Thursday, December 29, 2022

The New, New Antisemitism ~ VDH

Black antisemitism is spreading in strange, dangerous ways. Why?


The old antisemitism was more a right-wing than a left-wing phenomenon—perhaps best personified by the now-withered Ku Klux Klan.

A new antisemitism followed from the campus leftism of the 1960s. It arose from and was masked by a general hatred of Israel, following the Jewish state’s incredible victory in the 1967 Six-Day War. 

That lopsided triumph globally transformed Israel in the leftist mind from a David fighting the Arab Goliath into a veritable Western imperialist, neocolonialist overdog. 

On campuses, Middle-East activism, course instruction, and faculty profiles are now virulently anti-Israel—and indistinguishable from anti-Jewishness. 

When columnist Ben Shapiro spoke at Stanford University in 2019, left-wing posters were plastered around campus depicting Shapiro as an insect menace. A “BenBGon” bug spray bottle in Nazi fashion unsubtly suggested that a chemical agent is the best remedy to make sure Jews “be gone” from the premises. 

The avowed socialist Representative Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) retweeted the old propaganda boast, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” 

Tlaib knew well “to the sea” could mean only the extinction of Israel itself and its 9 million Jews. She deleted her tweet—but only after an outcry of protest. 

Anti-Zionists and leftist Palestinian activists Linda Sarsour and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)—“it’s all about the Benjamins”—often made no effort to hide their antisemitism. 

Yet now a dangerous new, new antisemitism is trending, predominantly among African-Americans—especially prominent politicians, celebrities, and billionaires. 

The old trope that blacks inordinately were prejudiced against Jews due to past inner-city stereotypes of exploiting Jewish landlords has been recalibrated. It is now repackaged by black elites claiming that their careers are overly profitable to and orchestrated by “the Jews.”

It has been difficult to find any major black leader who has not trafficked in antisemitism, whether Jesse Jackson (“Hymietown”), Al Sharpton (“tell them to pin their yarmulkes back”), Louis Farrakhan (“gutter religion”), or Obama’s former pastor, Jeremiah Wright (“Them Jews”). 

Yet what is different about the new, new antisemitism is the open defiance, often even or especially when exposed. 

Kayne West was met with pushback after warning, “I’m going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE.” Yet he trumped that by soon praising Adolf Hitler. 

The Black Hebrew movement absurdly claims blacks are the real Biblical Jews, Jews the imposters. Black Lives Matter clumsily disguised its antisemitism when claiming Israelis were committing mass genocide in the Middle East.

When novelist Alice Walker was chastised for praising virulent antisemite David Icke (he claimed that Jews formed a cabal of “lizard people”), she too was unremorseful. Walker retorted that Icke was “brave” for publishing his nutty rants. 

Rappers from Public Enemy and Ice Cube to Jay-Z and Kanye West all spouted anti-Jewish venom. And billionaires, from the late Michael Jackson to LeBron James, dabbled in antisemitic talk, the first in lines from lyrics, the second in retweets. 

In the hate-crime statistics, blacks as perpetrators are overrepresented, and, as victims, Jews and Asians are overrepresented. “Knock out the Jew” occasionally resurfaces as a common sport among New York city black youth.

In our “woke” age, race is seen as an indemnity policy for any self-described victim. Thus even elite blacks, as the still oppressed, cannot be seen as oppressors against “white” Jews. 

Wokeism’s competitive victimization often embraces Holocaust denial. That way, the systematic slaughter of 6 million Jews in industrial fashion does not overshadow the need for a reparatory legacy to atone for slavery and Jim Crow. 

When Whoopi Goldberg claimed the Holocaust was not about race and was, for a while, suspended from her morning chat show, she only temporarily apologized. Goldberg this week returned to claiming that the Holocaust was only a crime by white people against white people.

In her ignorance, she was oblivious that Hitler and the Nazis did not believe Jews to be fully human at all.

Among black elites in professional sports and entertainment, the belief that Jews inordinately are represented as agents, executives, or commissioners is considered proof of exploitation—and often ridiculously reduced to master-slave psychodramas. 

Marquee professional athletes like Kyrie Irving, DeShawn Jackson, and the retired Stephen Jackson only reluctantly backed off their blatant anti-Jewish messaging.

Apparently, if the athletes of the NFL and NBA are approximately 60 percent or more African American, then they are merely diverse. But if Jews in the entertainment and sport hierarchies appear more frequently than their 2.4 percent demographic, then as a “cabal” they supposedly pose a threat to black livelihoods. 

