American people are great people. When my birth country was ravaged by war in 1990, we received packages with "Donated by people of United States" written on them. I remember my grandfather telling me same, that he to as a child in 1945 also received packages with similar inscription. There are few nations that are so ready to help, as people of USA are.
That being said, please what I write now is not criticism on People of US, but on US politicians.
I disagree with large parts of this article. For last 30 years, US, trough its misguided foreign policy has been effectily running its self to the ground. And only thing exceptional in US seem to be its ever increasing debt that we will leave to our children.
And no US is not some special nation that its soly duty in the world is to "defend" our allies, that are in many cases very rich, and have for years underinvested in their own defense, because you know "crazy" Americans are spending more than enough and will defend Europe in necessary.
I have lived in EU for years, they have much higher social spending for their own population, free college, free healthcare, paid family leave and many more. At same time, healthcare in US is in crisis, we have opioid crisis, we have looming college debt crisis and many others.
EU itself has larger population and GDP than USA, why do our tax dollars need to defend them? I have a feeling that EU will defend itself to the last $ of US tax payers.
I currently live and work in China, but I am under no illusion, US main geopolitical rival in 21st century will be China. And while we are in process of bankrupting our self for defense of very rich EU, that same EU has absolutly no interest in supporting us when it comes to China. If you think that Germany is addicted to import of Russian gas, it is 10 times worse when it comes to their exports to China, same goes to Italy, France and many other EU nations.
Trough complely insane foreign policy, that is focused on NGOs and "spreading" of democracy, we have lost Africa and Asia to China. Good African friend of mine put it best:
"US shows up and wants to teach us some woke nonsense that is simply not applicable to our country and then actively meddles in our internal affairs, at same time China comes and build all infrastructure we need and don't meddle in our internal politics, what do you think, who do we like more?". I know the answer, because China plays same game in my birth country. And China is winning long game.
What US needs now, is not to focus on external affairs, especially not on those on continent rich as Europe. US needs to fix itself, especially issue with our ever ballooning debt that is spiraling out of control. Then we should finally deal with mounting internal crisis (healthcare, college debt, opioid, mental health, social security and others).
World needs US, but if US continues to destroy itself as we have been doing in last 30 years, who will help US?
US needs to be exceptional of its own people, to be shiny beacon for immigrants that come here, we are not worlds police, last 30 years has show that being world police only costs treasure with zero benefits to people of America. We cannot fix the world.
Agree completely. I've been to 40 nations on six continents. America is in sharp decline and I agree completely that we can NOT afford to be the world's policeman nor do American taxpayers have any obligation whatsoever to foot the bill to resolve border disputes in wealthy Europe.
Isolationism is a long way from Obama. He was in the business of being in everyone’s business just he refused to go all the way to war... or refused to go to war when he couldn’t just drone bomb the adversary into the ground. There is something to be said about getting your nose out of the worlds business until it’s in your interest.
I disagree Biden is distinctly a Obama lackey it fact Obama is the lead puppeteer pulling the strings and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to understand how we going to get out of this mess
This article (which is very good) is still only describing symptoms. So what's the underlying disease? My contention is careerism, which really got rolling with the Boomers in the Sixties (I am one), and widespread institutional corruption, which is the sine qua non of the Clinton School.
The article is about foreign policy, but the problem is found everywhere in United States culture. Our institutional rulers, our elites, arrived where they are because of the rise of careerism and credential-worship. Far from being a true meritocracy, which they love to crow about, it's just a spoils system where degrees (and where they came from) determine where you get to stand in the handout line. This has now reached the end-game, where everything is relative, nothing is objectively true, and the true Coin of the Realm is just nuclear-strength horseshit, served up as a cure for everything.
Our adversaries do not share our love of horseshit, they do not value it as we do--they see it for what it is: pathetic and worthless. They also understand that an enemy that has only crap for a tool is not a serious threat to anyone but themselves. They see the U.S as a nation devoid of timeless values, and led at every level by corrupt toadies, drunk on their own unearned privilege. Thus, they successfully press their advantages, on every front.
I wish I had a more hopeful post, but the idiots are fully in charge now--and the conclusions are inescapable.
I also thing the beuracritization of policy with little or no fall out for waste and incompetence. Think about our wars for the last 20 years (and the 9/11 failure) and how few civil servants if any were subject to consequences.
I have to agree that the idiots are firmly in charge - counterbalanced, though, by the fact that their ideologies are far from the majority opinion. Of every hundred Americans I encounter, not more than 5% subscribe to the woke, identity-politics, racist agenda of the elite. Is it enough? I don't know. Sure hope so. This place is worth saving.
This is the sort of comment I come here to read. Points of view I hadn't considered, written by someone with broad experience in the topic at hand, responded-to by other folks also with experience.
Side comment: I've really begun to notice how well Substack works. Never a problem with reading or posting; no interference - that I have seen, anyway - with commentary; yet somehow very little in the way of 'bots or obvious trolls. Doesn't blow up your email inbox, but has pertinent alerts. Anybody else notice that you can "heart" a post, but not downvote it? Some designers and programmers did their homework. Well done.
Supporting one's country and people (which in the US means everyone who wants to be here...and is multiracial...is not automatically nationalistic or racist. There is healthy forms of positive group affinity and negative forms. You appear to assume that there are only negative forms.
If the comment says "Kevin" assume the worst. Or, actually the best.
Btw - "everyone who wants to be here" is not the correct definition of who gets to be an American. That was provided by Theodore Roosevelt more than a century ago when he wrote: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
This is exactly how I was raised. My grandparents came to America to be Americans. They assimilated. We have drifted to far from American patriotism and now wonder how we have become so fragmented.
You’re right about the US being in very bad internal shape, but the EU and China have their own serious problems. China is the world’s largest importer of food and, due to industrialization and environmental pollution, is running out of water. And, because of it’s one-child policy (now dropped), the population will grow old before it grows rich. Then, too, a revolutionary government is always highly vulnerable to collapse, especially as its totalitarian policies are more and more on display. And African nations may find their dependency on Chinese infrastructure to be as double-edged as Germany’s dependence on Russian oil.
As for the EU, its situation is inherently tenuous, with “exit” movements having emerged in France, Italy, Greece, Poland, and Hungary. The vaccine rollout of Britain versus Brussels showed how the inflexible EU bureaucracy is incapable of acting quickly, even in the midst of a pandemic, and other internal policy tensions abound. The trend in the world is to get smaller, not to confederate. And, once the EU starts paying for its own defense, individual countries will find it increasingly difficult to support large welfare systems.
Focusing on social problems is not the answer, at least not as long as the US is the US. Bolstering support for the principles that guided the development of the world’s oldest democracy is. Unfortunately, the only principle that our ruling elites seem to want to follow is winning, whatever that means and whatever the cost.
Leslie...makes sense to me. I can remove my thoughts on the "green world", which sounds nice, which is pushed in order to show "how naughty We Is".
No mention, when promoting "green", about China reliance on COAL. They have plans for 120 J Bridger coal plants ( HUGE) along with their 600 coal plants in operation.
Oh yes, we knock em down and they build more...is that a joke?
I agree that China and EU have their own problems, but those are their problems.
We should be focused on fixing our own issues => fist deficit and ballooning debt, then healthcare & opioids, looming social security bankruptcy, then student debt.
I am not proposing isolationism, but reduced focus of our politicans on foreign affairs.
I agree with you about our internal situation. I don’t agree on government as the answer to the social problems you rightly bemoan—except for student debt, IMO.
I didnt say that the government is the answer to the social problems. I said that we have issues at home that need to be fixed ASAP and that fixing these problems will probably require investment at home. How social problems should be fixed is debatable. I myself am against excessive government involment
But a significant part of the problem.is the massive federal bureaucracy that only knows to take from the productive Americans and give to the unproductive both here and abroad. This is stymies the productive class.
All I’m trying to say is that, as Russia has shown, our foes aren’t as powerful as we fear. And, despite the current internal chaos, our inclination toward free expression, innovation, dynamism, and the like make us different, that is, better prepared to respond to and handle devastating events, both local and internationally, only to the extent we agree on and adhere to those policies.
Russia is not our foe, we have made it to be by following EU interests. Russia is on an different continent, we have no land border (small border in Bering sea), our real interests (our focus should be in Asia, their is in Europe) are not overlapping.
If we were smart, we would have made Russia our friend, because now we have pushed it to hands to China, and Russia has everything China needs, resources and food.
And as all proverb says "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" and China knows this. We sadly are acting in interest of EU and not our own and that same EU has 0 interest in helping us with China, because the are intested only in their own interests
I agree that Russia is not our foe. As I wrote on a comment thread from early in the hostilities, I think (hope) the US and Russia will one day be allies, particularly in containing China. But there’s a difference between caring about a country’s people and recognizing that it’s impossible to be friends with the elite that is currently in charge.
We shouldn't care who runs Russia, this is not our problem but of Russians themself. Honestly, we have been friends with worse elites than those in Russia, just look at our good friends in Saudi Arabia and rest of middle east.
Sadly, after what is happening now with US supporting Ukraine and getting even more fanatical about NATO (which is compelty irrelevant for US, and is literal money drain on us with no strategic importance for us) Russia has been been lost to China. China has plyed very smart, they have fixed all border issues with Russia and have no ongoing issues, and are now in process of building pipelines to get their oil and gas for cheap and fully over land without US to do anything.
Thanks. You make solid points which are mostly consistent with my understanding. I am however, skeptical that isolationism to the level you suggest is wise.
