↓
 
Home » Roundup

Roundup

The New Neo Posted on by

(1) Hamas once again demonstrates that it is evil. As though any more demonstration were necessary.

(2) Expelling Santos would only benefit Democrats. So why are Republicans about to do it?

(3) Yes, the stabber of several children and adults in Ireland was ineed someone of Algerian ethnicity who came to Ireland twenty years ago, was almost deported initially in 2003, and has been on welfare the entire time. But shhhh! You’re not supposed to say it in Ireland, because people might end up “connecting crime with migration” – even if it’s the truth. Maybe especially if it’s the truth.

(4) Hamas commits a terrorist shooting that kills three at a bus top near Jerusalem. This was during the supposed “pause” in violence between Israel and Hamas. Not only that, but Hamas also fired some rockets into Israel and failed to provide a hostage list for the day as promised. So it’s war on again, according to Israel.

(5) Blinken tried to tell the Israelis that they don’t “have the credit” to continue the war until Hamas is dismantled. Netanyahu replied, “We have sworn, I have sworn, to eliminate Hamas. Nothing will stop us.”

(6) DeSantis and Newsom had a debate. I didn’t watch. Did you?

(7) “Decolonization” studies have taken hold at Georgetown’s influential Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service (SFS), with predictable results for foreign policy.

Comments

Roundup — 30 Comments

  1. The Debate: I didn’t watch but saw numerous clips this morning on the CoTR podcast. Newsom flat out lies even when the facts are right there on the screen in front of him. Total gaslighting and done in his usual smarmy way. Will any minds change? Maybe a few on the GOP side, especially after Trump’s snarky, name calling of DeSantis just prior to the debate. Ridiculous. As far as Newsom goes, Amy Jo of CoTR summed it up: no matter how much he lies there will always be the suburban liberal women who want to sleep with him.

  2. There are nine political parties in the Irish parliament. Seven of them should be electorally destroyed next year. Not holdin’ my breath.

  3. In a roundup spirit, Guyana still trembles though some flouncy international court today tells Venezuela to *back-off*, so to speak. Haz my doubts Venezuela will pay that any heed. We’ll see.

    Sandra Day O’Conner passed at 93. RIP

  4. I didn’t watch the debate, other than a few clips. But I see the MSM is abuzz about Newsom’s smile, trotting out some random ‘expert’ to assure is it appears genuine, as opposed to DeSantis’s ‘insincere’ smile.

    That pretty much tells you everything you need to know. Of course, the conservative commentariat is awash in comments that DeSantis destroyed Newsom on facts on argument. If there were any reason to doubt this, the MSM would be highlighting it. Rather, it’s all about Newsom’s smile.

  5. For our cchttps://themessenger.com/opinion/donald-trump-fraud-trial-engoron-letitia-james-bankers-testimony

  6. Yes, just why did those Republicans vote to expel Santos and not what’s his name that pulled the fire alarm? Oh well the Stupid Party strikes again.
    I don’t watch any debates.
    Blinken should just nod off.
    Nothing to say about Ireland. The Rot is deep everywhere.

  7. Blinken speaks for an administration that reeks with the stench of illegitimacy. Peak irony that he would tell anyone in any context that they don’t “have the credit”.

  9. I didn’t watch the DeSantis/Newsom debate either, but going on what I’ve heard and read about it I’ll just say that if the Democrats were hoping for Newsom to emerge as the next charismatic rockstar (D) savior of the party (aka the next Obama) I’m certain they’ll be let down. Newsom is just a fairly generic, smarmy Democrat politician who may be aesthetically pleasing to some, but there’s clearly no substance to him. He may look good on camera, but things change once he opens his mouth.

    One of my favorite old-timey words is “coxcomb”. Gavin Newsom exemplifies what a coxcomb is to me.

  10. JFK started the unfortunate Democratic obsession with good looks rather than competence. In the my list of worst presidents in my lifetime, JFK is near the top.

    In other news, Mary Cleave died last Monday. I knew her when she was at USU, and got an invite to view the launch of her first shuttle flight. I was going to recommend her for a talk, but discovered that she had died, so ended up writing a short eulogy instead. Damn.

  11. }}} (1) Hamas once again demonstrates that it is evil. As though any more demonstration were necessary.

    If this does not piss off more people than it discourages, we are already doomed.