Black antisemitism is spreading in strange, dangerous ways. 

Why? Woke orthodoxy offers cover by insisting supposed victims can never be victimizers. A leftist-dominated media hides or contextualizes the hatreds promulgated by its own constituents. 

Jewish-American groups remain predominately liberal. And too often, they conveniently overlook black antisemitism, given the demands of left-wing intersectional solidarity. 

So, expect the new, new antisemitism to grow more common—and more toxic.




And we Know, On the Fringe, and more- December 29

 



Feels good to be almost done with the Christmas movie watching season. Here's tonight's news:


2022 Sucked


Picture 365 days full of sucking and you’ve got this past year. Not in my personal life, and hopefully not in yours either, but politically. We have a moron in the White House, a culture going to hell, and a media actively working against any and everything that refuses to conform to their left-wing agenda. At least on January 3rd a new Congress with convenes and some of the horrible will end. So we make sure we repeat a little of the garbage from 2022 to 2023, let’s take a look back at some of the worst.

First, we’re going broke faster than anyone thought possible. Joe Biden doesn’t understand math… economics…or how to tie his shoes (seriously, he’d either be barefoot or tripping constantly with only laces), and no amount of explanation is going to make him care that he’s bringing about the collapse of our economy. It’s not really that he’s too stupid to understand, though he’s plenty stupid, it’s that to the extent to which he does understand what he’s doing, he does not care.

If you’ve ever seen the movie Road House, there’s a scene where the character of Brad Wesley (played by Ben Gazzara) simply does not give a damn about anything, he owns the town, and he’s driving down a country road singing along with “Sh-Boom,” swerving from side to side singing a song. He runs Patrick Swayze’s car off the road because he does not care. Joe Biden is Brad Wesley and we’re that guy in the other car. 

Honestly, why would Biden care? As long as the economic collapse doesn’t occur on his watch he’ll not only never be blamed for it by a compliant press, it’s very unlikely he’ll be alive when it happens, so he’ll never have to face the consequences of his failure. While 2023 won’t stop him from screwing things up, it will at least bring us closer to ending him from making things worse.

Then we have that media that will not report honestly about Joe Biden or any Democrat. That’s not going to get any better, they’re on the team. I’ve never seen adults look at something so obviously, one thing, and all collectively either ignore it or insist that it is something else entirely. After an election season of them screaming “THREAT TO DEMOCRACY!!!!” you’d think the people actively working to undermine it in the name of politics might recognize an actual threat to democracy.

They aren’t going to get any better, they aren’t going to change…except that more and more people will see them for what they are, which means fewer and fewer people will believe their bile or patronize their employers. More lay-offs and closures. It’s not ideal, it’d be better if they did their damn jobs, but it’s better than them continuing along the path they’re on now. Besides, to hell with them.

I saved the cultural rot for last because it is, long term, the most important and dangerous. 

There is no point in my life in which I would have believed you if you’d told me a political party would be openly sided with pedophiles, but here we are. And have no doubt, that’s what you are engaged in when you’re sexualizing children, whether or not it gets physical is irrelevant.  

In 2022, the smell from the dump not only wafted all over everyone, but it also came to life and was given royal treatment by the political left in the country. 

Honestly, I don’t care what people do in private, as long as whoever they do it with is of age and willing. At some point over the past few years what was going on in private became public, not because normal people started prying into the bedrooms of others, but because some people decided to make the world their bedroom and try to force the world to watch and applaud.

If some guy in a dress gyrated in front of me when I was a kid my dad would’ve knocked him into next week. Now, that same guy is celebrated by politicians, the media, librarians, etc. I don’t care if you want to wear a dress or pretend to be a woman, it’s the need a small percentage of these people have to rub the faces of kids in it, or at least their crotches, that is sick. There is no circumstance under which the sexualizing of children is OK. Parents who bring their kids to these “shows” are just as sick as the men getting off on it. If you took a kid to a strip club you’d be arrested, what the hell is wrong with the people who cheer it?

I know, they say it’s all about “acceptance” and not making trans people feel bad. When it comes to kids, I simply don’t give a damn. I’m not going to celebrate anyone’s sexuality or fetish, I simply don’t care – you have to explain to God what you’ve done, I don’t – but no one’s self-esteem or anything else is worth damaging a child. If you want to have a drag club where adults who enjoy that toss cash and adulation your way, knock yourself out. If you want your elementary school’s public library filled with students to be that venue, hell no. 

