Tag: donald-trump

REPUB MIDTERM ELECTIONS CONVENTION

As always, the contents of this blog constitute a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

In my view, it is an absolutely brilliant strategy. Of course, I am referring to the GOP’s decision to assemble for a midterm elections convention. The focus will be on the various races in which the Repubs are behind or in a toss-up. It is the first of its kind, and I predict it will become a staple prospectively.

Most of the credit for this idea goes to President Trump, who is the driving force behind anything Repub. What is the objective? Quite simply, the Repubs and Dems are embroiled in a battle for the sole of America. The Repubs want to continue the 250-year direction of the country, whereas the Dems want to fundamentally change it, that is, tear it all down and rebuild it as a far left communist state. More on this below.

In these midterms the Repubs are not only going against the Dems, they are also fighting history. As we all know, typically the party in power almost always loses congressional seats in the midterm elections. Since 1934 the party holding the presidency has lost seats in one or both of the chambers of Congress in every midterm election except for 2002. Some of the losses were small; some were substantial. The reasons varied from election to election, but the central fact is that they lost seats.

Currently, the Repubs have very thin majorities in both chambers – 53-47 in the Senate and 218-214 in the House. To secure a majority, the Dems need to gain a net of just four seats in the Senate and three in the House in November’s elections. Given the highly contentious political landscape they cannot afford to lose control of even one of them, much less both. If they do, President Trump would instantly become a “lame duck,” his programs would likely be thwarted, nothing of consequence would get accomplished, and we could once again be subjected to endless and pointless investigations and another impeachment. That would be bad, but even worse the neo-communist radicals would have attained a toehold in the federal government.

Most of the 22 seats the GOP is defending are in states that President Trump won by comfortable margins in 2024. But, the unpopular war with Iran, the price of oil and gas, inflation, and persistent other affordability issues have helped render several Republican-held seats increasingly competitive. 

These are the 12 key Senate races to watch:

  1. Maine- Susan Collins (R) vs Troy Jackson (D). The Cook Political Report and the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as a toss-up.
  2. Michigan – Abdul El-Sayed (D) vs. Mike Rogers (R) – The Cook Political Report and the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as a toss-up.
  3. Ohio – Jon Husted (R) vs. Sherrod Brown (D) – The Cook Political Report and the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as a toss-up.
  4. Dan Sullivan (R) vs. Mary Peltola (D) and others – Another candidate with same name as Repub Dan Sullivan has entered the race, which has confused matters. The Cook Political Report and the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as a toss-up.
  5. Texas: Ken Paxton (R) vs. James Talarico (D) – The Cook Political Report and University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as a toss-up.
  6. Iowa: Josh Turek (D) vs. Ashley Hinson (R) – The Cook Political Report rates this race as a toss-up, while the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics ranks it as leaning Republican.
  7. Georgia – Jon Ossoff (D) vs. Mike Collins (R) – The Cook Political Report rates the race as leaning Democrat, while the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rates the race as likely Democrat.
  8. New Hampshire: Chris Pappas (D) vs. John Sununu (R) – The Cook Political Report and the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as leaning Democrat.
  9. North Carolina: Michael Whatley (R) vs. Roy Cooper (D) -The Cook Political Report and the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as leaning Democrat.
  10. Minnesota: Peggy Flanagan (D) vs. Michele Tafoya (R) -The Cook Political Report and the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as likely Democrat.
  11. Kansas: Roger Marshall (R) vs. Adam Hamilton (D) -The Cook Political Report and University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as likely Republican.
  12. Nebraska: Pete Ricketts (R) vs. Dan Osborn (I) – The Cook Political Report and University of Virginia’s Center for Politics rate this race as likely Republican.
  13. That amounts to five toss-ups, three leaning Repub and four leaning Dem. Polling for the House races was not available. I know it’s early, and two months is a lifetime in politics, but to quote the late Yogi Berra: “It gets late early.” In my view, Repubs have good reason to be concerned.

These DSA/neo-communists are not “liberals,” nor are they “progressives” as they would have voters believe. Those labels are way too tame. Some of them are far left “socialists,” but many others are dyed-in-the-wool “communists.” They are not looking to negotiate with those who advocate different political views. They are not interested in compromise. They are not even looking to replicate the socialist systems of, for example, Sweden and Denmark. That would be bad enough but they want more. They have already taken control of the Dem Party since the Dem leaders, Schumer and Jeffries, as well as the moderate Dems have been afraid to challenge them. Their ultimate goal is to seize power and control over every facet of Americans’ lives. They want to control food distribution, child-rearing, medical care and wealth distribution, among others. They will confiscate private citizens’ wealth and property, like one’s home and car, and redistribute it to those deemed “needy.” This will not occur right away. It will happen so gradually you will not even notice until it is too late.

Look at the history of Soviet Russia. At the time of the Russian Revolution there were only about 24,000 Bolsheviks in Russia out of a total population of roughly 18 million, but they were aggressive, vicious and well-organized. We all know what happened.

If you think it can’t happen here, think again. Just a few years ago would you have thought that NYC with the largest Jewish population of any city in the world outside of Israel woud elect an antisemitic, anti-Israel, communist mayor? Could you have envisioned dozens of neo-communists running for office and/or being elected? I think not, but here we are.

They hate America and the American way of life. They want to tear it all down and rebuild it in the manner of Soviet Russia, Communist China and Cuba. Some of their more outlandish goals are to abolish the office of the President, the Senate, the electoral college, the Pentagon, and ICE, open the borders to one and all who want to emigrate, curtail the powers of the Supreme Court and the police, release all prisoners, allow boys and men to compete against girls and women in sports, and much much more. They hate Jews and Israel. They want to cease granting any foreign aid to Israel, which is our most reliable ally in the critical and unstable ME.

It appears that not all the DSA candidates are hardcore extreme radicals. They may not all espouse all of the most inane elements of the DSA’s platform, but I maintain that all of them, by going along with and not condemning nor even challenging the more radical wing are tarred with the same brush.

CONCLUSION:

Regardless of the aforementioned history that the Party with the president in office gets “smoked” in midterm elections, based on the issues there is no way these elections should be this close. It defies all logic. The Dem s’ primary issue is their blind hatred of President Trump. They criticize, but they do not offer any sensible, viable alternatives. For instance, they continually criticize his prosecution of the Iran War ignoring the fact that the overriding issue to deprive Iran of nuclear weapons has been achieved. In my view, that was a life and death issue. If Iran were to possess a nuclear weapon it would very likely use it, and even if it didn’t we would all have to live under the threat that it could do so at any time.

