There are some good signs out there if you’re a conservative — or even if you’re simply an opponent of the Obamunist hard Left’s ongoing “fundamental transformation” of America — as 2024 sets up shop. READ MORE from Scott McKay: Barack’s Lieutenant: The Racism‚ Revenge‚ and Ruin of Claudine Gay We should appreciate good signs. After the last three years‚ there have been far too few of those‚ and what good signs we’ve seen have generally been mirages. See November 2022 for a good example. Accordingly‚ cautious optimism is the wise approach when one sees green shoots emerging from the wasteland that our politics‚ culture‚ and economy have become thanks to the ministrations of our ruling elite. What green shoots am I talking about? Well‚ the approval numbers for one Joseph Robinette Biden‚ Murderer of the U.S. Dollar‚ would indicate some level of public accountability for failure. It seems paradoxical that a president’s approval rating in the 30s would be a hopeful sign for a nation‚ but‚ in this case‚ we are talking about a positive: President Joe Biden heads into the election year showing alarming weakness among stalwarts of the Democratic base‚ with Donald Trump leading among Hispanic voters and young people. One in 5 Black voters now say they’ll support a third-party candidate in November. In a new USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll‚ Biden’s failure to consolidate support in key parts of the coalition that elected him in 2020 has left him narrowly trailing Trump‚ the likely Republican nominee‚ 39%-37%; 17% support an unnamed third-party candidate. When seven candidates are specified by name‚ Trump’s lead inches up to 3 percentage points‚ 37%-34%‚ with independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the top of the third-party candidates at 10%. The findings underscore the formidable political task the president faces this year to win a second term. That USA TODAY/Suffolk poll has Biden at 39 up‚ 58 down on approval. In a test ballot with Trump and third-party candidates‚ he tops out at 37 percent — which is an impossible number for an incumbent seeking another four years in office. Joe Biden‚ as things stand‚ cannot be elected president. Biden’s vice president‚ Kamala Harris‚ is even less electable… Harris’ job approval rating is 33% approve‚ 57% disapprove. Of those‚ 40% “strongly” disapprove and 7% “strongly” approve. …and yet‚ as of right now‚ Harris is the only plausible alternative to Biden unless Michelle Obama can be induced to run. And by “run‚” I mean “be parachuted into the Democrat Party nomination at the convention after Biden is somehow convinced to drop out and Harris is bought off or otherwise dispatched.” It’s too late for anyone to make a serious run at Biden‚ and what’s worse is that there are now four states in which the local Democrat apparatchiks have foreclosed any other candidates from the ballot: Four states—Florida‚ Tennessee‚ North Carolina‚ and Massachusetts—have decided to force voters with a single option for the Democratic primaries: Joe Biden. The decision‚ which effectively crowns Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee in those states without primary contestation‚ has incited allegations of disenfranchisement and questions about the democratic process within the party. The true threat to the demise of our democracy lies with the Democrats‚ not Donald Trump. The communist party will now decide the Democratic Party’s nominee and who they install into the White House. The Florida Democratic Executive Committee announced that in the upcoming primary elections‚ the ballot will only feature the name of Joe Biden‚ effectively excluding any potential challengers within the party. It isn’t as though Marianne Williamson and Dean Phillips are real alternatives to Biden with any chance at the nomination‚ but here’s the thing: No healthy political party would deny them ballot access. You’re going to need candidates in 2028‚ you know. Letting a few people test the waters‚ meet some donors‚ gain some name ID‚ and so forth isn’t all that bad an idea‚ even if you’re committed to Biden. Instead‚ they force them off the ballot. After they forced Robert F. Kennedy Jr. out of the Democrat Party. As I note in Racism‚ Revenge and Ruin: It’s All Obama‚ this is just another example of how much influence Barack Obama and his minions have on that party and this administration. Obama’s electoral history is all about rigging things and preventing free and fair elections. All the way back to 1996‚ when his people challenged the ballot petitions of all the major candidates in an Illinois state Senate race‚ including the incumbent‚ to pave the way for his entry into elective politics‚ Team Obama has emptied the bag of dirty tricks to deny voters the chance to choose somebody else. Because they often do. In 2000‚ when Barack Obama thought he’d done enough in four years as a state senator to run for Congress‚ he was torched nearly two-to-one by Bobby Rush. Four years later‚ Obama and his people learned their lesson; when he ran for the U.S. Senate‚ his people found a way to release the divorce records first of Blair Hull‚ the leading Democrat candidate‚ and then Jack Ryan‚ the Republican nominee‚ and spilled out enough compromising information from those to first gut Hull’s campaign and then drive Ryan from the race. Then it was‚ suspiciously‚ Democrat crossover voters and corporate media promotion making John McCain‚ the most unliked Republican contender‚ somehow the 2008 GOP nominee‚ with something somewhat similar happening four years later after the weaponized IRS had strangled the Tea Party movement to death by killing key organizations driving that movement. Team Obama knew that a populist conservative movement was kryptonite to its aims of “fundamental transformation‚” and so‚ suspiciously enough‚ America’s alternatives in 2008 and 2012 were a pair of Bushie Republicans who the GOP’s own voters disliked. When the populist conservative did come along in 2016‚ they attempted to paint him as a Russian puppet. The public didn’t buy it‚ but that didn’t stop Team Obama from continuing that lie all the way beyond the 2018 midterm elections as a means of making a slow-motion coup d’etat against a duly-elected president. And then there was 2020‚ the most suspicious presidential election in American history. And now no one is allowed to run against Obama’s puppet Joe Biden‚ whose own numbers show is unelectable. Biden is scuppering the Democrats’ voting base as we speak. It’s impossible for a Democrat to win an election with less than 70 percent of the black vote in hand; the entire