The Republican wins in the Tennessee special election

The New Neo Posted on by

Good news: the Republican Matt Van Epps has defeated Democratic Socialist Aftyn Behn in Tennessee’s special election to replace retiring House member Mark Green. With 95% of the vote in, he won by five points.

This was in a district that Trump won by +22 in 2024, so the margin of victory should have been far greater. Then again, this was a special election, which generally favors the party not in power – and Behn got a head start in early votes that probably occurred before the GOP was alerted to the danger of an upset.

“Brown” and borrowed racial victimhood

The New Neo Posted on by

This sort of use of the word “brown” annoys me greatly:

Mark Kelly seems to be intent on running for president in 2028, by the way (and this may be the moment for me to remark that he looks like Lex Luthor).

But anyway, back to “brown.” I’m as “brown” as the Afghani guy who shot the members of the National Guard, or as “brown” as any Middle Easterner. The common modern-day use of the term “brown,” which Kelly employs here, is an attempt to appropriate a racial designation for cultural purposes, a sort of “stolen valor” from the civil rights movement that involved black people (called “Negroes” in my youth).

NOTE: Jews are an all-purpose exception. To those Jew-hating neo-Nazis on the supposed right, Jews are “brown.” To the Jew-hating leftists, Jews are the whitest of white oppressors. But Jews actually come in all skin colors, of course.

Roundup!

The New Neo Posted on by

(1) The New York Times isn’t go along entirely with the WaPo’s hit piece on Hegseth about the second strike. The Times is saying it can’t find any sources that implicate Hegseth. What’s going on at the Times? First the expose of Walz and the Minnesota fraud, and now this.

(2) Around 16K people in Canada killed themselves through medically assisted suicide last year. Of these, 95.6% were people whose death was “medically foreseeable” and the rest were not. Each year the program has been operating since 2019, the numbers using the program have grown.

The entire thing is highly depressing, IMHO. There are plenty of statistics at that link, but nothing really tells us: who are these people, and why did they make this choice?

(3) Whistleblowers say that Minnesota’s Governor Walz looked the other way and allowed the fraud committed by Somalis in Minnesota to run rampant. The reason he would have done that isn’t too hard to guess:

Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett said Monday that Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz allowed the state’s massive COVID-era fraud scandal to fester because he sought political favor from the state’s large Somali community.

Walz defended his administration Sunday by claiming Minnesota “attracts criminals” and telling the public not to “demonize” the Somali community, even as he faced questions over more than $1 billion in welfare fraud tied to Somali-linked schemes. Appearing on “The Evening Edit,” Jarrett said the question many Minnesotans want answered is simple: Why would Walz allow a massive fraud scheme to flourish?

“So if all of this is true, and I suspect it is, the question is, why would he do it? Well, the answer is he was currying favor with the large Somali community where the fraud was largely happening. He was turning a blind eye for political gain,” Jarrett told host Elizabeth MacDonald.

What percentage of Minnesota’s voters are Somali? It’s a large group compared to other states, but it’s really not all that large: 1.12%. Then again, although that’s a small group, turning on them probably would have earned Walz the “racist” label. Now he gets to call others racists.

(4) Jack Smith had several reasons for spying on GOP members of Congress:

House and Senate Republicans targeted by former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s subpoenas were gearing up for significant oversight of both the Justice Department and the FBI when their phone records were seized.

This raises questions about whether the subpoenas served a dual purpose—to investigate Jan. 6, as Smith was appointed to do, and to keep tabs on the oversight probes into agency conduct, one former representative whose phone records were seized by Smith suggested.

“They were trying to spy on us to see what we were doing,” former Rep. Louie Gohmert told the John Solomon Reports podcast. “And also, I think they were looking for anything that they could use to come after us, or hold over our heads, because, you know, you can intimidate the people that are coming after you.”

(5) The same media that covered up for Biden’s completely obvious decline is engaged in trying to get us to believe that Trump is ill and senile:

President Trump has been working up to 12-hour days this month, according to Oval Office logs the White House provided to The Post after the New York Times claimed there were “signs of fatigue” in his less detailed public schedule.

The previously unpublished “private narrative” documents span 10 weekdays between Nov. 12 and Nov 25 — the day the Times story was published — and show the president worked roughly 50-hour weeks, not counting any official duties that may have been performed on weekends.

The White House made the rare decision to share the logs to counter the narrative that Trump, 79, is slowing with age — with the files instead showing him working longer hours than the average American as he overhauls trade and immigration policies, attempts to end the Russia-Ukraine war and spearheads the most significant construction at the White House in decades.

He also released a normal MRI report.