Also, as I think you know, African nations are being unsustainably indebted by China. It is revealing that while more than half(?) in China live in poverty the CCP chooses to offshore low skilled labor. Can’t imagine why…
This is so true, and many people have no idea how big crisis is brewing with social security that is running out of money, and that current system is not sustainable and needs fixing now.
Why the USA Government & its politicians don't help Americans first is continually baffling....yet today we see infant formula at the border for illegal migrants and none in the shops for Americans. We see jobs shifted abroad, we see no plans for infrastructure just lots of money allocated. Our leadership has no vision and has let the electorate down - that is BOTH parties.
CC I think Americans have let Americans down we don’t know what we want or need we had a President who was for American First - we apparently voted in a man with 8 million more votes in 2020 whose policies are America Last now why in Gods name would we have done that if that’s answered truthfully maybe then we will all have a better understand of where we stand as a nation 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
The reality is that the Left genuinely wants to destroy the United States. The 1619 Project is the perfect encapsulation of their beliefs: not only is this country evil, it always has been, and always will be as long as one Enlightenment philosophy (or *any* ideas of white men) remain in our culture. They've admitted that they want to "burn it to the ground."
Engaging in foreign policy that very probably ends with nuclear war makes a disturbing kind of sense when the destruction of your country is the end game. Perhaps they genuinely believe they can build their utopia on the ashes, no matter how insane that appears to the rest of us.
In the private circles of the American intelligentsia, they are proud to talk about how much they hate America and how they identify as globalists.
When they talk about fighting for the "soul of America" they are aware their intention is to kill the American spirit.
The old America was exceptional. The new one is godless, indulgent, and prone to all the corruptions and stupidities that the old America was designed to prevent.
I'm curious, Anthony, when the 'old' America ended and the 'new' began. Do you include as exceptional the old America of the 1960's - the decade of assassinations, racial strife, riots, Viet Nam, the Cold War and unregulated pollution? The 1950's - with its stultifying conformity, rampant segregation, military/industrial complex, a swaggering CIA, and onerous tax rates? How about the 1970's - when people were really worrying about America's decline (much more then than now), and there was stagflation, gov't corruption and crime (remember Nixon and Agnew?), hostage taking etc..
So that leaves one decade left - you don't mean Reagan's '80's. Do you? With AIDS, huge recession, 16% interest rates, massive tax cuts along with massive deficits, Iran/Contra, drug money, crack cocaine? It can't be the '90's - that was as indulgent and as 'godless' as today (Bill Clinton, right?) with ridiculously high crime rates (great economy though. Bill did do that well). Can it?
When was the 'old' America better?
To me, it's all one and the same. We're Americans, and this is who we are, and have been.
This isn't curiosity, it's a screed of non sequiturs that ignores the core concept of my comment.
I can easily think of ten things Democrats have done in the last five years that I consider as bad or worse than Watergate, so imagine that I consider Democrats 1000% worse than one of the most infamous scandals in history.
When your only justification for the current dismal state is a cynical attempt to portray the past as worse, you support and make excuses for failed leadership.
But you still haven't explained when the 'old' America ended and the 'new' began, Anthony. I presume that forms part of your core concept. You instead get upset at my examples (btw, eight years of the rabid '60's was under Dem rule).
What 'old' America are you referring to?
My point is that there is no old and there is no new. No real difference. Only us. The past was bad (and good). Just like the present - bad (and good).
The old America is defined by the values of truth, freedom, justice and independence.
The new one is defined by the globalist/Marxist values of diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging.
There isn't a dividing line because these things are gradual evolutions and there is plenty of crossover.
Along with the change in fundamental values is a change in the definitions of rights. Leftists now tell me there's no right to free speech, gun ownership, or privacy from arbitrary government raids, but there is a right to free healthcare and to kill your unborn children.
I wouldn't say that diversity is Marxist. Really? WASPs, Catholics, Blacks, Hispanics, Irish, Italians, Jews, Koreans - all here at once - sounds like the 'old' America to me.
And you don't have to worry about gun ownership. There are more weapons in private hands than Americans - that will not disappear. Free health care? It will never happen.
And killing unborn children? (though many women wouldn't call them kids yet) - that might end too!
Free speech - alive and well in forums like this (and soon coming back to Twitter!)
Your 'old' America might never have left, Anthony. You can relax.
You are absolutely correct. The aim of BLM, Antifa, DSA and the Democrat/Socialist Party is to destroy our democracy and burn this country to the ground. And out of the ashes, shoulder to shoulder the workers will arise to form a perfect Communist state, a workers paradise, like Cuba or Venezuela or China.
Every Communist state has been a failure yet these morons, like Bernie Sanders, AOC and the squad apparently don't read history.
I respectfully disagree. Bernie/Squad, BLM, Antifa and wokeness are tools the Democrats use to distract from their subservience to Big Tech, Wall Street, Raytheon, etc.
The Republicans are the same at the core but with fewer distractions.
Yes if one premise of this article were true, that the US regime wants world peace, then they’d have negotiated with Russia over Nato and the Ukraine. I’m thinking these DC types believe in American world hegemony, but still think their “soft” methods will work. In that I agree with the writer. IMO the American public has little or nothing to do with the calculations of DC elites, who still think all the world is their stage. It’s power all the way down, not peace.
BTW, one of the things the 1619 Project overlooked was the fact the people most responsible to highlighting the awfulness of the Transatlantic trade were Equiano and his shadowy group the Sons of Africa in 1783. I personally think the name is based on the Sons of Liberty.
It was the 2nd trial about the Massacre of the Zhong which ignited the abolition movement in the UK and ultimately led to the banning of importation of enslaved people in 1808 by Jefferson.
I agree there are numerous errors and the 1619 project is best understood as a political argument rather than a serious study of history. It relies heavily on so-called French Theory and deconstructing/tearing down.
I simply have not seen that particular point mentioned. IMHO, it strikes at the heart of the argument namely that the American Revolution was done to enable slavery to continue. Until you get the massacre of the Zhong and the 2nd trial, the abolition movement struggled in Britain and was not considered a force. 1619 also presents slavery as being complete in 1619 rather than looking at the gradual erosion of the right of manumission (among other things). Or why the teaching of literacy to enslaved people was expressly banned (only happens after Equiano).
Also as people don't mention it, one of the more important integrations happens due to Edward R Murrow, a man normally considered to be a WASP. Off his own bat, he integrates the National Student Federation of America in 1930 and conducts an integrated conference in Atlanta (including African American delegates being seated and fed). The NSFA is the precursor if you will to student activism on college campuses. His efforts result in many HBCU becoming members and student activism starts on those campuses.
This directly contradicts the assertion that the main impetus always came from the African American community.
It also doesn't mention Tunis Campbell and his role in changing the focus from Liberia to ensuring that the US was where his people could plant their trees. Campbell also wrote on e of the first business management books (on hotel management and how to run them efficiently) published in the US circa 1840.
Slavery is deeply embedded in world culture. It’s yet another thing the woke get wrong. It’s not necessarily about race at all. And they always ignore the abolition movement and all the blood spilled to bring an end to slavery here.
The only positive thing about the ludicrous 1619 “project” is it reminded Americans that there was history prior to 1776. A history which is glossed over in most American history books and classes
Celia - I think it's useful to not treat the 'Left' as monolithic. It is as fragmented as the Right is. The 1619 Project has huge detractors among liberal circles in all points of the country (myself included) - pretty much like not all Republicans wear MAGA hats. To say that the 'Left' genuinely wants to destroy the US puts everybody left of yourself in the same basket. Not a good idea if you want to understand the other side.
Let's consider how the Democrat leaders explicitly dictate what their members tweet, when and how. Consider how every single Congressional Democrat fell for Jussie's race hoax. Not a single one spoke up in favor of intelligence and reality.
Good enough. I'll counter with the public Republican indignation (how shocked they were!) at the events of Jan 6 and Trump's apparent non-intervention. They understood he was involved. Don't have to name names - you know who they are - but four or five weeks later? Two months later? All back in the Mar-a-Lago fold.
When I refer to "the Left," I mean specifically the kind of people who drove Bari Wiess out of the NYT. The kind of people who think all Republicans wear MAGA hats. The kind of people who think all white people are inherently racist and that everyone to the right of themselves is evil.
Celia, the 1619 Project is critical of America’s past and present. Because of this, you think the black people feel this: “not only is this country evil, it always has been, and always will be as long as one Enlightenment philosophy (or *any* ideas of white men) remain in our culture. “I can see you’re a snowflake woke culture warrior! You see the demographic freight train ending the white world of the 1950s, and you’re not happy about it!
Don't provide me with links to biased sources. Years ago when I was curious I read the opening - it is an acknowledged fictionalized account of American history. It is at best a historical novel. Not that fiction cannot be thought-provoking but it is not history. And on another note my comment was more to the fact that you equate it with black people. I know a lot of black Americans who disavow it. It is in reality woke theatrics largely espoused by some whites liberals.
2016-2021: Donald Trump completely unleashed American energy and mining production along with imposing strategic tariffs which completely neutered Russia, China, and Iran. More importantly, he strategically engaged with regional partners for them to police their own regions engaging in business rather than war. And our world has never been more peaceful... until Biden/Obama just came in and made it 2015 again. Oh yeah, rather than fight a 20 year, $3T war enriching the worlds arms suppliers, he strategically took out Qasem Soleimani - the sole leader in terrorist technology for the last 40 years - with one missile strike. Peace. And $1.80/gallon gas...
Speaking with arab people during this time they totally respected Trump and his ways because they are reality; he treated them as adults, not as subjects to be given 'aid' and then ordered to do what US blackmailers wanted.