electoral strategy of the national Democrat Party is to harvest ballots and run a massive get-out-the-vote operation among urban blacks in major elections‚ but if black support for that party is only two in three or even less‚ the inefficiency of GOTV operations and the negative ROI of actually turning out votes for third parties or even the opposition turns all those plans to mush. The numbers indicate that the wheels are screeching‚ and the machine is throwing off smoke. Political operations at the national level usually don’t last more than three or four cycles‚ based on history — when we’ve had major sea changes in our politics‚ like we had after Jefferson’s Revolution of 1800‚ the post-Civil War era‚ or the New Deal‚ it’s been less a function of great political machinery and more a function of moving the Overton window by capturing the public’s sentiment and actually succeeding in governing. But for all the changes to American society that I write about in Racism‚ Revenge and Ruin‚ almost none of them truly reflect public sentiment. Nobody voted for woke corporations‚ nobody goes to see girl-boss action heroes who beat up all the men‚ and nobody thinks Bidenomics is worth spit. The country is deeply unhappy and viscerally rejects the Obama-style America we’ve been force fed‚ which tells you that if the political machine isn’t capable of running in high gear‚ the country won’t carry Biden — or whoever else is parachuted in to replace him — to victory this fall. Which means that while this could be a very‚ very bitter year for the American people who might have to endure growing and substantial signs of our rapid decline as a global superpower (China invading Taiwan‚ the loss of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency‚ loss of influence in Latin America and elsewhere‚ renewed inflationary pressure and a potential recession‚ etc.)‚ perhaps at some point we’ll hit rock bottom and choose to reject national decline. But here’s the problem: This ruling class‚ this Obamunist faction‚ does not admit defeat. They don’t reexamine their ideas. And they never back off. Instead‚ they escalate. Those 91 indictments of Trump in Miami‚ Atlanta‚ New York‚ and Washington are many things‚ but most of all‚ they’re an escalation. They’re a message — if you try to put us out of power‚ we will go to the mattresses against you. Remember‚ the Miami case grew out of the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago‚ an unprecedented and shocking abuse of power aimed at intimidating the leading political dissident to the Obama/Biden regime. The continuing bleating that Trump is a “dictator‚” a “Nazi‚” and “Hitler” is a similar escalation. Those screeching accusations aren’t just left-wing hysteria; they’re calculated. They’re aimed at so whipping up the Left’s crazies that one or more of them might follow Trump around with a loaded pistol or rifle and complete the ultimate escalation against his candidacy. Don’t dismiss this as hyperbole. RFK Jr.‚ whose candidacy is an even greater threat than Trump’s given the votes he’s likely to take away from Biden‚ still can’t get Secret Service protection‚ after all. Why do you think he’d be denied? If they can’t win the election freely and fairly‚ they’ve demonstrated that they won’t go away quietly. They don’t go away at all. Instead‚ they escalate. They seek to make the public so miserable for the crime of resistance that everything is on the table. Blocking interstate highways? Check. Airports? Check. Rioting in the nation’s capital? Been there‚ done that — and you saw what happens if it’s done to them. Burning down cities in an effort to make the country ungovernable? Sure‚ multiple times. All of it‚ they’ve already done. You should be under no delusion they won’t do it again. The year 2024 will be a very‚ very interesting one. It might be too interesting for anyone’s tastes but Team Obama’s. The post Beware the Wounded Animal in 2024 appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

“The president proposes‚ the Congress disposes” is the way the Founders set up our government. Here’s how it’s supposed to work: legislation is proposed (by the president or a member of Congress) through an “authorization” bill that “can establish‚ continue‚ or modify an agency‚ program‚ or activity” including the estimated cost. However‚ a separate “appropriations” legislation must then be passed to fund that project/activity (i.e.‚ the amount that actually will be spent). The U.S. Constitution‚ Article I‚ Section 9‚ Clause 7 reads: “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury‚ but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” According to Cornell’s Legal Information Institute (LII)‚ “This was intended as a restriction upon the disbursing authority of the Executive department” (emphasis mine). But that hasn’t stopped the U.S. national debt from growing exponentially. The U.S. In 1971‚ the debt was $398 billion; 1981 was the last year our debt was below the $1 trillion mark. Under Barack Obama‚ the debt jumped from just under $12 trillion to almost $20 trillion‚ even more than the almost $6 trillion increase under George W. Bush. Under Trump‚ there was another $6.5 trillion increase in national debt (fueled partly by the recession but especially by the COVID debacle). When Joe Biden took office the debt was almost $27 trillion‚ and today it stands at $34 trillion — a $7 trillion increase in just three years. (READ MORE: Five More Stupid Things the Left Demands You Believe) Practically speaking‚ Congress has removed that restriction. LII continues‚ “Congress…approved the frequent practice of making ‘lump sum’ appropriations … to be allotted and expended as directed by designated government agencies” (emphasis mine). That sounds reasonable since we don’t want politicians — who are often ignorant of what’s needed — dictating how monies are spent.’ An example: In the early 90s Georgia began participating in the lottery and proceeds were supposed to support public education. Once at an elementary school for a presentation‚ I noticed that every classroom was filled with computers‚ even the first grade‚ and commented in the teacher’s lounge on their good fortune getting all that money from the state government. (READ MORE: Congress Can Redeem Itself by Calling for Help) Every teacher froze and looked at me‚ and I was curtly informed that politicians in Atlanta had decided that “all that money” could only be spent on computers‚ despite the educators’ repeated requests to spend it on more pressing needs (books‚ teacher’s aides‚ classroom equipment and supplies‚ etc.). Allowing federal agency personnel familiar with their needs to decide how money is spent sounds rational. The ‘Unconstitutionality Index’ But‚ when the government is involved‚ what sounds good in theory doesn’t always translate to practical‚ effective outcomes. Clyde Crews‚ Jr.