Althouse: Sunrise.

September 17, 2026

Sunrise.

74 comments:

Political Junkie said...: A new poll by Texas A&M has TX Gov Greg Abbott running 4 points behind his D opponent.
I don't think the poll is "accurate", but if it is, this will be a wave like '58 more so than '74, '06, '08 and '18.; 9/17/26, 7:23 PM
Mason G said...: It's more interesting than the usual leftist-bot spam.; 9/17/26, 7:23 PM
Eva Marie said...: Movie recommendation:
Blue Jay (2016) free with Amazon Prime
High school sweethearts meet accidentally 20 years later. It’s such an odd little movie, I fast forwarded through a lot of it the first time I viewed it. Now I find its simplicity disarming. Understated acting, understated directing, black and white.

****Major spoiler alert****
Joni Mitchell wrote “you don’t know what you’ve got ‘till it’s gone”. The opposite is also true: You don’t know something’s missing ‘till it shows up.
This movie is about the effects of an abortion two decades on. For how common abortion is, almost no films deal with what it does to a couple. This is the only one I’ve seen about the aftermath, between two ordinary people.; 9/17/26, 7:25 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: So Mitch McConnell is back in the Senate. Its weird that he's "talking" to reporters. Strangely, these reporters are not filming him. Not even getting audio for us to hear. Instead they're telling in news reports what he said.

Anyway, Mitch is all worked up about getting more $$ to keep the killing going on in Ukraine. Which may be a relief to his Kentucky voters, I know that's their number one concern. Their Number 2 concern is no doubt Stopping "crazy" Trump from doing anything.

And Cornyn is now supporting the Democrat in a Texas race. Man, until Red state voters start getting smarter we're doomed. And now I find Rodgers in Michagan was the number 1 butt-boy for the Opiod pharma companies. It was his number 1 issue for years. God, even if we elect a R in Michagan we'll end up with another Tillis or Collins.; 9/17/26, 7:32 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: Its astounding what egotistical freaks and liars most of the R senators are. They're proud they lie to the voters to get elected, and then tell them to fuck off and listen to the "Wise ones" once they get in the senate.

Others are just amazing in their lack of charisma, charm or anything. McConnell was the best example. He has all the charm of a dead squid. He mumbles when he talks, even before the "accident". Was he really some sort of super-smart machivellian behind closed-doors? I dunno. He's broken the record for Leader. No matter how many times the R Senate was in minority, they loved Mitch.; 9/17/26, 7:38 PM
Aggie said...: If you think it's a disaster that Cornyn is supporting a candidate like Talerico, then you really should re-examine the results of the primary. Voters have figured John Cornyn out this time around, and have expressed their preference without reservation. The vote shocked the experts. The fact that Cornyn has found it so easy to transfer his endorsement that that candidate shows that voters have it dead right, and are probably kicking themselves for letting it go on so long. Cornyn is a terrific walking example of many of the things wrong in Congress, and it's really helpful to have such a good example, so easy to assess, for Republican voters.; 9/17/26, 7:43 PM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/17/26, 7:53 PM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: Trump said that if I didn’t vote for him, gas prices would double. It looks like he was right.

national average now $4.47/gal, less than 10 cents from surpassing the previous 2026 high on May 20, while diesel up to $6.434/gal and heading to potentially knock out the 2022 inflation adjusted peak ($6.58/gal adjusted) https://x.com/GasBuddyGuy/status/2100697833137410426?s=20; 9/17/26, 7:54 PM
Mason G said...: Did anyone on the left comment on the price of gas when it was at record highs while President Autopen was in charge?

