++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I believe, people are motivated by self-interest. That is why they embrace capitalism. Capitalism provides the opportunity for choice, the opportunity to prosper from the fruits of your own labor. You want something, you work and you exchange your money for a particular good. The seller benefits with income, the buyer from ownership. Capitalism promotes a win-win system.
What I described is deemed by many to be immoral because there are those who do not have the wherewithal to have what they want and/or need. Some do not have the ability to work, others the skills and many the motivation. This is where government comes into the picture. Those who profess they are more moral, "read liberals," say they deeply care about "have nots" and thus, are willing to take from others in order to provide those without through government "confiscation" called "taxation."
Over time, what happens their needs becomes entitlements and as demand for such grows government does as well. To meet the government's deficits, taxes are raised and eventually those paying the most taxes are those who can most afford to do so and they eventually become resented when they begin to feel abused or taken advantage of and discord replaces a degree of previous social tranquility accompanied by uneven distribution.
This change in social circumstances, "the compact," sets up an opportunity for "liberals" to assume a position of moral righteousness increasing the discord between haves and have nots and now capitalism and government are placed on trial. This provides an opportunity for a new breed of "do gooders" to enter the picture. A tragic event often triggers a backlash based on a build up of depressed resentment. The new participants are more radical in their methods. They resort to riots and turn on commercialists and government for failing to provide the ever growing demand/need for "entitlements."
What I have described, in a less sophisticated manner, is where America finds itself. For a variety of reasons, the disparity between haves and have nots has widened and government, which has become the cow through which the growing amount of milk is dispensed, is blamed for failing to measure up to the demands of the have nots who have come to believe they are entitled. Since they perceive economic system is against them they seek change. The change sought is called socialism. It has never worked but, by now, the belief in entitlements has become a driving force based on moral deprivation, need and even greed. As for government, the cow's udders have grown to the point the cow is unable to function and it's appetite (taxes) becomes crushing and debilitating
No politician is likely to be elected who is prepared to run a campaign based on reason, who talks about abnegation and obtaining goods through an expansion in the economy and/or through work. In other words in opposition to welfare. Furthermore, during this period of "shifting attitudes" society has also lowered other standards in education, in family structure and even in religious faith and, most importantly, resulting in an un-willingness for government to expend funding on defense against internal and/or domestic threats, ie. defund the police and either take money from the military or turn the military into a social experiment.
Again, this is where America has gotten itself and even it's former, so called allies, no longer have faith in America's political system or ability and/or willingness to defend them should the need arise. Consequently, our allies begin to threaten, since they have no recourse, they will defend themselves causing a potential rift which gives comforts to mutual adversaries. In other words, a weakened America could well be on it's own against China at a time when it has a weak president, a depleted military and find itself economically overspent.
This is what I see and believe. I welcome comments.
https://amgreatness.com/2021/
And:
According to The Blaze, former President Barack Obama blamed the “politics of white resistance and resentment” for not pursuing reparations payments to black Americans while he was in office.
“We can’t even get this country to provide decent schooling for inner-city kids,” Obama said. “And what I saw during my presidency was the politics of white resistance and resentment. The talk of welfare queens and the talk of the undeserving poor. And the backlash against affirmative action. All that made the prospect of actually proposing any kind of coherent, meaningful reparations program … not only a non-starter but potentially counterproductive.”
You can read the full story here.
++++
Even Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas agree with my own position on Pennsylvania. Where the hell are Kavanaugh and Barrett? Hiding under Robert's robe? Very disappointing and intellectually speaking, cowardly.
++++++++++++++++
God help us!
Biden
Now Going To Negotiate Directly With Iran
(ThePatriotSource.com)- President Joe Biden’s administration
has opened a line of communication with Iran about American hostages that are
being held in the region.
On Sunday, Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, said
this is a “significant priority” for the Biden White House. He said:
“We intend to very directly communicate with the Iranians
about the complete and utter outrage — the humanitarian catastrophe that is the
unjust, unlawful detention of American citizens in Iran. We have begun to
communicate with the Iranians on this issue, yes, and we will continue to do so
as we go forward. It will be a significant priority of this administration to
get those Americans safely back home.”
At least 43 known detainee or hostage cases exist in 11
different countries, the Foley Foundation says. In addition to Iran, those
countries include Syria, Afghanistan, Turkey, Venezuela, Egypt, Russia, Saudi
Arabia and Rwanda.