That an entire wing of society defends and cheers this is not only a sign of the decline of American greatness, but if we don’t squash it’ll be the end of it, and deservedly so.

It’s shocking enough how pandering Democrats collectively forgot what a woman was in 2022, especially the “feminist” wing, but that they’re now forgetting what a child brings to a new level. Body mutilation, chemically altering children on whims and delusions, permanently butchering…

Yes, 2022 brought about a new level of evil most people wouldn’t have thought possible just a couple of years ago. If it isn’t destroyed, it will destroy us all. And honestly, we’d deserve it. Let’s hope 2023 is much, much better. 




Harvesting Low-Effort Votes Is Working Great For Democrats, So They’re Going For More

While some congressional Republicans might think the post-2020 election integrity fight is over, that couldn’t be farther from the truth.



The dust of the 2022 midterm contests has barely settled and Democrats — invigorated by the Red Wave that evaporated under extended lax voting policies — are out to make sweeping changes to our nation’s election laws once again.

Think back to 2020, when Democratic governors and unsuspecting Republican lawmakers made unprecedented changes to state election policies in the name of Covid that included mandating universal mail-in balloting and a month of early voting. Some states have kept these changes permanently. 

But Democrats are not satisfied, and why should they be? With their gubernatorial power retained (they kept all but one of the governor’s offices) and newfound control of state legislatures in both Michigan and Minnesota, Democrats are keen to ram through a whole gamut of unprecedented and unconstitutional changes. It’s working, so they’re going to keep doing it.

As The New York Times reported, Democrats’ list of policy proposals for 2023 includes expanding automatic voter registration systems, preregistering teenagers to vote, granting the franchise to felons, and criminalizing what the left thinks is election “misinformation.” Of course, all these policy prescriptions have little to do with “voting rights,” but Democrats package them as such, and slander their opponents as — you guessed it — racists. 

Make no mistake about what these proposals are meant to accomplish. Take automatic voter registration. The New York Times notes that such a system — already adopted by 20 states — “adds anyone whose information is on file with a government agency — such as a department of motor vehicles or a social services bureau — to [a state’s] voter rolls unless they opt out.”

During the 2020 election, Michigan’s Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson sent out automatic voter registration forms to all eligible Michigan residents. As a result of the mailer, 114,000 people were automatically added to Michigan’s voter rolls. Many were duplicate and otherwise inaccurate registrations. By padding state voter rolls with new unlikely voters, Democrats can target unsuspecting blocs of voters, harvest their ballots, and put their candidates over the top. Various leftist 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations are solely dedicated to this.

As I’ve previously reported regarding Democratic attempts to court high school-age kids, multiple left-wing organizations are targeting young people to effectively propagandize them into future Democratic Party voters. As two-thirds of Gen Z voters backed Democrats this past midterm election cycle, Democrats are hoping to capitalize on this emerging voting bloc while also setting their sights on even younger kids. While leftist organizations have tried to couch their outreach efforts as bipartisan, Democrat politicians admit they’re going after younger voters to benefit the left.

“[Targeting young people] is something the left’s been pushing for quite a while — along with enfranchising noncitizens and automatic restoration of felon voting rights,” executive director of the Honest Elections Project Jason Snead told me earlier this month. “They’re always looking for new people to bring into the election system and calculating the targeted groups who will be more likely to vote Democratic.”

Along with making the state a key player in their efforts to pad voter rolls in their favor, Democrats are also intent on criminalizing any information that could hurt their electoral prospects. Known Democratic Party hack and Michigan Secretary of State Joycelyn Benson told the New York Times that she wants new rules and penalties for individuals peddling “misinformation” in election mailers or language on proposed ballot amendments. 

“The greatest threats to our democracy right now continue to be the intentional spread of misinformation and the threats and harassment of election officials that emerge from those efforts,” Benson said.

With Democrats’ history of using Big Tech to label the New York Post’s verified story on Hunter Biden as misinformation and its subsequent censorship during the 2020 election, as well as myriad true scientific claims that countered the bureaucracy’s Covid narrative, it’s clear Benson and fellow Democrats’ desire to censor “misinformation” is code for cracking down on any information Democrats don’t like.

What’s To Be Done

Republicans must be wary of Democratic efforts to fortify elections in 2023 and beyond. While some congressional Republicans might think the post-2020 election integrity fight is over, that couldn’t be farther from the truth. Democrats have a massive ground game advantage over Republicans already, and if they pass these policy proposals — under the insufferable label of “voting rights” — in key swing states, that advantage will only grow to an insurmountable one. Republicans must realize election integrity is not a seasonal push nor a battle isolated to 2020. Rather, they must be on offense for years to come. 