Of all the criticisms that can be mounted against Trump, this seems the oddest to me. Not only is he obviously vigorous, not just for a man of his age but compared to most people over forty, but the left’s covering up of Biden’s obvious lack of vigor was blatant. But this contradiction doesn’t seem to faze Trump’s critics. After all, sooner or later his health will decline, and then they’ll say, “See, I told you so!” In the meantime, there are plenty of gullible Trump-haters who will believe what the MSM says.

As New York City goes, so goes DC?

The New Neo Posted on by

The Democrats seem to think that moving ever leftward would be a good thing, at least in deep blue areas. Further evidence of this is that a Democratic Socialist, Janeese Lewis George, is running for mayor in Washington DC. Her campaign is conveying the same basic message as Mamdani, and appealing to the same disgruntled demographic:

“Rent’s rising in homes people can’t afford. Folks are working hard and still feeling the squeeze, while the few in power rake in profits,” Lewis George said in a video announcing her run for mayor, echoing the rhetoric that propelled Mamdani to victory in the Big Apple.

“And now our neighbors, our families, are under attack because we are failing to stand up to defend them,” the council member continued, as images of federal agents arresting people on the street played in the background.

So we have “affordability,” class and generational envy, and anti-ICE sentiment. George is also bringing in some of Mamdani’s digital advisors to target young people on TikTok and the like. She similarly was once against police defunding, but later changed that to being against long sentences but for swift incarceration. I wouldn’t trust a thing she says, except that she’s a Democratic Socialist and wants to become mayor.

Look to see more of these sorts of mayoral candidates in major blue cities. The Overton Window has shifted.

About the second strike on the drug boat

The New Neo Posted on by

At a press conference today, Press Secretary Leavitt clarified certain things about this story, but left others murky. Here’s what she said:

What do I take from that exchange? That there was a “second strike” ordered by Admiral Bradley rather than Hegseth (although in accordance with the authority given Bradley by Trump and Hegseth), and that the goal was to destroy the boat and thus eliminate the threat. Also, that the administration has designated these boats as foreign terrorist organizations threatening the US, and it’s under that designation that they believe lethal force is legal and justified.

What is left unaddressed? Some of the specifics of the story, although one detail – the idea that Hegseth personally gave the order – is denied. However, there is no mention of the goal of killing survivors either on the ship or outside of it, which has been a big element of the story as covered by the MSM. There is mention of the goal of destroying the ship, which could be important, because the degree to which the ship was still functioning after the first strike might have some bearing on the legality of the second strike. As commenter “Brian E” has pointed out:

Cited Hague, 1907 Convention XI, art. 3; Second Geneva Convention (1949) art. 12 & 18.

U.S. Navy Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations: “Once a warship is clearly indicates an intention to surrender or is otherwise rendered ineffective (e.g., dead in the water with no means of defense or propulsion and crew abandoning), it may not be subjected to further attack.”

But of course this was no warship, and the drug-runners are not signatories to the Geneva Convention. What law does apply? The laws involving terrorists? And how much freedom does a president have to declare groups terrorists?

One thing I think is wise to keep in mind is that this is not a new story. This incident supposedly occurred in early September, although the WaPo article that stirred up all the talk about it was published this past Friday. But it’s by no means the first article on the subject – the story actually broke in The Intercept on September 10, about a week after it was said to have occurred. September 10 was the day of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, so I doubt the boat article got as much attention as the left had hoped, and so they may have decided to kick it up a notch to the WaPo.

The Intercept story already has just about all the elements of the story with which we’ve become familiar. For example:

People on board the boat off the coast of Venezuela that the U.S. military destroyed last Tuesday were said to have survived an initial strike, according to two American officials familiar with the matter. They were then killed shortly after in a follow-up attack.

The boat was under U.S. surveillance for a significant period of time. Those on board apparently spotted the U.S. aerial assets and altered the vessel’s course. U.S. officials said the boat appeared to have turned back toward shore, after which it was subjected to multiple strikes. Three sources, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said the boat was attacked by one or more drones.

Much more at the link.

As I stated recently, I think the story was recycled in order to dovetail with the video six members of Congress made, telling the military to disobey illegal orders. It certainly got more attention this time.

Pause for the dentist

The New Neo Posted on by

I’ve got to go to the dentist now for what I hope will be the finishing touches to my root canal.

I’m still planning other posts today – but in the meantime, you can talk about dentists – or shoes and ships and sealing wax, cabbages and kings.

Media coverage of the fraud in Minnesota committed by Somalis

The New Neo Posted on by

It’s not just the story, it’s the coverage. After all, if only the right reads about something, the left doesn’t really have to deal with it at all.

The widespread fraud in Minnesota at the hands of a not-insignificant number of residents of Somali background has been a big story on the right for a long time. But in the MSM, although there’s been some coverage, until recently the Somali angle and the Walz angle have been muted.

Over the years, the story has been especially well-covered at the Powerline blog, as Scott Johnson writes here:

Ryan Thorpe and Christopher Rufo are to be congratulated for the attention they have drawn to the issue of fraud committed by a large cast of Minnesota Somalis. I have devoted attention to the issue over the past eight years, including in a 2018 article I wrote for City Journal headlined “Mogadishu, Minnesota,” and in daily coverage of the two federal trials conducted so far in the massive Feeding Our Future fraud for Power Line.

The Feeding Our Future case involves some $300 million obtained by blatant, gross, and widespread fraud featuring a cast of mostly Somali perpetrators. Driven manifestly by greed, they wanted to get rich fast. The motive of greed permeates these cases.

When the second trial resulted in guilty verdicts that nailed the white ringleader of the fraud and one of her main co-conspirators, I sought to bring the Feeding Our Future case to the attention of a national audience in a Washington Free Beacon article, “From Feeding the Kids to Fleecing the Government: Inside the Country’s Largest Covid Fraud.” What I sought to do in that piece Thorpe and Rufo have done a thousand times over.

President Trump has responded by announcing termination of the Temporary Protected Status of Somali immigrants in the U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson has expressed his disgust. Senator Cruz has devoted a podcast to the subject. Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth has called on United States Attorney Daniel Rosen to investigate.

Please read the whole thing. It reminds me in some ways of the British scandal in which many girls in Rotherham were raped by “Asians” (usually Pakistanis) and the authorities looked the other way for years because of fear of being called racist, fears of backlash from the “Asian” community, and incompetence. In Minnesota, some combination of these factors were probably present regarding the Walz administration, the virtue-signaling bureaucrats, and the local press.

But, why is there now more honest coverage in the MSM, especially the NY Times? Is it because of the recent City Journal piece having come to Trump’s attention, and therefore the Times felt it had to play catch-up? I think it was partly that; the article in the Times has this headline and sub-headline: “How Fraud Swamped Minnesota’s Social Services System on Tim Walz’s Watch: Prosecutors say members of the Somali diaspora, a group with growing political power, were largely responsible. President Trump has drawn national attention to the scandal amid his crackdown on immigration.” Seems like that’s pretty much it for the Times – it got to the point where it was difficult not to cover fairly honestly.

But still, the highlighting of Walz’s role surprised me. My guess is that the Times would like him to refrain from any more participation in national politics, he was such a disaster in 2024. I have no evidence for this; it’s just a hunch.

On the other hand, Time magazine has the sort of headline I would expect – the “Republicans pounce” emphasis: “What to Know About Trump’s Targeting of Somalis in Minnesota—and Allegations of Fraud.” (By the way, there haven’t just been allegations; there have been many convictions so far, and more to come.) From the piece:

During his first term, [Trump targeted Somalis] at a rally, saying “leaders in Washington brought large numbers of refugees” to Minnesota “without considering the impact on schools and communities and taxpayers.”

More recently, he claimed in a Nov. 21 Truth Social post that “Somali gangs are terrorizing the people of that great State, and BILLIONS of Dollars are missing,” and he announced he would end Temporary Protected Statuses for Somalis “effective immediately,” causing alarm among the Somali population in Minnesota.

The article does go into the fraud cases, but only towards the end – after many of the people reading it have probably turned away.

On turkey soup and books for sale

The New Neo Posted on by

I’ve been making turkey soup with the leftovers from Thanksgiving, which this year in my case amounts to about 95% of a cooked turkey. Turkey soup always sounds so easy, and is one of the reasons I like to make a turkey for Thanksgiving. But I keep forgetting that the soup part is fairly labor-intensive, although very rewarding.

It’s important to find a pot big enough. The prep requires a lot of cutting of carrots and other veggies. The cooking takes many hours, and then there’s the taking the meat off the bones once it’s pretty much falling apart. In go leftover green beans and a bit of leftover stuffing (most of the stuffing was demolished on Thanksgiving Day). Hey, let’s even dump in a scoop of leftover mashed sweet potatoes for thickening, and a spoonful of cranberry sauce. Why not? Gravy, too. Be creative – in the end, it always tastes good. And the rest of the turkey meat – there’s plenty more – makes turkey salad sandwiches for days.

While I’m doing that, I want to remind you to use the Amazon portal here for Amazon gifts. You might be interested in this book by Eric Trump; I haven’t read it, but I heard him interviewed about it. It’s an account of what the Trump family went through during the years out of power and under siege – which is the book’s title.

But I also especially want to remind you that Gerard Vanderleun’s essay book, still available through the Vanderleun Books website here, is a handsome volume that makes an entertaining read and is a great gift (if I do say so myself, which I do). It’s not political, so you can even give it to liberals on your list. There are only a couple of hardcovers left, but there are plenty of non-flimsy paperbacks.

What’s more, pretty soon the Vanderleun poetry book will be available. I know I’ve said that before, and I was hoping it would be ready by November 1. But I ran into unforeseen formatting trouble and once that was fixed I ran into some difficulties with the printer. Now I’m awaiting book proofs from two different printers, and once I make that decision – hopefully in a week or even less – I’ll make the big announcement that it’s ready for ordering.

Now I’m getting nervous about the special election in Tennessee

The New Neo Posted on by

These special elections and/or off-year elections have been going especially poorly. This one in Tennessee should be an easy win for the Republican, but polls say it’s not:

Special elections are notorious for yielding unexpected results because they tend to draw only the most politically engaged voters, a pattern that generally favors Democrats. All eyes are on Tuesday’s fight for the House seat vacated by Republican Rep. Mark Green in Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District, who retired in July. The 7th District, which is “located in central and western Tennessee, stretches from Kentucky to Alabama, and includes parts of Nashville.”

The stakes are high as Republicans seek to preserve their already narrow 219–213 majority in the House. Even by special election standards, the polls should not be this tight in such a reliably red state, which explains why both parties have poured significant resources into this contest.

Fears of an upset in this race increased after an Emerson poll released on Wednesday showed liberal Tennessee state Rep. Aftyn Beyn, the Democratic candidate, within 2 points of her Republican opponent, Mark Van Epps. President Donald Trump carried the district by 22 points last November.

Perhaps the poll is wrong – it certainly wouldn’t be the first time. Then again, recent special election and general election polls were wrong, too – in the direction of not giving the Democrats as much of a lead as they actually ended up getting when the votes were in. Tennessee’s Aftyn Beyn is a leftist somewhat in the mold of AOC, and should be far behind in the race. She’s not.

And why do special elections seem to favor Democrats so heavily? After all, people on the right certainly know the dangers of electing someone on the left. Yes, I’m aware that many on the right are perennially displeased with the GOP in Congress. But do they really think they’ll like a Democrat majority there?

Trump and Latin America

The New Neo Posted on by

Trump has made a somewhat cryptic announcement:

President Donald Trump on Saturday said that the airspace “above and surrounding” Venezuela should be considered as “closed in its entirety,” an assertion that raised more questions about the U.S. pressure on Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.

The White House did not respond to questions about what Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, and it was unclear whether he was announcing a new policy or simply reinforcing the messaging around his campaign against Maduro, which has involved multiple strikes in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean on small boats accused of ferrying drugs as well as a buildup of naval forces in the region. More than 80 people have been killed in such strikes since early September.

The Republican president addressed his call for an aerial blockade to “Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers,” rather than to Maduro.

What’s going on? It seems one goal is to isolate Maduro and Venezuela. I suppose the idea is to frighten and intimidate those in the drug trade – although I would think they’ve already gotten that message through the attacks on drug boats. Trump also likes to employ his reputation as an unpredictable loose cannon, which can be useful.

Trump’s policies in Latin American haven’t gotten too much coverage compared to so many of his other actions, such as in Ukraine and Israel. But his administration – and particularly SOS Rubio – has been quite busy there. For example, here’s an article from last month:

Nine months into Donald Trump’s second term, Latin America has become a central focus of U.S. foreign policy. The administration has shifted away from traditional development aid and diplomatic forums, opting instead for a strategy centered on tariffs, military pressure and bilateral political alignment. …

U.S. Representative María Elvira Salazar, a Florida Republican and one of the administration’s most outspoken defenders, said Trump’s approach marked a long-overdue shift. “The Trump administration is doing exactly what it needs to do — to take out of power an illegitimate president, someone who stole the elections last year after promising to abide by the Barbados Accord,” she told Newsweek.

The article goes on to describe Trump’s alliance with Argentina’s Milei, and his opposition to Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro as well as his confrontations with Panama over the Canal and Chinese influence.

More:

Michael Shifter, former president of the Inter-American Dialogue, described the administration’s approach as “aggressive but erratic.” He told Newsweek: “It’s hard to deny that the Trump administration is doing more in Latin America than any U.S. government this century. Yet it’s equally hard to discern a coherent plan.”

Oh, is it? How about: promote what’s good for the US and discourage what’s bad for the US, as well as being friendly with simpatico leaders such as Milei? It doesn’t seem all that incoherent.