Apparently advocating U.S. extended involvement in lengthy wars that turned out to be disastrous costly quagmires is not a humbling experience for what is left of the American neoconservative movement. Today’s neoconservatives are a far cry from the Irving Kristols and Norman Podhoretzs who founded the movement in the late 1960s and provided intellectual and policy-making support for the Reagan administration’s successful foreign policies that won the Cold War. The neoconservative remnant — the lead cheerleaders for the endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first two decades of the 21st century — today pushes for greater U.S. involvement in the Ukraine war. Anyone who disagrees with them, including those who reasonably contend that NATO expansion in the aftermath of the Cold War contributed to the rise of Putin and revived Russian imperialism, is labeled “pro-Putin” or “pro-dictatorship.” Now they are promoting a new book by Jacob Heilbrunn, a former critic of the neoconservatives, who has apparently joined the movement despite editing a journal — the National Interest — that prides itself on promoting foreign policy “realism.” Heilbrunn’s new book is titled America Last: The Right’s Century-Long Romance with Foreign Dictators. The timing of the book is no accident. Heilbrunn attempts to use a foreign policy “history” of American conservatism from the 1920s to the present to persuade voters that Donald Trump favors foreign dictators over Democrats, and if elected will likely attempt to establish a dictatorship here in the United States. (READ MORE: American Appeasement Emboldens Bad Actors) All one needs to do is read the reviews of the book by neoconservative writers and others on the anti-Trump left to see what is going on here. Writing in the Bulwark, founded by Trump-deranged neocons Bill Kristol and Charlie Sykes (a regular contributor to Trump-deranged MSNBC), Ronald Radosh criticizes Heilbrunn for contending that “neoconservatives were the predecessors of MAGA” but praises him for labeling Pat Buchanan pro-Putin for arguing that “NATO expansion and intervention in the Balkans were colossal errors” — which they were — and pro-authoritarian for supporting Hungary’s democratically-elected Prime Minister Viktor Orban. Radosh is at one with Heilbrunn in seeing Trump and his supporters as threats to “liberal democracy” and proponents of an “illiberal world order.” Radosh concludes that “An illiberal United States would be a natural ally of illiberal Russia, and illiberal Russia can help create an illiberal United States.” This is yet another version of the Russia hoax just in time for the 2024 election. (READ MORE: What Does America First Actually Mean?) In American Purpose, neocon intellectual Arch Puddington praises Heilbrunn for helping to expose “right-wingers who succumbed to the allure of the tough-guy autocrat, ranging from Pinochet to Hitler.” Puddington criticizes “today’s MAGA operatives, who claim democracy’s mantle while aligning themselves with democracy’s enemies,” and identifies William F. Buckley, Jr and early National Review conservatives as MAGA’s predecessors in aligning the right with unsavory dictators. Like Radosh, Puddington defends the neoconservatives from Heilbrunn’s attempt to link them to Trump’s America First movement. Instead, Puddington writes, the neoconservatives “should be credited with their early and perceptive warnings about the threat to democracy, here and across the globe, from Trump’s MAGA movement, national conservatism, and the right-wing media machine.” Heilbrunn’s most important message, Puddington writes, is that Trump and the “authoritarian Right” are “dedicated to first gaining political power and then dismantling the institutions of democracy.” (READ MORE: Just Call National Review the Stupid Party Review From Now On) But it’s not just neoconservatives who are praising Heilbrunn’s book. Favorable reviews have appeared in the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, New York magazine, the Economist, the Washington Post, the Atlantic, and other leftist anti-Trump newspapers and magazines. It is a full-court media assault on Trump using Heilbrunn’s book as a vehicle intended to persuade voters that Trump intends to destroy democracy both at home and abroad. Conservative critics of Heilbrunn’s book, like James Piereson in the New Criterion and Helen Andrews in the American Conservative, point out how bad the book is as history, intellectual or otherwise, but they make the mistake of judging the book on its merits. Heilbrunn tipped his hand earlier this year when in the National Interest he described Joe Biden as a “vigorous leader” who has demonstrated “diplomatic savvy” as a “war president” in the Ukraine conflict, while labeling critics of U.S. co-belligerency in the Ukraine War as being “chicken about backing Kyiv” and of engaging in “cowardly trucking to the Kremlin.” America Last is not history and is not meant to be history. It is a campaign book that the leftist and anti-Trump media is already using to concoct another Russia hoax on the American people. If in the meantime the United States gets drawn into another war of choice that just might escalate into a broader European war, so be it. At least Donald Trump won’t be president again. The post Neocons Slander the American Right appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