In recent years, Iran has launched a program where they
arrest dual nationals, mostly on charges of espionage. Tehran has dismissed the
charges from many other countries that Iran is doing this to eventually win
other concessions from the countries.
Sullivan bluntly said:
“We will not accept a long-term proposition where they
continue to hold Americans in an unjust and unlawful manner.”
A state-run Iranian news website published a story following
Sullivan’s remarks. It said a source said any communication that has occurred
between Washington and Iran about the hostages has been done through the embassy
in Switzerland, rather than any direct communication between leaders.
In early February, Antony Blinken, the secretary of state,
talked with the loved ones of those Americans who are being held as hostages or
being unlawfully detained in other countries. He told the families that the
Biden administration would make freeing their loved ones a priority.
The get-together was held via video call.
Maryam Kamalmaz, whose father Majd disappeared in 2017 in
Syria while on humanitarian work, told CNN:
“Secretary Blinken was patient and kind to answer all of our
questions and concerns with real concern for each individual case. We are truly
thankful.”
And Paula Reed, whose son Trevor is currently imprisoned in
Russia, said:
“It just made my heart sing. I felt like a whole weight had
been lifted off my shoulders. I felt heard. I felt cared for. And it was just,
it was awesome to feel that way. I was crying when we got off (the call); it
was just so emotional.”
Sullivan also remarked that the Biden administration is willing
to sit down with Tehran and other countries to talk about the Iran nuclear
deal. As of now, though, Iran hasn’t responded to a meeting that was proposed
by the European Union to discuss the program. The national security adviser
said the ball is now in Iran’s court on the issue.
In a statement, Ned Price, a spokesperson for the State
Department, said:
“The United States would accept an invitation from the
European Union High Representative to attend a meeting of the P5+1 and Iran to
discuss a diplomatic way forward on Iran’s nuclear program.”
The P5+1 refers to the UN Security Council’s five permanent members — France, China, the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia — plus Germany
And:
I am asked time and again why are Jews so liberal and I always respond there are a multitude of reasons but I always refer to Norman Podhoretzes' book which is explained quite well in the op ed below:
https://www.americanthinker.
Finally:
Liberal Jews are damn fool to think Jews in Biden's Adminstration are a positive for our relationship with Israel. Biden will throw Israel, The Saudis and The Abraham Accords under the bus just as Obama wishes. Obama always wanted to strengthen Iran because of his antipathy towards Bibi:
Israel needs America but the client state era is over
The foreign-policy establishment is warning Israel to watch its step with Biden. But Trump’s policies fostered regional changes that mean that total dependence on Washington is finished.
(February 24, 2021 / JNS) President Joe Biden may have finally called Israel last week after waiting nearly a month since he was sworn in. But the foreign-policy establishment has left its own message for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: Watch your step!
The transition from the Trump administration to that of Biden means an abrupt, and in some cases, a 180-degree policy shift. The difference between the two presidents on how to treat Israel and the Arab states aligned with it against Iran is as stark as any other being contemplated. And the prospect of Netanyahu, as well as the Gulf states and Muslim countries that have chosen peace with Israel over continuing to be held hostage to Palestinian intransigence, being demoted from America’s priority to being an afterthought is a matter of pure delight to establishment types.
But amid their celebration about this change, these inveterate purveyors of conventional wisdom about the United States needing to “save Israel from itself” by creating more daylight between the two allies need to understand that things have changed since the last time the establishment was running Washington four years ago.
With Biden’s foreign-policy team almost entirely composed of Obama administration alumni, former U.S. State Department peace processors like Aaron David Miller can barely contain their glee over Netanyahu’s demotion. In an op-ed published by Politico this week, Miller and Richard Sokolsky—another former State Department staffer and fellow senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace—summed up the view of the so-called experts about what Biden’s policies will mean for the Middle East. Headlined “How Biden Will End the Trump Sugar High for Israel and Saudi Arabia,” the article explains that the “big egos” that lead those two American allies are in for a series of blows of which the delayed phone call is just the start.
Speaking with authority about the mindset of former colleagues of theirs, like Secretary of State Tony Blinken, the pair states in no uncertain terms that both Netanyahu and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman should get used to not being on anyone’s speed-dial in Washington. Both knew they could count on the support of former President Donald Trump with respect to their main concern: how to stop Iran from achieving regional hegemony, as well as from becoming a nuclear power. But Biden, beset at home by the problems of dealing with a coronavirus pandemic that didn’t magically disappear with the swearing-in of a new president and a failing economy, has other pressing concerns.