The Dems are attempting to “put Trump on the ballot” figuratively. Enough already! Personal opinions of him are not as important as his policies and accomplishments, which I have detailed in previous blogs. Current polls have disclosed that Trump’s approval ratings are low, but this is not a popularity contest. It is fair to dislike him on a personal level, but one cannot reasonably criticize his policies. Although he is not literally on the ballot, in my opinion his policies are. He deserves another two years to continue them.

By their own words and written statements the Dems are on the wrong side of a myriad of 80-20 issues. The only sensible explanation for all the close races is that the voting public is unaware of how radical they really are. Furthermore, in order to win their elections they are beginning to portray themselves as more moderate than they really are. They are “walking back” previous statements and deleting or modifying previously-posted comments. This gaslighting has worked in prior elections. Don’t let them get away with it now. Their true beliefs are on the record. Spread the word.

I will stipulate that the mainstream media has aided and abetted the Dems in disguising their true beliefs, but it is also true that the Repubs have done a poor job in exposing them. Now, post-Labor Day, the electorate will commence to focus on the elections. Now is the time for the Repubs to swing into action.

This election is the most critical one in my lifetime, maybe ever. Repubs need to wake up and focus. They need to disseminate the Dems’ true policies to the voting public and ask them if they are in favor of these outlandish, radical positions or not. Like I said, if voters were cognizant of the true facts these elections would not be close.

Moreover, they need to get out the vote. Turnout is usually a major factor in elections. Typically, in off-year elections the turnout rate is only about 40% compared to about 60% in presidential elections. That will not be acceptable. The Dems are well-organized, well-funded, determined and laser-focused. The Repubs must match that intensity or else we will all be headed to disaster.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

DSA ELECTION GASLIGHTING

As always, the contents of this blog constitute a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

I have published multiple blogs describing the Dem’s pre-election gaslighting. Some of you may recall the essence of it, but I suspect an equal number of you will not. In any event, I am repeating it because it is a critical topic in what I believe is the most crucial and transformative election in my lifetime to date.

It happens every election cycle like clockwork. It is one of the few things upon which we can rely along with death, taxes and the sun rising in the east and setting in the west. Of course, I am referring to DSA pre-election gaslighting. I know all politicians shade the truth, exaggerate and obfuscate to a degree. Otherwise, they wouldn’t get elected. However, what the far left Dems have habitually done and will continue to do is far more extreme than that. They do it every election cycle, and aided and abetted by a compliant mainstream media and an apathetic voting public, it is often successful. So prepare yourself to be bombarded with an array of “I was misquoted;” “those comments were taken out of context,” “what I really meant was….,” and my favorite, “my position on that has evolved.” In my view the classic case of gaslighting in recent years was perpetrated by Abigail Spanberger, the current governor of Virginia. She ran as a moderate, but soon after taking office this past January she commenced to govern as a radical lefty. She isn’t the only one either, just the one that sticks in my mind.

In the past year the neo-communists on the radical left have become emboldened. Many of them are no longer reticent about their intentions. They have come right out and told us. For example, in his 2025 mayorial campaign Zohran Mamdani freely touted his radical policies, many of which could have been written by Karl Marx, as well as his strong anti-Israel/antisemitic opinions. Despite that and despite the fact that NYC has a Jewish population of some 960,000, which comprises about 12% of the city’s population, inexplicably, he won handily.

As the radicals in the DEM party have become more aggressive, at the same time the moderates have become more reticent. I believe as do many other observers that they are afraid of being primaried. They don’t realize that regardless of how far “left” they go it will never be enough for these radicals. They will be primaried anyway. This situation reminds me of an analogy. A man is confronted by a wild lion that he is afraid will eat him. So, he keeps feeding the lion to delay it from happening. Unfortunately, eventually he will run out of meat, and the lion will eat him anyway.

Schumer and Jeffries have been claiming that the Dem Party has a “big tent,” and the radicals are welcome to share it. That sharing will never last. History tells us that appeasement never works. An aggressor will continue to take, take, and take some more until he confronted and thwarted. Either they are incredibly naive and dumb, or they think we are. As I wrote in my blog “The Camel’s Nose” eventually the radicals will take over.

In case you have forgotten or only watch CNN and MSNBC below please find some of the radicals’ inane agenda items. I have included them in previous blogs, but perhaps a refresher is needed. I’m not making them up. They have been published, and they are available to anyone who wants to bother to research them.

  1. Abolish the Senate and the office of the President.
  2. Expand the membership of the Supreme Court and reduce its powers.
  3. Abolish the electoral college.
  4. Open our borders to any and all who want to emigrate.
  5. Release all prisoners.
  6. Abolish ICE.
  7. Universal cradle to grave medical insurance administered by the federal government.
  8. Government takeover of the education system.
  9. Government takeover of all private property.
  10. Terminate foreign aid to Israel.
  11. Tax the rich and even the not so rich.
  12. Redisbute wealth from the “haves” to the “have nots.”

The DSA and the media are not publicizing these because 90% of the voters would be appalled and would not approve of most of them. They are perpetuating a massive deception along the lines of the “Trojan Horse.” To me, any and all DSA candidates are married to these policies whether they have espoused them or not. Many of them are unworkable, illegal and/or would bankrupt the country, but they don’t care.

Currently, two of the most prominant races involve Abdul El-Sayed and James Talerico, who are running for US Senate in MI and TX, respectively. As I write this a survey by The Hill shows El-Sayed with a slight lead over his Repub opponent Mike Rogers, and a survey of likely voters in TX has disclosed that Talerico is in a dead heat with his Repub opponent. In light of the foregoing DSA platform these results defy all logic. I can only attribute it to gaslighting the voters.

Both men have said things in the past that they now want to walk back. When they said them they were unknown and few people paid them any attention. Now, that they are running for high office people are scrutinizing them, and a substantial majority would disagree. Since the comments are on tape they can’t deny them they now claim they have “reassessed” their opinions. In reality they really believed those positions and still do. They don’t regret saying what they said. They just regret they were uncovered.

El-Sayed’s well-publicized close relationship with Hasan Piker, a rabid antisemite political commentator, is a good example of the foregoing. Heretofore, even the hint of such a relationship would have damaged his campaign beyond repair. Lately he has been trying to distance himself from Piker, but Piker, himself has been confirming and reconfirming their relationship. I don’t see how he can do it, but on the other hand the voters don’t seem to care. In fact, many of them probably view it as a plus.

