PowerLine -> John Hinderaker – Once Again, the Democrats Are Losing On Guns – “Samantha Power lied to my face”

FBI stats ⚔ 374 Murdered by Killers using a rifle, 4 times more killed by knives ⚔

PowerLine -> John Hinderaker – Once Again, the Democrats Are Losing On Guns – “Samantha Power lied to my face”

FBI stats ⚔ 374 Murdered by Killers using a rifle, 4 times more killed by knives ⚔

FBI stats ⚔ 374 Murdered by Killers using a rifle, 4 times more killed by knives ⚔

Daily Digest


  • Once Again, the Democrats Are Losing On Guns
  • The Power Line Show, Ep. 59: Populism Sweeping Europe?
  • “Samantha Power lied to my face”
  • CRB: How the ruling class rules
  • Xi Jinping’s promotion signals a cold war with China
Once Again, the Democrats Are Losing On Guns

Posted: 28 Feb 2018 02:53 PM PST

(John Hinderaker)Perhaps the Democrats thought their Children’s Crusade would put them over the top this time, after repeatedly losing the battle over guns. But so far, it doesn’t look that way. Most people believe that stricter gun laws will either have no effect or lead to increased violent crime. And Rasmussen finds that 54% think massive government failures are mostly to blame for the Parkland, Florida shootings, while only 33% blame a lack of gun control. Interestingly, the finding is even more pronounced among those who have school-age children: 61% think the government is mostly to blame, while only 23% point the finger mostly at guns.

In other words, despite the non-stop efforts of CNN and MSNBC, attitudes toward gun control and violent crime haven’t changed much. It may well be that a few modest changes will be made, e.g. a ban on bump stocks, which hardly anyone cares about. But if the Democrats believe they can ride vilification of America’s largest civil rights organization to victory in November, I think they are mistaken.

Finally, this is a serious topic, but I can’t resist a moment of levity. This is a video of CNN’s Gary Tuchman firing an AR-15 at a range. Why he allowed himself to be filmed, I have no idea. I hadn’t realized it was possible to shoot a rifle so incompetently. It isn’t clear what Tuchman is shooting at–normally, one would assume a target–but the way the gun’s muzzle is bouncing around, he must be spraying bullets all over the opposite wall. Via Twitchy.

Firing off into the weekend like pic.twitter.com/hmV4ccd16x

— Anthony Abides (@AnthonyAbides) February 28, 2018

  

The Power Line Show, Ep. 59: Populism Sweeping Europe?

Posted: 28 Feb 2018 01:22 PM PST

(Steven Hayward)Steve Hayward catches up with Henry Olsen, who is over in London this week taking in the strange game that the Brits for some reason insist on calling “football,” just ahead of the upcoming general election in Italy where populist parties are expected to do well, and where German politics remain in disarray because of the populist eruption in their last general election. Meanwhile, Brexit continues to be a non-stop agony for British PM Theresa May, while the best performing government in western Europe right now may well be (sit down for this) … France! Just 19 minutes long for this quick-hitting episode where Henry covers the territory faster than Patton’s Third Army in July 1944.

As always, we recommend that you subscribe to Power Line in iTunes (and leave a 5-star review, please!).

https://d11k1eidkpp6ab.cloudfront.net/2018/02/Powerline-59.mp3

  

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

“Samantha Power lied to my face”

Posted: 28 Feb 2018 06:43 AM PST

(Scott Johnson)Samantha Power made a name for herself with a book proclaiming our obligation to stop genocide abroad. Once she took office in the Obama administration, she became an apologist for Obama’s detachment from the catastrophe in Syria and his deal with the genocidal maniacs in Iran, among other things. It’s almost enough to make one question her bona fides, or even to suspect she may be a complete fraud.

Today Tablet has posted Kassem Eid’s letter about his encounter with Power during her tenure as United States Ambassador to the United Nations. Prefaced by Tony Badran’s introduction, the letter is published as “‘Samantha Power lied to my face,’ by Kassem Eid.” In addition to Samantha Power, Eid’s letter also takes up misleader of the pack Ben Rhodes.

Eid’s account makes a valuable contribution to our understanding of the Obama administration and two of its prominent scoundrels. I learned of it via Twitter (below). Highly recommended.

Kassem Eid, who survived Assad’s bombings, starvation, and chemical weapons attacks:

Obama admin knew about Assad prison crematoriums & hid evidence because it would have forced them to act vs Syria – and that would’ve gotten in way of their Iran policy https://t.co/t1HGd6iXlH pic.twitter.com/NEp5zUowCG

— Omri Ceren (@omriceren) February 28, 2018

NOTE: I first read about Kassem Eid in Anne Barnard’s New York Times profile “A weary rebel retreats to fight another day,” also highly recommended.

