(I’m too tired to proofread. Please forgive any typos in advance and, if you think anything doesn’t make sense, you’re absolutely right.)
It was one of those days, with my running from pillar to post, circling the post, doubling back to the pillar, and then starting all over again — timed, while wearing weights. I’m hoping tomorrow is a little more peaceful, because the sudden upsurge in gray hair (I have a skunk stripe of gray that keeps getting wider) tells me I can’t keep up this pace.
This morning, before my day exploded in my face, I tagged some articles I wanted to share with you — only four, because I never got further in my morning reading than that, but I think they’re all good. More than that, three are from National Review. Sometimes, I don’t like anything I find there, and some days I hit the jackpot.
Michael Rubin is not sanguine about Afghanistan and, for the reasons he states, neither am I. I especially appreciated two lines, which is why I tagged the article: “Officials endorsing such timelines—too often out of political perspicacity rather than military wisdom—are culpable in setting the stage for defeat. Momentum matters in Afghanistan more than spin, as Afghans have never lost a war: they simply defect to the winning side.” Yeah, what he said.
Is Rand Paul playing a very deep game or is he really abandoning his father’s pretty open antisemitism? I’m watching closely.
Victor Davis Hanson says that fracking may make the Arab Middle East irrelevant. There used to be a punch line that had Jews respond to every news item, from world chaos to the price of milk by asking “But is it good for the Jews?”
Given the Jews’ proximity to the Arab Middle East, it’s a very good question. If Western nations are less dependent on Arabs for oil, will they feel less pressure to cave to Muslim pressure about Israel? Will Muslim nations become ineffectual backwaters, or will they all turn in Egypts — armed, dangerous, ineffectual backwaters?
And what does this mean for America? Will all of Obama’s efforts to destroy the economy so that he can socialize it come to nothing? Will this destroy the whole green mania that’s been trying to pitch us back into a pre-industrial era? All good questions, for which I have no answers. I’d love to hear your thoughts, though.
And finally, another Gabriel Gomez article. He’s the underdog, former SEAL, Harvard MBA trying to get John Kerry’s now-vacated seat. I know I’m living in la-la dream land, but wouldn’t it be totally awesome if he won? If you’d like to help level out a very uneven economic battle (his opponent is rolling in money), you can contribute your mite here.