    }}} (2) Expelling Santos would only benefit Democrats. So why are Republicans about to do it?

    If there is no question about what he did, well, I can’t say that the principles don’t apply, here. The loss of his vote is not good, but, if he’s from an area where they may well elect a Dem, he’s probably a RINO anyway. The thing to do is to hold the special election and use his ouster as a talking point that the right is better than the left, because they DO clean house, even when it’s not to their advantage.

    ))) (6) DeSantis and Newsom had a debate. I didn’t watch. Did you?

    Sorry, I would have had to know about it in order to have missed it. 😀

  12. Expelling Santos would only benefit Democrats. So why are Republicans about to do it?

    Because the GOP has been hacked? When it comes to important close votes, the country can be assured that one or a few Republicans will side with the Dems. These people are not RINOs, they are effectively Democrats. That is, double agents.

  14. sdferr, I have thought for some time that those young women won’t come home, because of how they’ve been used. Lord have mercy on them.

    physicsguy, what is the CoTR podcast?

  15. I didn’t watch the debate, which I rarely do. In this case and at this point DeSantis is a side note. It’s hardly surprising that Newsom had only lies to offer.

    That said, I now think it a political nonstarter for Harris to be dropped, as the democrats need the black vote far too much. So barring a wild card event, it’s likely that Harris will be the 2024 Democrat presidential nominee with Newsom drafted as her VP.

    Obviously she’s not up to the job. But then neither is Biden so why not manage Harris as they’re doing with Biden?

    “I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this—who will count the votes, and how.” Joseph Stalin

    Harris for two terms, then Newsom for two terms. That would result in 20 years of Marxist rule… which should be just enough to take the world into a new dark age.

  16. JFK started the unfortunate Democratic obsession with good looks rather than competence. In the my list of worst presidents in my lifetime, JFK is near the top.

    Chuck:

    OK. Granted, but would you have preferred Carter, Clinton, Obama or Biden over JFK in the White House, had Rod Serling proffered it for your consideration?

    IMO JFK set the template for good looks, but more than that, the Democratic obsession on messianism. The Chosen One to Set Things Right, which seemed to have come from the FDR experience.

    Obama filled that bill brilliantly, though short on results, but no one else really come close.

    But they are still waiting for the Messiah or Someone Like Him!

  18. Carter, Clinton, Obama or Biden over JFK in the White House

    Oh, that’s a tough one, especially if we posit 1960. On purely foreign policy grounds alone, uh … hey, how about that Nixon guy 🙂 More seriously, I might go with Carter, maybe Clinton, Obama and Biden are non-starters.

  22. (1) & (2) One of the most curious things to happen this fall is that the stroke-disabled Democrat Congressman John Fetterman is actually supporting Israel rather than Hamas, and asking why Democrats like Menendez are not being expelled along with Santos.

    https://redstate.com/bonchie/2023/12/01/john-fetterman-takes-on-the-screeching-ladies-of-the-view-in-mind-bending-segment-n2167062

    (3) Why are so many people trying to shut down X-Twitter?
    Could be things like this, from Neo’s link:

    https://ace.mu.nu/archives/407264.php#407264

    The Irish government, through its own Stasi the Garda, demanded that social media companies censor “hateful” messages, like people accurately reporting the fact that the knife terrorist is an Algerian migrant who has apparently not worked a single day in his worthless life.

    Instagram and FaceBook and TikTok were more than willing to censor the truth.

    Twitter/X refused, and so the Irish government is demanding the EU punish X/Twitter and take away its power to “self-govern.” Substituting EU bureaucrats’ preferred lies over the uncomfortable truth.

    (4) @ Neo > “This was during the supposed “pause” in violence between Israel and Hamas.”

    AesopSpouse was telling me about a post he encountered today that purported to explain how the lack of economic and social development in “modern” Muslim nations was directly attributable to the fundamentals of Shari’a law. One of the lesser factors, but still important, was that Muslims are allowed to lie to non-believers if they choose. That, plus a prejudice against written contracts, pretty much precludes any really productive business dealings.
    Or diplomatic dependability.

    Not the first or last time the Palestinian “peace process” has been derailed by the Palestinians themselves.