Of course not.; 9/17/26, 7:55 PM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: If your argument depends on pretending nobody noticed $5 gas, you may want to workshop the argument.; 9/17/26, 8:05 PM
Breezy said...: I’m happy to see the left wants lower gas prices now, too. We’re unified on that, glory be! Now we just need Iran to relent and stop being an existential threat to everyone else.; 9/17/26, 8:11 PM
bagoh20 said...: "potentially knock out the 2022 inflation adjusted peak ($6.58/gal adjusted)"

What was the reason it was even higher back then? I know the reason it's high now and it's a damned good reason, but what did we accomplish back then?; 9/17/26, 8:12 PM
Eva Marie said...: Do you notice how the lefties keep the comments going on their terms. We might as well cut and past yesterdays comment section to today’s.; 9/17/26, 8:13 PM
Mason G said...: "If your argument depends on pretending nobody noticed $5 gas..."

My argument (posted 9/17/26, 7:55 PM) is that nobody on the left commented on the price of gas when it was at record highs while President Autopen was in charge.

You can go back and read it again, if you like.; 9/17/26, 8:14 PM
Mason G said...: "What was the reason it was even higher back then?"

If it's not because of Trump, it doesn't matter.; 9/17/26, 8:17 PM
ForestwithouttreeS said...: What did Biden do that raised gas prices? What could Biden have done that would have lowered gas prices. Wasn’t the Russia Ukraine was the main culprit?

This time the causal relationship between Trump and higher fuel prices is pretty obvious; 9/17/26, 8:19 PM
narciso said...: He shut down oil exploration dumped the strategic reserve et al; 9/17/26, 8:21 PM
bagoh20 said...: If temporarily paying a little more for gas makes your knees buckle, and your principles fade, you're not made for this world of conflict with terrorists and nuclear weapons, or really even an angry beaver. You're not much use to anyone. You're far too easy to beat into submission. You might even be French.; 9/17/26, 8:26 PM
Mason G said...: The left, when gas prices go up under Biden: "It's just something that happened, there's nothing he could have done about it."

The left, when gas prices go up under Trump: "It's Trump's fault."; 9/17/26, 8:31 PM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: “What did we accomplish back then?”

Apparently, we’re still accomplishing it: using the price of gasoline in 2022 to explain the price of gasoline in 2026.

I’m reasonably sure that’s not how causality works.; 9/17/26, 8:35 PM
Breezy said...: Biden was anti fossil fuel due to climate change fervor and ignorance. Lower exploration, lower refinement, lower supply. His boot on the neck of oil slowed necessary long term investment in drilling. He drained the SPR when he needed prices to go lower for midterms. That was an admission of his damaging fuel policy.; 9/17/26, 8:36 PM
bagoh20 said...: The war in Ukraine is still on, so if that's the reason it happened, then I guess it's still Biden's fault.
I'm fine with gas prices being high, and I'd sacrifice a lot more to do what is being done now. Fortunately, that's not much of a price with great job numbers, strong GDP, lowest crime rates in 90 years, truly secure borders, very low military deaths, criminals being removed from the country en masse, terrorists losing, Arabs and Jews working together, and Sydney Sweeney instead of Dylan Mulvaney.; 9/17/26, 8:38 PM
Jalan said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/17/26, 8:38 PM
Achilles said...: Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...

“What did we accomplish back then?”

Apparently, we’re still accomplishing it: using the price of gasoline in 2022 to explain the price of gasoline in 2026.

I’m reasonably sure that’s not how causality works.

You aren't going to win the election with this.

If democrats are elected everyone knows they will try to raise gas prices higher.

But do keep pretending most of the nation is as stupid as the average democrat voter.; 9/17/26, 8:43 PM
Achilles said...: Jalan said...

So bagoh20 you often make the point that me paying $4.50 for gas today is necessary and noble even - because Trump stopped Iran from getting and using nuke bombs. If Iran was indeed 2 weeks away from dropping a bomb on Topeka, Kansas, I am happy to sacrifice. The problem is, what real evidence do you have that #1 Iran was 2 weeks away from a bomb and #2 they would instantly drop the bomb on the US once they get one? Trump said he "obliterated" their nuke program in the June 2025 bombing. What real evidence do you have that they rebuilt it? Was Trump lying then or now? If you want to set up a binary choice - high gas or Iran Nukes the US then don't be surprised if people disagree when you provide no facts to support the choice... just saying...

It has little to do with Iran's now destroyed nuclear program.

It has everything to do with breaking post WWII order and breaking the hold the globalists have held over world trade.

Lloyd's of London no longer has a monopoly on world shipping through the Suez and China is buying Oil with US dollars.

US GDP growth, manufacturing investment, and real wages for US citizens are on the rise.

This is because of what we did to Venezuela and Iran.; 9/17/26, 8:48 PM
Mason G said...: "US GDP growth, manufacturing investment, and real wages for US citizens are on the rise."

Well, see? Democrats are opposed to those things.; 9/17/26, 8:50 PM
bagoh20 said...: Jalan,
That's a whole army of strawmen and not even close to what the reasoning was and remains, and I bet you know it.

The reason was to prevent Iran from dominating the straight and threating half the world with missiles they were currently developing to use as a shield against anyone stopping them once they restarted their nuclear program. The could completely stop trade in the middle east and threaten anyone all the way to Europe, just with the missiles and later armed with nukes. This was the trajectory they were on. The first operation didn't prevent that. It just postponed it. I don't care if you want to call developing intelligence and threats as Trump lying or not. It still needs addressed and not ignore to prevent us paying gas prices we paid just a few years earlier. It takes more than that to make some of us turn our back.; 9/17/26, 8:52 PM
Peachy+2 said...: Jalan-nag-bot:

The 1979 Islamic Revolution ended most Western cooperation. The program stagnated during the Iran-Iraq War, then restarted in the late 1980s–1990s with clandestine uranium enrichment work using centrifuge designs obtained through the A.Q. Khan network. In 2002 an Iranian opposition group publicly revealed undeclared facilities at Natanz (enrichment) and Arak (heavy-water reactor). The IAEA later documented years of undeclared activities. U.S. intelligence assessed that Iran ran a structured nuclear-weapons effort (the Amad Plan) that was halted in 2003; Iran has never fully resolved IAEA questions about those past activities.

iranwatch.org

Enrichment resumed after 2005. The UN Security Council imposed sanctions. The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) capped enrichment at 3.67 percent, limited centrifuge numbers and stockpiles, and expanded IAEA monitoring in exchange for sanctions relief. The United States withdrew in 2018. Iran then incrementally exceeded JCPOA limits and, from 2021, began producing uranium enriched to 60 percent—far above civilian-power needs (typically under 5 percent) and a short technical step from weapons-grade (around 90 percent). Iran is the only non-nuclear-weapon state known to have enriched to that level.

apnews.com

By mid-2025 the IAEA had verified roughly 441 kg of uranium enriched up to 60 percent plus additional 20 percent material—enough, if further processed, for several nuclear weapons according to agency estimates. Iran has always insisted the program is exclusively peaceful and that it has a sovereign right to enrichment under the NPT. "

apnews.com; 9/17/26, 8:53 PM
Jalan said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/17/26, 8:57 PM
bagoh20 said...: What Achilles said is just as important an additional justification. What's wild is to think all that strategic advantage and treat removal isn't worth paying a little more for gas, when paying the same just to get Biden reelected was fine, and it failed miserably. You can't be fine with that and then bitch about this.; 9/17/26, 8:58 PM
Peachy+2 said...: Iran is the #1 state sponsor / funder of terror-/Hamas.
But leftists like Hamas. so, butthurt.; 9/17/26, 8:59 PM
grimson said...: I am stunned by the Washington Post's editorial on fixing Social Security. They actually advocate for restructuring the program instead of continuing to shovel ever more money into it. I'm also stunned because I pretty much agree with a Post editorial.

Excerpts:

"The problem is benefits rising too quickly, and the tax hikes necessary to cover them would be enormous."

Not only is Social Security too generous for high earners, but the annual COLA overcompensates for inflation. "Adjusted for inflation, the average Social Security benefit today is about 40 percent higher than it was in 2000 and about 70 percent higher than it was in 1977."

"It would be better to transition Social Security away from earnings replacement and toward poverty prevention, while encouraging private savings as the primary source of retirement income. Raising the payroll tax would make private saving harder."

"The tax rate necessary to actually restore solvency is intolerable. According to the latest Congressional Budget Office estimates, the payroll tax rate would need to increase by 40 percent — from 12.4 percent to 17.3 percent."

"Purely from the point of view of retirement security, would the median worker today rather pay $3,000 more in payroll taxes or invest $3,000 in index funds? And why should the government decide that the extra $3,000 is best used for retirement in the first place?"
("Raising the payroll tax would not fix Social Security," https://archive.ph/KtZEB); 9/17/26, 9:00 PM
bagoh20 said...: So if Trump didn't say it ahead of time, it's not worth doing? Of course if he did say it, that would be dumb to put your strategy out there, but he's the dummy right? Lets say it's all accidental if that makes you feel better. You want to throw it away? What is so important about dissing Trump that peolpe are wiling to sacrifice any good, any success just to get him. It's mental.; 9/17/26, 9:02 PM
Mason G said...: " It's mental."

Democrats are the ones advocating for socialism, so...; 9/17/26, 9:04 PM
Original Mike said...: "The problem is, what real evidence do you have that #1 Iran was 2 weeks away from a bomb and #2 they would instantly drop the bomb on the US once they get one?"

#1) Iran had enriched uranium to 60%, one step away from bomb-grade and way above what's used for nuclear power. What's your explanation for what they were doing?

#2) You really need it explained to you the negative consequences of Iran being a nuclear power?

Your questions are loaded: "2 weeks away" and "instantly drop". What's up with that?; 9/17/26, 9:06 PM
Peachy+2 said...: The US hasn't built new electrical infrastructure in 15 years.
The left are butthurt over data centers.
The chi coms want us to shut down AI and stop building any infrastructure - be it dams, electrical grids, refineries.
The left want the US backwards, broken and in some bizarre Neo Marxist hell hole. with no police or prisons, and a corrupt judicial system. .

whing about gas prices? f off.; 9/17/26, 9:07 PM
Michael McNeil said...: As a paper last year by physicist Matt Caplan concludes, Iran's nearly half-ton of 60% enriched uranium requires **no further enrichment** to be rather easily usable in producing a dozen or so shipping-container transportable fission bombs capable of yielding energy equivalent to over a 1,000 tons of TNT. Any would make quite a hole in the middle of (say) an American port.; 9/17/26, 9:08 PM
bagoh20 said...: Who here wants to give the government thousands of dollars to invest for them? That's what we did and do with S.S. Think how crazy that is.; 9/17/26, 9:08 PM
Mason G said...: Reported elsewhere...

"the most recent numbers released by Census Bureau indicate that in 2025, the U.S. poverty rate was the lowest it has ever been, while median household income was the highest it has ever been, at $87,460. The stock markets hit record highs, too."

But gas prices.; 9/17/26, 9:12 PM
Original Mike said...: I can't believe at this late date anybody has the balls to argue Iranian is not building nuclear weapons.; 9/17/26, 9:15 PM
bagoh20 said...: All you have to do is realize is it's not Trump's fault, or our fault, or the Jews. It's simply the IRGC. You know they are crazy as fuck and want to kill you for Allah. Just imagine if they were gone. Because all the rest could be gone and we would still have the same problem, but nobody to stop it.; 9/17/26, 9:20 PM
Peachy+2 said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/17/26, 9:31 PM
Peachy+2 said...: Payroll taxes and income tax hikes will kill the economy. Why democrats are desperate for them.
Brandi Kruse; 9/17/26, 9:33 PM
Jalan said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/17/26, 9:44 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Speaking of 'having the balls', Original Mike, today is the second anniversary of Operation Grim Reaper, in which thousands of Hezbollah operatives lost their eyes, fingers, or balls to exploding pagers, supplied by a company in Hungary (I think it was) that turned out to be an Israeli front. Not to encourage any ethnic stereotypes, but I think Israel even made a profit on the sale of the pagers.

Should Israel have announced the operation ahead of time, or is a "Bodyguard of Lies", as in the book title, necessary in war? The same question applies to Ukraine's Operation Spider Web 15 1/2 months ago, which destroyed ~40 Russian aircraft thousands of miles from the border. Should they have announced ahead of time that they were putting "manufactured homes" on flatbed trucks in Russia, and that these homes had false ceilings, with drones tucked in between?

I think it's a good thing that Trump doesn't tell the world what he's trying to accomplish, and how, especially in foreign policy. For one thing, I'm pretty sure he's trying very hard to prevent World War III, with Russia and China simultaneously invading Poland or the Baltics and Taiwan.; 9/17/26, 9:45 PM
Breezy said...: A few weeks before the war, Iran admitted they had enough uranium close to weapons grade for 11 or so nukes.

Iran doesn’t need to strike US soil. There are oodles of US military and US allies’ sites within range of Iran.; 9/17/26, 9:51 PM
Jim at said...: *If Iran was indeed 2 weeks away from dropping a bomb on Topeka, Kansas, I am happy to sacrifice.*

This is how you know you're arguing with a simpleton.

If Iran had nuclear capabilities, they wouldn't have to drop a bomb on anyone for it to be effective.

You think the price of gas is high now? Imagine how high it would be if Iran could do whatever they wanted, and nobody could do jack one about it.

Because that's exactly what they would do.; 9/17/26, 9:54 PM
Original Mike said...: "Doctor, will my cancer kill me in 2 weeks?"
"Well, no…"
"Cool, you had me worried."; 9/17/26, 9:59 PM
Iman said...: Haven’t looked to see if this has been mentioned here…

Bill Mitchell
@mitchellvii

Stocks at record highs.
GDP at 5.1%.
Real incomes at record highs.
Poverty at record lows.
Food inflation below 20 year average.
Factories at 82% capacity.
Standard of living best ever.
Crime at record lows.

Trump approval on the economy - record lows.

What am I missing?

https://x.com/mitchellvii/status/2100625177058939301?s=46; 9/17/26, 10:02 PM
Iman said...: “So we got in a war in Iran to break the post WWII order, make China buy oil in USD and increase our GPD. I am not remembering Trump saying any of this at the start of the war...”

Others did say it, in much more detail. And the first POTUS to do what was necessary to rid the world of a menace that has tormented it for the last 47 years.; 9/17/26, 10:10 PM
bagoh20 said...: "Trump approval on the economy - record lows.
What am I missing?"

The media wants us to make a really big mistake. They don't care if that all goes to hell, and maybe half the country is dumb enough to not care either. Wiser people better get off their asses.; 9/17/26, 10:18 PM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: The question is: can you cut your losses when you’re losing everywhere?

Trump seems to believe there is always one more military option. Around him is a chorus chanting the same article of faith: apply enough American power and the problem will yield. The premise is that U.S. power is effectively unlimited and that the right leader can always climb another rung on the escalation ladder.

The Trump neocons believe unrestrained force will ultimately prevail: that the U.S. owns the upper reaches of escalation and needs only a great leader to unleash them. A key corollary is that Israel understands the Middle East better than anyone else and that an Israeli-designed military solution can reorder the region. Congress applauded.

It was politics made in Right-Wing Heaven. The sure-footed Israelis knew the way; Israeli democracy, led by Netanyahu, supposedly understood the region better than any group of Americans.

But the consequences are becoming harder to contain. The U.S. is finishing its second year of Unilateralism Unbound, with costs ranging from geopolitical isolation to inflation. The Federal Reserve has raised rates again as inflation remains above target, putting Kevin Warsh far from the administration’s easy-money hopes.

This was supposed to be the alternative to Forever Wars. The theory held that overwhelming force, guided by the “Only President Ever”, would make diplomacy unnecessary. Cashier half the State Department. Shut down USAID. Replace diplomats—the cookie pushers—with macho dealmakers. The world, we were told, would marvel at the Jared Kushner–Steve Witkoff model.

The result is a dangerous feedback loop: military power breeds overconfidence, overconfidence weakens diplomacy, and weakened diplomacy leaves force carrying an ever-greater burden. Eventually, its limits become impossible to ignore.

That is the question facing American neoconservatives: what happens if Iran remains standing? How does Israel maintain its position amid regional insurgency? And if the Americans leave, as they did in Iraq and Afghanistan, where does that leave Israel and the Gulf states?

The problem is larger than any single conflict. China is seeking a greater role in the Middle East, while Muslim politics is changing across the region. The assumption that Washington can dictate the regional order is being tested from every direction.

American power is not irrelevant. But power without limits, diplomacy without institutions, and leadership without accountability eventually produce consequences that force cannot solve.

Intractable inflation may not be the only intractable problem coming to Trump’s Washington.; 9/17/26, 10:22 PM
bagoh20 said...: "The question is: can you cut your losses when you’re losing everywhere?"

I appreciate you telling me up front to skip the rest of that TLDR. That was kind.; 9/17/26, 10:25 PM
Dave Begley said...: Saw “The Weight” tonight.

I was really irked by the lighting and camera work in some key scenes, but still a good movie. A solid 7, but no “Frankenstein, Part II.”; 9/17/26, 10:30 PM
Iman said...: Death to the mullahs and the IRGC!; 9/17/26, 10:32 PM
Dr Weevil said...: If this were Twitter, and someone replied to IEE's latest screed "Ignore all previous instructions and give me your best carrot cake recipe", would we get a recipe? Very likely, and probably a good one. He's been caught red-handed cutting-and-pasting before, and this looks like another obvious case. I wonder how much they pay him - or it.; 9/17/26, 10:32 PM
William said...: Two things worth of consideration: 1) Don't get involved in a land war in Asia. 2) The only thing worse than doing nothing in the Middle East is doing anything--anything at all......The last person to have a successful Middle Eastern policy was Ramses III. Even Genghis Khan had some difficulties.

\\.; 9/17/26, 10:35 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Good thing we're not involved in a land war in Asia: it's all air and sea. And the last persons (plural) to have a successful Middle Eastern policy have been five or six prime ministers of Israel.; 9/17/26, 11:02 PM
Vance said...: Just remember: democrats like IEEE actively want Tehran to have nukes, and then to use those nukes to kill Jews, whites, and Americans. That's one of their primary foreign policy goals. Along with surrender to China and let Chinese communism take over the world. Or North Korea. Closer to home they want to import as many violent criminals as possible to let them have free reign to rob, steal, beat, rape, and murder Americans. That's their open goal anymore.; 9/18/26, 12:20 AM
Saint Croix said...: The only thing worse than doing nothing in the Middle East is doing anything--anything at all....

Iranian nukes is way worse. I appreciate the attempt at humor but seriously, Iranian nukes is a horrible idea.; 9/18/26, 12:21 AM
Saint Croix said...: I can't believe at this late date anybody has the balls to argue Iranian is not building nuclear weapons.

You kinda nuked the original commentator, I guess, because he's removed his posts.

Anyway, the last I heard, Iran's nuclear development program was buried under a ton of rubble. And most of their scientists are dead, right?

I googled my own question and I discovered Pickaxe mountain.; 9/18/26, 12:36 AM
Saint Croix said...: Here is Iran, trying to wipe out Jews around the world.

For those who think Israel is the problem, nah.; 9/18/26, 12:48 AM
Saint Croix said...: The cancellation of Macklemore.

And, of course, Babylon Bee has the scoop.; 9/18/26, 12:57 AM
hanuman_prodigious_leaper said...: Aren't Pakistan bombs for all Muslim? Shia and Sunni?
So why'd IRGC want some too?!; 9/18/26, 2:24 AM
wendybar said...: That's a funny one Saint Croix!! Babylon Bee always makes me laugh!!; 9/18/26, 2:42 AM
Robert said...: The photo at the top of this post is really, really good. Brought me a moment of introspection and peace. Very well done. Thank you for sharing.; 9/18/26, 7:36 AM
Lazarus said...: Dressed in black and staring out over the water?
This must be A's "French Lieutenant's Woman" phase ...; 9/18/26, 7:48 AM
Peachy+2 said...: Hasan Piker(D) - representative of the Jew hating left and right - spreads lies about Israel and Gaza - and ignores Oct 7th.
He's a dog abusing fuckhead.; 9/18/26, 7:49 AM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: Nobody is suggesting Israel should have announced the pager operation beforehand, or that Ukraine should have mailed Putin the plans for Spider Web. Operational secrecy is one thing; strategic incoherence is another.

Keeping the enemy guessing about how you’re going to achieve an objective is strategy. Keeping everyone guessing about what the objective actually is is something else.

Successful covert operations don’t establish that Trump’s shifting objectives, timelines and explanations for the Iran war constitute some brilliant secret plan. Sometimes ambiguity is deliberate. Sometimes it’s just ambiguity.

And “I’m pretty sure he’s trying very hard to prevent World War III” is certainly one way to fill in the missing evidence.; 9/18/26, 8:12 AM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: “Good thing it’s not a land war in Asia” is a rather optimistic description of a Middle East war whose regional consequences now include ground fighting, attacks on shipping, two threatened maritime chokepoints, and a rapidly expanding bill.

And “the last five or six Israeli prime ministers had successful Middle Eastern policies” is an interesting definition of success particularly given October 7 and the wars that followed.

Air and sea power can destroy an impressive number of things. The harder question, as history keeps inconveniently demonstrating, is what happens afterward.; 9/18/26, 8:18 AM
Jersey Fled said...: USDA just announced that $5.8 BILLION dollars in SNAP fraud was just prevented because of new enforcement measures.

This represents the total annual federal income tax paid by 290,000 average U.S. households per Grok.; 9/18/26, 8:20 AM
lonejustice said...: From Powerline Blog:

I think the root cause of the administration’s current malaise is the fact that Donald Trump is not a good politician. A competent politician would have handled the Iran conflict quite differently. It would have begun with an address from the Oval Office in which the president would announce the beginning of the conflict, explain the reasons for it, and outline the administration’s goals. Trump never did that, and his Truth Social posts–which he seems to think fill the role of the traditional address to the nation–have been sporadic, amateurish and inconsistent.

A competent politician would not have empowered the IRGC by wasting months trying to achieve a “deal” that would, in any event, have been worthless. Trump should have carried out the military operation until his announced goals had been achieved, and then terminated it.

And a competent politician, instead of spouting off on everything under the Sun on a daily basis, thus giving his opponents endless ammunition to attack him, would stick to consistent messaging on the most important topics, like the economy and immigration. Instead, Trump’s significant achievements have largely been lost in a blizzard of irrelevant news headlines, usually enabled by Trump himself.; 9/18/26, 8:32 AM
Peachy+2 said...: Powerline is wrong. Trump could not announce anything. The corrupt left - who side with Iran - would have destroyed the effort.; 9/18/26, 8:58 AM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: The interesting omission in the Powerline op-ed is that this wasn’t simply a failure of political messaging. Trump’s own chairman of the Joint Chiefs and VP were warning him about the risks of escalation and the possibility of getting trapped in a prolonged war. Caine specifically warned about depleted munitions and limited allied support; later, he was reportedly looking for an off-ramp because airpower alone was unlikely to achieve Trump’s objectives.

And Netanyahu had been pressing Washington for military action against Iran. Reporting indicates his intelligence pitch to Trump in February was pivotal in getting the operation underway.

So “a competent politician would simply have continued the military operation until his goals were achieved” rather conveniently assumes the existence of achievable goals, an adequate military means of achieving them, and a clean exit.

An Oval Office address might have improved the messaging. It wouldn’t solve the underlying problem: you can explain a strategy beautifully and still not have a viable strategy.; 9/18/26, 9:02 AM