Trump is up there with Reagan in my opinion. I adored Reagan. He is the reason I switched from Democrat to Republican and have never looked back. Reagan is my ideal of a president; suave, charming, intelligent, witty. Trump is a natural born manager. Unfortunately he could have used some of Reagan's ability to use wit to mock and bring down the temperature. All that aside, Trump kept us safe in every way.
Agreed Reagan was hilarious. Trump had his moments but definitely harder edged. It’s probably not healthy or useful, but after years of abuse from Democrat jackals attacking spineless Republicans I was more then happy to see Trump punch them in the face
I was just going to respond to wonderful Naomi, but you took the words out of my mouth. :-D If we look back to all republican presidents from Nixon they ALL were treated poorly at best by 'the media' and rarely did they fight back. Trump is the perfect gentleman when approached as one, but punches back twice as hard if not. And I loved every minute of it.
Oh YES!!! For years and years, particularly through the GW Bush years I so wanted Republicans to swing back and get in a few punches. I didn't like Trump at all but voted for him in 2016 because I knew Hillary was a nightmare. After he was elected I was continually surprised and elated by his policies, appointments, actions, and never backing down. Way to go, Trump. However, (I may be the only one who had this reaction after 2020), once I got over the deep sadness of the massive vote fraud and Biden becoming president, it was also a relief not to have the constant warfare between Trump and the media.
"massive relief not to have the constant warfare between Trump and the media"
Yes, the media conceals all of Biden's many mistakes and missteps, making him out to be the greatest man since George Washington. Meanwhile, the country is imploding and the world is headed into nuclear war.
Agreed. Just remember the leftist media jackals will NEVER treat a republican president with any modicum of peace. Dubya was 'nice' and grew government almost as big as LBJ and they still excoriated him at every turn. Trump or DeSantis will receive the same no matter what.
The Dems are all about feelings. So when an authoritarian dictator provides some soothing words that make them feel good, they go along, regardless of that dictator's track record of aggression and dishonesty. It FEELS good to say we are getting a peace agreement with Iran, even if the agreement is an illusion. They reject reason and objectivity.
“At the end of the day people won't remember what you said or did, they will remember how you made them feel.” ― Maya Angelou
A true statement, but one which we need to guard against rather than embrace.
There’s also a dusting of pathological narcissism where you are unable to grasp the notion that people don’t have the same goals as you and pagan naïveté that insists people are inherently good.
Dems see Iran (like minorities) as people that they just need to put on the right path, i.e. a very narcissistic and condescending view. Just like the masks and mandates. They get a warm fuzzy feeling that they are teaching Iran how to be good world citizens. The Dems (except for a few) don't hate America, they just consider most people beneath them, so they need to instruct us deplorables to be better.
How about - if he gets Iran off the table he and his Stasi will be free to deal with the white supremacist terrorists whom he considers the real enemies of America. The people who, in a fair and honest election, would have reelected Trump. No rational person voted for a corrupt and senile imbecile to lead us. No sane person is surprised at the chaos that has ensued.
If 2000 Mules is even partially accurate, it exposes a vast and well funded criminal conspiracy to usurp the honesty and fairness of the 2020 election. The mules are on video surveillance. It wouldn't be hard for a state and federal investigatory agency to arrest and question them. If their guilt is established, more investigations, leading to those higher and higher, would be warranted until the ultimate criminals are exposed. D'Souza makes out a plausible case. If not followed up - so that Americans can know the truth - 2020 will always be tainted.
My understanding is that Richard Spencer, one of the 15 actual white supremacists in America, supports the Iran deal because the root word for Iran is ‘aryan’ or some crap.
To think that my former cantor, who moved to Israel with his wife a few years ago, toasted with champagne when Biden was inaugurated. They will probably never admit that Biden's foreign policy choices may doom their lives and those of their family living in Israel.
Lately I've been going to the local Chabad. The last non-political synagogue around here (though I hear that the other Orthodox shuls are also non-political). WTF is wrong with these Reform and Conservative and Reconstructionist rabbis, that they feel they have to opine on every political trend. The one Conservative guy loves to rail against guns. The Reconstructionist one rails against "white supremacy" which she considers a major threat to our country. Neither of them EVER talk about Islamic extremism which is responsible for most of the actual anti-Jewish violence, plus Black thuggery which now regularly targets Orthodox Jews (and also Asians, who now fear to go out after dark in NYC -- sucks that they voted Democrat all these years -- wonder if they'll change their ways, now that they're being targeted, and also now that their kids are being racially discriminated out of the elite high schools). Neither of them EVER mention the fact that black-on-black shootings constitute the vast majority of all gun homicides. They want to sound hip and in tune with current trends, so they pick on whites... even on Jews... because they're safe targets. God forbid a spiritual leader should condemn an actual murderer, like the black guy who ran over all those people at that parade, or the one who shot up that restaurant, etc. etc. But during the Kyle Rittenhouse thing they were all holier-than-thou.
"...“Our biggest problem is our allies,” Biden said in October 2014,..." Ah yes, those pesky allies, always so needy and selfish!
"Of course, the Israelis will always prove a ready scapegoat." This is where it inevitably ends, and that's terrifying to me. Worse, I think they know that, and that's their end goal anyway.
The Left's end goal is the destruction of Israel. That is the only thing that could possibly explain the love the Left has for Islam--a religion that stands against the pro-women, pro-LGBT ideals the Left claims to support.
We've seen the "New World Order" before. We had to clean those messes up and we will have to clean this one up. Sharing nuclear capabilities with pariah states isn't my idea of shared prosperity.
Bober, I have an idea: make the Middle East a nuclear-weapons-free zone, although Israel would have to give up their nukes. But the world would be safer if Iran and Israel didn’t have nuclear weapons!
It would be great if pigs could fly, too. But I'm not going to wait around for that to happen.
Israel is taking care of business, e.g. that drone they smuggled into the country in several pieces, and used it to severely damage a nuclear facility, then hid it away again for future use.
It’s simple. The left hates America. Joey depends has always been a go along with to whatever guy. His overlords have put in leftists in every facet of government to complement the termites the Obama placed. And voila! The hate America band is back together again canoodling with our enemies.
They somehow think they won’t be purged by our enemies,
The corollary is that if you hate America you see enemies of America as "good guys" and allies of America as "bad guys." Leading examples Israel and Castro's Cuba.
But you guys have a 6-3 lead in the Supreme Court. Not too many Obama 'termites' there. Soon enough there could be zero abortion rights across the land, but the right to open carry allowed everywhere. What are you so worried about?
Also, there will never be zero abortion ‘rights’. Leaving abortion to states will guarantee at least 30 states with legal abortion. Frankly Roe v Wade wouldn’t have been a hot-button issue if Democrats hadn’t insisted that ALL taxpayers fund it (even if against personal religious values) and in the last few years—pressure for up-to-birth abortions (see Gosnell), and pushing us towards infanticide. But even with all that, the leak was designed to give Democrats a leg up in the midterms, a straw vote didn’t necessarily mean the law would be struck, especially since Roberts would have weighed in as pro-abortion. This was a massive ruse—wouldn’t be surprised if Roberts leaked it himself.
In my stack examining the failures of our covid response the common theme from our leadership has been to blame their followers for the failures of our leaders. Their is no Obama/Biden playbook other than “do something stupid and when it doesn’t work blame someone else for not being smart enough to appropriately follow.”
That said, I think the issue is much larger than identified in this piece. The issue is that Obama/Biden and the progressive “left,” don’t believe in the American idea. How can we use hard power when we don’t believe in what we’re supposed to be fighting for. The progressive left is really the modern alt-right - they don’t believe in freedom or liberty they believe in capitulation and state power. So how, then, could they go tell Iran or China that they are guilty for not believing the same? There is no new world order under this regime because they believe in an old world order - that power is all that matters but with a populace unwilling to follow that power will concentrate elsewhere. As we have multiple times our history (the civil war being the clearest but not the only) we will be asked again if we believe in freedom and democracy (the last 50 or so years have seen us sacrifice huge amounts of both) or if we will allow man, in the form of State, to take dominion over man once again and see the complete unraveling of the American Dream
Yes I agree. I hate to bring up the name, but the philosophy of the de facto owner of the Democrat Party, George Soros, appears the be the guiding light for the Democrat Party. A fantasy world where the USA and Israel are taken down a few notches, While Iran, Palestine, Syria and the like are ‘raised up’ and we all live happily-ever-after in peace. A world which denies the very very core ( and success morally and economically) of Western Civilization.
I'm never comfortable with trying to determine intent... intent is important when teaching your children morals or dealing with interpersonal conflict, but attempting to discern the intent of strangers never works.
There's a very simple dichotomy we make significantly more complex than it needs to be. Institutions either exist to protect the rights of the individual or the individual exists to protect the rights of the institution. It's that simple. Intent is irrelevant. There are plenty of people who genuinely, with the best of intent, believe the institution can protect people (and should) more than people can (and should) be responsible for themselves. They're wrong, but the belief it based on good intent. What it fails to recognize (and why they're wrong) is that if the institution exists below the individual then one bad individual is only as powerful as they themselves are. When the institution sits on top of the individuals then one bad individual is exactly as powerful as the entirety of the institution. There is nothing more naïve than believing institutions can correct for immoral people but also believing that institutions then will always be run by moral people. This is the quagmire that is modern progressivism (the antithesis of "liberalism") - it requires cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy to exist. But intent remains irrelevant...
I totally agree with all of the above, including the mens rae piece - my issue with analyzing intentions is it always makes us late. Establishing intent in a murder trial is important because the defendant, is, and must be, innocent until proven guilty and serious time should be invested in determining extent of guilt.
