May in January and Other Events in the New Era of Trump

UK PM Theresa May visited Philadelphia and DC. She met the Republican Congressional contingent, laid a wreath at Arlington, and then dealt with the Man himself, President Trump. In the interest of full disclosure, I was never a big May fan. She, of course, seems much better for the West than the milquetoast Cameron, but that's a pretty low bar to clear. I was never convinced she fully converted to Brexit, for example, and she made clear that she did not care much for Trump before November 8. I never thought she particularly cared much for the USA, in general, either. Just an impression; might be wrong; let me know.

The visit went fine. I am always a bit discomfited by US-UK summits. There is a lot of syrupy sappiness (is that a thing?) in these events with both sides falling all over each other praising the Special Relationship and reminding us all about our common history. OK, must accept that, I guess, in the interest of fortifying the Anglosphere. There is also generally a bit of the schoolmarm in the British approach to the US, with Britain playing the role of the wise ol' veteran of the world who must restrain the boisterous Yanks for their own good. The May visit had quite a bit of that in the build up with journalists and celebrities telling May her job was to get Trump under control, tell him torture is bad, and that NATO is really, really a good thing. The PM did do some of that both at the GOP retreat and with Trump. Box checked. I thought Trump was gracious, not at all in awe or awkward, and demonstrated that he has, as befits his own British background, an appreciation for Britain and the importance to the USA of the relation. Trump, in other words, was Presidential. Box checked. Not bad, at all.

Let's not forget that Thatcher and Reagan did not start off too, too well (remember Grenada?) but eventually turned into the Dynamic Duo and Killers of Commie world.

Aside from playing host to his first foreign visitor, President Trump, of course, was in the center of a bewildering array of events. He continued his Executive Order assault on Obama's sad legacy, and demonstrated that by doing what he said he was going to to do, he is the master of the news cycle. He told the Mexican President to take a hike if he wasn't going to discuss paying for the wall--and the Mexican President dutifully fell into Trump's trap. So much so that Mexico's ultra billionaire Carlos Slim gave a very rare news conference in which he proffered advice to Mexico on dealing with Trump. Slim is an extremely intelligent man, and if I were Mexican I would listen to him. At his press conference he showed an impressive grasp of complex issues and an excellent public speaking ability. He is not too dissimilar from Trump, a man whom he clearly likes and admires. His basic message to Mexico was to shape up and act like a grown up. He offered to help negotiate with Trump and the Mexican government should take him up on it. Now Slim, of course, is a major shareholder of the New York Times and at times his address sounded much like a NYT editorial--hmmm, wonder why? He praised immigration and diversity as good for the USA and urged Mexicans in the US to become US citizens. I noticed, however, that he did not praise immigration and diversity for Mexico; it seems that only the US must agree to alter its culture while everybody else gets to keep theirs. Interesting, no?

The media have gone crazy, yet again, over Trump's "Muslim ban," which, of course, is no such thing. It's actually a rather limited step, and I hope there is something more to come. He temporarily banned visas to a handful of countries, including Iran, and suspended the insane Syrian "refugee" program. Good. The list of trouble countries, however, is considerably longer than the few miscreants on the list, e.g., no Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, but it's a start.

I love the reaction from the Iranians who immediately said they would reciprocate. Wow! There go my vacation plans . . .

The reaction from the loons on the left was also priceless. It seems there is some sort of Constitutional right that the world has to get a visa to the USA. I did not know that. It also seems that if we don't give visas to any Muslim who wants one and if we stop taking "Syrian refugees"(discussed here, here, and here) then ISIS is going to get very nasty. I guess we have to let ISIS hold our immigration policies as a hostage to prove that we believe that Islam is a religion of peace. Hard to keep up.

Trump is on the right track. Hope he stays there.

A Little Aside: My New S&W

I mentioned before that I had purchased a .357 S&W Performance Center Model 327 TRR8. I picked it up on January 16 after the obligatory ten-day wait; apparently Governor Brown decided that I was of sufficiently good character that he would allow me to use my second amendment right. Thank you, Mr. Governor, thank you for your kindness and . . . never mind.

I love revolvers. Can't get over it. When I first started in the Foreign Service I carried my S&W Model 19. As years went by, under peer pressure, I switched to higher capacity semi-autos, a variety of 9s, .45s, and even a .380 for a time. They were OK, and I love the Model 1911, but, but . . . I continued to be drawn to good old style American revolvers. Now that I am retired, and good for nothing, I no longer have to hide in the closet. Yes, I am coming out as a revolver lover! Please, don't hate me for that.