    Nitpicking: I understand the presumption of innocence that underlies the need to speak of “alleged” perps after arrest, but really!
    FOX: “Israel Defense Forces shot and killed the two suspected Hamas terrorists at the Givat Shaul junction”

    (5) Most of the posts I’ve seen about Blinken’s statement appear to take the view that “credit” is short for “credibility,” as in Israel not being able to defeat Hamas in the month or two that the weight of world opinion will allow.

    I think it much more likely that he is referring to the Jews’ “credit line” with Biden Inc., which they are threatening to shut down if Hamas & the Left are not placated.
    Red State (Neo’s link) waffles ambiguously about what kind of “credit” is at issue.
    https://redstate.com/bonchie/2023/11/30/biden-administration-throws-israel-under-the-bus-in-private-meeting-netanyahu-responds-with-fire-n2167025

    According to Ch. 12 report, Blinken clashed with Israel’s war cabinet about the next phase in the Gaza operation.

    “I don’t think you have the credit for that,” Blinken reportedly told the defense minister about his stated goal to “dismantle Hamas, even if it takes months.”
    …
    In other words, the Biden administration has officially lost its stomach for the elimination of a terrorist government that continues to carry out attacks inside Israel. Imagine if Israel had demanded the United States stop fighting Al Qaeda after less than two months. Would that have made any sense?

    Keep in mind, this is the same Biden administration that has repeatedly pledged to back Ukraine for “as long as it takes.” I guess Israel, which is in a far better military position to deal with its enemy, doesn’t get that same treatment. Why? Israel is a much more committed ally than Ukraine. So what’s the difference?

    The difference is international opinion driven by rank antisemitism within the United Nations, and Biden, Blinken, and the rest of their cohorts do not have the backbone to stand up to that.
    …
    Sen. Tom Cotton responded to the news with the following.

    “The idea that after the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, Israel needs “credit” to defend itself is outrageous.”

    (6) I’ve watched a few clips of the alleged debate and my reaction to Newsom was “Why is he smiling at DeSantis while the Florida governor is shellacking him with very damaging facts? He looks like an animated waxwork!” — so of course that’s the feature Democrats fawn over, because the Californian had no credible rebuttal.

    To the pundits wondering why DeSantis turned in such a “good performance” despite his “reputation” as a poor debater (mostly hyped by themselves), my impression of his past appearances is that he always does better with a concrete situation involving facts rather than the kind of touchy-feely events that are PR-focused schmoozing unmoored from actual events.

    It’s an Introvert vs Extravert sort of thing.

    The debate played to his strengths as a wonky lawyer.

    The Bee has the right idea:
    https://babylonbee.com/news/newsom-desantis-debate-to-be-sponsored-by-u-haul

    Grammar maven nitpicking: ignore the current vogue for spelling both personality traits with an “o” as in “extroversion.”
    If an “a” was good enough for Carl Jung, it’s good enough for me.

    https://www.britannica.com/science/introvert

    (7) I refer back to the Powerline post cited by Mike K in the “moral compass” thread, since Georgetown is like every other “poisoned Ivy” these days.
    (h/t a meme at Bookworm Room today).

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/12/when-how-did-universities-become-so-crazy-left.php

    But Robbie’s book [Prof. Robert P. George, entitled Making Men Moral] was politically incorrect then, and even more so now. As one panelist remarked, “If Robbie is ever up for canonization in the Catholic Church, earning tenure at Princeton after this book was published will be acknowledged as his first miracle.”
    …
    A particular question posed by Prof. Christopher Wolfe, emeritus from Marquette University, started my reflection on today’s campus leftism. Prof. Wolfe asked: why has there been no successor to John Rawls as the preeminent thinker of the left? Rawls, of course, is the author of A Theory of Justice that attempted to re-found liberalism on non-foundational (that is, non-Lockean, etc) grounds, though Rawls’s dense 600 pages really just boil down a fancy argument in favor of egalitarian redistributionism by the state. Rawls’s book became the ur-text of the left following its appearance in 1970.
    …
    But to the extent Rawls has receded and not been replaced by anyone else, it is because for today’s campus left, Rawls isn’t radical enough.

    And thus the “progressive” slide into CRT, BLM, OWS, and the raving apologists for terrorist massacres.

    I can testify to the craze for Rawls’ book, as it was the hot new thing when I was in graduate school c. 1975.