‚ described what he called the “Unconstitutionality Index‚” the purpose of which was “to highlight … the extent to which the unelected personnel of federal agencies … do the bulk of lawmaking in America” (emphasis mine). In 2020‚ for example‚ Congress passed 178 laws; during that same year‚ federal agencies issued 3‚353 rules and regulations — which can impact the daily lives of American citizens every bit as much as Congressional legislation‚ even though citizens have no representation in the federal bureaucracy. Crews came up with his index by dividing the number of federal agency rules by the number of laws passed by Congress. In 2020‚ that index was 19 (3‚353/178)‚ which means unelected bureaucrats created 19 times more “laws” than Congress. Under Biden‚ in 2021 federal agencies imposed 4‚429 rules and regulations‚ while Congress passed just 143 bills‚ for an index of 31. In 2022 there were 3‚168 federal rules and 247 bills‚ so bureaucrats created “only” 13 times as many rules as laws passed by Congress. In a 2023 update (which slightly altered the 2020 index)‚ Crews notes “Administrative agencies‚ not Congress‚ do most U.S. lawmaking‚ despite Article I of the Constitution stipulating otherwise. Congress is to blame here‚ as it routinely … delegates substantial lawmaking power to agencies.” Bureaucrats Want More Money‚ Congress Gives It to Them Yes‚ but didn’t we just say that un-informed politicians shouldn’t micro-manage “experts”? The trouble is that federal agencies are not populated by experts but by bureaucrats‚ whose primary motivation is (a) acquiring a bigger budget next year by (b) spending all the money allocated for this year‚ so Congress will provide as much or more for next year. No incentive to save‚ only to somehow spend it all to justify getting more. Try running your household like that. Crews is exactly right: Congress is to blame. They neglect their Constitutional duties‚ simply using last year’s budget as the starting point for ever-growing budgets. As Ronald Reagan said‚ “A government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Even now‚ with a $34 trillion national debt‚ instead of rejecting budget requests that are simply pork‚ political favors‚ and pay-back for political donors‚ they continue to spend “like drunken sailors‚” putting the U.S. on the verge of a Soviet-style economic collapse. The difference is that sailors once sobered up‚ must suffer the consequences of their irresponsible spending. Congress does not. It just passes that suffering on to us‚ the taxpayers. The post Congress Should Apologize to Drunken Sailors appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The United States Naval Institute’s (USNI) web page reports that China has for the first time appointed an admiral as its defense minister. Adm. Dong Jun‚ who previously served as commander and deputy commander of the PLA Navy (PLAN)‚ replaces Gen. Li Shangfu‚ who has been missing since August and may have been arrested for “corruption.” The USNI report notes that it is likely that Dong will also sit on China’s Central Military Commission (CMC)‚ which is chaired by President Xi Jinping. If personnel translates into policy‚ this move may be yet another sign and portent that China plans to take Taiwan by force if necessary. READ MORE: Vivek‚ China and Russia Are Not Breaking Up Dong’s resume is impressive. As Ying-Yu Lin‚ a research fellow at the Association of Strategic Foresight and adjunct professor at National Sun Yat-sen University in Taiwan‚ noted two years ago when Dong was named commander of the PLAN‚ Dong became a rear admiral in 2012‚ served as deputy commander and chief of staff of the East Sea Fleet‚ and later served as deputy commander of the Southern Theater Command‚ where he cooperated with China’s new commander of the PLA air force. “Such a combination‚” Ying-Yu Lin wrote‚ “should be helpful to the PLA’s efforts to develop joint operations between the air force and navy‚” which may spell trouble for Taiwan. Dong‚ writes Ying-Yu‚ has been promoted‚ along with other members of what are known in China as the “Southeast Corps” and the “Taiwan Strait Gang.” Dong’s appointment should be seen in the context of China’s increasing assertiveness in military exercises in the Taiwan Strait‚ China’s anti-access/area denial capabilities‚ and Xi’s recent statements that China will reunify Taiwan peaceably or by force. Presumably‚ as defense minister‚ Dong will prioritize improving China’s naval power‚ especially in the waters of the western Pacific. Presumably‚ Xi selected Dong because China’s naval power will play the key role if a decision is made to forcibly seize Taiwan. But Xi’s selection of Dong as defense minister has larger geopolitical implications. It may mean that what James Holmes and Toshi Yoshihara warned about in 2008‚ and what Holmes reiterated only a few years ago‚ has come true: Chinese naval strategy has “turned” to Alfred Thayer Mahan. Holmes notes that in April 2021‚ he delivered a paper in Beijing on “seal-lane security” which brought forth from Chinese panelists “the most bellicose-sounding of Mahan’s precepts.” Holmes compares China’s attachment to Mahan to Kaiser Wilhelm II’s similar attachment to Mahan (he reportedly ordered all German warships to have on hand a copy of Mahan’s The Influence of Sea Power Upon History) in the years leading up to World War I‚ which helped fuel the naval arms race that contributed to the outbreak of that disastrous war. China’s turn to Mahan must also be seen in the context of its broader Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)‚ which has both land power and sea power components across the vast Eurasian-African landmass‚ China’s growing strategic partnerships with Russia and Iran‚ the relative decline in numbers of U.S. warships vis-a-vis China‚ and America’s dysfunctional foreign policy under the Biden administration — a foreign policy that has produced disaster in Afghanistan‚ uncertainty in Eastern Europe among the carnage of the Ukraine war‚ dissembling in the Middle East where it “supports” yet attempts to restrain our longtime ally Israel in its war in Gaza‚ indifference to a dying Monroe Doctrine in the Western Hemisphere‚ and a crisis on the U.S. southern border. We may be approaching an international situation reminiscent of what Winston Churchill called the “gathering