It’s early, I know. But I just checked, and Instagram’s logo looks normal. So does Google’s, YouTube’s, and even Facebook’s. Maybe Etsy has me figured out, but I scrolled top to bottom, and it’s a lineup of Father’s Day gift ideas. Not a rainbow in sight. Isn’t it June? Usually, by this point, we’ve been inundated with rainbow-colored products, from stickers to magnets to kids’ bathing suits. This year feels tame. There’s a documentary on gay animals narrated by Elliot Page (a female actor who claims to be a man) coming out, and most restaurants in downtown Columbus are decked out in flags. But it feels like they’re doing it out of habit, not out of some militant desire to shove immorality down our throats. (READ MORE: The Purpose of Pride Month) Thus far, most of the TikToks I’ve seen of Pride parades and celebrations come not from the New York Times (there wasn’t a single Pride-themed article in sight on the front page this morning) or CNN, but from Libs of TikTok. That matters because it means the Left is only half-heartedly shoving those parades down the throats of those who don’t want to go. The way we see them is when the Right exposes them (as it should). We’re only on day five, so maybe it’s too early. Scott McKay did note on Tuesday at The American Spectator that athletic departments are publishing rainbow graphics, some bar is celebrating the month with a “gender neutral” beer, and the Dublin airport isn’t exactly friendly to “Normies.” But these instances are looking more and more like remnants of past years, rather than part of a militant crusade. And that’s fantastic. It’s not just that we can hear the sweet bells of a cultural win ringing in the distance, but also that this kind of muted response is exactly what needs to happen to break the positive feedback loop that keeps this kind of perversion “loud and proud.” Anyone who spent any time with a schoolyard bully knows that bullying is a result of two things: insecurity and a need for attention. If you give the bully the attention he craves (even if it’s negative attention) you, as the victim, create a positive feedback loop that will keep him coming back to get more. The same thing is true for adults who believe the lie that society misunderstands them and their sexuality. They crave attention, even if it’s negative attention, and we’ve been giving it to them for years. (READ MORE: Save the Hollywood Children) But businesses, even big ones like Bud Light and Target, don’t crave all forms of attention. They signed onto the Pride agenda out of a mistaken belief that it might increase sales while signaling to progressive bigwig cultural fiends that they were on the right side of history. What they discovered is that their customers have no interest in being on the “right side of history.” It’s possible that the boycotts worked. Maybe Target learned a lesson when Christian moms stopped buying scented candles at Target because they didn’t want to have to walk their brood of children past kids’ bondage wear. Bud Light certainly did when college kids and dads looking for a cheap beer for barbeque night found alternatives — and other companies took note. I’m not saying we should rest on our laurels. Pride — the rainbow flags, the parades, the public celebration of perverted sins of the flesh — must be eradicated completely from our society. That’s the goal here. I’m just saying that, on day five of my least favorite month of the year, it feels like we’re making some progress. Here’s to making more in 2024. This article is an excerpt from The American Spectator’s Spectator P.M. newsletter. Subscribe today to read future letters from our staff! The post Isn’t It Pride Month? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Time for a brief look back into history: In the two world wars in the first half of the 20th century, the United States of America was the best ally a country could have. “The Americans” were the proverbial cavalry coming over the hill to rescue the good guys from the bad guys. The “good guys” were people who wanted to live in freedom in their own countries. The “bad guys” were malevolent, imperialistic tyrants who sought to conquer and enslave other nations. We fought those enemies of human rights with the single-minded goal of soundly defeating them. We accomplished that worthy goal and came out of World War II having obliterated German, Italian, and Japanese militarism. Alas, war-weary, the decision was made to end combat without thwarting Soviet Russia’s imperialistic designs — a fateful decision for which we are paying a price today.  