Monthly Archives: April 2022

“We’re Not Sending Him”

Posted on by
Reply

President Joe Biden (D) says he’s ready and willing to go to Ukraine and meet with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

However.

His Press Secretary, Jen Psaki, pooh-poohed the idea.

He’s ready for anything—the man likes fast cars and aviators[.]

Biden’s desire to go is just more thrill-seeking in the eyes of White House staffers.

Psaki went on:

He’s ready to go to Ukraine. We are not sending the president to Ukraine.

We are not sending the president. Think about that. Biden isn’t making the decision to travel to Ukraine and meet with Zelenskyy, or not, on his own initiative.

Many have suggested, over the last year, that Biden is a captive of the Extremist Left of his Leftist Party, but this statement by Psaki makes those suggestions statements of fact. The President of the United States is not his own man. Nor does he seem to be the one in charge in his own job.

Worse, Jill Biden is no Edith Bolling, and she’s not the one standing in for the man.

Russian Territory Is Already Involved

Posted on by
Reply

The Biden-Harris administration has approved an additional $800 million in weapons for Ukraine, the better for that nation to fight against the barbarian’s coming assault on Ukraine’s Donbas region. In conjunction with that, Biden-Harris has moved to increase the level and quality of intelligence shared with Ukraine, the better for the latter to target Russian forces after they’ve broken into Ukraine.

However.

The US, however, will refrain from providing intelligence that would enable the Ukrainians to strike targets on Russian territory under the new policy, a constraint Washington has imposed to reduce the risk of broadening the conflict, US officials added.

This is a continued mischaracterization of the situation, a continued misconstrual that is deadly to Ukrainian civilians, women, children, medical facilities.

The “conflict,” to use Biden-Harris’ carefully vapid term, is already broadened. Russian territory is already a part of the conflict. Aside from the bare fact that Russia is the belligerent in this Putin War, Russian territory is being openly used to assemble, supply, and stage forces that will be used to assault a sovereign nation’s territory.

The Belgorod region just 25 miles from the Ukraine-Russia border north of Kharkhiv, for instance, is a major supply and staging area for Russian units organizing for a spring assault on the Kharkhiv-Izyum region in the northern Donbas. That area, thus, would be a lucrative target that, if struck, would severely disrupt Putin’s planned assault.

Withholding that cross-border intelligence has even worse outcomes. It denies the Ukraine’s ability to know where the Russian units are gathering at their Lines of Departure, so the withholding denies the Ukrainians the ability to anticipate Russian axes of attack, which in turn denies the Ukrainians the ability to prepare their own responses for when those attacks roll. Which, despicably, only runs up friendly force casualty rates and friendly force equipment loss rates.

Denying the Ukrainians knowledge of those gatherings at those Lines of Departure also denies the Ukrainians the ability to launch spoiling attacks–ideally done by air (armed drones, helicopters, the aircraft they have still)–against those Lines to weaken, delay, possibly preempt the attacks before they start.

In no way can any part of Russia be given functional sanctuary status. Except in the fearful imaginations of Biden-Harris and his cronies.

Putin Confirms the Need

Posted on by
Reply

In the wake of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s atrocity-ridden and barbaric invasion of Ukraine, Finland and Sweden announced that they were seriously considering applying for membership in NATO, with applications likely to flow this summer.

Now Putin is making nuclear threats against them, both implied and direct. Putin spoke through his Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev:

There can be no more talk of any nuclear-free status for the Baltic—the balance must be restored. Until today, Russia has not taken such measures and was not going to. If our hand is forced, well…take note it was not us who proposed this[.]

Not at all. It wasn’t Russia who threatened to put nuclear weapons in the Baltic region. Uh, uh.

Putin’s threat is direct: he will put nuclear weapons into the Baltic region if Finland and Sweden go through with their NATO membership application. Putin’s threat is implied: he will use those nuclear weapons against Finland and Sweden, specifically, if he deems them threats.

Putin’s threat also is dishonest. [N]o more talk of any nuclear-free status for the Baltic? Russia has had nuclear weapons in the region for years. Lithuania’s Defense Minister Arvydas Anusauskas:

The current Russian threats look quite strange when we know that, even without the present security situation, they keep the weapon 100 km from Lithuania’s border. Nuclear weapons have always been kept in Kaliningrad. The international community, the countries in the region, are perfectly aware of this. They use it as a threat.

Putin’s threats are validation of Finland’s and Sweden’s realization of their need of the mutual protections represented by NATO membership.

Inflation and Wages

Posted on by
Reply

In a Tuesday Wall Street Journal editorial, the editors talked at length and some depth about President Joe Biden’s (D) lies regarding today’s—actually, the last 15 months, the term of his Presidency—inflation as being all the Russian’s, Vladimir Putin’s, fault.

There’s an aspect of the Biden inflation that’s of particular interest though, and that’s the damage Biden is inflicting on us American workers.

[T]he overall price news is terrible for American workers and consumers. The March surge means that real wages fell 0.8%, or a decline of 2.7% in the last year. (See the nearby chart.) Real average weekly earnings fell a striking $4.26 in March alone, and they’ve fallen nearly $18 during the Biden Presidency.

The graph below illustrates the matter since March a year ago.

This is a lot like the previous Progressive-Democrat administration, that of ex-President Barack Obama (D). Real wages declined (though not as dramatically) during most of his time in office, also due to his and his Party cronies’ anti-business policies—which amounted to anti-worker policies.

Discrimination

Posted on by
Reply

Recall the California law that requires (required) the boards of directors of California-headquartered public companies to have at least one member of an “underrepresented” race, ethnicity or sexual orientation, and two to three for larger boards. Recall further that California Superior Court Judge

Terry Green judge struck the law for violating California’s constitution.

Now The Wall Street Journal includes a bit of the judge’s reasoning from his opinion.

the judge says no one “appears to have made any effort to identify, define, or survey the qualified talent pool for director positions.”

Oops.

In an associated footnote, the judge went on, with clarity that even a California Progressive-Democrat should be able to discern.

Some of the experts have identified common feeder positions (such as “C-Suite” executive roles) and academic qualifications (such as an MBA), but there appears to be no one single” gatekeeping “qualification that could be used to define the pool in the way that a license might for lawyers and medical professionals, or a credential might for teachers.

Then he drove the point home in his conclusion.

Corporations Code § 301.4 [the board of directors membership law] violates the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution on its face. The statute treats similarly situated individuals—qualified potential corporate board members—differently based on their membership (or lack thereof) in certain listed racial, sexual orientation, and gender identity groups. It requires that a certain specific number of board seats be reserved for members of the groups on the list—and necessarily excludes members of other groups from those seats.

It’s hard to get any clearer than that, but if the California Progressive-Democratic Party legislators are true to their history, they’ll work hard to find a way to be confused.