storm” in the first volume of his history of World War II. But perhaps the more accurate analogy is the international situation leading up to World War I‚ which Churchill also wrote about in the first volume of The World Crisis. Churchill‚ who served as First Lord of the Admiralty at the outset of that war‚ recounted how “German ambitions grew with German prosperity‚” and how “[n]ot content with the hegemony of Europe … she began increasingly to turn her thoughts to the sea.” “The determination of the greatest military Power on the Continent‚” Churchill explained‚ “to become at the same time at least the second naval Power was an event of first magnitude in world affairs.” Despite the fact that Germany and Britain were commercial partners (like China and the U.S. are today)‚ German naval ambitions combined with conflicts in the Balkans and the Middle East led to what Churchill characterized as “a world of monstrous shadows moving in convulsive combinations through vistas of fathomless catastrophe.” China’s turn to the sea‚ which is evident by Dong’s appointment as minister of defense‚ should remind U.S. policymakers that what Churchill said about British naval supremacy in 1914 applies equally to the United States today: “[T]he whole fortunes of our race and Empire‚ the whole treasure accumulated during so many centuries of sacrifice and achievement‚ would perish and be swept utterly away if our naval supremacy were to be impaired.” The post China’s Defense Minister Is Now an Admiral. What Does That Mean for Taiwan? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

There’s an old Russian proverb ostensibly about a dancing bear: “The marvel is not that the bear dances well‚ but that the bear dances at all.” By this logic‚ The Boys in the Boat should not exist as a new Hollywood release‚ having too many anti-woke demerits. It’s the inspiring true story of how nine poor students at the impoverished University of Washington during the Great Depression formed a rowing crew that beat their rich Ivy League competition to become America’s team at the Hitler-watched 1936 Olympics in Germany. Adding conservative insult to liberal injury‚ it’s the whitest‚ male-friendliest studio film of the century and one in which beautiful feminine women love and support their men. The latter elements seem so discordant in 2023‚ I was expecting some black woman at any point to grab the oars and show the patriarchal white boys how to row. Fortunately‚ the movie sticks to the riveting actual history expertly chronicled by Daniel James Brown in his 2014 bestseller‚ The Boys in the Boat: Nine Americans and Their Epic Quest for Gold at the 1936 Berlin Olympics. In more competent hands‚ the positive‚ patriotic film could have been the Top Gun: Maverick of the year‚ but the sloppy direction by George Clooney and a lazy script by Mark L. Smith made the MGM production a frustrating disappointment. (RELATED: Hollywood Offers Two Year-End Hits) You can sense an attempted return to traditionalist filmmaking via its old-fashioned full opening credits — a long-abandoned art that once made cinema special. Recall the magnificent main-title sequence from the classic historical Olympian epic‚ Chariots of Fire (1981)‚ enriched by the unforgettable Vangelis score. Tragically‚ Vangelis‚ like all the other modern master film composers — Jerry Goldsmith‚ Henry Mancini‚ Elmer Bernstein‚ John Barry‚ Ennio Morricone‚ Maurice Jarre‚ James Horner — except for John Williams has passed. Alexandre Desplat’s dull score for The Boys in the Boat is nowhere near their level. Apart from the music‚ the new movie’s similar flashback framing device falls intellectually far short of Chariots’‚ demonstrating a steep 40-year decline in respect for the audience. Actor Nigel Havers’ poetic oratory recollecting his team’s glory (“Now there are just two of us … who can close our eyes and remember those few young men with hope in our hearts and wings on our feet.”) is updated in Boat to a generic old man — supposedly lead character Joe Rantz — watching his grandson mightily row a canoe. There follows a switch to Callum Turner as young Rantz trying to get factory work in 1930s Seattle. Turner is a major detriment to the film‚ trying too hard and obviously to channel James Dean. The Method — an irritating acting style exemplified by not looking at the person you’re talking to and mumbling semi-coherently — got old while James Dean was still alive. In fact‚ though Dean had the public heat in his final picture‚ Giant‚ Rock Hudson’s understated performance seems much more natural and realistic today in their scenes together. Turner’s attempted internalizing brings the movie down so low that his pretty co-star‚ Hadley Robinson‚ has to provide the energy for both of them as Rantz’s love interest. The actors playing Rantz’s teammates fare better‚ especially Luke Slattery as the stellar coxswain. A couple of them would have probably made better leads. I read Callum Turner is being considered for James Bond. I hope he gets it and kills Bond off even more decisively than Daniel Craig did. (READ MORE: James Bond: Time to Die) Joel Edgerton does all right as Coach Al Ulbrickson‚ his bombast a refreshing switch from Turner’s angst. Edgerton gets attractive visual and acting support from Courtney Henggeler as Ubrickson’s sexy wife‚ Hazel. The fine British actor‚ Peter Guinness‚ is cringeworthy playing a guru-like boatmaker reminiscent of his legendary namesake Alec (no relation) as Obi-Wan Kenobi. Guiness’s cliched character and words of wisdom are the fault of the muddled screenplay. The weak script combines with George Clooney’s hack direction to sink The Boys in the Boat. Clooney has no sense of dramatic rhythm. Scenes that should be vital receive short shrift while unnecessary ones play long and die. A speech where Coach Ubrickson announces he’s replacing the varsity rowing team with the central JV crew should have been explosive‚ but neither Clooney nor Smith had developed the varsity team to the point that anyone cares. So‚ instead‚ a typically villainous college leader tiresomely threatens Ulbrickson. In another sequence‚ a team member‚ Chuck Day (a solid Thomas Elms) falls sick in Berlin just before the race. Ulbrickson says he may not be able to compete‚ which would mean a forfeit loss. When the race starts‚ Chuck is in the boat‚ without a previous scene explaining this. You think they’re racing seven guys until counting the boys in the boat confirms the opposite. (READ MORE: Bradley Cooper Is Leonard Bernstein — And I Am Marie of Romania) The story’s main triumphs — that of the poor yet committed boys