Beijing causes panic after accidently announcing that they will pursue a zero-Covid strategy for the next five years.

 

A security guard watches children return to school in Beijing. The Guardian/Getty.

Beijing has caused a panic after accidently announcing that they will pursue a zero-Covid strategy for the next five years. The Guardian. The notice was posted by Cai Qi, the Beijing secretary of the Communist Party. The news went viral on Weibo, China's social network, before the government removed the reference and associated hashtags. Qi said the restrictions will include isolation of infected people, restrictions on travel and regular testing. China is unique in that it is one of the few countries pursuing a zero Covid strategy. Most other countries have returned to normal and are learning to live with the virus. 

My Comment:

This story broke on Monday but I did not see it until now. I thought it was important enough to cover since China's actions on the Coronavirus pandemic affect the world, not just China. This incident is not a good thing for anyone as far as I am concerned. 

Why? Because it will cause economic problems for the entire world, not just China. The world, very foolishly, depends on China to product products for them to buy. We have seen what that has led to when China restricts their population with these stupid lockdowns. It's why we are seeing shortages and huge backups at ports. If China has another major breakout of the virus and stick with this plan it could put more stress on the world's economy, which is already under extreme pressure due to the energy crisis. 

It also makes zero sense for China to pursue a zero-Covid strategy. The virus is nowhere near as dangerous as it was when it first came out. Most people now have a mild infection at worst, with many people not having symptoms at all. People are still getting sick, and a few even die, but it's not anywhere near like it was during the start of the pandemic. 

It's amazing to me that anyone still cares about the virus. Things have been normal here in Wisconsin for around a year now. Hardly anyone wears masks and other than a few paranoid people, nobody cares about the chance of getting the virus. Most people have gotten the virus now, survived and realized that it isn't much of a threat. 

I do wonder if this was a mistake though. China does often mention five year plans in their announcements and it might not have too much to do with the actual conditions on the ground. That might be giving them too much credit though as they do seem serious about going all in on fighting Covid. 

It does make me wonder how much more the Chinese people are going to put up with it. Though I don't think there is any apatite for revolution in China, the people there have to see how things are back to normal just about everywhere else, at least in terms of restrictions. They have to be wondering what their leadership is thinking. I don't think the Communists are anywhere near losing the "mandate of heaven", but this could contribute to discontent if another disaster happens... 

The oil industry is in deep trouble with limited choices to reverse the damage.

 

An oil well in Texas. Eric Kounce. 

The oil market is facing a major crisis with limited options for world leaders to correct the mess. Reuters. Global supplies are falling steadily as production is unable to keep up with demand. This will likely lead to a major depression if efforts aren't taken to lower prices but there are few options on the table. One of those options is to increase production, but most OPEC nations are already at or near full production. Shale producers will increase production but are unlikely to make up the difference. The only other option is to lift energy sanctions on countries such as Iran, Venezuela and Russia, which would require a major foreign policy change. 

My Comment:

It certainly looks like America is facing a reckoning when it comes to energy prices. Prices are already out of control with gas averaging around $5 a gallon with diesel being even more expensive. This has had a major impact on basically every facet of economic life. I know I have cut back on my spending and canceled tentative vacation plans this fall and I doubt I am the only one. 

This is largely a man-made crisis by the Biden administration and his European allies. The sanctions on Russian energy has caused prices to explode, though they were increasing even before the war in Ukraine. It's not so much that the sanctions are causing this but the fact that there was no plan for some kind of alternative. 

And I don't think there is much that can be done as far as OPEC is concerned. The above video was a hot mic moment between Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron saying that Saudi Arabia is about at peak production already. Most OPEC nations are as well and it does not seem like that is a solution. Plus, I have to point out, the Saudis absolutely despise Biden, to the point where they haven't been taking his phone calls. At this point they probably want to see us collapse. 

The other options have a better chance of working but I don't see them working out. Lifting sanctions on Russia would greatly increase supply and would solve much of the problem, but I can't see Biden ever doing that even if the war ends tomorrow. And that's considering the fact that fuel sanctions have actually helped Russia's economy. They haven't had trouble finding new buyers for their oil, and though they aren't selling as much they are making bank from it. Ironically, lifting sanctions would do a ton to hurt the Russian economy as it would dramatically lower prices. 

Lifting sanctions on Iran and Venezuela would help as well, but that seems politically impossible. Efforts have been made but nothing much has come from it. There is also the fact that Venezuela would take forever to ramp up production. They have nationalized their oil industry and that action left it in shambles. Long term it would help but in the short term it isn't going to do much. 

Domestic production could have been the solution, but we haven't even started to ramp up production. Even if we did it today it wouldn't help for a year or so. The problem would be solved but again, it's a long term solution, not a short term one. 

But Biden would never go for it. He is beholden to the climate change industry and isn't going to stand up to them anytime soon. He's in the cult of global warming and they have wanted to destroy the US oil industry for years now and they aren't going to give it up now while they are on the verge of success. 

Things are going to get ugly and get ugly soon. I don't think we will see gas rationing like we have been seeing in Sri Lanka, but I don't think that is impossible. At the very least we are going to see skyrocketing prices and we will likely see a recession. The Biden Admin is unlikely to take the steps to reverse this and it's too late anyways. 

Also keep in mind that the government's silver bullet to this mess has already been fired. The Strategic Oil Reserve is already being drained and will probably run out this fall. Releasing it did not do much to end the crisis but it did make it better, if it wasn't done we might already be in a major recession.. 

So things are going to get worse before they get better. I am expecting prices to go back up soon, past the record levels they have already reached. The fever will eventually break when the prices become so high that people simply stop buying things, but that is a ways off, and that recession will have its own major problems. 

All of this makes me wonder if the peak oil people were right in the end. They got proven wrong in the past due to the revolution that was fracking, but I don't know if we have another technological breakthrough in the pipeline. Eventually we will run out of oil, so our current situation might be the status quo at best... 

New voicemail leak shows that Joe Biden knew about his son Hunter's deal with China.

 

Joe Biden. New York Post/AP.

A new voicemail leak shows that Joe Biden knew about his son Hunter Biden's deal with a Chinese oil tycoon accused of economic crimes. New York Post. Joe Biden had always maintained that he never talked to Hunter about his various business dealings, many of which appear to be illegal. However the new recording has Biden saying "I think you are in the clear", referring to a 2018 New York Times report about Hunter's deal. Hunter Biden's deal was with Ye Jianming, an rising Chinese energy star that was accused of economic crimes by China and has disappeared. According to another leak from Hunter Biden's laptop, one of Hunters associates claimed that Joe Biden would receive 10% of the money from his son's deal with Jianming's company, China Energy Company. 

My Comment:

The Biden family corruption is well known and has been well detailed. Biden has always denied that he had nothing to do with Hunter Biden's corruption but that is obviously not the case. Biden was knee deep in it and it's pretty obvious that he's massively corrupt. 

In a sane world, Biden's relationship with Hunter and Hunter's various crimes would have been the top story but instead the outlets that broke the story were censored and the story was prevented from spreading. It is just another reason why the 2020 election was illegitimate. 

In the big scheme of things though, this story isn't that important. Everyone knew that Biden was lying about his son and the fact that we now have proof of it isn't a huge deal. Biden's statements about how he had never talked about Hunter's business dealings were never even remotely believable. 

Though I think the Biden's family's connections to China are disturbing I thought that the connections to Ukraine are a lot more relevant and devastating. Hunter Biden famously was on the board of a Ukrainian energy company in a do-nothing job that he was totally unqualified for. It is widely suspected that the entire thing was a way to launder money from bribes. 

