Hillary Clinton visited an elementary school in New York to talk to the kids about the world. After her talk she asked if there were any questions?
One little boy puts up his hand. He says his name is.
"Kenneth." "And what is your question, Kenneth?" she asks.
"I have three questions," he says. "First -- what happened in Benghazi? "Second -- why did you run for president if you are not even capable of handling two e-mail accounts? "And, third -- what happened to the missing six billion dollars while you were Secretary of State?"
Just then the bell rings for recess. Hillary tells the kids that they will continue after recess.
When they resume Hillary says, "Okay, where were we? Oh, that's right, question time. Who has a question?" A different boy -- little Johnny -- puts his hand up.
"And what is your question, Johnny?" she asks.
"I have five questions," he says.
"First -- what happened in Benghazi?
"Second -- why did you run for president if you are not capable of handling two e-mail accounts? "Third -- what happened to the missing six billion dollars while you were Secretary of State?
"Fourth -- why did the recess bell go off 20 minutes early?
"And, fifth -- where the hell is Kenneth?"
LIV gave all their money to the players and forgot to pay their camera crew.
Rahm made an albatross, and LIV didn’t even have any footage of it. It took a fan recording it to try to even get a glimpse.
LIV is clearly dying.
Food for thought.
Trump, Hormuz and the End of the Free Ride
For half a century, Western strategists have known that the Strait of Hormuz is the acute point where energy, sea power and political will intersect. That knowledge is not in dispute. What is new in this war with Iran is that the United States, under Donald Trump, has chosen not to rush to “solve” the problem. In Hegelian terms, he is refusing an easy synthesis in order to force the underlying contradiction to the surface.
The old thesis was simple: the US guarantees open sea lanes in the Gulf, and everyone else structures their economies and politics around that free insurance. Europe and the UK embraced ambitious green policies, ran down hard‑power capabilities and lectured Washington on multilateral virtue, secure in the assumption that American carriers would always appear off Hormuz. The political class behaved as if the American security guarantee were a law of nature, not a contingent choice. Their conduct today is closer to Chamberlain than Churchill: temporising, issuing statements, hoping the storm will pass without a fundamental reordering of their responsibilities.
Trump’s antithesis is to withhold the automatic guarantee at the moment of maximum stress. Militarily, the US can break Iran’s residual ability to contest the Strait; that is not the binding constraint. The point is to delay that act. By allowing a closure or semi‑closure to bite, Trump ensures that the immediate pain is concentrated in exactly the jurisdictions that have most conspicuously free‑ridden on US power: the EU and the UK. Their industries, consumers and energy‑transition assumptions are exposed.
In that context, his reported blunt message to European and British leaders, you need the oil out of the Strait more than we do; why don’t you go and take it? Is not a throwaway line. It is the verbalisation of the antithesis. It openly reverses the traditional presumption that America will carry the burden while its allies emote from the sidelines.
In this dialectic, the prize is not simply the reopening of a chokepoint. The prize is a reordered system in which the United States effectively arbitrages and controls the global flow of oil. A world in which US‑aligned production in the Americas plus a discretionary capability to secure,or not secure, Hormuz places Washington at the centre of the hydrocarbon chessboard. For that strategic end, a rapid restoration of the old status quo would be counterproductive.
A quick, surgical “fix” of Hormuz would short‑circuit the dialectic. If Trump rapidly crushed Iran’s remaining coastal capabilities, swept the mines and escorted tankers back through the Strait, Europe and the UK would heave a sigh of relief and return to business as usual: underfunded militaries, maximalist green posturing and performative disdain for US power, all underwritten by that same power. The contradiction between their dependence and their posture would remain latent.
By declining to supply the synthesis on demand, and by explicitly telling London and Brussels to “go and take it” themselves, Trump forces a reckoning. European and British leaders must confront the fact that their energy systems, their industrial bases and their geopolitical sermons all rest on an American hard‑power foundation they neither finance nor politically respect. The longer the contradiction is allowed to unfold, the stronger the eventual synthesis can be: a new order in which access to secure flows, Hormuz, Venezuela and beyond, is explicitly conditional on real contributions, not assumed as a right.
In that sense, the delay in “taking” the Strait, and the challenge issued to US allies to do it themselves, is not indecision. It is the negative moment Hegel insisted was necessary for history to move. Only by withholding the old guarantee, and by saying so out loud to those who depended on it, can Trump hope to end the free ride.
If you’re a 10 handicap, you shouldn’t expect to shoot 82 every time on a par 72.
Instead, focus on your target score: your course handicap + par from the tees you’re playing.
You’ll hit that number about 15–20% of the time. Most rounds will land 2–5 strokes higher!
I love this.
A guy I’ve known for 25 years shot his first under par round of golf today.
1 under 71.
At 69 years old.
He’s been playing his whole life, and after all these years, the game gave him another moment he’ll never forget.
Greatest game there is!
I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country
America is a compassionate nation, but our government is the easiest entity to fleece. The American taxpayer is getting screwed.
The only way to control this fraud is to limit the size, scope, and cost of government and return it to the constraints of its enumerated powers.