The Hound Of Ulster

I’ve never been a big Buchanan fan. Partially, I suspect it’s because his conservative credentials were earned and burnished before my political time. Partially it’s because he strikes me as a bit Wandererish, and I need more optimism in my political universe. And partially it is because he seems to have moved from the “far right” to “downright wacko conspiracy-theory territory.” He’s becoming a regular Jerry Fletcher.

Hard to know how else to read THIS article, which seems to go to great lengths to suggest there is “someone other than Putin at fault here” - a theory that strikes me as perfectly reasonable - but which also seems to go to great lengths to suggest someone (or some “socio-political” group) in particular.

At least that’s the way PODHORETZ and GOLDBERG read it. (Those two posts might give you a hint if you’re still wondering about which “socio-political” group they think Pat is trying to finger, by the way.)

Israel seems to be Pat’s answer to nearly any QUESTION nowadays, and I find that somewhere between utterly and disturbingly uncompelling. Even if it were true that our foreign policy decisions were closely connected to Israel’s best interests, that seems a far cry from any such global conspiracy stuff. (Of course, my general view that government conspiracies are badly over-diagnosed in general - and in this current political climate in particular- probably doesn’t make me a great test subject of Buchanan’s theories, anyway.)

But there are two other things about that article I find troubling. One is the issue Goldberg addresses: that sort of rhetorical writing is cowardly. If Pat thinks it’s the Jews, he should say so. Or he should be much subtler about it. Feels a bit like saying: “a certain person who shall remain anonymous, but whose initials are Winnie the Pooh.” If you’re going to such great lengths to spell it out, why the reluctance to avoid saying the actual word?

And secondly, why defend Putin at all?

As the Journal’s Bret Stephens POINTS out (behind a subscription wall, darn it!), Russia is not our friend. Hasn’t been for a very long time, and the future changes of its friendliness are not looking promising, either.

It’s time we start thinking of Vladimir Putin’s Russia as an enemy of the United States.

This isn’t simply because a former KGB agent turned Putin critic died last week in London after ingesting a dose of polonium 210, an element that usually functions as a neutron trigger in atomic bombs. Nor is it that Alexander Litvinenko’s death is the latest in a series of killings, attempted murders, imprisonments and forced exiles whose victims just happened to be prominent opponents of Mr. Putin. It is because the foreign policy of Russia has become openly, and often gratuitously, hostile to the U.S. …

There is no case for Russia’s continued participation as the eighth member of the Group of Seven, once a club for mature democracies only. Putting Mr. Putin on notice that only gentlemen belong in gentlemen’s clubs would be the right first step. Treating him for what he is — “unworthy of the trust of civilized men and women,” as Litvinenko wrote from his deathbed — would be the next.

Food for thought.

The Wolf DEAL appears to be done. $8M-per seems like a good price to me. Not sure how much this will impact the rest of the rotation, but I think he’s got a high chance for success. (And so does True Blue LA, who was badly in need of something to CHEER about.)

But I bet THIS would not make him happy.

The Dodgers, who are starved for power hitters, loaded with prospects and could probably offer the best possible package of youngsters, from third baseman Andy LaRoche to pitcher Chad Billingsley to outfielder Matt Kemp.

And I’m pretty sure the potential “Dave Roberts for $5M-per” wouldn’t, either.

Sometimes, I’m tempted to e-mail The Barb and ask her how long it has been since she enjoyed a FILM. (I was also tempted to ask her about the “projector framing” issue, but it looks like some folks have already done that.) Perhaps it’s just that she is more inclined to write after a bad film experience than a good one. I know that many people write better “bad reviews” than “good” ones. I’m hoping that’s the case here.

And lastly, SOMETHING interesting from The Cafeteria is Closed.

Hugh Hewitt says IT’S a “superb idea,” but I think he’s getting at the same thing.

Hugh,

I’d like to make a request that may have some broad applicability. I’ve discussed with my parents and my wife’s family that this year we give to armed services charities en lieu of gifts of things we don’t really need.

We’re not hurting nor are we rich. We don’t want to make a political statement; we want to help the families of those who have contributed to America at a level that most of us don’t. You’ve been a good source in the past of worthwhile ideas.

Fyi; between our families we will probably contribute a couple of thousand. Could you suggest worthwhile organizations and aid functions? My wife and I have a list but there are probably others that deserve support.