  23. @ sdferr > “Guyana still trembles though some flouncy international court today tells Venezuela to *back-off*, so to speak.”

    For those who missed it, Venezuela is personifying the meme of two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.

    https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/01/americas/venezuela-essequibo-referendum-guyana-intl/index.html

    Venezuelans will vote Sunday in a referendum to decide whether the country should create its own state within a large swath of its oil-rich neighbor Guyana – a move that has been denounced by Guyana as a step towards annexation and raised concerns of a possible military conflict between the two South American nations.

    The area in question, the densely forested Essequibo region, amounts to about two-thirds of Guyana’s national territory and is roughly the size of Florida. Venezuela has long claimed the land, which it argues was within its borders during the Spanish colonial period. It dismisses an 1899 ruling by international arbitrators that set the current boundaries when Guyana was still a British colony. The recent discovery of vast offshore oil fields in the region has heightened the stakes of the dispute.

    In campaign rallies and a stream of patriotic social media posts, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has cast the referendum in anti-imperialist sentiment, arguing that Venezuela’s historic rights to the region have been unfairly rejected.

    Guyana has said the threat of annexation is “existential.”

    Among the questions posed to voters on Sunday: do you agree with creating a new state in the Essequibo region, providing its population with Venezuelan citizenship, and “incorporating that state into the map of Venezuelan territory?”

    The practical implications of the vote – widely expected to go in favor of the government’s position – however, are minimal, analysts say, with the creation of a Venezuelan state within the Essequibo a remote possibility. It’s unclear what steps the Venezuelan government would take to follow through on the result, and any attempt to assert a claim would certainly be met with international resistance.

    Who is decolonizing whom?

  27. (2) Ace points out the obvious.
    (Although the crimes imputed to Santos, and apparently substantiated although he has not been tried in court for anything, are not all “minor” they did predate his election so far as I recall.)

    https://ace.mu.nu/archives/407278.php

    89 Republicans Join Democrats to Expel George Santos from Congress; Republicans Also Refuse to Hold Vote to Expel Fire-Alarm-Puller and Insurrectionist Jamaal Bowman

    The vote is just finishing up.

    It took a two-thirds vote to expel him, so all the Republicans had to do was not give enough votes to the minority of Democrats in the House to get to two thirds.

    From CNN:

    The House voted to expel indicted GOP Rep. George Santos over ethics violations, making him only the sixth lawmaker ever to be kicked out of the chamber. The resolution passed with a tally of 311-114, with 105 Republicans voting in favor. All four top House GOP leaders voted to keep Santos in Congress.
    George Santos is being expelled because he lied and committed some minor crimes. In the past. Not as a Congressman.

    Jamaal Bowman also lied and committed crime — he pled guilty to falsely pulling the fire alarm, and did so as a Congressman, to block an act of Congress (which we all now is insurrection).

    But few Republicans have the guts to vote to expel him.

    Now that Santos has been expelled, that resolution will not move forward.

    Chaya Raichik @ChayaRaichik10
    They won’t expel Swalwell, Schiff, Omar, Tlaib, Bowman for actual treason but they’ll expel Santos. This is why we lose. I’m so sick of cowardly and spineless Republicans!!!!

    Republicans also voted, of course, to strip Santos’ constituents of any Representation in Congress. They elected Santos as part of a general repudiation of Democrat politicians in New York State. But now they’ll have no Representative at all, at least until Kathy Hochul schedules a special election, which of course she can take months and months and months to do.
    …
    Good work, Republicans.

    With your every word and deed you demonstrate anew the necessity of your complete repudiation and abandonment.

  28. AesopFan:

    That guy writing about the DeSantis/Newsom debate seems to have a sample of two: himself, and some friend who wrote to him. Generalize much?

  30. If Santos had a bunch of off-shore bank accounts held in the name of a bunch of shell companies, he never would have been targeted.
    Just ask joe biden.

    And the lack of off-shore bank accounts held in the name of shell companies is precisely why US Senator Bob Menedez is now being targeted, In his stupidity, he hid gold bars under his pillow, instead of stashed away is some off shore bank.
    Just ask joe biden.

    Amazing that demonkrats never, ever vote to remove any of their congressional members from office – no matter what the infraction – but you can always count on dumbpublicans to do this.

    When it comes to political stupidity, no political party can outdo the dumbpublicans.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