1. Ross Douthat has a good piece in the NYT, pointing to the scandal of Joe Biden continuing to serve as president despite his physical and mental decline. But this specific sentence had me scratching my head:
And since things keep happening in the world — for instance, this week, the nation that we’ve been arming for a defensive war decided to invade Russia — it seems like America could stand to learn a bit more about how the White House has been working recently . . .
Decided to invade Russia? What the heck is that supposed to mean? Is he implying that the war is no longer “defensive”?
2. If China is so bad, why do we wish to copy their model? Here’s Foreign Affairs:
By offering large incentives to companies that invest in critical sectors in the United States, Washington could replicate some of the same problems that are plaguing China’s economy: a reliance on debt-fueled investment, unproductive resource allocation, and, potentially, a speculative bubble in tech-company stocks that could destabilize the market if it suddenly burst. If the goal is to outcompete Beijing, Washington should concentrate on what the American system is already better at: innovation, market disruption, and the intensive use of private capital, with investors choosing the most promising areas to support and taking the risks along with the rewards. By fixating on strategies to limit China’s economic advantages, the United States risks neglecting its own strengths.
3. Federal drug policy? The emphasis should be on deregulation:
4. Steve Waldman tried to Google my name, and noticed the following:
I’m flattered.
5. Trump says he’ll cut energy and electricity prices by at least 50%, within 12 months. Harris says she’ll ban “price gouging”. Eh, what could go wrong?
6. Trump seems to be trying to lose. Why?
6. Donald Trump discusses . . . something:
Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, okay, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, okay, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you’re a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right — who would have thought?), but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it’s four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.
7. Interesting:
8. Luttig has come around to my view on Trump:
Retired federal appeals court Judge J. Michael Luttig, a prominent conservative legal scholar put on the bench by President George H.W. Bush, is endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris over former President Donald Trump, whose candidacy he describes as an existential threat to American democracy.
It will be the first time Luttig, a veteran of two Republican administrations, has voted for a Democrat.
“In the presidential election of 2024 there is only one political party and one candidate for the presidency that can claim the mantle of defender and protector of America’s Democracy, the Constitution, and the Rule of Law,” Luttig wrote in a statement obtained exclusively by CNN. “As a result, I will unhesitatingly vote for the Democratic Party’s candidate for the Presidency of the United States, Vice President of the United States, Kamala Harris.”
Better late than never. Unfortunately, for every distinguished conservative intellectual moving away from Trump, there are 100 low information voters drawn to him by empty promises of no taxes on tips or Social Security.
9. Asian-Americans would seem to be a group that would be receptive to the GOP message. But Republicans just can’t stop being bigoted:
Wen Raiti, a Chinese American community leader in Jacksonville, Florida, has been a Republican for more than a decade. As a small business owner, she said, the party’s fiscal conservatism and small government ethos resonated with her.
But last May, when Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation banning Chinese citizens from buying property in Florida, Raiti changed her party affiliation and began campaigning for local and national Democratic candidates.
10. And JD Vance feels he needs to reassure his nutty right wing friend Charles Johnson that he only knows one Chinese-American:
In the messages, Vance pushed back on Johnson’s accusations that he was beholden to donors and other allies, including his law school mentor, Yale professor Amy Chua. When Johnson suggested that Vance was channeling Chinese and Israeli interests, Vance replied, “Chua doesn’t tell me anything.” He added: “I am pretty sure I don’t even know another Chinese american.” Chua declined to comment.
Imagine living in a world where knowing Chinese-Americans makes you suspect. Thank God my commenters would never behave that way.
11. A poverty stricken woman was recently arrested for shoplifting food to feed her children, or something like that:
A 35-year-old San Marcos woman accused of shoplifting $600 from Sephora at the Irvine Spectrum was found hiding inside the trunk of her Tesla after she attempted to flee from loss prevention, police said.
Her Tesla? Unfortunately, it’s very unlikely that California will “lock her up”.
12. I am currently reading Melville’s White-Jacket, and came across the following:
If there are any three things opposed to the genius of the American Constitution, they are these: irresponsibility in a judge, unlimited discretionary authority in an executive, and the union of an irresponsible judge and unlimited executive in one person.
I wonder what Melville would have thought of the recent Supreme Court ruling that the president is above the law. Or that presidents can set tariff rates wherever they chose.
PS. This will probably be my final post comprised of miscellaneous links. Within a few weeks I hope to wrap up TheMoneyIllusion and put you all out of your misery. Rising from the ashes will be a new and somewhat different blog, hopefully an improvement.
Substack!!!!