defeating‚ first‚ the prestigious schools‚ then‚ the Master Race‚ are lifelessly and superficially presented. Best done are the exciting training and racing sequences‚ where the rowers strain past the limits of their physical endurance for causes greater than themselves — their team and their country. Given the low regard in which both young men and America are held today in liberal culture‚ I recommend The Boys in the Boat‚ despite its flaws‚ as a welcome antidote to leftist propaganda. After all‚ it’s not how well they made the movie‚ it’s that they made it at all. The post The Boys in the Shaky Boat appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Milk is still expensive? You’re wrong. Can’t afford long trips? You’re wrong. You’ve lost customers? You’re wrong. Your company went bankrupt? You’re wrong. Can’t find anyone to invest in your business because of economic uncertainty? You’re wrong. Paul Krugman‚ my favorite Bidenomics junkie‚ is back‚ bigger and better than ever after Christmas‚ and he has started the year by blaming Americans for not wanting to accept that they are actually much richer than they think they are. “Our economy and society have‚ in fact‚ healed remarkably well‚” Krugman writes. “The big remaining question is when‚ if ever‚ the public will be ready to accept the good news.” Krugman also notes that “public perceptions” are “notoriously at odds with reality.”  READ MORE from Itxu Díaz: 2023: The Year That Began and Ended With Bombs If you are an average guy‚ just another taxpayer‚ and you think your personal economy is not going well‚ now you can easily fix it: You just call Krugman and ask him‚ “Hey‚ Paul‚ how is my economy doing?” And he will tell you‚ “Like a ballistic missile.” And then you’ll be very happy‚ you’ll thank him‚ and all your problems will be over.  The Left has undergone several transformations in recent decades. The most notorious is a pathological divorce from reality‚ precisely the same thing Krugman accuses normal Americans of. This dissociation is just as serious in scientific matters (they have problems understanding that human nature has only two sexes)‚ in social matters (they believe that the demographic crisis is not related to the crisis of the family)‚ and in purely economic matters (they will never accept the figures if they mess up their partisan narrative).  Joe Biden’s friends are engaged in a preelection campaign to insist that the economy is doing well. In the polls‚ Americans say otherwise. The Bidens rely on a few economic indicators that could be considered positive‚ even without having smoked crack before glancing at them. Americans rely on the one economic indicator that never fails: their own pockets. Even if both were right‚ the only thing that really matters is your own economic reality‚ along with the sum of all of the individual economic realities throughout the nation. That’s what counts.  The case of inflation is paradigmatic. The government can celebrate that inflation figures have improved; although this does not mean that prices have stopped rising‚ just that they are rising more slowly. Oh‚ thank you‚ we will not remove your testicle at full speed; we will do it slowly!  Prices are rising on top of the immense swelling that had already risen before. The case of unemployment is also illustrative: The upturn in employment is just the normal consequence of the pandemic crash. Not even a president as bad as Joe Biden would be able to prevent some improvement in employment in the years following a global health pandemic. It doesn’t bother me that Krugman is wrong. I would be very surprised if he were right. What really irritates me is to see that‚ once again‚ the big media loudspeakers of the left are blaming individual people for the evils caused by their damned government.  No‚ Krugman‚ the U.S. economy is not doing well. Biden’s economic measures can never work because‚ if Joe Biden himself is not capable of governing himself‚ he cannot possibly govern others well.  The one thing the Bidens and many of their media propagandists are right about is that the economy is a matter of perception. They think it’s going well. And maybe they are right from their point of view. Biden and his friends are probably making more money than ever‚ while American families cross an endless pitch-black tunnel through their bank accounts.  And finally‚ Krugman should also mention the issue of spending. Biden’s anti-crisis measures are trying to put out a small match‚ while government spending is causing a wildfire. A Democratic fireman is sure to show up to put it out soon‚ hosing it with … more government spending. Translated by Joel Dalmau. The post Year 2024: Everyone Except Paul Krugman Is Wrong appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Mississippi’s Michael Cassidy stands charged with fourth-degree criminal mischief for “vandalizing” the Satanic Temple’s display in the Iowa capitol. Well‚ there’s been a bunch of vandalizing going on‚ including that directed at a 25-foot-tall statue of a mounted Confederate general‚ Nathan Bedford Forrest. It stood just to the east of I-65 for us Nashville commuters to see until an art critic painted it pink‚ and steps toward its removal ensued. (A bust of Forrest has also been removed from the state capitol‚ and his remains have been displaced from a Memphis park.) Of course‚ vandalism is as American as apple pie (or‚ as the case may be‚ mud pies). Gang “tags” were ubiquitous in Chicago’s Cook County (our home for 11 years). Now‚ down this way‚ we savor the serial artistry of boxcar decorators as we wait at crossings. For my seminary aesthetics course‚ I shot field video of graffiti on random surfaces in Boston Common‚ just down from the Augustus Saint-Gaudens Robert Gould Shaw Memorial‚ itself vandalized with cop-hating messages during the George Floyd riots. And‚ indifferent or oblivious to the “broken windows” theory — which proposes that unchecked vandalism prompts the breakdown of law and order — a couple of visual savants celebrated the spirit and craft of those who defaced New York’s subway cars. Typically‚ vandalism gets bad press‚ so I was surprised to see a banner strung over the main drag of Moscow‚ Idaho. On a trip to the Northwest‚ I’d made a run to the city (with an intimidating name) to see New Saint Andrews College‚ where a friend served as dean. The town and school proved to be delightful. They are nested in the Palouse Region‚ which is just across the border from Washington State University. But there was that banner: “Welcome Back Vandals.” Was it surly‚ or perhaps progressive? No‚ as it turns out‚ that’s the team name for the University of Idaho‚ and the city was simply greeting new and returning students. (Come to think of it‚ even without the mascot‚ San Francisco and other centers of sidewalk defecation and smash-and-grab reparations-shopping might be in the market for a knockoff banner.) So why do people deface and tear down other people’s property? It strikes me that the big messages are “Look at me! I’m somebody‚” “To heck with you‚” and/or “Listen up‚ sleepy heads!” So‚ what shall we make of Michael Cassidy? Well‚ some might say that‚ being a failed candidate for Congress‚ he was drawing attention to his political self. But he claimed different motivation: “I saw this blasphemous statue and was outraged. My conscience is held captive to the word of God‚ not to bureaucratic decree. And‚ so‚ I acted.” (Of course‚ all three impulses could be in play‚ and legitimately so.) That being said‚ let’s examine the merits of the case. Gratuitously Obnoxious Phonies The Satanic Temple and its Baphomet display (a “sabbatic goat” with a pentagram) are nasty‚ delusional phonies. Yes‚ the group says they’re anti-supernatural‚ recognizing neither God nor the Devil as actual beings‚ but they pitch themselves as a religion identifying with a deity. It’s like “Lutherans‚” “Franciscans‚” and “Mennonites” denying the existence of Martin Luther‚ Francis of Assisi‚ and Menno Simons. Just what you’d expect from a group honoring the one whom Jesus calls “a liar and the father of lies.” They’re probably sincere in disavowing Satan-worship; the point is‚ rather‚ to be so gratuitously obnoxious as to force tender legislators to toss out the Christmas trees‚ crèches‚ and menorahs in the name of fairness. But‚ in doing so‚ these “Satanists” do‚ indeed‚ serve Satan‚ a personage they will meet‚ regretfully‚ one day. Yes‚ he’s outsmarted these geniuses who’ve trifled with his name. Ah‚ but they’ve clarified things for us by posting their seven tenets‚ explaining that they stand merely for “compassion and empathy‚” “the struggle for justice‚” “nobility in action and thought‚” and the rectification of “any harm that might have been caused” — all of which happen to be the opposite of what Satan values. It’s like calling yourself the Church of Hitler while championing Zionism. If you want a look at the real Satan‚ read the Bible to get acquainted with your “adversary” who “prowls around like a roaring lion‚ seeking someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8). Or pick up a copy of Anton LaVey’s 1969 classic‚ The Satanic Bible‚ which celebrates Satan as the one who “represents man as just another animal‚” “represents vengeance‚ instead of turning the other cheek‚” and “represents all of the so-called sins‚ as they lead to physical‚ mental‚ or emotional gratification.” But‚ again‚ the point is not accuracy or candor‚ but rather the forging of a blunt instrument to bash Christian images from civic spaces. If they spoke “in all honesty” (not Satan’s thing)‚ their libertine secular-humanism would be better represented by a statue of Bertrand Russell‚ but it wouldn’t pass as “religious” or pack the desired punch. (Of course‚ it’s one thing to punch Christians and their sensitivities; it happens all the time. But let the “Satanists” take a shot at Shia Islam by erecting a statue of Sinan bin Anas‚ the fellow who stabbed and beheaded Husayn ibn Ali‚ the grandson of Mohammed. You can bet the Sunnis would abuse more than the statue. And the legislators would look for cover.) OK‚ Let’s Talk Constitution What shall we say to “conservatives” who stand guard around Baphomet on “constitutional grounds”? As we say in the say in the South‚ “Bless‚ their hearts.” One’s a former Alliance World Fellowship pastor who‚ as a state representative‚ defends his stance‚ saying‚ “I don’t want the state evaluating and making determinations about religions. I am guided by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution‚” and “My faith is never imposed upon others‚ nor should it ever become a direct part of government. It is always a response to the person and work of Jesus Christ. I don’t want to mix the kingdoms! Government is a poor arbitrator of religion.” But would he apply this logic to proffered displays in honor of Shiva or Kali? Bacchus? Camazotz‚ the Mayan bat/death god? the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence? Isn’t at least some religious discrimination in order here? Look‚ I’m sure he’s good guy with honorable impulses. But he seems to have had a cup of the extremist Kool-Aid served up in recent years by secularists and religionists alike‚ including evangelicals‚ particularly those running around with their hair on fire‚ horrified by the “Christian nationalism” label (a designedly vague‚ multi-purpose smear word). To help sort things out‚ let’s go to the Constitution‚ at Article 1‚ Section 7‚ Clause 3: “If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him‚ the Same shall be a Law‚ in like Manner as if he had signed it‚ unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return‚ in which Case it shall not be a Law.” So right off‚ our nation was “making determinations about religions” with a measure of “faith becoming a direct part of government”: the Christian holy day (Sunday‚ the “Lord’s Day”) takes precedence over the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday) and the Muslim Jum’ah (Friday). Let’s press on to the First Amendment‚ the part about religion: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion‚ or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” So‚ what requires us to accommodate a Satan-labeled grotesquerie in the state house? Does Iowa (and the White House) “establish” Christianity when it puts up a Christmas tree? Not if you work with the ordinary meaning of “established religion‚” as in England (Anglicanism); Denmark‚ Iceland‚ Norway (Lutheranism); Saudi Arabia‚ Algeria‚ Egypt‚ Iran (Islam); Costa Rica‚ Malta‚ Monaco (Roman Catholicism); Israel (Judaism); Greece (Orthodoxy); and Cambodia‚ Myanmar‚ Sri Lanka (Buddhism). These faiths are established in a variety of ways‚ whether by tax support‚ appointive authority‚ or membership requirements for officials. In contrast‚ Christmas trees signify honor‚ not institutionalization. On the hysterics’ model‚ the U.S. government could‚ by extension‚ be said to “establish” all sorts of desiderata‚ e.g.