Archive: April 25, 2022

The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court

Hello Fellow Patriots:

A philosophy student was given the assignment to determine the meaning of truth. He decided to ask a
mathematician, a priest, and a statistician the meaning of the simplest truth he could think of. What is
the meaning of two plus two equals four?

The mathematician said, “This encapsulates the certain bedrock of our system of calculating.”
The priest said, “Here is the clear hand of God’s guidance.”
The statistician said, “What do you want it to mean?”

I began by considering the question, “What is the meaning of a five-to-four Supreme Court decision?”
When nine of the presumably best legal scholars read the same Constitution, review the same past
precedents, and hear the same oral arguments but four come to the opposite conclusion of the other
five, what should we make of this? If it were a question on a law school exam instead of a Supreme
Court case would the minority of four fail the class? Is there something about the law they just don’t

First, the nine justices of the Supreme Court are not our best legal scholars. They are political
appointees who were chosen because they shared the same political ideology as the appointing
president. Conservative presidents appoint conservative judges and liberal presidents appoint liberal
judges. No one can imagine Donald Trump appointing the liberal Kagan, Sotomayor, or Jackson to the
Supreme Court. And no one can imagine Barack Obama or Joe Biden appointing the conservative
Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, or Coney Barrett. Despite the claim of Chief Justice Roberts, that there are no
Obama justices and no Trump justices, clearly there are.

Worse, presidents choose appointees in order to secure the support of certain groups of voters, e.g.,
Blacks, Hispanics, women, Right-to-Lifers, gun advocates, etc. Winning a second term is very important
to presidents and appeasing the right special interest groups by appointing one of their members to the
high court can buy many votes. Still, we hope that despite these unworthy considerations, the chosen
one has at least a better than average knowledge of the law, perhaps he or she is even in the top 20%
percent of those with legal training.

Second, the Constitution, which is the ultimate justification for their decisions, is terribly vague and says
very little. There is no mention of abortion, stem cell research, the powers of regulatory agencies, the
scope of presidential immunity, or many of the issues decided by the Court. Even the Supreme Court’s
ability to declare a law, presidential directive, or a regulatory agency’s decision to be “unconstitutional”
is not in the Constitution. The Supreme Court merely declared it had this power in 1803 in the Marbury
vs. Madison case.  No one has challenged this presumption of judicial power.

To be fair, the founding fathers wrote the Constitution to be relevant to the world of 1789.   If James
Madison had any idea that one day there would be fully automatic assault rifles, or that drug gangs with
handguns would terrorize our inner cities, or that Baltimore would see 350 murders each year, he might
have been clearer about the “keep and bear arms” of the second amendment. It is unfair to expect that
a few revolutionaries should, in a few pages, give us ALL THE ANSWERS to ALL QUESTIONS for ALL
TIME. The Constitution was not written to absolve us from solving our own 21st-century problems.  The
framers of the Constitution never dreamed of a world with computers, corporate monopolies, organized
crime, or instant worldwide communications. We need to solve our problems without imagining what
Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, or John Adams would say about issues beyond their wildest dreams.
Unfortunately, the decisions of the Supreme Court are highly dependent upon exactly these imaginings
of the intent of the founding fathers. This leaves room for large differences in interpretation of the

In short, the justices (just like the statistician) can make the Constitution say anything that suits their
own political, social, or religious beliefs. The real question is whether this is a good or bad situation?
Do the justices, with their basket of biases, represent the will of America? In a country that claims to
believe in majority rule, is a five-to-four decision good enough to determine the law of the land? Does
an evenly split court represent the American will on abortion or gun ownership in the year 2022 better
than the founding father’s last will and directive?

If the justices of the Supreme Court are appointed not in spite of their biases but because of them, what
should we make of the five-to-four decision? The answer is deceptively simple. Whatever the majority
decides is the law of the land. Period. But this does raise a further question. What if a member of the
majority dies and is replaced by a justice who agrees with the original dissenting four making the
minority four the new majority? Then those who were the minority and therefore were wrong, are now
the majority and they determine the law of the land. This new opinion might change a previous opinion
that a woman DOES have a constitutional right to an abortion, to a new ruling that a woman DOES NOT
have a constitutional right to an abortion. Or an old opinion that a municipality CANNOT ban the
ownership of handguns, to a new ruling that a municipality CAN ban the ownership of handguns.   In
either case, the meaning of the Constitution and the law of the land changes to its exact opposite
without the change of a single word of the Constitution. What we want the Constitution to say or what
we believe the Constitution says is irrelevant. The Supreme Court has the last word.

