The CNN crew was morose last night when they realized that the Dem lost the most expensive House campaign ever:

Some of their talking heads claim “moral victories,” but the LA Times notices that “moral victories” mean losing:

Democrats are claiming “moral victories” after losing two special congressional elections in heavily Republican districts. Those results from votes in Georgia and South Carolina on Tuesday follow two other moral victories — also known as losses — in battles for House seats in Montana in May and Kansas in April. Many more results like these and the Democratic Party will be out of business.

The debate is on as to what this means for either party in next year’s congressional elections, since Georgia’s Karen Handel won by “only” 5 points over Jon Ossoff (even when she got a clear majority).

Paul Kane at the WaPo claims that Ossoff lost because he chose civility. I say that Ossoff lost because he did not care to be in his district and the voters noticed.

Charles Glasser points out that

Ossoff raised $23.6 million to make a symbolic run against President Trump, most of it from Marin County, California and Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts.

Georgia voters were bombarded with Ossoff media ads and junk mail.

The Democrats ran a pajama boy-looking candidate who apparently could not decide whether he was liberal or conservative, and who does not live in that district.

That is, Ossoff could not even vote for himself.

Adding to the ridiculousness, when asked, Ossoff replied that he lives just “down the street” from the district. Brent Scherr braved the Georgia heat and found that “down the street” meant 3.2 miles on foot.

Republicans can not afford to be complacent. The Democrats are hell-bent on winning.

But Andrew Klavan summarizes in one tweet what the Dems don’t get from yesterday’s Georgia vote:

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes in U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog.

by baldilocks

Only soft-handed Marxists natter on about the “right” or “wrong side of history.” Countries like Poland, however, have been battered by real Marxism and proceed accordingly.

NATO allies will hold emergency talks on the crisis in Ukraine on Tuesday, for the second time in three days, following a request from Poland, the alliance said on Monday.

In calling the meeting, Poland, a neighbor of Ukraine, invoked a NATO rule allowing any ally to consult with the others if it feels its security, territorial integrity or independence are under threat, the so-called Article 4.

“The developments in and around Ukraine are seen to constitute a threat to neighboring Allied countries and having direct and serious implications for the security and stability of the Euro-Atlantic area,” the alliance said in a statement.

Emphasis mine; Poland knows Russia well.

There’s the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, under which Hitler’s Nazi Germany and Stalin’s USSR agreed to split up Poland.[i]

There’s the Katyn Massacre. Originally attributed to the Nazis, it was actually perpetrated by the NKVD (Soviet Secret Police); the USSR admitted to the massacre in 1990.

And there’s the Warsaw Pact. Allegedly it was formed counter as counter to NATO and as a “Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance” between the USSR and eight other eastern European countries, including Poland. But, as is well-known,  it was de facto enslavement of those countries by Soviet masters.

But Poland doesn’t even have to look to the previous century find reasons to be suspicious of Russia and its goals.

Recall the scrapped agreement for the missile shield technology  for Poland and the Czech Republic. It had been promised by George W. Bush, opposed by Vladimir Putin, and, in the end, was reneged on by Barack H. Obama.  And recall that the turnabout was announced on September 18, 2009—the seventieth anniversary of the day on which Hitler and Stalin carried out their designs on Poland.

And let’s not forget what happened to the Polish leadership in 2010.

Polish President Lech Kaczynski and some of the country’s highest military and civilian leaders died on Saturday when the presidential plane crashed as it came in for a landing in thick fog in western Russia, killing 96, officials said.

(…)

Russian and Polish officials said there were no survivors on the 26-year-old Tupolev, which was taking the president, his wife and staff to events marking the 70th anniversary of the [Katyn] massacre of thousands of Polish officers by Soviet secret police.

This grimly ironic accident is still being questioned.

Our leadership and many other observers may not be taking into account—or even be familiar with—the history of this abusive relationship, but it would be safe to bet that the Poles had it in mind when they decided to make their appeal to NATO.

This is not to say that the United States should intervene on behalf of Ukraine. Even if our mandate to do so were morally and politically clear-cut, in the wake of the hollowing out of this nation–militarily, economically, socially, and, most importantly, in the leadership sphere–we are simply not able to help Ukraine or any other nation.

But while the President of the United States continually provides negative examples of an observation made by King Solomon in Proverbs, Poland looks at Ukraine, scrutinizes its own history and soberly ponders reality. Please, God, let there be a few more sober realists in the USA!

Stay tuned.

UPDATE: Lithuania invokes Article 4 as well.


[i] In his actions concerning Georgia and Ukraine, Russian president Vladimir Putin has borrowed a strategy from both Stalin and Hitler: both claimed that their attack on Poland was to protect ethnic Ukrainians, Belarusians and Germans in the country—a pretext, to be sure.

Putin used a similar justification, with respect to ethnic Russians living in the Republic of Georgia, for the Russo-Georgian War of 2008, which resulted in the “independence” of formerly Georgian provinces Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Both provinces “had been functioning for 15 years outside Georgian control, their de facto independence guaranteed by Russian peacekeeping troops.” Putin is using this same strategy at present as justification for Russia’s incursion into Ukraine–an old form of ethnic cleansing.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in early 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!

Cross-posted at Haemet.

In the latest round of Republicans are stealing your ladyparts!!, liberals have ditched the facts and gone for wild speculation, designed to gin up controversy and scare women into voting for them.  In the latest round, liberals claim that a Georgia state representative compared women to livestock and wants to force them to carry stillborn babies to term. (See also here, from the mis-named ThinkProgress.)

Here is the text of Georgia House Bill 954.  Take a quick read through it.  Now, most of you aren’t lawyers, but you’re probably wondering where the stillborn language is.  Or where the stillborn language was struck.

It wasn’t.  The new bill would prohibit abortion beyond the twentieth week unless to save the life of the mother, if the baby would die anyway, or if continuing the pregnancy would have a severe and permanent effect upon the bodily organs of the mother.  The bill would not change the meaning of abortion (notice how Chapter 9(B)(a)(1) does not have a strikethrough), which, under Georgia law, is:

(1) “Abortion” means the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or any other substance or device with the intent to terminate the pregnancy of a female known to be pregnant. The term “abortion” shall not include the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or any other substance or device employed solely to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, or to remove a dead unborn child who died as the result of a spontaneous abortion. The term “abortion” also shall not include the prescription or use of contraceptives.

[Emphasis added] As conservatives, we should start with the belief that the media will always lie to us, then move from there in figuring out the exact nature of the mendacity being shoveled down American throats.