“There are great reasons for the United States to adopt a non-interventionist foreign policy. Some of these are ethical, such as not violating the rights of other people and not supporting or engaging in aggressive conduct generally. Others are partly ethical and partly prudential, such as not wasting taxpayer’s money on foreign adventurism and limiting the influence of arms dealers and the like on our political system. But one overriding prudential reason for a non-interventionist foreign policy is to avoid becoming entangled in foreign intrigues and conflicts where we lack control over our involvement and the outcome. For all his ‘America First’ bluster, President Donald Trump seems to understand none of these, and it is the third that I will focus on here.” (06/30/25)
Source: The Erick Erickson Show
by Erick-Woods Erickson
“We are expected to cheer on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act because it is the Republican bill. This Republican bill adds to the deficit, adds to the debt, picks winners and losers, raises the debt ceiling beyond the $37 trillion in existing debt, and just rearranges deck chairs as the nation sinks into insolvency. It is fiscally irresponsible. Without its passage, taxes will go up. That is the only real justification for this legislation. But taxes are going to go up on everyone significantly eventually because this legislation does not seriously tackle the issues of our fiscal solvency and uses sleights of hand to suggest any real benefit. … All the savings come towards the end of the duration of the legislation, which means it is an accounting gimmick and the cuts will never actually come to be.” (06/30/25)
“[F]or decades, both parties have relied on expansive executive power to achieve their goals. In that sense, all Americans are imperial presidentialists. Is Trump really so different from the presidents before him? The expansion of presidential power has undoubtedly been one of the central developments of the United States’ 249 years of nationhood. Though the Constitution attempted to constrain the executive branch, President George Washington nonetheless issued a stern warning in his farewell address …. ‘the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.'” (06/30/25)
“Just when you think CNN’s Jake Tapper can’t become an even bigger media hack than he already is, he finds a way to prove you wrong. The latest incident of the network host’s shoddy conduct as a so-called ‘journalist’ came on Friday during his interview with New York City Mayor Eric Adams. Among the topics covered during the exchange was the Big Apple’s upcoming mayoral contest, which will pit Adams against the newly nominated Democrat candidate, radical socialist Zohran Mamdani. When the conversation shifted to the race against Mamdani, Tapper — whose network a jury found is actually fake news — probed Adams about his criticisms of his Democrat opponent.” (06/30/25)
“Amidst the trade wars and troubled economic understanding, it is tempting for economists to seek the counsel of despair. Indeed, the fallacies in popular economic reasoning are not the stuff of minute mathematical modeling, profound methodological disagreement, or advanced debate on controversial models. Rather, the sophistry on trade and tariffs is the stuff of the first or second week of economics 101. How could we have gone so wrong? In this time of economic illiteracy, it is worth returning to one of the masters of our tradition. Bastiat (1801-1850) was a brilliant economic mind, but he also remains an unmatched and witty expositor of simple truths. And he can be a lesson of hope.” (06/30/25)
Source: The American Conservative
by Josh Shifrinson
“Donald Trump ran for office promising to shake up U.S. grand strategy. In Trump’s telling, America’s leaders over the last several decades were too beholden to allied concerns, to the detriment of U.S. interests. And they were too enamored of military force that expended American blood and treasure on peripheral issues. In contrast, Trump suggested a willingness to break with allies when U.S. and partner concerns differed (‘they’re screwing us’ economically, he famously said of NATO allies), and he conveyed an openness to forgoing military adventures (there would be no ‘forever wars’ on his watch) and instead prioritize diplomacy and negotiation. In ordering military strikes against the Iranian nuclear program, President Trump has shown that his claim to be a grand-strategic change agent may be overstated.” (06/30/25)
“In defense circles, ‘cutting’ the Pentagon budget has once again become a topic of conversation. Americans should not confuse that talk with reality. Any cuts exacted will at most reduce the rate of growth. The essential facts remain: U.S. military outlays today equal that of every other nation on the planet combined, a situation without precedent in modern history. The Pentagon presently spends more in constant dollars than it did at any time during the Cold War — this despite the absence of anything remotely approximating what national security experts like to call a ‘peer competitor.’ Evil Empire? ‘It exists only in the fevered imaginations of those who quiver at the prospect of China adding a rust-bucket Russian aircraft carrier to its fleet or who take seriously the ravings of radical Islamists promising from deep inside their caves to unite the Umma in a new caliphate.” (06/30/25)
I see the Trump Doctrine, at least as articulated by Vice-President Vance, as little more than vainglorious political grandstanding. A brief look at his main points shows that there is no depth of thought behind them. First, ‘articulate a clear American interest.’ But there is no indication of any awareness about how this will affect other nations …. Second, pursue diplomacy ‘aggressively.’ At the very heart of diplomacy, however, is patience. Any haste or use of force to achieve a one-sided result result typically results in a failure to achieve any lasting objectives. … Third, ‘when you can’t solve it diplomatically, you use overwhelming military power to solve it.’ It is telling that the vice-president uses the word ‘when’ rather than ‘if.’ … Obviously, the vice-president is selling slogans, rather than engaging in a thoughtful foreign policy discussion. But even this simplistic rendition of the ‘Trump Doctrine’ leaves many unanswered questions.” (06/30/25)
“You have to give New York Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani one thing—he doesn’t hide it very well. His racism, his antisemitism, and his radical leftist extremism aren’t whispered in smoky back rooms. No, he says them out loud, with a straight face, into microphones, and on national television. The only time he pretends not to mean them is when the public backlash finally reaches his well-manicured ears. This week, Mamdani sat across from NBC’s Kristen Welker on ‘Meet the Press’ and was asked (over and over) whether he condemned the phrase ‘globalize the intifada,’ a rallying cry from anti-Israel, often antisemitic extremists around the world. And like every coward who knows the truth would get him disqualified from polite society, let alone public office, he bobbed, weaved, deflected, and flat-out refused to give a straight answer.” (06/30/25)
“One of the final cases the U.S. Supreme Court decided at the end of its term last week was Mahmoud v. Taylor, in which a majority recognized the right of parents to opt out of lessons contrary to families’ religious beliefs. In some circles, the decision is being portrayed as a setback for the treatment of gays, lesbians, and the differently gendered, since they were the focus of the books that the victorious plaintiffs objected to. That gets it all wrong. This case is really about the right of families to guide their children’s education and the difficulty of doing that in the rigid confines of one-size-fits-some government schools.” (06/30/25)
