theamericanconservative--2020-03-31--China’s Long Tentacles Extend Deep Into American Media

The companies that own our major networks all do business in China .
And that 's just the beginning .
The English-language daily newspaper 'China Daily ' are on display in the lobby of the Winters Hotel in Berlin , Germany , 28 March 2014 .
Photo : Jens Kalaene | usage worldwide ( Photo by Jens Kalaene/picture alliance via Getty Images ) One unfortunate casualty of media consolidation could be the objectivity of news at a time of rising tensions with China .
According to Gallup , public approval of the media ’ s response to the coronavirus pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ institutions surveyed , the only net negative on the list .
Many more Americans approve of the president ’ s response .
There are three reasons why the public is right to be skeptical , all of which have been on display during the coronavirus pandemic .
One is a credulity toward experts .
Max Fisher of the New York Times tweeted on Monday , in response to growing skepticism toward Chinese claims that they ’ ve brought the outbreak under control , “ If your well-grounded concern is that official Chinese data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s worth considering that the WHO is vouching firsthand for the country having achieved a major turnaround.
” The tweet linked to an interview with Canadian epidemiologist and World Health Organization advisor Bruce Aylward , who spent last Friday dodging a Hong Kong journalist ’ s questions about Taiwan in an interview that really has to be seen to be believed .
Setting aside the other evidence that the WHO has been co-opted by China , this is a little embarrassing .
The second reason is the worldview of most journalists .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public in February they should be more worried about the flu , or stigma against Asian Americans , than the virus itself .
The third reason is that many media companies either do business with China or are paid by the government in some way .
This one is potentially more insidious than the other two .
The companies that own the major news networks , NBC , ABC , and CBS , all do significant business in China .
On the print side , top U.S. newspapers like the Washington Post and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running paid China Daily inserts .
What they were paid for these inserts is still unknown .
By contrast , conservative news companies are much less involved in China .
Conservative radio giant Salem , whose attempt to buy Tribune several years ago provoked an enormous freakout from media reporters over consolidation , is all-American .
And Fox , after several troubled attempts to break into the Chinese market—including sending a News Corp team to help build People ’ s Daily a website—has mostly given up , after selling its Asia-Pacific operations to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Disney owns ABC and has a park in Shanghai .
It also owns ESPN , which was criticized for its coverage of China ’ s retaliation against the NBA earlier this year over one team owner ’ s support of the Hong Kong protests .
But other than ABC , Disney is relatively uninvolved in news .
Comcast , on the other hand , has a much larger footprint in the U.S. media landscape , between NBC News , CNBC , and MSNBC .
The company ’ s role in fostering cultural exchange @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought to millions of American homes a customer service experience akin to a utility provider in a communist country , and have invested billions to bring “ Minion Land ” and a Harry Potter village to Beijing , with the help of a state-owned investment vehicle .
What might the Chinese government do if it were displeased with something that ran on MSNBC ?
Perhaps they ’ d have a tense conversation with their partners at 30 Rockefeller Plaza about the forthcoming slate of movie releases in China .
Or it might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off all NBA games to retaliate against one team owner .
But evidently China is pleased with their partnership so far , and no NBC journalists had their residency permits pulled earlier this month .
A March 10 post on the New York consulate ’ s website touted a recent meeting with Comcast execs : Consul General Huang Ping made a point of discussing China ’ s response to the coronavirus , as well as news coverage in the U.S. : “ China ’ s prevention and control practices have earned valuable time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hope that the NBC and other U.S. media will objectively and fairly report China ’ s efforts to control the epidemic.
” At this point , there should be no doubt that the Chinese government would not view it as objective or fair to question their initial response to the epidemic or their case numbers now .
And it ’ s not hard to see an implied threat in the consulate ’ s statement : nice theme park you ’ ve got there , it ’ d be a shame if something happened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the meeting , NBC News stories appeared saying the only new coronavirus cases in China had come from foreigners , and another one about China asserting its global leadership .
These stories would no doubt be considered objective and fair by the Chinese diplomatic corps , but it ’ s a level of credulity NBC News would never take with , say , the Trump administration .
This kind of corruption looks very different from Paul Manafort trying to sneak an ostrich jacket through customs .
Yet it ’ s still troubling all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the managing editor at The American Conservative .

