BIDEN’s WAR

I said this in the days leading up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and I still believe it today:  President Biden wants a war with Russia.

Why do I say this?  Several reasons. 

First, before the invasion and up to the current moment, Biden seems to be doing everything he can both to not deescalate the situation and to anger Putin so that he becomes ever more aggressive. 

Before the invasion, Biden had sanctions he could have imposed to possibly deter the invasion.  He did not use them until after Putin began dropping bombs on Ukraine.  He then dolled out minor sanctions little by little, sanctions that could no longer be used for deterrence since the assault they might have deterred had already begun.

Long before the invasion, long before Russia began building up troops at the Ukrainian border, Biden had promised Ukraine we had its back.  We didn’t and we don’t.  Once the war began Biden agreed,  then refused to provide necessary air power to Ukraine by way of Poland or otherwise.  He accepted Putin’s threat not to close the air space over Ukraine or risk the possibility of all out war, maybe nuclear.

Yet at the same time we have CIA in Ukraine.  Biden yesterday stated we are helping to train Ukrainian troops.  Biden called for regime change in Russia to remove Putin.  He told a group of our troops they would be going to Ukraine.  Of course, with the help of talking points, written out on cards by his White House handlers, Biden has now denied making all these statements, calling assertions that he did so to be “outright lies.”

Yet, according to world leaders who were there, these “lies” that Biden made while in Europe have undermined peace negotiations and made Putin even more focused in his unrelenting aggression against Ukraine. 

Biden wants to fight Russia.  Or at least he wants to have a proxy war in Ukraine against Russia.  (The only alternative explanation is that he has not a clue what he is doing.)  

The big question is: why does he seem to want this war?

Actually, Biden’s performance regarding Russia-Ukraine is not unlike the rest of his performance as President and indeed throughout his political career.

Biden likes to lead from behind.  In this instance everything he has done that might have prevented or lessened the harm to Ukraine has been too little too late.  But that is not unlike his performance regarding Afghanistan.  It is not unlike his performance in most every crisis where he tends to ignore or deny there is a problem and/or assert that he has it all under control, then, when he cannot deny or ignore any longer pushes a blame story against his political opponents and then uses the damage caused to excuse damage caused by his own policies as well as missteps.

This is nowhere clearer than in regard to inflation, rising gas prices, supply chain issues and food shortages.  All of these problems existed well before Putin began amassing troops at Ukraine’s border.  These issues have come about since Biden’s inauguration as a result of his and his Leftist Congress’s policies.  Yet, Biden is now more than delighted to use Russia as cover for his disastrous presidency.  

We are told it is Putin who causes our gasoline inflation while Biden continues to limit gas production in our own country that would significantly impact and lessen the prices.  We are told that we must be prepared to suffer food and other shortages along with rising prices for most consumer goods due to the Russia war.  Yet, again, these problems were created by Biden and his disastrous domestic policies long before Putin began his move toward the Ukraine.

So, a Russian war provides cover for our President.  But that cannot be the only reason that Biden seems so eager to be at war with Russia.

I am not a psychologist, but my guess is that a psychologist would have a heyday with Biden.  My observations over the years of his political life do lead me to make some observations that may provide some insight. 

I think that Biden thinks he is a lot smarter than he is.  Maybe that is why he is something akin to a pathological liar; why he needs to boast about accomplishments that are not his and make up stories that are not true.

I recall his first act of plagiarism that made the national news:  in the 1980s then Senator Biden admitted he had plagiarized a law review article back in the 60s when he was in law school.  The fact came out because Biden authorized release of his law school file which he said would demonstrate his “honesty and openness.”  The report of his plagiarism was in the file and Biden then covered by saying as a student he just didn’t understand the rules.  Hard to believe since plagiarism is considered a serious sin in every law school in America and from day one students are taught what it is and that is not ethical to do it.  (One would like to assume that most students are already well aware of plagiarism long before they enter law school).

Biden also plagiarized scores of campaign speeches throughout his career.  When caught he always had one of his “C’mon man” excuses.  In 2019 and 2020 his presidential campaign “lifted language without credit” and when caught, Biden placed full blame on his campaign staff. 

He also lies about his political history, claiming to have supported that which he opposed when it is convenient for him to do so.  The most current example is his claims that he has always believed a Black woman should be on the Supreme court, conveniently forgetting his more than 2 year attempts to deny a judgeship to a Black woman, albeit a conservative, whose appointment would have put her on a fast track to SCOTUS.  (He used the filibuster in part to block that nomination; he now asserts that the filibuster should be abolished.)

