launched a series of savage attacks on President Trump in the past 48 hours, both in print and on television, branding him a ‘fascist’, a ‘growing global threat’, and demanding Britain should not be ‘rolling out the red carpet’ for him because it was ‘un-British’, adding that he was ‘the antithesis of our values in London and as a country’ and his ‘divisive behavior flies in the face of the ideals America was founded upon – equality, liberty and religious freedom.’

Mayor Khan also authorized, again, the flying of a giant orange Trump baby blimp over the Houses of Parliament during the visit, specifically designed to mock and humiliate the President.

By doing all this, Khan knew exactly what he was doing, and that was to create a firestorm of hatred towards the American leader and to whip up bigger protests against him than might otherwise have occurred.

Sadiq Khan  who’s been Mayor for three years, launched a series of savage attacks on President Trump in the past 48 hours and also authorized the Trump baby blimp being flown

He’s been joined in this unedifying campaign of anti-American negativity by numerous other senior British politicians including Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable, Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow and even by some of the media who should know better, like SkyNews who unwisely used the blimp to promote their coverage of the visit.

The politicians have all raced to denounce the state visit, refuse to attend a banquet in the President’s honor, bar him from speaking to Parliament, and all but condemn Trump as the worst human being that’s ever existed.

Little wonder than that when President Trump arrived in the U.K. this morning and read all this, he responded in kind.

British politicians including Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn (center), Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable (left) and Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow (right), have also been scathing of Trump’s visit

‘Sadiq Khan,’ he tweeted, ‘who by all accounts has done a terrible job as Mayor of London has been foolishly ‘nasty’ to the visiting President of the United States, by far the most important ally of the United Kingdom. He is a stone cold loser who should focus on crime in London, not me. Khan reminds me very much of our dumb and incompetent Mayor of NYC, de Blasio, who has also done a terrible job, only half his height. In any event, I look forward to being a great friend to the United Kingdom and am looking very much forward to my visit. Landing now!’

Predictably, this prompted an immediate roar of faux outrage from all those who had failed to be remotely outraged by Mayor Khan’s initial attacks.

Khan himself, without any apparent self-awareness, accused Trump of ‘childish insults’.

Yes, the man who approved a giant baby blimp of the U.S. President to fly over Parliament is accusing his target of being childish!

Of course, Khan knew exactly how Trump would respond, which is why he has spent the past two days attacking, mocking and goading him.

‘I don’t think much of him’ Trump blasts Khan before UK visit

Little wonder than that when President Trump arrived in the U.K. this morning and read all the negative comments from Sadiq Khan and others, he responded in kind and compared Khan unflatteringly with New York City's Mayor Bill de Blasio (top right, with Sadiq Khan) in a series of tweets (above)

Little wonder than that when President Trump arrived in the U.K. this morning and read all the negative comments from Sadiq Khan and others, he responded in kind and compared Khan unflatteringly with New York City’s Mayor Bill de Blasio (top right, with Sadiq Khan) in a series of tweets (above)

The Mayor wants this trip to be all about him, the tough-guy left-wing London boss standing up to the evil leader of the free world, rather then the D-Day heroes.

Yet by doing so, Khan is guilty of the very divisiveness, inflammatory rhetoric and childishness that he purports to find so distasteful in the President.

And he most certainly doesn’t speak for all of Britain, as he claims to.

Ironically, what the likes of Khan, Bercow, Corbyn and Cable have done to President Trump is the very antithesis of the good manners and dignified politeness that used to be the bedrock of being British.

Instead, given what Trump is here to commemorate, it’s been rude, obnoxious, self-interested and disrespectful.

Now, I fully accept those are all things that could rightly be said about Trump himself from time to time.

But that doesn’t make it OK for us to behave the same way or to treat the leader of our greatest ally with such wanton disdain in such a momentous week.

There’s also a sickening hypocrisy underpinning their treatment of Trump, and not just because there were comparatively very limited protests – and no baby blimps – for previous state visits by leaders of Saudi Arabia, Russia and China.

(Is Trump really worse than Putin, Mohammad bin Salman or President Xi?)

Sadiq Khan, as a human rights lawyer in a previous career, once passionately defended notorious Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who has denounced white people as ‘devils’, described Jews as ‘bloodsuckers’ and called Hitler a ‘very great man’.