David Friedman, Trump’s ambassador to Israel, saw his job as promoting close cooperation between the two nations and fostering American support for the Jewish state. Miller and Sokolsky want a return to the pre-2017 status quo in which the American ambassador will act like an imperial Roman proconsul who is there to give orders to inferiors, not to act like a friend. That would mean the Israelis might stop behaving as if they are entitled to defend their rights in Jerusalem and the territories and to make their own decisions about issues that involve their security. The establishment thinks that Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, as well as its sovereignty over the Golan and seeking to hold the Palestinian Authority accountable for subsidizing terrorism while getting nothing in return, was outrageous.
Biden is determined to revive Obama’s disastrous Iran nuclear deal. And despite supposedly consulting with Jerusalem about attempts to start negotiations with Tehran, the administration is determined to ignore the legitimate concerns of its closest friends and sole democracy in the region. Biden’s team is stubbornly indifferent to advice about the folly of returning to a pact that will expire by the end of the decade, leaving the Islamist regime free to resume its nuclear quest, while also doing nothing about its illegal missile program and its support for terrorism.
The authors acknowledge that the new president understands that the Palestinians have no interest in peace. That means a return to former President Barack Obama’s obsession with forcing Israel to make concessions to enable a two state solution would be a waste of time and effort. Still, Miller and Sokolsky would prefer a “reset” of relations with Israel.
The two have an impressive list of punishments for Israel and the Saudis that would mean torpedoing the relationship with both countries, lest either nation be too obstreperous about defending their interests or seeking to obstruct a new round of American appeasement of Iran.
The Saudis are unlikely to be impressed by such treats, while Netanyahu will seek to avoid unnecessary confrontations with Biden. But what Miller and Sokolsky—and perhaps their friends in the administration—fail to realize is that there’s no going back to the old paradigm of expecting Israel to behave as a servile client state.
Small nations have always had to defer to large ones, yet the dynamic of the U.S.-Israel relationship was always predicated on the Jewish state being the beggar who had nowhere else to turn for help except for the Americans. And while there is a growing faction of the Democratic Party that is influenced by the anti-Zionism of the intersectional movement, even in the worst of times, the majority of Americans still support Israel.
Most of Trump’s Middle East moves legitimizing Israel’s stance on the legality of settlements in the territories or on the Golan can be erased with the stroke of a pen. But what can’t be so easily reversed is the new correlation of forces in the region in which Israel and the most important Arab states are aligned together in a tacit anti-Iranian alliance.
Israel still needs its sole superpower ally; however, it is no longer as isolated as it was even during the Obama years. By resisting pressure to make foolish concessions to the Palestinians, Netanyahu has already proved he could say “no” to the United States, even to the point of publicly lecturing Obama in the Oval Office, and get away with it. The same will be true with respect to the Biden administration from an Israel that has more friends among the Muslim governments of the region that have given up on the Palestinians than enemies.
By choosing to appease Iran and to back down on his 2013 “red line” threat about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, Obama effectively left Israel and the Gulf States on their own, practically pushing them into each other’s arms. Though Trump was as uninterested in further direct involvement in the region as Obama, he encouraged this relationship, and the result was the Abraham Accords, a true breakthrough for peace.
But that didn’t happen as the result of an American fiat. It is precisely because the links between Israel and the Arab world are in the best interests of both sides, rather than being part of a plan hatched in Washington, that these agreements will endure.
With a strong economy and military—and now with a growing list of friends in the Arab world—Israel can’t be as easily bullied as it was in the past. Having experienced what it meant to be treated like a true ally by Trump, rather than a favored poor friend as it was with even the most sympathetic presidents before him, there’s really no going back to the old model even if that is what Biden and his supporters want.
Trump may be gone, but his legacy of empowering Israel to stand on its own with regional friends remains. Netanyahu or any potential successor will be loath to antagonize Biden; still, the sort of deference that would involve compromising Israeli security and vital interests is now off the table.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
There comes a time when even a politician needs to quit spending OPM.
|
|
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Chinese see through our mass media's desire to hide the Biden family's sordid history:
+++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment