Goodbye Marvin Dorfler

John Ashton, best known for his appearance as Taggert, the Beverly Hills cop in the movies of the same name, passed yesterday.  He was great in those films but my favorite Ashton role is as dim-witted bounty hunter Marvin Dorfler in Midnight Run.  Terrific and funny movie with many memorable lines, with an incredible cast, Robert DeNiro and Charles Grodin as the imperfectly perfectly matched pair, Yaphet Kotto, Dennis Farina, and Joe Pantoliano.  Doing a press tour for the recently released Beverly Hills Cop, Ashton tells as funny story of how he got the role in Midnight Run (starting around 1:45).  And here is a prior THC post on the film.

What's Next?

While many in Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Iran and elsewhere around the world celebrate the death of Nasrallah, leader of Hezbollah, the New York Times mourns his demise, describing the murderous fanatic as a gentle and tolerant religious sage "who maintained that there should be one Palestine with equality for Muslims, Jews, and Christians".  The Times assures us that as a Shiite, he represented a "historically marginalized group", so he was a Good Guy since he was Oppressed.  It's all about the narrative among those who hate the West. You will never see a non-Progressive coded American treated so reverently in a Times obituary.

What next for Israel, for Hezbollah, for Iran?  Hezbollah had always been Iran's ace in the hole against Israel.  The potential Israeli threat against Iran's nuclear program - a reasonable threat given Iran's policy goals of Death to Israel! and Death to the Jews! - was checked by possible retaliation from Hezbollah's huge rocket arsenal.

In 2000, Israel ended its occupation of south Lebanon without any preconditions, abruptly withdrawing its forces.  Hezbollah filled the vacuum, building its power base in the region, right on Israel's northern border.  In response to Hezbollah attacks, Israel reentered Lebanon in 2006, fighting a tough war in which it won a tactical victory but proved a strategic loss, because it was fought as a conventional war on Hezbollah's terms.  A UN Resolution promised that the area of Lebanon south of the Litani River would be demilitarized but, in reality, it was never enforced with the UN Peacekeeping Force serving as a shield while Hezbollah rebuilt its military capabilities.  After October 7, Hezbollah banked on being able to demonstrate solidarity with Hamas, launching several thousand rockets, forcing the evacuation of almost 100,000 Israelis from their home, believing itself at minimal risk of massive Israeli retaliation.

This time around Israel pursued a different strategy, focused on dismantling key Hezbollah capabilities and taking out the organization's leadership and middle management, as well as creating an atmosphere of mental insecurity for the survivors, rather than taking on its opponents in a ground war.  It's been impressive watching that strategy implemented.  Earlier this summer, the Israelis took out a good percentage of Hezbollah's rocket launching capabilities.  More recently we have the pager and cellphone exploits, and an increased pace of assassination of leadership, culminating in Nasrallah's death. 

What has also become evident is the extent of Israeli intelligence assets in Lebanon, compared to Gaza.  A lot of people in Lebanon, while they may not be pro-Israel, really hate Hezbollah, because that group has reduced the nation and its people to puppets.

In the past couple of days, it has been reported that Israel has turned back flights from Iran to Beirut carrying replacement equipment for Hezbollah, a demonstration of Israeli intent not to allow Hezbollah to rebuild.  The next question is whether Israel will take advantage of Hezbollah's current state to temporarily reoccupy south Lebanon and use the time to systematically destroy Hezbollah's complex infrastructure in the region.  If Hezbollah cannot rebuild, and other forces in Lebanon reassert themselves, it means Iran's shield is gone.

The recent events also highlight the impotence of Biden administration policy and the amateur hour performance of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken.(1)  President Biden delusionally believed freeing up tens of billions to fund Iran woud somehow have a positive impact from our perspective, instead of enabling its support of Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the Putin regime.  Blinken is the quintessential model-UN kid, living in a dream world, with the shallow credentials of expertise so common to those in the foreign policy "establishment".  His negotiations strategy regarding Hamas and Gaza is embarrassing.

Hamas:  We want 100.

Blinken:  We'll give you 95.

Hamas:  No, and now we want 105.

Blinken: We'll give you 100.

Hamas:  No, and now we want 110.

Blinken:  We'll give you 105.

When you sell your house, Blinken is the guy you want negotiating on behalf of the buyer. 

Sullivan appears to think that the Israelis are the bad guys because of Netanyahu.  I don't like Netanyahu and wish he were not in office, but after all these years it should be clear that no matter who headed Israel's government, Hamas and Hezbollah would be pursuing the same course.  Maybe we shouldn't be surprised that Sullivan appointed as National Security Council lead on intelligence matters a guy who headed the antisemitic Students for Justice in Palestine group at Georgetown.