In politics I don't care if you're well intentioned and dumb or poorly intentioned and smart - I care if your outcomes make things better or worse. Waiting to determine if you're evil or dumb is irrelevant. Now, on small things, sure, give someone a second chance if you REALLY believe they're well intentioned, but on big things, like the nursing home fiasco above, just get rid of the people immediately. If later you want to try to determine intent, and what they knew, and when, and whether that makes them legally liable, go crazy, but that is then a justice issue, not a political issue. We too often conflate these things and treat politicians like citizens in a justice system. I could care less about mean tweets or whether you're a good wife/husband/parent - I'm not asking you to raise my kids or be my pastor or take care of my sick wife - I'm asking you to make macro improvements to the life of your constituents, and I'm primarily asking you to do it by staying the hell out of the way and helping to get everyone else out of the way at all so liberty can reign. And in those regards, intentions just don't matter all that much...
Obama attended Harvard Law but was not a professor there. He was a lecturer. But point taken and I agree. He knew exactly what he was (and is) doing. Bring the US and the notion of Western Civilization down a few notches with the help of funded groups like ANTIFA, BLM etc.
I agree that was the traditional standard. But it needs to change. Badly. Theso-called "elites" have bit the hand that feeds them. The hands they are helpless without. I say good riddance to bad news.
“The Biden administration believes that soft power is smart and hard power is dumb. Our allies are paying the price.”
————————————————
It’s only going to get worse.
Maybe the reason SCOTUS is finally overturning Roe is because ever since Biden got elected everyone has mainly just been getting f***ed in the a** so pregnancy is a non-issue these days…..
For some reason, the left cannot handle the truth about human nature. As a result they're constantly surprised by graft, insolence, dissembling and blatant aggression. Get it through your heads folks: People are NOT good by nature, and the Ten Commandments exist for a reason. Doesn't mean all is lost by any means - just learn to deal with people as they ARE, rather than how you might wish them to be.
They may or may not belive people are good. Personally I don't think the give a damn about the populace. But they definitely believe we are stupid and need their guidance. I get my guidance from my Creator.
Mr. Doran’s column is provocative and worthy of consideration because it offers an explanation of an American foreign policy that appears growingly incoherent.
The author speaks as if American “hard power” is infinite, it’s just a matter of turning it on. But the United States is currently in a state of social division and financial collapse which is the consequence of two pointless losing wars that cost trillions of dollars and thousands of deaths. Those wars were started, not by Obama, but by Bush. In whose administration, the author served. The words “Bush”, “Iraq War” and “Afghanistan” do not appear in this essay even once. Special pleading, much?
I don't see it as infinite, but I see it as a very important component of our position in the world. But I am not writing in this article simply about "our" hard power, but the place of hard power in international politics in general. The utopian belief that we have moved beyond hard power simply hands all initiative and advantage to those who live by the sword alone -- Putin, Xi, and Khamenei. As for the Bush admin and my role in it, that would be a different article. I do believe that Bush's views represent "muscular Wilsonianism." Personally, I am not a strong advocate of Wilsonian principles, as I think the article makes clear.
I don’t disagree with you on that: I think that Wilsonian moralism in international politics is both hypocritical and dangerous. At this time, of all times, I am grateful for the power of the US military and the hard power component it represents. At the same time, as we know from Thucydides, it is much easier to start a war than to end it, and another war could be catastrophic for us. Our country is in a weakened state. We don’t have the luxury of taking the offensive on all fronts to defeat the emerging axis of evil. At best we can defend our most essential interests and support our allies while we try to heal from our ills. Putin and Xi and Khamenei know that, and we will have to be canny and smart and unsentimental to maintain our position under those conditions. It is a risky time.
I have same opinion. This author seem not to understand that our financial situation is everything but good.
We are running record deficits and our debt is ballooning out of control. Everything what we do now, we are financing it trough debt that will will leave to our children.
Yes we should help other countries, but not if it is leading us in financial ruin.
Iraq and Afghanistan wars seem to show the utter naïveté of Bush - that we could coercively transplant American style governance into fundamentally different cultures.
The 20 year “war” in Afghanistan showed both the left and the right lacked the courage of our convictions and became an unethical pursuit. On the hard left because they preach feminism and stand idly by as the taliban do what they do. On the right because we were unwilling to admit our goal was to liberalize Afghanistan, to change the culture. Crazy us, thinking the utter subjugation of women is evil.
I agree with Doran and I agree with you. The Bush doctrine heavily influenced Obama/Biden doctrine. But the exhaustion from Afghanistan and Iraq does not mean we need to go 180 degrees in the opposite direction.
I don’t think Americans would really mind keeping a few thousand soldiers in Afghanistan to avoid last summer’s failures, to keep girls in school, and prevent the country from sliding into starvation. Not when there are tens of thousands of soldiers stationed in South Korea and we aren’t “exhausted” from that.
Agreed. Doran is fighting a previous generation's wars - and, of course, conveniently obscures his support for the worst American policy decision in fifty years - the invasion of Iraq.
I agree but I think it is a consequence of far more than those two wars. While Obama's name might not be on those two, or earlier ones, his hands are far from clean in the Ukraine fiasco just to name one. We need to realize the Dems and the Repubs are two sides of the same coin.
The parties have certainly been alike in sowing division in the country, and this has had severe consequences. The Republicans like tax cuts without (unpopular) reductions in spending. The Democrats like spending with (inadequate) tax increases. Both of them like stigmatizing and blaming each other. Meanwhile most Americans want less division and more unity, but somehow we haven't been able to get it yet. We are far away from 1941 when the draft-age Rockefellers and Kennedys stood on the street with everyone else to get registered for the draft. E pluribus unum seems to be a forgotten concept.
I have no idea how the craziness happens on the Republican side, but on the Democratic side I think it's a combination of how progressives are in safe districts and accumulate seniority, and that the political people who do the work of government during Democratic administrations seem to conceive of their role as a social justice mission. Thus, we can elect moderate Democrats that Americans like until the cows come home, but what we'll get is a government dominated by the actions and concerns of leftists. Most disheartening.
But the Repubs have their share of blame. The prior president had both houses of Congress and the RINOs failed to act. I think far too many of them feather their nests the same way. I would love to see info on McConnell's, McCain's and Graham's financials. McConnell' in-law are very well heeled Chinese. My question is how to separate the real conservatives from the fakes. And as far as moderate Democrats PTL for Sinema and Manchin.
Let’s get clear on the word “exceptional”. People think it means Americans see themselves as special. (well I believe that, but that’s beside the point). It’s original meaning was that America was the exception in the world. Other countries had monarchs, despotic systems of government. We formed a democratic republic where “we the people” were in charge. And we have shared that all over the world for the good.
I reject those below who say America is done. It is not. We just have to remember we aren’t perfect, but net-net, we have been the world’s best idea and a force for good. Right now the idiots on the left want us to forget that. REFUSE!
NCMaureen, you may think the idiots on the left want us to forget about America’s exceptionalism, but those on the right are actively trying to destroy the Republic; they don’t believe in democracy!
American people are great people. When my birth country was ravaged by war in 1990, we received packages with "Donated by people of United States" written on them. I remember my grandfather telling me same, that he to as a child in 1945 also received packages with similar inscription. There are few nations that are so ready to help, as people of USA are.
That being said, please what I write now is not criticism on People of US, but on US politicians.
I disagree with large parts of this article. For last 30 years, US, trough its misguided foreign policy has been effectily running its self to the ground. And only thing exceptional in US seem to be its ever increasing debt that we will leave to our children.
And no US is not some special nation that its soly duty in the world is to "defend" our allies, that are in many cases very rich, and have for years underinvested in their own defense, because you know "crazy" Americans are spending more than enough and will defend Europe in necessary.
I have lived in EU for years, they have much higher social spending for their own population, free college, free healthcare, paid family leave and many more. At same time, healthcare in US is in crisis, we have opioid crisis, we have looming college debt crisis and many others.
EU itself has larger population and GDP than USA, why do our tax dollars need to defend them? I have a feeling that EU will defend itself to the last $ of US tax payers.
I currently live and work in China, but I am under no illusion, US main geopolitical rival in 21st century will be China. And while we are in process of bankrupting our self for defense of very rich EU, that same EU has absolutly no interest in supporting us when it comes to China. If you think that Germany is addicted to import of Russian gas, it is 10 times worse when it comes to their exports to China, same goes to Italy, France and many other EU nations.
Trough complely insane foreign policy, that is focused on NGOs and "spreading" of democracy, we have lost Africa and Asia to China. Good African friend of mine put it best:
"US shows up and wants to teach us some woke nonsense that is simply not applicable to our country and then actively meddles in our internal affairs, at same time China comes and build all infrastructure we need and don't meddle in our internal politics, what do you think, who do we like more?". I know the answer, because China plays same game in my birth country. And China is winning long game.
What US needs now, is not to focus on external affairs, especially not on those on continent rich as Europe. US needs to fix itself, especially issue with our ever ballooning debt that is spiraling out of control. Then we should finally deal with mounting internal crisis (healthcare, college debt, opioid, mental health, social security and others).
World needs US, but if US continues to destroy itself as we have been doing in last 30 years, who will help US?
US needs to be exceptional of its own people, to be shiny beacon for immigrants that come here, we are not worlds police, last 30 years has show that being world police only costs treasure with zero benefits to people of America. We cannot fix the world.
Agree completely. I've been to 40 nations on six continents. America is in sharp decline and I agree completely that we can NOT afford to be the world's policeman nor do American taxpayers have any obligation whatsoever to foot the bill to resolve border disputes in wealthy Europe.
