Save Canada

At Instapundit, Stephen Green reposts something good originally Xed by Canadian Mark Reid. Reid doesn't know who created it. 

I wish Canadians well for I've visited Canada 10+ times and been from Newfoundland to the Yukon. I like it a lot.

Save Canada

Trump wasn't born in Canada.
Trump isn't Canadian.
Trump is doing what he believes is best for his country, the USA.
So why are we making this election about Trump?

The Liberals got us into this mess.
Not Trump.
Not Conservatives.
Not China.
Not Ontario - Not BC - Not Quebec!

The Liberals.

They gave us a 69-cent dollar.
They gave us broken healthcare.
They let in 4 million refugees without a plan.
They legalized hard drugs and watched our streets rot.
They doubled our national debt and blamed everyone else.

Trump didn't do any of that.
The Liberals did.
And now they want another term?

This election isn't about the USA.
It's not about Trump.
It's about Canada.
It's about change.
It's about making the Liberals pay at the polls…and giving Canada back to All!

Weird Aromatic Science

I bring you news of a RealClearScience article concerning the production and elimination of gas in your intestines, in other words, of farts. It is a quite accessible pop science article on how and why you produce gaseous emissions that - quite often - smell bad. My favorite quote:

However uncomfortable or embarrassing they are, farts are natural and a sign that your digestive system is alive. Quite literally, actually. It’s not just your own body that’s responsible for producing gases. Trillions of microbes live in your gut, helping you digest your food – and producing farts in the process.

All those happy little micro-critters along with us for both the ride, and a regular 3 squares. Pardon my indelicacy in bringing you this reminder of a bodily process of which we attempt to remain unaware. 

Our Ukraine Involvement

My favorite foreign affairs analyst - George Friedman - weighs in with a synopsis of a long article in the New York Times (behind paywall) concerning the US role in the Ukraine war. Bottom line: we were much more involved than we were led to believe, although short of boots on the front lines. Hat tip to RealClearDefense for the link.

Rather than call the NYT article a "leak," Friedman believes it was intentionally released in a way to be picked up by the Russian press. Implicit is the idea that Putin has been hiding from his own people exactly how involved we were, and how responsible the technologically inferiority of his military has been in their high casualty totals.

War is getting closer and closer to that depicted in the early Terminator films. The Ukraine war has been a laboratory of sorts for testing and proving new technologies of war, for both sides. It is likely, however, that we've benefitted more than they. 

The article reinforces Putin's claim that Russia is fighting "the West" rather than merely Ukraine. What remains inescapable is that Russia started the war, thought they could win it quickly and cheaply, and were proved quite wrong in that assessment.

Putin likely could have turned Ukraine into an ally if he'd emphasized honeyed words and benevolent policies. Instead he has created an implacable enemy, which nevertheless still lives and sits on his border like a gangrenous wound he has proven unable to excise. There is a lesson in this, if we're able to learn it.

Their “Roswell”

 A declassified CIA document recounts a low-flying saucer-shaped UFO shot down with a MANPADS by a Russian soldier out on maneuvers in Siberia. It crashed, five short humanoids got out, merged into one big ball, exploded and the result of that explosion turned some 23 soldiers into stone, two more who were somewhat shielded were spared. 

Supposedly the stony former soldiers and the craft were sent to an institute near Moscow for study, the Sun (U.K.) has the story. This sounds a lot like the Russian version of Roswell and Area 51, amirite?

Russians spoofing the CIA? The CIA spoofing the Ruskies? A Ukrainian reporter with too much time on his hands? Maybe even the real deal? 

Tariff Day

President Trump announced his new higher tariffs yesterday with considerable fanfare. Predictably most Democrats hated them, Republicans mostly liked them. Some details provided here.

The most important thing these will do is to get other nations to lower their tariffs and barriers on US goods, in the quite likely hope that Trump will lowers his in reciprocity. The other really important thing they will do is bring manufacturing for the US market. back to the US.

This will create US manufacturing jobs which tend to pay well. More importantly, reshoring manufacturing will increase the believability of our military threat, paradoxically reducing the likelihood we will have to actually take military action.

Going into World War II, the US had a big manufacturing sector which rapidly converted to producing the wherewithal for war, making the US famously “the arsenal of democracy.” We need to rebuild that capacity, and absolutely must produce vital pharmaceuticals and microchips in quantity here at home.

Why Too Many Fed. Workers

The federal government has too many employees. The way the civil service works, this was almost inevitable. 

The pay level a supervisor or boss gets in the civil service is related fairly directly to the number of employees he or she has directly and indirectly reporting to him or her. Grow the number supervised, grow the paycheck.

