Everyone in the world knows what MAGA means thanks to Donald Trump. But now the Democrats have developed a new doctrine of their own. It is more insidious.

Democrats don’t brag about theirs, they just support it on all issues. In layman’s terms it is Screw America first. Or if you want to translate it: Sellout America First (SOAF) doctrine.

How’s that pan out in serious issues? Here’s only one example.

Their war on energy policy is actually kneecapping America. Yeah, the new green deal and all that is true but in the meantime it is even more malicious at the core.

Joey first restricts and constrains our new oil production any way possible. They’ve already done a stunning job at that. Then he uses Putin’s war on Ukraine as a justification to deplete – not drawdown or tap into – the strategic petroleum reserve. (SPRO) 180 million barrels over 6 months, conveniently before midterms as an extra political bonus.

Of course AOC and the Loony Left let it be known, they have no interest in refilling it later. They believe it is entirely unnecessary anyway and only want to deplete it.

That mad little Russian dictator, Vlad the Bad, could not have asked for more. It’s exactly what he’s been pushing for years So two birds with one shot, Joe appeases the wild green left and Russia, along with other tyrants, at the same time.

For the militant green freaks, this could not be better. First they loved the price spike to 5 bucks a gallon. It doesn’t even matter why. They liked all Joe’s restrictive energy policies, too, making new production into a fantasy. But then you put that together with depleting our national security preserve and what do you get?

You get less and less energy, regardless if it looks like you are begging other countries to produce more, as cover. Then we will have no choice but to rely on anything else, like their energy fantasies, except for fossil fuels. That’s one way to knock fossils fuels off our demand. Then you have to do all the crazy things they want , you have no choice.

It all fits into their crazy war on energy strategy perfectly. No matter the consequences, it is all a process of force. There is no way back once you go down the road. Then tear out any options to their green deal. That is their preferred method to everything, force.

You simply will have no choice, nor an emergency relief valve for when the SHTF.

 
Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022

The Telegraph – “Ukraine war: Putin’s invasion stalling because majority of ‘dud’ bombs are failing to explode”

Also a Russian General who said the “special operation” would be over quickly has been killed in Ukraine. So it is now up to 15 top Generals and Russian military commanders that were killed by Ukrainians. Well, well.

https://news.yahoo.com/russian-general-said-ukraine-invasion-162705478.html

“[Gen]Rezantsev had reportedly told his men on the fourth day of their deployment that the so-called “special operation” would be over quickly. One soldier said: “Do you know what he told us? ‘It’s no secret to anyone that there are only a few hours until this special operation is over.’ And now those hours are still going.” “

Sitting peacefully by the waterfront pondering what are the answers? But what are the questions? Are the ripples on the water the answers or the questions? Is the stone that made them the real problem?

That is hardly over dramatic, considering the circumstances or news feeds.
 
It strikes me as odd that for years we have been accused of being Russian trolls only to come face to face with real Russian propaganda. It is even worse than the fear mongers perceptions of it were. But forget past accusations, even NYT admitted denials about Biden were lies. It takes a war to uncover that bullshit.

Even a 4-year fake narrative – concocted by media and operatives here – was widely accepted by some until recently. But debunked doesn’t make it into the narrative.

Now we got a glimpse of what Russia and Putin are actually up to. It is so bad that some don’t even want to believe this reality could be true. There is a lot of denial out there – whatever the origins. Stories even surface of Russia abducting children from Ukraine.

So we have two factions, according to public consensus in media anyway. One side is anti-war and the other being the neo’s – with each side being defined by their opponents respectively.

It boils down to anti-war siding with Putin, they claim, and the other war faction opposes him. Things are not always what they appear.

One thing I despise is broad brushing large groups, just like pigeon-holing people into identity groups. Even when they don’t fit. Also some of us want to oversimplify, even when it is as complex as war. Yet some wars defy all those stereotypes.

The two sides, under their paradigm, come down to two quandaries. The anti-war side saying no war at any cost. The other neocon (neoliberal) side presumably sees no war it can refuse. Both stereotypes are a mission impossible to me.

The antiwar side must realize there can eventually be conditions which you cannot repel from a war. And the neo-side must realize that there are times when you have to resist the impulse to go to war. Those sound more authentic than their common ideological perceptions.

On the upside, it has to be an incredibly interesting time to be a psychologist or therapist today with this plethora of issues on which to blame human behavior problems or anxiety. I mean is this a rich climate or what? It is a psychological smorgasbord out there, probably no better time for psychology.

That is not to make light of mental problems. Though the war stand is a fascinating thing to the human psyche.

 
I saw one man talking about how he was always an ideological antiwar guy but he finally rejected that position and went to Ukraine to help. He said the antiwar stand no longer made rational sense to him, and never will again. I can understand that.

Still there is the other neocon side. They are fighting the impulses to see the reasons to jump headlong into a hot war. Because, with the dismal record over the last 20 years, they cannot now justify a pro-war position.

But one area everyone seems to agree on now, from both camps, is doing what they can do to help the victims of this unjustified invasion. Give them real aid and supply what they need to repel an invasion.

There are many who believe in negotiating at all costs to bring a solution, to be agreed on by both sides. But what if you have one party who is unwilling to agree on anything? That party, the invader, wanted war from the beginning and why they declared it.

Antiwar idealists have to come to terms that doing nothing in the face of this evil is condoning it, maybe even perpetuating it.

Then you have those idealists who say continuing aid and supplying victims only draws out the “inevitable” result. But isn’t that the same as conceding to the evil? The only benefit they point to is that it ends quicker and maybe not as many people are killed.

The bitch of all this is that we have seen all these conditions before but we looked the other way and ignored them – genocides and brutal slaughters, besides WWII. But they still happened. True we never got involved in those the way we are getting involved helping the Ukrainians. So this is a bad thing? It doesn’t follow.

Apparently much of the world knows this will not end well if we just sit back and do nothing. Again, that is not a bad thing to accept.

Sure, we have our own problems at home too. Well, you could probably always make that claim. We have severe problems. No, I don’t want to see this become only a diversion from those problems. But I don’t want those other problems to make it impossible to do what we can in this war. I guess by now you can see I am trying to be objective, even if I know one side is correct.

There is also another matter. I’ve seen lots of newsletters from Christian organizations who claim to see it one way too. They only accept the antiwar side as moral. I have problems with that. I heard it from the same folks before, no war is ever justified.

There were plenty of them around at the time of the Revolution who said just chill and stay with the King. That is best. So why is it they cannot oppose authoritarian power? How is that God’s will? But during the Revolution some sided with the King, making them opponents to settlers. They were not conscientious objectors; they actively opposed a new free country. Consequences of actions?

 
The details of the Ukraine invasion are bad enough on a daily basis, but the circumstances are just as bad.

For instance, a man takes his army into another country and starts making all kinds of demands. He declares the country needs to be demilitarized and denazified. He bombs and destroys large swaths of its structures killing thousands of civilians. He particularly aims at civilians, hospitals etc. He pushes millions of the residents out.

He claims the reason he is doing it is due to threats he perceives from them and his neighbors. He plots to kill the leaders of the country or run them out. He wants to install his own people. (Democracy and sovereignty be damned) He dictates the conditions on anyone giving them aid, or interfering. In effect, he acts like he owns the place without having any legitimate authority.

He claims the sovereign country has no right of self-determination at all.
Where have I heard that?

 
_________________________________________________________

Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 — (New King James Version)

“To everything there is a season,
A time for every purpose under heaven:
A time to be born, And a time to die;
A time to plant, And a time to pluck what is planted;
A time to kill, And a time to heal;
A time to break down, And a time to build up;
A time to weep, And a time to laugh;
A time to mourn, And a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, And a time to gather stones;
A time to embrace, And a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to gain, And a time to lose;
A time to keep, And a time to throw away;
A time to tear, And a time to sew;
A time to keep silence, And a time to speak;
A time to love, And a time to hate;
A time of war, And a time of peace.”
(NKJV)

 
Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022

At a certain point a man can become a prisoner to his ideas. He can also become a hostage to his ideology. Then no amount of ransom will do.

What bothers me in this war, as with many issues, is not the issue itself but the surrounding discussion, or lack of it. In the greater conversation, it reveals what is important to us as a society.

Maybe I am as fascinated by the reaction as the event itself. Either is disturbing. I could make a list of items that bother me about this war, as provocative and unjustified as it is.

For example, we value peace and Russia values war. You could not have two things more diametrically opposed. We value security and they value war of might.

Might makes right in their minds.

We value life; they affix value to the cost of killing and particularly innocent civilians. We strive to limit conflict and prefer resolution; they strive to escalate conflict to achieve their goals and deter resolution. They don’t care about the methods used to achieve their desired ends. We make moral judgments where they endorse immoral means. Morality is not a principle to them but only a tool to use against their enemy.

We value saving lives and they put value on killing lives. Maybe it is inherent in their DNA, but that is further than I want to go here.

So in the conversation or reporting on the details of this evil war, without a wider discussion much gets lost in the details. That is not to minimize the details of the war at all. They are critical to the record. However, one has to rise above that to ideals that bind people and unify them. A lack of that today is what does bother me.

You think of Churchill and others who rose to the times, but then you look at leaders today. That is what people see in Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy – regardless what you thought of him before – a man who could speak on moral grounds without fear. That in the face of a brutal war is commendable. It is real not a façade.

There is a complete lack of that by our leaders today. Since they are so used to speaking on political terms, win or lose, they lost touch with moral principle or just plain don’t care. Politics has become the only unifying ideal to them. That is what is wrong with us.

But we are still the same people at heart that we were in past times. Most of us are capable of seeing moral principle even if they don’t. We can’t dismiss it. That principle still unites, as Trump proved.

We long to hear someone like Ukraine’s president talk of moral terms about war, speaking to the justification of peace not might. It still stirs the passion of people, so all is not lost. A pity our own leaders could not take a cue from him to rise above political or ideological narrative. Churchill did it but they later tossed him out, used and discarded.

You wonder what Zelenskyy’s future will be whenever this is over, if it does end? But he will be known as one who rose to the times, not fled from them, stood firm in the face of aggression not appeased it. One who made use of his voice for a higher purpose than a self-serving political career. Now who could fault him for that? Who could fault Churchill for what he did?

Another problem evident in this whole mess is a concept. When we say no one likes war that is not entirely true as we see with Russia. Some of us wish we could abolish war. Would that we could. (enter hideous Jennifer Granholm laugh here)

Something has changed since WWII, not to exclude the wars since – even if they did not call them that. Somewhere the entire debate and problem turned into a diatribe about WWIII. We are to avoid it at all costs. It is always noble and good to avoid war, except that alone has become the overarching goal. Anything to avoid a world war or WWIII. Avoiding WWIII is not a policy.

But that translates into allowing anything under the auspices of avoiding a WWIII. And Russia is very attuned to that sentiment. Translate that to “these people will accept or endure anything rather than have WWIII.” So WWIII has become the enemy, not real circumstances. It has turned into the main problem not a solution. But WWII is what finally ended the rise of Hitler. No one wanted it, even at the time, but it became the means to end Hitler’s final solution.

I only say that because today it has become the central problem. That is not fair to the legacy of WWII or the people that fought it. A lot can be learned about the brutality of war, and we should wish to avoid it. And weigh the cost carefully. Maybe much has changed because of the nuclear deterrent. But can it not be used negatively in the same way? I think it already is, at least by Russia. They extort it.

So World War as defined has become the greatest enemy. But when World War is the chief enemy, everything else becomes acceptable and tolerable. That even allows for threats of nuclear war, as Putin is demonstrating. It is now a cudgel. Could a mushroom cloud be preferable to a World War? That is the provocative calculation they are making.

We now hear that Russia’s doctrine is escalate to deescalate. What a twist. They believe in escalating as a means, in order to to force appeasement. Put nuclear weapons into that doctrine and you have a toxic mix.

So instead of World War being a deterrent, it becomes an excuse for any type war short of that. Just as long as it isn’t, or certainly must not lead to a World War. It is hard to wrap your mind around the rationalization for war. A World War turns from ultimate solution into the high bar. That philosophy should seem scary.

I mean we have lived in a post World War world for decades. It’s like telling a cop that he must never confront a killer because we know where that might lead. Can’t be too safe, you know. And if we don’t believe in the process of charging him, it may be best to let it be.

If Washington is not going to do anything about our spending problems, then maybe we should not worry about spending. In fact, that sounds like an ideal excuse to do more spending. See the way deterrents and accountability work, or should work? Take away that deterrent and you have chaos. If you simply say that we will never have world war again, we have compromised the deterrent. If we say we would never fire a nuclear weapon under any conditions, then we lost the deterrent. When there is no justice there can be nothing but chaos.

Some may not like that system but those are the guidelines to preserving a civilized world. And some don’t like it.

Whatever the stakes, whatever it takes, we must accept anything to avoid World War 3. A new doctrine has emerged.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022

As to the US energy thing with the green agenda, there is a way to look at it. Here is the analogy:

Suppose you are going on vacation, just say, or any destination you wish. You go part way down the road and decide you no longer like or want to use the car anymore. Then what?

So you abandon the car right there without having a valid alternative. The only thing you know for certain is that you now hate the car. Of course the passer-bys would be laughing at you.

At that point it doesn’t even matter where you were going, your odds of getting there have just severely decreased, if they still exist. But no, your passion about it is so deep you have to make sure the car is destroyed so it can’t be used again by anyone.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022

Just when you think the unity of the world — crossing all political and geographical divides – looks authentically encouraging, the skunk enters the room and pisses all over the place.

On Monday Senator Schumer, from the crime-ridden NYC area, spoke on the floor of the Capitol praising the great coming-together unity, claiming it has been “much to the credit of President Biden.”

Did you ever hear such useless nonsense?

Pardon me, but what unified people was staring at the face of evil and one man who caused every bit of what we see. Along with the evil regime he runs that condoned it.

Further, it is the idea of many that this evil on the march is headed elsewhere as soon as it gets a foothold in Ukraine. That Putin’s war of hybrid evil is capable of and committing war crimes, humanitarian, environmental and ecological disasters across the region which will not stop.

Schumer can try selling that Biden credit message but it is preposterous. The only thing worse will be Biden’s State of the Union Speech in a fenced up, half-attended Capitol on Tuesday night. Never underestimate Joe’s ability to F*** that up either.

 “Biden unity junk bonds, get them while they’re hot!”

Absolutely as worthless as the man they are named after. A refugee in his own mind; surviving only on alternate reality fumes and a sycophant press.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022

And now a message for our liberal friends, and I use the term loosely. What happened in Ukraine was not an act of democracy, in case you wondered. No one voted for this. It was pushed by force. I know that does not fit into your kaleidoscope glasses. It is very real.

War is not diplomacy. And radicalism is not just another hybrid form of justice.

But if you empower tyrants this is what you will get – whether they be Trudeau, Biden, Putin, Xi Jinping, or Chavez, etc. If that is who they are, in the end this is what you get in return. That is why you don’t put tyrants in positions of power, and why you take care whom you elect to positions of authority. Of course, that is when you have a choice.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022

Putin invades Ukraine, Biden gives speech

That should be the obvious headline.

Now for anyone who benefits or profits from Putin’s or Russia’s actions, there must be significant consequences.

If you listen to Putin – not sure who does – we are all just living in a world according to Russia’s whims. It feels as though we are only passengers in Vladimir Putin’s reality.

Did anyone in the administration think of just telling Putin to “knock it off?” Obama swears by that method, it worked so well for him.

So in 2022, as the world rolls toward the future, Putin scrambles back to the past ignoring every reason the world exists as it does – denying all of reality. Ignoring historic realities even of his own country.

Yet no matter what he does, his major problem is he will never have legitimacy for what he is about to do. No matter what legalistic case he tries to concoct, he still has no legitimacy for his actions. But that does not stop an old school KGB guy from pretending he does. Nor from screaming to the world that he has complete justification; nor from rewriting the past to facilitate his future fantasy.

His historical revisions don’t have to make sense, they just are. He denies all the valid history and reasons for the world being in the shape it is.

But as I reread that comment about Putin, it cannot escape me the stunning similarities that mindset has to someone else. Care to guess who? Of course it is parallel to the way Hillary Clinton thinks and operates, which is why it is so hard in the US to deal with her. She refuses to accept any basis of fact and reason. She incessantly argues to the contrary. Fortunately, for us, we do not live in a country molded in her image. Or do we?

So it now appears, after his exhaustive lesson in revision,  Vladimir Putin will use his own pen to issue a decree — by his authority as dictator — to create an illusion of legitimacy for him taking Ukraine. It sounds familiar — “We came, we saw, he died,” on Qaddafi.

The playbook is the same: first, destabilize the target area, by any means, then stand up to announce the solution to fix it. And then criticize anyone who questions your motives.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022

I think the whole country has come to realize that we only living in a world of the Left’s evolving truth. (their euphemism for BS) I know they keep labeling everything truth or facts but that does not make it so.

I mean they regularly spew out this stuff and the rest of us have to just live with it until enough people finally say “enough, we don’t accept or believe this bullshit.” But by then the Left has usually moved on to its next thing, like sexuality or climate change hysteria.

So like you cannot discriminate against trans(men) athletes competing in women’s sports. When it proves out this agenda discriminates against women athletes, they get angry. Who cares about fairness, as long as you’re saving transgender athletes?

The list goes on and on, but so happens sexuality is one of their favorite whipping posts. We all see it is ridiculous on it’s face but we play along as if it were a real thing.

You can literally make something up and then accuse other people of having a bias against it. (the more outrageous the better.) Meanwhile, they have no tolerance for reality. (which Is to be destroyed or distorted)

In almost every absurd story you see today, the deeper you look the more absurdities there are in it. You could say the same for most of the Left’s political positions too.

Keep on looking at them and it will drive you crazy trying to make any rational sense of it. This is because common sense has been removed leaving a big black hole into which everything gets sucked. Trying to apply rational arguments to it is foolish. The Left looks at you like you have two heads or something.

Why should you try to apply common sense where there is none? Be it crime, open borders, Democrats’ plans, destruction of the economy, not to forget foreign policy.

So whatever you personally want to believe is okay until it crosses with their political orthodoxy. Then it must be abolished. The favorite tool to destroy opposing arguments is to claim it has been debunked — apparently a place opponents go to die.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022