The Ukraine war will end this year and someone will get the Nobel Peace Prize for stopping it

After three years of fighting, Ukraine's war with Russia is at a stalemate, Russia controls about 20 percent of Ukraine, and the Ukrainians can't drive them out.

Last August, in a surprise move, Ukrainians staged what the Western media called an incursion into the Kursk region of Russia and captured about 500 square miles of Russian territory. The United States, Ukraine's closest ally, claimed to be surprised by this move, but I suspect the Americans helped plan this mini-invasion. 

Ukraine hoped to use the captured territory as a bargaining chip to improve its position during peace talks, which were bound to occur sooner or later. Unfortunately for the Ukrainians, the Kursk invasion brought North Korean troops into the war as Russian allies, and now Russia has pushed the Ukrainians out of Russian territory. 

President Trump has pushed aggressively to end the Ukraine war--this "ridiculous war," as Trump has described it. He's taken a lot of heat from Democratic politicians and the Trump-hating media for his efforts. His enemies at home would rather continue the senseless bloodshed than allow Trump to get credit for brokering a peace deal.

Trump may have made some tactical errors in his vigorous efforts to push Ukraine President Vladimir Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin to the bargaining table. Trump cut off arms shipments to Ukraine for a short time, giving his enemies an opening to accuse Trump of being Russia's ally. 

Nevertheless, Trump's diplomatic pressure, asserted against both Ukraine and Russia, has changed the dynamics of the conflict. This war will end before the year is out.

Ukraine and its allies must face the fact that Russia will control Crimea and much of the Donbas region when this war is over. Crimea has been part of Russia since the 18th century,  and Russia has critical military installations there. Moreover, Russia must control the Sea of Azov and at least part of the Donbas to safeguard its supply line from the Russian Motherland to the Crimean peninsula.

The sooner the warring nations reach a peace deal, the fewer young soldiers will die in this nonsensical conflict.  I predict someone involved in bringing peace negotiations to fruition will be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

However, it will not be President Trump. The leftist media, afflicted with a terminal case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, would never allow it.

Cover of Crimean Blunder by Pete Gibbs. Image credit: Amazon 

WaPo Columnist Catherine Rampell accuses Trump of pushing Americans to become subsistence farmers: I can think of worse things to be

Egg prices are up all over the U.S. primarily due to bird flu, which forced chicken farmers to liquidate their poultry. However, prices will come down soon because if there is anything Americans know how to do, it's mass-producing chickens.

Nevertheless, the Trump administration feels compelled to address this short-term crisis because the President promised to lower food prices. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins off-handly suggested that people should raise their own chickens.

Catherine Rampell, a Washington Post op-ed columnist, jumped on this casual remark, accusing Trump of urging Americans to go back to subsistence farming. I have a few bones to pick with her arguments.

First, the Trump administration is not pushing Americans to become subsistence farmers, and it was disingenuous for Rampell to say that it did.

Second, Ag Secretary Rollins's suggestion that people raise chickens for home consumption is not a bad idea. Rampell pointed out that some cities ban townspeople from raising livestock on residential property, but that's not universally true. People are raising chickens in their backyards all over America.

A young relative of mine raised chickens at his suburban home in upstate New York for several years. His family obtained all the eggs they needed from just six chickens. I ate some of those eggs, which tasted delicious--much better than store-bought eggs.

Rampell's essay throws cold water on the notion that Americans should grow their own food. "The fact that we humans don't have to spend all our time growing our own sustenance, and can instead specialize in other fields where we're more productive is a tremendous victory for our species," she writes. Indeed, Rampell argues, "Our post-agrarian society has allowed Americans to lead richer, healthier, longer, more leisure-filled lives."

I disagree. Over my life, I've known a few people who grew most of their food from backyard gardens.  I think their lives were just as rich as those of urban dwellers who bought all their groceries from Whole Foods. And home gardeners, I feel sure, are as healthy as people who don't cultivate anything besides a marijuana plant.