In addition to the above radical agenda items I wonder how many voters in MI, where the economy is heavily dependent upon automobiles with internal combustion engines, are cognizant of the fact that El-Sayed (1) has repeatedly stated his preference for electric vehicles over gas, (2) has said that if one wants to achieve the “American Dream” move to Canada, and (3) has advocated banning fireworks on the 4th of July. These comments are a matter of record, and now that he realizes they are unpopular he is attempting to “walk them back.” Of course, the compliant media has not pressed him as to what led him to change his opinion, but it’s obvious to me and many others. Similarly, James Talerico has been trying to “walk back” past comments such as “capitalism is oppressive,” “there are six genders,” and his preference for vegan food over beef.

Conclusion

As always, the Dems will be running on negativism and hate, hate for Trump, hate for Israel, hate for Jews, and hate for America and the American way of life. They will denote the rate of inflation, in particular, the rising costs of food, oil, and healthcare. Historically, cost of living has been the most important issue for voters, so unless things change in the next two months this will be damaging to the Repubs.

They will question President Trump’s prosecution of the war against Iran ignoring the fact that its purpose was to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear capability, which has been achieved. They will accuse Israel of genocide in the ME ignoring the human rights violations of the Islamic terrorists in the region. All the while they will not be able to offer any viable solutions. They don’t really want to solve any of these problems; they just crave power, and once they achieve it, they will not relinquish it.

Unfortunately, the issues regarding the economy are painful and tangible. People experience them every day. On the other hand, depriving Iran of a nuclear weapon is intangible. It’s not something people can see, feel, touch or experience, although I would argue that it holds more significance. In addition, Trump’s actions to bring down the price of oil, which will jumpstart the economy, will not be felt until after the election.

Even though President Trump is not on the ballot personally his policies are. If the Dems gain control of even one house of Congress his entire program will cease. Once again, we will be subjected to endless investigations and another impeachment. Nothing will get accomplished for the remainder of the second term.

Finally, as I have written in previous blogs, in my opinion this election will be the most critical one in my lifetime. It is about much more than the usual issues. It is about America itself. Do we want to retain our way of life that has stood for 250 years, namely capitalism, free enterprise, individualism and a free society under the protection of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, or do we want to tear it all down and slide into the abyss of communism. Make no mistake. That is the goal of the radical DSA neo-communists. Change would be gradual and largely unnoticeable to most people, but make no mistake, once we enter onto that slippery slope there will be no turning back.

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

ABDUL EL-SAYED

As always, the contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

Who is Abdul El-Sayed, and why should all those who believe in and want to preserve America and the American way of life that has flourished for some 250 years be concerned about him? Read on for the answers.

Until a few months ago few people had heard of El-Sayed. Now, we all know who he is. Abdul El-Sayed is the far left Dem candidate for US Senate for the State of Michigan. Last week he won the Dem primary over US Representative Haley Stevens by the very narrow margin of 48.5% to 47.5%, a mere 15,000 votes. Senator Bernie Sanders, a leader of the progressive movement who was an early supporter of El-Sayed’s candidacy, characterized it as “the most extraordinary victory that I can think of in modern American politics.” Senator Chris Van Hollen, another progressive leader who endorsed El-Sayed, said the victory “should be a wake-up call to the Washington Democratic establishment.” For once I agree with Van Hollen.

Sanders’ hyperbole aside, the political ramifications of El-Sayed’s victory should not be ignored or minimized. He is a prime example of the alarming shift to the left in the Dem Party. These far lefties hate America and the American way of life. They want to tear it down and reconstitute it as a communist state in the model of Soviet Russia, Communist China, Venezuela and Cuba. They are ignorant of or choose to ignore the historical fact that communism has failed wherever it has been tried.

Like many of his ilk El-Sayed has never held elected office and has very limited, if any, experience in or knowledge of finance, business, economics and history. In his last election in 2018 he lost Michigan’s Democratic gubernatorial primary to Governor Gretchen Whitmer by more than 20 percentage points. This time, espousing an unabashedly far left platform, he won despite being outspent by a huge margin and the fact that his opponent had the support of Chuck Schumer, outgoing Senator Gary Peters, and host of other establishment Dems.

In the intervening seven years El-Sayed had wisely remained in the public eye biding his time waiting for the right situation. For instance, he started a podcast, wrote a book and became a regular presence on YouTube and television. He steadily developed a political base. His opportunity came when Senator Peters declined to seek re-election.

In April 2025 he launched his campaign with a tiny staff. In his victory speech he reminisced how it all began. “I remember talking to a room of five people,” he said. “It was an opportunity for us to share an honest conversation about pain and about purpose. And I’ve been able to have 500 more of those discussions over the past 15 months.”

El-Sayed ran a classic grass roots campaign. He visited some 110 cities and hosted more than 500 events. According to his campaign his volunteer network eventually grew to 12,000 people. Julie Brink, a 29-year-old volunteer from the Detroit area, said the campaign still felt like an “underdog” when she joined in February. From there, she said, it was “gaining momentum really consistently.” El-Sayed embraced his underdog status declaring “what we’re doing is building a movement of the many against the money.”

El-Sayed never let up. He sprinted to the finish line. For example, on Election Day he held several interviews with content creators at Detroit’s Eastern Market and traditional news organizations, such as The Associated Press and MS NOW. Following his upset victory the campaign that had once struggled to fill small rooms packed Detroit’s Majestic Theatre for a huge election night party.

So, I repeat my earlier question. Who is El-Sayed? Now, we are cognizant of his background and work experience, which incidentally does NOT qualify him to be a US Senator, but what are his politics? Read on for the shocking and disquieting answer.

Below please find some of his policies. These extreme positions are typical of those espoused by El-Sayed and other neo-communists of the DSA. The differences between these and traditional American values are not the kind that could be resolved by debate between reasonable persons. They are inane, unworkable, and demonstrate a lack of common sense and historical context. They would destroy America as we know it. Regardless of whether or not he has actually advocated all of them; as a DSA candidate for the US Senate he is tied to them and should be compelled to defend them as well as other similar comments.