Isolationism is a long way from Obama. He was in the business of being in everyone’s business just he refused to go all the way to war... or refused to go to war when he couldn’t just drone bomb the adversary into the ground. There is something to be said about getting your nose out of the worlds business until it’s in your interest.
Wasn't it Gov. Cuomo who said "America was never that great"?
lost another ball...ut oh.
When you keep losing the balls in the rough golf can become very expensive
I think she sounds like Obama on the 'decline' part - but like Trump in the 'no obligation whatsoever' in helping Europe.
I disagree Biden is distinctly a Obama lackey it fact Obama is the lead puppeteer pulling the strings and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to understand how we going to get out of this mess
This article (which is very good) is still only describing symptoms. So what's the underlying disease? My contention is careerism, which really got rolling with the Boomers in the Sixties (I am one), and widespread institutional corruption, which is the sine qua non of the Clinton School.
The article is about foreign policy, but the problem is found everywhere in United States culture. Our institutional rulers, our elites, arrived where they are because of the rise of careerism and credential-worship. Far from being a true meritocracy, which they love to crow about, it's just a spoils system where degrees (and where they came from) determine where you get to stand in the handout line. This has now reached the end-game, where everything is relative, nothing is objectively true, and the true Coin of the Realm is just nuclear-strength horseshit, served up as a cure for everything.
Our adversaries do not share our love of horseshit, they do not value it as we do--they see it for what it is: pathetic and worthless. They also understand that an enemy that has only crap for a tool is not a serious threat to anyone but themselves. They see the U.S as a nation devoid of timeless values, and led at every level by corrupt toadies, drunk on their own unearned privilege. Thus, they successfully press their advantages, on every front.
I wish I had a more hopeful post, but the idiots are fully in charge now--and the conclusions are inescapable.
I also thing the beuracritization of policy with little or no fall out for waste and incompetence. Think about our wars for the last 20 years (and the 9/11 failure) and how few civil servants if any were subject to consequences.
I have to agree that the idiots are firmly in charge - counterbalanced, though, by the fact that their ideologies are far from the majority opinion. Of every hundred Americans I encounter, not more than 5% subscribe to the woke, identity-politics, racist agenda of the elite. Is it enough? I don't know. Sure hope so. This place is worth saving.
Great points. Make America great again. America first. Bring Trump back, pronto.
De Santis will get in the way. Imo Trump won't be in a position to run for anything in two years. Time will tell.
This is the sort of comment I come here to read. Points of view I hadn't considered, written by someone with broad experience in the topic at hand, responded-to by other folks also with experience.
Side comment: I've really begun to notice how well Substack works. Never a problem with reading or posting; no interference - that I have seen, anyway - with commentary; yet somehow very little in the way of 'bots or obvious trolls. Doesn't blow up your email inbox, but has pertinent alerts. Anybody else notice that you can "heart" a post, but not downvote it? Some designers and programmers did their homework. Well done.
Agree! I was so happy to welcome Common Sense and abandon Facebook, Twitter, et al.
Agree totally Also everyone is nice A simple observation but much appreciated I learn so much from the comments in addition to Bari’s great reads
“American people are great people”
——————————————-
This is racist nationalism.
Supporting one's country and people (which in the US means everyone who wants to be here...and is multiracial...is not automatically nationalistic or racist. There is healthy forms of positive group affinity and negative forms. You appear to assume that there are only negative forms.
If the comment says "Kevin" assume the worst. Or, actually the best.
Btw - "everyone who wants to be here" is not the correct definition of who gets to be an American. That was provided by Theodore Roosevelt more than a century ago when he wrote: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
This is exactly how I was raised. My grandparents came to America to be Americans. They assimilated. We have drifted to far from American patriotism and now wonder how we have become so fragmented.
I agree. My comment should have been more specific.
No but putting ethic heritage above being American can and has. IMO.
Kevin is poking fun at the Left, who consider it all negative.
Thanks for the clarification. It can be hard to tell irony and sarcasm online.
Correct, Kevin should have closed it with a disclaimer like this: (that was sarcasm)
Kevin............
🤓🤓🤓💃🏻💃🏻
This is sarcasm
Hate to point out the obvious, but "American" isn't a race.
And, also, ableist, sexist, and ist-ist.
No. It's not. "American people are the best people in the world" would be.
The US foreign policy is a liberal foreign policy. Liberals cannot help but tie their meddling to their largesse with our tax dollars.
You’re right about the US being in very bad internal shape, but the EU and China have their own serious problems. China is the world’s largest importer of food and, due to industrialization and environmental pollution, is running out of water. And, because of it’s one-child policy (now dropped), the population will grow old before it grows rich. Then, too, a revolutionary government is always highly vulnerable to collapse, especially as its totalitarian policies are more and more on display. And African nations may find their dependency on Chinese infrastructure to be as double-edged as Germany’s dependence on Russian oil.
As for the EU, its situation is inherently tenuous, with “exit” movements having emerged in France, Italy, Greece, Poland, and Hungary. The vaccine rollout of Britain versus Brussels showed how the inflexible EU bureaucracy is incapable of acting quickly, even in the midst of a pandemic, and other internal policy tensions abound. The trend in the world is to get smaller, not to confederate. And, once the EU starts paying for its own defense, individual countries will find it increasingly difficult to support large welfare systems.
Focusing on social problems is not the answer, at least not as long as the US is the US. Bolstering support for the principles that guided the development of the world’s oldest democracy is. Unfortunately, the only principle that our ruling elites seem to want to follow is winning, whatever that means and whatever the cost.
Leslie...makes sense to me. I can remove my thoughts on the "green world", which sounds nice, which is pushed in order to show "how naughty We Is".
No mention, when promoting "green", about China reliance on COAL. They have plans for 120 J Bridger coal plants ( HUGE) along with their 600 coal plants in operation.
Oh yes, we knock em down and they build more...is that a joke?
Voters focus on the sham news...unreal.
That’s going to be my new descriptor: sham news!
I agree that China and EU have their own problems, but those are their problems.
We should be focused on fixing our own issues => fist deficit and ballooning debt, then healthcare & opioids, looming social security bankruptcy, then student debt.
I am not proposing isolationism, but reduced focus of our politicans on foreign affairs.
I agree with you about our internal situation. I don’t agree on government as the answer to the social problems you rightly bemoan—except for student debt, IMO.
I didnt say that the government is the answer to the social problems. I said that we have issues at home that need to be fixed ASAP and that fixing these problems will probably require investment at home. How social problems should be fixed is debatable. I myself am against excessive government involment
But a significant part of the problem.is the massive federal bureaucracy that only knows to take from the productive Americans and give to the unproductive both here and abroad. This is stymies the productive class.
your right about other countries having problems, the problem is they start to get desperate and if that happens lord help us.
All I’m trying to say is that, as Russia has shown, our foes aren’t as powerful as we fear. And, despite the current internal chaos, our inclination toward free expression, innovation, dynamism, and the like make us different, that is, better prepared to respond to and handle devastating events, both local and internationally, only to the extent we agree on and adhere to those policies.
Russia is not our foe, we have made it to be by following EU interests. Russia is on an different continent, we have no land border (small border in Bering sea), our real interests (our focus should be in Asia, their is in Europe) are not overlapping.
If we were smart, we would have made Russia our friend, because now we have pushed it to hands to China, and Russia has everything China needs, resources and food.
And as all proverb says "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" and China knows this. We sadly are acting in interest of EU and not our own and that same EU has 0 interest in helping us with China, because the are intested only in their own interests
I agree.
I agree that Russia is not our foe. As I wrote on a comment thread from early in the hostilities, I think (hope) the US and Russia will one day be allies, particularly in containing China. But there’s a difference between caring about a country’s people and recognizing that it’s impossible to be friends with the elite that is currently in charge.
We shouldn't care who runs Russia, this is not our problem but of Russians themself. Honestly, we have been friends with worse elites than those in Russia, just look at our good friends in Saudi Arabia and rest of middle east.
Sadly, after what is happening now with US supporting Ukraine and getting even more fanatical about NATO (which is compelty irrelevant for US, and is literal money drain on us with no strategic importance for us) Russia has been been lost to China. China has plyed very smart, they have fixed all border issues with Russia and have no ongoing issues, and are now in process of building pipelines to get their oil and gas for cheap and fully over land without US to do anything.
Raz...sounds like you want Trumty back...nice
Thanks. You make solid points which are mostly consistent with my understanding. I am however, skeptical that isolationism to the level you suggest is wise.
Also, as I think you know, African nations are being unsustainably indebted by China. It is revealing that while more than half(?) in China live in poverty the CCP chooses to offshore low skilled labor. Can’t imagine why…
China is creating debt trap for many African nations, this is absolutely true.
But with our current foreign policy we are creating debt trap for our own children, our debt ist growing with over $1.3 trillion per year.
And a biggie is unfunded Social Security and related liabilities as well.
This is so true, and many people have no idea how big crisis is brewing with social security that is running out of money, and that current system is not sustainable and needs fixing now.
Why the USA Government & its politicians don't help Americans first is continually baffling....yet today we see infant formula at the border for illegal migrants and none in the shops for Americans. We see jobs shifted abroad, we see no plans for infrastructure just lots of money allocated. Our leadership has no vision and has let the electorate down - that is BOTH parties.
CC I think Americans have let Americans down we don’t know what we want or need we had a President who was for American First - we apparently voted in a man with 8 million more votes in 2020 whose policies are America Last now why in Gods name would we have done that if that’s answered truthfully maybe then we will all have a better understand of where we stand as a nation 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Well written🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Are you Serbian or Croatian?