Biden regularly makes false claims about his personal history from his childhood and lives of his parents, to jobs he claims to have but actually never had, to being arrested during civil rights protests, to visiting our southern border.  He also lies about his family, denying the actual time when his relationship with his current wife began and of course lying about his son Hunter and his foreign interactions that at a minimum implicate Joe himself.

So, Biden is a liar.  Perhaps those lies are all based on insecurity or to fool himself into believing he is the man he would like to think he is.  And perhaps he is angry with those who do not recognize the greatness of that fictional persona. 

That anger would certainly explain his apparent hatred of his political opponents (not a simple difference of political policy, but very real, tangible hatred).  That anger seems to extend to America itself, or at least the core ideals that have made America the great nation that it is and that many of his opponents hold dear.  Meanwhile, he rewards supporters with any number of taxpayer funded programs.   Biden’s domestic actions since becoming President seem to have all been at least in part directed toward destroying and then remaking America into a very different place.

But back to his war with Russia.  These lies that seem to be a core essence of Biden’s character may also be behind his foreign polices.  Again, he wants the world to recognize him as the great leader that he believes that he is but that too few seem to recognize.  A war with Russia would not only give him cover for his disastrous domestic policies, but it would also prove to the world that he is a great leader because of course he believes he will win that war. 

The alternative, of course, is that his war could destroy the world as we know it.  But then, perhaps he would see that as just punishment for all those who failed to believe in his false greatness that he himself sees as real.

Or he could just be so senile that he has no comprehension of what he is saying or doing (although to explain his consistent history of inconsistencies and lies, that senility would have had to have been with him for 50 years at least).  I suspect that whatever senility he has simply exacerbates the problem of his delusional greatness of ability and with it his consistent missteps that are destroying America and now the world.

I think Biden is a selfish, self-centered person who cares nothing for those around him other than how they might be useful to him.  He has clearly acted in racist and sexist ways in the past, though now he asserts his support for minority populations.  He has been outspoken against illegal immigration and supported a “very high wall” though now he is for open borders.  He has supported the American dream but now considers it a lie. 

Joe Biden uses those about whom he really has no concern and then tosses them aside when their usefulness to him is over.   He will do whatever is necessary to keep himself in a position of power because that is where he believes he should be.

And now, that power combined with his incompetent belief that he is smarter and more clever than he really is are allowing the destruction of Ukraine and its people.  This because a war with Russia is something that Joe Biden wants, something that he believes is useful to him because it will explain away the crises he has already created and somehow prove to the world his true greatness.

These are dangerous times that we live in.  Senile or not, Joe Biden is a dangerous man.  We all need to see and understand what he is doing.   This is Biden’s war – just the latest fiasco in his history of lies and denials.  But this fiasco is one that is affecting the entire world.

Blame, Excuses, and Ignorance

I have been watching the confirmation hearing of Judge Jackson to become Justice Jackson and I am very troubled.  If this is the best that this country can put forward to sit on the highest court in the land, then this country is in deep trouble.

Thus far what I see from Judge Jackson is an understanding of Constitutional law that is not much better than that of an average second year law student, an inability to take responsibility for her actions, both as a lower court judge and in other aspects of her legal career combined with a keen ability to make excuses and blame others.

I realize we have another day or more of hearings, but at the moment I am not convinced that Judge Jackson should be confirmed; indeed, I hope that her confirmation fails.

Methodology is not Philosophy

Judicial philosophy is an important aspect of determining the suitability of a Justice to the Supreme Court.  That philosophy incorporates a multitude of aspects of the Constitution and Constitutional law as well as an understanding of our form of government and its checks and balances.

Although sometimes referred to by the terms liberal and conservative, judicial philosophies are not necessarily affiliated with liberal or conservative political views.  Instead, they reflect an approach to how one interprets and applies the constitution and existing law to a case under consideration.  Basically, philosophies will be based either in an attempt to construe what is unclear in a way that is usually limited and consistent with the intent of the framers or in a view that is more likely to see the constitution as a sort of living document to which rights and responsibilities not specifically referred to in the document can nonetheless be discovered by the Court.

Most law students in required and perhaps additional elective Constitutional Law classes will study these philosophies in addition to the Constitution itself and the law it has generated.  Students will become familiar with the philosophies of the current as well as past Justices and learn to understand how a different philosophy will direct a different conclusion and result in a case, both past and hypothetically in the future.

Methodology is how one goes about using their judicial philosophy.  It is the method not the underlying guiding principle.  The method will generally be the same regardless of the underlying philosophy:  understand the facts of a case, understand the relevant law including what aspects of that law are settled and what aspects are open to interpretation.  If an interpretation is required, go to accepted and/or required rules of interpretation as well as use your judicial philosophy to apply and interpret.

Judge Jackson does not have a judicial philosophy.  She has a methodology:  look at the facts and apply the law consistent with the Constitution.  That may sound good in passing, but the devil is in the details. That phrase “consistent with the Constitution” will be controlled by one’s judicial philosophy, something that Jackson says she doesn’t have but perhaps something which she is not willing to (or her handlers have told her not to) disclose.

When asked what Justice, current or past, she saw as a good model she could name no one; she was not familiar with what their judicial philosophy is or was – not even Justice Breyer for whom she clerked. 

I have to conclude that Judge Jackson does not understand what a judicial philosophy is, let alone what hers might be.  As a trial judge that doesn’t matter so much because she is not sitting on the highest Court in the land deciding cases that affect our very democracy but is instead deciding cases for which the law is well settled and simply needs to be applied to facts proven at trial.  And improper decisions will be fixed on appeal.  Even as an appellate Judge she still is not deciding cases of the magnitude of those faced by the Justices of the Supreme Court.

Law vs. Policy

Judge Jackson’s lack of a clear philosophy is dangerous.  First, it reflects what is becoming a clearly apparent lack of understanding of the Constitution and a lack of familiarity and/or understanding of Constitutional law.  (I really don’t understand why those who prepared her did not address her obvious ignorance in this area and ask her to hit the books and study before her hearing began.) 

Or perhaps she really doesn’t understand the difference between law and policy – a key difference that separates the political and policy branches (Congress and Executive) from the Judicial branch.  The policy branches are elected and thus the policy reflects the voice of the people.  The Judicial branch is not a policy branch specifically so that policy is of the people and not a fiat by 5 (majority) justices. 

The judicial branch is about the law.  Someone who sits on the Supreme Court needs to understand that and needs to have a better understanding of Constitutional law than this nominee has demonstrated to date. 

The law does not care about what the Court looks like.  I was particularly offended by the testimony during Sen. Feinstein’s questioning this morning that if confirmed Justice Jackson will be a role model for little Black girls.  It is not the job of the court to be a role model just as it is not the job of the court to make policy.  It is the job of the Court and therefore of the Justices to be faithful to the law and the Constitution.  And if they are role models too, then they should want to be role models to all children, not just those of one race or gender.

Accountability

The Supreme Court is the Court of last resort.  The buck stops there. The Justices must know what they are doing; they will have no one but themselves to blame for their decisions.  Which is why Judge Jackson’s seeming inability to take responsibility for her District and Circuit Court opinions is troubling.

Of course, like any trial Judge, Judge Jackson must follow existing law.  But beyond that, she seems to not want to take responsibility for anything.  When asked about an Amicus Brief she wrote and signed, she said she was just doing as told by those who hired her.  (An amicus brief is not written on behalf of a client in the case before the court in which the brief is filed; rather it generally advocates for a particular outcome, often based on policy, hoping to persuade the court to which it is addressed to decide in a particular way.) 

While an attorney is in a way nothing more than a hired gun, when an attorney signs his or her name to a document, under court rules that attorney is certifying, among other things, “the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law” and that “the factual contentions have evidentiary support.”  Most attorneys take very seriously the act of placing their signature on a pleading or other legal document.  At a minimum they will have carefully read and understood the document before signing.  Thus, I was quite surprised when Judge Jackson was completely unable to discuss allegations in an amicus brief she had authored and signed.

When asked about her sentencing as a trial judge, especially in regard to pornography cases, Judge Jackson blames her consistently low sentences (well below sentencing guidelines and prosecutorial requests) on Congress for not making guidelines mandatory or clear. 

She excuses statements in a law review article she wrote by saying she was just a law student then.  She seems not to understand that a Law Review Note, while presenting current law, also presents an analysis and conclusions of the author about that law.  When faced with similar statements made by her  as Judge on the record in a recent sentencing hearing, she can’t comment because she doesn’t have the record in front of her.  These statements involved her seeming view that society and the law are too harsh on pornographers; one would think she could explain that even without a record in front of her. 

General Legal Knowledge (or lack thereof)

But then so many things that Judge Jackson was asked about she either didn’t understand or clearly had never even heard about until the Senator asking the question explained it to her.  That is frightening.

In my opinion, from what I have seen thus far, Judge Jackson may be an adequate lower court judge, but she is not ready for the Supreme Court.  Maybe one day she will be, but today is not the day.    She is charming and has a fairly good understanding of the role of a trial judge, but that is not enough.   She lacks a solid grasp of the law and legal concepts that are crucial to understanding cases that come before the Supreme Court.   

On the highest court in the land I expect to see the highest, most stellar legal minds.  I do not see that here.

This nominee seems to think that she would skate through this hearing as the first Black Female to be nominated.  Her supporters do seem to imply that she should be confirmed on that fact alone, so perhaps she believes the confirmation is assured.  I hope that is not the case.  Not only because it would be destructive to the Court, but because it would also not create a role model but rather an embarrassment to those “little Black girls” that she and her supporters think they are championing. (For another time is a comment on the hypocrisy of Democrats making a big deal out of this “first” when they, including then Sen. Biden, filibustered and voted against other Black female judicial nominees when they were conservatives). 

I hope that the Senate will not confirm this nominee.  I hope that the President will then look at qualified candidates, not just those who meet a particular race or gender requirement and pick a truly stellar legal mind for the Court.   If that person happens to be Black, all the better, but reducing candidates to the color of their skin is wrong on so many levels.   Picking a nominee based on the content of their character and qualifications, not just as a “first”, is what can truly make everyone in this country proud.  And for those who care about our fragile democracy, it is the best way to preserve and protect its greatness.

Focus on the Rule of Law

This coming week begin the confirmation hearings for Judge Jackson to become Justice Jackson of the Supreme Court.  I previously wrote two posts dealing with this specific SCOTUS nomination and the link to each is here:

               1.  Justice Jackson, 2/25/2022. CLICK HERE

               2,  Lady Justice, 1/22/2022. CLICK HERE

I reiterate the importance of the thoughts in both of those posts regarding the fact that this nomination was the first in modern times in which any number of well qualified individuals were excluded from consideration simply because of their race and sex.  

But that discriminatory criterion is what the President chose to use, and we have a nominee set for questioning.  At this point my main concern is that the questioning of this nominee will be rigorous.  Rigorous does not mean acrimonious but it does mean that the nominee must be held to account for past judicial activity and past statements or actions that may be relevant to her ability to serve as a fair and impartial justice on the highest court in the land.

Since she was nominated, I and others have had some time to look into those things.  It is clear that her personal beliefs and agenda are liberal.  That does not disqualify her unless (and this is a very big and important UNLESS) she is unable to set those personal views and agenda aside when asked to hear and decide cases coming before the Court.

Her past record would seem to make the answer to this question uncertain.  Many cases that she has decided appear to rely more on her personal beliefs of what should be the outcome and/or what the law should be rather than what the law is and might mandate.  I don’t know if that is because she is not capable or willing to be impartial or if it is because she lacks a clear understanding of the role of a judge and the legal principles underlying the application of law to the actual facts of a case.  

Sometimes the law mandates an outcome that a judge personally finds abhorrent.  But to allow the judge to change the mandates of the law based on his or her personal and emotional preferences would completely undermine our rule of law.

Which leads me to another point worth pursuing.  We are told that it is important to have a Black woman on the Court and especially this Black woman because her upbringing and life experiences are different.  If you buy into this, it is a great argument for packing the court with nearly as many justices as we have citizens of the United States.  Afterall, don’t each of us have different life experiences?  And within the identity groups to which Judge Jackson belongs and which are the primary criteria for which she was selected, there are many different life experiences and viewpoints. 

But none of that is relevant, because when a judge or justice puts on the black robes, he or she must put aside those personal experiences and feelings and opinions.  She or he must simply understand the facts of a particular case and the law that is relevant to that case and objectively apply that law to the facts to reach a reasonable and legally supportable opinion of what the result must be.

These are the questions that must be put to Nominee Jackson.  The Senate must be assured that she is capable of doing what a judge must do:  fairly decide a case based on law and fact and not on personal opinion and emotion, and most certainly not on what is currently most popular with society or with one or another political party.

This nominee must be pressed.  Her statements that she will be fair, that she understands how to apply law in rendering a judicial opinion must be questioned beyond and below the surface.  These are relevant and no one should get testy over such questions.

I fear that those questioning this nominee will be faced with calls of racism or sexism if their questions become too difficult.  That seems to be what happens if anyone questions a member of a specific identity group or the views and agenda of those supporting that individual.  But if the questions are relevant, even if tough and a bit aggressive, they must be allowed.  Afterall, the Democrats found it relevant to attack a nominee based on false allegations about his high school behavior; certainly they should not oppose questions dealing with this nominee’s adult professional activity and her legal and judicial performance to date.  Those questioning Judge Jackson must not be deterred.

In the end, the filling of this position with an avowed liberal, even if her legal reasoning turns out to be less than stellar, will not make a lot of difference in the outcome of cases.  She will be replacing a solid liberal vote on the Court, and every Justice gets just one vote.