Given that the world risks a world war over the Ukraine conflict it's hugely important to note that the guy in charge of our foreign policy was getting money from the country. It goes a long way to explaining why Biden has been so hardcore against any kind of deal with the Russians that could end the war. Doing so would cut him off from his dirty money. 

This doesn't have too much to do with the corruption accusations, but it's shocking after listening to he audio how much more coherent that Joe Biden sounds back in 2018. He's not stuttering or confused and he's articulate. Not so much today. Even when the cracks started to appear in 2019 and 2020 Biden was more coherent then than he is now. Biden's mental abilities have regressed massively... 

 

46 illegal immigrants found dead in tractor trailer in San Antonio Texas.

 

Police at the scene of the disaster. Reuters/Texas Tribune. 

At least 46 illegal immigrants were found dead in a tractor trailer in San Antonio Texas, near Lackland Air Force Base. Texas Tribune. 16 survivors were brought into hospitals for treatment. Cross border smuggling has been a problem and occasionally people die in hot conditions while being smuggled in tractor trailers. However, this case is much more severe than most incidents of this nature. 

My Comment:

This is hardly the first time this has happened, but the loss of life is fairly stunning. And it might get worse, not all of the people that were rescued from this trailer may survive, meaning the death toll could get even worse. 

Death was fairly predictable with this kind of transport. If people are locked into a trailer with no way to get out and are left in the heat with no water or way to cool themselves they will die in a fairly predictable manner. It's not a good way to go to say the least. 

Whoever did this to these people should be charged to the full extent of the law. This was negligent homicide to say the least and leaving these people to die is terrible. I hope whoever is responsible for this gets the book thrown at them. 

What is shocking to me is that there are safer ways to do this. One would expect a trailer with a refrigerator would be the way to go with this kind of smuggling. Reefer units allow climate control and would bring down the temperatures to survivable levels. It's possible this trailer was equipped with a reefer unit and it coded out and failed but even then it was totally negligent to not keep the trailer cool. 

In the end though, I think at least some of the blame goes onto the Biden administration and their insistence on an open border. Under Trump the border was mostly a solved issue. But once Biden came into power he threw open the gates and this was the predictable result...

Sri Lanka is rationing fuel due to economic collapse.

 

Soldiers check fuel tokens at a gas station. CNBC/Reuters. 

Sri Lanka is rationing fuel due to an ongoing economic collapse. CNBC/Reuters. Sri Lanka is dealing with an economic crisis and foreign reserves at a record low. Fuel will now be reserved for essentials including food transport, health service and public transportation. Even with restrictions Sri Lanka is likely to run out of fuel in a week to ten days. Schools will be closed and everyone will be advised to work from home. The country is falling apart and it is feared there will be more clashes between pro and anti government forces. Sri Lanka is trying to get a bailout from India to resolve its economic situation. 

My Comment:

I haven't been paying close attention to Sri Lanka but it is crazy that they are in such a poor financial situation that they will be running out of fuel. Fuel rationing like this is almost unimaginable even in the third world but it is happening. 

Sri Lanka's economy is a basket case for many reasons that should sound familiar to Americans. They have huge budget deficits and are dealing with major inflation. The government also has done some incredibly dumb things, like moving to only organic farming, which had predictable results. Doing so caused them to be no longer self-sufficient in their rice production and ruined their tea exports. 

Some of this is due to the utter destruction of the Sri Lankan tourism industry. The massive ISIS attack in 2019 did not help things at all but that's not the only problem. Many people don't want to go to an economically stable country. Things were made worse due to the war in Ukraine as both Russia and Ukraine are a major source of tourism for the country and that has obviously been shut down. 

I don't really know enough about the situation to know if Sri Lanka can pull themselves out of this misery. It doesn't look like it. If they are at the point where they are even rationing fuel I don't things will be getting much better anytime soon. 

I do think that this problem won't be limited to Sri Lanka. Fuel prices are out of control and Sri Lanka is far from the only country that is dealing with inflation and huge amounts of debt. Sure, they have other problems but I just don't see how things get better until fuel prices drop. And given the war in Ukraine and the reluctance of oil producing countries to pump more oil I think that things will get worse before they get better... if they get better. 

Russia captures the critical city of Severodonetsk

 

The city of Severodonestk during heavy fighting. CNBC/Getty/AFP. 

Russia has captured the critical city of Severodonetsk, bringing much of the Luhansk oblast under their control. CNBC. Both sides have confirmed that Ukrainian fighters have quit the city. The victory was the biggest one since Russia captured the city of Mariupol. Russia will now attempt to cross the river to capture Severodonetsk's twin city, Lyschansk. Russia has switched tactics in the war, avoiding their failed attempts at blitzkrieg style armor attacks moving towards a slower, grinding artillery offensive. 

My Comment:

This news broke yesterday, but given Friday's abortion ruling here in the United States, the US media is totally out to lunch on this and all other stories. Plus, it's not like they are motivated to point out that Russia actually got a major victory.

A quick note. Every single news article I have seen has spelled Severodonetsk differently, sometimes differently in the same article, like this CNBC piece. I don't really know if the way I am spelling it is the former pre-war spelling or it's like Kiev and Kyiv. Or is it just different media outlets choosing different spelling? I don't know or care which way is politically correct but I am going to go with the one that's easier to spell, assuming I am spelling it right in the first place. 

Still, it was foolish of these Ukranians to keep contesting the city for as long as they did. The city had been surrounded and all the bridges over the Seversky Donets river had all been blown up. At that point they should have pulled out but Zelenskyy insisted that the troops there fight to the end, against the advice of his generals. 

It was stupid to not pull out then and I am not sure how many of Ukraine's best troops were able to make it out of the city. I said back when the bridge was blown that Ukraine might be able to ford the river or by using small boats, but they would lose much of their equipment doing so, and with heavy casualties to boot. Without more information it's unclear if that happened or not, but my guess is that the retreat was more of a rout. 

We will likely see a repeat of this debacle happen in Lyschansk. The only advantage for the Ukrainians is that the Russians will eventually have to cross the river, which will be somewhat difficult. However, I have little doubt that the artillery strategy Russia has used to great effect. The Ukrainians simply can't counter this strategy because they have largely run out of ammo. 

Sure, the United States and Europe are supplying arms but it's not enough for Ukraine. They are going through it as fast as it is being delivered and much if it is being destroyed before it even reaches the front line. The Russians still have a huge amount of weapons stores and won't run out anytime soon. The Ukrainians would need an equal number of weapons to match the Russians and that simply isn't possible with the level of production the west has for weapons. 

But the biggest problem for the Ukrainians is the fact they are running out of troops. When the war began the Ukrainians had a large, combat tested army. But that army has largely been destroyed with most of those troops killed, wounded or captured. Much of Ukraine's forces now are made up of conscripts and reservists. And morale is going to collapse with this defeat. 

My thoughts on the overturn of Roe v Wade...

 

The Roberts Court that made the decision in Dobbs v Jackson. Fred Schilling. 

As you are almost certainly aware the Supreme Court has ruled in Dobbs v Jackson that Roe v Wade is no longer the law of the land. This happened yesterday but I decided to not write about it then for several reasons, the biggest of which is that I wanted to go fishing instead. Given the hysteria online it was probably better for me to go out and touch grass so that is exactly what I did. Plus it gave a bit of time for the most unhinged people to calm down a bit. 