Let's not go hating on the notion that people should be encouraged to grow some of their food. During World War II, roughly half of American households tended victory gardens, which provided 40 percent of the nation's wartime vegetable supply. During the 900-day siege of Leningrad, people grew gardens in parks and public places to fight off famine.

My father was a wheat farmer and cattleman, and I spent many weary hours driving a tractor on hot summer days. I experienced enough farm life to know I didn't want to be a farmer. I wound up being a college professor.

Nevertheless, if I were given a choice between tending my garden on a sweltering summer afternoon and attending a university faculty meeting, my decision would be easy. I would much rather weed my vegetable patch than sit through a tedious academic discussion in an air-conditioned university conference room. There are worse ways to spend a day than tending a garden.

Not the best of all possible worlds: A litany of distressing news in my local newspaper

 This morning, I scanned my local newspaper as I sipped my first cup of coffee and was slammed with a litany of depressingly lousy news. 

First, Anthony Robinson, a 17-year-old high school student, was shot and killed just after getting off a school bus. The police arrested a 16-year-old and charged him with first-degree murder. 

Second, the Baton Rouge police charged a third student with felony hazing after Caleb Wilson, a fraternity pledge at Southern University, died from injuries he received during a hazing ceremony.

Third, a federal judge halted the scheduled execution of Jessie Hoffman Jr., a convicted murderer, to consider Hoffman's argument that execution by nitrogen gas constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment" in violation of his constitutional rights.

And there's more. Ashley Lights, a 39-year-old mother, was arraigned on charges of criminal abortion for reportedly giving her teenage daughter abortion-inducing drugs that Lights ordered online from New York.

All these news stories are depressing, but they're particularly dispiriting because they highlight our society's inability to solve our most profound and pervasive social problems.

The United States has struggled with the issue of school violence since the Columbine school massacre more than 25 years ago. Yet a 16-year-old Baton Rouge kid was apparently able to obtain a loaded pistol and gun down a high school student.

Louisiana strengthened its anti-hazing law after Max Gruver, an LSU fraternity pledge, died of alcohol poisoning in 2017. One LSU student was sentenced to prison for negligent homicide in the wake of that tragedy, but fraternity hazing continues in Louisiana.

And then there's the ongoing litigation to stop capital punishment in this country, which has stretched out over decades while more than 2,000 men and a few women sit on death row.

I'm adamantly opposed to the death penalty for one reason: the practice brutalizes our society. Nevertheless, I don't understand why one man's execution is delayed in Louisiana to determine whether death by nitrogen gas is unconstitutional while a man in South Carolina is executed by a firing squad.

I'm also troubled about the criminal case against Ashley Lights, the mother who allegedly obtained abortion-inducing drugs from a state where such drugs are legal and then gave them to her daughter in Louisiana, where abortion is a crime.

Like most Americans, I believe abortion is wrong, but I'm sympathetic to women caught in desperate circumstances or who become pregnant through incest or rape. The prosecution would not want me on the jury if Ms. Lights's case goes to trial.

Most of the issues highlighted in my morning newspaper will be resolved in the courts, but the larger issues that these cases symbolize will continue to fester for many years. These events remind me that I do not live in the best of all possible worlds and that my puny efforts will do little to make the world a better place.

Voltaire is right to remind us that all we can do in this world of violence and injustice is cultivate our gardens.

My spring garden is planted in tomatoes, eggplants, potatoes, and popcorn. If my popcorn is a success, I can at least take comfort in knowing that my homegrown popcorn is better than Orville Redenbacher's.

Jesse Hoffman Jr., scheduled for execution on March 18

90 second movie review: The Brutalist is a fine movie with a few flaws

 The Brutalist, a period drama that takes place in the aftermath of World War II, stars Adrien Brody, who plays a Hungarian Jewish Holocaust survivor. Film critics have widely praised the movie, which garnered ten Academy Award nominations and won three Oscars, including Brody's award for Best Actor.

Brody's Oscar is well deserved. Brody plays the character of Laszlo Toth, a Hungarian architect who emigrates from Germany to the United States after surviving the Buchenwald concentration camp.  Traumatized by the Holocaust and separated from his wife, Toth struggles against various obstacles, including antisemitic prejudice, until Harrison Van Buren, a wealthy industrialist played by Guy Pearce, hires him to create a monumental structure in a small Pennsylvania town to commemorate Van Buren'sdeceased mother.

Toth's anguish and pain are perfectly portrayed on Brody's tortured face, along with his pent-up anger, which Toth displays from time to time throughout the film. Indeed, the energy in Brody's performance carries the entire movie.

Nevertheless, The Brutalist has a few flaws. First, the movie is far too long--three and a half hours, so long that it includes an intermission. Gone with Wind needed an intermission. Doctor Zhivago needed an intermission, The Brutalist needed to be shorter.

Second, Director Brady Corbet included some scenes that added nothing to the movie except gratuitous shock value. Van Buren, Toth's wealthy patron, rapes Toth in Italy.  The audience already knew that Van Buren was a creep. The rape scene should have been cut.

Finally, the film's title, The Brutalist,  links Toth's architectural style with Brutalist architecture, but that association was probably unclear to most moviegoers. Perhaps Corbet sensed this and included an epilogue in which Toth's niece explains that Toth's Brutalist architectural design was Toth's way of processing his traumatic experience at Buchenwald. The film would have been stronger if Corbet had connected Toth's trauma to his Brutalist architectural style earlier in the movie.

All told, The Brutalist is a fine movie. Laszlo Toth, Brody's chain-smoking, grief-stricken, agonized character, compellingly displayed the lifelong damage of trauma for those who survive it. Toth drew on his creative architectural talents as a way of coping with his psychic injuries, but, like every victim of profound trauma and violence, he never recovered from the pain. 

Buchenwald Concentration Camp. Photo credit: West Virginia University.

People die too soon in Flyover Country: Do the Democrats care?

 The New York Times published a story a few days ago about Sam Runyon, a homecare nurse in Mingo County, West Virginia. Eli Saslow, a Times reporter, accompanied Ms. Runyon on her home visits to several working-age people suffering from chronic diseases.

Runyon's patients suffered from such illnesses as diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, liver disease, and kidney disease. These chronic afflictions are reducing life expectancy in Wingo County and working-class communities nationwide.

Indeed, Wingo County is typical of rural, low-income communities across America, where life expectancy has gone down dramatically over the past twenty years due to a rising rate of chronic disease, drug addiction, and suicide. Americans spend more money on health care than any nation in the world, but they don't live as long as people in other developed countries.

As Saslow pointed out, Wingo County was once solidly Democratic, but 85 percent of the county's voters cast their ballots for Trump in the last presidential election. Statewide, Trump carried West Virginia by a margin of 40 percent. 

Poor and working-class Americans living in Flyover Country don't live as long as their parents did, and millions spend the last decades of their lives suffering from chronic diseases. The Democratic Party doesn't seem to care. 

If they cared, they wouldn't have given Robert F. Kennedy such a hostile reception during his Senate confirmation hearing. Kennedy has spoken out tirelessly on health issues for many years, raising the alarm about the American diet of ultra-processed food and the overconsumption of sugar.

 Kennedy was the perfect choice for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Nevertheless, Democrats tried to paint Kennedy as an opportunist whose stance on health issues was based on greed. Not a single Democrat voted to confirm him.

The Democrats have abandoned Flyover Country, and Flyover Country has abandoned the Democrats. The Dems fuss and fume over President Trump's policies, but their disdainful attitude toward the American working class handed Trump his victory. 

In my opinion, the Democrats have lost their core constituency forever and will never get it back. An effective political party may rise up to oppose Trumpism, but it will not be the Democratic Party of the coastal elites.

Photo credit: Erin Schaff/New York Times

Democrats dig in on transgender sports: Are they nuts?

 President Trump gave a speech to a joint session of Congress last night while Democratic legislators sulked in their seats, looking very much like small children who didn't get what they wanted for Christmas. Nancy Pelosi appeared particularly unhappy. She wore a sullen expression, angry perhaps that no one gave her a copy of Trump's speech to tear up.

The Dems are digging in, making it clear to Americans that they hate President Trump and will resist anything he tries to accomplish. Like lemmings rushing to the sea, they are scurrying toward total irrelevance. 

Nowhere is the Democrats' urge to commit collective suicide more apparent than their opposition to Trump's efforts to ban boys from participating in girls' sporting events. The vast majority of Americans think it's nuts for a boy to be allowed to compete against girls simply because he identifies as female. 

Forty-five Democrats in the U.S. Senate filibustered against a Republican-written bill that would bar transgender athletes from female sports teams--a bill that was supported by a majority of legislators in both houses of Congress. Not a single Senate Democrat voted to allow the bill to go forward for an up-or-down vote.

Sixteen Democratic senators are women, and 15 joined the filibuster, which is astonishing. Do any of these female senators have daughters or granddaughters who participate in girls' sports? If so, how can they oppose a law banning biological boys from competing against girls at school athletic events?

My granddaughter plays soccer on her high school's varsity team. She could get hurt if she were forced to compete against a transgender six-footer.

I hope voters remember that 15 Democratic women in the U.S. Senate voted to stall the bill that would bar transgenders from playing on girl's school sports teams. They should all be voted out of office.

Angela Alsobrooks (MD)

Tammy Baldwin (WI)

Lisa Blunt Rochester (DE)

Maria Cantwell (WA)

Catherine Cortez Masto (NV)

Tammy Duckworth (ILL)

Kirsten Gillibrand

Maggie Hassan (NH)

Mazie Hirono (HI)

Amy Klobuchar 

Patty Murray (WA)

Jacky Rosen (NV)

Jeanne Shaheen (NH)

Tina Smith (MN)

Elizabeth Warren (MA)

The list of 45 Democratic senators who filibustered the bill banning transgenders from competing against girls in school sports.

"The status quo sucks." Trump's enemies would rather prolong the Ukraine war than let Trump get credit for ending it.

 Someday, the Ukraine war will end, and the outcome is predictable. Russia will retain Crimea and much of the Donbas. Ukraine will not join NATO but will get security guarantees from the United States and many Western European countries. Russia will promise not to invade its Western neighbors again.

The war can end now on these terms, or the war can stretch on for several years. In the end, however, after the killing has stopped, Russia will hold Crimea and much of the Donbas.

President Trump moved the peace process forward by forcing Ukrainian President Zelensky to face reality. The U.S. is not going to prop up the Ukraine military forever. 

Trump also pressured the Europeans to take more responsibility for their defense and actively participate in peace negotiations. Indeed, the Europeans recently put forward their own peace proposal.

In the U.S., the slimy D.C. swamp dwellers are doing all they can to prevent Trump from getting a peace deal. As I wrote yesterday, President Zelensky met with Senator Chris Murphy only a few minutes before going to the Oval Office to sign a mineral rights agreement with President Trump.

I do not know what was said between Zelensky and Senator Murphy, but the upshot of that meeting was that Zelensky went to the Oval Office, spoke rudely to President Trump, and refused to sign the mineral rights deal.

President Trump's political enemies, led by Senators Murphy, Blumenthal, and Schumer, prefer the status quo in Ukraine to peace. But, as the comedian George Carlin once remarked, "The status quo sucks."

Most Americans support President Trump's efforts to bring peace to Ukraine. If his efforts fail, they will place the blame where it belongs--on the insidious Democrats in the U.S. Senate.

As for Zelensky, he needs to realize that he will be jeopardizing his own safety if the war drags on. Russia launched a new hypersonic missile into Ukraine a while back, a weapon that the Russians claim is nearly impervious to Ukraine's anti-missile defenses. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin said he might aim his new missile at "decision-making centers" in Ukraine. What do you suppose he meant by that remark?

Senator Chris Murphy plays the demagogue. Photo credit: The Irish Times