July 2019

Townhall.com

by Bob Barr

The world in which most liberals live is one of magic and fairytales — where socialist systems have starved millions of people and destroyed every economy forced into its model, but which certainly will work the next time. It is a world in which using fascist tactics to silence opponents actually makes you an anti-fascist; and where presidential candidates can promise everything for everyone, and still have enough money left over to cut taxes. In this fantasy land, anything is possible if you just feel it to be true.

Perhaps nowhere is the Left’s disconnect from reality more acute than in its assault on the Second Amendment. Despite decades of gun control proposals debunked time and again, the same schemes and arguments regularly are recycled and repackaged. Democrats remain convinced that Americans are just waiting for permission to hand over their firearms and their God-given right to self-defense. After all, Democrats say, other countries are doing it, so why not us?

Take for instance New Zealand, which recently achieved rock star status in the eyes of Democrats in our country, when its prime minister reacted to a tragic mass shooting with a crushing blow to the country’s firearms rights. The prime minister immediately banned “military-style assault rifles,” to be jump started with a “buy-back” program. 

As expected, Democrats here gushed with envy at what would be possible in our country. “Christchurch happened, and within days New Zealand acted to get weapons of war out of the consumer market. This is what leadership looks like,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez cluelessly tweeted, echoing sentiments from Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Chris Murphy, and others.    

The “leadership” which so moved Ocasio-Cortez, however, appears to have hit a roadblock – the country’s citizens are not responding as expected. 

While New Zealand’s left-wing leaders appear to have felt that a firearm ban was the correct and only possible response to the Christchurch shooting, the reality is that its citizens did not feel the same. In spite of the rush to enact a ban, subsequent pushback from citizens and noncompliance with the law have stalled what was expected by New Zealand officials to be an easy process of collecting now-illegal firearms. Months after the ban, reports suggest only 700 firearms have been voluntarily surrendered to police.  Optimism about the effectiveness of the buy-back program is waning, with the next move up to the government. 

Confiscation efforts have been further hampered because in New Zealand – as in the United States – the government does not maintain a registry of firearms owners. In spite of what government leaders apparently expected, New Zealanders are not rushing to let the authorities know what may be locked in their gun safes (or now buried in their yard).  Gun owners in New Zealand obviously do not share the liberal delusion that guns are instruments useless for any purpose besides shooting people, and therefore to be handed over readily to please the authorities and avoid prosecution.

Like their mentors in New Zealand, Democrats in the United States appear oblivious to the reality of firearms ownership, and piously drone on and on about the evils of gun ownership and their ideas for gun control. They grow curiously quiet, however, when it comes to articulating what is to happen when people refuse to surrender their Second Amendment rights. Discounting Rep. Eric Swalwell’s bizarre threat that the federal government could use “nukes” to accomplish such a goal, the crucial question becomes, how would Democrats respond? 

If they ban AR-15s (the most popular sporting rifle in America), would Democrats send authorities to knock down doors, and drag people off to jail for noncompliance? Or, would they simply turn a blind eye; thereby confirming that such bans are not so much about public safety, as to satisfy a political agenda? Democrats should not be let off the hook simply because the consequences to their proposals are frightening for them (and us) to articulate.

It is doubtful the sycophants from the Mainstream Media tapped to preside over the Democratic presidential debates would dare to broach such a topic; but the American public deserves to hear what would be in store for them. If New Zealand is any indication, there is no fairytale ending, regardless of how hard Democrats otherwise try to pretend this elephant is not in the room.

Townhall.com

by Bob Barr

Last week, the President of Taiwan visited the United States and four other countries, including the small Caribbean nation of Haiti.  A visit by President Tsai Ing-wen to Haiti might be viewed with surprise by some observers.  However, to those familiar with economic and strategic factors important to both Taiwan and the United States, the fact that Taiwan’s chief executive included a stop in Port-au-Prince during her visit to Washington, DC is significant.

Haiti is one of only 18 countries that still recognize Taiwan diplomatically.  Shoring up that support at a time mainland China is moving significantly to increase its economic and military presence in our hemisphere, is important not only for Taiwan but for the U.S. as well.

Also important for America’s interests in the region is the fact that Haiti early this year joined with the United States in recognizing Juan Guaido as Venezuela’s legitimate leader.  

When Jovenel Moise took his oath of office as Haiti’s 42^nd President in February 2017, he inherited a government that had forged extremely close ties with the leftist regime in Venezuela.  During his long tenure in office – from 1999 to 2013 – former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez used his personal charisma and his country’s vast supply of oil to win friends throughout the region.  

Moise’s predecessors benefitted greatly from Chavez’ largesse; receiving huge quantities of Venezuelan oil under an extremely beneficial deferred payment plan.  The “Petrocaribe” program was launched in 2004; but instead of boosting Haiti’s economy, it morphed into a cash cow for the cadre of corrupt politicians that have controlled the country’s levers of power for the past quarter century. 

The Petrocaribe program was structured by Chavez as a vehicle through which to gain political influence throughout the Caribbean.  It never became, and was never intended to be, an economically viable program.  Petrocaribe generated hundreds of millions of dollars that were supposed to be used to fund desperately needed infrastructure projects in Haiti.  Instead, most of the cash generated was diverted into personal bank accounts controlled by those in power prior to 2017, including Marcel Martelly, who became president in 2011.  

Before becoming Haiti’s president, Martelly was a well-known singer.  As president, he was a favorite of Hillary Clinton when she served as Secretary of State.  Martelly also is a friend of Bill Clinton, who somehow had managed to have himself named a United Nations “special envoy” to Haiti following the massive 2010 earthquake. Even as Martelly basked in the glow of the Clintons’ friendship, he continued his close friendship with Chavez; and was rewarded with the honor of serving as a pallbearer at the Venezuelan leader’s 2013 funeral. 

The long-standing and systemic inability of Haiti’s government to fund vital domestic programs worsened as a result of the devastating 2010 earthquake that rocked the country.  Despite the injection of $10.5 billion in aid from numerous private, government and international organizations (some channeled through the Clinton Foundation), hardly any of the money found its way to improving the living conditions for Haiti’s beleaguered citizens.

Haiti’s position as a transshipment point for illicit drugs coming from South America to the United States, has made matters worse — expanding opportunities for corruption.  This scenario is well-known to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration; but the Obama administration did little to address the problem, even though many of the corrupt officials in Haiti maintain residences and bank accounts on the U.S. mainland.

The good news in what otherwise presents as a bleak picture for Haiti’s future, lies in the fact that the current president, Jovenel Moise, is not part of the corrupt underbelly of Haitian politics.  He is a man highly motivated to do the right thing for his country; and in so doing, continue friendships and alliances that benefit his country, the region, and the United States. But there is a catch.  

As a result of changes made to Haiti’s Constitution more than 20 years ago, the President is extremely limited in his ability to fight the money and corruption that has fueled Haiti’s poverty for decades.  His hold on power that is so vital to the country’s well-being is tenuous; and he needs all the help he can get from Haiti’s true friends, including the United States.

Jovenel Moise may very well be Haiti’s last and best hope for a legitimate government that actually serves the people.  The Trump administration must not let slip by the chance to help ensure that this historic opportunity for the Haitian people is realized.

Townhall.com

By Bob Barr

Most parents know negotiations with toddlers are less an artful debate than a war of attrition. Toddlers make their demands, and failing to immediately get their way, throw a tantrum until the parent either relents or punishment ensues. This, of course, is reflective of basic childhood development; their reasoning skills have not had a chance to mature, and the tantrum tactic is all they know. Parents face similar circumstances several years later with teenagers coping with raging hormones.

In this still new 21^st Century, our country faces a new challenge – confronting an emerging breed of adult whiners who are simply raging.

Over the last month, the United States women’s national soccer team battled through the FIFA World Cup to triumph over the Netherlands last Sunday. Largely overshadowing this impressive athletic victory, however, was the team’s disgraceful conduct off the field; most notably that of its co-captain, Megan Rapinoe.

Rapinoe first ignited a national firestorm by stating publicly and gratuitously early in the tournament that she was “not going to the f***ing White House” if the team won the World Cup. Rapinoe tossed more fuel on the fire when, after the team’s final victory, she pointedly dropped and stepped onto the American flag rather than hold it aloft as has become the custom for victors in such international tournaments.

By pushing herself into the limelight on the World Cup stage, Rapinoe has become the newest anti-Trump hero in a movement always on the prowl for new champions. 

Far from achieving notoriety based on activities or ideas of substance, Rapinoe joins a growing list of egomaniacal celebrities who consider a moment in the national (or international) spotlight simply an opportunity to “virtue signal” their hatred for Republicans generally, and President Trump in particular.  

Whether it is Olympic ice skater Adam Rippon’s needlessly antagonistic comments about Vice President Mike Pence, or the MVP of Whining, Colin Kaepernick, declaring “hurtful” a Nike tennis shoe depicting the Betsy Ross American flag, the new breed of whiners has overtaken much of professional sports. Lost in their fits of rage, of course, is any real opportunity to accomplish that which their words and antics purport to seek.   

Refusing an opportunity to meet with the President of the United States, for example, even as one member of a championship team, closes off a unique opportunity to have a substantive impact for their cause (whatever that might be).   This President, more so than his predecessors, has shown himself open to listening to other viewpoints and changing his views on issues, if approached respectfully rather than with profanity and name-calling.  Rapinoe could take a lesson from Kim Kardashian in this regard.

Kardashian certainly is not a Trump supporter, but she wisely has engaged the White House on criminal justice reform multiple times in recent years. The result of her work with the White House not only secured the release of Alice Marie Johnson, a grandmother serving a life sentence for a non-violent drug offense, but provided momentum for the “First Step Act,” a major criminal justice reform package signed earlier this year by Trump– a goal denied to President Obama even when he enjoyed a Democrat-controlled Congress.

These whiners find delight in feeding the toxic environment infecting today’s politics; in which liberals prefer to throw “f-bombs” and milkshakes at political opponents (or worse), or have them censored on social media, rather than engage them in thoughtful debate. Unfortunately, we cannot even expect better than the behavior exhibited by Rapinoe from most elected Democrats, who as a group have come to realize this boorish behavior plays well to their followers on social media; even if it means further alienating their colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and thereby making any substantive progress virtually impossible to achieve.

How much will Rapinoe accomplish for gay rights, or equal pay for women, by refusing to meet with the President in favor of taking snarky shots at him on Twitter or in other venues?  In the end, she and others like her really don’t care; to them, the goal is the delivery of the message, not the result.