This post is going to be more of my own personal reaction to the case and the aftermath and not as much a round up of what happened and why it happened. There are a million places to get that and at this point it's not super relevant. Apologies in advance for the listicle format. 

1. My own views on abortion are esoteric and not strongly held. I have never really cared too much either way about abortion as it has been a total non issue for my entire life. It's just not something I think about much and a total ban or total access would not affect me in anyway, with the possible exception of me getting a woman pregnant accidently. In all honesty that is not very likely at my age and level of social interaction. If I had to make a choice, gun to my head, between a total ban and no restrictions, I would probably go with a total ban, but that's like asking me who I think the President of Argentina would be. It's just not something I feel strongly about. 

Generally speaking people tend to view abortion as a black or white issue and I don't. I would allow it in some cases, forbid it in other and make it mandatory in some extreme cases. That alone puts me outside of the mainstream on the issue, even though I think a lot of America would agree with  a compromise between pro-life and pro-choice. I personally think that the only people that would have a problem with at will abortion in the 1st trimester, extremely rare in the 2nd and banned entirely in the 3rd (outside of the rare rape/incest/mother's health exception) would be acceptable to almost anyone except hardcore pro-life and pro-choice people. 

I also tend to think of things on a more strategic level. Though I lean towards pro-life, I do have to admit that the Democrats would have had their demographic total victory if they hadn't left three entire generations of babies behind the dumpster at Planned Parenthood. If winning was the only consideration, I would expect the positions on abortion to flip, with Democrats being against it and Republicans being for it (and that does seem to be the case among the fringe left and fringe right). I was going to write an entire essay about that at one point but I figured both pro-life and pro-choicers would be infuriated with me for saying it...

2. I find both sides annoying. I said I lean pro-life and that is true, but it's not because of the quality of the arguments they make. Indeed, I think I was pro-choice out of spite when I was in high school because there were often protesters that would have posters with aborted babies on them while I was just trying to drive home from school. Seeing an aborted baby didn't change my mind, it just made me sick to my stomach and it annoyed me so much I was pro-choice out of spite.

 It's like how I didn't have any opinion on gay marriage at all but when it came up to a vote in 2006, I voted no because I lived in college at the time and I couldn't leave my dorm room without being harassed about gay marriage. Seeing pictures of aborted babies made me even more angry than that did, but thankfully, it largely stopped after my time in High School. 

Plus, I'm not a very religious person, and most pro-life arguments are religious in nature. I'm a lapsed Lutheran and abortion didn't come up much when I still went to church, but I have certainly heard enough from Catholics and other more dedicated pro-life Christians. They just don't resonate with me  at all. It's a shame because the secular arguments against abortion are stronger, but they just simply aren't made. 

With all that being said, I hate the pro-life people even more. They have gone nuts in the past few years. Seeing former Virginia Governor Ralph Northam say that he wanted post-birth abortion was shocking to me, but elicited nothing more than yawns from the pro-choice community. They have become parodies of themselves.

And the quality of their arguments are pretty terrible. When they aren't referencing The Handmaiden's Tale they are spouting off about woman's rights and how men can get pregnant too. Plus they defame their opponents by saying it's not about saving babies lives but about "controlling" women. I never bought that argument and I never will. 

Finally, both sides don't seem to get that abortion hasn't really been banned nationwide. It's just going to be left to the states to decide. In red states (or purple like my home state of Wisconsin) it will be illegal. In blue states, nothing will change! But it's the blue states that are whining about this the most, which boggles my mind... 

3. I would have much preferred that the political capital that the Republicans just spent was spent elsewhere, specifically gun rights. This was a huge deal for Republicans and one that they will have to spend a huge amount of political energy to preserve.

This is incredibly annoying to me given how much of a threat our gun rights are under. Unlike abortion, I care deeply about gun rights and it's the only issue I'd be willing to lay down my own life for. Abortion is a major distraction and will help people forget how terribly the Republican Party just betrayed us on gun rights. 

I also think that the ruling will probably galvanize the left and though I think the Republicans will destroy the Democrats in 2022 anyways, if the Democrats have a chance at all it's because their voters will be motivated now. If it was going to happen I am glad that it was overturned now because if this was a normal political cycle with a Democratic President that was in anyway popular or competent it would probably cause a huge amount of damage in the next election. As it stands right now, I don't think the disadvantage this gives the Republicans does not outweigh the huge advantage having a terrible economy and terrible president on the other side, but if the Democrats do manage to keep the Senate it's going to be because of this issue. 

4. Despite all that I am happy with the ruling. Regardless of what you think of abortion in the first place, Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey, were badly decided cases. The court invented the right to privacy out of thin are and the ruling was simply wrong on the facts of the constitution. It was always going to be overthrown eventually. I also think that massive social issues like this should be handled by the legislative branch, not the judicial. Indeed, Democrats only have their selves to blame for this as they had 50 years, some of which they held both houses of Congress and the Presidency, to codify abortion and they did not. 

But it's also just good to have my "team" get a major win like this. This is the biggest win since Donald Trump was elected in 2016 and should be rightly celebrated on the right. Even if it's not something I care about it, it is good to finally get a win after the absolute disaster that has gone on since 2020. It gives me some hope for the future, which, I have to say, I have not had much of lately.  I also think that it is an another example of how people are shifting to be more conservative. Outside of the internet most in real life reaction I have seen to this ruling is non-existent. People are just sick of the left and I hope that continues. 

And I think it's another example of just how badly the left is doing right now. Biden has been a total failure as  President from any perspective but now even hardcore Democrats have to be wondering what on earth is happening in the White House. I don't know how Biden could have stopped this ruling (and I am glad that he can't) but it has to be totally demoralizing for Democrats to have one of their cornerstone issues like this ripped out from under them. Honestly, if it hadn't been for the gun rights ruling SCOTUS just put out, I would feel the same way about gun rights, but at least Republicans are in a "one step forward, two steps back" situation there. The Democrats here didn't so much as step back but fall down the stairs and break their necks. It's horrible for them and that is something I am happy about. 

5. I think people will adjust to the new status quo pretty quickly. Indeed, that's what happened when the news leaked in the first place. Democrats were really upset for a week but then they got distracted because of the Uvalde School Shooting and then the January 6th hearings. The issue is back for now but I am sure something else will come up to distract them yet again. 

As for normal people, the issue won't come up unless they are hardcore into the issue or they are considering an abortion. The former will be status quo ante, only with the pro-life side on top for the foreseeable future and the pro-choice folks being the underdogs. Normal people will go along with their lives... 

As for me, I hope this means I don't have to write about abortion for a long time. Like I said, it's not a topic that I am deeply interested in, and I almost felt compelled to write about this time. To be fair it's probably the biggest supreme court decision in recent history, so a post was warranted. But unless something major happens, like the continuing wave of pro-choice terrorism, I doubt I will write about it again for quite some time.. 

Supreme Court rules New York gun law restricting concealed carry unconstitutional, in a major win for gun rights.

 

A Glock at a gun buyback in New York. Fox News/AP.

In a 6-3 decision the Supreme Court has ruled a New York gun law that restricted concealed carry unconstitutional. Fox News. The ruling states that New York's law, which required applicants to show "proper cause" was too restrictive as it said carrying for self defense was not enough. The court argued that violated not only the 2nd Amendment but the 14th Amendment as well, and also ignored previous precedent set by Heller and McDonald, two major gun rights cases that were the last ones to be decided by the court. However, the ruling said that it was constitutional to require a license to carry, but that the license had to be obtainable for a normal person. The opinion also lamented that the 2nd Amendment was being treated as if it was not equal to other Amendments. Three liberal justices disagreed and cited gun violence as the reason. However, Justice Alito pointed out that the gun law in place in New York did not do a thing to stop the most recent mass shooting there in Buffalo. 

