…comes from the Tucker Carlson interview, not with Trump but with the Prime Minister of Hungry Viktor Orbán:
Because you know, you can criticize him for many reasons. I understand all the discussion. But the best foreign policy of the recent several decades belonged to him. He did not initiate any new war. He treated nicely the North Koreans and Russia, even the Chinese. You know, he delivered a policy which was the best one for Middle East, Abraham Accords. So he had very good foreign policy. He’s [Trump] criticized because he’s not educated enough to understand the world politics. This is not the case, Facts count and his foreign policy was the best form for the world in the last several decades I have seen. And if he would have been the president at the moment the Russian invasion started, no, it would not be possible to do that by the Russians. So Trump is the man who can save the western world and probably the human beings in the world as well. That’s my personal conviction.”
It’s worth remembering that Hungary is right next door to Ukraine and has a long and unplesant history with Russia to wit:
So if a Hungarian says that Trump is the best bet to avert a 3rd world war, a World War that would likely crush a Hungary that is a now a prosperous nation and turn it into a heap of rubble, I tend to believe him.
If you want to hear the whole thing, it’s here.
Ep. 20 Hungary shares a border with Ukraine. We traveled to Budapest to speak with the country’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán. pic.twitter.com/LOzpMrQNIz
Trump is still my 2nd choice behind DeSantis (and I suspect this week DeSantis will show why with his handling of the crisis in Florida). But if I was a Trump supporter I’d be playing this over and over again and pointing to the Trump foreign policy which was one of the most successful of this century.
Apparently Hurricane Hillary caused flooding at Dodger Stadium an excellent reminder that while God promised not to end the world by flood he gave no such assurances for Chavez Ravine.
Might I suggest that LA operate a program to make sure there are at least 10 faithful devout Catholics in the city at all times (Any Biden or Pelosi doesn’t count).
The Diocese of Worcester, which is about 45 miles west of Boston, announced last week that Bishop Robert McManus earlier this summer approved a policy titled “Catholic Education and the Human Person” for all schools under its jurisdiction starting this fall.
The policy states: “Pope Francis has repeatedly stressed the importance of a proper understanding of our sexuality, warning of the challenge posed by ‘the various forms of an ideology of gender that denies the difference and reciprocity in nature of a man and a woman and envisages a society without sexual differences.’” …
Students under the policy are expected to act according to their biological sex, including in school sports, uniforms and locker rooms.
He’s going to catch hell here in Massachusetts but he’ll help avoid hell both for himself and those under his charge.
Donald Trump has announced that he will not just be skipping one debate but won’t be attending ANY debates with his GOP rivals.
While many say this is a sound decision as he will not be challenged on things like Fauci (which DeSantis et/al will eat him alive on) the problem here is that if he doesn’t absolutely wipe out his opponents fast then any decision to debate later will look like desperation.
Trump has a pretty good record as president and he should be spending every single day comparing the Trump years to the Biden years. I think making that point bluntly on stage with the rest of the GOP candidates on stage is a winner for him.
If even half of what is being said about the Ukrainian war on the Tucker Carlson show is true the disaster that this war is going to produce is horrifying.
This is yet another cost of the stolen election in the US. If this was Trump’s 2nd term Russia would not be in Ukraine today, but then again lots of elites would not have the graft they have made off of this war.
Cowardice in not stopping the steal has incredible costs and will continue to cost more.
It has taken less than a week for the governor of Hawaii to blame the fires in Maui on climate change.
What’s really amazing about this is that compared to Biden words in Maui he sounds sane.
But the craziest thing about it all is that I suspect when November 2024 comes along Hawaii will still vote for the left because they’re rather risk being burned out of house and home than vote for a republican or even worse a conservative.
With the Biden administration proposing another $24 billion to support Ukraine’s military, I think it may be time to reassess my enthusiastic backing of the fight against Russia.
The United States is by far the largest donor to Ukraine. Congress has already approved $113 billion in military, economic, humanitarian, and other aid for Ukraine, including around $70 billion for security, intelligence, and additional war-fighting costs. An estimated 90 percent of that total has already been spent or designated to be spent.
In the past year, overall support for Ukraine has waned. According to a poll released by CNN last week, fifty-five percent of Americans now oppose more aid to Ukraine. The party breakdown is stark—71 percent of Republicans oppose additional assistance, while 62 percent of Democrats favor it.
Vladimir Putin is a bad guy. His invasion of Ukraine, which began in 2014 with the seizure of Crimea and the subsequent attacks a year ago, is anathema to world peace and security.
But is the wholesale support of Ukraine worth the cost and the potential downside of exhausting the ability of the United States to keep its military ready to fight against other threats, such as China?
The Heritage Foundation has put together a rather convincing case against continuing aid to Ukraine at its current levels.
In a recent opinion piece, Kevin Roberts, the president of the foundation, wrote the following:
–“It is simply untenable for Americans to bear the vast majority of the burden among our allies in standing up to threatening states.”
–“Our concentration on Ukraine has undermined our ability to address the worsening military situation in Asia, especially around Taiwan.”
–“However just and noble Ukraine’s cause is, continuing to focus on it at the expense of confronting and deterring China is not wise, moral, or conservative.”
Roberts makes a variety of good points. I take away three important ones. First, U.S. foreign policy must focus mainly on China’s economic and military threat rather than Russia’s. Second, the United States must take a strategic approach toward Ukraine rather than depleting American military stockpiles. Third, Russia poses a more significant threat to Europe than the United States, so NATO countries should assume a substantial burden of the cost. See https://www.heritage.org/asia/commentary/the-correct-conservative-approach-ukraine-shifts-the-focus-china#
I’m not arguing that we should cut off Ukraine. We just need to figure out a better strategy there and an even better one in dealing with China.
Blogger with a Soviet-made Volga sedan in Sece, Latvia. Behind the car is a newly-built tractor barn.
By John Ruberry
Late last month I traveled to Latvia, where Mrs. Marathon Pundit was born and raised, for the first time in 25 years. I had also visited with her in 1994.
I expected a different Latvia, and indeed that was the case.
First, a little history. A series of nations ruled Latvia, the last being czarist Russia, until 1918. The Bolsheviks recognized Latvian independence in 1920.
But along with neighboring Estonia and Lithuania, while most of the world was focused on Nazi Germany’s aggression in western Europe, Latvia was forcibly annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940. The Nazis attacked the USSR a year later, but the Soviets recaptured the Baltic States later in the war.
Three months before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Evil Empire recognized the independence of the Baltic States.
When Latvia regained its independence, the population as just 52 percent Latvian. Russians, many of them brought to Latvia to replace Latvians deported to Siberia in the 1940s, made up about a third of the population in the last days of the Latvian SSR. Many of them quickly left after independence, but Russians still make about one-quarter of the population of Latvia. Riga, Latvia’s capital and largest city, has a Russian population of about 35 percent. Russians are a clear majority in Daugavpils, Latvia’s second city.
The Latvia I saw in the 1990s was poor, my guess is, without the abject poverty, economically speaking it was on the level of Mexico.
But in 2004, the Baltic States joined the European Union, also that year they became members of NATO.
Since then, it’s been full steam ahead for Latvia, notwithstanding the 2008-09 recession.
What I saw in Latvia in June was a prosperous European nation. Gone are the gray–literally, they were gray–retail stores. They have been replaced by colorful and brightly lit retail outlets. Many of these stores, as well as hotels, utilize English-language names. Instruction in English began in Latvian schools after independence was achieved. All Latvians under 35 speak pretty good English.
I’m a runner, and I was one of the few when I hit the roads for a workout. Now there are many running, or if you prefer, cycling trails.
During my first visits I saw many Russian-made cars on the Latvian streets and highways. My wife and I traveled hundreds of miles during my nine days there–she will be in Latvia for another week—and I saw just two Russian-made cars, both Ladas. I’m pictured with an old Volga above. That make was discontinued in 2010. Volkswagen, Audi, and BMW are the most popular cars in Latvia.
Mrs. Marathon Pundit and I spent a lot of time in rural communities. She grew up on a collective farm in Sece, which is pretty much at the center of Latvia. They grew an assortment of crops, mostly potatoes, beets, and cucumbers, and while driving thru Latvia in the 1990s, the look of the land betrayed that odd lot cultivation. While Latvia doesn’t look like Iowa–there are few cornfields and about half of Latvia is forested–it’s becoming a nation of mega-farms. Wheat, canola, oats, are the major crops. And potato growing is hanging on.
My wife attended her high school reunion in Sece, she was one of three in attendance from her graduating class of seventeen. One our hosts was another, and the third, almost certainly the wealthiest man in Sece, has been buying, one by one, parcels of land that were part of those old collective farms that were divided up after independence, in Sece, from people to old to tend to the soil, or who have no interest to do so.
The prosperous farmer is the owner of that Volga in the photograph.
The graduating class sizes of my wife’s old school is now roughly 10 students per year. Rural Latvia, just like rural America, is shrinking.
Only rubble remains of the farmhouse where my wife grew up. Thousands of Latvians can attest to the same situation.
Scattered throughout Latvia are the ugly white-brick buildings, poorly built, that are long-abandoned. “That used to the community creamery in Sece,” Mrs. Marathon Pundit said to me. “That used to be the tractor motor pool, the tractors parked next to them haven’t moved in years.” She could have said the same to me every dozen miles or so when we drove past similar structures. Nearly every one of these collective farm buildings have been long abandoned. They are miniature Pompeiis that were never buried, sad monuments to the failure of communism, an economic and political system that never should have been implemented. Sadly, after over a century of proven failure, there are still people falling for Marxist nonsense.
In the cities and the small towns, khrushchevka apartment buildings, known in the West as “commieblock” structures, are still omnipresent. Most of them utilize those same unpleasant white bricks.
And in the cities, especially Riga, you’ll find many abandoned buildings that were Soviet-era factories.
Yes, I know, we have abandoned buildings in our American cities. But Riga has many new buildings–beautiful ones. I’m particularly fond of the National Library of Latvia.
Yes, but what about Donald Trump?
Okay, that was an abrupt transition, but most Latvians don’t like him. With the war in Ukraine showing no sign of ending, and when I was in Latvia when the apparent Wagner Group attempted coup occurred, his name, and that of Vladimir Putin, was brought up many times.
Oh, Joe Biden is viewed in Lativa as an ineffective old man.
But wait, what about Trump?
To a person, Latvians are pissed off about Trump’s compliments of Putin. For instance, shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine, he called Putin’s move “genius” and “savvy.” I explained that Trump is running to regain the White House, and the former president, dating back to his career as a real estate mogul, is the consummate negotiator, Trump, in my opinion, could be simply playing mind games with Putin. He used a similar strategy with Kim Jong Un. Trump’s flattery is analogous, I tried to reason, to entering a store and being complimented on the shirt I am wearing by a flirtatious saleswoman. Suddenly, my guard is dropped. True, Putin is likely made of tougher stuff than I am. I think.
Only the Latvians I spoke to weren’t buying my explanation. Don’t forget, Russia borders Latvia on the east, and Putin’s puppet state of Belarus is on Latvia’s southeast. In spite of their nation’s membership in NATO, it’s understandable that Latvians are quite nervous about Russia. Dual invasions from Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave and from Belarus into Lithuania could quickly isolate all three Baltic nations.
Latvia faces challenges, a declining population is the biggest one. While life is better now in Latvia, it’s even better in Scandinavia and Germany. European Union membership presents a dilemma for Latvia.
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 