Khan led a legal bid for Farrakhan’s ban on coming to Britain (for his hateful behavior) to be lifted, and denied his client was either anti-Semitic or a preacher of ‘racial hatred or antagonism’.

Sadiq Khan says UK is wrong to “roll out the red carpet” for Trump
….

Sadiq Khan, as a human rights lawyer in a previous career, once passionately defended notorious Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who has denounced white people as ‘devils’, described Jews as ‘bloodsuckers’ and called Hitler a ‘very great man’.

So his concept of who is and isn’t acceptable to let into Britain seems a rather fluid one, depending on who’s signing the checks.

Khan has also, as Trump rightly said, been an abject failure as London Mayor (even worse than Bill de Blasio in New York!) presiding over a terrible surge in knife crime that has led to dozens of young people being murdered on the streets of the city.

So who the hell is this jumped-up pipsqueak to start barking out insults at the American President when he can’t even protect our kids from being stabbed to death?

As a Londoner, I’m utterly ashamed by the selfish, puerile, virtue-signalling antics of my Mayor.

He has diminished himself, his office, and his country, and I apologise to all Americans offended by this disgracefully antagonistic welcome to their President during such an important visit.

But I say this to them: most Britons greatly value the support of America during World War 2.

Without it, it is very doubtful we could have defeated Hitler.

President Trump is here to represent those who enabled us to win the battle on the beaches of Northern France.

In that capacity, he deserves our dignified respect, not our snobbish sneering and petty partisan sniping.

As for those champing at the bit to protest against Trump this week, with their abusive placards, mocking chants, and pathetic baby blimp, I simply say this: the only reason you can do so in this country is because of what happened 75 years ago on D-Day. The heroic British and American forces (with the help of other Allied forces too) that fought that day did so to protect your freedoms.

So whatever your view of Trump, this is surely the week to park the incessant anti-Trump hysteria for just a few days and instead honor those who died and risked their lives in Normandy?

Bottom line is this: do we want the lasting images from this historic occasion to be of a pathetic orange baby balloon flying over our Parliament, or of a U.S. President standing shoulder to shoulder with the Queen to pay tribute to the D-Day heroes?

If your answer is the balloon, then you’re a stone cold loser too.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7099055/The-real-big-baby-London-week-Mayor-Khan-whod-shamefully-mocking-Trump.html

Prager University: How the Reformation Shaped Your World

Gophers Are Closely Related to Rats….In Politics They Seem Kin to California… It’s NOT the Weather.

Could it be the Scandinavian living among the Ten thousand Lakes?  Are we  tired of fishing? of honesty, knowledge, decency, of working?  We certainly aren’t tired of foul ball Democrats…..

Have we become so feminized that what matters in today’s Goopherland government has become our MASTER ala Canada, Sweden, China, and the Good Old Soviet Union still stirring  in the State of Russia?

Is problem causing replacing problem solving in the homes of the free and the brave?

Are there homes anymore or merely  structures for the mindless and University educated ditsies?   Is it ‘SAN FRANCISCO HERE WE COME’…or VENEZUELA..WE LOVE YOUR FUTURE?

Please read the following review of Lessons from Minnesota’s Primaries:

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/08/lessons-from-minnesotas-primaries.php

Communist John Brennan, Head of Obama’s CIA, Dumps on Trump!

Brennan: Trump-Putin Presser Nothing Short Of “Treasonous,” “There Will Be Consequences For Him”

by Ian Schwartz  at  realclearpolitics:

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/07/17/brennan_trump_putin_presser_nothing_short_of_treasonous_there_will_be_consequences_for_him.html

Our Donald’s Press Conference at Chequers….

DONALD TRUMP AND THERESA MAY MEET THE PRESS

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

Earlier today, President Trump and Prime Minister May held a joint press conference at Chequers. This transcript comes from the British Embassy, and appears to be sanitized in that it doesn’t include Trump’s exchange with CNN’s Jim Acosta:

 

 

 

After criticizing CNN, Pres. Trump declines to take a question from a CNN reporter at joint presser with Theresa May. “CNN is fake news. I don’t take questions from CNN.”

Pres. Trump then called on a Fox News reporter: “Let’s go to a real network.” https://abcn.ws/2ukHjgl 

Acosta and his network have made war on President Trump, and I don’t know why he shouldn’t respond in kind. Trump brings clarity to the battle between the Democratic Party media and the rest of America.