The name of the case is New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen

My Comment:

This is obviously a huge win for gun rights and is the most important ruling that SOCTUS has done this term. And yes, that include the probable ruling on abortion tomorrow, which I will most certainly cover if/when it happens. No other right is so vital to the survival of the United States than the right to keep and bear arms. 

The ruling has essentially banned "may issue" or "no issue" CCW schemes and forced the six states that still had may issue into a shall issue scheme. Breyer actually does a good job explaining the difference between the three schemes in his dissent, even though he was arguing against the ruling. But as a review, "may issue" means that the government can decline a permit to a law abiding citizen if they feel like it. Shall issue means they have to give the permit to anyone who qualifies. 

Given that 44 states are shall issue now, with many having moved onto permit less "constitutional carry" schemes, New York's law really was an outlier. In New York you basically couldn't get a permit in New York City unless you had connections because they would reject for most reasons. The high level of crime rampant in New York City was not a valid reason under this law, which is idiotic. Of course the idea that they could reject someone's permit that could lawfully own a gun was always an obvious violation of rights and directly went against the 2nd Amendment. 

I am assuming that all of the remaining "may issue" states will have to now update their laws and practices so that they will become "shall issue" states. However, I do wonder how this will work in practice. States like New York, New Jersey and California are insanely against gun rights and may do whatever they can to make the right hard to exercise. I am thinking they may try something like huge fees for applying or slow walking applications to prevent people from exercising their rights. Indeed, I fear that some states might simply ignore the SOCTUS ruling here. Keith Olbermann, a dangerously insane man, has suggested just that. 

I don't think their arguments have any merit though. The world has not ended as the country has largely moved on from may issue and no issue CCW schemes. America does have mass shooting problem, but there is evidence that the situation would be much worse if it wasn't for CCW as there have been many mass shootings that were either stopped or prevented due to armed Americans. 

This has been some rare good news in terms of gun rights. As SCOTUS has ruled against a major gun control scheme the Senate is pushing their own nonsense, with the betrayal of 14 GOP senators. This ruling puts that law, which would include red flag laws and restrictions on 18-20 year-olds, in jeopardy. It might take years to get through the courts, assuming that the ruling doesn't actually change some senators minds. Justice Thomas has a new standard that the courts must consider when evaluating gun laws and it essentially bans using "think of the children" as an excuse. The only thing they can consider is America's historical relationship with guns. Under this standard "assault weapon" bans would likely be ruled unconstitutional as Americans have owned military grade firearms for the entire existence of the country. 

The Democrats, predictably, are acting like the sky is falling. It makes little sense at the ruling was fairly limited in its scope at this time. It merely brings a few blue states in line with the rest of the country. But it's not the law that matters here, it's the fact that the court actually ruled in favor of gun rights at a time they want them completely eliminated. The fight for gun rights is far from over and I hope that this ruling means that the court will take up more gun rights cases in the future. 

Massive earthquake in Afghanistan kills at least 1000 people.

 

People evacuate the injured via helicopter. CNBC/Bakhtar News Agency. 

A massive earthquake in Afghanistan has killed at least 1000 people. Reuters.  The magnitude 6.1 quake destroyed buildings and trapped people inside of the rubble. Rescue operations are being complicated by bad weather, including heavy rains and landslides. The Taliban are trying to coordinate the rescue operations and the effort will be a major challenge for them. Afghanistan is dealing with a major economic crisis in the wake of the Taliban's takeover. The earthquake was the worst one in 20 years in terms of casualties. 

My Comment:

Americans have largely forgotten about Afghanistan as the media has done everything they can to memory-hole how the Taliban took over the country. But it happened and it is still having repercussions for the region. 

The Taliban are probably not going to deal with this event well. They aren't helped by the weather which is extremely bad and might be a disaster in its own right. It's really hard to rescue people in torrential rain and landslides are going to complicate things even more. That's the last thing they need. 

But they were going to have problems regardless. Much of the infrastructure in Afghanistan was destroyed and the Taliban have largely been cut off from western help. They just don't have the equipment and skills to rescue their people here. Indeed, I was very surprised that they still had some helicopters flying to assist in rescue operations. 

This could be very bad news for the Taliban. They are already dealing with an economic disaster that this earthquake will make worse. A lot of people are going to go broke as well because they banned opium production, which was Afghanistan's biggest cash crop. So things are already very bad there. 

But failing to properly react to a major natural disaster could push things over the edge. People will tolerate a lot from a government but they won't stand for it when they fail to react well to a disaster. Just ask George Bush, who's response to Hurricane Katrina, was largely viewed as a failure (unfairly in my mind) and was a reason why Barack Obama was elected in 2008. Obviously there aren't going to be any elections in Afghanistan anytime soon, but it could lead to a revolution against the Taliban. 

Either way, this was a major natural disaster and I think it will get worse before it gets better. I also don't expect Afghanistan to get much help, they have burned their bridges with just about everyone. It's going to be a rough time for anyone living in the country. 

Police in Chicago will no longer be able to chase suspects that flee from them in most circumstances.

 

Chicago police at a graduation ceremony. NBC News/Chicago Tribune/Getty.

Police in Chicago will no longer be able to chase suspects that flee from them in most circumstances. NBC News. Police will only be able to begin a foot pursuit if they suspect the suspect has or will commit a felony, a class A misdemeanor or certain driving offenses. Police will not be able to detain people suspected of minor crimes such as public drinking or parking violations, even if they run. The policy was in response to a pair of black men who ended up dead in foot pursuits. 

My Comment:

This is an idiotic policy and it's the kind of thing that will cause crime to spike. Which is really saying something since Chicago has some of the worst crime in the country. Chicago has had more than 200 murders in April and has had many more since then. The city regularly sees over 500 homicides and is wracked by other violent crimes, including regular shootings. 

The police are now going to be hamstrung even more and won't be able to confront people who run away from them. There is no valid reason to run from police, the only reason you would do so is because you committed a crime. That means even more crimes will go unsolved and the people that would have been caught in foot pursuits.

And I don't care at all about the fact that police might shoot a criminal or two if they are allowed to pursue them. Cops killing criminals is not a serious problem. And most of the time those killings are totally justified. 

I'm going to go back to my college days and explain a common concept in policing. It is called broken windows policing. It basically states that police should focus on smaller crimes as getting those people off the streets will reduce crime. It also states that focusing on public order crimes gives the impression that people can't get away with crime, thus deterring it. 

Police have largely moved on from broken windows policing and have changed to focusing on community focused policing. Though community focused policing has advantages, it has proven to be a failure as communities now reject the police regardless of the job they are doing. Because the media misinforms people on police shootings they are now demonized even more than they were before. 

Chicago seems to be using neither approach and just seems to be ceding criminality in much of the city. If cops can't even chase criminals what incentive is there to not run away from every crime you commit in Chicago? It's basically a free pass unless you get reported or the police see you commit a crime. It seems like a great place to be a criminal. Instead of being proactive by either focusing on small crimes or trying to work with the community, they are raising the white flag and just saying "it's ok to commit crime, we can do nothing to stop you. 