There's Barely Any Point to the Legacy Media Anymore


The mainstream media’s reputation is in the toilet. There’s absolutely no doubt about that. Whether it’s ABC, NBC, CNN, or any other order you can put random letters in, the legacy media has a bias problem that it’s too deep into to crawl out of now.

RedState has covered the media’s egregious one-sided reporting on a daily basis. I’ve likely forgotten more stories about its bias than many people ever learn. That’s how often these stories come about.

Moreover, no one really contends that the legacy media is pure as the driven snow anymore. With the exception of hard leftists, nearly everyone pretty much accepts that MSNBC, CBS, and others are biased to the left and report whatever is convenient to the Democrat Party at the time. Despite this knowledge, the messaging and narrative driving that takes place still gets around, tainting and eschewing every conversation we have about any given subject.

And isn’t this antithetical to what the press is supposed to be?

The point of the press is to be an entity that delivers notable events and information to the people. It’s supposed to also be, in a way, their voice. They’re supposed to ask the tough questions that make the people in charge careful about the decisions they make.

Instead, the legacy media has become a servant of the very people they’re supposed to question. As Elon Musk recently asked, corporate journalism is more apt to defend the state than the people, prompting Robby Starbuck, a former director, to respond with a very accurate statement:

Because corporate journalists are the PR arm of the left wing ruling class and have been for over a decade. They did this because the left understands the value of owning cultural institutions like media, film, music, etc. Their billionaires invest tons into this. Ours do not.

On Wednesday, I reported about how legacy media outlets such as the Associated Press, New York Times, and the Washington Post have all been making claims about climate change that don’t hold up. Sure enough, as one report uncovered, the Associated Press was taking millions of dollars from various left-leaning groups in order to make dubious climate change claims.

This is the same media that dedicated next to no time on the “Twitter Files,” arguably the biggest story of the year, but were jumping at every twitch someone on the January 6 committee made.

The mainstream media is bought and paid for, ready and willing to lie at drop of a hat and ask “how high” when a Democrat says “jump.” So what’s the point of them now?

Nowadays, I find myself actively avoiding clicking on anything from NBC or CBS because I’m not sure I can trust the information being handed to me. I’m now constantly asking myself “what’s in it for (insert MSM source here) by issuing this report?” Nowadays, I tend to find more safety in reading reports from what the left labels as “alternative media.” At least they’re honest about their bias and seem to have far more cause to tell the truth.

The bottom line is that the media is no longer your friendly neighborhood source for information. It’s not your friend. These are businesses with a bias. They have a vested interest in telling you a lie and getting you to believe that lie by any means possible.

Think about it this way. They will literally fan the flames of a riot to the point where people will burn city blocks and do extraordinary acts of violence for both the ratings and the pushing of a message.

They don’t care about you. In fact, they likely look down on you. You are not the priority. You are merely a tool to manipulate.

Don’t trust the mainstream media anymore.




Pele: Brazil football legend dies aged 82

 

Brazilian football legend Pele, arguably the greatest player ever, has died at the age of 82.

More to follow.   




Even Far-Left Activists Are Now Savaging Pete Buttigieg


Bonchie reporting for RedState 

Today is a special day. For the first time since the invention of the internet, I’m going to agree with far-left activist Nina Turner, who is usually stumping for minimum wage increases and price controls.

But hey, when someone is right, they’re right, and Turner nailed it regarding Pete Buttigieg. In a social media post, she described him as a “small city mayor” trying to pad his resume that is “failing up.”

Fact-check: True

There are a lot of politicians in Washington, D.C., who don’t deserve the positions they hold. That’s especially true when talking about the bloated bureaucratic system. Yet, Buttigieg manages to rank near the top of the list of worst government officials.

He was appointed as the Secretary of Transportation despite having zero experience in the field. Worse, his prior record as a politician (i.e. the mayor of South Bend, Indiana) is pretty awful. He oversaw a surge in crime, in what was once a fairly safe city, and he was so bad at his job, he couldn’t even keep the potholes filled. One of the reasons Buttigieg enjoyed essentially no black support during the 2020 presidential campaign was that the black residents of his own city couldn’t stand him.

But while Buttigieg didn’t have the record or qualifications for his current position, he was gay, well-spoken, and liked choo-choo trains. He even proposed to his husband in an airport. Or was it a train station? I don’t know, but it was all enough box-checking for Biden, who had never managed much of anything before entering the White House.