The whole press conference is interesting, but I want to highlight some of the exchanges on Russia. President Trump will meet with Vladimir Putin on Monday.

What three or four things to you hope to achieve in your meeting with Putin?

Donald Trump: We go into the meeting with Putin following the tremendous NATO meeting. It was testy at the beginning, but then everyone agreed to come together and the U.K. fully adhered to it. We left that meeting more unified and wealthier as a group than ever before. So we go in strong.

We will talk about a number of things: Ukraine, Syria, the Middle East, nuclear proliferation. We are massively modernizing and fixing and buying and it’s just a devastating technology. It is a very bad policy. We have no choice. We are massively big and they are very big and I’ll be talking about nuclear proliferation. I will absolutely bring up ‘meddling.‘ Hopefully we will have a very good relationship with Russia, China and other countries.

As Steve noted here, proliferation is a longstanding concern of Trump’s. He is right about NATO being wealthier than ever, as his tough talk at the NATO summit produced billions in additional commitments.

You spent the week criticizing NATO allies and taking on PM May – are you giving Putin the upper hand by challenging alliances?

Donald Trump: That’s such dishonest reporting from NBC, which is possibly worse than CNN. We have left NATO with more money, more unity and more spirit than it has possibly ever had. We had people who weren’t paying their bills or following commitments. When you look at what we’ve done in terms of Russia, I bet they’re saying ‘I wish Trump wasn’t the victor in that election.’ We have been extremely tough on Russia, including when the PM called after a horrible thing happened here. She asked if I’d do something and we expelled 60 people — Germany did three. The fake news doesn’t want to talk about it. We have been very strong on Russia. If I had a relationship with Russia or with China it would be good. If we get along with countries, that’s a good thing.

Classic Trump: he is right that his administration has been “extremely tough on Russia,” which the fake news “doesn’t want to talk about.” At the same time, he wants good relations with all countries, including Russia and China.

Putin will see the headlines?

Donald Trump: The headline he sees isn’t what happened in the morning, but in the afternoon when we came together as one. Thirty-four billion dollars more was raised since I became president of NATO.

Right.

Some people have suggested relations between the US and Russia are at their lowest point since the cold war – how can relations improve if Putin continues to occupy Crimea?

Donald Trump: I think I would have a very good relationship with Putin if we spend time together. After watching the rigged witch-hunt yesterday, I think it really hurts our country and our relationship with Russia. I hope we can have a good relationship with Russia.

Trump is right again. The “rigged witch-hunt”–a fair description–makes it harder for the administration to conduct a normal foreign policy vis-a-vis Russia. Do the Democrats care? Of course not.

Even if it occupies another country?

Donald Trump: President Obama failed very badly with Crimea — I wouldn’t have done that. He took it over during the Obama administration. We’ll have to see what happens … I’m not bad at doing things. Let’s see what happens. This was an Obama disaster. If I were president, he would not have taken over.

How do you fix it?

Donald Trump: We’ll see what happens. If I knew, I wouldn’t tell you, because it would put us at a disadvantage. Crimea was another bad hand, like North Korea, but we’re doing very well there. We will look at it just as we’ve looked at other disasters we’ve taken over.

Again, classic Trump. He is right about Obama. Whether he can do much with the Crimea “disaster” remains to be seen, but most of us have learned not to bet against him.

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/07/donald-trump-and-theresa-may-meet-the-press.php

Our Donald Confronts our Friendly NATO Thieves!

BULL: 1, CHINA SHOP: 0

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

Get out the fainting couches! President Trump is in Europe, and once again he is saying the unsayable. The occasion is the NATO summit that began today in Brussels. Trump fired an opening salvo that included two themes, as reported by Bloomberg. The first is that Germany, in particular, undermines the alliance’s defenses against Russia by being too dependent on Russian natural gas:

“It’s very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia where we’re supposed to be guarding against Russia and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars a year to Russia,” Trump said before meeting with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on Wednesday morning.

Trump pressed on: “If you look at it, Germany is a captive of Russia, because they supply — they got rid of their coal plants, got rid of their nuclear, they’re getting so much of the oil and gas from Russia. I think it’s something NATO has to look at.”

