New Hope for A US-UK FTA

New Trade Deals, Daily Signal, January 30, 2018. "The president’s call for new trade deals that are fair and reciprocal, and that protect American workers and American intellectual property, bode well for a ground-breaking free trade area agreement between the U.S. and Britain."

Another Obama Straw Man

A False Foreign Policy Alternative, part of "What Obama Got Wrong in the State of the Union," Daily Signal, January 12, 2016. "President Obama offered his usual false alternative between occupying and rebuilding “every country that falls into crisis” (an option that literally no one is proposing), or agreeing with his foreign policy. Putting it that way is a cheat, not a choice. But let’s take the president at his word, which is that he wants the U.S. to “help remake” the international system that the U.S. built after 1945. Even he doesn’t seem sure about this, because a few lines later, he suggests instead that we should be seeking to strengthen that order, not remake it. And a president more grounded in history might wonder if it’s wise to want to remake the order: from 1815 to 1918 to 1945 to 1991, the system has been at its most flexible after the world has been exhausted by a major war, which isn’t what any of us want. Nor did the president suggest a single measure that would genuinely re-make the world order: from fighting terrorism to complaining about ungoverned spaces to lecturing Russia to talking about trade deals, his proposals (or rather, his applause lines) were all old hat. But yet, if his goal really is to remake the order, he’s actually doing a good job of it. That order was grounded on U.S. pre-eminence – but from Ukraine, to Syria, to Iran, it’s American weakness, not its strength or its leadership, that’s on display. A world order without American leadership would indeed be a new one. But it’s not one that most Americans, or most people around the world, would like."

More On The "Sputnik Moment"

Re: Re: Oh, Man, Not Another Sputnik Moment . . ., Contentions, January 28, 2011. "J.E. Dyer’s reaction to my post on the “Sputnik moment” theme prompts this reflection: as a conservative, you can cite examples like the academy’s treatment of the Cold War all day long. If you’re a historian, you can point to the Arming America saga, which revealed that a few Second Amendment supporters and amateur historians had a better grasp of historical methodology and reality than the distinguished committee that awarded the Bancroft Prize to that faked book (and then was forced to take it back)."

Obama Uses Another Bad Historical Analogy

Oh, Man, Not Another Sputnik Moment . . ., Contentions, January 26, 2011. "I keep a list of historical analogies — derived from years of grading papers — that tell me that the individual using them is (to be polite) more interested in rhetorical impact than historical accuracy. Before last night, the list began with “we need a Marshall Plan for X,” where X usually equals Africa or the Middle East, and ended with “the United States is a young country.” Both are fallacies: the Marshall Plan was a pump-priming program, not an effort to rebuild the infrastructure and remake the culture of half a continent; and while European settlement of North America is fairly recent, the U.S.’s political institutions have a longer continuous existence than those of any other country except, arguably, the United Kingdom. Now, thanks to President Obama, I’ve got a third analogy to add to the list: 'Sputnik moment.'"

Response to State of the Union

Reaction Roundup: Heritage Responds to the State of the Union, Heritage Foundation Foundry, January 25, 2011. "In the opening section of his address, the President referred to the need to “sustain the leadership that has made America not just a place on a map, but a light to the world.” Those are certainly words that conservatives can endorse and respect, just as they will agree with his statement that America is “the first nation the be founded for the sake of an idea.” As Matthew Spalding has stated, the American creed 'is set forth most clearly in the Declaration of Independence, . .. a timeless statement of inherent rights, the proper purposes of government, and the limits on political authority.' Unfortunately, this was not the creed that the President proclaimed in his speech."