The damage will be not to the specific case outcomes, but to the long term credibility of the Court and with that comes damage to the justice system and our rule of law.  But that damage has to large extent already been done by Biden in using discriminatory and exclusionary criteria to select this nominee.

A Few Short Notes

These short thoughts are a few of many than regularly come to me when I hear the “news” or think about the political and world situation.  These all, along with many more, deserve further discussion and elaboration in the coming weeks. 

NO, it is not “Putin’s Price Hike”.  While Putin must take the blame for the horrors he is inflicting in Ukraine, this is Biden’s, not Putin’s gas increase.  Biden finally stopped buying Russian oil (good, though late) but he still refuses to open this country’s oil and gas production.  Thus, rather than produce gas locally we still must import it, which is increasing the costs.  Biden’s policies had already unconscionably raised gas prices and it is those policies that are causing it to rise further.  Continuing to buy foreign rather than return to American oil independence is what is causing the unprecedented hikes at the pump.  Biden’s coining and use of the hashtag “PutinPriceHike” is blatantly false.

Not producing gas in America does not turn the world green.  To think that hiking gas prices will cause us to immediately turn to renewable energy is ridiculous.  To tell us that is the way we can support Ukraine is another falsehood.  First, that cannot happen overnight.  Second, we continue to use oil and gas, but instead of producing it here where we do so in the cleanest fashion, we buy from countries whose actual production does greater damage to the environment than would American production.  Then, we must transport it here, which leaves additional carbon footprints. And none of that will stop the immediate tragedy in Ukraine.

Is the administration so stupid that they think by not producing American oil that we will be instantaneously green? If yes, then we are in deeper trouble than I thought.  But no, they know exactly what they are doing.  Perhaps they think they are somehow teaching us a lesson on how to be green, but for sure they know they can use this to make people think that our inflation at the pumps and elsewhere is not Biden’s fault but instead belongs to Putin.  Just another lie from an administration for whom lying seems to be the only thing that they do well.

Never let a crisis go to waste.  That mantra from the communist ideology is well understood by the Left in this country.  That and the idea that if you repeat something, no matter how false, often enough the people will believe it to be true.

The real world is not the world that one aspires to.  Sen. Manchin had it right when on Sunday’s Meet the Press he said our leaders and policy makers have to start living in the real world.  That world cannot be aspirational in the sense that when one has aspirations/aspires to something, they are looking for a reality that does not currently exist but toward which they would like to work.  To expect reality to be at this moment the aspirational world that one envisions is not only stupid, it also likely defeats the aspirational future.  Yet, the Left would have us all behave as if we were now living in their aspirational world.  That is not only an impossibility, but their demands that everyone accept their delusions are destroying the world.

A day late and a dollar short.   Biden’s actions relating to the Ukraine situation have all been too little too late.  He removed sanctions which he said he would use as deterrence when necessary.  He didn’t begin to impose sanctions until after the act (war) that they were supposed to deter had begun.  He held back on the most significant sanction (Russian oil) until it was clear that public opinion would not stand for him to hold back any longer.  He now seems to think that if we all just stop using non-renewable energy then Ukraine will be saved.  Is he really that stupid?  Or is this all part of his agenda?

 “You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”  I think that used to be true, but that was before the news media became spokespeople for the popular lie rather than spokespeople for facts and truth.  Now I’m not so sure.  Clearly the Biden administration and the Left think that if they simply repeat something often enough that with the help of mainstream media that they can fool all of the people all of the time.  Hence the most recent assertion – that this gas hike is Putin’s fault.

Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire.  I don’t know what happened to fact checkers (well, actually I do –most have been proven to be biased and inaccurate) but I do know that our President, if not a liar, is a total hypocrite who regularly speaks out of both sides of his mouth (perhaps a forked tongue?).  For example, on Ash Wednesday Biden, asserting his alleged Catholicism, wore ashes on his head – a sign of a devout Catholic who, if truly devout would honor the sanctity of life and oppose abortion.  On Ash Wednesday Biden also spoke out in favor of abortion.  More broadly, he claims to be all about support for the working/middle class (which he claims to understand and be part of) but everyone of his policies hurt the middle class.
Here are just a few of the recent blatant lies told by Biden (these from Politifact):