Trump is right about this. Germany stupidly closed nuclear and coal power plants in favor of huge investments in “green” energy. Those investments, predictably, have failed to do anything other than drive the price of electricity unacceptably high. Germany is now backing away from its “green” policies in favor of natural gas. Where does it get most of its natural gas? From Russia.

The specific focus of Trump’s criticism is the proposed Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would take gas from Russia to Germany. That pipeline has been controversial for a while, as CNBCexplains:

Some European countries oppose Nord Stream 2, arguing that it increases Europe’s dependence on Russia and poses threats to their national security. The opposition comes primarily from the Baltic states and former Soviet satellite nations, including Ukraine, Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

They argue Europe should not be filling Moscow’s coffers after Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and in light of its broader efforts to destabilize the European Union.

Nord Stream 2 also reduces Europe’s reliance on Russian gas that runs through Ukraine’s pipeline system, opponents say. That makes it easier for the Kremlin to punish its Eastern European neighbors by cutting off gas supplies while minimizing damage to its lucrative markets in the broader EU.

So President Trump is siding with Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltic countries. He also is agreeing with Barack Obama:

President Barack Obama opposed Nord Stream 2 and President George W. Bush came out against the original Nord Stream prior to its completion in 2011. Like the central and eastern European countries, they worried it increased Russian influence over the Continent.

That policy has carried over into the Trump administration.

The concern about Russian influence in Central and Western Europe is well founded. In the past, Putin’s regime has demanded concessions from the West by threatening to cut off natural gas supplies. These first two headlines are from the New York Times; the Times may have forgotten, but the Ukrainians, Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians haven’t: Russia Cuts Gas, and Europe Shivers, January 6, 2009Gazprom Cuts Russia’s Natural Gas Supply to Ukraine, June 16, 2014; Telegraph: Putin mocks the West and threatens to turn off gas supplies, March 7, 2014; Financial Times: Europe supply in jeopardy as Putin warns of Ukraine gas cut, April 11, 2014. Given this history–and these links are just a few samples–why would Germany want to increase its dependence on Russian natural gas?

I think the answer is that German post-war guilt is now indistinguishable from lazy softness. Russia is playing a hard game, annexing Crimea, putting constant pressure on Ukraine, making preparations to invade the Baltics. Putin’s regime is trying to restore the Russian empire, and it is questionable whether Europeans west of Poland have the will to resist. Trump is obviously, and rightly, trying to stiffen their spines.

Trump’s second point, one that he made during the 2016 campaign and often since, is that our NATO allies need to begin bearing their fair share of the cost of the alliance. In the aftermath of World War II, when the U.S. had just about the only industrial economy that hadn’t been bombed, it made sense for the bulk of the money to come from U.S. taxpayers. That hasn’t been true for a long time, and Trump shouldn’t have to be the first president to assert the interests of American taxpayers. On this issue, too, he is right:

“Many countries owe us,” Trump said in Brussels, before attending the summit at NATO headquarters. “The United States is paying far too much and other countries are not paying enough… This has been going on for decades, for decades, it’s disproportionate and not fair to the taxpayers of the United States.”

Trump is going to succeed here. A number of NATO countries have pledged to increase their defense contributions, but he is pressing them to act more rapidly. This tweet from earlier today sums up the situation well:

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

What good is NATO if Germany is paying Russia billions of dollars for gas and energy? Why are there only 5 out of 29 countries that have met their commitment? The U.S. is paying for Europe’s protection, then loses billions on Trade. Must pay 2% of GDP IMMEDIATELY, not by 2025.

This one came just 15 minutes ago:

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

Billions of additional dollars are being spent by NATO countries since my visit last year, at my request, but it isn’t nearly enough. U.S. spends too much. Europe’s borders are BAD! Pipeline dollars to Russia are not acceptable!

Trump is right about a more equal sharing of the costs of defending Europe and the North Atlantic. More importantly, he is right about the sheep-like quiescence of too many Western Europeans–Angela Merkel is one among many–in the face of a serious challenge from Russia.

Pretty much all the press coverage of the NATO summit, consisting mostly of hand-wringing and Trump-bashing, is ignorant and partisan. President Trump is standing up for American security and American taxpayers, as he promised to do. He could do it more effectively if nearly the entire American establishment were not arrayed against him and, implicitly, on the side of the Putin regime.