  1. Medicare for all.
  2. Open borders
  3. Abolish the Senate
  4. Abolish the office of the President.
  5. Abolish the electoral college.
  6. Abolish ICE.
  7. Favor electric vehicles over gas vehicles. (This would be a particularly “hard sell” in Michigan, which is dominated by the automobile industry.)
  8. His comments regarding the ME are particularly disturbing and not just to Jews. For example (1) He has questioned whether Israel has an “inherent right” to receive American taxpayer money. (2) He has advocated ending military aid to Israel which he characterizes as supporting “genocide and apartheid.” (3) He has been a strong critic of pro-Israel lobbying groups like AIPAC. (4) He has openly labeled Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal. These comments are not only highly antisemitic, but also exhibit a lack of awareness that Israel has been America’s only consistent and reliable ally in the volatile and strategically critical ME. The two countries have developed a symbiotic relationship, which is critical to the national security of both countries.

CONCLUSION

The foreboding significance of El-Sayed’s victory should not be underestimated or ignored. Heretofore the establishment politicos had crowed that the far left agenda would only be successful in certain deep blue locales such as NYC. Now, for the first time the far lefties have proven they could win a primary election in a crucial swing state. Even more alarming is a newly released poll, which was commissioned by pollsters Fabrizio Ward and Impact Research, that disclosed that El-Sayed is leading Rogers among likely voters 48%-47%.

Winning a Dem primary in which fewer than half of registered voters bother to participate, is one thing. Winning the election against a Repub opponent supported by moderate to conservative Repub voters is a whole other task. El-Sayed’s qualifications (or lack thereof), policies and prior statements will be heavily scrutinized by the Rogers campaign as well as by objective members of the media and discerning voters. Like most other radical candidates with a narrow base of support El-Sayed will likely attempt to “moderate” certain prior actions and comments to convince mainstream voters he is not as extreme as he really is. He will claim he has “evolved,” was “misquoted” or his comments were “taken out of context.” The “spin doctors” will be working overtime.

Will this strategy succeed? Who knows? Unfortunately, sometimes it has in prior elections, because typically, many voters are lazy, misinformed, stay home, or vote for a certain political party out of habit.

At least there are indications that the Repubs are viewing El-Sayed as a legitimate threat and are taking this election seriously. For instance, the Senate Republican campaign committee has already allocated some $45 million in advertising to support Rogers with more to come. Also, AIPAC, which has already spent more money on Michigan’s primary than on any other contest, has indicated it would continue its financial support.

In my opinion this election will be among the most important in my lifetime. Either the neo-communists will win and demonstrate their program has mainstream support or they will lose and be relegated to a fringe extremist group. My urgent message to Michiganders is VOTE, VOTE, VOTE/

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

CAPITALISM AND COMMON-SENSE VS COMMUNISM AND CHAOS

As always, the contents of this blog constitute a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

Finally, we are beginning to get some clarity with respect to the DSA/neo-communists’ radical political platform. Finally, the veil of secrecy and deceit is being lifted, and we are getting a peek behind the curtain. Finally, they are disclosing their scary, radical, insane, inane plans. Megan Romer, DSA National Co-Chair laid it all out very specifically in a recent interview on Fox News. It was pretty consistent with what I had discussed in an earlier blog. Romer cannot claim she was misquoted. DSA spin doctors cannot “clean up” her comments. This was the moment I and many others have been waiting for. Finally, the DSA advocates are no longer hiding inside the “Trojan Horse.” I don’t know why Romer disclosed the DSA’s plans in such a forthright manner. As I stated in an earlier blog the TH strategy was very effective.

Afterwards she was mocked by some conservative commentators, but it will behoove all Americans to understand that she was deadly serious. Speaking on Fox News Sunday Romer responded to criticism by claiming that establishment Democrats are the ones who should be concerned because “they have not been delivering [on voters’ cost of living concerns], and our candidates are and have been, and it’s resonating with voters.”

Below please find a list of some of the DSA’s more egregious policies. Again, the following is not based on guesswork nor my opinion. It is straight from “the horse’s mouth” so to speak:

  1. Its overall goal is to “build a new society from the ground up.” That means tearing down the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and destroying the America that we know and love and that has existed for 250 years and rebuilding it in their own image.
  2. Eliminate the delicate system of “checks and balances” that exists among the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the federal government and which is one of the cornerstones of our republic.
  3. Abolish the Senate. Congress would then consist solely of the House of Representatives in some form. (Students of history are cognizant that the Senate serves two vital purposes. (1) It protects the small, less populated states from being dominated by a few large states as each state has two senators regardless of size. Without that protection the small states would likely not have agreed to join the republic.) (2) Its much maligned rules of debate and 60-vote requirement to pass legislation in many cases serve to make the legislative process more thoughtful and more deliberate and to encourage debate.
  4. Abolish the presidency.
  5. Cripple the authority of the Supreme Court by rendering it subservient to the Congress. Those actions would leave us with a politbureau style of government similar to that in Russia and China.
  6. Abolish ICE.
  7. Abolish prisons
  8. Eliminate our national border; permit anyone to enter.
  9. Grant amnesty and citizenship to all illegals.
  10. Defund the Pentagon and the police.
  11. Make large corporations government-owned and controlled.

Obviously, it is critical that the Repubs and moderate Dems spread the word regarding the aforementioned agenda. The DSA’s policies are off-the-charts radical. They would certainly lead to lawlessness and chaos. I cannot see how any more than a thin sliver of the electorate would support them. These crazies are relying on low turnout, voter apathy and ignorance. I cannot comprehend how any sensible voter could possibly vote for candidates that espouse those policies. Daylight is the best disinfectant.

As the midterm elections approach finally mainstream politicians are beginning to wake up and push back.