And they wonder why crime is exploding nationally? Why wouldn't it? Cops can't do their jobs and criminals are given a free reign to do what they want. Indeed, I think the only reason the crime hasn't spread out of the cities is because most Americans in the suburbs and rural areas are armed, and they are working on changing that as well. 

I can't understand why anyone would want to be a police officer in Chicago. Not only are you not allowed to effectively do your job, but if something happens the government will not even pretend to have your back. I don't understand why these cops don't just resign and get a better job somewhere else. 

Germany fires up coal energy plants in response to natural gas shortage...

 

A German power plant. CNBC/Bloomberg/Getty.

Germany has fired up dormant coal energy plants in response to the European natural gas crisis. CNBC. Germany gets much of it's power from burning natural gas, but in response to Russia restricting supplies and various sanctions, Germany will have to switch to coal. Germany wants to conserve gas supplies because European homes are reliant on natural gas to heat homes. The hope is that Germany will be able to store enough natural gas this summer to survive fall and winter. Russia has been threatening to cut of European gas supplies in response to sanctions against them. Europe gets 40% of their gas via pipelines with Russia. 

My Comment:

What is the most shocking thing to me is that Germany turned to coal plants instead of their nuclear power plants. Those power plants do not pollute anywhere near the amount that coal plants do, but Germany bafflingly shut them down in response to the Fukushima disaster in 2011. 

Those nuclear plant would be a much better option for Germany if they wanted to save gas supplies. But they won't do it because they somehow think that it's a worse option? It makes zero sense and it seems extremely hypocritical on the German's part. 

I do think that Germany needs to prepare for this winter and do it soon. They will need all the fuel they can get to heat homes in winter. Even a mild winter can be deadly if you don't have heat and not being able to heat homes can cause major problems like frozen pipes and other damage. 

I also don't think that the German people would tolerate a government that can't even properly heat their homes. People will tolerate a lot but they won't stand for cold homes in winter. They will try and replace their government by any means necessary if people start dying. 

Russia is in a very strong position here. They can afford to lose whatever profit they lose from cutting off gas supplies and by doing so they are bringing Europe to their knees. Russia has suffered a bit from sanctions but their effect has been crippling to Europe. All they have to do is wait until winter and European governments will likely be begging for Russian natural gas. 

Of course the whole thing is moot if the facts on the ground in Ukraine change. If Russia manages to defeat Ukraine militarily or manage a diplomatic solution than the situation becomes even more dire for Europe. Some people support these sanctions because they, somewhat foolishly, believe that they are helping the Ukrainians. If that is no longer in play than there really isn't a purpose to keep these sanctions other than spite. 

On the other hand Russia honestly doesn't really have a reason to let up on punishing Europe. Like I said, a winter without heat will do massive damage to European governments and whatever replaces them might be more hostile to NATO or less hostile to Russia. I guess it could backfire on them and they get a much more nationalistic and anti-Russia government as well, which is especially relevant in Germany. 

Regardless though, all of Europe basically depends on their government getting this energy crisis figured out. Germany is going to try and solve it with coal and I don't know if that will work or not. If it doesn't than Germany is going to be screwed and the government may fall. 

Woman's swimming organization decides to ban most transgendered people from swimming competitions.

 

Lia Thomas. NBC News/AFP.

Woman's swimming organization FINA voted to ban most transgender people from competing in woman's swimming events. NBC News. The members of FINA voted in favor of a new gender inclusion policy with 71.5% of the vote. The policy would ban any transgender person that transitioned after age 12. They noted that they were not encouraging people to transition before age 12, but said any male-to-female transgender person would have an unfair advantage over natural women. FINA is also looking at an open category that would allow transgender people to compete. Other sports organizations use levels of testosterone to determine who can compete. 

My Comment:

This seems like a rather obvious decision as it was clear that a male-to-female transgender would have a huge advantage over normal women. That doesn't mean that they would win all the time, I think Lia Thomas didn't win all the time, but it would mean that someone would lose a spot to someone who is still basically a man. 

Taking hormones and having surgery is not going to change the fact that after puberty a man is dramatically stronger and has about 15% more body mass than the average woman. And many men are even stronger than that. Given that someone like Lia Thomas was a major athlete back when he was still called William, it means that means they would have a major advantage in woman's sports.

I don't think that their should be an exception for someone that transitions before 12 but that's mostly because I don't think anyone should ever transition before puberty. Many children who think they are trans grow out of it and many that do transition end up regretting it. In theory they would not have the advantage over female athletes but even if that is true, I don't think they would be mentally stable enough to compete in the first place. 

Male to female transgender playing in woman's sports has always been unpopular to the point that even many trans people, like Caitlyn Jenner, are opposed to it. It's been a strange alliance as well, as many feminists' are opposed to it as well, along with more traditional conservatives or people just freaked out by the whole thing. This decision is not unexpected. 

I know that there are a lot of women that are sick and tired of MTF transgenders taking over female spaces. I have some sympathy for them as I have seen dating sites for lesbians that have been totally taken over by transgenders. Women fought for gender exclusive places, and I don't think it is wise for people to try and end that. 

The transgender community tries to argue that they are women and should be treated that way, but care little for the costs to others. Woman's sports is a good example of this but far from the only one. I just don't think there is a way to accommodate them on this issue as they would always have an unfair advantage over women. 

The funny thing is that the opposite situation never comes up. You never hear about female to male transgender people trying to compete in male sports and it is pretty obvious why. If you put someone like Ellen, now Elliot, page in an NFL game they would be utterly destroyed. They wouldn't be able to compete and that kind of proves the objection to allowing the reverse to be true. 

I do think there is a backlash against the LGBT community over the T portion of the community is getting larger. Pushing for transitioning younger and younger children and pushing for this is schools has angered a lot of people. And so has things like allowing transgender people in woman's sports. I think people have found their limit of what they are willing to accept and I think things will end up being rolled back... 

Lithuania bans imports and exports with Russia, cutting off Kaliningrad.

 

A port in Kaliningrad Russia. Reuters. 

In a major escalation, Lithuania has banned imports and exports with Russia, cutting off Kaliningrad from the rest of Russia. Reuters. The ban would block most rail traffic to the Kaliningrad area, which is cut off from the rest of Russia. Russians would be forced to ship goods over the ocean instead. 40 to 50% of Russian goods, most notably construction supplies, would be banned. The move would increase already high tensions between NATO and Russia. 

My Comment:

Lithuania is a border country and has a large Russian minority that will probably have a problem with this. Not so much that they will actually do anything, mind you, but enough that there might be internal blowback from this decision. 

This is a pretty huge deal and a major escalation from NATO. Blocking off Kaliningrad is not something that will accomplish much other than making the Russians angry. They can easily ship these good through the Baltic Sea, but at a higher cost. That tiny amount of economic damage is not worth the risk of pissing off Russia, especially now. 

Why? Because I think it's pretty clear now that Ukraine is losing the war. They are taking unsustainable casualties and are going through weapons faster than they can be shipped in. Russia is pretty systematically destroying their military and it feels like only a matter of time before they collapse. And their "no retreat" mentality is just making it happen quicker. 

But the danger of this is pretty extreme. Russia is already upset with Lithuania as it is, cutting them off from supplying Kaliningrad will be worse. Kaliningrad is a strategically important region and not something that the Russians can just write off. They will also lose face from this and it may even provoke some kind of response. 

