“Far right” is the new term for being sane

From Arthur Chrenkoff, Everything I don’t like is far-right, via Powerline where they note he is an Aussie blogger:

“The Washington Post” (“Democracy Dies in Darkness”) spends the whole article discussing how various “far-right” figures and forces, from France’s Marine Le Pen to Germany’s Alternative for Germany, got angry at the coordinated Islamist terrorist attacks that targeted churches among other locations and killed some 300 people. When I was growing up and well into my adulthood, “far right” was a description for neo-Nazi skinheads; nowadays it’s being used for those who might merely be Eurosceptics or don’t believe in open borders. But never mind the ever-creeping redefinition – just what exactly is the message of the article? That only “far-right” is angry about attacks on Christians? Or that if you are angry about attacks on Christians you must be “far right” yourself? Is Christianity now to be considered a white supremacist dog whistle? And if you are concerned about Islamist terrorism and/or terrorism against Christians world-wide are you now supposed to keep it down lest you somehow give succor to the far right or actually risk becoming associated with the far right in the eyes of the sophisticates who feast on Bezos’s fish wrapper? Maybe all of the above.

The article ends even more disingenuously than it starts, by advising readers not to jump to conclusions because no one has yet claimed responsibility for the Sri Lankan attacks (unlike in the clear cut case of the Christchurch terror attack), and reminding everyone that the bloody civil war in the country’s past was an ethno-nationalist affair rather than a religious one. Sure, it was the Tamils and the Sinhalese and Buddhist against Hindus, with the Marxist Tamil Tigers being quite big on suicide bombing, but is the WaPo suggesting – hoping? – that the recent outrages were a return to that old conflict rather than an instance of Islamist terrorism? Quite possibly, because we are lastly reminded that “Although Christian minorities are targeted around the world, analysts say that the vast majority of terrorism victims globally are Muslims.” Omitted is any mention that the vast majority of these Muslim victims of terrorism are murdered by the Muslim perpetrators. Can we be angry about that or is that also some sort of a far-right trait?

“Far left” meanwhile is the name for the suicide cult of Western civilisation.

Tactile nuclear weapons

Is this really funny? She is one of two Senators from New York and is running for President. This should truly frighten you, as much for the lack of attention this has received from the media as for her outright ignorance and stupidity. All this supposed concern with Presidents having their finger on the nuclear button, but then this: John Bolton ridicules Kirsten Gillibrand’s talk of ‘tactile nuclear weapons’.

“The presidential campaign is underway. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand ventured into strategic matters at a town hall in Dover,” Hewitt said, introducing the clip.

“When you say you want to develop low-yield nuclear weapons that are tactile, what you’re saying is you want to use them. Now, the military will make an argument to say, ‘Oh, this is just again to make, we have to have an equal threat. And this, if it’s usable, then it’s a better threat.’ I just found that is not believable,” Gillibrand said. “So I opposed the entire defense bill because of that one provision. So if I am president, I am going to make sure we unwind that completely, and I don’t think we should be trying to create tactile nuclear weapons.”

Bolton burst into laughter. “Tactile nuclear weapons?” he spluttered. “Well, I was unfamiliar with the concept, Mr. Ambassador,” Hewitt said. A mirthful Bolton responded, “I have to say, I was unfamiliar with it as well. I wonder what Sen. Gillibrand knows that I don’t.”

Sure it’s funny in a macabre kind of way, but if this does not terrify you about our future, what would? Her aim is to be the leader of the West in our defence of our way of life against others who would destroy it in a heartbeat if they could. Beyond this, what else does she know nothing about since her ignorance seems to be deep and vast.

How ignorant would a Democrat have to be for the media to start spreading cautious words about whether they should be elected? From the evidence we have, no such level of ignorance exists.

Is this the greatest political scandal in American history?

Is a scandal still a scandal if it’s not reported in the press? If not, what is it? Seems pretty bad. Start with this from Ace of Spades.