Since World War II, we seem to have forgotten that wars are fought to be won. Our leaders lost moral clarity over 50 years ago during the Vietnam War. They failed to define “victory.” Consequently, our military forces became bogged down in a ghastly war of attrition. After years of needlessly wasting lives, the Americans got fed up with the futility of it all. President Nixon pulled our troops out, and the Democratic congress even stopped supplying desperately needed weapons to our erstwhile allies, ensuring their total defeat.  During the Vietnam War, the dreadful term “no-win wars” entered our national vocabulary. Since then, fighting no-win wars seems to have become the default modus operandi of the U.S. military. True, we won the Cold War. But when it comes to actual troops on the ground, we still haven’t recovered the ability to define victory and then to achieve it (see Iraq and Afghanistan). We (or our political leaders, at least) seem to have abandoned the traditional American view of war as a contest between right and wrong, good and evil, with decisive military victory as the unambiguous goal. (READ MORE: Countering the Criticisms Aimed at Ronald Reagan) Today, our leaders’ rhetoric remains largely unchanged — they still pay lip service to the U.S. being on the side of freedom and national self-determination — but actual policies tell a different story. We express sympathy and support for Ukraine and Israel as they fight back against ruthless aggressors, but our actual support for them is tentative and equivocal. The message boils down to this: We sure are sorry about what has been happening to you, but we don’t want you to achieve a clearcut victory over your aggressors.  Apparently, official Washington’s fixation on “no-win wars” extends to American allies. We don’t want them to win, and so we criticize their military strategies, oppose their objectives, and withhold crucial military aid. (In the case of Israel, we even call for regime change.) Frankly, the whole sordid business reeks of treachery and betrayal. The Ukrainians and Israelis have clear visions of what would constitute a victory for them: Ukraine seeks to drive all Russian occupiers back into Russia; Israel seeks to degrade the ability of Hamas to launch additional terrorist waves of atrocities in Israel against Jewish (and American) civilians. Yet, until recently Joe Biden told the valiant Ukrainians that they are not to strike Russian assets that are inside Russia. He has pressured the Israelis to grant a ceasefire to Hamas that would give the terrorists time to organize their next murderous offensive. (READ MORE: America’s Foreign Policy Utopians Ignore Culture) Biden’s policy toward Israel makes the most sense when viewed through the cynical lens of politics. Israeli lives and safety are nothing to Biden compared to his desire to be re-elected. He needs the votes of Arab sympathizers in states like Michigan, and he is perfectly willing to trade the lives of our allies for votes. Biden doesn’t have either the patriotism or the spine to say to pro-Hamas voters, “The United States opposes genocide, period. If you can’t accept that Jews have the same right to live that you do, then you should go back to the countries you came from.” But what can explain his attempts to rein in the Ukrainians? Is there any realistic quid pro quo that Vladimir Putin might concede in exchange for America putting the brakes on Ukrainian fighters? None whatsoever. Biden openly expressed his desire that the Ukrainians refrain from striking Russia’s domestic oil-producing infrastructure because he doesn’t want oil prices to soar during an election year. If that is how shallow Biden’s support of Ukraine is, then Ukraine’s prospects for survival are dim. Putin must be chortling in the Kremlin. Surely, as we remember with gratitude the heroism of millions of American servicemen who laid down their lives in the service of noble moral principles, it is distressing to see an American political establishment today that is averse to fighting evil in the name of good and remains stuck in a no-win-war mentality. The whole world must doubt whether the U.S. can be a reliable and trustworthy ally. The post The US Is No Longer a Trustworthy Ally appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Three American citizens, Tyler Thompson, Marcel Malanga, and Benjamin Reuben Zalman-Polun, were