•   As a youth, “I got arrested” protesting for civil rights.  FALSE
•   “I’ve been in and out of Iraq and Afghanistan over 40 times.” FALSE – never been there as president or in recent years.  May have gone to visit son when he was serving there and in Iraq.
•   “I’ve been against that war in Afghanistan from the very beginning.” FALSE
•   “I used to drive a tractor trailer … I only did it for part of a summer.” FALSE – never drove one.
•    "The Second Amendment, from the day it was passed, limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own.” FALSE and demonstrative of a failure to understand basic  Constitutional principles.  The Second Amendment limits governmental power, not the right of individuals to own a weapon. The first national gun regulation law in 1934 did not rely on the Second Amendment.
• “The boilermakers union has endorsed me because I sat down with them and went into great detail with leadership [about] exactly what I would do.” FALSE – they didn’t endorse him.
•  Senate Republicans' move to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court in an election year is "not constitutional."  FALSE and again shows a lack of understanding of the Constitution, our nation’s governing document which Biden swore to uphold.
•  Says he was the first person to call for invoking the Defense Production Act. FALSE
•  “The NAACP has endorsed me every time I've run.” FALSE – the NAACP doesn’t endorse candidates.

The above are just a few of the multitude of lies, ones that he has told since 2020.  The Politifact list from which these were culled goes back to  2007 (LINK).  Some can remember back further to his acts of plagiarism as Senator and many other lies.  This man lives in a world of lies, saying whatever is useful at the moment.  

Is truth no longer important?  Certainly not to the president.  Not to mainstream media “journalists.”  Not to the politicians and partisans who want the world to be entirely made to their design.  Not to those who are looking to create a “new world order”, probably one in which they see only themselves as holding all the power.  But I still like to believe that truth and honesty still matter to the everyday Americans who make this country what it is.

What to make of it all.  These short thoughts do have a common thread.  It is that Biden, his administration, and the Left live in some world that is not the world in which the rest of us live.  In their world facts and truth take second place to their own narrative.  Biden is either deluded or diabolical:  he either has no clue about what he is doing or what a president should be doing or he is acting to further a calculated scenario that destroys this country and the world order as we know it.  I just wonder what happens to those of us who don’t want to live in Joe’s aspirational world.   

(poster from Newsmax TV)

Whose Side is Biden on?

 Supporting Putin's war with our oil money, negotiating to buy Venezuelan oil and thus help finance another dictatorship, joining Russia and China in a deal very favorable to Iran and its nuclear program, all while destroying American economy and culture – it sure looks like Biden has chosen to align with socialist dictatorships rather than democracy.

OIL

Let’s look at the oil aspect of this.  Under the previous administration (the one with the mean tweets that also actually did so much to make America and its economy great again) we were energy independent. 

As part of the numerous policy reversals that Biden took upon becoming President, actions seemingly simply taken out of spite and not based on thought or logical rationale, he halted pipelines, oil leases, and oil production in America.  We are no longer energy independent.

So, having made us dependent upon foreign oil, Biden has put this country in the position of funding Russia’s war against Ukraine.  This is a position that he could remove us from almost immediately simply by restarting American oil and gas production.  Not only would we once again be energy independent, we would be able to provide energy to European countries currently dependent on Russian oil.  We could cut off the supply of blood money to Russia.

That alone would be good.  The reopening of our internal energy production would provide jobs and income and would boost our economy.  It would help to fight Biden’s inflation including the daily price hikes at the gas pumps.

But Biden refuses to do this.  He does not want us to be energy independent.  He says we can help the Ukrainians by going green instead.  Do the environmental experts at the White House not understand that we cannot go green overnight? That just because we are not getting gas and oil from America does not mean that it is not being produced elsewhere, probably less cleanly than we do it here and with the additional environmental impact of transporting foreign oil to our country?

No, he apparently does not understand that (or chooses not to).  Instead, he is negotiating with Venezuela.  His secret oil meeting with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was a huge PR boost for the socialist regime, a regime with notoriously outrageous human rights abuses.  Biden may be willing to trade our giving blood money to Russia for our giving it to Venezuela, but he is not willing to simply bring the money back home and produce the oil here.

Biden is also negotiating with Saudi Arabia and who knows what other countries; negotiations that are unnecessary when he could simply open U.S. oil production again.  (I’m wondering if North Korea has oil, maybe we could give them some blood money too.)

What kind of president acts so callously and so disregards his country’s own people?  Only one who is senile or simply hates his own country so much that he would perhaps enjoy seeing it destroyed.

WAR

Everyone needs to recognize that Russia’s war on Ukraine is a complicated situation with a long history leading to this Russian invasion and there are many who merit some blame.  Let’s also acknowledge that Putin does not see the world as we do, and at the moment he has a very destructive focus that is likely to go well beyond Ukraine.

But did this war have to happen?  Perhaps, and perhaps not.  But certainly, the actions of President Biden leading up to the Russian invasion were not wise, did nothing to prevent the attack, and likely provided encouragement to Putin.