Thursday and the big story is the reaction to Attorney General William Barr’s unvarnished, unapologetic and clinical declaration that yes indeed, there was spying (or bugging or eavesdropping or espionage or whatever Hawaiian Senator Brian Schatz-n-giggles can understand it) being perpetrated against the Trump presidential campaign. After more than two years of a steady diet of Trump and Russia colluded to steal the 2016 election and the anticipation that Robert Mueller’s persecution of the President and his allies would eject him from office, the one-two punch in the gut and boot to the groin of first the Mueller deception dissolving into thin air and AG Barr openly stating the plain hard truth was a marvel to behold. And without missing a beat, Barr announced that his office was going to at long last launch an investigation to uncover how the whole thing started and who was behind it. Frankly, there’s really not much to investigate since we know the machinations of the phony Steele dossier being used as a pretext to abuse the FISA courts to spy on the campaign and then use that as propaganda to insinuate Trump was a Russian spy or dupe. The real question is was this done with the knowledge of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama or was it done directly on their orders?

No matter what, this entire thing is without doubt the greatest political scandal in American history.

What if the Obama White House really was spying on the Trump campaign during the election? Sounds bad, if true. So a couple more from Lucianne before the story completely disappears.

Barr is right, spying on Trump
campaign did occur
Washington Examiner, by Byron York    Original Article
Democrats and some in the media expressed shock and outrage when Attorney General William Barr said Wednesday that “spying did occur” on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. Barr “must retract his statement immediately or produce specific evidence to back it up,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. “Perpetuating conspiracy theories is beneath the office of the attorney general.” Barr has gone “off the rails,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. “The attorney general must retract his unfounded, irresponsible claim,” said Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal. Cable news commentators called Barr´s statement “stunning” and appeared baffled that th

 

Barr Confirms Multiple Intel Agencies
Implicated In Anti-Trump Spy Operation
The Federalist, by Mollie Hemingway    Original Article
 
“Spying on a political campaign is a big deal,” Attorney General William Barr told a Senate committee on Wednesday morning. Barr’s comments came in the context of potential Justice Department reviews of the Trump-Russia investigation and how it began in 2016. While it is important that the top law enforcement in the United States publicly acknowledged that the Obama administration and its intelligence agencies surveilled its domestic political opponents during the heat of a presidential election, it is what he said next that was most startling: that the CIA and other federal agencies

Add one more from Powerline.

Democrats cannot handle the truth. We saw this yesterday in their uniform reaction to Attorney General Barr’s acknowledgment that “Spying did occur” on the Trump presidential campaign. The link is to today’s Wall Street Journal editorial (by Kim Strassel, I am quite sure, and behind the Journal’s paywall.

Somewhere near the top of this post, however, I want to quote a sentence from Mollie Hemingway’s Federalist column on the Barr confirmation of the discomfiting truth sentient observers have pieced together over the past two years: “This is a scandal of epic proportions. It is one that threatens the foundations of constitutional government. It is a direct attack on American democracy.”

She puts it bluntly this way: “The fact of the matter is that federal intelligence agencies spied on a rival political campaign. They illegally leaked information about that surveillance. They abused their authority to at best undermine the duly elected president and at worst to attempt a soft coup against him. They did so with the near-total cooperation of the American media establishment.”

It’s clearly only those over-reacting fanatics who worry about such things.

Further evidence of The Rise of Anti-Christian Sentiment in the West

Received today from Professor Augusto Zimmermann in WA.

Dear Friend,

I would like to call your attention to a very serious matter.

As you know, I am organising in Perth a major conference on religious freedom entitled ‘Religious Freedom at the Crossroads – The Rise of Anti-Christian Sentiment in the West’

To be held at Sheridan College between 14-15 June 2019, our list of speakers/moderators includes some our finest legal minds in Australia – Neville Rochow QC, Christopher Brohier, John Gilmour QC, Martyn Isles, and many otherms.

Our keynote speaker is none other than a leading American constitutional lawyer, the Distinguished Emeritus Professor William Wagner of Western Michigan University, Thomas Cooley Law School.

And yet, our historical legal-academic conference on religious freedom has been arbitrarily CENSORED by Facebook.

As seen attached, Facebook arbitrarily refuses to allow us to post any information about the forthcoming religious freedom conference.

Facebook simply claims that our religious freedom conference has VIOLATED COMMUNITY STANDARDS.

This is absolutely appalling and it objectively constitutes an egregious instance of censorship of ideas on social media.

Perhaps the PM’s idea of combating ‘right-wing extremism’ on social media has already started to produce its unintended consequences…

Religious freedom is most definitely at the crossroads and Facebook has just proven the point.

I guess this only reveals a DESPERATE NEED to hold a legal conference of this nature in Australia.

May I please ask you a favour?