Turner is right to use the phrase “failing up.” We are talking about a guy who heavily inflated his military experience (you’d have thought he was an operator, based on his talk during the 2020 campaign), failed as a mayor of a small city, and then bombed as a presidential candidate. Yet, somehow, he was the top choice for one of the top cabinet positions in the Biden administration. What else explains that, except identity politics and favoritism to try to help Buttigieg pad his resume for yet another presidential run?

And what have the results of that decision been? Massive supply chain issues, a possible railroad strike, and an airline industry in chaos. Buttigieg’s response was to take half a year of “paternity” leave and go on cable news to talk about “equity” initiatives. You can’t get the groceries you need, but by golly, the United States is instituting equity or something.

It’s all just so absurd, but that’s modern politics for you. Few people in DC actually deserve to be in their positions of power, and the consequences of that back-slapping and palm-greasing culture end up crushing normal Americans. Buttigieg has his piece of the pie. He has his months and months of paid vacation, his private jet rides, and his expensive DC row house. Why would he care about actually trying to do his job well? There’s no gain in doing the right thing in Washington. It’s all about who you know, who you are, and what you can promise each other.




EU calls screening of travellers from China unjustified

 

The EU's disease agency has said the screening of travellers from China for Covid-19 would be "unjustified".

On Thursday, Italy urged the rest of the EU to follow its lead and ensure Chinese arrivals were tested, and quarantined if necessary.

The US, Japan, Taiwan and India also recently announced mandatory testing, as China deals with a Covid surge.

But the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control said the surge was "not expected to impact" the EU.

In a statement, the ECDC said:

  • High levels of Covid in China are anticipated given the country's low immunity and recent relaxation of its rules
  • But higher immunity in the EU means a Covid surge in China is not expected to impact the bloc
  • The Covid-19 variants circulating in China are already circulating in the EU
  • Potential imported infections from China are "rather low" compared to the number of infections already occurring in the EU
  • And citizens in the bloc have relatively high vaccination and immunisation

Concerns were raised after Chinese authorities decided to let people travel more freely from 8 January, after almost three years of largely-closed borders.

EU health officials held talks in Brussels on Thursday to co-ordinate any response. The ECDC added: "We remain vigilant and will be ready to use the emergency brake if necessary."

The EU can issue recommendations, but each nation is free to make their own policies, like Italy.

 

 

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said her country's efforts to curb Covid-19 transmissions from China would be undermined if other EU countries did not follow suit.

In the UK, a minister said the issue was "under review".

Meanwhile, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said testing visitors from China, Hong Kong and Macau was needed "to help slow the spread of the virus as we work to identify... any potential new variants that may emerge".

China's National Health Commission published its most recent daily Covid data on 24 December, registering 4,128 new cases the day before.

But analysts say such numbers are a vast underestimate - and the daily case load may be closer to a million.

On Thursday, British health data firm Airfinity said 9,000 people in China could be dying from Covid-19 each day - almost double its previous daily estimate.

Despite the official numbers being low, the World Health Organization has warned the healthcare system in China could be under severe pressure.  

As Covid surges in China, some nearby countries have moved swiftly to announce restrictions.

  • In India, people travelling from China and four other Asian countries must produce a negative Covid test before arriving, with those who test positive put in quarantine
  • In Japan, from Friday, travellers from China will be tested for Covid upon arrival. Those who test positive will have to quarantine for up to seven days
  • Malaysia has put additional tracking and surveillance measures in place
  • Meanwhile Taiwan has said people arriving from China, by air or sea, will have to take Covid tests on arrival throughout January   

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64119080   




The Republicans’ Mitch McConnell Problem


One of the annoying tendencies of our conservative-populist movement is to conflate objective evaluations of individuals in the arena with the approval of those individuals. For years, I have found Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell to be a frustrating and imperious charter member of the GOP establishment while simultaneously being the best parliamentary leader we have had in living memory. He has done important things for the movement. I get a lot of grief for saying, “You must love Mitch!” but that’s fine. We need to be objective instead of emotional – we’re not Democrats. And he was objectively skilled and effective once upon a time. Who else could keep a caucus that ranged from maple syrup-moderate Susan Collins, to based Show-Me State conservative Josh Hawley mostly together? Who else was tough enough to hold out under the pressure of the entire regime media to let Obama appoint the odious Merrick Garland to SCOTUS?