Beyond removing sanctions, including sanctions on oil, that the prior administration had in place, Biden also failed in other ways that served to encourage Putin. 

Biden completely failed in the Afghanistan withdrawal last fall, something of which the Putin administration surely took note of.  As Putin then began increasing troops at Ukraine’s border, Biden did little more than wring his hands.  What little more he did was not helpful. 

Biden issued warnings to Putin, but never followed through.  He said we would not commit troops, which was an assurance to Putin that he would not have to face American soldiers.  Biden told Putin that “small incursions” would not warrant serious retaliation.  

Biden stated he would use sanctions as a deterrent at the right time.  Note to Biden:  deterrent means something that discourages someone from doing something.  If you want sanctions to deter an invasion, you need to use them before the invasion occurs.

After the invasion which Biden did nothing to deter, he announced sanctions while stating that sanctions never work, and it would be months before they could take any effect.  Did he not notice the Russian troops piling up at Ukraine’s border on which maybe sanctions imposed earlier might have been able to have a deterring effect?  Or did he just choose to let Putin move forward?

And now, Russia has invaded.  Biden bemoans the damage and destruction to Ukraine and imposes sanctions that are likely to have no effect whatsoever on Putin’s decisions to move forward and continue his attacks on Ukraine.  And the one sanction that might actually have some effect – cutting the purchase of Russian oil – Biden refuses to impose.

Again, I ask, what kind of president acts so callously and so disregards his country’s own people, not to mention the people of Ukraine? What kind of President seeks out countries that would like to destroy us as business partners from whom we will buy products we could easily produce ourselves? Again, the answer seems to be only a president who is senile or simply hates his own country so much that he would perhaps enjoy seeing it destroyed.

CHINA

There is so much bending to China’s will, primarily because we need much of what China provides to us.  Again, I note, that President Biden, while saying words like “buy American”, does nothing to encourage making that a reality and hence ending some dependence on China. 

China is not our friend.  Nonetheless, Biden provided our intelligence about the war, how he would handle sanctions, etc., to China.  Was Biden the only one to whom it was not obvious that China would immediately provide all that information to Russia?

But perhaps worse is his overlooking of the Chinese genocide of the Uyghur Muslims.  Biden talks a good talk about his concern for human rights, both in our country and abroad, but he certainly does not walk the walk. 

Again, I ask, what American who appreciates democracy can ignore so much that is undemocratic?

IRAN

The new Iran deal will be finalized in the coming days.  Iran is our sworn enemy, yet Biden has continued to negotiate with Russia, China, and Iran, all enemies of the United States.  The agreement will restore nuclear capability to Iran and, in the words of a Russian diplomat taking part in the talks, “Tehran got much more than anyone expected.”

BIDEN

So, again, I ask, what the heck is our President doing?  Certainly not conscientiously fulfilling his oath of office.  Certainly not competently carrying out his duties.  Certainly not doing what is best for America.  But yes, acting in any number of ways that are benefiting our enemies and those who are the enemies of democracy.    For an American president this is simply unacceptable.

Accusations and Condemnations do not help the Ukrainians

 From recent headlines:

UN votes to condemn Russian invasion of Ukraine
NATO accuses Russia of using cluster bombs
West condemns attack on nuclear plant

During Tuesday’s State of the Union address, Biden condemned Russian President Vladimir Putin and vowed that the United States is supportive of Ukraine.

That’s all great.  But condemnations and verbal support do not end the holocaust (I do not use that word lightly) that is occurring in Ukraine right now.

What is the West DOING?  What is President Biden DOING?

The West’s NATO refuses to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine, despite pleas from Ukraine.  They say it was “a painful decision.”  Well, not nearly as painful as it is to the people of Ukraine who are dying.

President Biden keeps adding to his list of sanctions, all of which are ineffective.  Yet he continues to purchase Russian oil and gas, thus daily providing funds to the Russian war effort.  He does this while claiming he supports Ukraine, while that blood money he pays to Russia is used for the war effort that is destroying Ukraine and its people.

Talk is cheap.  The Ukrainians see the total ineffectiveness of talk as they realize they are nothing more than a disposable pawn in the power games of the West and Russia (and probably China too). 

We promised the emerging democracy of Ukraine that we would always have its back as we pushed it to join the West’s ever-expanding NATO power structure.  But where is that support now that the killing has begun?

Biden promised he knew what he was doing when he released Russian sanctions as part of his reverse everything Trump did policy.  When it was obvious to the world that Putin was likely planning an invasion, Biden continued to do nothing, saying sanctions would be better used after an invasion.  Now he says sanctions take months (if ever) to work.  If he knew what he was doing then he knew he was about to hang the Ukrainian people and their culture out to die.  If he had any remorse about doing so one would surely never know it.