Religious freedom is DEFINITELY at stake in Australia. Please consider heavily PROMOTING THIS EVENT and AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

Below are the relevant details about this important conference that has been ARBITRARILY CENSORED BY FACEBOOK.

I am proud to have gathered a ‘dream team’ of leading lawyers and legal academics in the field.

Thank you very much in anticipation for you kind attention.

Warm regards,

Prof Augusto Zimmermann

Your enemies don’t always tell you what they’re up to

Let me start with this as a preamble, from: Thomas Sowell Is Right to Predict a Socialist America:

Recently, Thomas Sowell appeared on the Fox Business Network. The host, David Asman, asked Sowell whether America will go down the dark and dangerous road of socialism:

The future of America — do you think that we are destined to go through a period of socialism, a period where these ideas that have not worked wherever they have been tried and will not work here, will be tried here, and could bring down our country?

Sowell responded by offering sober and troubling thoughts:

I do have a great fear that, in the long run, we may not make it. I hate to say that. … And so, we may make it, but I wouldn’t bet on it. (March 6, 2019)

Which leads to this.

The only people who laugh at conspiracies are conspirators themselves trying to divert attention from what they are doing.

For background there are also these. First:

And then this:

These people should terrify you

Why are these lefty idiots so upset about Mueller not intending to indict the President? Why aren’t they relieved that there was no conspiracy to subvert their democracy? Because they are dishonest swine who care not a whit about truth, justice or the democratic order. Here’s the answer.

ALL BECAUSE DEMOCRATS COULDN’T ACCEPT AN ELECTION RESULT:

They stand for nothing other than power. No decency, no morality, nothing but the raw assertion of power.

Mueller, Mueller!

Donald Trump is easily the least corrupt person ever to reach high office anywhere. Two years of turning over every rock and nothing, not an indictable offence to be found. He is not a sinless man of no imperfections. But he has run as honest an administration as one is likely to find. First from Drudge.


DELIVERED
675 DAYS OF INVESTIGATION
PUBLIC STILL IN DARK
COUNTDOWN TO LEAKS
NO MORE INDICTMENTS

And a bit more from Instapundit.

ROGER SIMON: The American Media Destroyed Themselves Over Mueller.

UPDATE: Endorsed:

Plus this.

The persistent failure of economic theory

I see the RBA today froze at the thought of raising rates in the midst of an economy as stone cold dead as this one. They are, of course, clueless about why this is, just as Treasury is equally clueless. So let me take you to my article just published at Quadrant on The Dangerous Persistence of Keynesian Economics. Here’s how it starts.

OUTSIDE the United States, no economy has fully recovered from the downturn that followed the Global Financial Crisis in 2008-09. The crisis came and went in half a year, but just about every economy continues to have problems generating growth, increasing employment and raising real incomes. As I was writing my article on “The Dangerous Return to Keynesian Economics” in 2009, I commenced working on an economic textbook, now in its third edition, to explain why modern macroeconomic theory is utterly useless, why no one using these economic models as a guide to policy would ever succeed. And here we are, ten years later, and everything discussed in that earlier article, explained in far more detail in my text, has come to pass.

________________

Just as the causes of this downturn cannot be charted through a Keynesian demand deficiency model, neither can the solution. The world’s economies are not suffering from a lack of demand and the right policy response is not a demand stimulus. Increased public sector spending will only add to the market confusions that already exist.
What is potentially catastrophic would be to try to spend our way to recovery. The recession that will follow will be deep, prolonged and potentially take years to overcome.
—Steven Kates, Quadrant, March 2009

.

Why have the IMF, the OECD, the ILO, the treasuries of every advanced economy, the Treasury in Australia, the business economists around the world, why have they got it so wrong and yet you in your ivory tower at RMIT have got it so right?
—Question to Steven Kates from Senator Doug Cameron, Senate Economic References Committee, September 21, 2009

________________

Why did I get it so right? Because nearly everyone else thinks economies are made to grow through increases in demand, while in reality, as was once universally understood, economies can only be made to grow through improvements in supply-side conditions. Demand has absolutely nothing to do with making an economy grow. Demand of course is crucial to how many units of any particular good or service will sell, but has nothing whatsoever to do with how fast an economy in total will grow, or how many workers will be employed.

Does being right count for anything? Not a bit. Still, you can go back to my original article from ten years ago, The Dangerous Return to Keynesian Economics, and see how well what I said then stacks up with how things now are.

Let me add that if you are not already a subscriber, you should be. Subscribe here.