donelsonfiles

Another Camelot Coming in Kansas City?

When I grew up, I was a Washington Redskins fan in football and followed the Washington Senators in baseball. While still following the Washington football team or Commanders which they are know now, in baseball, the Senators moved twice, the first to Minneapolis and the second to Dallas. Since 1973 and until the Nationals moved from Montreal in 2005. By then I have lived in the Midwest since the mid-1970’s and lived in the Kansas City area for nearly a decade from the mid 80’s to the mid 90’s. We adopted the Kansas City Royals as a family.

For a brief moment in 2014 and 2015, Royals had their Camelot in which they competed for World Series titles. In 2014, they came within 90 feet of sending the 7^th game into extra innings as Alex Gordon settle for a triple instead of going for an inside the park home run and then finally winning it all in 2015. Within three years, they return back to the incompetency that marked much of the 21^st century and 2023 is taking incompetency to a new level.

For many Kansas Citians, they are waiting for the Kansas City Chiefs and first preseason. Football fans are now living in the Golden age of Chiefs football with two Super Bowls and three Super Bowls appearance over the last five years, surpassing the late 1960’s and early 1970’s during the Len Dawson era. Yet I am still intrigued by the Royals for I don’t know if we are witnessing the Royals of 2011 and 2012 where the core of the team that won 2015 were learning to win or just a continuation of our mediocrity.

We have won six games, swept two series, beating the Central division leader Minnesota Twins and the New York Mets. Brady Singer had a great start against the Mets giving no runs and he gutted out a start against Twins giving up only two runs. In his last seven games, he is 3-1 with a 3.00 ERA and looks like the Singer of 2022. Bobby Witt has been pounding the ball with 13 RBIs over the six game homestand as he hit over .500 on the homestand including a walk off grand slam and has hit .333 for the last 30 games and Maikel Garcia is hitting .300 as the lead off batter. Garcia and Witt are becoming a potent one-two punch and Freddy Fermin has had a strong season catching behind Salvador Perez. Fermin development has allowed Perez to DH and even play a little first base.

For the rest of the year, it will be interesting to see how Michael Massey, Kyle Isbel, and M.J Melendez developed since they have shown potential but Massey and Melendez are still under .220 but Isbel is up to .232 after hitting over .300 for the last 15 games and Drew Waters has hit .260 over the last 30 games.

On the pitching front, there is another story as many of the 2018 draft class has failed to make an impact beyond Singer as Lynch and Bubic are both injured and Kowar has simply flopped. With Scott Barlow being traded, Carlos Hernadez has 1.65 era over the last 15 games and now will have to show if he was temperament for being a closer. Coles Ragans may be a potential starter as he pitched six shouts out innings and that is after allowing one earned run in five innings against Tampa Bay. Only one run over the past 11 innings.

Royals are 40 games under .500 after 110 games and yeah, they reflect their record but for the rest of the year, we will see which youngsters can help and certainly they picked up additional support at the trade deadline including Devin Mann who was hitting .308 for the Dodgers triple AAA this year.

In 2011, the core of Gordan, Hosmer, Moustakis, and Perez were learning to be major leaguer and due to some good trades, Escabar and Cain joined the core that led to brief moment of Camelot for Royals fans and will 2023 be remember the year when the core learn to become major leaguers on the way to yet another Camelot?

Who Are Truly Nuts

Richard Fernadez recently asked the questions, “Suppose we got it all wrong and the real crazies are the TV people in nice suits and $300 haircuts?” and as Glenn Reynolds noted in a recent NY Post column, “It wasn’t farmers and factory workers who came up with the idiotic COVID responses — nor was it they who originated the more or less criminal idea of conducting “gain of function” research on making dangerous viruses more dangerous.” The reality is that much of what was tried by the experts failed miserably but then if these same experts had studied past pandemics, they would have known that this would end in failure. Shutting down schools and businesses lead to economic catastrophe for millions with which we are still struggling with. The data for those whose mantra is follow the science is becoming overwhelming including increase suicide, mental illness, economic dislocation, and even more premature deaths now and into the future. We failed to stop the infection and the vaccine that we were told was a game changer proved to be a complete failure in stopping the transmission, but many lost their jobs because of vaccine mandates being enforced, a vaccine mandates for a vaccine that didn’t even stop the transmission.

The same brilliant people who gave us the covid lockdowns also gave us the brilliant idea that if we take police off the street, cut funding for police protection, and allow criminal back to the street or not prosecute crimes just as shoplifting would have no impact on crime was equally stupid. Glenn Reynolds added, “It hasn’t been landscapers and auto mechanics championing the notion that a child in the single-digit age range can make a lifetime choice about his or her genitalia or maintaining that even criticizing that idea is itself a species of “violence…Ordinary Americans haven’t been claiming the way to promote free speech is to censor people or the way to end racism is to classify everyone by race and consequently treat them differently…It’s not the working class that wants to “save the planet” by blocking traffic, starting forest fires or banning pickup trucks or gas stoves (though private jets remain surprisingly free from criticism).” We are being told that a hot July was sign of climate disaster even though it has been known to get hot in the summer. I mean, Arizona reaches 110 degrees in the summertime is hardly news or sign of climate apocalypse, but our so-call experts are tying to tell us that we need to rid ourselves of pickup trucks and gas grills to save the planet or for that matter eat bug instead of steak or chicken.

What does a society succeed if the elites and “intellectuals or brains of society” are plain nuts. Glenn Reynolds noted, “Exactly how important is open to question — in his recent book “How Innovation Works,” Matt Ridley argues that most 19th- and 20th-century innovations actually came from tradespeople and industry, not academics doing abstract research — but important enough.” And while society needs intellectuals or thinkers, they also need doers who are willing to take risks to move society forward. Reynolds observed, “Communism and Nazism started as intellectual movements; so did such fads as eugenics and lobotomies…The Tuskegee Experiment wasn’t the product of racist Klansmen but of the curiosity of credentialed public-health experts… Ideas can be dangerous; playing with them can be like gain-of-function research with viruses — if they escape into the general environment, disaster can ensue.”

A century ago, many of the people running our government, along with running our economy, many of our universities and media were varied and not necessarily the same class. I remember meeting a long-time reporter in Kansas City who got his start in the circulation department. I questioned him, “The circulation department?” He smiled and responded, “I started as a paperboy.” He lived in an era in which he learned the basic in writing in High school and spent his life perfecting his craft. Today much of the media, academics, politicians, and even much of our business class are members of the same class. For many in the media, their willingness to follow the narrative as oppose to challenge comes from the reality is that many of them know the powerful officials and hold similar views and attitudes.

We have a leadership class that really can be at times be classified as “bat shit crazy.” Reynolds concluded, “The result is that any crazy idea can flourish if it’s stylish. And it’s gotten more dangerous, probably because social media allow so much self-herding behavior by elites. Dissent is instantly ostracized before it even has a chance to be considered…A decade ago, the crazy ideas I listed earlier would have been seen as beyond the pale of civilized political discussion. Now they’re all endorsed by leading American institutions…That’s the hallmark of dysfunctional politics, and dysfunctional politics is what we have.” Listen to the debate and what you will hear that much of the stupid ideas put into effect didn’t come from the Middle class, the workers or even MAGA but from the leadership class.

Dutch and Us

John Hinderaker in a recent powerline blog talked about Netherland’s politics and how it resembles what we see here. Hinderaker reported, “Politics in the Netherlands have been increasingly contentious of late. The most recent coalition government fell earlier this month, and now Finance Minister Sigrid Kaag has not only resigned her post, but says she might be leaving the country,” Now the key issue is why and maybe the European media noted, “Just two years ago, she was the great hope of Dutch politics, a cosmopolitan voice of reason, who made unprecedented gains for liberals by taking on the country’s far-right populists.” The message here is that voice of reason are the progressive voices and the voice to fear are the far-right populists.

As the media report continues, “The prospect of her departure, after being hailed as a champion for the traditional Dutch liberal consensus, comes as the country’s security services warn that growing “anti-institutional extremism” poses a new threat to society…In 2021, Kaag represented a different path for the Netherlands after winning an unprecedented and surprise election performance, with her socially progressive, pro-European and welcoming to refugees Democrats 66 party, netting their best ever results.”

The media report goes further when the reporter noted, “One notable fault-line in Dutch politics has become environmental policies, with an insurgent rural movement against plans to cut nitrogen emission in agriculture to meet European Union climate change targets…The populist farmers’ party, the BoerBurgerBeweging (BBB), has come from nowhere a year ago to become the second largest Dutch political party and probable kingmaker of a new government.” And what does the “far right” fear? The impact of the Dutch government war on nitrogen and its impact on farming industry, phenomenally successful and the war on Netherlands livestock and the world second largest food exporter. The parliament plan to eliminate half of the livestock numbers, promoted major protests from farmers and formation of a political movement. So as John Hinderaker notes, “So trying to destroy the country’s biggest industry is perfectly reasonable, while opposing that destruction is “extreme.” That is the upside world we live in, destroy a profitable industry is reasonable and, in the process, reducing exports could mean starvation for those who depends on these exports but protecting those industry is “extreme.” What this shows is what I wrote recently, the idiocy of our leadership class and Europe leadership class is equally full of idiocy like their American counterpart.

The climate change debate shows the problem with the green policies as they entail the destruction of agriculture but also in ability to increase building projects that will help alleviate housing storage and congestion on the roads as many of these building plans are being protested by environmentalist.

John Hinderaker discusses which of the present values are closer to being correct, the progressive enlightened liberal thoughts or the “far right populist views” and concludes,” But whose version of reality is the right one? Certainly not the version that says we should kill half our livestock, stop fertilizing our fields, stop constructing buildings and highways, all while welcoming infinite numbers of immigrants from underdeveloped countries, so that we can impoverish ourselves with unreliable energy that will have zero measurable impact on the Earth’s climate…The fundamental problem the world’s liberals are experiencing is precisely that their crazy plans are bumping up against reality.” He is right, it is the leftist leadership class view of the world that is wrong and much of what “far right populist” is closer to the truth.

Who is the best pound for pound

Naoya Inoue and Terrance Crawford

This past week, we saw two great fighters dominate their leading opponents in their division. Naoya Inoue fought for the 122-pound title against undefeated Steven Fulton, who was a slick boxer and the bigger opponent. Fulton only had eight knockouts in his twenty-one victories but there was a path to victory to upset the powerful Inoue.

Inoue not only dominated with power shots, but he also out boxed the taller Fulton. He landed double the jabs and was more accurate than Fulton. His hands speed showed up and yes, he also landed nearly triple the power shots. From the beginning of the fight, Inoue took control of the fight and there was not a round that Fulton even won.

Terrance Crawford faced Errol Spence, Jr. for undisputed control of the Welterweight division. Crawford cleaned out the junior welterweight and now he wanted two divisions that he was in complete control of.

Like Inoue did four days earlier in Japan, Crawford simply dominated the fight from the almost the beginning. The only round I gave Spence was the first round and that was more due to Spence’s activity as he threw nearly three times the punches, but he only connected on ten percent of them. In the second round, Crawford landed a quick left that sent Spence to the canvas and this was the first time Spence hit the canvas. From that point, Crawford took over the fight. He bloodied Spence’s nose in the fourth round and knocked him down two more times in the last minute of the seventh round before stopping him in the ninth round.

Shawn Porter, a former champion, and consistent contender for the title, fought both fighters but only Crawford ever stopped Porter in Porter’s career. And Crawford is the only fighter who defeated Spence and stopped him.

You could make the case that either fighter can be officially declared the best pound for pound fighter in the world since both fighters have held multiple titles and dominated their key rivals. What is more impressive is that both fighters can both box and knock out their opponents. Crawford out boxed Spence, landing triple the jabs and connected on forty two percent of his jabs. Spence could not outbox his opponent and was vulnerable to Crawford combinations. This was a similar performance to Inoue who also not only out slugged his opponent but out boxed his opponent. Their boxing skills allowed them to control their opponents and allowed them to dictate the pace of the fight.

Right now, I view Inoue as the best pound for pound but many boxing pundits will view Crawford as the best. You can make the case for both, and we will see over the next few years how this plays out. Crawford is 35 years, and his last fight was the best he ever fought. He is at his peak. Inoue is only thirty and now he has the opportunity to go from 108 pounds to maybe the lightweight division. The last fighter who followed a similar trajectory was the great Manny Pacquaio who went all the way up to the Welterweight division. Inoue has the skills and power to move up to at least the lightweight division. As for Crawford, will he go up to the 154-pound division? Both fighters will be Hall of Fame fighters when they retire and their place in boxing history is secure.

Crawford wins an easy victory

Terrance Crawford had been one of the past pounds for pound fighters having been first a lightweight champion before cleaning out the junior welterweights and faced Spence jr. for Spence WBA, WBC, and IBF title along with his own WBO title. Spence, Jr. had been a Welterweight titlist since he defeated Kell Brook in 2017 for his IBF title.

Spence, Jr. was a slick boxer who could change sides seamlessly, had a power full jab and could sting the body with powerful shot. He had been a welterweight for his entire career as Crawford moved up to the welterweight. Crawford was one of those fighters who combined both power and boxing style, but I viewed this fight as a close one before the opening bell rang. I was wrong.

Crawford often took the early part of the fight to figure out his opponent and often ended up giving up early rounds on the scorecard but often came back in the second half of the fight. In the opening four rounds, Spence averaged nineteen punches landed and thirty-five thrown compared to Crawford landing only seven punches and throwing fifteen. Spence has been a consistent puncher as he averaged nineteen punches landed per round throughout the bout, but Crawford increased both his input and accuracy as he will double both his punches landed and thrown over the final four rounds. This trend would indicate that it would be close fight with Spence most likely to win early rounds.

According to CompuBox, Both Spence and Crawford are among the top ten when it comes to landing combinations punches and their data were similar coming into this fight.

The first round was a feeling out round as Spence threw forty-seven punches while he only landed five punches and Crawford landed two punches but then Crawford starts out slowly as usual. While I gave Spence the first round, it had more to do with him throwing a ton of punches, but he was ineffectual. This would be the last round he would win as Crawford turned this fight into a virtuoso performance.

In the second round, Crawford nailed Spence with a straight left that sent Spence on his seat. Spence got up quickly, but this was first time Spence hit the canvas and it gave Crawford a 10-8. The third round was close as Crawford landed fourteen punches to Spence 17 punches, but Crawford was the more accurate puncher as he connected on those fourteen punches in while throwing only thirty-seven punches whereas Spence needed to sixty-two punches to land seventeen. Crawford had the more effective defense and Spence was having trouble landing those big shots.

In the fourth round, a straight left backed up Spence and hurt him while a hook busted up Spence’s nose. In the fifth round, Crawford landed upper cuts and hooks as he dominated the round. Spence looked spent but he showed his guts by fighting on. Crawford continued to land punches at will and in the seventh round, Crawford sent Spence down twice in the last minute of the round with lefts.

The eighth round was a mere prelude to the final round as Crawford closed the show as he landed combinations that stunned Spence before the referee stopped the fight.

At the age of thirty-five, Crawford proved himself at the top of his game and this may have been his greatest fight. He connected on 185 punches to Spence 96 punches, and his connect rate was 50 percent and landed 60 percent of his power shots, something that no other Spence’s opponents had ever done.

What was supposed to be a close fight turned into a rout for Terrance Crawford who showed that he is one of the top pounds for pound fighters. Last week Naoya Inoue showed that he was a complete fighter and Crawford proved to be equally a complete fighter. Both men can box, and they can slug.

Crawford often started fights slowly, but, in this fight, he only used the first round to have his feeling around round but by the second round, Crawford figured out his opponent and from that point, it was all Crawford. Crawford has now become the undisputed champion in two different weight divisions, at 140 pounds and 147 pounds, so where does he go from here? He can fight Jaron Ennis or Vergil Ortiz or move up. Spence wants a rematch but not at welterweight but at junior Middleweight as he is no longer going to fight as a welterweight. So, does Crawford move up to the Junior Middleweight or finishes up the Welterweight division? Would Crawford domination of Spence hurt the rematch even if at a higher division? And not forget a rematch at junior Middleweight would not be for a title, there will be less than appeal for the fight. For now Crawford proved himself one of the elite boxers in the world.

July 28th

Show At Rumble —> https://rumble.com/v32zs3g-frontiers-of-freedom-weekly-report-july-28-2023.html

Show At FF.Org —> https://www.ff.org/fof-weekly-report-july-28-2023/

GL’s Twitter —> https://twitter.com/GLandrith/status/1685121932885164032?s=20

FOF’s Twitter —> https://twitter.com/FoF_Liberty/status/1685129395940249600?s=20

GETTR —> https://gettr.com/post/p2n2054cee2

Education Revolution

I have made the case that Ron DeSantis is moving toward a more modest foreign policy similar to the Weinberger doctrine and that GOP governors are leading an economic revolution resulting in lower unemployment and job creations.

Now the next stage is revolution in education. Yes, there are two sides to this revolution, beginning with what is being taught in the classroom and the second is school choice. The fight over DeSantis curriculum in Florida is significant since the curriculum was designed by bipartisan group of scholars including many Black scholars tell the truth about the evil of slavery while eschewing the less accurate 1619 projects and Critical Race Theory. It is the most significant and if DeSantis is forced to retreat or the GOP fails to defend this, the leftist will be allowed to indoctrinate American children about our history. In Florida, the teacher union were invited to participate in its development but refuse, leaving them open to outright lie about the final product along with many Democrats. Meanwhile, many in the GOP using this issue against DeSantis and are simply surrendering to the leftist agenda and questioning their mettle in combatting the administrative state and the left.

Charles Cooke noted about the curriculum, “ If you are able to read it and conclude that the single reference to slaves developing skills (which I’ve bolded) is indicative of the narrative direction of the course, rather than a tiny (and correct) part of it, then you are beyond saving and you deserve to live your life as an ignoramus. There is simply no way of perusing this course and concluding that its “gaslights” people or whitewashes slavery. Among many, many other things, it includes sections on “the conditions for Africans during their passage to America”; “the living conditions of slaves in British North American colonies, the Caribbean, Central America and South America, including infant mortality rates”; “the harsh conditions and their consequences on British American plantations (e.g., undernourishment, climate conditions, infant and child mortality rates of the enslaved vs. the free)”; “the harsh conditions in the Caribbean plantations (i.e., poor nutrition, rigorous labor, disease)”; “how the South tried to prevent slaves from escaping and their efforts to end the Underground Railroad”; the “overwhelming death rates” caused by the practice; the many ways in which “Africans resisted slavery”; “the ramifications of prejudice, racism and stereotyping on individual freedoms”; and “the struggles faced by African American women in the 19th century as it relates to issues of suffrage, business and access to education.” Many of these modules apply to Florida specifically.” Cooke is right that this course does not teach that slavery was good for Black people but the complete opposite. I want to know how many critics of this curriculum have actually read the curriculum. I have.

To defeat this curriculum is the left goal so they can move on indoctrination of students as opposed to truth. John Hinderaker recently showed how many students have a false impression of America as he noted, “A case in point: American college students think their country is going downhill. Not in the ways it actually is going downhill, but in the ways it is not.

This was the question:

Based on what you have learned in college so far, do you think that life in the United States has generally been getting better or worse over the last 50 years (considering issues such as life expectancy, income per person, and level of education)?

The students obviously have not learned any history:

The survey finds nearly 60% of students think life in America has gotten worse or stayed the same over the last 50 years.

Only 41% correctly understand it has overall gotten better over the last five decades.
***
Let us look at those metrics.

In 1973, 50 years ago, US life expectancy was 71.4 years, per the World Bank. In 2020, it was 77.3 years. By any objective measure, which is a huge improvement.

In the same vein, average income per person has significantly improved since 1973.

To accurately compare across time and account for inflation, we can look at income with all figures adjusted to reflect, say, 2015 dollars. When we do that, we see income per person in America rose from $28,114 to $66,866 over the last 50 years.

Yep — it is more than doubled.”

John Hinderaker concluded, “No doubt these students also have no idea that billions of people worldwide have been lifted out of poverty by the transition from socialism up to free enterprise. I seriously think the country would be better off if fewer of our young people went to college. And it would be much better if young people were getting a decent basic education through high school, as they once did, in which case the remedial function that most colleges now play (badly) would be unnecessary. But that is looking like a pipe dream, for now.”

The second revolution was in promoting school choice as a state just as Iowa has promoted school choice. So far, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, and Utah have joined Arizona and West Virginia in making families eligible for education savings accounts. This revolution was given momentum during the Pandemic as many public schools were closed and many parents simply moved their children out. Another aspect is the radicalization of the teacher unions. For many Republicans, the teacher union has a leading supporter of the Democratic Party in both manpower for get out the vote campaign and donations. Allowing parents more of say where their children go to school or have a say in what is being taught in the classroom is the revolution that many Republican governors are leading.

Inoue wins easily

Stephen Fulton faced his toughest challenge in Naoya Inoue as they fought for Inoue WBA and WBC super-bantamweight title. Inoue is one of the best pounds for pound fighters and now is a three-division title holder. Inoue combines hand speed and power along with excellent technique. Fulton, who is undefeated but has only eight knockouts in his twenty-one victories, is a boxer with solid tactics and he is an effective counter puncher but could not match Inoue power. He had to fight the perfect fight and stay upright for the entire fight.

Inoue is a smart fighter who can adjust in a bout and despite his power, he is an effective counterpuncher, always ready to take advantage of mistakes. Fulton had advantages in height and reach but Inoue had the home boxing ring advantage as the fight is in Toyoko.

Those advantages in height and reach did little as Inoue not only pounded his opponent, but he also out boxed his opponent. Fulton was a bloody mess and at the receiving end of Inoue power shots. Inoue landed nearly double the jabs than Fulton and at higher percentage. Fulton boxing skills and jab were neutralized.

In round eight, Inoue unleashed a brutal right hand that stunned Fulton and sent him twirling across the ring. While Fulton retreated, Inoue smashed a left hook into Fulton’s face and Fulton hit the canvas. Fulton barely got up and Inoue finished him as he delivered a flurry that doubled Fulton body in half and into the canvas. The referee saved Fulton from further punishment.

Punch Stats

PUNCHES	FULTON	INOUE
Total landed	47	114
Total thrown	223	379
Percent	21%	30%
Jabs landed	23	44
Jabs thrown	152	199
Percent	15%	22%
Power landed	24	70
Power thrown	71	180
Percent	34%	39%

Inoue can claim the king of the pound for pound king as he won titles in three divisions. While some may view the winner of Errol Spence Jr. and Terence Crawford as they meet for the best of the welterweight division coming up this Saturday. Inoue may have shown that he is the king of the pound for pound as he combines speed, boxing skills and one punch power that can be stretched.

Steve Fulton may have been the best fighter in the 122-pound division that Inoue could have faced, and Inoue easily dispatched him in. Inoue won his first title at 108 pounds and has carried his title through the 122-pound division. Fulton is a very good fighter who became a champion in 2021 by defeating Brandon Figueroa but against Inoue, he had little answers against Inoue and except for a couple of landing a couple of right hand in the seven rounds, he couldn’t carry much of an offense as Inoue simply landed more than doubled the punches including dominating with power shots and out jabbing the taller boxer.

Inoue has outstanding footwork, and this allows him to connect punches from all angles plus his hand speed forced Fulton to be a defensive fighter who feared opening up for he feared those powerful Inoue counter punches.

For Inoue, he can fight Marlon Tapales who is the title holder of two belts at junior featherweights. Inoue won his initial title in the 122 pounds from Paul Butler. Inoue may be repeating what another great Asian fighter, Manny Pacquiao who went from a 108-pound champion to being a champion at the welterweight division. Inoue has the power and skills to move up to maybe even light weight division.

Climate Absurdity

I must admit, I never quite grasp the science behind these apocalypse predictions dealing with climate change considering that science as it is, has the world upside down.

Begins with the premise that what we need is a colder planet never mind the fact that more people die in colder weather than warmer. A 2014 study by the Department of Health and Human Services found that for everyone who died in hot weather, two died in colder weather. This was similar to what the EPA saw and Lancet reviewed data from 384 locations and found that people died in wintry weather by a 15 to 1 ratio. So, there is no rationale to lower the planet temperature.

The other aspect that if CO2 is so bad, what explains how we can be able to increase food production and better diets while the CO2 has increased? Or how we have seen the number of people living in poverty dropping and health indexes despite warming weather? Could it be that maybe a little CO2 is good for the planet or for humanity? Or a warming planet is good for the planet?

The World Bank and other organizations estimated we will be 450 percent rich by the end of the century so if the worse scenarios are reached, we will be only 434 percent richer which is hardly a crisis.

The solutions to climate change by the alarmist are worse than the actual problem. Some solutions include:

Geoengineering to block portions of the sun from reaching the planet, now what could go wrong. A colder planet means shorter growing season.
Reducing yields of agriculture means massive starvation. One study shows that organic farming will feed 4.7 billion and fertilizer including fossil fuels which is what we are doing will feed twelve billion people. The world population is eight billion, you do the math. Climate solution for farming will not be able feed forty percent.
The elimination of fossil fuels will hamper economic prosperity and the energy provided by fossil fuels has led to unprecedented economic growth worldwide. Eliminating means returning our economy to the 19^th century. Massive poverty is hardly a solution.
The attack on the free market will only increase worldwide poverty and increase famines.
Then there are the trivial things like no gas grill, eliminate your “gas guzzling car” for electric cars, less airfare among other things to make your life sucks,

So, if your solution to a problem is to kill of 40 percent plus of the world population is not a solution but mass murder and genocide.

DeSantis revive Weinberger doctrine

Did DeSantis revive the Weinberger doctrine in his interview with Tucker Carlson at the Family leadership summit? Just a remainder, those principles were:

1. Forces should not be committed unless the action is vital to national interest.

2. Forces should be committed wholeheartedly with the intention of winning – or they should not be committed at all (No half-hearted commitment).

3. Forces should be committed with clearly defined political and military objectives.

4. The use of force should be the last resort (after all diplomatic initiatives have been exhausted).

5. The relationship between objectives and the force committed should be continually reassessed and adjusted if necessary.

6. Before committing forces abroad (in foreign countries) there should be some reasonable assurance of public support.

DeSantis mentioned in his interview that the lessons he learned from his experience in the Middle East that you needed a concrete end game, and he criticized that the present foreign policy establishment failed to detail an endgame in Ukraine. He added that they should be concerned about the southern border. His own stated goal is a sustainable peace in Europe and details a path to that. (But he did not elaborate on how to but this format was conducive to a more in depth details.) He added that China is the number threat and is indicating he would concentrate on dealing with China just as Reagan number one objective was the Soviet Empire. Like Trump he would force Europe to spend on their defense. Would be interested how DeSantis view Polish government own increase spending and the biggest land army in Europe and their economy has been growing and prepared to surpass Great Britain in 2030. How would President DeSantis deal with Poland and other nations in Central Europe.)

DeSantis made it clear that whether military support or the imposition of troops in foreign lands must have clear objectives and his criticism of recent past in our policies in Iraq and Afghanistan dealt with changing objectives from stopping Weapons of Destruction and evolving into nation building which in Afghanistan failed. He is talking a return of modest foreign policy that George W. Bush campaigned in 2000 and before 9/11. As the campaign continues, we will see more details about his foreign policy will surface but for now, he is following a more modest policy with China his number one threat.