‚ physical strength and vigor. We’ve established a National Council on Fitness and Health and levied “sin taxes” on cigarettes‚ whose packaging must bear warnings over cancer‚ stunted fetal growth‚ and lung disease. And we funded the First Lady’s “Let’s Move!” campaign (“America’s Move to Raise a Healthy Generation of Kids.”) Christianity gets none of this. We share tax exemptions with the Sierra Club‚ mosques‚ and other nonprofits‚ and our pastors enjoy clergy housing allowances along with rabbis and imams. As for the “free exercise” clause‚ nobody is stopping Satan’s Temple from erecting a Baphomet on its property (subject to HOA strictures and zoning requirements) or in their “Legion Hall” or sanctuary. Let them mutter incantations against a local church‚ drink chicken blood‚ or howl at the moon. Just don’t ask us to put their practices and accoutrements in a place of honor. The same goes for fitness shunners. They’re perfectly free to smoke five packs a day on the couch while watching TV endlessly and wolfing down brats and shakes. When‚ at 350 pounds‚ they die of heart failure‚ there’s no rap sheet dogging their descent into disability. Of Decrees‚ Assignments‚ Addresses‚ Endorsements‚ and an Anthem To be sure‚ our special regard for theism in general and Christianity in particular extends well beyond Article 1‚ the First Amendment‚ and the Declaration of Independence (“endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”). A brief sampling might feature reference to God in 20 state constitutions‚ including Iowa’s (expressing gratitude “to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed‚ and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings”); Franklin Roosevelt’s endorsement in the New Testament published by the Government Printing Office and distributed to the army in 1942; and Abraham Lincoln’s Order for Sabbath Observance‚ which was published on November 15‚ 1862‚ and wherein he said that “he desires and enjoins the orderly observance of the Sabbath by the officers and men in the military and naval service‚” and added‚ “The importance for man and beast of the prescribed weekly rest‚ the sacred rights of Christian soldiers and sailors‚ a becoming deference to the best sentiment of a Christian people‚ and a due regard for the Divine will‚ demand that Sunday labor in the army and navy be reduced to the measure of strict necessity.” In their inaugural addresses‚ all presidents have noted respectfully the Creator‚ some quoting Scripture (e.g.‚ John Quincy Adams from Psalms; Jimmy Carter from Micah)‚ and some sounding distinctively Christian themes: “to consider a decent respect for Christianity among the best recommendations for the public service” (John Adams‚ who knew a thing or two about the U.S. Constitution) and “a profound reverence for the Christian religion” (William Henry Harrison). In an 1822 report to the House of Representatives on the “Condition of the Several Indian Tribes‚” President Monroe listed various missionary societies (including Baptists and Moravians) as government agents to help Seneca‚ Oneida‚ Cherokee‚ Chickasaw‚ Miami‚ and Osage people. Then there are commemorative stamps honoring “These Immortal Chaplains‚ Interfaith in Action” (1948) — a rabbi‚ a Catholic priest‚ and two Protestants who drowned together‚ having handed their life preservers to troops on the torpedoed S. S. Dorchester as it sank into the North Atlantic — as well as Junipero Serra‚ the Franciscan friar was instrumental in establishing San Diego and eight other California missions up the coast. Cultural Debtors That earlier roll call of “establishment” nations points to a connection between core beliefs and national well-being. It takes willful blindness to suggest that a Myanmar and Algeria are as attractive to immigrants as Texas. To put it another way‚ we trace our national character to William Bradford and the Pilgrims who stepped onto Plymouth Rock. What if the Mayflower had been a Ming dynasty junk‚ an Ottoman galley‚ or a sea-going Sinhalese outrigger? What if those other religious orientations had predominated? Well‚ the answer is not puzzling. All we have to do is look to the nations of China‚ Turkey‚ and Sri Lanka. The cultural relativist might say‚ “So what?” I’ll simply leave him to his puzzlement. Throughout the land‚ there are scores of hospitals with Judeo-Christian roots‚ e.g.‚ Baptist Health of Louisville; Advocate Lutheran General in Chicagoland; Cedars-Sinai of Los Angeles; Saint Francis of Nashville; Methodist in San Antonio; and New York-Presbyterian. Furthermore‚ the lengthy roll of universities with Christian roots extends back to the 17th century — Harvard (Congregational) and William and Mary (Episcopalian) — and the 18th century — Yale (Congregational)‚ Princeton (Presbyterian)‚ Columbia (Anglican)‚ Penn (Anglican)‚ Brown (Baptist)‚ Rutgers (Dutch Reformed/Calvinist)‚ and Dartmouth (Congregational‚ with special missionary focus on the Indians). Of course‚ many of these schools have been secularized‚ but there’s no denying their heritage‚ as reflected in Harvard’s original motto‚ Christo et Ecclesiae (“For Christ and Church”). Our National Anthem‚ “The Star Spangled Banner‚” includes the words‚ “Then conquer we must‚ when our cause it is just.” And “In God is our trust” is our motto. Also‚ the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” features‚ “In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea‚ with a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me. As He died to make men holy‚ let us die to make men free‚ while God is marching on.” On a road trip through the basketball‚ baseball‚ and football halls of fame‚ I started in Springfield‚ Massachusetts‚ home of the old YMCA missionary training school. It was there that James Naismith invented the game that ultimately gave us Air Jordans‚ Bracketology‚ Hoosiers‚ and Yao Ming (the last the product of a Chinese government‚ tall-guy breeding program spurred by basketball fever‚ ignited by YMCA missionaries.) Entering the museum‚ one find Naismith’s New Testament on prominent display. I was reminded of that exhibit when I visited the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington‚ D.C. There‚ I found Harriet Tubman’s copy of Gospel Hymns No. 2‚ edited by P. P. Bliss and Ira Sankey‚ “As Used by Them in Gospel Meetings.” And speaking of abolitionists (i.e.