No one. That’s just a fact. As much as his contempt for the base grates – and he has always had nothing but contempt for mere plebes – once upon a time, Senator McConnell got it done. Cocaine Mitch may have caused us cons fits, but he gave the Dems grand mals.

And then came the last two years.

It’s time to face facts. The Mitch McConnell of today is not the savvy and savage killer of yesteryear. The Mitch McConnell of today is hapless and hated, weak and tone deaf, barely competition for the second-rate hack who is Chuck Schumer. He is perhaps the most unpopular major politician in America, a group that includes Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden. It’s sad, but at 80 years old, Mitch McConnell is fading, and he is not going quietly. Instead, he is raging at the GOP base for daring to object to his increasingly opaque and bumbling schemes.

It's getting sad.

He is of a kind with failed RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel – failing, flailing, and unwilling to give up power even when it is crystal clear that it is past time to let go.

Let’s review McConnell’s rise and precipitous downfall. Like so many other establishment notables, Donald Trump broke him. As the consummate insider, the guy who played the long game to get to the pinnacle of parliamentary power, he always resented outsiders and interlopers. He was no friend of the Tea Party. He loved the votes and the energy but not the insistence by those uppity peasants that they get a say in policy. After all, policy is the domain of him and his, not of angry housewives, insurance salesmen, and other citizens who neither know nor appreciate how government business is done. When the Tea Party insurgents attacked business as usual, McConnell correctly read the attack on the institutions like the Senate as an attack on him. Out-of-touch, high-handed, and arrogant were features, not bugs, in his mind.

And Trump was the ultimate outsider. Trump got power without eating a hundred dry chicken breasts at a hundred dry Lincoln dinners across Kentucky. And worse, when Trump got power, he used it to keep his promises when the purpose of promises was obviously to get elected so one could go to Washington and take care of business, ignoring the campaign covenants that everyone in the club understands are merely a necessary evil.

Needless to say, you are not in the club.

McConnell always hated Trump – you could see it, and Mitch was never one to hide his feelings. Of course, Trump now hates him back in stupid and tacky ways, meaning volleys of pointless, counterproductive shots back and forth between two old men whose eras are ending. During 45’s reign, McConnell pursued his priorities rather than the President’s. He was responsible for the great judicial renewal under Trump, including appointing three Supreme Court justices. Holding the Scalia seat open for Gorsuch, shepherding Barrett, and hanging tough for Kavanaugh – McConnell deserves props for saving the Court for a generation. But he did not force through other Trumpian priorities – the border was never resolved, our military was largely weakened due to ill-conceived overseas antics, and the budget ballooned. He decided to wait Trump out, knowing that things would return to normal with the orange interloper gone. Don’t imagine that he cried when Joe Biden allegedly won.

And then, even without a GOP majority, it should have been his time to shine. His guerrilla campaign to obstruct Obama as minority leader a decade ago was legendary. You might have thought he would be the voice of the Republican Party saying “No,” but that is not how it went. Like Justice Roberts, Mitch McConnell places the interests of his institution above all else – he wants to preserve the Senate just like Roberts wants to preserve the Supreme Court. And like Roberts, McConnell is in the process of burning down his village to save it.

He wants a return to the old-time transactional Senate of yesterday and showed it by voting for Merrick Garland for Attorney General. Garland proceeded to persecute Republicans, and McConnell has not uttered a peep. He has also tolerated collaboration with enemy initiatives. Who the hell voted for a Republican to go to Washington and sign onto a Democrat gun control law? No one, yet McConnell 2.0 let his Texas minion John Cornyn do that and give the Schumer/Biden team a big win. Mitch 1.0 would have taken Cornyn out back and slapped him silly. The same was true of the recent marriage law that shafts traditional families – if Previous Mitch had said “No dice,” this attempt to screw over traditional Americans would have been a non-starter. But he let it happen. What was he thinking?

And this Omnibus monstrosity… ugh. You have to believe that McConnell wanted it to go down as it did because he could have stopped it. The Senate had a whole year to pass its appropriations, and it waited until the week before Christmas, dropping the 4100-page turd in the legislative punch bowl just hours before the vote. No real debate, no real amendments – McConnell could have at least had his caucus hold out for a Title 42 extension, but he did not. Some might say he could not have made that amendment happen, but isn’t that even worse? What good is a powerless Mitch McConnell? A powerful one is bad enough.

Then there is Ukraine. Younger Mitch would never have been so insane as to announce that giving money to Ukraine to secure its border when ours is wide open is the Republican Party’s Number One priority. It is not our Number One priority. It is not even in the Top Ten. The base was disgusted and appalled. We just lost the midterms, and then this – anyone shocked that so many Republicans stayed home? But Mitch did not care – that turtle toughness again, yet where it is helpful when aimed at our opponents, it is self-destructive when aimed at our people.

And the midterm election – there is plenty of blame for that clusterfark, but Mitch shares the blame for not winning the Senate majority. It is all his fault? No. There is plenty of fault to go around, including Trump and Ronna McDaniel, his fellow establishmentarian offended that the masses are trying to hold her accountable for her sub-par performance (Do your part to rid our party of this loser by going to www.HireHarmeet.com). The fact is that Mitch McConnell is the man in the Senate, and the man gets the credit when we win, and the man gets the blame when we lose. Did his leadership inspire GOP voters? Maybe to stay home, which many did. Why bother to vote for Republicans when they feel free to vote with Democrats because McConnell won’t (or worse, can’t) stop them?

Mitch did not like some of the Senate candidates the base picked, but he might have kept his mouth shut during the election season. And after the election, too – no one needs him saying, “I told you so,” when he spent a ton of cash on keeping leftist Lisa Murkowski in power over an actual Republican in Alaska. I can only assume he was trying to buy off Murkowski so she did not jump parties, but it was still a terrible look. It looks like he did not want a true conservative voice in that seat, and he probably did not.

His decline can no longer be denied. Mitch is staggering. He’s past his prime and making rookie mistakes. Schumer and the Dems are laughing at him. His respect among his peers on both sides of the aisle and the base is circling the drain, and it’s sad – he deserves credit for the past, but in politics, the question is always, “What have you done for me lately?” Sadly, the answer today is “Nothing except fail.”

But the fading McConnell will not go quietly into that good night – he will rage at the dying of the legislative light and his voters. The same uncompromising toughness – and he is tough – that once made McConnell a fearsome foe is now aimed not at the Democrat enemy but at those of us who he is supposed to represent and who are insufficiently obedient. Old people get angry when defied – look at his elderly analog Joe Biden or socialist spinster Taylor Lorenz. The sad and undeniable truth is that Mitch no longer seems focused on winning conservative victories but on lashing out at those within the GOP who offend him. And that’s why he keeps losing over and over again.

It's sad to see him go out this way. It’s undignified. It’s time for him to step back and find someone not named Cornyn to step up. Mitch McConnell has run a good race, slow and steady, but the hare will not be caught napping this time. The Democrats are running circles around him, and his desperate clutching at his declining power is not merely embarrassing but has already hurt the Republican Party in past elections and will hurt them in the future – why vote GOP if you still get Democrat priorities? Mitch is too old, too unpopular, too angry, and increasingly too ineffective to be the senior Republican elected official. It’s time for the Murder Turtle to withdraw into his shell.




Zelensky’s Groveling PR Offensive Hits The DC Uniparty’s Sweet Spot


The $100B poured into Europe’s most corrupt nation so far is both excessive and unrelated to direct American national interests.



Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been repeatedly compared to Winston Churchill. The comedian-turned-politician is not the avatar of democracy that his legion of American admirers think he is, let alone this generation’s savior of Western civilization. But it’s doubtful that Churchill’s star addresses to joint sessions of Congress during the Second World War were received with any less adulation than Zelensky’s speech in the week before Christmas.

The question of whether it was appropriate for Zelensky to appear on the podium of the House in a variant of the GI Joe costume he’s been sporting on Zoom appearances throughout the year misses the point. He may have been the first foreign leader to behave this way since Palestinian Liberation Organization terrorist Yasser Arafat showed up in 1993 at the White House in a military uniform to sign a peace deal with Israel that he never intended to keep. But it was par for the course for a man who knows that his role is to play the hero at any and all times.

What was fascinating about the orgy of praise and support for the massive amount of U.S. aid heading to Kyiv is the way most of the Republican congressional leadership seemed just as eager to fawn at the Ukrainian leader as the Democrats.

Most Americans sympathize with opposing a blatantly illegal and brutal invasion of Ukraine by Russian President Vladimir Putin. But the notion that “Providing assistance for Ukrainians to defeat the Russians is the number one priority for the United States,” as Minority Leader Mitch McConnell put it, is quite another thing. The same can be said for doubling the amount of money the United States was spending on Afghanistan in its last years for this war’s first year.

Yet that is exactly what the governing class appears to be telling us. Few in either party treated the Russian seizure of Crimea and part of Eastern Ukraine in 2014 as an existential crisis, let alone the most important issue facing the country. A lot has changed since then.

Democrats, who have opposed almost every instance of American military involvement abroad since Korea, have finally found a war they can love. That’s largely because Ukraine — and Zelensky — played a central role in the Democrats’ first impeachment of former President Donald Trump.

The myth that Trump was blackmailing Ukraine became linked to the equally fallacious claim that he had colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 presidential election. By the time Putin invaded Ukraine in February 2022, the country had become a symbol of the struggle against both Putin and Trump as well as a principal focus of left-wing NGOs devoted to “human rights” that are, regardless of its often-undemocratic behavior, deeply committed to Zelensky’s government.

At the same time, Republican congressional leadership is engaging in some Cold War nostalgia by acting as if Russia poses the same threat to the West as Soviet Communism did.

Once Putin’s war began and Ukraine became a plucky underdog successfully resisting the aggression of its larger neighbor, it also became the darling of an uncritical media while the Washington uniparty circled the wagons around the idea that its security was somehow synonymous with the battle for democracy. Since then, any scrutiny of Ukraine, even if only to discuss what exactly American taxpayers are supporting, is treated as only something extremists care about.

Zelensky’s government is itself largely corrupt, connected to the same sort of wealthy oligarchs that dominate Russia’s kleptocratic economy. That government treats its opposition and critical press with the same disdain as Putin. Yet few in the corporate media are interested in discussing these realities. The same applies to Zelensky’s suppression of the Russian Orthodox Church.

During Zelensky’s Washington visit, anything other than obsequious adulation was considered inappropriate if not downright unpatriotic. Those who point out Zelensky’s flaws while acknowledging that Ukraine is the injured party have been called “isolationists,” accused of possessing “only the most desiccated character” or are just behaving like “jerks” choosing to be on the wrong side of history. And that just involves commentary from some conservative outlets.

Even if we acknowledge that the Ukrainians are the good guys, the idea that going all in on this war is the only way to save Europe from Russian domination is risible. That’s especially true now that the Russian military has been exposed as a shambles, Putin’s attempt to topple Zelensky failed, and the war has become a bloody stalemate. Yet McConnell and many in the GOP’s Senate and House caucuses as well as some conservative pundits speak as if it were 1987 and the forces of the now-defunct Warsaw Pact were still poised to race to the Rhine on Moscow’s orders.

That is why they are fully on board with Biden’s decision to grant Zelensky a blank check which, after the congressional passage of the scandalous $1.7 trillion spending bill, is sending more than $100 billion to Ukraine this year while America’s own neglected southern border is being erased by a massive surge in illegal immigration.

Nor is any member of the establishment pointing out that Zelensky’s vow to continue fighting until the unlikely event that a nuclear power is completely defeated and thrown back to the 2014 borders ensures an unwinnable war can go on indefinitely, something from which only the Ukrainian president stands to gain.

Zelensky’s Washington charm offensive succeeded because it hit the sweet spot of both variants of the DC uniparty. It appealed to both Democrats’ hostility to Putin and to a GOP establishment that still instinctually supports all foreign adventures that can be constructed as a defense of democracy or the West, whether or not those criteria actually apply.

In this manner, and regardless of its impact on readiness to deal with the far more important threat from China, enthusiasm for this proxy war with Russia has seized hold of the inside-the-beltway crowd. Democrats ascribe criticism of the frenzy over Zelensky as evidence of Putin’s influence while the GOP establishment dismisses it as something only isolationists ready to appease any dictator would say. Neither criticism is true.

It is possible to despise Putin and oppose his invasion and still see the $100 billion (and surely counting) being poured into Europe’s most corrupt nation as both excessive and unrelated to direct American national interests. It’s equally possible to support self-determination for Ukraine and admire its fight for survival while viewing the adulation for Zelensky as divorced from the reality of his rule. It’s also preventing Washington from telling him that his war goals are unrealistic and could set off a catastrophic wider conflict that should be avoided at all costs, and that a negotiated settlement of the war is necessary.

The war in Ukraine is a humanitarian catastrophe that should be ended as soon as possible, not prolonged indefinitely in the vain hope that it will somehow result in either regime change in Moscow or a total victory for Kyiv. What was drowned out in the rhetoric of Zelensky’s visit was not isolationism or sympathy for Russia but the imperative to hold a debate about how American security is advanced by continuing this war at such a high cost in the absence of a direct interest in whose flag should fly over the Donbas or Crimea.