Both :D
The reality is that the Left genuinely wants to destroy the United States. The 1619 Project is the perfect encapsulation of their beliefs: not only is this country evil, it always has been, and always will be as long as one Enlightenment philosophy (or *any* ideas of white men) remain in our culture. They've admitted that they want to "burn it to the ground."
Engaging in foreign policy that very probably ends with nuclear war makes a disturbing kind of sense when the destruction of your country is the end game. Perhaps they genuinely believe they can build their utopia on the ashes, no matter how insane that appears to the rest of us.
In the private circles of the American intelligentsia, they are proud to talk about how much they hate America and how they identify as globalists.
When they talk about fighting for the "soul of America" they are aware their intention is to kill the American spirit.
The old America was exceptional. The new one is godless, indulgent, and prone to all the corruptions and stupidities that the old America was designed to prevent.
I'm curious, Anthony, when the 'old' America ended and the 'new' began. Do you include as exceptional the old America of the 1960's - the decade of assassinations, racial strife, riots, Viet Nam, the Cold War and unregulated pollution? The 1950's - with its stultifying conformity, rampant segregation, military/industrial complex, a swaggering CIA, and onerous tax rates? How about the 1970's - when people were really worrying about America's decline (much more then than now), and there was stagflation, gov't corruption and crime (remember Nixon and Agnew?), hostage taking etc..
So that leaves one decade left - you don't mean Reagan's '80's. Do you? With AIDS, huge recession, 16% interest rates, massive tax cuts along with massive deficits, Iran/Contra, drug money, crack cocaine? It can't be the '90's - that was as indulgent and as 'godless' as today (Bill Clinton, right?) with ridiculously high crime rates (great economy though. Bill did do that well). Can it?
When was the 'old' America better?
To me, it's all one and the same. We're Americans, and this is who we are, and have been.
This isn't curiosity, it's a screed of non sequiturs that ignores the core concept of my comment.
I can easily think of ten things Democrats have done in the last five years that I consider as bad or worse than Watergate, so imagine that I consider Democrats 1000% worse than one of the most infamous scandals in history.
When your only justification for the current dismal state is a cynical attempt to portray the past as worse, you support and make excuses for failed leadership.
But you still haven't explained when the 'old' America ended and the 'new' began, Anthony. I presume that forms part of your core concept. You instead get upset at my examples (btw, eight years of the rabid '60's was under Dem rule).
What 'old' America are you referring to?
My point is that there is no old and there is no new. No real difference. Only us. The past was bad (and good). Just like the present - bad (and good).
The old America is defined by the values of truth, freedom, justice and independence.
The new one is defined by the globalist/Marxist values of diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging.
There isn't a dividing line because these things are gradual evolutions and there is plenty of crossover.
Along with the change in fundamental values is a change in the definitions of rights. Leftists now tell me there's no right to free speech, gun ownership, or privacy from arbitrary government raids, but there is a right to free healthcare and to kill your unborn children.
I wouldn't say that diversity is Marxist. Really? WASPs, Catholics, Blacks, Hispanics, Irish, Italians, Jews, Koreans - all here at once - sounds like the 'old' America to me.
And you don't have to worry about gun ownership. There are more weapons in private hands than Americans - that will not disappear. Free health care? It will never happen.
And killing unborn children? (though many women wouldn't call them kids yet) - that might end too!
Free speech - alive and well in forums like this (and soon coming back to Twitter!)
Your 'old' America might never have left, Anthony. You can relax.
You are absolutely correct. The aim of BLM, Antifa, DSA and the Democrat/Socialist Party is to destroy our democracy and burn this country to the ground. And out of the ashes, shoulder to shoulder the workers will arise to form a perfect Communist state, a workers paradise, like Cuba or Venezuela or China.
Every Communist state has been a failure yet these morons, like Bernie Sanders, AOC and the squad apparently don't read history.
I respectfully disagree. Bernie/Squad, BLM, Antifa and wokeness are tools the Democrats use to distract from their subservience to Big Tech, Wall Street, Raytheon, etc.
The Republicans are the same at the core but with fewer distractions.
Yes if one premise of this article were true, that the US regime wants world peace, then they’d have negotiated with Russia over Nato and the Ukraine. I’m thinking these DC types believe in American world hegemony, but still think their “soft” methods will work. In that I agree with the writer. IMO the American public has little or nothing to do with the calculations of DC elites, who still think all the world is their stage. It’s power all the way down, not peace.
It is worth reading this essay on the so-called French theories to understand why such a POV can only tear down. https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/deconstructing-french-theory/
BTW, one of the things the 1619 Project overlooked was the fact the people most responsible to highlighting the awfulness of the Transatlantic trade were Equiano and his shadowy group the Sons of Africa in 1783. I personally think the name is based on the Sons of Liberty.
It was the 2nd trial about the Massacre of the Zhong which ignited the abolition movement in the UK and ultimately led to the banning of importation of enslaved people in 1808 by Jefferson.
One of the things? What did the 1619 Project get right? It's a lie from beginning to end.
I agree there are numerous errors and the 1619 project is best understood as a political argument rather than a serious study of history. It relies heavily on so-called French Theory and deconstructing/tearing down.
I simply have not seen that particular point mentioned. IMHO, it strikes at the heart of the argument namely that the American Revolution was done to enable slavery to continue. Until you get the massacre of the Zhong and the 2nd trial, the abolition movement struggled in Britain and was not considered a force. 1619 also presents slavery as being complete in 1619 rather than looking at the gradual erosion of the right of manumission (among other things). Or why the teaching of literacy to enslaved people was expressly banned (only happens after Equiano).
Also as people don't mention it, one of the more important integrations happens due to Edward R Murrow, a man normally considered to be a WASP. Off his own bat, he integrates the National Student Federation of America in 1930 and conducts an integrated conference in Atlanta (including African American delegates being seated and fed). The NSFA is the precursor if you will to student activism on college campuses. His efforts result in many HBCU becoming members and student activism starts on those campuses.
This directly contradicts the assertion that the main impetus always came from the African American community.
It also doesn't mention Tunis Campbell and his role in changing the focus from Liberia to ensuring that the US was where his people could plant their trees. Campbell also wrote on e of the first business management books (on hotel management and how to run them efficiently) published in the US circa 1840.
Unfortunately slavery is not a crime in half the world's countries. IN 94 countries you can not be punished in a criminal court for trafficking or enslaving another person. And yes, the majority of these countries are in least developed nations. https://theconversation.com/slavery-is-not-a-crime-in-almost-half-the-countries-of-the-world-new-research-115596
Slavery is deeply embedded in world culture. It’s yet another thing the woke get wrong. It’s not necessarily about race at all. And they always ignore the abolition movement and all the blood spilled to bring an end to slavery here.
The only positive thing about the ludicrous 1619 “project” is it reminded Americans that there was history prior to 1776. A history which is glossed over in most American history books and classes
Bruce... correct, on top of the fact, we were not even a country.
Thank you for the link and history Sir.
Celia...sad but correcto mundo.
Spot on
Celia - I think it's useful to not treat the 'Left' as monolithic. It is as fragmented as the Right is. The 1619 Project has huge detractors among liberal circles in all points of the country (myself included) - pretty much like not all Republicans wear MAGA hats. To say that the 'Left' genuinely wants to destroy the US puts everybody left of yourself in the same basket. Not a good idea if you want to understand the other side.
Let's consider how the Democrat leaders explicitly dictate what their members tweet, when and how. Consider how every single Congressional Democrat fell for Jussie's race hoax. Not a single one spoke up in favor of intelligence and reality.
That's why they're a monolith.
Good enough. I'll counter with the public Republican indignation (how shocked they were!) at the events of Jan 6 and Trump's apparent non-intervention. They understood he was involved. Don't have to name names - you know who they are - but four or five weeks later? Two months later? All back in the Mar-a-Lago fold.
Intelligence and reality -indeed.
They explicitly espouse collectivist and communist principles while uniformly repeating the narratives of a billionaire propaganda network.
That's why I treat them as monolithic.
A billionaire propaganda network - a la Rupert Murdoch's Fox?
When I refer to "the Left," I mean specifically the kind of people who drove Bari Wiess out of the NYT. The kind of people who think all Republicans wear MAGA hats. The kind of people who think all white people are inherently racist and that everyone to the right of themselves is evil.
If that shoe fits, you should certainly wear it.
That is a very small shoe. Most liberals don’t fit into it. That is my point.
Celia, the 1619 Project is critical of America’s past and present. Because of this, you think the black people feel this: “not only is this country evil, it always has been, and always will be as long as one Enlightenment philosophy (or *any* ideas of white men) remain in our culture. “I can see you’re a snowflake woke culture warrior! You see the demographic freight train ending the white world of the 1950s, and you’re not happy about it!
justy...you make no sense, ever. you use words that will not fit "demographic"..."ending the WHITE (?) world"...so funny and sad. worthless
She did not say anything at all about black people.
Right, Lynne, do you know what the 1619 project is?
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/1619-america-slavery.html
Don't provide me with links to biased sources. Years ago when I was curious I read the opening - it is an acknowledged fictionalized account of American history. It is at best a historical novel. Not that fiction cannot be thought-provoking but it is not history. And on another note my comment was more to the fact that you equate it with black people. I know a lot of black Americans who disavow it. It is in reality woke theatrics largely espoused by some whites liberals.
Right!
2016-2021: Donald Trump completely unleashed American energy and mining production along with imposing strategic tariffs which completely neutered Russia, China, and Iran. More importantly, he strategically engaged with regional partners for them to police their own regions engaging in business rather than war. And our world has never been more peaceful... until Biden/Obama just came in and made it 2015 again. Oh yeah, rather than fight a 20 year, $3T war enriching the worlds arms suppliers, he strategically took out Qasem Soleimani - the sole leader in terrorist technology for the last 40 years - with one missile strike. Peace. And $1.80/gallon gas...
Speaking with arab people during this time they totally respected Trump and his ways because they are reality; he treated them as adults, not as subjects to be given 'aid' and then ordered to do what US blackmailers wanted.
Best President in my lifetime. He Attis against the corrupt DC interests. They got rid of him. For now
Trump is up there with Reagan in my opinion. I adored Reagan. He is the reason I switched from Democrat to Republican and have never looked back. Reagan is my ideal of a president; suave, charming, intelligent, witty. Trump is a natural born manager. Unfortunately he could have used some of Reagan's ability to use wit to mock and bring down the temperature. All that aside, Trump kept us safe in every way.
Agreed Reagan was hilarious. Trump had his moments but definitely harder edged. It’s probably not healthy or useful, but after years of abuse from Democrat jackals attacking spineless Republicans I was more then happy to see Trump punch them in the face
I was just going to respond to wonderful Naomi, but you took the words out of my mouth. :-D If we look back to all republican presidents from Nixon they ALL were treated poorly at best by 'the media' and rarely did they fight back. Trump is the perfect gentleman when approached as one, but punches back twice as hard if not. And I loved every minute of it.
Oh, Danimal28, what a lovely thing to say about my comments. Hugs to you.
And, yes, I too loved every minute of Trump punching back. I would watch the TV and listen to the radio and cheer him on.
Oh YES!!! For years and years, particularly through the GW Bush years I so wanted Republicans to swing back and get in a few punches. I didn't like Trump at all but voted for him in 2016 because I knew Hillary was a nightmare. After he was elected I was continually surprised and elated by his policies, appointments, actions, and never backing down. Way to go, Trump. However, (I may be the only one who had this reaction after 2020), once I got over the deep sadness of the massive vote fraud and Biden becoming president, it was also a relief not to have the constant warfare between Trump and the media.
"massive relief not to have the constant warfare between Trump and the media"
Yes, the media conceals all of Biden's many mistakes and missteps, making him out to be the greatest man since George Washington. Meanwhile, the country is imploding and the world is headed into nuclear war.
Agreed. Just remember the leftist media jackals will NEVER treat a republican president with any modicum of peace. Dubya was 'nice' and grew government almost as big as LBJ and they still excoriated him at every turn. Trump or DeSantis will receive the same no matter what.
Yes sir. This author does a good job navigating the 'nuance' of this issue, but as usual he ignores reality. Trump didnt.
Danimal...as the fans stood cheering...forward motion, with nice on top.
Thumbs up :-D
“Eager to get the deal done, President Biden began to consider complying with Tehran’s demand”
————————————————-
I still have not heard an explanation for the Democrat obsession with helping Iran that doesn’t involve satanic possession.
The Dems are all about feelings. So when an authoritarian dictator provides some soothing words that make them feel good, they go along, regardless of that dictator's track record of aggression and dishonesty. It FEELS good to say we are getting a peace agreement with Iran, even if the agreement is an illusion. They reject reason and objectivity.
“At the end of the day people won't remember what you said or did, they will remember how you made them feel.” ― Maya Angelou
A true statement, but one which we need to guard against rather than embrace.
There’s also a dusting of pathological narcissism where you are unable to grasp the notion that people don’t have the same goals as you and pagan naïveté that insists people are inherently good.
Dems see Iran (like minorities) as people that they just need to put on the right path, i.e. a very narcissistic and condescending view. Just like the masks and mandates. They get a warm fuzzy feeling that they are teaching Iran how to be good world citizens. The Dems (except for a few) don't hate America, they just consider most people beneath them, so they need to instruct us deplorables to be better.
How about - if he gets Iran off the table he and his Stasi will be free to deal with the white supremacist terrorists whom he considers the real enemies of America. The people who, in a fair and honest election, would have reelected Trump. No rational person voted for a corrupt and senile imbecile to lead us. No sane person is surprised at the chaos that has ensued.
2000 mules
If 2000 Mules is even partially accurate, it exposes a vast and well funded criminal conspiracy to usurp the honesty and fairness of the 2020 election. The mules are on video surveillance. It wouldn't be hard for a state and federal investigatory agency to arrest and question them. If their guilt is established, more investigations, leading to those higher and higher, would be warranted until the ultimate criminals are exposed. D'Souza makes out a plausible case. If not followed up - so that Americans can know the truth - 2020 will always be tainted.
Well, it's a LOT worse than that: they got away with it in 2020, and, as a result, will now do it every time.
My understanding is that Richard Spencer, one of the 15 actual white supremacists in America, supports the Iran deal because the root word for Iran is ‘aryan’ or some crap.
To think that my former cantor, who moved to Israel with his wife a few years ago, toasted with champagne when Biden was inaugurated. They will probably never admit that Biden's foreign policy choices may doom their lives and those of their family living in Israel.
None are so blind that cannot see
My rabbi openly exulted on his Facebook page when Trump lost. You'd think Moshiakh had arrived, from the way he talked.
Conservative Egalitarian
Lately I've been going to the local Chabad. The last non-political synagogue around here (though I hear that the other Orthodox shuls are also non-political). WTF is wrong with these Reform and Conservative and Reconstructionist rabbis, that they feel they have to opine on every political trend. The one Conservative guy loves to rail against guns. The Reconstructionist one rails against "white supremacy" which she considers a major threat to our country. Neither of them EVER talk about Islamic extremism which is responsible for most of the actual anti-Jewish violence, plus Black thuggery which now regularly targets Orthodox Jews (and also Asians, who now fear to go out after dark in NYC -- sucks that they voted Democrat all these years -- wonder if they'll change their ways, now that they're being targeted, and also now that their kids are being racially discriminated out of the elite high schools). Neither of them EVER mention the fact that black-on-black shootings constitute the vast majority of all gun homicides. They want to sound hip and in tune with current trends, so they pick on whites... even on Jews... because they're safe targets. God forbid a spiritual leader should condemn an actual murderer, like the black guy who ran over all those people at that parade, or the one who shot up that restaurant, etc. etc. But during the Kyle Rittenhouse thing they were all holier-than-thou.
Don't get me started.
Oh... too late. I started.
"...“Our biggest problem is our allies,” Biden said in October 2014,..." Ah yes, those pesky allies, always so needy and selfish!
"Of course, the Israelis will always prove a ready scapegoat." This is where it inevitably ends, and that's terrifying to me. Worse, I think they know that, and that's their end goal anyway.
The Left's end goal is the destruction of Israel. That is the only thing that could possibly explain the love the Left has for Islam--a religion that stands against the pro-women, pro-LGBT ideals the Left claims to support.
We've seen the "New World Order" before. We had to clean those messes up and we will have to clean this one up. Sharing nuclear capabilities with pariah states isn't my idea of shared prosperity.
This one could leave quite a mess to clean.
Bober, I have an idea: make the Middle East a nuclear-weapons-free zone, although Israel would have to give up their nukes. But the world would be safer if Iran and Israel didn’t have nuclear weapons!
It would be great if pigs could fly, too. But I'm not going to wait around for that to happen.
Israel is taking care of business, e.g. that drone they smuggled into the country in several pieces, and used it to severely damage a nuclear facility, then hid it away again for future use.
Sounds good...on paper. Both of those nations are about as intransigent as they come.
I think quite possibly, that could be an understatement!
It’s simple. The left hates America. Joey depends has always been a go along with to whatever guy. His overlords have put in leftists in every facet of government to complement the termites the Obama placed. And voila! The hate America band is back together again canoodling with our enemies.
They somehow think they won’t be purged by our enemies,
The corollary is that if you hate America you see enemies of America as "good guys" and allies of America as "bad guys." Leading examples Israel and Castro's Cuba.
But you guys have a 6-3 lead in the Supreme Court. Not too many Obama 'termites' there. Soon enough there could be zero abortion rights across the land, but the right to open carry allowed everywhere. What are you so worried about?
Also, there will never be zero abortion ‘rights’. Leaving abortion to states will guarantee at least 30 states with legal abortion. Frankly Roe v Wade wouldn’t have been a hot-button issue if Democrats hadn’t insisted that ALL taxpayers fund it (even if against personal religious values) and in the last few years—pressure for up-to-birth abortions (see Gosnell), and pushing us towards infanticide. But even with all that, the leak was designed to give Democrats a leg up in the midterms, a straw vote didn’t necessarily mean the law would be struck, especially since Roberts would have weighed in as pro-abortion. This was a massive ruse—wouldn’t be surprised if Roberts leaked it himself.
Roberts is an Obama guy, he will rule in favor of what his overlords require.
This article alone is worth the price of a subscription to Common Sense. Wow.
In my stack examining the failures of our covid response the common theme from our leadership has been to blame their followers for the failures of our leaders. Their is no Obama/Biden playbook other than “do something stupid and when it doesn’t work blame someone else for not being smart enough to appropriately follow.”