Whether this is good or bad depends completely on whether the court agrees with our own opinion on
the issue. Since the country is roughly evenly divided on the big issues, each court decision will make
half the country happy and feel justified, and leave the other half claiming the decision is
“unconstitutional”. The happy half of the country will decide that the justices defended freedom,
morality, and the American way. The unhappy half will decide they understand the Constitution and
the law better than the Supreme Court, which is possible but not likely and certainly not relevant.  We
do not live in 1789, and in 2022 the Supreme Court has the last word.

In the end, someone has to have the last word, i.e., there must be a Judiciary. The founding fathers got
that right. The question is, what form should the Supreme Court take to make the law work as well as
possible for as many as possible? What will best ensure our freedoms within the framework of our
American traditions?  Perhaps the Court should be larger than the current nine, making it less
dependent on a single swing vote. Perhaps it should gradually be expanded to 15 or 19 justices with no
president allowed to appoint more than two of the new positions. Perhaps decisions that don’t have a
consensus of at least seven of nine votes should be invalid, forcing compromise and less dependence on
personal biases. Perhaps if a clear consensus can’t be reached the issue should go back to congress for
the enactment of new and clearer law.

Or perhaps the less than perfect court that we have is the best we can get, and five votes beats four

Larry Ames

God Bless America and especially at this time of extreme suffering; Ukraine.
Allan J. Feifer

Turning Back America’s Clock

Turning Back America’s Clock

Hello Fellow Patriots:

I am 65 years old. Your age is an important determiner of what decade(s) you might have a particular
hankering to return to. For me, it was the 70s and 80s. By no means were these perfect decades. There
was the winddown of Vietnam, race riots, and much negativism you could easily point to. But it was also
a time of opportunity, family was still central to our values, people believed in God and our economy
was revving up as it does from time to time in a never-ending cycle that represents the normal ebb and
flow of ups and downs, but until lately, always trending upwards.

A lot has changed in how we view our special place. Let me ask you something. Have you ever looked at
the same picture filtered in numerous different ways? Same subject, but entirely different perspective.
It is the same way with America. Some see it as the promised land, while others see it as the devil’s
construct. We each have our own set of filters derived from our upbringing, life experiences, and where
we live, among many factors that helped us create the filters that allow different people to view the
same subject but with entirely different takeaways.

Let’s jump in and explore these eight filters in more detail:



Of all the factors we present to you today, Globalism is one of the big three. Books are written on this
single subject, so we can only skim one or two high points. Globalism in America for our first 200 years
or so constituted two recurring themes.

a. Protection of American Commerce throughout the world
b. Becoming the dominant political force throughout the globe by promoting our theories of
democracy and capitalism

We largely accomplished these two imperatives. Our country entered this world in a fiery baptism but
emerged as more than just a new country, we set a tone for the entire world. An interlocking set of
beliefs set down in a largely new concept…our Constitution facilitated that. It was not long before our
fledgling nation set a small fleet of ships to Tripoli to fight the Barbary Pirates and in the process wound
up with a twofer…it both stopped the piracy for a long time and started a process that showed the world
what standing up to tyranny looked like. It was our debut as a kind of policeman to the world.

With two oceans protecting our shores we felt safe and secure. War would not come to our shores
(except for war with Great Britain in 1812 and Pearl Harbor in Hawaii) ever again. We now fought wars
preemptively to ensure commerce continued unfettered and to spread our ideals preventing fighting
adversaries on our beaches. This calculus all changed in 1957 when Russia tested its first ICBM and we
no longer could depend on a war warning to build up our forces. This changed us in many profound
ways and set us on the course we are on today, with engagement around the world necessary to ensure
we would not face a nuclear Pearl Harbor. Unfortunately, Globalism has led to many other
consequences, many of them counter to America’s interests. This is the natural lead into our next


America’s Role in the World

Think of the world as a crockpot with each nation contributing various ingredients. What results is
something distinctly different from any single ingredient in the pot. Sometimes it tastes good and
sometimes not so much. Good cooks and bad cooks. America has frequently been a good cook! We have
saved the world from despots, given the most comfort and support during times of natural and
unnatural disaster, flood the world with our innovations, medicines, and culture. I have traveled
throughout the world. One of the most memorable moments I experienced was when I was working
deep in the interior of Senegal on a construction project when I observed a dust cloud coming down the
road. When it passed me, I recognized the familiar logo of the Coca-Cola Company! America is truly
everywhere. Thinking back, that encapsulated, in a single moment the realization of the power of
American commerce, social acclimatization, and more. Anywhere you go in the world are American hats,

T-shirts, and music. People want to be Americans. Not all, but very many. It’s important to accept that.
For everyone who hates us, a hundred love us, aspire to be like us, or come here. We have, as a country
been the most successful force for good the world has ever seen! We must continue to engage and
encourage others who might aspire to be like us in their own country. That is both the message and the
imperative that we must never lose focus on.

The United States continues to be the most consequential arbiter of what’s good in the world. It’s only
in the last 40 years or so that our role has begun to change. Maybe we’ve been too successful. Perhaps
we gave away our moral mantle a bit at a time. But there continues to be an incredibly important need
for American leadership. There are only a couple of bullies that could realistically challenge our moral
leadership. We give up that role at our peril.



There are tight-knit families throughout the world. It is the natural order of things to have loving parents
who commit to putting their children ahead of their own needs. Do I have to explain to my audience the
implicit benefits of a two-parent (male and female mind you) home? I despise anyone that promotes
non-nuclear families as equal to or even superior to the traditional family unit. It’s taken a generation
for that nonsense to somehow take hold and become at least partially accepted. The hubris in believing
that the foundational concept and implementation of what created the entire human race is somehow
wrong. More than hubris, the destruction, subversion, and promotion of alternative lifestyles has
undermined our entire belief system that now screams…no judgment, do your thing, marry a dolphin (as
someone did in France), just do whatever you feel like doing at the moment. Our government,
institutions, and too many dimwitted individuals now parrot the same nonsense without any
introspection or sense of history. Gender fluidity? Are you kidding me? You can’t allow yourself to be
sucked into a belief system that is fundamentally at odds with logic and evolution.

Family is everything! It is the Alpha and Omega. Yes, add God to that shortlist, but if you want to raise
smart, healthy, and productive children, give them a grounding that makes sense. Don’t create an
artificial construct that has no natural place in nature and defend it, as if you’re saying something is true,
makes it true. 1plus1equals2 is the fundamental logic that defines all things in life; including what
constitutes a family.



Many nations are patriotic. Nations that lose their patriotism are generally in decline. Patriotism and
Nationalism are closely linked. Globalism is the antithesis of Patriotism and the beginning of a one-world
government. Globalism seeks the extermination of Patriotism and Nationalism as not only being
redundant but in opposition to itself.

There are two forms of Patriotism. Natural and Fundamental. Natural patriotism is the type of
patriotism you get like rooting for your home team. Your team may not be the best in the world, but it is
your team. It works the same way in countries. Many, if not most people are loyal to where they were
born. That’s why some immigrants (we’ll talk about that later) come here but don’t ever choose to
assimilate; they never become patriotic, they’re here for the goodies. The other kind, what I term
fundamental patriotism is more like a religion, based on a series of truths, layered one upon the other.

American patriotism is that kind. Our beliefs in freedom, the equality of man, and that the fruits of our
labor should belong to no one except ourselves are the essence of being an American.
We are rightfully patriots, and we must be patriotic to defend our ideals and place in the world. Without
patriotism, we will slowly wither on the vine as we become less sure of who we are and why it is
essential not to stray too far from our foundational beliefs as we have begun to. Let’s amplify that a bit.
No one has anything coming to them. What was true in the past is not guaranteed in the future as our
government now “guarantees” more and more rights to people without requiring a countervailing set of
efforts and success from these very same people. The government has now institutionalized the concept
of “Big Brother.” There is no “Big Brother, it is a fantasy that only seeks to justify the taking of
somebody’s wealth to give to another and is antipatriotic at its core.


Big Government

God help us! Our Founding Fathers understood it. Conservative thinkers understand it. Humanists
understand it. Big Government is the greatest threat to our continued way of life and survival. Through
policy actions, the government creates the conditions for our success or failure. To the extent that policy
decisions are made for partisan reasons, we are condemning ourselves to not just mediocrity, but
extinction. Just look at issues like education, race, civil rights, immigration, climate change, and more
than not just can, but will change the world we live in ways that people never voted on, and are
powerless to effectively oppose.

We have allowed Governmental inertia, an entrenched politicized bureaucracy, and politicians whose
sole goal is to keep their seat at the table no matter what it takes, to contrive and cajole to maintain and
increase their power, regardless of the long-term effects on the people they ostensibly serve. Long
sentence to describe an insidious and unrestrained central government that exists largely for its own
purposes and is at odds with what is the correct strategy to maintain our position in the world and
promote our citizen's health and welfare. I continually say, “We get the government we deserve.” With
more and more people voting to take from those that have to transfer to those that demand, we are in a
continuous graveyard spiral. I don’t know what we can do to change this course without a revolution.



Let’s begin with the statement that technology is a double-edged sword. So many wonderful
technological breakthroughs have made our lives easier, fun, safer, and more productive. Ok. Now that
we got that out of the way…technology is strangling us in a manner that no one ever dreamt of. For

a. I know of five-year-olds with smartphones. Why does a five-year-old need a cell phone? They should not be off on their own and there is just too much bad material on the internet. It is a parent’s job to teach their children foundational truths, not the internet. If you change that age from 5 to 12 I would say the same thing. A smartphone or other device in the hands of squishy little minds is an invitation to no good. Is your child mature enough to handle the awesome responsibility that having the entire internet as your babysitter implies? How does a parent’s role change when he/she is the last to know or be asked?

b. Social Media—if your child has access to a computer or a smart device, they more than likely
already have multiple Social Media accounts. Not only do they get to interact with other children, but they also get to interact with grown-ups acting as children for nefarious purposes. Add to that the psychological trauma many kids experience through online bullying, peer pressure, and shaming and you understand the profound effect social media has on your child. It is a direct line from people you don’t know into the brain of the child you love so much. The risk is unfathomable.

c. Remote Learning—here’s an oxymoron. Remote Learning is the greatest failure in American Education since the introduction of New Math. The vast majority of kids who were taught in this manner fell backward and did not advance in knowledge.

d. Work from home has had a huge effect on our productivity and creativity. Services like Zoom and others have made a fortune but are we really doing better as a people? I don’t see it. Only a minority of us are self-actualized. Most of us need to be around others and need bosses to review, observe and instruct us. Teams work better when you see each other eyeball to eyeball.

These four categories of technology will have long-lasting negative effects on our children. It’s not in our
scope today to discuss solutions; just awareness and a bit of fear if you have a child and had not
recognized this threat, both to your parental control and your child’s development.


Social Mores

It’s not difficult for anyone who regularly follows the news to realize that there is a huge societal push to
redefine what is moral and correct. Whether you are discussing gender, race, economic equality,
religion, clean energy, incarceration, climate change, or myriad other topics that we have latched onto
as “the” most important imperative. All of the above and more infer your duty to comply with what
amounts to a quasi-religious adherence to the tenets and edicts of this or that orthodoxy.

Reminds me a lot of the Inquisition. All other cherished values are secondary to these demands to
acquiesce. Parents are virtually warned not to interfere with State and Federal Education mandates and
if they do, there are considered terrorists. How did we let this happen?



Immigration has become a kind of Social More unto itself. But it is so huge, so diabolical in its
implementation, it’s just monstrous on its face. Does anyone care to give me the logical reasons as to
why open borders and mass migration of mostly uneducated, frequently violent, or frequently
unproductive individuals is a good thing for America? It isn’t. But what it does accomplish is three things:

1. It convinces more and more Americans that they have a government that is out of touch with
their wishes and that they are powerless to challenge.

2. Its sole function is the dilution of the current American population. There are currently more
than 22 million illegal aliens in the United States costing us more than $150 Billion. There will
likely be more than 30 million by the end of Biden’s first term.
(Numbers revised upward by the author to account for the passage of time and new

3. American lives are lost through criminal activity, smuggled drugs that would not make it into the
country if not for lax border controls, vehicular accidents caused by both the interdiction of
illegals coming into the country and driving in our country without being legal to do so.

Add your favorite to the above list. There are other reasons as well. The major takeaway is that rampant
immigration was a choice, a decision by the current administration and Democrats. Heck, they want to
make it easier to come here, not harder.

If we want our country to be a reflection of how we were in the past that made us unique, special, and
happy; we must revisit what we did to so profoundly change who we are. There’s always a way back. It
takes guts and determination to buck authorities who see you only as some kind of nuisance or terrorist.
Too many of our leaders and those in the bureaucracy are not your friends and do not represent your
interests honestly and fairly. They work for what makes them more powerful and like some tick, they
burrow into our skin and suck our blood.

I love America as you do. Rather than give up or accede to Big Brother’s edicts on how you are to live
your life, don’t negotiate (that’s their way to keep you occupied.) Instead, do what they do not expect;
fight them everywhere and at every level. Set the terms of the debate and give no ground. We are
fighting for our very existence. I hope you believe it and take that to heart!

God Bless America and especially at this time of extreme suffering; Ukraine.

Allan J. Feifer

putin war

Why Putin Welcomed War

Hello Fellow Patriots:

I have eight infrequently discussed theories on why the war in Ukraine is taking place.

  1. Because Putin can
  2. Putin uses wars to solidify his power and control
  3. Putin needs war to test his weapons
  4. Putin needs war to keep his fighting forces formidable
  5. Putin uses war to enhance his stature in the world
  6. Putin believes he can obtain certain political and economic objectives only through war
  7. Putin is testing his belief that the West is decadent, in decline, and can only focus its attention for so long
  8. Putin has never tasted failure

Because Putin Can:

Few of us live lives of white or black, true or false, seeing things in the context of success or failure with no middle ground. Putin does. Putin is very much a student of history. He does not love or hate like so many of us do. He’s a logician that understands that nature abhors a vacuum and like nature does, he fills vacuums. Putin perceives a weakness in the world that is exploitable. That’s why he is in Syria, that’s why he is in Kazakhstan and several other smaller countries, mostly in Asia. Ukraine has natural resources that Putin wants; that’s one significant reason of several as to why he invaded. That theme repeats itself wherever you see Russian military force being applied. Either the specific nation has natural resources or they control access to them.

Ask yourself why is Russia being so brutal? First, military doctrine as classically understood is about killing people and breaking things. Check. The West is much more nuanced about war and protecting non-belligerents. This has proven to be costly for us, prolongs war, and ultimately has largely been unsuccessful. The brutal truth is that this is the only way he can wage war and win. He lacks the resources that America has to stay at war forever. It was costing somewhere in the neighborhood of 1-2 billion dollars a week at some point in Afghanistan. Putin understands he can’t afford that kind of cost, and in the end, in conducting a forever war, we lost anyway. He believes in fighting his wars the old-fashioned way because it can achieve his objectives more economically and faster. At least that’s what he likely believed at the start of this conflict which he doesn’t even allow his press to call it war under penalty of imprisonment.

Putin Uses Wars to Solidify His Power and Control

Back to that brutality thing. Study how Putin runs his political apparatus at home. It can be very hard to understand the unique setup that allows Putin to stay in power and control his population. Like in 1984, Putin depends on keeping his population misinformed and seeks to destroy any political opposition or differing political thematics.  He imprisons his enemies, kills disloyal individuals outright, and empowers over 200 oligarchs to economically run Russia according to his desires. It also helps to be able to simply order these oligarchs to send him money when he demands it!

Anyone wanting to effect change in Russia knows the risk they are taking; so, few actually will take the risk.  More brutal, the better, as far as Putin is concerned. Russian Mafia, major hacking conglomerates, and various other supporting evil doers all swear an oath of fealty to Putin; or they would cease to exist. Putin runs what amounts to a vast criminal enterprise because he can. War is simply an extension of his internal killing, poisoning, disappearing, and imprisoning of his enemies. Note that Putin has executed various political leaders in Ukraine recently.

Putin needs war to test his weapons:

It’s in his playbook. Russia was in a steep decline economically from right after the dissolution of the USSR until the West reinvigorated its oil and gas fields. We created a resurgent Russia. Until relatively recently, Russia was unable financially to assert itself to any significant degree on the world stage that it covets. Russia has aggressively played its energy card to its advantage at the expense of the West.

Russia has spent rapidly on advanced technology to deter and defeat the West in some future confrontation. Putin is spending big on a range of technologies including nuclear-powered cruise missiles, hypersonics, stealth aircraft, and first strike weapons such as a hundred megaton underwater nuclear-powered torpedo designed to create massive tsunamis to inundate our coasts. This is not science fiction. It’s diabolical and ultimately clever for someone who has no morality except for the pursuit of victory at any cost. Are we even forming a clever response to what you can see Putin is thinking about? How can he kill massive amounts of Americans cheaply and effectively? We are not even playing the same game as he is. The US has already been defeated so far, through a lack of focus and determination. That must change; but will it?

Putin Needs War to Keep his Fighting Forces Formidable

It is now obvious, with at least 20,000 dead Russians that Putin wildly miscalculated the current war in Ukraine. Let me let you in on a macabre fact. Militaries that don’t go to war regularly lose their ability to conduct successful war. On paper, the European armed forces are very formidable. In actuality, their ability to kit out for war is limited. Let me give you a couple of hard to believes:

  1. The Dutch army is unionized and can’t be called out to fight without consulting their unions.
  2. Switzerland Air Force is off on the weekends. You can’t make this stuff up!
  3. Germany does not have enough bombs and bullets to go to war if it happened on short notice.

Have I made my point? For better or for worse, even though we have recently seen Congress trying to experiment socially with our military, we’re a better fighting force due to the continued number of engagements we have been involved with throughout the world. Sad, but true.

Putin watches us closely. He does not model his forces on us. Instead, he looks at our weaknesses and strategies. He politically and tactically seeks to find an advantage over the West anytime he can. He has discovered recently that theory can only be proved right or wrong on the battlefield. Without military experience on the field of battle, you are only a paper tiger. He is learning that lesson again at a very high cost to his people, military, and the previous world view of the 10-foot-tall Russian soldier.

Putin Uses War to Enhance his Place in the World:

Sun Tzu, in The Art of War famously said “Know Your Enemy to Gain Advantage”.  One of those advantages is to be so feared that your enemy will surrender without a fight. That was the strategic doctrine that Putin employed in his war with Ukraine at the start. He expected a 3-to-7-day war with mass defections of Ukrainian soldiers, a collapse of support for President Zelensky, and for Zelensky himself, a former comedian to be ineffectual and nothing more than a fool. He was wrong on all counts.

Right idea, wrong implementation. Had Putin been successful in his strategy, it would have changed the calculus for Russia going forward. Putin, much like Genghis Kahn carefully curates an image of someone you would not like to tangle with. Violence, brutality, torture, and even rapes are carefully and precisely encouraged to strike fear into Russia’s enemies. Putin wants you to think of him and Russia as ruthless, unstoppable, and worse. All to deter its enemies from standing up to it and to carve out outsize advantages through such thinking. Fairness is not part of his DNA. I fear that having unmasked Russia as something much less than his ambition would have you think, makes him more dangerous than ever. The West has hold of a wounded tiger; a very dangerous position to be in. You can’t let go now or that tiger will likely kill you! We will have to play out a most dangerous hand.

Putin Believes He Can Obtain Certain Political and Economic Objectives Only Through War:

Weakness. Putin thrives and lives off the weakness of others. Whether domestic or international, Putin seeks advantage in the weakness of others. Except for its nuclear weapons, Russia is a second-rate nation by almost every metric. The GDP of Russia is less than that of South Texas.  Threatening war, veto power in the UN, and constant general Sabre rattling is Putin’s tried and true method to get what he wants through intimidation and deceit. With the West always willing to loan money to him and his cronies, always willing to grant him this or that concession, Putin takes everything he can get and rails against those that would deny him what he wants. It’s been an effective strategy for him.

Ultimately, he’s willing to spill Russian blood in the pursuit of his larger objectives; of which Ukraine is not the main focus, but an appetizer to the main course, the destruction of NATO politically and militarily. Putin was also very aware of NATO’s problems before the invasion of Ukraine. He felt he had a good chance of not only winning Ukraine but also his wider goal of emasculating and castrating NATO. Putin forgot one of the fundamental rules of war…no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy. This revealed Putin’s war machine’s ultimate weakness. Running a war directed by the Kremlin, with loyalty as the most important measurement over competence, is doomed to failure as we have seen recently. A command-and-control system has its limits. Russian morale is low, logistics seems to be an afterthought, and the complete failure of Russia to dominate the skies has doomed him so far. The problem with dictators is that they frequently don’t learn their lessons. We’ll see if Russia changes its tactics and salvages a modicum of success in Ukraine. They definitely have completely lost the war against NATO.

Putin is Testing His Belief that the West is Decadent, in Decline, and Can Only Focus its Attention for a Limited Time:

It is the last part of the above statement that I want to focus my attention on. I have to agree with Putin, at least partially, that we are decadent and in decline. Success has in fact weakened our resolve, discipline, morals, and other measurements of a society’s health. But I think we’ll pull through if we discover and correct, at least to a degree, these failings. It’s our attention span that bothers me the most.

As a society, we are too distracted by shiny things, self-esteem, and a decidedly lazy population, measured both in effort and pleasure-seeking. That’s not a good thing. I believe Putin is banking on America to grow weary of this war, no matter how awful it gets. It’s a form of battle fatigue. Both the media and our political leaders will eventually move on. The only way forward is to supply Ukraine with the decisive tools they need to bring this war to a close on better terms than Putin would willingly offer. The signs that we are willing to do so don’t portend well. There are too many things Biden and some NATO members withhold on fears of a wider war. They are wrong. History is replete with failed gestures, strategies, and tactics that don’t shut down aggressors in their tracks. Let there never be any doubt where we stand; it should be all or nothing, in for a penny, in for a pound. That’s what history reveals over and over again.

Putin Has Never Tasted Failure:

This is simple. That clever rascal has played chess better than his opponents so far. Throughout his career, Putin has figured out how to come out on top, through any means necessary. And, he’s gotten away with it…until now. There’s an expression that says “They snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.” The West has started to congratulate itself already on how they have comported themselves in this evolving war crime. I strongly caution those that are almost ready to break out the champagne glasses though. War must, by its nature be all or nothing. Trying to measure the aid we are giving Ukraine out of fear of proportionality or other specious rationales is dangerous.

We must defeat Putin on the battlefield. He can not escape only to have him pop back up at someplace of his choosing. We must put a stake through his proverbial heart so he will plague us no more. Don’t we understand that? Putin must not only taste failure, he must experience it and be consumed by his failures. The decency of good people living or dead owes him something less than a sweet farewell. He must be made an example of.

The Future:

What Putin has started; the West must end. We are at a moment of inflection. My friends know me as the eternal optimist. If we destroy this devil, it will be a well-lit signpost for the rest of the world that clearly implies that there is no room for dictators, war crimes, genocide, and unjust war in general anymore. If we take the right road, this world will be much calmer, less dangerous, and generally a much better place to live and prosper than at present. Yes, the United States does have a special role in ensuring an end to the suffering of others by providing the conditions for all to prosper. Do you think we would allow some nation to start up the slave trade all over again? Why let dictators wage unjust war then? The United Nations needs an overhaul. It has been completely ineffective at calming the world and preventing outrages. It is feckless and self-involved. I don’t think it can be reformed. That leaves us as the ultimate guarantor of freedom, democracy, and keeping the bullies of the world from doing their worst.

I hope you think about these thoughts.

God Bless America and especially at this time of extreme suffering in Ukraine.

Allan J. Feifer



Biden’s Loss of Moral Authority

Hello Fellow Patriots:

I’m going to discuss two interlocking themes today. They are Biden’s Loss of Moral Authority and the mechanism whereby it became so. I believe the President is in Cognitive Decline, perhaps from some form of Dementia. We’ll also discuss how the President views Russia’s incursion into Ukraine, both as a threat to the West and as an opportunity to grind Russia down. Certainly, a very dangerous game for an unstable person to play.

It is not useful to discuss one issue without the other.

Let me present a few terms first:

Moral Authority: The quality or characteristic of being respected for having good character or knowledge, especially as a source of guidance or as an exemplar of proper conduct.

Cognitive Decline: Cognitive impairment is a condition in which a person experiences a noticeable decline in mental abilities (memory and thinking skills) compared with others of the same age. The ability to learn new information may be reduced, mental processing slows, speed of performance slows, and the ability to become distracted increases.

Dementia: is a general term used to describe a decline in mental function that is severe enough to noticeably interfere with daily living.

Without a doubt in my mind, Biden meets the criteria for significant cognitive decline based on his actions, hesitations, outbursts, and denial of facts in evidence. It’s only a question of how much decline he is suffering. And we must remember, he has his finger on the button of nuclear Armageddon every second of every day. Is the definition of Dementia too much of a stretch in this case to apply?

Everyone should not only be concerned but genuinely afraid. I don’t know what the remedy is, especially since the next person in the Presidential line of succession could actually be worse; that would be -our obviously inept- Vice President.

I want to transition into possible actions and triggers that could potentially be used to set the President off or neutralize his ability to function effectively. Believe me, Putin no doubt has had his best psychiatrists working on methods to both predict Biden’s next moves and determine how far Mr. Putin can push him towards the edge of becoming dangerously irrational, but no further. Putin wants Biden to be constantly reactive to his moves but not pushed into unpredictability.

Think of the Ukraine war in a different context. For, as bad as the war has been for Ukraine’s people itself, on the larger stage this is a test of wills, power, and strategy very much akin to a high stakes Chess match if you will. I think it instructive to discuss the attitudes of some of my friends as a proxy for the nation as a whole who are conflicted and don’t see Ukraine and America as having a strategic interest in common.  

I will describe my friends as either isolationists or non-interventionists. These friends are in disagreement with me generally on the issue of the importance of America’s engagement throughout the world. This is especially true concerning the current war in Ukraine and our national interest.

Wikipedia provides a useful definition of both philosophies:

Isolationism is a political philosophy advocating a national foreign policy that opposes involvement in the political affairs, and especially the wars, of other countries.”


Non-interventionism or non-intervention is a political philosophy or national foreign policy doctrine that opposes interference in the domestic politics and affairs of other countries but, in contrast to isolationism, is not necessarily opposed to international commitments in general.”

To create uncertainty and political divisions, Putin is trying to influence US public opinion to be bound to one or the other of these two philosophies. Let’s circle back to my two friends and put them to the test! If our enemies arrived on our borders or blocked our free trade with the rest of the world, would they still stand pat on their belief in non-intervention? I think it is likely I know how they will feel then, but it will also be too late to change what comes next. Because it will be Checkmate. Can you honestly say that the scenario I proposed in our introduction is totally implausible?

I have a problem with both of these philosophies, even as I understand how liberating it would be to believe one or the other to be true. But, in a multi-polar world such as we live in, both of these philosophies will only wind up making us slaves as the bullies of the world take advantage of our perceived weakness.

I use a methodology to inform my thoughts and actions that I will call “The ridiculous extreme.” I have always held that the death or suffering of one person is just as meaningful as the suffering of a million. Therefore, I extrapolate situations to the extreme to test my resolve to stand by my beliefs and what hills I choose to die on.

Circle back to my initial scenario, in which Russia and China commit to a worldwide game of Extortion through the threat of Conquest. Who is to say that scenario doesn’t make perfect sense to the leaders of Russia and China, even though we may find it implausible and repugnant to our sensibilities?

The US is a huge thorn in the side of these two leaders, as well as in their ambitions for regional and/or world dominance. Our own nuclear weapons keep them at bay for the time being. But, what if the decline of US power and influence over the past generation can be shown to have been nothing more than a prolonged form of warfare on their part? In my book “Unconventional War—”How war came to America” I detail the process by which we have been infiltrated by multiple groups, only vaguely coordinated but with the same goal; i.e. the destruction of the United States. Our country is demonstrably much weaker today based on a myriad of social, economic, and military metrics that together define our current strength. We have indeed lost a great deal of our moral authority. I believe President Biden continues to squander what’s left by and through his actions and inactions which have been carefully scripted by our enemies.

To fend off a coordinated attack on our system of democracy, its institutions, and social mores, we need to be cohesive and self-aware with the right strategic plan to execute against a much more cerebral pair of enemies. We have not recently been up to the task, distracted by the crisis du jour that always seems to be sucking up all the oxygen. We lack a proactive, forward-thinking strategy.  We are paying a huge price in blood and treasure for our missteps and lack of detailed planning.

Leadership is key. With the Presidential elections only 29 months away, we need a positive and successful strategy. One such action should lead to a more proactive Congress after the mid-terms that stops constantly re-litigating the past election as nothing more than a distraction. Here are several critical issues that Congress could move on proactively if they chose:

  • Iran—Congress must stop the President from making one of the worst decisions in modern history getting back in bed with Iran and giving them billions of dollars in sanctions relief for no real purpose. Many Arab nations are so angered by our cozying up to Iran that two of those leaders would not even pick up the phone to ask for more oil when Biden called recently!
  • Energy—The President has said it numerous times; he’s going to kill the fossil fuel industry. This decision should become a national debate at the very least. Right now, his policies are making us poorer and weaker.
  • The Southern Border—With the end of the Title 42 Covid exclusion rule on May 23rd, the current surge at the southern border will become a Tsunami. Predictions have been made of 200,000 to 250,000 illegal aliens will come across the border each month thereafter. Why are we allowing this to happen? How does the US benefit from this nonsense? More than 65% will never even show up for their asylum hearings. The vast majority will not qualify for that asylum protection and should be thrown out immediately for trying to game our system.  As a country, we look stupid. Biden and the Democrats must have some other reason for prioritizing illegal aliens over our fellow countrymen. You know the answer, it’s to win future elections.
  • The Green Agenda—Every bill that has passed the legislature since he became President has had a Green New Deal tax and initiatives baked in. Whether for Covid spending, Infrastructure, or even the DOD budget, there are billions and billions of dollars tucked in for what amounts to; a wholesale change to our economy and way of life. All that has been undertaken without any substantive national debate and by using as much stealth as possible. On the contrary, I believe that Americans consistently think issues like Climate Change, the Green New Deal, and other social agendas should not be among our nation’s top priorities.
  • Other National Priorities— President Biden has completely realigned our priorities to push race, ‘Wokeness,’ wide-open immigration, and globalism ahead of what should be our most important priorities which should include the re-industrialization of our country, territorial integrity, and world leadership. Only the United States still has the military muscle to push back against Russia and China. As the only free superpower in the world, we have squandered our military and political power too often in the past.

We are now struggling with America’s place in the world. Worse, we seem to have lost the understanding and hard-earned wisdom that was gleaned through the spilling of American blood in past wars. We fight over much the same issues over and over again. We are again choosing the wrong path in pursuing make-believe, feel-good policies that only dimmish our place in the world and reduce us as a people.

For better or worse, our individual futures are directly tied to what President Biden says and does. Every wrong pronouncement and every walk back by his staff, seconds after this or that gaff, only reinforces a growing belief that Biden’s competence and mental decline are real. Our lack of focus on what keeps us ahead, militarily, economically, and politically creates uncertainty in the world. Good nations start to desert us and bad actors will frequently test the waters to see what they can get away with. That’s the dangerous world we live in.

For all of us, stay engaged. Stay connected to what’s going on no matter how hard, distasteful, and frustrating it may seem. The America we live in is very much influenced by the beliefs and actions of our people. Politicians would love to run this country without you. But, never underestimate your individual power to effect change. Don’t allow politicians to pull the wool over your eyes by being sneaky in how they go about their business or by what they tell you. You can discover the truth. You can and should investigate to separate the lies and distortions from what is true and real.  And, you must always, always become informed and vote in every election.

America holds a very special and unique place in this world. It would be a travesty beyond belief to allow what we have accomplished to die like so much roadkill. I remember an America I was proud of, faults and all.  Even if you cannot remember it, we should never give up and accept a world of fear, uncertainty, lower living standards, and a belief that our best years are behind us.

I hope you agree with me.

God Bless America and especially at this time of extreme suffering in Ukraine.

Allan J. Feifer