  1. GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a post on Fox News, “Read their platform: Abolish the Senate, the Presidency, the Supreme Court and immigration enforcement. Open the border wide. Grant mass amnesty. Defund the Pentagon. The barbarians are inside the gate—and Democrats are WELCOMING them in! Communism is no longer a far-fetched threat. It is here on our SHORES! This isn’t just Common Sense vs. Crazy anymore. It’s Common Sense vs. COMMUNISM.”
  2. TX Senator Ted Cruz, never one to mince words, “told it like it is.” “These people are insane.”
  3. Even the left-leaning Washington Post has weighed in urging mainstream Dems to “find their ‘spine,’ ” and fight back by rejecting the DSA’s platform and policies, and aggressively supporting campaigns against DSA candidates.
  4. So far, the only Dem politician who has taken a stand against the radicals has been PA Senator John Federman.
  5. Most Dems have been reluctant to speak out for fear of being “primaried.” They have been standing by watching the radicals tear their party apart. As I wrote in the blog “The Camel’s Nose” the “big tent” concept is just a form of appeasement, and history tells us appeasement never works. The moderate Dems are “feeding the lion” hoping it won’t eat them, but eventually they will run out of food to feed it, and it will eat them. The radicals don’t want to share control. They want total control.
  6. Finally, some moderate Dems are beginning to fight back, but it’s already a little late. Radical candidates, capitalizing on a wave of antiestablishment sentiment and rising opposition to the US’s strong support of Israel, have already beaten Dem moderates in several primaries notably in House races in NY and CO and in mayoral elections in Washington, D.C., Seattle and of course NYC. Strong, unwavering support of Israel has always been a “given,” but recent polls indicate that support is wavering. For example, a July 2026 Emerson College poll found that 61% of likely voters feel the federal government spends “too much” on aid to Israel, although polls like Ipsos/Washington Post disclosed that only 29% support complete termination of military aid.
  7. In the interest of balance, I feel compelled to disclose that various recent polls have disclosed that even though Democratic socialism isn’t particularly popular in mainstream America, it is slightly less unpopular than MAGA politics. I must say that I question the validity of those polls as I believe many of the respondents were unaware of the real DSA agenda as articulated above.

Conclusion

So, how will all this affect the upcoming elections? Everyone has an opinion, but nobody knows for sure. In my view, the rise of the radical neo-communists threatens the long-term viability of the Dem Party. This election will be critical. The commie movement MUST be stamped out.

I expect the Repubs to characterize the DSA’s radical and scary agenda as communist, not socialist nor progressive. As you know, I heartily agree with that characterization. Unfortunately for the Dems many far left Dem candidates have already won primaries against more moderate Dems who would likely have stood a better chance in the general election.

The Repubs are fighting history. Since 1946, the party holding the White House has gained House seats in only two of 20 elections (1998 and 2002). With respect to the Senate, historically the sitting president’s party has lost an average of four seats. There are 33 U.S. Senate seats up for regular election in 2026, 20 of which are held by Republicans, which gives the Dems more chances to gain seats. Perhaps, the most critical factor will be voter turnout. Generally, it has been about 40% in midterm elections compared to 60% in presidential elections. The country needs a high turnout. Everybody get out and VOTE!

I don’t believe it is hyperbolic to state that in this election the US is fighting for its future viability as a free republic based on capitalism, free enterprise and freedom of choice. The Founding Fathers and all those who have fought and died for this country over the past 250 years will be watching.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

DON’S DEFICIENT DEAL

As always, the contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

Obviously, I have no inside knowledge of the ongoing peace negotiations among the US, Iran, Israel, and other interested parties. All I know is what I have read in the news and seen on tv. The following opinions and comments are based on that.

As most of you know, I have been an avid Trump supporter since 2016. I haven’t agreed with everything he has said and done but based on his many accomplishments I have always given him the benefit of the doubt. All that said, I am appalled at the terms of the proposed peace agreement as disclosed to date. For months Trump has reiterated that the purposes of the war were (1) to prevent Iran from ever having a nuclear weapon; (2) Iran must surrender its cache of enriched uranium; (3) there must be a reliable methodology to independently verify Iran’s compliance with #s 1 and 2; and (4) Iran must allow all ships free and unfettered passage through the Strait of Hormuz.

There are significant inconsistencies with respect to this “deal.” Trump has been saying that a deal to “end the war” has been “largely negotiated.” Only some details remain to be resolved, and they will be announced “shortly.” In addition: (1) Iran is reportedly committing to abandon the pursuit of developing nuclear weapons; (2) it is negotiating the surrender of its stockpile of highly enriched uranium; and (3) the Hormuz Strait will be reopened completely. In return, (1) Iran would be able to resume free oil sales; and (2) billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets would be released contingent upon reaching a final nuclear agreement.

Sounds promising, except just today an Iranian spokesperson issued a statement that totally contradicts Trump’s statement. He told a USA Today reporter anonymously that Iran has NOT committed to giving up its stockpile of enriched uranium as part of any settlement. Furthermore, Iran’s Fars news agency reported early Sunday that any agreement would have to continue to allow Iran to retain control of the Strait of Hormuz; Iran is continuing to deny claims that it has pursued or is pursuing nuclear weapons other than for “peaceful purposes,” and it has the right to do so; and it wants an end to the U.S. blockade on its ports and the lifting of sanctions on Iranian oil sales.

Also, what will be the procedures for inspections of nuclear sites. For example, who will perform them, how often, will they be surprise visits or scheduled, will the inspectors have complete and unfettered access, and what will be the penalties for noncompliance. Truly, the devil is in the details. Does the foregoing sound like an agreement is “imminent,” and just a few “details” remain to be ironed out? I think not.

Trump’s and Iran’s positions are miles apart with significant unresolved differences. In fact, they are mutually exclusive. Both cannot be true. Since Iran’s militant leadership has adamantly and consistently stated it would never give up its stockpile of enriched uranium I believe it is more likely that its statements are more accurate.

One glaring omission from the proposed deal is Iran’s ballistic missiles program. Its missiles represent a clear and present danger. Iran already possesses missiles that can reach all of Europe. It will not be long before it develops missiles that can reach parts of the US as well.

There is also the matter of Israel, which may have different goals and a different attitude toward Iran and its proxies. In my view, there are signs that Israel is more cognizant of the dangers Iran and its proxies still present. Indeed, Israeli media has reported that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had told President Trump that Israel must “maintain the freedom to act against all threats, including in Lebanon.” I’m not sure if this signifies a slight difference between Trump and Netanyahu or an actual rift.

Conclusion

History tells us that Iran has consistently negotiated in bad faith. Its representatives say one thing and do another. Their negotiating strategy has been to lie, obfuscate, deceive and delay, delay and then delay some more. This strategy has been very successful for 47 years with multiple Administrations. Trump has repeatedly denigrated these negotiating tactics and derided those who have fallen for them. Yet, it appears that he may be falling into the same trap.

If we were to agree to Iran’s current terms the war will have failed to accomplish any of our main objectives. In fact, I could make a case that we would be worse off. Iran would still have its stockpile of enriched uranium; we would not be certain that all of its nuclear material was destroyed; we would have expended a goodly portion of our weaponry; Trump would have dissipated much of his political capital; and many people would perceive Iran to be the winner thus raising its status and diminishing ours in the eyes of the world.