That said, I think the issue is much larger than identified in this piece. The issue is that Obama/Biden and the progressive “left,” don’t believe in the American idea. How can we use hard power when we don’t believe in what we’re supposed to be fighting for. The progressive left is really the modern alt-right - they don’t believe in freedom or liberty they believe in capitulation and state power. So how, then, could they go tell Iran or China that they are guilty for not believing the same? There is no new world order under this regime because they believe in an old world order - that power is all that matters but with a populace unwilling to follow that power will concentrate elsewhere. As we have multiple times our history (the civil war being the clearest but not the only) we will be asked again if we believe in freedom and democracy (the last 50 or so years have seen us sacrifice huge amounts of both) or if we will allow man, in the form of State, to take dominion over man once again and see the complete unraveling of the American Dream
Yes I agree. I hate to bring up the name, but the philosophy of the de facto owner of the Democrat Party, George Soros, appears the be the guiding light for the Democrat Party. A fantasy world where the USA and Israel are taken down a few notches, While Iran, Palestine, Syria and the like are ‘raised up’ and we all live happily-ever-after in peace. A world which denies the very very core ( and success morally and economically) of Western Civilization.
I'm never comfortable with trying to determine intent... intent is important when teaching your children morals or dealing with interpersonal conflict, but attempting to discern the intent of strangers never works.
There's a very simple dichotomy we make significantly more complex than it needs to be. Institutions either exist to protect the rights of the individual or the individual exists to protect the rights of the institution. It's that simple. Intent is irrelevant. There are plenty of people who genuinely, with the best of intent, believe the institution can protect people (and should) more than people can (and should) be responsible for themselves. They're wrong, but the belief it based on good intent. What it fails to recognize (and why they're wrong) is that if the institution exists below the individual then one bad individual is only as powerful as they themselves are. When the institution sits on top of the individuals then one bad individual is exactly as powerful as the entirety of the institution. There is nothing more naïve than believing institutions can correct for immoral people but also believing that institutions then will always be run by moral people. This is the quagmire that is modern progressivism (the antithesis of "liberalism") - it requires cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy to exist. But intent remains irrelevant...
You're right that actions (and their consequences) are more important than intentions.
But some of these people have plainly stated their intentions.
I totally agree with all of the above, including the mens rae piece - my issue with analyzing intentions is it always makes us late. Establishing intent in a murder trial is important because the defendant, is, and must be, innocent until proven guilty and serious time should be invested in determining extent of guilt.
In politics I don't care if you're well intentioned and dumb or poorly intentioned and smart - I care if your outcomes make things better or worse. Waiting to determine if you're evil or dumb is irrelevant. Now, on small things, sure, give someone a second chance if you REALLY believe they're well intentioned, but on big things, like the nursing home fiasco above, just get rid of the people immediately. If later you want to try to determine intent, and what they knew, and when, and whether that makes them legally liable, go crazy, but that is then a justice issue, not a political issue. We too often conflate these things and treat politicians like citizens in a justice system. I could care less about mean tweets or whether you're a good wife/husband/parent - I'm not asking you to raise my kids or be my pastor or take care of my sick wife - I'm asking you to make macro improvements to the life of your constituents, and I'm primarily asking you to do it by staying the hell out of the way and helping to get everyone else out of the way at all so liberty can reign. And in those regards, intentions just don't matter all that much...
Obama attended Harvard Law but was not a professor there. He was a lecturer. But point taken and I agree. He knew exactly what he was (and is) doing. Bring the US and the notion of Western Civilization down a few notches with the help of funded groups like ANTIFA, BLM etc.
You put wa-a-a-ay too much stock in Ha-a-av-a-a-a-ahd. The American ideal is contrary to the idea of elitism.
I agree that was the traditional standard. But it needs to change. Badly. Theso-called "elites" have bit the hand that feeds them. The hands they are helpless without. I say good riddance to bad news.
“The Biden administration believes that soft power is smart and hard power is dumb. Our allies are paying the price.”
————————————————
It’s only going to get worse.
Maybe the reason SCOTUS is finally overturning Roe is because ever since Biden got elected everyone has mainly just been getting f***ed in the a** so pregnancy is a non-issue these days…..
For some reason, the left cannot handle the truth about human nature. As a result they're constantly surprised by graft, insolence, dissembling and blatant aggression. Get it through your heads folks: People are NOT good by nature, and the Ten Commandments exist for a reason. Doesn't mean all is lost by any means - just learn to deal with people as they ARE, rather than how you might wish them to be.
You are so right. If people were naturally good there would be no need for the Ten Commandments.
Left wing politicians like to take advantage of the weak-minded.
They may or may not belive people are good. Personally I don't think the give a damn about the populace. But they definitely believe we are stupid and need their guidance. I get my guidance from my Creator.
I like these pro Western pro American policy analyses. Douglas Murray's War on the West nails it too.
Mr. Doran’s column is provocative and worthy of consideration because it offers an explanation of an American foreign policy that appears growingly incoherent.
Cliff notes: they’re idiots.
"Growingly incoherent." Like the President who "presides over them?
I so agree with you.
The author speaks as if American “hard power” is infinite, it’s just a matter of turning it on. But the United States is currently in a state of social division and financial collapse which is the consequence of two pointless losing wars that cost trillions of dollars and thousands of deaths. Those wars were started, not by Obama, but by Bush. In whose administration, the author served. The words “Bush”, “Iraq War” and “Afghanistan” do not appear in this essay even once. Special pleading, much?
I don't see it as infinite, but I see it as a very important component of our position in the world. But I am not writing in this article simply about "our" hard power, but the place of hard power in international politics in general. The utopian belief that we have moved beyond hard power simply hands all initiative and advantage to those who live by the sword alone -- Putin, Xi, and Khamenei. As for the Bush admin and my role in it, that would be a different article. I do believe that Bush's views represent "muscular Wilsonianism." Personally, I am not a strong advocate of Wilsonian principles, as I think the article makes clear.
I don’t disagree with you on that: I think that Wilsonian moralism in international politics is both hypocritical and dangerous. At this time, of all times, I am grateful for the power of the US military and the hard power component it represents. At the same time, as we know from Thucydides, it is much easier to start a war than to end it, and another war could be catastrophic for us. Our country is in a weakened state. We don’t have the luxury of taking the offensive on all fronts to defeat the emerging axis of evil. At best we can defend our most essential interests and support our allies while we try to heal from our ills. Putin and Xi and Khamenei know that, and we will have to be canny and smart and unsentimental to maintain our position under those conditions. It is a risky time.
I have same opinion. This author seem not to understand that our financial situation is everything but good.
We are running record deficits and our debt is ballooning out of control. Everything what we do now, we are financing it trough debt that will will leave to our children.
Yes we should help other countries, but not if it is leading us in financial ruin.
Iraq and Afghanistan wars seem to show the utter naïveté of Bush - that we could coercively transplant American style governance into fundamentally different cultures.
The 20 year “war” in Afghanistan showed both the left and the right lacked the courage of our convictions and became an unethical pursuit. On the hard left because they preach feminism and stand idly by as the taliban do what they do. On the right because we were unwilling to admit our goal was to liberalize Afghanistan, to change the culture. Crazy us, thinking the utter subjugation of women is evil.
Obama continued Bush era policies
Much to many people's disappointment
I agree with Doran and I agree with you. The Bush doctrine heavily influenced Obama/Biden doctrine. But the exhaustion from Afghanistan and Iraq does not mean we need to go 180 degrees in the opposite direction.
I don’t think Americans would really mind keeping a few thousand soldiers in Afghanistan to avoid last summer’s failures, to keep girls in school, and prevent the country from sliding into starvation. Not when there are tens of thousands of soldiers stationed in South Korea and we aren’t “exhausted” from that.
Agreed. Doran is fighting a previous generation's wars - and, of course, conveniently obscures his support for the worst American policy decision in fifty years - the invasion of Iraq.
I agree but I think it is a consequence of far more than those two wars. While Obama's name might not be on those two, or earlier ones, his hands are far from clean in the Ukraine fiasco just to name one. We need to realize the Dems and the Repubs are two sides of the same coin.
The parties have certainly been alike in sowing division in the country, and this has had severe consequences. The Republicans like tax cuts without (unpopular) reductions in spending. The Democrats like spending with (inadequate) tax increases. Both of them like stigmatizing and blaming each other. Meanwhile most Americans want less division and more unity, but somehow we haven't been able to get it yet. We are far away from 1941 when the draft-age Rockefellers and Kennedys stood on the street with everyone else to get registered for the draft. E pluribus unum seems to be a forgotten concept.
I agree. I think the leadership of both parties has forgotten where they come from.
I have no idea how the craziness happens on the Republican side, but on the Democratic side I think it's a combination of how progressives are in safe districts and accumulate seniority, and that the political people who do the work of government during Democratic administrations seem to conceive of their role as a social justice mission. Thus, we can elect moderate Democrats that Americans like until the cows come home, but what we'll get is a government dominated by the actions and concerns of leftists. Most disheartening.
But the Repubs have their share of blame. The prior president had both houses of Congress and the RINOs failed to act. I think far too many of them feather their nests the same way. I would love to see info on McConnell's, McCain's and Graham's financials. McConnell' in-law are very well heeled Chinese. My question is how to separate the real conservatives from the fakes. And as far as moderate Democrats PTL for Sinema and Manchin.
Let’s get clear on the word “exceptional”. People think it means Americans see themselves as special. (well I believe that, but that’s beside the point). It’s original meaning was that America was the exception in the world. Other countries had monarchs, despotic systems of government. We formed a democratic republic where “we the people” were in charge. And we have shared that all over the world for the good.
I reject those below who say America is done. It is not. We just have to remember we aren’t perfect, but net-net, we have been the world’s best idea and a force for good. Right now the idiots on the left want us to forget that. REFUSE!
NCMaureen, you may think the idiots on the left want us to forget about America’s exceptionalism, but those on the right are actively trying to destroy the Republic; they don’t believe in democracy!
That’s because we are not a democracy. We are a Republic. Understand the difference
NCMaureen, you have a reading comprehension problem. I said: “…but those on the right are actively trying to destroy the Republic:” go back and look!