This gives every boss in the federal civil service an economic motive to justify the employment of additional subordinates plus subordinates of subordinates. Having successfully done so, the next step is a reclassification audit with hoped-for upgrade resulting, without changing job or employer.

Given how the system is designed, you’d be amazed if there were not too many employees.

Announcement This Afternoon

Today we get to find out how Trump will impose tariffs on foreign goods imported into the US.  Securities markets have been ‘nervous’ at the prospect. I have seen YouTube video of  a youngish Trump complaining of unfair tariffs, so his interest in the issue is no new thing.

In anticipation of this move, yesterday Israel cancelled all tariffs on US imports. If Trump chooses reciprocity, he should likewise impose no tariffs on Israeli imports, even if the switch was last-minute, giving him only one day notice.

At least some believe Trump will do a flat across-the-board tariff on all imports. We should know by this evening.

Off-year Voting Results

There were four things on the ballot in yesterday’s off-year election. Two in Wisconsin: a state Supreme Court justice and a constitutional amendment requiring voter photo ID. Plus two House seats in Florida. 

Republicans won three of the four, the two FL House seats which stayed Republican, and the voter ID requirement which passed. Democrats won the Wisconsin Supreme Court seat, which of course is being spun by the legacy media as the most important of the four.

By my count, the GOP won three out of four. That is a decent night’s work, but a clean sweep would have been nicer still. 

Musk threw a ton of money at the WI judge election, to no avail. He isn’t a natural politician and WI is a purple state. Was it a referendum on Musk himself … maybe in part.

Kennedy on Injunctions

Go read the transcript of Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) questioning a nominee for Assistant Attorney General. In the manner of a kindly law prof conducting a Socratic master class on the law concerning nationwide injunctions, he gently demolishes the legal basis (hint: there is none) for the practice. 

With kind words he lays out the lack of constitutional or common law underpinning for district judges to issue nationwide injunctions. These should only occur in the case of class action suits.

I hope the Supremes see it as he does, they certainly should. However, Chief Justice Roberts is unreliably conservative.

Obsolete, Arrogant, and Parasitic

Writing for The Guardian - a Brit paper that's definitely never-Trump - a columnist pens an interesting view of the relationship between Europe and the US.

Washington considers Europe to be obsolete, arrogant and parasitic.

So, is that a fair appraisal? Let's consider the evidence, is Europe obsolete? It seems clear its great days of world dominance and empire ended nearly a century ago, and are unlikely ever to return. 

Is Europe arrogant? It is trying to force US companies to comply with its overly bureaucratic and stifling regulations. It's politics are post-democratic, having completely surrendered to the bureaucratic blob in Brussels. It is trying to force Net Zero on the world, when nearly everywhere not-Europe isn't buying what they're selling. 

Is Europe parasitic? It has allowed the US to provide their defense; most of its nations have token militaries. It has given up on tech leadership, and to a large extent on manufacturing. They're largely "retired on the job."

I conclude that whether or not Washington considers it so, Europe is actually obsolete, arrogant, and parasitic. They've decided hard work, long hours and having children aren't worth it. They're going to take it easy and enjoy life, be satisfied with less, and let the future take care of itself when the time comes.

Europe has chosen the path they're on, a choice they are free to make. It does not, however, deliver the great power status to which they were once accustomed and appear to still feel entitled. 

Another Politician Plagiarizing

Economist Mark Carney replaced Justin Trudeau as the leader of the Liberal Party in Canada, and thereby became PM. He has an impressive resume' and held high level positions in the Canadian and British governments 

He has called a "snap" election happening soon. Before the plagiarism accusations surfaced, Carney was favored to win the PM job in his own right. 

Someone ran his doctoral dissertation against a plagiarism checker. They found 10 or more examples of Carney using others' words without making clear they were borrowed.

Joe Biden was famous for borrowing other pols' speeches to give as his own, so maybe the bar is lower for politicians. Or more likely, Carney cut corners. 

Don't give his adviser's claim that the work is original too much credit. Not catching the plagiarism makes her look bad too. 

See this long column in Canada's National Post for multiple examples of Carney playing fast and loose with citation of others' works. I'd expect to see this kind of shoddy citation in undergraduate work, not in a dissertation.

Signalgate

The Washington Examiner’s Byron York posts this quote by the New York Times’ Ross Douthat, (behind NYT’s paywall) and I take the liberty of reposting it here for the good sense it reflects. 

No leading officials were fired over the Iraq/W.M.D. debacle. There were no notable resignations when Barack Obama’s Libya intervention turned that country into a war-torn terrorist haven. No heads rolled when the Afghanistan papers revealed official dishonesty, and Biden’s foreign policy team did not quit after the Afghanistan withdrawal became a bloody rout.