President Trump Stars in Quebec

TRUMP NAILS TRADE HYPOCRISY

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

President Trump’s participation in the G7 conference in Canada focused on trade. Once again, he made it clear that he wants our trading partners’ tariffs and other barriers to U.S. imports to come down. This gave the American press the vapors, but why? Our president certainly should try to reduce obstacles to sales of American goods.

President Trump gave a press conference this morning in which he expressed his belief in free trade:

Q Mr. President, you said that this was a positive meeting, but from the outside, it seemed quite contentious. Did you get any indication from your interlocutors that they were going to make any concessions to you? And I believe that you raised the idea of a tariff-free G7. Is that —

THE PRESIDENT: I did. Oh, I did. That’s the way it should be. No tariffs, no barriers. That’s the way it should be.

Q How did it go down?

THE PRESIDENT: And no subsidies. I even said no tariffs. In other words, let’s say Canada — where we have tremendous tariffs — the United States pays tremendous tariffs on dairy. As an example, 270 percent. Nobody knows that. We pay nothing. …

We have to — ultimately, that’s what you want. You want a tariff-free, you want no barriers, and you want no subsidies, because you have some cases where countries are subsidizing industries, and that’s not fair. So you go tariff-free, you go barrier-free, you go subsidy-free. That’s the way you learned at the Wharton School of Finance. I mean, that would be the ultimate thing. Now, whether or not that works — but I did suggest it, and people were — I guess, they got to go back to the drawing and check it out, right?

But we can’t have — an example — where we’re paying — the United States is paying 270 percent. Just can’t have it. And when they send things into us, you don’t have that.

Trump is right that most countries protect their agricultural industries with tariff and non-tariff barriers. (The EU’s ban on GMO crops is an example of a non-tariff barrier that is rational only as an act of protectionism.) The U.S. has the most efficient agricultural sector in the world, and since most countries can’t compete with our farmers, they erect trade barriers. How is this any different from our imposing tariffs on steel or automobiles? It isn’t.

Does Canada actually impose a 270% tariff on American dairy products, as Trump keeps saying? Yes, it does, according to the Canadian Broadcasting Company:

Canada levies a tariff of 270 per cent on milk, 245 per cent on cheese and 298 per cent on butter in an effort to keep imports out and tightly control supply.

So Trump is right. A world without tariffs is a desirable goal, but a world in which the U.S. has no tariffs, but other countries erect barriers to our products, is not.

After President Trump departed for Singapore, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau gave a press conference in which he responded negatively to Trump’s call for reduced tariffs all around. It isn’t clear to me exactly what set Trump off, but he tweeted this: 

“Based on Justin’s false statements at his news conference, and the fact that Canada is charging massive Tariffs to our U.S. farmers, workers and companies, I have instructed our U.S. Reps not to endorse the Communique as we look at Tariffs on automobiles flooding the U.S. Market!”

“PM Justin Trudeau of Canada acted so meek and mild during our @G7 meetings only to give a news conference after I left saying that, “US Tariffs were kind of insulting” and he “will not be pushed around.” Very dishonest & weak. Our Tariffs are in response to his of 270% on dairy!”

We will see where this leads, but my guess is that the president will ultimately succeed in bargaining for reduced trade barriers. The question is one of degree.

Finally, there were a couple of other highlights in Trump’s press conference. Here, he responded to a hostile question:

Q As you were heading into these G7 talks, there was a sense that America’s closest allies were frustrated with you and angry with you, and that you were angry with them and that you were leaving here early to go meet for more friendlier talks with Kim Jong Un in Singapore. And I’m wondering if you —

THE PRESIDENT: It’s well put, I think.

Q — if you view it the same way. And do you view the U.S. alliance system shifting under your presidency, away —

THE PRESIDENT: Who are you with, out of curiosity?

Q CNN.

THE PRESIDENT: I figured. Fake News CNN. The worst. But I could tell by the question. I had no idea you were CNN. After the question, I was just curious as to who you were with. You were CNN.

And Scott had to especially appreciate this moment:

Okay, how about a couple of more? Go ahead in the back.

Q Thanks, Mr. President. Eliana Johnson with Politico.

It was a good day all the way around.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/06/trump-nails-trade-hypocrisy.php

Trouble in Europe?