And, don't forget, this is the team that gave a wink-wink to Putin if he was restrained enough to just "wet his beak" by taking the rest of the Donbas, giving a thumbs-up to Nordstream 2 and the INF treaty to show their good faith, and, when that didn't work, put restraints on Ukraine's response, allowing Putin an asymmetrical advantage in the use of weapons. Don't try to make sense of their policy, since they can't.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 (1) Sullivan and Blinken also played important roles in the Russia collusion hoax.  In 2016, Sullivan, then with the Clinton campaign, was one of the lead promoters of the Alfa Bank allegation, the conspiracy theory that the Trump campaign had a secret server connected with Alfa Bank that supposedly allowed the Kremlin to communicate with the campaign.  Like the rest of the allegations it was misinformation.

In 2020, Blinken, working for the Biden campaign, organized the infamous letter by 51 former intelligence officials denouncing the Hunter Biden laptop story as a Russian disinformation operation.  It wasn't, and they knew it.

Sullivan and Blinken's roles in spreading misinformation in an effort to influence presidential elections contributed significantly to the erosion of trust in our institutions, leading to the current instability in our public processes, and posing a danger to the continuation of our democracy.  They have no business being in leadership roles in our country.  They should be outcasts, shamed for their behavior.

Morning Has Broken

 Here in Maine

Stats II

Aaron Judge and Shohei Ohtani have had seasons for the ages, separating themselves offensively from everyone else in the league, in a year off general offensive decline in baseball.  The only closely competitive overall performance is by the young Kansas City Royal shortstop, Bobby Witt Jr, who combines sterling offense with top-notch defense.

In my stats post on August 24, I reported on Judge's performance over a 94 game stretch, but used some 100 game benchmarks for comparison.  Aaron's best 100 game performance actually ended on August 28.  During those one hundred games he batted .382, with on-base percentage of .517, while slugging .854 with 45 home runs and 105 RBI.

Meanwhile, Ohtani has had a incredible season, but his last eight games have seen as torrid a performance as any over a similar period in the game's history.  Beginning with his 6 for 6 night against the Marlins, he has 24 hits in 34 at bats, along with 6 doubles, 6 home runs, and 7 stolen bases.  He's hitting .706 and slugging 1.412.  Shohei has been successful in his last 34 steal attempts and is 57 of 61 for the season.  While not as prolific on the basepaths as Ohtani, Judge has stolen ten bases this season without being caught.

The Daredevil

Fifty years ago this month.  Evel Knievel's big jump never really took flight but may he always be an inspiration to every 11 year old with a bike.

pic.twitter.com/0ZDPjQ8NGf

— Darrell Epp (@DarrellEpp) September 14, 2024

Skin Suit

The other day I saw a lawn sign in our town, "Harris/Walz: Unity Over Division".

The Democratic ticket is campaigning on the themes of "Centrism", "Joy To The World" and "Uniting America".

How can this be for the party that has made the race essentialism of "Diversity Over Unity" as its governing policy since 2020, seconded only by its efforts to attain permanent power by "Unity Over Dissent", defining any policy disagreement as misinformation and/or hate speech deserving of suppression?

The answer was provided by David Burge (Iowahawk) back in 2016.

1.  Target a respected institution.

2.  Kill & clean it.

3.  Wear it as a skin suit, while demanding respect.

It's happened over and over to our institutions, that continue to trade on their prestige from the old days, when they have become merely debased propaganda outlets (see, for instance, the New York Times).

In the case of Harris and Walz, the skin suit they have donned for the campaign consists of the Democratic Party of 1996 and Centrism, a strategy that may work for those who pay more attention to vibes instead of substance and for whom the fear of Trump obliterates any reasoning power.

But what is inside the skin suit is a radical reformation of America, continuing the march of insane academic theories hostile to racial conciliation, to the family, to freedom, and to equality under the law, in which the only solution to the inevitable frictions and disagreements that arise in a nation of more than 300 million with a diversity of political and religious beliefs, and of different racial and ethnic backgrounds, is the suppression of opposition in the name of "preserving democracy", when "democracy" is defined as doing what Democrats want.

It may work, as the Democrats have four advantages.  

First, they are much more effective in aligning their rhetoric with a strategy to achieve their goals than Donald Trump.  The Democrats use their rhetoric to obscure their goals.  It's their skin suit.

With Trump it's the opposite.  His reckless rhetoric undercuts his goals.(1)  Trump can sound authoritarian (and ignorant), yet most of his actions while President were not, and most of his policies were centrist.  The best example of the mismatch is with regards to Russia.  Much of Trump's rhetoric regarding Russia and Putin was irresponsible and terrible, while Biden talked tough about Russia during the 2020 campaign and thereafter.  But what were their actions? 

- In contrast to the Obama administration, Trump authorized the sale of anti-tank weapons to Ukraine, weapons which proved critical to that country's defense in the early days of the Russian invasion.  At the time, AP sadly reported that, by doing so, Bad Man Trump had created yet another "sore point" between Washington and Moscow.

-Trump vocally opposed the Nordstream 2 pipeline, which would supply Russian gas to Germany, because, as he argued, it would make Germany economically dependent on Russia.  For this he was mocked for alienating an ally.