Given that record you can argue that Hegseth or Waltz should resign over operational security failures even if those failures didn’t have tragic consequences—but it is silly to act shocked when they do not.

What a chronicle of screw-ups in two short paragraphs. Such missteps appear to be almost the disgusting norm in DC.

Saturday Snark

Images courtesy of Power Line's The Week in Pictures

and its Comments section.

We Share the Blame

In conservative media you will see columns like this one at Red State that bemoan limitations on free speech being openly practiced in Germany. These limitations act to the detriment of the increasingly popular conservative Alternative for Germany Party (AfD). 

What most such don’t tell you is that Germany limits speech because we (the US and allies) required them to do so following the collapse of the Third Reich. Our concern then was forestalling any resurgence of the Nazi Party that had held sway under Hitler. So any depictions of Nazi regalia or symbols were banned, and the stating of nationalist positions were sanctioned.

Germans in particular but many European polities as well (e.g., Netherlands, France, etc.) have national agreements among all centrist and leftist parties that they will not join parliamentary coalitions with openly rightist parties. The effect is to require a right wing party to get an absolute majority to form a government, nearly impossible to do.

Since parliamentary systems tend to feature more than two parties, often four or more, the effect has been to freeze conservative parties out of government even when they might be the most popular party in the nation. A plurality of seats in parliament is insufficient if no other party will join yours in coalition.

This obviously has been a great boon to the left. The left therefore ends up in most European governing coalitions and has had undue influence on European government policies. 

Yes, European political parties refuse to join coalitions containing openly conservative, anti-immigration parties. And yes, that makes their political system biased toward the left. But understand part of the guilt for establishing those policies had US collaboration and encouragement in those long-ago, post-World War II days. 

We in the US tend to forget that substantial numbers of Norwegians, French, Dutch, Czechs and Poles actively and enthusiastically collaborated with the Nazis. We forget, but the Europeans have not forgotten. Those memories still bias their politics.

Excellent News

Some amazing news tonight, the White House announces President Trump has signed an Executive Order ending collective bargaining for all federal agencies with a national security mission. These include the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, State, Energy, Health and Human Services, all federal Information Offices, Treasury, most of Justice, and FEMA. 

His rationale is that our national security requires there be no work stoppages in any of these agencies. Collective bargaining is therefore inimical to the nation's security. You need to realize the unions here banned will sue to stop this order, and the issue will likely be settled at the Supreme Court.

In my opinion this move is long overdue. I'd favor banning unions for all federal workers. Trump may view a wholesale ban as the proverbial "bridge too far."

Friday Snark

Images courtesy of Politico's 

The Nation's Cartoonists on the Week in Politics.

Tough Love Indicated

In a column criticizing German state governments for banning police officers joining or supporting the conservative AfD Party, David Strom concludes with a statement I like and endorse.

I love Europe in the way any family member loves an alcoholic family member. It pains me no end to watch the continent destroy itself, but at some point, you have to recognize that we are enabling, not helping them.

I generally share that view of the ancestral homeland.

Conflict of Interest

This article alleges the left-wing CEO of National Public Radio (NPR) Katherine Maher sits on the board of directors of Signal. It is the platform which gave Jeffrey Goldberg the White House chat about bombing the Houthis. 

That at least suggests perhaps someone who hates Trump at Signal arranged the hookup. It is possibly sabotage by the company or one of its bent minions.

An Unusual Story

A very interesting minor story on the wires today. President Trump has withdrawn the name of Rep. Elise Stefanik to be UN Ambassador. That isn't what is unusual, other names have been withdrawn.

What makes the story news is that the White House concluded she was more valuable to its policy goals staying in her House seat representing upstate New York. The Republican majority in the House is so slender that literally every vote counts.

A poor turnout in a special election to name a successor for her seat could be won by a Democrat. So whoever gets the UN job won't be a sitting member of Congress.

Something Brewing

Diego Garcia is an island in the Indian Ocean located roughly halfway between Singapore and Dar es Salaam. This article and another similar one suggest US long-range bombing assets are massing at Diego Garcia. The means one of two things.

Either they are there to add weight to the pressure Trump will put on Iran to reach a no-nukes deal, or they are there to bring pressure and, if the diplomatic effort fails, bomb to destruction Iran's nuclear program using (non-nuclear) ground-penetrating high explosive bombs. Carrier based assets will aid in this latter effort.

The intelligence behind this article comes from open-source unclassified civilian satellite look-down video. There is not a lot of overhead privacy in this modern age.