Europe’s Vanishing Calm

 by Victor Davis Hanson  at realclearpolitics:

AVIGNON, France — The Rhone River Valley in southern France is a storybook marriage of high technology, traditional vineyards and ancestral villages. High-speed trains and well-designed toll roads crisscross majestic cathedrals, castles and chateaus.

Traveling in a Europe at peace these days evokes both historical and literary allusions. As with the infrastructure and engineering of the late Roman Empire right before its erosion, the Continent rests at its pinnacle of technological achievement.

There is a Roman Empire-like sameness throughout Europe in fashion, popular culture and government protocol — a welcome change from the deadly fault lines of 1914 and 1939.

Yet, as in the waning days of Rome, there is a growing uncertainly beneath the European calm.

The present generation has inherited the physical architecture and art of a once-great West — cathedrals, theaters and museums. But it seems to lack the confidence that it could ever create the conditions to match, much less exceed, such achievement.

The sense of depression in Europe reminds one of novelist J.R.R. Tolkien’s description of the mythical land of Gondor in his epic fantasy “The Lord of the Rings.” Gondor’s huge walls, vaunted traditions and rich history were testaments that it once served as bulwark of a humane Middle-earth.

But by the novel’s time, the people of Gondor had become militarily and spiritually enfeebled by self-doubt, decades of poor governance, depopulation and indifference, paradoxically brought on by wealth and affluence.

Europeans are similarly confused about both their past and present. They claim to be building a new democratic culture. But the governing elites of the European Union prefer fiats to plebiscites. They are terrified of popular protest movements. And they consider voters little more than members of reckless mobs that cannot be properly taught what is good for them.

Free speech is increasing problematic. It is more dangerous for a European citizen to publicly object to illegal immigration than for a foreigner to enter Europe illegally.

Elites preach the idea of open borders. But people on the street concede that they have no way of assimilating millions of immigrants from the Middle East into European culture. Most come illegally, en masse, and without the education or skills to integrate successfully.

Oddly, less wealthy Central and Eastern Europeans are more astutely skeptical of mass immigration than wealthier but less rational Western Europeans.

Europeans claim to believe in democratic redistribution, but apparently not on an international level. They are torn apart over a poorer Mediterranean Europe wishing to share in the lifestyles of their northern cousins without necessarily emulating the latter’s discipline and work ethic.

Germany wishes to be the good leader that can live down its past by virtue-signaling its tolerance. Yet Berlin does so in an overbearing, almost traditional Prussian fashion. It rams down the throat of its neighbors its politically correct policies on Middle Eastern immigration, mandatory green energy, virtual disarmament, mercantilist trade and financial bailouts. Rarely has such a socialist nation been so hyper-capitalist and chauvinist in piling up trade surpluses.

The world quietly assumes that the rich and huge European Union cannot and will not do much about unscrupulous Chinese trade practices, radical Islamic terrorism, or Iranian and North Korean nuclear proliferation.

Such problems are left to the more uncouth Americans. That unspoken dependency might explain why many Europeans quietly concede that the hated Donald Trump’s deterrent foreign policy and his economic growth protocols could prove in the long term a better deal for Europe than were the beloved Barack Obama’s lead-from-behind and redistributionist agendas.

The European Union’s sole reason to be is to avoid a repeat of the disastrous 20th century, in which many millions of Europeans were slaughtered in world wars, death camps and the great communist terror in Russia.

Yet paradoxically, the European reaction to the gory past often results in an extreme Western sybaritic lifestyle that in itself leads to decline.

European religion has been recalibrated into a secular and agnostic political correctness. Child-raising, if done, is often a matter of having one child in one’s late 30s. Buying a home and getting a job depend more on government ministries than on individual daring and initiative.

Yet the more credible European lesson from the last century’s catastrophes is that too few 20th-century European democracies stayed militarily vigilant. In the 1930s, too few of them felt confident enough in Western democratic values to confront existential dangers in their infancy like Hitler and Stalin.

Atheistic nihilism and a soulless modernism — not religious piety and a reverence for custom and tradition — fueled German and Italian fascism and Russian communism.

Contrary to politically correct dogma, Christianity, military deterrence, democracy and veneration of a unique past did not destroy Europe.

Instead, the culprit of European decline was the very absence of such ancient values — both then and now.

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/06/07/europes_vanishing_calm_137214.html