One unfortunate casualty of media consolidation could be the objectivity of news at a time of rising tensions with China. According to Gallup, public approval of the media’s response to the coronavirus pandemic is the lowest out of the nine institutions surveyed, the only net negative on the list. Many more Americans approve of the president’s response.
There are three reasons why the public is right to be skeptical, all of which have been on display during the coronavirus pandemic. One is a credulity toward experts. Max Fisher of the New York Times tweeted on Monday, in response to growing skepticism toward Chinese claims that they’ve brought the outbreak under control, “If your well-grounded concern is that official Chinese data can never be trusted, it’s worth considering that the WHO is vouching firsthand for the country having achieved a major turnaround.”
The tweet linked to an interview with Canadian epidemiologist and World Health Organization advisor Bruce Aylward, who spent last Friday dodging a Hong Kong journalist’s questions about Taiwan in an interview that really has to be seen to be believed. Setting aside the other evidence that the WHO has been co-opted by China, this is a little embarrassing.
The second reason is the worldview of most journalists. These were the same people who told the public in February they should be more worried about the flu, or stigma against Asian Americans, than the virus itself.
The third reason is that many media companies either do business with China or are paid by the government in some way. This one is potentially more insidious than the other two.
The companies that own the major news networks, NBC, ABC, and CBS, all do significant business in China. On the print side, top U.S. newspapers like the Washington Post and New York Times have been criticized for running paid China Daily inserts. What they were paid for these inserts is still unknown.
By contrast, conservative news companies are much less involved in China. Conservative radio giant Salem, whose attempt to buy Tribune several years ago provoked an enormous freakout from media reporters over consolidation, is all-American. And Fox, after several troubled attempts to break into the Chinese market—including sending a News Corp team to help build People’s Daily a website—has mostly given up, after selling its Asia-Pacific operations to Disney over the last two years.
Disney owns ABC and has a park in Shanghai. It also owns ESPN, which was criticized for its coverage of China’s retaliation against the NBA earlier this year over one team owner’s support of the Hong Kong protests. But other than ABC, Disney is relatively uninvolved in news.
Comcast, on the other hand, has a much larger footprint in the U.S. media landscape, between NBC News, CNBC, and MSNBC. The company’s role in fostering cultural exchange is truly historic: they’ve brought to millions of American homes a customer service experience akin to a utility provider in a communist country, and have invested billions to bring “Minion Land” and a Harry Potter village to Beijing, with the help of a state-owned investment vehicle.
What might the Chinese government do if it were displeased with something that ran on MSNBC? Perhaps they’d have a tense conversation with their partners at 30 Rockefeller Plaza about the forthcoming slate of movie releases in China. Or it might be worse, given their decision to cut off all NBA games to retaliate against one team owner.
But evidently China is pleased with their partnership so far, and no NBC journalists had their residency permits pulled earlier this month. A March 10 post on the New York consulate’s website touted a recent meeting with Comcast execs:
Comcast Corporation is not only the participator of the increasingly close cultural exchanges, but also the contributor and beneficiary of deeper economic exchanges between China and the US. The NBC and the Universal Studios Theme Park in Beijing are witnesses of the in-depth development of Sino-US economic and trade relations and increasingly close cultural exchanges.
Consul General Huang Ping made a point of discussing China’s response to the coronavirus, as well as news coverage in the U.S.: “China’s prevention and control practices have earned valuable time and experience for other countries. …We hope that the NBC and other U.S. media will objectively and fairly report China’s efforts to control the epidemic.”
At this point, there should be no doubt that the Chinese government would not view it as objective or fair to question their initial response to the epidemic or their case numbers now. And it’s not hard to see an implied threat in the consulate’s statement: nice theme park you’ve got there, it’d be a shame if something happened to it.
A few weeks after the meeting, NBC News stories appeared saying the only new coronavirus cases in China had come from foreigners, and another one about China asserting its global leadership. These stories would no doubt be considered objective and fair by the Chinese diplomatic corps, but it’s a level of credulity NBC News would never take with, say, the Trump administration.
This kind of corruption looks very different from Paul Manafort trying to sneak an ostrich jacket through customs. Yet it’s still troubling all the same.
J. Arthur Bloom is the managing editor at The American Conservative.


theamericanconservative--2020-03-31--The Real Presidential Campaign: Trump Versus the Coronavirus