arrested by the Congolese military last month after getting mixed up in a failed coup led by Christian Malanga against the president of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). What Happened? Christian Malanga, originally from the DRC and the leader of the coup and a minority opposition party, the United Congolese Party, was living in self-imposed exile in Salt Lake City, Utah, until last month. Malanga described himself as the “president-in-exile” of a new DRC nation called New Zaïre on his website. During his attempted coup in May, Malanga first attacked the home of a close ally of President Felix Tshisekedi before moving on to the Palais de la Nation (the presidential palace). He live-streamed his attempt to overthrow the Congolese government and stated “[President] Felix, you’re out. We’re coming for you,” while inside the Palais de la Nation. The ultimate goal of the coup is unclear because President Tshisekedi does not live in the Palais de la Nation, nor was he present there during the nighttime coup. The Congolese military quickly took control of the situation, and Malanga was killed while resisting arrest. Six people were also killed during the attacks, and three American citizens, along with 50 other suspects in the coup, were detained. No reason or comment has been given by the DRC as to how Malanga’s group was able to enter the Palais. Americans Involved Marcel Malanga, son of Christian Malanga, was one of the three Americans allegedly involved in the attempted coup. Marcel can be seen standing next to Malanga at one point in his livestream in the Palais de la Nation. There is also a video of him being taken into custody by the Congolese authorities. Tyler Thompson, another American detained after the coup and a friend of Marcel, had flown to Africa with Marcel for what his family believed was a vacation to South Africa and Eswatini. It is unclear how Thompson got involved in the coup, but a friend of Thompson and Marcel claimed he had been offered between $50,000 and $100,000 to act as a “security guard” for Christian Malanga. The families of both Marcel Malanga and Tyler Thompson maintain that the men are innocent. Little information is available on the third American, Benjamin Reuben Zalman-Polun, and his involvement in the coup. Zalman-Polun, a convicted cannabis trafficker, supposedly connected with Malanga through a gold mining company set up in Mozambique in 2022, but it is unclear how Malanga recruited him. US Response In response to the arrests, Lucy Tamlyn, the U.S. ambassador to the DRC, stated, “We will cooperate with the DRC authorities to the fullest extent as they investigate these criminal acts and hold accountable any U.S. citizen involved in criminal acts.” (READ MORE: WE SHOULD STOP EXPLOITING AFRICA – AND START CARING) The State Department has stressed that “consular access” is highly important for the three detained Americans. A request for the detained citizens to have consular access has been made, but the request has not yet been fulfilled. The Congo has also refused to say whether the three Americans will appear in court. Nearly a month has passed since the coup occurred and very little information is available for the families of the three detained Americans, including whether they are alive and healthy. The families have been pressuring the U.S. government to secure this information from the Congo, but so far to no avail.   The post Congo Continues to Deny US Access to Americans Detained for Alleged Involvement in Failed Coup appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Do Not Resuscitate notices are only inches away from euthanasia. In recent years, GPs all over the world have been contacting their elderly patients, both chronically ill and healthy, soliciting Do Not […]

Red Lobster was once a seafood restaurant stalwart, but things are looking bad for this previously popular and profitable chain. What happened?

From herbs that have gone extinct to seasonings are still popular in other parts of the world, here are spices that are underutilized in the U.S.

BREAKING: A husband and his pregnant wife were viciously attacked and beaten by a group of 10 teenagers in Chicago. During the attack, the teens were repeatedly yelling "We own these streets." The wife was struck multiple times in the stomach and later found out she suffered a… pic.twitter.com/FvLsKhlV0T — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) June […]

by M Dowling, Independent Sentinel: The Daily Mail reports that NATO is drawing up plans to send American troops to the front lines of Europe in the event of an all-out conflict with Russia. Last year, NATO promised to send 300,000 troops. NATO is primarily the US. They selected land corridors to funnel soldiers through central […]