- Biden, upon taking office, endorsed Nordstream 2.  In fact, when Senate Republicans tried to introduce a resolution rebuking Biden for that support, Democrats used the "Jim Crow" filibuster to avoid the resolution even coming to a vote, so they would not have to take a public position.

- Trump vocally urged NATO allies to increase their military expenditures, for which he was mocked by our allies and American media outlets.  Doesn't sound so bad now, does it?

- Trump withdrew from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty with Russia, because of the Kremlin's noncompliance with its provisions.

- Upon taking office, Biden said, "where do I sign for the INF extension?".

- Trump imposed sanctions on Russia's ally, Iran.

- Biden lifted the sanctions on Russia's ally, Iran, providing billions of funds which Iran is using to supply armaments to Russia in support of its Ukraine invasion, as well as to Hamas and Hezbollah.

- In 2017, Trump went to Poland, delivering a speech in Warsaw praising that country as an ally, and warning Russia "to cease its destabilizing activities in Ukraine and elsewhere, and its support for hostile regimes — including Syria and Iran", adding, "We must work together to confront forces, whether they come from inside or out, from the South or the East" 

- Biden labeled Poland a "rising totalitarian" regime (because, at the time, its government was not considered progressive), grouping it with a real totalitarian regime, Putin's ally, Belarus.

- Up until the moment of the Russian invasion in February 2022, Biden sent signals to Putin that the U.S. would do nothing if Russia satisfied itself by just seizing the remaining parts of the Donbas Region, something Trump never did. 

- Trump encourage increased oil and natural gas exploration and fracking in the U.S., all of which lowered global prices, hurting the Russian economy.

- Bush hindered such exploration, helping increase oil prices and aiding the Russian economy. [NOTE: The National Intelligence Assessment on Russian interference with the 2016 election, stated as undisputed fact that Russia supported the anti-fracking movement in the U.S.].

The bottom line:

In the Bush administration, Putin invaded Georgia.

In the Obama administration, Putin invaded Crimea, the Donbas region of Ukraine, and intervened in Syria.

In the Biden administration, Putin invaded Ukraine.

In the Trump administration  . . .

Yet the public impression is much different, and part of that is due to Trump's own rhetoric, which allows the Democrats and media create false narratives on this and other issues, and it is a trait he clearly cannot, or has no interest in, modifying. 

The second advantage is the role of the news and social media in creating a bubble in which many voters who don't carefully follow politics exist.  We've seen how quickly most of the news media has switched on a dime from telling us that Joe Biden remained on top of his game mentally, and running stories questioning Harris' ability to step up, to rapturous coverage of Harris and Walz. (2)

But it is the longer term existing bubbles that create the information world in which most of us exist.  An example is the Russia collusion story, which I've covered in exhaustive detail, and is the greatest political scandal in American history, though for a large percentage of the populace that scandal doesn't even exist.

What I've experienced speaking with people who live within that media bubble is complete disbelief with what I've learned from reading the source documents.  Over and over again, I've heard people say "I read the Mueller report", but upon further inquiry it becomes clear that what they read is what the NY Times, the WaPo, the New Yorker, or other such publications or news media said about the Mueller report, which is quite different.  That media bubble is very difficult to penetrate.

The third advantage is that the sheer insanity of what the Democratic party has become inside the skin suit is hard for people to believe, particularly for older, more traditional liberal Democrats.  When you tell them that the Biden administration has repeatedly declared its top domestic priority to be promoting a conspiracy theory that whites and Jews have attained and maintained their positions in society by plotting to promote white supremacy and that is the sole explanation for any group discrepancies in America, and that all federal actions need to be taken applying those analytical lenses, they simply will not believe you because it sounds so bizarre, so un-American, and such a repudiation of traditional liberal values because it denies the legitimacy of free speech, freedom of conscience, due process, equal protection under the law, and a sense of basic fairness to individuals.

The final advantage is they are running against Donald Trump, who has no discipline or self-control when it comes to campaigning.(3)

-----------------------------

(1) "Goals" is probably the wrong word to use, but not sure what that right one is.  Trump cannot articulate meaningful goals in most cases, beyond a very high level statement.  He constantly improvises and sees what works for him and his audience.  It's why, on an issue like Ukraine, Trump's rhetoric has been all over the place.  He really doesn't know what he thinks, other than falling back on the one constant in his public life; he'll negotiate a "great deal".  In that way, he is oddly like Harris, who is stunningly inarticulate.  Her inability to speak coherently on policy is because she's never had to think clearly or deeply about serious issues.  She comes from a one-party state and has, from the start of her career, been in campaign mode, just saying stuff that her partisans like to hear, even if it doesn't make much sense.  It's why she ducks any tough questioning.  We are in such deep trouble as a country with these two people as presidential candidates.

(2) And why does the same news media, now ignore that a clearly incapable Joe Biden remains nominally president? Who is making the big decisions in this administration?

(3) To be fair, Trump's greatest advantage is he is running against Harris.