Finally, let’s not forget that we won the war, not Iran. Thus, we should be dictating terms not getting bogged down in prolonged negotiations with murky details. Trump has said he is reluctant to attack in force. He wants to give the negotiations a chance. He wants to avoid killing innocent Iranians. I agreed up to a point, but we are well past that point. The longer these negotiations drag on the more it will hurt our economy. When all is said and done elections are always about the economy. A problematic economy will likely spell defeat in the midterm elections. Remember, America first!

These negotiations have not and will not bear fruit. It’s time to lay down the hammer and end this once and for all.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

PROJECT FREEDOM

As always, the contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

Negotiations have gone on long enough. They are at a standoff. The time has come to act. It’s clear that the Iranians are not negotiating in good faith. They are doing what they have always done – stall, stall, and stall some more. This “rope-a-dope” has worked for years, and they are hoping it will work again. They are banking on political pressure from within the US, and they are getting it. Trump is being criticized for his handling of the war, the price of oil, and the rate of inflation. He is losing popularity, and the midterms are coming soon.

The Iranians have not and are not going to agree to our core demands. We don’t even know that the Iranians with whom we are negotiating have the power and authority to negotiate. We are receiving conflicting information. Who’s in charge? Is it the politicians? Is it the military? Is it the Ayatollah? Is the Ayatollah alive, dead or incapacitated? Is a small cadre of close advisors making decisions in his name? (This is eerily similar to the Biden presidency.)

As I have opined in previous blogs in my view, President Trump’s prosecution of the war has been flawless to date. In a matter of weeks our military has destroyed Iran’s nuclear capability, its military, its infrastructure, its communication systems and its economy. Militarily, the war a complete mismatch akin to an NFL team playing against a high school team.

Now, comes the harder part. We won the war; now we have to win the peace, which will be largely fought in the court of public opinion both in the US and abroad. Now, the overriding goal is to bring down the price of oil and hence the inflation rate. The blockade of the Hormuz Strait was a wise attempt to force Iran to surrender without additional loss of lives – ours and theirs. Trump was being considerate of the Iranian people who have suffered greatly and are continuing to do so. That is to his credit. Unfortunately, the blockade has not opened up the Strait. It has not revitalized the flow of oil. Americans are suffering and getting mad.

Now, Trump must take more decisive action. He has a plethora of choices ranging from continuing diplomacy to “letting the dogs loose,” i. e. resuming massive bombing and/or taking Kharg Island. We don’t have to “bomb Iran back to the Stone Age.” Just take control of its oil.

Wisely, he has chosen a “middle of the road” response. Just today he has initiated one of the mildest possible actions dubbed “Project Freedom” whereby US Navy ships will commence escorting commercial oil tankers through the strait. Many of these tankers are owned and operated by neutral countries who have had no part in the war. Nevertheless, they have been stuck outside the strait since the war began. At this point their crews are running low on fuel, food and other necessities. Trump said these countries have been requesting the US for assistance. The situation grew more critical over the weekend as Iranian boats attacked one of these ships. Additional attacks are feared. If this action does not work, he can always proceed with one of the more aggressive actions.

Several observers, such as Retired General Jack Keane, have been advocating for military action to resolve the Iran problem once and for all. There is merit to that position. This will probably be our one and only shot. We have a president who has the guts to do what’s right, not what is politically expedient. Unfortunately, Trump will not be president forever. His successors might be less assertive. Moreover, let’s not forget, we have three carrier groups in the area and thousands of jets and troops. We can do whatever we want.

Conclusion

Domestic support for the war is dwindling. Trump knows the midterm elections are only six months away. Politically speaking, this war must be resolved before then.

When all is said and done, the top issue for voters is the economy. Elections are always about the economy. Thanks to the rhetoric of the Dems and their allies in the media a goodly portion of voters are not even cognizant of the seriousness of the existential threat of a nuclear-capable Iran. They are unaware of the objective of the war and are questioning its necessity.

People are suffering, and they are mad. They don’t care about Iran. All they focus on is the high price of oil, now as high as $115 per barrel and $4.46 at the pump for a gallon of regular. Before the war it was significantly lower. Prices, in general, are high. They are reminded every time they gas-up their car, go food shopping, or pay the rent or mortgage. Naturally, they blame Trump for all of it.

As of early May 2026, President Trump’s approval ratings, heavily impacted by the economy, inflation and the war, have hit new second-term lows. For example, the most recent ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos Poll disclosed his approval to be just 37% and his disapproval at 62%. Unless these ratings rebound Republicans will likely lose control of one or both house of Congress. In that event Trumps’ program will be thwarted and he will likely be impeached again.

It’s time to focus on the needs of the American people, not those of the Iranian people. It’s time for Trump to refocus on his famous mantra – “America First.”

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

GERRYMANDERING

As always, the contents of this blog represent a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

Gerrymandering is the act of manipulating the redistribution of electoral districts in order to favor a particular candidate or political party. It has been prominent in the news recently, as both political parties have been engaging in the practice to gain an edge in Congressional representation as well as in their own state legislatures. This practice is especially significant now in advance of the 2026 midterm elections. Currently, the Republicans have very slim margins in both the Senate and the House, and maintaining control will be difficult but crucial. I believe if the Dems seize control of one or both houses, they will seek to stifle Trump’s agenda and possibly impeach him again on some “trumped up” charges. More on this later.

The law requires redistribution in at least every decade. Traditionally, these redistributions have been effectuated in response to periodic census results. The law requires such redistributions to be equitable. One of its major requirements is not to disadvantage any race. As you will see below, all too often, that has not been the case.

According to Wikipedia the practice of gerrymandering originated in 1812 when Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry signed a bill that resulted in the manipulation of electoral districts in a partisan manner with the intention of benefiting his Democratic-Republican Party. It concentrated Federalist voters into a few districts (packing) while spreading Democratic-Republican voters across many districts to maximize their influence. Of course, this was controversial, and the Boston Gazette conceived the term to lampoon the distorted, politically skewed maps. In particular, it denigrated one district it said was “shaped like a salamander.”

As I said, currently the practice has become quite common. For example, in just the last five years Alabama, Maryland, Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Illinois, and Utah, among others, have or are planning to gerrymander. Both political parties have engaged in or are planning to engage in this practice and always to the advantage of the party in power in that particular state. The goal is packing (concentrating the opposition party’s voters into a few “safe” districts where they will win by large margins, or cracking (widely dispersing the opposition’s voters so they rarely or never have a large enough majority to win a particular district). Some of these redistributions have been so egregiously inequitable that they have attracted the attention of the Judiciary.

Over the years there have been various cases involving redistricting. However, a few days ago the Supreme Court issued a ruling that promises to have a seismic effect regarding this issue. By a 6-3 margin it ruled that Louisiana’s redistricting plan, (which had been mandated by a federal judge in 2014) in which the state had packed black voters into a newly-created second black majority district constituted a violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees all citizens equal protection under the law. The court ruled that this practice unduly reduced the statewide effect of the black vote,

The ruling was very controversial and has precipitated vitriolic objections from many black leaders, Dem politicians and their supporters. For example, NAACP President Derrick Johnson characterized it as a “license for corrupt politicians who want to rig the system by silencing entire communities.” In fact, the opposite is true. The Court’s main objection was Louisiana’s packing blacks into just the two black heavily majority districts, which they would win anyway, and which had resulted in more congressional seats for whites at the expense of blacks.

Conclusion

This ruling will likely impact many states. They will have to redistribute their voting districts before the 2026 elections. Most of these redistributions will favor one party or the other. The key question is which party will benefit on a net basis. Early indications are that the G.O.P will benefit more as the current districting is viewed as more favorable to Dems, but we will have to wait and see. Politics aside I believe this was the right decision to foster voter equality.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

TRUMP’S STRANGLE STRATEGY

As always, the contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

I like President Trump’s current strategy to blockade Iranian shipping attempting to navigate the Strait of Hormuz. At this stage of the war, it is the best strategy. I prefer it over the alternatives such as additional massive bombing of Iran’s oil wells or agreeing to a peace settlement that falls short of the primary objectives of the war, which for those who may have forgotten is to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weaponry.

The obvious objective of the blockade is to strangle Iran’s economy by depriving it of its sole source of revenue – oil. Normally, some 80% of Iran’s oil and 20% of the world’s oil and liquid natural gas passes through the Strait. It is the best and most expeditious route for these products to transit between the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. As I write this, the blockade has generally been very effective even though a few ships have managed to sneak through.

Iran has no alternative sources of revenue. It has no other natural resources, no manufacturing to speak of, and certainly no tourism. All it has is huge deposits of oil, which heretofore have sustained its economy and funded its desire to foment terrorism throughout the ME and the rest of the world through various proxies.

According to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth all ships (some 34 in total) traveling to or from Iranian ports have been “turned around without incident.”  Moreover, the blockade has been expanding. As I write this, the US now has three carrier groups in the region. Hegseth added “just this week, we seized two Iranian ‘dark fleet’ ships in the Indo-Pacific region that had left Iranian ports before the blockade went into effect.” Furthermore, in posts on his Truth Social platform Trump claimed: “Iran is collapsing financially! [It] want[s] the Strait of Hormuz opened immediately. [It is] starving for cash! [It is] [l]osing about $500 million a day.” Recently, it was reported that Iran has about 127 million barrels of crude oil reserves that are stored in parked tankers. That sounds like a lot, but in truth it will not last long. But that doesn’t mean that the blockade wouldn’t hurt Iran,” he said.

For various reasons a goodly portion of congresspersons and other critics has opposed the war from its inception. As I explained in previous blogs they fall into four categories: (1) those with a political agenda whether or not it is beneficial to America, (2) “never Trumpers,” who blindly and automatically oppose any action or policy Trump undertakes, (3) antisemites and anti-Israel critics, and (4) those who are misinformed by the “fake news” media and/or ignorant of or choose to ignore the lessons of history. These categories of vociferous naysayers include many Dem politicians such as Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, Gavin Newsome, Kamala Harris and AOC, who should know better. Perhaps, some or all of them should brush up on their knowledge of history.

On May 1 the Trump Administration may face a Congressional challenge with respect to the continued deployment of the military in Iran. Some Congresspersons have opined that the duration of the US’s military campaign against Iran is limited by the War Powers Act of 1973, which mandates that a President commence military withdrawal after 60 days unless Congress either declares war, authorizes the specific action, or extends the deadline. Congress has not taken either action and is unlikely to do so.

The Administration has “pushed back” claiming there is “no firm deadline for ending the conflict as it has not formally characterized the campaign as a “war.” Consequently, congressional approval is not required. The 60th day is May 1. We’ll have to see how this matter is resolved. It may require a ruling by SCOTUS.

Conclusion

The blockade has been opposed by the usual suspects as detailed above. Due to their ten-year record of lies, exaggerations and obfuscations that have invariably been ultimately debunked their opinion no longer has any credence if it ever did.

In my opinion, however, it has proven to be a very successful strategy. It has strangled Iran’s economy by depriving it of some $500 million of oil revenue per day. As a result, in addition to not having any nuclear weapons or an effective military Iran’s economy and finances are being severely degraded. It has nothing. NOTHING.

At this point, we don’t have to fight. We don’t have to risk American lives. We can just sit back and watch Iran strangle to death unless it accepts our terms.

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

THE HARD WAY OR THE EASY WAY

As always, the contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

As I write this blog the US is attempting to arrange round two of peace negotiations with Iran. Predictably, round one did not yield any meaningful results. As always, the Iranian negotiators were not negotiating in good faith. Obviously, they did not have the power and the authority to do so seriously. Since then, it has become apparent that the country is in turmoil. There is a power struggle between the politicians who seem willing to be realistic and reasonable and the military, which is not. There is no clearcut leader, so a meaningful, lasting deal cannot be consummated.

Despite all the fake news characterizing President Trump as a reckless, heartless, warmonger the empirical evidence clearly illustrates that he wants a peaceful resolution to this war. Iran has been thoroughly and completely defeated militarily. At the moment, it is “circling the drain” financially and economically. Its navy has been destroyed; its nuclear weaponry and nuclear “dust,” Trump’s term to describe Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile and residual nuclear material currently buried under tons of debris that could be retrieved and “enriched” to make nuclear bombs have been neutralized; its leadership has been virtually wiped out; its communications systems are “shot;” its economy is destroyed; and the US’s blockade of the Hormuz Strait is preventing any ships from entering or leaving its ports. In short, Iran is completely helpless. It is at our mercy. Trump could, as he has said, bomb it back to the stone age. For them, continuing the war would be futile and suicidal.