Anyhow, I finally got around to taking my new acquisition to the range. Beautiful gun. It even made me into a good shot, sort of. The action is extremely smooth; the piece is very nicely balanced; I love the fact that it carries eight rounds, and is a whole lot easier and quicker to clean than a semi-auto. I still have not completely mastered a smooth and quick reload with either moon clips or a speed loader, but will keep trying. My enjoyment got a bit soured, just a bit, by some crappy ammo. It was cheap, and I have had no problems with that brand before, but this time, gads! Out of exactly 104 rounds I fed the gun before I switched, I had 13 fail-to-fires (FTF). Now on the range, if the price is right, I guess that's not too bad; you put up with it. In an emergency, however, I think you would want ammo with better than an 87% success rate. I switched to Remington HTP 110 grain semi-jacketed hollow point and ran another 117 rounds through the weapon with no FTFs at all. Very nice. Very clean burn, too, and with a nice roar.

I am still not exactly a crack shot and need some work. At about ten yards, however, my Model 327 let me put in some very tight groups. Beyond that distance, well, let's just say it's a good thing the targets don't shoot back. I have got to get better. It's on my bucket list.

OK, that's it. I will now get back to all things Trump.

OK, OK. NOW I Believe in Climate Change!

Decades of political hot air, fetid progressive gasses, and greasy Democratic smoke have done it. The climate in DC has changed! They have produced the Trump Tornado, the Trump Tsunami, the Trump Typhoon, the Trump Tremor, the, the . . . TRUMP!

I have never seen such socio-economic-political climate disruption in all my life. President Trump, who seems to be completely energy independent, is dominating the air waves and barely giving his opponents a chance to draw breath. The media, especially the hideous New York Times is melting faster than an ice cap in an Al Gore fantasy movie.

The once mighty NYT now no longer makes any pretense at all, none, of being a newspaper. Its "news" stories are full of words such as "lies," "bizarre," "crazy," when referring to President Trump and his policies. They are stunned, stunned, I tell you, that the man is actually doing exactly what he said he would.  They call him a liar for saying that illegal aliens voted in the last election; they say there's no proof . .  . and then go ape when he says, fine, let's investigate. No! There's no need! WE are telling you, WE are assuring you that there is no evidence! I can't stop laughing.

I can only imagine the panic among the bureaucrats at my old employer, the State Department, as Trump turns his guns on all sorts of hoary and untouchable foreign policies, assumptions, and beliefs.

Look, not all of his executive orders are as dramatic as the press would have you believe, and he needs to make sure there is legislative follow-up to ensure the next guy/gal doesn't undo them . . . but, but, he has changed the climate in a just a few days, and changed it exactly as he said he would.

Hats off to the man.

Keep winning! I am not tired of it, yet!

Marching for the Right to Kill

As a rule, I do not care for mass marches. Some, admittedly, are conducted and headed with discipline, dignity, and a sense of purpose, e.g., MLK, Tea Party, General Sherman. Most, however, prove unruly, unfocussed events that leave behind trash, and attract the weird, the bored, the sad loser, and, of course, the so-called "A-List" narcissist celebrity who jets in, delivers some bombast, and then jets back out. In most of these events participants say mean and little things, and the march produces mean and little things of no lasting impact--except, perhaps, to the small businesses that have had their windows broken and premises trashed.

The "Million Women March" falls into the same category as most of these events. To their credit, these marchers did not trash businesses but, as typical with leftist marches, left behind piles of trash for others to clean up. From what I saw of it, and its companion marches in Europe and elsewhere, this was, perhaps and at best, some vague expression of unhappiness with an election that didn't turn out the way the marchers wanted, and so . . . they march. OK. They have that right. Doesn't bother me at all. Other than that, what was it about? We heard and saw marchers exhibit girlish delight in using "grown-up" profanity and coarseness, and we read pompous statements from the organizers bragging, "They said it couldn't be done!" Who are "they"? What "couldn't be done"? Are we to swoon in amazement over the organizers' ability to solicit and obtain a marching permit from DC authorities? Hate to break it to the marchers, but it's been done before--many, many times--and will be done again. This is neither the first nor last rodeo, ladies, not at all. For that, you can thank the Constitution, and a lot of men who have marched to war to defend it for you.