‚ Tubman)‚ Frederick Douglass’ 1845 slave narrative recounted his use of the Bible in Sabbath schools to teach literacy (a complementary inversion of Massachusetts Bay Colony’s 1647 “Old Deluder Satan Law‚” which established literacy schools so that children could arm themselves spiritually through Bible reading). And let me note another museum‚ the one devoted to the Pony Express at its starting point‚ St. Joseph‚ Missouri. It introduced me to Alexander Majors‚ who established that service along with Messrs. Russell and Waddell. He ensured that riders took an oath before “the Great and Living God” to eschew profanity‚ intoxicating liquors‚ quarreling‚ and dishonesty and that each rider was issued a special‚ calf-bound edition of the Bible. All of this is to say that‚ from its founding‚ our nation has found it licit and inspiring to honor the God of the Christian faith who has revealed himself in the Old and New Testaments. And it is surpassingly irresponsible to demean this heritage. At the same time‚ we have refrained from dignifying tokens of the occult and demonic realms. And we don’t much like trifling with talk of the dark world. (One of my guys in the 2nd Armored Division had a real problem with wearing a patch reading “Hell on Wheels‚” and I respected him for that. We need to go easy on making light of eternally transcendent‚ metaphysical horrors.) Vandalizing the Vandalism So‚ did Michael Cassidy vandalize a display in the Iowa capitol? Having read the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of a “vandalic” act (a deed that is “barbarously or ignorantly destructive”)‚ I’m reluctant to say yes. Mr. Cassidy well knew that the Baphomet figure was “barbaric‚” i.e.‚ uncivilized‚ an affront to our nation’s guiding sentiments. So‚ I’ll reserve the term “vandal” for the Iowa Department of Administrative Services (DAS)‚ which green-lighted emplacement of the demonic figure with the indulgence of the legislature and governor. I believe they acted “ignorantly‚” misreading their constitutional prerogatives and obligations. And the result was barbaric‚ crude‚ and boorish. Unfortunately‚ we’re being conditioned to the barbaric by two presidents‚ whether through Biden’s raunchy guests on “pride” day‚ the First Lady’s creepy “Christmas” dancers‚ or Obama’s use of lighting to turn the White House into an obnoxious giant LGBT flag. Go ahead‚ raunch‚ creep‚ obnox it up‚ but not in our seats of government. What About Skeptivus? Dustivus? George Costanza’s dad introduced us to Festivus‚ and I think he’s opened the door to fresh alternatives. What about Skeptivus? Our nation is‚ indeed‚ indebted to individual atheists (e.g.‚ Linus Pauling and Orson Welles)‚ and we historically treasure our right to dissent and offend. Perhaps we could set aside a day or even a week for religious skeptics to position tasteful theme pieces in civic spaces. How about a statue of Thomas Paine? He’s a Founding Father and an early slavery abolitionist. President Obama quoted him in his inaugural address. No‚ Paine wasn’t an atheist‚ but‚ as a Deist‚ he wrote‚ “I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church‚ by the Roman church‚ by the Greek church‚ by the Turkish church‚ by the Protestant church‚ nor by any church that I’ve heard of. My own mind is my own church.” So there! In his book‚ On Two Wings‚ Michael Novak argued that the combination of “humble faith and common sense” at America’s founding explains the nation’s goodness and prosperity. The Satanic Temple would have us clip the faith wing‚ and we have every right to resist that. Some charge that we Christians want to clip the common-sense wing through fundamentalist overreach. This is demonstrable nonsense: Esteem for natural law as well as scriptural fidelity is prevalent among believers. The real threat today is from those who would clip both wings‚ dismissing both the Creator and the deliverances of common sense‚ which is dependent upon a shared human order. (Paine wrote Common Sense‚ and there’s no way he could sign off on William Thomas’ competing as “Lia” in NCAA swim meets; or on condemning the use of fossil fuels; or on erasing the nation’s southern border‚ etc.) As for the observance‚ perhaps they could go with six traits‚ using the keyboard set‚ QWERTY‚ as an outline since Paine and many other counter-culture scrappers were writers: Questioning‚ Withering‚ Eloquent‚ Radical‚ Transgressive‚ and Yeomanly. Maybe surround the statue with six decorative plates corresponding to the virtues. The problem is that Jesus himself manifested each of these in one way or context or another. Also‚ those who love Nativity scenes are some of the most skeptical Americans when it comes to trusting the conceits of the elites. They might well get on board with Skepticus. What about Dustivus (or Epicurivus)‚ a time of public celebration for metaphysical materialists who think we’re just a concatenation of physical particles and forces at play? A statue of Carl Sagan would do. Perhaps a nighttime‚ outdoor ceremony involving the discharge of Roman candles to a Peggy Lee recording of “Is That All There Is?” (or‚ of course‚ “Dust in the Wind” by Kansas). But maybe that’s not fair to the “Satanic” Temple crew. After all‚ they twice cite esteem for “justice” within their fundamental tenets; they must be a high-minded crew. So how about the statue of a blindfolded lady who is holding scales in one hand and a sword in the other‚ signifying impartiality in the courts. Wait! We already have those in government buildings. And Christmas tree enthusiasts long for the day when our justice system will track with this symbol. Whew‚ this gets complicated. Or not‚ if you’re willing for the nation to fly on the two wings of humble faith and common sense. To the others‚ I say: Knock yourself out. But don’t try to knock tokens of respect for Christ and the God of Abraham‚ Isaac‚ and Jacob out of our civic spaces. READ MORE: Islam Needs Reform — But Is That Possible? Sudanish America The post Who’s the Vandal? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Jowl is perhaps one of the most desirable cuts of pork‚ but just how do you prepare it? The ideal method is multifaceted and gives melt-in-your-mouth results.

by Dr. Joseph Mercola‚ Mercola: STORY AT-A-GLANCE According to research published in December 2023‚ the mRNA COVID shots suffer high rates of ribosomal “frameshifting‚” which causes your cells to produce off-target proteins that can trigger unintended immune reactions According to the authors‚ off-target cellular immune responses occur in 25% to 30% of people who have […]

by Rhoda Wilson‚ Expose News: “The police state has arrived” according to U.S. Constitutional Attorney John W. Whitehead‚ who writes that “As long as we continue to allow callousness‚ cruelty‚ meanness‚ immorality‚ ignorance‚ hatred‚ intolerance‚ racism‚ militarism‚ materialism‚ meanness‚ and injustice—magnified by an echo chamber of nasty tweets and government-sanctioned brutality—to trump justice‚ fairness‚ and equality‚ there can […]

from Arcadia Economics:  TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/