My hope is that cooler heads will prevail and understand that this is a major risk with little to gain. It seems a lot like NATO is acting a lot like a child, doing what feels good and not doing what is smart. Right now nobody seems to want to admit that Russia outplayed us in Ukraine and has figured out how to counter our moves. So NATO is just stomping their feet and throwing a tantrum. 

Understatement of the year? Joe Biden says Americans are "down", blames Coronavirus pandemic for bad national mood.

 

Joe Biden during his interview with the Associated Press. New York Post/AP.

Joe Biden says Americans are "really, really, down" and blamed the poor national mood on the Coronavirus pandemic. New York Post. Biden said that demand for mental health treatment has gone up due to everything they count on being "upset". Biden said that it was "bizarre" to blame inflation on the massive Coronavirus relief bills and said that a recession was still avoidable. Biden cited a low unemployment rate as a reason why America was in a better position than the rest of the world. 

The Associated Press has an article about their interview with Biden. 

My Comment:

First of all, Biden is totally wrong. Nobody is blaming the current situation on the Coronavirus pandemic anymore. Indeed, I don't think people think about it at all. I know that in my personal life I haven't heard much about it at all, other than the many people at work that complain that we still have some coronavirus restrictions. 

Coronavirus is just not relevant anymore. Supposedly we are having a spike in cases here in the United States, but you would never know it. Most people have antibodies now and even if they don't the current strains of the virus are not anywhere near as dangerous as the original Wuhan strain. Biden's claim here is ludicrous. 

I do think that people are losing it because their lives have been disrupted. I know I have been extremely frustrated with just about everything that is happening. Had the economy not crashed I probably would have bought a house by now, instead I am worrying if my money is about to be made worthless and pretty much given up on ever owning a home. There is no amount of certainty about anything right now and that is leading to a large amount of stress. 

Biden is totally wrong about the Coronavirus relief bills not causing inflation. Of course it did! You can't print that much money without there being consequences. And giving people a large amount of money will cause them to spend more, which increases demand and thus increases prices. It's not the total story, gas and food prices would have gone up for other reasons, which are Biden's fault as well, but it's idiotic to argue that the relief bills did not contribute. 

I don't think recession is avoidable at this point. People are losing so much money due to higher prices and energy costs that they won't have money to spend on anything else. That means people will buy less and then companies will have to make cuts. Plus the government is doing next to nothing to lower inflation and gas prices and as long as that is true nothing will change. 

I also don't think Biden should be bragging about low unemployment. 3.6% isn't bad but like I said, it won't last. And I don't think anyone who is upset about where the country is right now is happy that they have a job. What good is a job if it can't pay your bills? 

But Biden is right about one thing. The national mood is awful. People are extremely upset about everything that is happening. Inflation is up, gas is up, wages are stagnant and people just can't handle it anymore. Not to mention the massive culture war that shows no sign of slowing down. It's as bad as I have ever seen it and even the darkest days of the Coronavirus pandemic or the 9/11 attacks were more optimistic and positive than things are now... 

Democrats feeling effects of shocking GOP pickup in heavily Hispanic house district.

 

A polling place in Texas. Politico/Getty.

Democrats are in shock and are responding to a critical pickup by the Republicans in a traditionally Democratic and heavily Hispanic house district. Politico. The Democrats had held onto the 34th Congressional district for almost a century but lost the seat in a special election. Mayra Flores defeated Dan Sanchez in the special election. The victory may be short lived due to redistricting which means Flores will go up against Vicente Gonzalez, an incumbent, in a much stronger Democratic district. However, Democrats are furious that Flores won at all. Republicans spent heavily in a district that was not considered competitive until recently. Sanchez got very little support from national Democrats. Republicans have made huge gains among Hispanics since 2020, and have captured several majority Hispanic districts. 

My Comment:

This is largely a symbolic victory for Republicans as the new district that is going to replace the 34th will be a lot more favorable for the Democrats. That doesn't mean that it isn't in play. The current district was fairly biased towards Democrats but Flores won 51% to 43%. The new district won't be the same but it's possible that Flores could win again. 

But even if the victory is temporary the election is causing panic among the Democrats who are already facing major problems in 2022. This election shows that formally safe districts are in play and could be lost in 2022 as well as the more competitive districts. 

This is a huge problem for Democrats because they are going to have to defend more seats now. For example is the 34th district. On paper it is safe but now Republicans can and will contest it and I bet Flores will get a lot of money. She's a new Republican rockstar, attractive and a good speaker, she's bound to get money. The Democrats have a tough choice, do they spend money on a seat that might be safe anyways? Or do they spend money to counter Republican spending leaving less resources to go around?

But it's not spending that is the real problem here. The fact is that Hispanics are sick and tired of the Democrats. There are different reasons for this but I think in this part of Texas it's pretty obvious why. The border is a huge problem there and just because people are Hispanic does not mean that they love illegal immigrants. And even the ones that do like their fellow Hispanic illegals may not be so happy about all the various other ethnicities and groups that are coming in. The Democrat's "solution" to this problem is to either ignore it completely or, even worse, openly encourage it. 

The economy is playing a role as well. People of all races remember that before 2020 our economy was doing great. 2020 was a bump but things really went off the rails after Biden took the White House. The Democrats don't seem to have much to say about this either, with what little attention they are using is wasted on tone deaf "advice" like buying a $70,000 electric car to deal with high gas prices. 

It do have to mention that the Democrats are pushing Hispanics away with their wokeness. Most Hispanics are economically liberal but socially conservative. But the Democrats are doubling down on the wokeness. The best example of this is them trying to push "Lantinx" as the replacement of Hispanic and nobody is going for it. Indeed, most Hispanics are offended by this push and hate it. And that's just one example. 

I do think that the Democrats are heading for a wipeout in 2022. They have not been able to change course at all and with Biden in charge he's dragging them all down. It's not just Hispanics that disapprove of Biden and his party, it's almost everyone and that means they are pretty much guaranteed to lose control of the House and will likely lose the Senate as well. And that does not bode well for them in 2024. 

"Surrender or Die" are the choices offered to Ukrainian fighters still in Severodonetsk...

 

An Ukrainian fighter on the front lines in Severodonestk. Yahoo News/AP.

"Surrender or Die" are the choices that are being offered Ukrainian fighters now trapped in the critical city of Severodonetsk. Yahoo News. The Russians have blown up all the bridges between the city and its twin city of Lysychansk, meaning that retreat is now impossible for soldiers and civilians alike. Eduard Basurin, the Deputy Leader of the Donetsk People's Republic made the comment and urged Ukrainians to surrender. Meanwhile Ukraine is begging for more weapons saying they need 1000 drones, 500 tanks and 1000 howitzers to push the Russians back. 

My Comment:

The battle of Severodonetsk is basically over. The only question is if the Ukrainian soldiers and civilians will survive the war. If they surrender they probably will. But if they don't then they will do little but die pointlessly. 

My guess is that the Ukrainian government is ok with that. They can no longer evacuate these soldiers so they are instead ordering them into a final stand that won't accomplish much. All they will do is buy the government time and perhaps kill a few Russian soldiers. That is probably not worth it at this point. 

Regardless, this is a huge defeat for the Ukrainians. Many of their best remaining soldiers were deployed in Severodonetsk and now all of those soldiers will either be killed or captured. That's a huge loss for a country that is already suffering more than 100 dead a day, and that is a conservative estimate. Ukraine can not afford to lose these soldiers. 