I believe further negotiations would be a “fool’s errand.” It would provide Iran with another opportunity to lie, delay and obfuscate and turn public opinion in its favor. It’s what they have always done and what they will continue to do. They are not in any position to negotiate terms. Their choices are to (1) surrender and accept our terms unconditionally (the easy way) or (2) continue to resist and be annihilated (the hard way). At this point most countries would accept reality and opt for the easy way in order to retain some semblance of viability.

However, Iran’s leadership is dominated by fanatical religious zealots who have espoused the destruction of Israel, the US, and any other “non-believers.” We have to understand that they have no desire to negotiate a lasting peace treaty. They would rather fight to the end and die as martyrs. They have been attacking Israel, the US and others and fomenting terrorism through their proxies for 47 years. They have tried to assassinate Trump at least twice. They have no empathy for anyone, even their own citizenry who have been suffering greatly. After all, they have already slaughtered tens of thousands of them merely for the “crime” of protesting. They will fight to the last man. I applaud Trump for continually attempting to forge a lasting peaceful solution, but the time to “lower the boom” once and for all is approaching rapidly. The current situation is untenable. It is hurting Americans economically and, by extension, the GOP’s prospects for the midterm elections. In my view, Iran is akin to a cancer that must be extirpated.

Conclusion

The latest Reuters/Ipsos Poll disclosed that Trump’s approval rating has declined to 36%, which is a new low. A majority of respondents were critical of both the state of the economy and his conduct of the war. There is substantial pressure on him to negotiate a settlement even though we have not yet achieved complete and total victory and even if it would allow Iran to rise again in the future.

His critics primarily include the following groups:

  1. The “never-Trumpers” who will always oppose any action or policy of his. In this case many of them have openly stated that they would rather the US lose this war than see Trump get credit for winning it,
  2. those who hate Israel and Jews,
  3. the politicians (mostly Dems) who crave power over doing what would benefit the country,
  4. the well-meaning persons who have been gaslighted by the fake news media, and
  5. the inattentive and/or ignorant persons who neither know nor care about the lessons of history and have no appreciation of the gravity of the current situation.

Luckily, Trump is impervious to criticism and polls. He has consistently pursued the course of action that he believes is right, not one that is politically expedient. It’s what he is doing now. It’s fine to give a negotiated lasting peace a chance, but not for too much longer. I hope that Trump retains the fortitude to persevere and finish the job. To use a sports analogy, we’re at the one-yard line. Punch it in!

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

A PEACE AGREEMENT WITH IRAN IS IMMINENT, OR IS IT?

As always, the contents of this blog constitute a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

As I have written in previous blogs militarily, it was a complete mismatch, comparable to an NFL team taking on a high school team. In a matter of weeks, we have defeated Iran militarily completely and decisively. We have bombed them relentlessly (including destroying its nuclear capability, its nuclear enrichment sites, its factories, its communication systems, and its economy, among other targets), killed the Ayatollah and the top two or three tiers of Iran’s leadership, destroyed its Navy, taken out virtually all of its missiles, rockets and other weaponry, opened up the Hormuz Strait, blockaded the Strait to choke off any ships trying to enter or leave Iranian ports, and cut off its primary means of revenue – oil. Like I said, a total and decisive military victory. Kudos to President Trump, Secretary of War Hegseth, and the entire military hierarchy from the Joint Chiefs down to the enlisted men and women.

It was well-known that Iran was close to attaining nuclear capability. Its negotiators even bragged about it at one of the sessions. Everyone knew that the rest of the world could not allow that to happen. Something had to be done and soon.

Iran’s military was no match for the US. All that was required was a US president with the b**ls to do what needed to be done. Unlike predecessors Obama and Biden, President Trump was that man. He understood that history tells us appeasement never works in the long run. The other side views it as weakness and always seeks to take advantage. Aggressors will always keep pressing until they meet resistance. He was wise to Iran’s negotiating tactics and would not be deceived.

However, I believe all that was the easy part. Now comes the hard part, to forge an agreement that will last, that Iran will honor, and that future US presidents will have the fortitude to enforce if it doesn’t. In summary, we won the war; now we have to win the peace. More about this later.

As I have said multiple times anyone who has been paying attention to the news and is analyzing it objectively, rationally and coherently was cognizant that (1) Iran was close to developing nuclear capability, (2) was lying about it, (3) would likely use it once it had it, (4) could never be allowed to possess it, and (5) it was incumbent on the US to prevent it by force, if necessary.

And yet, the Dems and their allies in the media fought Trump at every turn. This was incredulous under the circumstances, but not surprising. As I have blogged many times, they have consistently opposed and denigrated every Trump policy and action. They have persisted even though it consistently placed them on the wrong side of various “80-20” issues. But this was different. We’re used to TDS. Normally, we laugh it off, but this situation presented an existential threat not only to the US, but potentially to the entire world as a whole. This situation had the potential to impact not only us, but also future generations. Obviously, they didn’t care. Obviously, they wanted Trump to fail even if it damaged our national security.

For example:

  1. At first, they insisted the war was illegal. The Constitution states that only Congress can declare war. True, but there have been a plethora of precedents in which the president has commenced hostilities going all the way back to Thomas Jefferson and the wars against the Barbary Pirates beginning in 1801.
  2. At the beginning Trump was labeled a “warmonger,” a “fascist,” and a “violator of human rights.” Later, when he agreed to a cease fire he was labeled “soft.”
  3. As I said, many of his critics were openly rooting for Iran just so Trump would fail and give them a political issue in advance of the 2026 midterm elections. For instance, NY Times columnist Thomas Friedman, a hardline progressive and avowed Trump-hater actually admitted that “although he doesn’t like [the] Iranian regime,” he is rooting for it because he “doesn’t want to see Trump or Bibi Netanyahu getting credit for what would be a historic win for global peace.”
  4. Reportage of the war was radically different depending upon which media outlet was reporting the news.

Conclusion

As I write this it appears that Iran is agreeing to all of the US’s peace terms. That’s great, but as I said above, given its history of lies and obfuscations a word of caution is needed. Negotiations are still ongoing. We cannot assume anything. We don’t even know for sure that we are negotiating with the persons who actually have the authority to make a deal. Iran could be stalling while it rebuilds and re-arms.

Moreover, even after a deal has been signed there will no assurances that Iran will abide by it. It will require continuous monitoring, probably indefinitely. Iran fears and respects Trump, but it is playing the “long game.” It knows Trump will be gone shortly. Its hope is that eventually we will elect another president who will be weak, lax or inattentive and will re-engage in appeasement. I hope not, but I fear it will happen.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment