Our defenders of democracy really don’t like it when the people take democratic choices of which they disapprove

Sometimes an author spends a lot of time, finely crafting his OpEd for The Philadelphia Inquirer, and winds up telling us exactly what he didn’t really mean to convey.

On immigration, Trump doesn’t have a copyright on cruelty

On both sides of the Atlantic, migrants are regarded as a problem at best, a danger to national security at worst, writes German journalist Adrian Schulz.

by Adrian Schulz | Tuesday, September 2, 2025 | 6:00 AM EDT

Detention camps, violent rhetoric, physical harm, deportations to third-party countries under brutal regimes — Donald Trump did not invent the playbook on callousness toward immigrants.

The European Union, winner of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize, got there ahead of him.

As I read the news about the U.S. government’s continuing assault on people whose sole fault is not having the right documents to legally live in a country that is otherwise happy to exploit their labor, I also follow the German debate around the 10th anniversary of the so-called refugee crisis. In 2015, more than a million people came to Germany seeking refuge, many of them fleeing from war-torn Syria.

“(N)ot having the right documents,” huh? Yet another euphemism for being in the country illegally!

I cannot speak to European law, but “not having the right documents” is not their “sole fault” in the United States, because to work in the United States you must be a citizen or be here legally, with the appropriate documents. This means that the illegals who work have either presented forged documents, or be working for a company which has knowingly hired them without documentation, or they are, like those apprehended at Home Depots while looking for day labor, working for cash, almost always unreported, and are thus evading our income and Social Security taxes.

Those things are all felonies!

What I see is not so different. On both sides of the Atlantic, migrants are regarded as a problem at best, a danger to national security at worst. Trump has no copyright on cruelty. Europeans just put on a friendlier face.

Is there ever a ‘friendly face’ on an arresting officer? Regardless of the crime, no one likes being arrested, but that’s what doing something really radical like enforcing the law requires. Our good friends on the left were saying all along that ‘no one is above the law,’ as they prosecuted and persecuted then former President Donald Trump, trying everything they could to throw him in jail and prohibit him from running for President again. They had no problem with the prosecution and persecution of the January 6 Capitol kerfufflers and screamed blood murder when the re-inaugurated President Trump pardoned them, even though most had already served their sentences. Philadelphia District Attorney, who routinely hands out lenient plea bargains to gang bangers, even said he’d try to prosecute the pardoned kerfufflers on state charges.

But somehow, some way, no one being above the law doesn’t seem to matter to them when it comes to people living in our country illegally. Given that they are committing felonies every day they go to work, I’d say that they are far worse criminals than the kerfufflers ever were.

The decision of then-Chancellor Angela Merkel not to close the borders in 2015 is seen today by many as a cardinal sin that fundamentally changed the German political landscape, leading to the rise of the far-right Alternative für Deutschland party, known as the AfD. It came in second place in the recent federal elections.

AfD was founded in 2013, just before the immigration crisis in Germany, but started growing as Germans became more and more disillusioned by the unrestrained, mostly Muslim, immigration. Germany is a democratic republic, and when author Adrian Schulz tells us that the party came in second in recent elections, he is telling us that the German people are disillusioned with the huge number of immigrants in the country.

(Frau Merkel) chose the former. Her phrase, “Wir schaffen das,” or “We can make it,” endeared her to liberals and outraged conservatives, but for a short moment, most Germans celebrated a Willkommenskultur, a culture of welcoming. People brought truckloads of stuffed animals to train stations where the refugee families arrived.

The optimism soon vanished, though. As in other European countries, the debate started to focus on radically limiting the number of asylum-seekers. The rhetoric became hostile.

“As in other European countries . . . .” Herr Schulz has admitted to us that the movement to reject unregulated Muslim immigration is growing throughout the European democracies. The editors of the Inquirer certainly loved an article decrying President Trump’s immigration policies as “callousness” and “cruelty,” but in doing so, the newspaper concomitantly told readers that we were not alone among democracies in rejecting what is, in the end, an attack on our culture, on Western civilization.

This is what the editors of the Inky, and Herr Schulz just don’t quite get. In the democracies that they claim to cherish, sometimes the people may take democratic choices they just don’t like.

World War III Watch: Do the left really hate Mr Trump so much that they’d rather see more and more blood flowing than the President get some credit for stopping a war? The left would rather see the killing continue than President Trump achieve a diplomatic victory and peace

Our good friends on the left — and I include the recent neoconservatives, who are not really conservative in very much among the left — are up in arms that the wicked, evil, hated President Donald Trump is trying to get at least a ceasefire, and possibly a lasting peace agreement, between Russia and Ukraine, claiming that such would lock-in Russia’s conquests of roughly 20% of Ukraine. The Editorial Board of The Philadelphia Inquirer, about which I would have written yesterday but was afraid of sounding like a broken record, was simply the latest.

The left are just deathly afraid that Mr Trump might win the Nobel Peace Prize, said to be one of his heartfelt desires, as though promoting peace is somehow a bad thing. But the President said that he just loved stopping wars! Continue reading →

World War III Watch: The moustache wants more war! Let's tell the truth here: John Bolton is an idiot.

If there’s anything consistent in this world today, it that former Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs John Bolton loves wars in which Other People have to fight. Mr Bolton, who chose to avoid service personally in the Vietnam War, a war he supported, wants the war between Russia and Ukraine to rage on and on and on, to an impossible conclusion.

In an OpEd for The Wall Street Journal, he concluded:

Mr. Putin’s postsummit remarks emphasized that Russia’s aims—essentially re-creating the Russian Empire, hadn’t changed a scintilla. Russia holds roughly 20% of Ukraine’s territory, doubling from the approximately 10% seized in 2014 in the first phase of Moscow’s annexation plan. If a cease-fire line traces what Moscow now holds in phase two and negotiations drag on, Mr. Putin will gain time to restore his economy, rebuild and repurpose his army and navy, and prepare for phase three. He has patience, waiting eight years between the first two efforts at reuniting “little Russia” (as Muscovites call Ukraine), with the rodina, or motherland. In response, Ukraine requires security guarantees, including from Washington — about which Mr. Trump remains exceedingly vague, his recent positive noises notwithstanding.

Kyiv should reject this scenario unequivocally, not embrace it, with one major caveat. Ukraine must have assurances that European and U.S. military assistance will continue at appropriate levels to allow them to resist further Russian advances, and begin regaining lands, to achieve the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s stated goal of restoring the country’s full sovereignty and territorial integrity. This will force Mr. Trump and the Europeans to decide whether they are prepared to accept Russian aggression or resist it.

Who here believes that Ukraine can ever “begin regaining lands, to achieve the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s stated goal of restoring the country’s full sovereignty and territorial integrity,” without American and/or European NATO troops on the ground, directly fighting Russia, a nation with a strategic nuclear arsenal? That’s World War III, something that at least one of us believes is a bad idea.

How much consideration does this really take? Yes, it’s a bad thing that Russia has been able to invade Ukraine, and seize roughly 20% of its territory, but some things are worse. World War III would be worse, and World War III between nations with nuclear arsenals?

Let’s tell the truth here: John Bolton is an idiot.

World War III Watch: “Well boys, I reckon this is it. Nuclear combat toe-to-toe with the Russkies!”

The Snowball Summit was over quickly, and now President Trump is scheduled to meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Washington on Monday. Then additional European leaders will join in the fun. From The New York Times:

European leaders are set to join Zelensky for Ukraine meeting with Trump.

by Constant Méheut and Enjoli Liston | Sunday, August 17, 2025

European leaders said on Sunday that they would join President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine when he meets with President Trump on Monday at the White House, as they strive to show solidarity against Russia and avoid being sidelined in peace talks.

“Our goal tomorrow is to present a united front between Europeans and Ukrainians,” President Emmanuel Macron of France told reporters. “I don’t believe Putin wants peace. I believe he wants Ukraine’s capitulation.” Continue reading →

World War III Watch: The left and the Neocons want the killing to continue in Ukraine

Our good friends on the left are just up in arms over President Trump’s meeting with Soviet Russian President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin in Alaska, ostensibly to discuss some way to end the Russo-Ukrainian War, which has been raging — well, maybe raging isn’t the right word; how about plodding along? — for 3½ years now. The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Trudy Rubin, as much of a neocon as anyone working for the Inky can be, frets: Continue reading →

The one tool Hamas have

Every once in a while, a ‘Palestinian’ ‘leader’ will do something really radical and tell the truth. It’s a very different thing, because, to paraphrase Mary McCarthy, “Every word they utter is a lie, including ‘and’ and ‘the’.” But sometimes the truth is so in-you-face obvious that it cannot be denied.

‘We have to reconsider our tools’: Terror chief Zubeidi laments that all Palestinian strategies have failed

Continue reading →

Thoughts on Nagasaki Day

Atomic bomb cloud over Nagasaki.

My mother served as a WAC — Women’s Army Corps — in General Douglas MacArthur’s headquarters in Tokyo during the Korean War, and she came to know the Japanese people, inasmuch as that was possible for a white woman who didn’t speak Japanese, in the early 1950s. She met and married my father there, so I’m pretty grateful for all of that; without the Korean War, I wouldn’t exist!

Mom didn’t really discuss her life in Tokyo that much. She was one of hundreds of WACs who typed up letters to the families of servicemen killed in action, and she did tell me that she could not refer to the “Korean War”, but only the “Korean conflict” or “Korean Police Action.”

But one point that she made several times was that we should not have used the atomic bomb. Rather, she said we should have detonated it in Tokyo Bay, a demonstration shot as it were, to show the Japanese what could happen to them if they didn’t surrender. The problem with that argument, though I didn’t make it at the time, was that we only had two atomic bombs at the time. What if it had failed? Continue reading →

The Philadelphia Inquirer harbors illegal immigrants There is plenty of dignity in obeying the law; there is none in breaking it.

As we have previously noted, The Philadelphia Inquirer is very much on the side of the illegal immigrants. The good journolists[1]The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their … Continue reading there, from the far-loeft Will Bunch to even the more moderate Daniel Pearson, the newspaper’s chief editorial writer, all want the illegals — at The First Street Journal we do not use the euphemism ‘undocumented’ — to be allowed to stay here.

But now they might have just fouled up:

‘The last thing that is protecting my dignity.’ A South Philly mother talks about life under sanctuary.

Continue reading →

References

References
↑1 The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.

If you are not calling on Hamas to surrender and release the hostages, your cries about people suffering in Gaza are worthless.

Armand Domalewski describes himself, in his Twitter biography, as a “Data scientist” living in San Francisco, and “Co-Founder, YIMBYs for Harris”. He’s actually followed by several real people I know, so perhaps he’s not an actual Palestinian bot, like so many of the other pro-Hamas posters on social media, but in this, he might as well be.

Mr Domalewski tweeted that the headline on the Babylon Bee satire site, “Gaza Said To Be Starving But Not ‘Release The Hostages’ Starving,” “is an evil, evil, evil headline”, But, even from a sarcasm site, it’s an accurate headline. The only thing that needs to happen for tons and tons of food and other aid to flow into Gaza is for Hamas to surrender and release the hostages. But the Palestinians and their useful idiots on social media would rather keep on fighting an unwinnable war. Continue reading →