The problem is that they do not have a good way to evacuate them. All of the bridges across the Siverskyi Donets river have been destroyed so those troops can't get out in traditional means. Some might be able to evacuated if they swim or use boats but even that would be perilous and would require a large number of troops to remain behind anyways. I can't see Ukrainian engineers replacing the bridge and even if they were able to do that somehow it would likely be destroyed in Russian artillery or air strikes. And the ones that will escape will likely have to leave their weapons and supplies behind and risk being shot as deserters. 

I think most of this was avoidable. Though Severodonetsk is a critical city there is nothing there so important as the troops that were guarding it. If the Ukrainians had pulled their troops out when it was still possible those fighters would be in a good position to fight the next big battle, which will likely be in Lysychansk. Instead they will likely lose almost all of those fighters. 

I do think that Russia has largely changed tactics and they are dramatically more effective than their tank rush to Kiev was. That offensive was beaten back and cost the Russians quite a bit of weapons, equipment and men. It was never suited to their doctrine and the success they are having now is because they abandoned the tactic. Now they are focusing on devastating artillery strikes that are grinding the Ukrainians to dust.

And that is why Ukraine is so desperate for more western weapons. They have expended almost all their pre-war stocks and are rapidly going through what they have been given. But even with US and European weapons they don't have the artillery to counter Russia's massive stockpile of weapons. Ukraine may get what they demand but I don't think it honestly matters at this point. 

Why? Because what they need more than anything else is men and they are losing those at an unsustainable amount of troops. They lost a ton of their best fighters in Mariupol and now they are doing the same thing in Severodonetsk. All they will have left are conscripts, old men and whatever foreign volunteers that are foolish enough to sign up. 

Police shoot and kill man who fired shots inside a school summer camp.

 

Duncanville police at a press conference. Dallas Morning News.

Police shoot and kill a man who fired shots inside of a school summer camp. The Dallas Morning News. The incident occurred at a fieldhouse that was hosting a summer camp for 250 children between the ages of 4 and 14. The shooter confronted a camp official and fired a shot. Counselors immediately reacted by evacuating students and locking doors. The gunman attempted to enter a classroom but was unable to get in due to the door being locked. The suspect fired another shot while trying to get in, but then retreated to the fieldhouse where the suspect was shot and killed by the police. It was unclear what the motive of the attack, but a witness said he was threatened to "shoot up the place" if he wasn't allowed to see someone he wanted to see. The response to the incident is in stark contrast to the Uvalde shooting that left 21 people dead, with doors being locked and police responding within minutes. 

My Comment:

This story would not be notable if it wasn't for the massive contrast between it and the Uvalde shooting. In that shooting doors were left open and then police took forever to stop and kill the attacker. In this case the attacker was dead two minutes after help was called and the people at this building actually were able to secure the scene and protect the children. 

Some people might downplay this incident because nobody but the attacker died. But that seems naïve. We don't know the motive but based on the witness statement it seems like a custody incident. Plus, he threatened to shoot up the place and given that he fired his gun twice and he knew that the people at the fieldhouse were children, I have little reason to doubt that if this had gone differently people could have died. 

I can't praise everyone involved in this enough. Though locking the doors and shooting the attacker seems like the bare minimum for teachers and police respectively, it is clear that we can't always count on that happening. These counselors and police officers did exactly what they needed to do and they should be commended for it. 

Some of this is due to pure luck though. A two minute police response time is usually pretty unlikely,  unless the officer is at the scene of the shooting. This incident shows why it is important to have armed people near likely targets as the longer it takes to put down the shooter the more people they can injure or kill. 

It's also a very strong argument against efforts to not fortify schools and other targeted places like churches. Democrats have argued that the only possible solution to mass shootings is to ban guns, even though that's not at all possible. This incident shows that a fortified environment with competent people can stop a tragedy. Sure it's not great that the attacker died and a bunch of people got scared but compare the outcome here to what it was in Uvalde and it's not even close. 

Ukraine's president Zelenskyy is in a precarious political position...

 

A destroyed apartment complex in Kiev. The Daily Beast/Getty.

Ukraine's President Volodymry Zelenskyy is in a precarious political position. The Daily Beast. Zelenksyy remains popular since the invasion of Ukraine, reversing a major drop in support during the build up of the war. The problem with that is that most of his support is dependent on not giving anything up to the Russians. 82 percent of Ukrainian people do not want to give up any land up to the Russians at all, including Crimea, which was annexed in 2014. Indeed, many Ukrainians want the Russians to be totally pushed out of Ukraine, which does not seem militarily possible. Territorial demands are sine qua non for any peace deal with the Russians, with the Russians likely to demand at the very least current holdings as well as all of the Donbass region. 

My Comment:

The Daily Beast is a pro-Ukraine outlet and because of that I think they are downplaying the nature and severity of the threat to Zelenskyy. My guess is that if he were to give the Russians anything, even to save the lives of his people, he would find himself in a ditch somewhere with his hands tied behind his back and a bullet in the back of his head. 

But I don't know if the threat is larger from the United States or from his fellow Ukrainians. The CIA certainly wants the war to continue and aren't above assassinating leaders who don't play ball. They might not even get the chance though as the Ukrainians might beat them too it. Conceding anything to the Russians is very unacceptable to the hardliners in the Ukrainian government and Zelenskyy does that he might end up facing a coup or worse. 

The problem is that the Russians appear to be doing much better on the battlefield. They are very close to taking all of Luhansk and appear to be winning the battle of Serverodonstk. Indeed, I saw a Reuters report today that claimed that Russians just blew a bridge out of town, meaning that many of Ukraine's best remaining fighters could be surrounded and destroyed, if it is true. 

That means that idea that Ukraine could ever push Russia out of Ukraine seems incredibly short sighted and unrealistic. I don't think the Ukrainians can push the Russians out of Serverodonstk, let alone out of the rest of Ukraine. The idea that Ukraine could take back Crimea and the two breakaway republics is ridiculous and not something that is in any way likely to happen. 

The other problem is that Russia does not appear powerful enough to take their war goals in a short amount of time. They gambled hard in the beginning of the war with their push to Kiev that failed and now that they have regrouped and reorganized they are making progress but it is slow going. Largely because their newer more effective tactics involve massive artillery strikes. Though effective those tactics are slow and cause heavy casualties. I think Russia could take Ukraine, all of Ukraine, if they were willing to fight the war for a decade or so, but if there is to be any end to the war it's probably not going to happen on the battlefield unless Ukraine collapses entirely.  

So Zelenskyy is in a very bad position. If he lets the war continue he is going to lose tons of people, devastate what is left of his economy and ruin his military. If he tries to sue for peace he will probably be killed and replaced by a hardliner. It's a terrible position to be in and I would feel sorry for him if he hadn't invited all this himself. 

Democrats are turning on Joe Biden, don't want him to run in 2024.

 

Joe Biden. Fox News/AP.

Democrats are turning on Joe Biden and do not believe that he can save the 2022 midterms and don't want him to run in 2024. Fox News. The New York Times interviewed 50 high ranking Democrats and Democratic voters and the consensus was that Biden had failed. Democrats blame Biden for failing to get big ticket Democratic legislative bills done and are worried about his age and leadership abilities. Most also say that the country is on the wrong track. Biden has also failed to control public opinion as even the media is starting to turn on him and his approval ratings are dismal. Biden's history of gaffes and other strange statements have not helped him. The Democrats are seeing the January 6th hearings as their only chance to preserve any kind of victory in the 2022 midterms. 

The New York Times article can be read here, but be aware of the paywall. 

