Wednesday, May 25, 2022

Provoking the Dragon


Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show features a dialogue between me and Brian about the reckless boast by our "President" (God help us!) to the effect that, if China attacked Taiwan, we would intervene militarily.  It's not generally the policy of the U.S. to threaten the PRC, so the wisdom of these remarks is...questionable, and plenty of analysts on the Left agree.  In addition to the potential Taiwanese quagmire, Brian and I also discuss Colombia's dalliance with Marxism (let's hope it doesn't go any further), the re-electability of Joe Biden, the political future of AOC, the perils of "stagflation", and the risks of NATO expansion.

When we get to "This Day in History", Brian and I hash over the English Restoration of 1660, the legacy of JFK in the space race, President Lincoln's violation of Americans' habeas corpus rights, the massive economic and cultural changes in Red China since the 1970s, and the rise of the modern environmental movement and the creation of the EPA.

I guess the only question is: are there any themes that Brian and I didn't cover in this week's show?  Not many!!!




In other news, here's an insightful, intriguing analysis of where we stand economically, written by a pal o' mine.  Are things really as bleak as he says?  Darned if I know! 

Apropos of questions about the future of Joe Biden, and whether the Dems could really stomach him as their candidate again in 2024, check out this article, which explores the issue from a lefty perspective.  Progressives are starting to question -- sometimes openly -- whether Biden is their man.  I guess they're not as delusional as we thought?


AOC has had it with Elon Musk!  So much so that she's dying to ditch her Tesla...  That may seem like trivia to you, but to Tesla it could be the leading edge of a serious problem: progressives may soon stop believing that owning/driving a Tesla is cool, simply because Musk, who runs Tesla, dares to defy leftist orthodoxy on censorship.  Basically, Musk, by advocating free speech, is taking a "reputational risk", and Tesla may suffer because of it.  Of course, all this makes Musk's bravery even more praiseworthy! 

Finally, Beto O'Rourke recently heckled the Governor of Texas in the aftermath of the school massacre in Uvalde.  The Governor was nonplussed, but the Mayor of Uvalde was apoplectic, and frankly I don't blame him.  Beto is the lowest of the low.


  1. Dr.Waddy from Jack: Re the "environmental" movement originating inthe 70s: Your observation that many of today's onerous regulations protecting an "environment" which appears disdainful of human well being are advanced by lobbyists to disadvantage business competitors: it makes much sense. But, could it not also be that some 60s leftists, realizing that the "revolution" had failed,resolved to subvert from within the hated establishment? So they became government executive cadre resolved to promulgate disruptive and counterintuitive administrative law to further the destruction of America. The "environment" was perceived by the left as their latest vehicle for a totalitarian power grab and the establisment of such as EPA empowered them

  2. Dr.Waddy from Jack: Pino Biden did no doubt damage our delicate relationship with, well yes, very "influential" China with his typically vacuous remark on "guaranteed" US military defense of Taiwan. US promises of defense of Taiwan date from fear of the unbridled expansion of insanely Maoist China. Say what you will about a China now possessed of very unMaoist prosperity, yes, they still look to an eventual reunification , perhaps even mutually agreed upon,with what they consider(with some historical justification; I mean, it predates our Manifest Destiny) their Taiwan. Our heretofore ambivalence about defense of Taiwan was well considered and worked well with sane China's traditional long range historical outlook. Perhaps until Joe's faux pas that is. Let us meet China's challenge economically, deterrently as we did the Soviets and only if necessary, direct military action. And the latter is NOT guaranteed: Chinese history, which we MUST understand, in all circumstances, justifies some continued Chinese assertion.

  3. Dr.Waddy from Jack: The 1660s Stewart dynasty restoration in England. Its one of several examples of nations recklessly venturing into radical solutions for, yes, actual problems, which nonetheless turned out to be far worse than what they replaced! Other examples: post revolutionary France, nonetheless despite their continuing difficulties; post 1917 Russia ,Maoist China and Pol Pot's Cambodia. Numerous somewhat less but still murderous examples exist. Let an America which tolerates marxist America haters in its law making and executing institutions take very close heed to these historical examples and cautions!

  4. Dr.Waddy from Jack: Your assertion that Russian perception of incursion must be considered is very plausible; I have often expressed congruent views. But, I suggest we strongly consider also the perceptions of nations approximate to and sharing very justified concerns about, the Bear. (Sweden and Finland)Heretofore, they have for very long ,pursued policies of nominal nonconfrontation with Russia. Now they seek security in obviously antiRussia ( even if probably only defensive) Nato. Why? They cannot but if, due to their necessarily close attention to Russian reaction to incipient Nato incursion since 1989, having garnered very well informed perceptions of eventual Russian intent. And they may be reeacting

    in accordance with long held expectations of Russan reaction to plausible Nato investment of Ukraine. Sweden and Finland KNOW Russia!

  5. That's a sage observation, Jack. Many leftists are in their neo-Marxist element shoving arbitrary environmental regulations down our collective throat... As they've proven, care for Mother Earth can be used to justify almost anything (up to and including mass murder, which, I trust, is in the works).

    Jack, I understand China's feelings towards Taiwan, even more so than I understand Russia's feelings towards Ukraine, and frankly I feel that the best solution for both areas is to consider them within the sphere of the influence of their local superpower. To play games and to tempt them with American "protection" would be to invite disaster...most of all, on the Ukrainians and the Taiwanese themselves!

    Yes, Jack! The grass always seems greener, but it's frequently redder -- red with torrents of blood (not to get too overheated about it)... Even a flawed political/social/economic order is frequently to be preferred to revolutionary change.

    Eh. I'm still not convinced. I say: Sweden and Finland, so long as they mind their own business, face ZERO possibility of Russian aggression.