Still, we have the unanswered question: What was this really about? I, for example, never understood the march in Paris put on after one of the Islamic atrocities and wrote about my disgust that,

It was a very typical, in fact, an extremely typical leftist/progressive/narcissist manifestation akin to so many others we have seen over the years. It was replete with the usual trademarks of progressivism: prancing and preening; empty slogans and rhetoric; and equally empty gestures and cartoonish props, e.g., giant pencils, rakishly worn bandanas, silly make-up, etc. . . In sum, the "march" was a call to do, what exactly? Simple: It was a call to do exactly nothing. The march was about nothing.

We can say much of the same about the January 21 festivities: a lot of mostly white middle and upper class women, wearing funny hats, claiming to be "oppressed" in some way, and giving "notice" that they will "resist." They said nothing about the real oppressor of women today, Islam, and, in fact, went out of their way to make nice with Islam; a prominent Muslim pro-Sharia "activist" had a major role in organizing the event. I am surprised that CAIR did not put on a Sharia-approved honor killing demonstration, or one on how to throw acid in the face of girls who "dishonor" family, or how to perform a clitoridectomy on a screaming girl, or how to hang gays from construction cranes: well, maybe next year, along with one on how to drive a truck into a crowd . . .

The only concrete theme was abortion. That seems to serve as the sole unifier of today's feminism, i.e., preserving and expanding the right to kill the unborn with no restrictions. That seems to define bravery for these folks; that's the core impetus behind the move to "resist."

So, in the end, I guess I am partly wrong. Unlike the march in Paris, this march wasn't about nothing. It was a march for the right to kill.

President Trump

Against the odds, and in defiance of the polls and the predictions of our political savants, Donald Trump has become the President of the United States.

Few gave his campaign any hope of coming close to clinching the GOP nomination not to mention the White House. The science was settled: he could not win the GOP primary battle. Even once he did become the Republican candidate, beating a crowded and even impressive field of other candidates, it seemed that every week the media pronounced him DOA, announcing with 100% certainty that Hillary Clinton would be President 45. The science was settled: he could not win the Presidency. Even once he won the election, the opponents would not stop: Popular vote! Russians! Faithless electors! Stop him in Congress! Riots in the streets! One major media organization even ran a piece suggesting that were he and Pence assassinated, personnel of the Obama administration would remain in power and run the country. The progs have no shame.

Well, Donald Trump is President. Let the progressives run off to therapy--maybe what they really need is rehab. Donald Trump is President thanks to a wave of revulsion and disgust with what progressives have done to our country over the past 25 years.

Trump's inaugural address? I thought it was just right: terse, to the point, no flowery empty phrases. Minimal use of "I."

Many prog and some conservative commentators--the same who thought he would never become President--criticize his address as just another campaign stump speech. Yep. They're right. That's why it proved so powerful. I saw no sign in that speech of him backing down from the themes and the promises of his campaign. That is very good. He seems intent on trying to do what he said he would try to do: drain the swamp and return our country to its people. That's a tall order, and, frankly, I don't think he will succeed 100% . . . but, but, but he is going to try and, bold prediction, he will make some major progress in that direction. I liked how he had no reluctance to tear into the disaster that has been "establishment" rule, with the major representatives of the establishment sitting right behind him. The man has guts.

All the best, President Trump.

Obama's Exit: Definition of No Class

Judging from his performance these past few days, the last of his hideous reign, President Obama clearly thinks of himself as Hernan Cortes confronting the events of June 30, 1520. Mexico history buffs--and it is a genuinely remarkable history, well worth studying--will recognize that date as the infamous La Noche Triste (The Night of Sorrow) during which Cortes and his army of Spaniards and Tlaxcala allies fought their way out of the Aztec capital, Tenochtitlan. Cortes barely escaped with his life when the Aztecs, at last, grew wise to Spanish intentions, deposed the ineffectual Moctezuma, and went into full revolt captained by their new King, Cuitláhuac. Cortes, having survived the bloody escape from Tenochtitlan, lived to fight another day, and eventually exacted a brutal revenge on the Aztec civilization, including King Cuitláhuac and the Aztec capital (read Victor Hanson Davis's account of the battle in his masterful Carnage and Culture.) Obama apparently thinks he, too, will lead the counter attack to take back the capital city which has fallen to the illegitimate tlahtoani Donald "Call Me Cuitláhuac" Trump.

Far fetched? Maybe, but Obama is certainly not going out quietly and with class. He will not replicate George W. Bush's graceful exit and subsequent political silence. At his FINAL (?) press conference, Obama's lack of class, grace, and reflection, and the absence of any sense of personal responsibility shone brightly. He performed before the pet journalists of the White House press corpse as though he were taking a victory lap. He proved full of praise for himself, and brimming with "sage" advice for his successor and for the press in dealing with the new President. He wanted them to be as tough on Trump as they had been on him . . . low bar, insert jokes here . . . He could not admit that nearly everything he touched has turned to disaster for America and, ironically, for his own political party which has become irrelevant in huge swathes of the country. He vowed, a la Cortes, to come storming back if he saw his values under attack! Unlike other ex-presidents, he will remain in DC, just so he can try (Good Luck With That!) to steal the spotlight from President Trump. In other words, this final press conference will not be the final press conference from the biggest disaster ever to occupy the White House.

Worse, however, than the evident narcissism and delusion on display at the presser, and in his even more pompous "farewell" address, Obama has taken actions in his last days in power to make life much more difficult for President Trump and for America, including his outrageous commutation of Manning's 35-year prison sentence. Manning should have been left to rot.

While Trump will quickly dismantle most if not all of Obama's absurd Presidential Directives, Obama has set down IED's for the new administration in foreign affairs. Obama's last minute discovery, for example, that Russia has interests of its own and that they do not necessarily coincide with ours will create long-term problems. The dispatch of US troops, for example, to Poland in the waning days of this horrid misadministration sets up a dilemma for Trump. If he leaves the troops there, the job of reaching out to Russia becomes all the more difficult. If he pulls them out, he will be accused of being a Putin puppet, out to destroy NATO. This is not a problem without resolution, but it is an unnecessary one. Likewise, the Obama/Kerry/ Powers last-minute blitz on the Middle East in which the US has sided openly with the corruptocrats and terrorists of the so-called Palestine Authority, and placed Israel's core interests at risk in exchange for, well, nothing, sets up Trump for an immediate clash with the Arabs, the UN, and, potentially, our ally Israel who feels betrayed. Israel and our own interests have been betrayed not only by Obama's actions at the UN but by the fake Iran deal, (go here, here and here, for example) that legitimizes and helps fund terrorist Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons. Trump will now have to deal with a surging Iran. In East Asia, of course, the Obama misadministration has so mishandled relations with our allies there, including Philippines, that the new administration will have an even more difficult time than necessary in dealing with the growing threat from China. In the Americas, Obama has up-ended decades of US policy towards the Castro regime, again, in exchange for nothing, and at the price of making America seem weak. I am sure you can spot many more Obama IEDs.

Anyhow, tomorrow we will have a new President, one that actually seems to want America to do well. What a change from the past eight years . . .

On Russia, Again

On this, the last week-end of the Obama misadministration, I charge onward, onward like Lord Cardigan  . . . Ok, Ok, I am getting carried away. It's all this talk about Russia that has me on my charger heading into the "Valley of Death." I am going to repeat myself a bit, as I have written quite a lot about Russia, but events drive me "Half a league, half a league/ Half a league onward. . ."

I am deeply touched by the sudden progressive concern for the security of the United States. Most of the same people now screaming "RUSSIA!" and accusing President-elect Trump of being the Siberian Candidate, historically have opposed a strong US military, opposed efforts to fight Soviet Communism, laughed at "a Red under every bed" as paranoia, derided the CIA as murderers and coup-plotters, wanted immediate US nuclear disarmament, made fun of Romney's concerns about Russia, defended Hillary's use of an insecure server, and, well, lots more--you can fill it in. They also have opposed strong US border defense, and an immigration policy to protect us from foreign jihadis, rapists, murderers, and urban criminal gangs. Obama, the ultimate political expression of the progressive world view, gutted the US military, instructed our intel and enforcement agencies to focus on "climate change," ordered them to downplay the illegal alien and jihadi threats, tried to politicize them and shape them into extensions of the DNC (see DOJ, IRS and EPA, for example). He, in sum, turned them into purveyors of the usual progressive nonsense that has gotten us into our current socio-political-economic fix, and, by the way, led to the election of Donald Trump.

OK, let's turn to Putin and  Russia. I wrote some time ago that,

It does not require a genius to see what is happening in the post-USA world of the Obamistas. Other actors, many of them ruthless opponents of Western values of democracy and liberty, are stepping in to fill the power vacuum and reshape the world--and do it while laughing at us. Of these actors, Putin is the most determined and committed to reforming the globe into a place much less congenial for those Western values, and much friendlier to Russia's rise to the top. His plan is exceedingly simple. No Snowden-like revelations required. Taking advantage of the weakness and self-loathing of the Obama misadministration, Putin is out to neutralize Europe and make it into an economic resource for Russia, e.g., gas sales, investments, access to high tech, and to ease the US out of the picture. NATO is to be seen for what it increasingly has become, to wit, a joke.

I also noted in another 2014 piece that,

Russia almost always, if not always, has been on the edge of Western consciousness. Before anybody gets offended, there is no doubt about the greatness of Russia's contributions to the hard sciences, literature, theater, and music. Russia for numerous reasons, however, never has been fully a part of Western civilization. Starting with Peter the Great, Russia's Tsars made on-and-off, and usually half-hearted efforts to become part of the West. Those rulers were attracted to the wealth, power, and technological advancement of the West, but had little to no interest in adopting Western ideas of democracy and, especially, liberty which made that wealth, power, and technology possible. There seemed always a dark, conspiratorial, even piratical tone to Russia's relations with the West: we seeing Russia, not unreasonably, as a crude, obscurantist, dangerous bogeyman, and Russia viewing the West, not always inaccurately, as looking down on Russia and intent on preventing it from finding its rightful "place in the sun." Russia's attempts to find this "place in the sun," of course, ran into notable obstacles such as Japan's own quest for that sunny spot which generated a massive defeat for Tsarist efforts to become a major force in Asia and the Pacific, and, lest we forget, World War I which ended the Tsars and served as midwife for the even more horrid Bolshevik rule.

That, in my humble view, still proves an accurate assessment today. Russia is a big, important country, with a significant military and intelligence capability. It is governed, unfortunately, by some, ahem, very difficult people such as Vladimir Putin, who have no love or respect for democratic norms--in fairness, however, we should note more freedom exists in Russia under Putin than did in the USSR under the progs beloved Gorbachov. Russia's leaders, above all, are Russian nationalists full of resentment for the West's alleged failure to take Russian interests seriously. That said, Russia is much weaker and less dangerous than the old Soviet Union, and beset by enormous economic and demographic problems which undermine its ability, even without Western opposition, to find its "place in the sun."

We must realize, of course, that even under the best of circumstances and the best of intentions on our part, relations with Russia most likely will prove difficult. They will become even more difficult if the left's current obsession with undermining any approach to Russia continues. I can't help but think that this leftist obsession with trying to undermine Trump's ability to deal with Russia is linked, at least in part, to the fact that Russia is no longer Communist. The progs liked Communism, whatever they might claim now. That Russia loudly proclaims itself a Christian power and makes no secret of its politically incorrect animosity to jihadi Islam, has won Moscow no friends among Western progs.

How to deal with Russia? It does not involve labeling Putin and Russia as war criminals, especially since the story about what happened in Aleppo seems to be changing; the information provided by progressive folk heroes such as the "White Helmets" is coming into question. We can deal with Russia, as I stated before, by ensuring our own energy independence, having a reinvigorated and highly lethal military force, and showing less willingness to listen to the Europeans, who, with the exception of the British, have a remarkable track record of being wrong on almost every major issue for the past three hundred years. We should keep in mind that Russia has intel capabilities that it will use against us, and must be willing and able to use ours against Russia, as needed. In addition, as noted before, we frack, we stand by Israel and the Kurds, and we strengthen our military and our domestic economy. With Russia we deal on narrow, very concrete issues, and we should do OK, unless the Russians prove more irrational than I think.

For example, Russia and the US could reach an accommodation on the Middle East and on Eastern Europe that does not threaten the interests of either country or sell out our allies such as Israel and Poland. Israel, please note, is seeking better relations with Russia. Improved relations between Russia and the USA would, it seems, serve also as a counter to Chinese aspirations to become a superpower. These are not bad things. If we can achieve some of them, that's good for us and the West. The odds are against, but . . . .

To the progs, it is time to give it a rest. One proven foreign intervention in our politics came from Mexico. If you are really concerned about our sovereignty, focus on that.