My Comment:

Democrats really are out of touch, aren't they? They seem to think that the January 6th hearings will move the needle at all. I am willing to bet that outside of the beltway, not a single person is paying attention to them. Why would they? At this point I am guessing a lot of Americans would love to be living in the universe where January 6th WAS an actual coup attempt and Biden was sitting in a prison cell instead of the oval office. 

It's been obvious for awhile that Biden has been a failure as a president. Though it has largely been memory-holed, the Afghanistan withdrawal alone would have been enough to sink a president. Not only did Biden lose Afghanistan, he did it in an embarrassing and pathetic way, that left some of our soldiers dead and videos of Afghan civilians dropping out of airplanes going viral. 

It hasn't been much better since then. Biden's biggest challenge is the absolute nosedive that the economy is taking right now. Inflation is out of control, gas prices are rising higher and people are very concerned about paying the bills. The president usually doesn't get a pass for a bad economy even when it isn't his fault but in this case Biden's responsible for most of it. He and his party passed major legislation that caused inflation and turned America from a net energy exporter to one that has to get fuel from other countries, and then sanctioned one of our bigger sources. 

The ruling party always has a difficult time during the first term of a president. They usually lose house and senate seats during the midterm elections, but in this case it seems as though the Democrats are going to get wiped out. There is basically no chance that they keep the house and the senate will likely fall as well. 

And there isn't really any off ramp for the economic crisis either, short of abandoning the green energy and anti-Russia policies that the Biden administration would never do. The biggest silver bullet Biden had was the release oil from the strategic energy reserve and he already did that, to almost zero effect. Demand is still high and will be through the summer, and with energy prices skyrocketing it's only a matter of time before people stop buying products and instead focus on paying their energy bills. 

Inflation is going to get worse before it gets better. Food prices are going to rise even further than they have before due to multiple huge problems globally with the food supply. A lot has been made of the war in Ukraine and food supplies but it's not just that. China and the Midwest United States had major winter wheat crop failures and I have heard that summer wheat isn't doing that hot in parts of the US as well. With wheat prices already high, expect these failures to compound the problem dramatically over the summer. 

But the biggest problem is how Biden is handling these issues. His solution to high gas prices is to buy an electric car. Even if you forget about the massive cost of purchasing a vehicle, electric cars simply aren't a viable solution to most folks who drive. I know for me personally it is totally off the table, I don't own a house and don't have a way to charge an electric car even if I did want one. It's a "let them eat cake" moment and pretty emblematic of how the Biden administration handles all of their problems. 

Another problem is that Biden just isn't a likeable or eloquent person. The past two Presidents were a lot better at this. Obama was a good speech giver and Trump could always frame the issue of the day just by sending out a tweet. Biden can't do either of these things and is limited to statements from his staff or his own non-existent skills. Obama was talented and Trump was entertaining but Biden? He's a joke. 

Finally, I have to say that Biden's focus seems to be everywhere but where it should be. The baby formula crisis is a big example of that. He seemed totally unaware that it was happening and didn't do anything until it was out of control. And the problem is still not fixed, the shelves at my local store were fairly bare again this week when I went grocery shopping. 

Most people want these kind of problems solved. When people are broke and can't feed their babies because the government screwed up they don't want to hear about January 6th or gun control. They want to hear about what the government is going to do about it. And the only thing we hear from the Biden camp on the economy is either "it's all good fam, the economy is actually great and you are racist if you disagree" or "lol just buy an electric car". That's just bad politics all around. 

I expect Democrats to be screwed in 2022 and even worse in 2024. Biden seems incapable of admitting he's a screwup and will probably try and run in 2024 even if the party doesn't want him. I can't imagine him not losing to a challenger if that happens, but the process will be painful. And even worse, many of the potential POTUS candidates for 2024 have been tainted by association with the utter incompetence of the Biden White House. People like Kamala Harris and Pete Buttgieg don't have a chance because of what Biden has done. I honestly don't see how the Democrats can win against Trump or DeStantis or whoever runs in 2024 unless something very drastic happens. 

Average gas prices top $5 a gallon for the first time ever...

 

Prices in California are even higher. National Review/Reuters.

Average gas prices have reached $5 a gallon for the first time ever. National Review. The news comes just two months since gas prices reached $4 a gallon for the first time since 2008. No state has average gas prices below $4.40 and California tops the list with average prices there being $6.40 a gallon. Prices are high due to high demand, a decrease in capacity and oil sanctions against Russia. Prices could increase again over the summer if a hurricane affects oil refineries. The shock in prices has not reduced demand at all. 

My Comment:

Joe Biden deserves most, though not all, of the blame for this. Obviously, demand isn't his fault and the lingering problems with refineries due to the Coronavirus pandemic aren't really his fault either. And if there is a hurricane that happens this summer he won't be at fault for that either. 

But the rest of it? It's all on Biden. No factor is worse for this than the war in Ukraine, which Joe Biden provoked. He knew that Ukraine joining NATO would be a casus belli for Putin, but he told the Russians indirectly that Ukraine was going to join. And once the war happened, it was his choice to sanction Russia, which has cause untold problems. It is probably the first time in history where the sanctioned country is better off afterwards than it was before. 

Why? Because it caused oil prices to skyrocket. Russia has made so much money of these higher oil prices it has single handedly reversed the other sanctions. They haven't had much in the way of problem selling their oil as many countries have lined up to buy more. 

But that isn't the only problem Joe Biden caused. Donald Trump enjoyed a good relationship with Saudi Arabia and the other gulf states. Biden has thrown that away to the degree that he can't even get a phone call with the leadership of Saudi Arabia. He was supposed to go there soon, but that won't happen. His support of Iran backfired terribly as the Gulf States want nothing to do with us. And it was all for nothing as his effort to get oil from Iran and other terrible states like Venezuela have failed. 

Biden also pretty much destroyed our domestic oil industry. His first act was to cancel the Keystone pipeline and though that wouldn't have been finished by this point it's a good example of the utter hostility Biden has to the industry. He isn't allowing new drilling and changed America from a net energy exporter to being dependent on foreign energy yet again. 

Higher gas prices are utterly devastating economically. They are a huge tax on every product that gets transported and it is a major reason why inflation is spiraling out of control. Companies have to make up the losses they gain from higher gas prices and they do that by raising prices. It's why I spent $100 to get groceries now when it used to cost me between $60 and $80, even though I am mostly buying the same stuff.  

Biden does not have much he is willing to do to reduce gas prices. He won't reverse Russian sanctions, fix domestic production or get help from other countries. Doing any of those things would help immensely but he won't do it. And his supposed silver bullet was releasing money from the emergency reserves. Those reserves will be depleted soon and did very little to reduce gas prices. 

This is a situation that is going to get way worse before it gets better. Demand will probably stay steady but supplies are worse. News outlets have already said that we will be at $6 a gallon and that's probably optimistic. There does not seem to be any solution that Biden is willing to take and the problem won't go away on its own until production is increased or Russian sanctions end. Gas prices will probably decrease in the fall due to less demand but not anywhere near enough. Under current circumstances I can't see gas getting under $4 a gallon unless something dramatic changes, even in fall and winter. 

All of this news is absolutely devastating for the Democrats, who are going to get blamed for the high oil prices. The ruling party gets blamed for high prices regardless, but in this case they can't seriously argue that it isn't their fault. That is why they have gone all out in their attempts to distract the nation with their abortion nonsense, the gun control push and this weeks January 6th show trials. None of it will work. People will understand that their pocketbooks are empty because of Joe Biden and his party and they will punish him for it this November.