  

CRB: How the ruling class rules

Posted: 28 Feb 2018 05:09 AM PST

(Scott Johnson)The new (Winter) issue of the Claremont Review of Books is published today. Thanks to our friends at the Claremont Institute, I have read the new issue in the galley to select three days’ worth of pieces to be submitted for the consideration of Power Line readers. The new issue is full of great reviews and essays. As always, wanting to do right by the magazine and by our readers, I had a hard time choosing. You, however, can do your own choosing for $19.95 a year by clicking on the link above and accessing subscription services. At that price, the CRB affords the most cost-effective political education available in the United States of America. Subscribe by clicking on Subscription Services at the link and get immediate online access thrown in for free.

Both today and tomorrow we feature pieces that are linked thematically: today on the problem of the administrative state, tomorrow on the troubled condition of freedom of speech. My thought is that it is time for us to advance our studies and deepen our understanding of these critical subjects. On Friday, in search of the critique of pure comic relief, we will conclude with Joseph Epstein’s essay on P.G. Wodehouse.

In “Putting the big in big government,” the sagacious Michael Uhlmann reviews Joseph Postell’s new book, whose title takes off from the Tocqueville classic. Professor Postell’s book is Bureaucracy in America: The Administrative State’s Challenge to Constitutional Government. Steve hailed it here last year on Power Line, yoking it with Philip Hamburger’s Is Administrative Law Unlawful? Uhlmann does as well, providing a concise review of our studies to date before assessing Postell’s contribution.

In “How the ruling class rules,” John Marini reviews Paul Moreno’s The Bureaucrat Kings: The Origins and Understandings of America’s Bureaucratic State. Among the scholars affiliated with the Claremont Institute, Professor Marini has led the way in tracing the philosophical background of the administrative state. Here Professor Marini brings his deep understanding of the theoretical roots to bear on Moreno’s account of the fix in which we find ourselves. He persuades me that Moreno’s book is must read. I have added both Postell’s and Moreno’s books to our Amazon bookshelf.

  

Xi Jinping’s promotion signals a cold war with China

Posted: 27 Feb 2018 09:29 PM PST

(Paul Mirengoff)Peter Beinart proclaims that “the Trump administration is preparing for a new Cold War.” Against whom? Against Russia and China.

The left can’t seem to make up its mind. Is President Trump a tool of Putin or an anti-Russia cold warrior?

I say he’s neither. Instead, I think Trump is slowly recognizing, as President Obama never seemed to, that Russia and China are waging a Cold War against us, and is beginning to respond accordingly.

This time around, China is the stronger of our two adversaries. And it signaled its determination to escalate its Cold War against the U.S. when Xi Jinping became, in effect, dictator for life.

As the New York Times puts it:

Rather than beginning a final term next month as a lame duck, Mr. Xi will govern with new authority to pursue his agenda of making China a global power even if it risks putting Beijing in conflict with Washington and triggering a new Cold War after 40 years of mutual engagement. . . .

Cui Liru, the former president of a think tank under the Ministry of State Security that often reflects Chinese government thinking, puts it this way:

In the Asia-Pacific, the dominant role of the United States in a political and military sense will have to be readjusted. It doesn’t mean U.S. interests must be sacrificed. But if the U.S. insists on a dominant role forever, that’s a problem.

A problem in what sense? China has thrived economically under the status quo. It has benefited from favorable trade deals with the U.S. And the U.S. certainly has not used its political and military power to engage in aggression against China or anyone else in the region.

The problem for China is that the U.S. stands in the way of Chinese aggression and visions of regional, and indeed global, domination. Hugh White, a scholar and former defense official in Australia, explains:

It is now clear Xi’s agenda to rebuild an Asian order with China at its center is here to stay. I think Xi is impatient. He wants China to be the predominant power in the Western Pacific. He wants to do it himself and for it to go down in history as his achievement. That makes him formidable.

According to the Times, Chinese leaders view the U.S. as a superpower in decline. They doubt that we have the will to compete economically or militarily with China in Asia.

Their doubt is well-founded. The Democrats don’t have the stomach to compete with China and until recently, Trump’s willingness to do so seemed to consist only of engaging in a trade war.

That’s changed, as Beinart says. But Trump is not a dictator and he won’t be president for more than the next seven years.

If China fails in its quest to dominate Asia, and indeed the globe, it probably won’t be due to sustained U.S. resistance. Rather, it will be down to inherent weaknesses in the Chinese system manifested, for example, by Xi’s ascension to a dictator for life.

  

Leave a Reply