Biden’s lies have put Ukraine in a no-win situation where they can continue to fight until all are dead and the country totally destroyed, or they can give up and let Putin have his way with them and their country.  As they continue to fight, their strength against Russia may be increasing the risk of nuclear and/or world war.  But how can anyone ask them to stand down and give up their country and who they are?

This is the no-win situation to which the accusations and condemnations without supportive action have led us.  Putin’s actions are clearly condemnable and criminal.  But simply saying that does not stop them.  What would have stopped them before they began would have been action in the form of sanctions and diplomacy.  That time has passed.  What might have caused Putin some pause would have been a better handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal by President Biden, but the lies and weakness and incompetence he showed there cannot be rescinded. 

Ukraine is being slaughtered.  Biden seems more concerned with not upsetting the Woke and Green wings of his party.  He will not lift his ban on oil and gas production in this country – a ban that is making us dependent upon Russian oil and gas such that we are indeed funding Putin’s war.  Biden is about to go forward with the Iran deal, adding nuclear capability to another country that is clearly not our friend and is a likely Russian ally.  He has shared our Russian intelligence and sanction strategy with China – yes, China!  And they of course shared it with Putin.

Biden is Putin’s ally and accomplice, no matter what his words may say.  We all know the phrase “actions speak louder than words,” and Biden’s actions directly contradict his words of support for Ukraine.  I don’t know if Biden’s actions and inactions rise to the level of war crimes, but they sure come close as being Putin’s enabler.

So what can we the people do? Make our voices heard. Write to the White House, write to Joe Biden, write to your representatives and senators in Congress.   Tell them to open U.S. oil/gas production.  Tell them that Ukraine needs weapons, not platitudes.  Tell them that the America that we all know and love would not allow Ukraine or any country to be a sacrificial lamb to a President’s political and power agenda. Take action with your votes in the upcoming midterms and future presidential elections.

It may very well be too late.  But perhaps not.  We owe it to the Ukrainians, whom our country urged to move toward democracy and Western values and promised support for doing so.  They kept their promise.  We need to keep ours.

Putin is dropping bombs, Ukraine is dying, and Biden makes promises.

Putin is committing war crimes.  He is targeting civilians including children.  Ukraine is being destroyed. 

It did not have to come to this. 

Biden told us he has known what Putin would do all along, yet he failed to do anything until after the bombing began. 

Our President is funding Putin’s war effort.  Biden continues to buy oil (over 200,000 barrels per day) from Putin rather than let us reopen our oil production in this country (our capabilities would produce more than what we buy from Russia).  What is Biden waiting for?  How many more have to die? 

Meanwhile, Biden keeps taunting Putin who is becoming more and more erratic and more likely to be pushed to actually use the nuclear weapons as he has threatened.  I hope all Biden’s supporters remember that they told us that President Trump would get us into a nuclear war; the reality is that it seems that Biden is actually more likely to do so.

I am distraught over the horror and destruction in Ukraine.  I am more distraught watching our President pretend he has the situation under control.   Perhaps he is happy to sacrifice Ukraine so that he has an identifiable enemy to pontificate about.  Perhaps he really believes he can still have his “Cuban missile moment.”

It seems that Ukraine is nothing more than a pawn to Biden; one that he has no problem sacrificing while he uses its people as set pieces during his pathetic State of the Union speech. 

Biden said “buy American.”  If only we could buy American oil once again.  But his refusal to let us do so underscores his lie that he is “doing everything [he can] to stop Putin.”

Biden calls Putin evil.  Putin is clearly that, the evil actor killing innocents, their country, and their culture.  But I place Biden beside him as an accomplice.   Biden may not be dropping the bombs, but he, who told us and Ukraine he would not let this happen, left Putin with no other move to make in this chess game between two unstable leaders, neither of whom gives a damn about the real people involved.

Biden’s State of the Union speech last night was not that.  If it was, he would have told us that the state of the Union is a disaster.   But instead, he gave us lies, statements that contradicted one another, and a list of promises that will only further bankrupt our already bankrupt country. 

And the people in Ukraine are being murdered.  And Biden is lying when he says he is doing everything he can.  He is sidestepping until the only option will indeed be World War Three, perhaps (actually likely) a nuclear war. 

I sit here writing in frustration because what can one person do when so many in this country are willing to look the other way just so long as they don’t have to read mean tweets.  Anyone who, at this point, even attempts to justify this President’s behavior has the blood of the world on his hands.