In order for Biden to have a shot , Trump will have to come up short on the pandemic .
“ This is the question that is going to dominate the election : How did you perform in the great crisis ?
” So says GOP Congressman Tom Cole of Oklahoma in yesterday ’ s New York Times .
GOP National Committeeman Henry Barbour of Mississippi calls the crisis “ a defining moment… .
The more [ Trump ] reassures Americans , gives them the facts and delivers results , the harder it will be for Joe Biden.
” Indeed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say Trump ’ s presidency will stand or fall on the resolution of the coronavirus crisis and how Trump is perceived as having led us in that battle .
Recent polls appear to confirm that .
Though daily baited by a hostile media for being late to recognize the severity of the crisis , in one Gallup poll a week ago , Trump was at 49 percent approval , the apogee of his presidency , with 60 percent of the nation awarding him high marks for his handling of the pandemic .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how Trump ’ s antagonists in the media have performed in America ’ s great medical crisis ?
Of 10 institutions , with hospitals first , at 88 percent approval , the media came in dead last , the only institution whose disapproval , at 55 percent , exceeded the number of Americans with a favorable opinion of their performance .
The media are paying a price in lost reputation with the nation they claim to represent by re-assuming the role of “ adversary press ” in a social crisis where , whatever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the country wants the president to succeed .
If Biden begins to mimic a hostile media , baiting Trump at every turn , pointing out conflicts in his views , Joe will invite the same fate the media seem to have brought upon themselves .
Since that Gallup poll , Trump has been seen daily by millions in the role of commander in chief .
He speaks from the podium in the White House briefing room or the Rose Garden just outside the Oval Office .
He is invariably flanked by respected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and economics .
All appear as Trump allies , and Trump treats them as his field commanders in the war on the virus .
And Joe Biden ?
He pops up infrequently in interviews out of the basement of his Delaware home where , sheltering in place , he reads short scripted speeches from a teleprompter .
And Biden ’ s presence has been wholly eclipsed by daily televised appearances of Governor Andrew Cuomo , who is at the epicenter of the crisis in New York .
Cuomo is taking on the aspect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What Trump is doing calls to mind Richard Nixon ’ s “ Rose Garden strategy ” in 1972 .
Though goaded by the press , Nixon avoided attacking his opponent , George McGovern , and declined to engage him on issues .
Instead , Nixon used the Rose Garden to highlight popular initiatives .
Candidate Nixon ’ s campaign strategy in 1972 was not to campaign .
But if Biden can not gather crowds to hear him in a time of social distancing , how does he get his message out ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to undermine the president in his role as a wartime commander in chief , where America wants Trump to succeed ?
How does a basement-bound Biden compete with Trump in the Oval Office , Cabinet Room , East Room , and Rose Garden ?
Whom does Biden call upon to rival Trump ’ s instant access to respected leaders eager to come and stand beside the president in the most serious crisis since World War II ?
How does Biden recapture the spotlight of Super Tuesday ?
Senator Bernie Sanders wants Biden to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems a no-win proposition .
Moreover , when Biden appears on camera , he often seems confused and forgetful , loses his train of thought and doesn ’ t remember what he came to say .
The sense that Biden is losing it is taking hold , and not only on the Republican right .
Democrats have to be looking closely at Cuomo ’ s success , as they wonder how Biden will stand up in the debates with Trump six months from now .
And what lies ahead for Democrats when spring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , scheduled to begin July 24 , have been postponed until 2021 .
The Democratic National Convention , scheduled for Milwaukee even earlier in July , has yet to be postponed .
But if Tokyo recognizes it would be a terrible risk to the health of athletes and spectators to have people come from all over the world to Japan this summer , would it not also be an intolerable risk to have Americans from all 50 states and U.S. territories arrive for a week of mingling in midsummer in Milwaukee ?
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must lose it .
And the one way Trump can lose it is the perception on the part of a majority of Americans that he has proven an ineffectual president in America ’ s worst pandemic since the Spanish flu of 1918 .
If Trump is seen as the victor over the virus , Biden is toast .
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon ’ s White House Wars : The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever .

“This is the question that is going to dominate the election: How did you perform in the great crisis?”
So says GOP Congressman Tom Cole of Oklahoma in yesterday’s New York Times.
GOP National Committeeman Henry Barbour of Mississippi calls the crisis “a defining moment…. The more [Trump] reassures Americans, gives them the facts and delivers results, the harder it will be for Joe Biden.”
Indeed, it is not a stretch to say Trump’s presidency will stand or fall on the resolution of the coronavirus crisis and how Trump is perceived as having led us in that battle. Recent polls appear to confirm that.
Though daily baited by a hostile media for being late to recognize the severity of the crisis, in one Gallup poll a week ago, Trump was at 49 percent approval, the apogee of his presidency, with 60 percent of the nation awarding him high marks for his handling of the pandemic.
What was the public’s assessment of how Trump’s antagonists in the media have performed in America’s great medical crisis?
Of 10 institutions, with hospitals first, at 88 percent approval, the media came in dead last, the only institution whose disapproval, at 55 percent, exceeded the number of Americans with a favorable opinion of their performance.
The media are paying a price in lost reputation with the nation they claim to represent by re-assuming the role of “adversary press” in a social crisis where, whatever one’s view of Donald Trump, the country wants the president to succeed.
If Biden begins to mimic a hostile media, baiting Trump at every turn, pointing out conflicts in his views, Joe will invite the same fate the media seem to have brought upon themselves.
Since that Gallup poll, Trump has been seen daily by millions in the role of commander in chief. He speaks from the podium in the White House briefing room or the Rose Garden just outside the Oval Office. He is invariably flanked by respected leaders in medicine, science, business and economics. All appear as Trump allies, and Trump treats them as his field commanders in the war on the virus.
And Joe Biden? He pops up infrequently in interviews out of the basement of his Delaware home where, sheltering in place, he reads short scripted speeches from a teleprompter.
And Biden’s presence has been wholly eclipsed by daily televised appearances of Governor Andrew Cuomo, who is at the epicenter of the crisis in New York. Cuomo is taking on the aspect of both rival and partner to Trump.
What Trump is doing calls to mind Richard Nixon’s “Rose Garden strategy” in 1972. Though goaded by the press, Nixon avoided attacking his opponent, George McGovern, and declined to engage him on issues. Instead, Nixon used the Rose Garden to highlight popular initiatives.
Candidate Nixon’s campaign strategy in 1972 was not to campaign.
But if Biden cannot gather crowds to hear him in a time of social distancing, how does he get his message out? How does he attack Trump without appearing to undermine the president in his role as a wartime commander in chief, where America wants Trump to succeed?
How does a basement-bound Biden compete with Trump in the Oval Office, Cabinet Room, East Room, and Rose Garden?
Whom does Biden call upon to rival Trump’s instant access to respected leaders eager to come and stand beside the president in the most serious crisis since World War II?
How does Biden recapture the spotlight of Super Tuesday?
Senator Bernie Sanders wants Biden to come out and debate. But that seems a no-win proposition.
Moreover, when Biden appears on camera, he often seems confused and forgetful, loses his train of thought and doesn’t remember what he came to say. The sense that Biden is losing it is taking hold, and not only on the Republican right.
Democrats have to be looking closely at Cuomo’s success, as they wonder how Biden will stand up in the debates with Trump six months from now.
And what lies ahead for Democrats when spring turns into summer?
The Tokyo Olympics, scheduled to begin July 24, have been postponed until 2021. The Democratic National Convention, scheduled for Milwaukee even earlier in July, has yet to be postponed.
But if Tokyo recognizes it would be a terrible risk to the health of athletes and spectators to have people come from all over the world to Japan this summer, would it not also be an intolerable risk to have Americans from all 50 states and U.S. territories arrive for a week of mingling in midsummer in Milwaukee?
For Biden to win this election, Trump must lose it.
And the one way Trump can lose it is the perception on the part of a majority of Americans that he has proven an ineffectual president in America’s worst pandemic since the Spanish flu of 1918.
If Trump is seen as the victor over the virus, Biden is toast.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.


theamericanconservative--2020-04-01--Trump Versus Biden? Maybe. Trump Versus the Media? Absolutely

The press has its lowest ratings in a crisis ever -- -and they walked right into it .
A new poll from Gallup reveals some of the contours of the 2020 presidential campaign , which are likely to stay in place , no matter what the ultimate impact of the current health crisis .
The March 25 poll asked Americans to give their approval/disapproval ratings for selected individuals and institutions in terms of their response to the coronavirus .
Not surprisingly , U.S. hospitals were rated on top , with an 88 percent positive rating .
Meanwhile , President Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say that Trump ’ s approval rating is unimpressive , given that past crises—resulting in the rally- ‘ round-the-flag effect—have sent presidential ratings soaring into the 80s , even 90s .
And that may well be true , although , of course , in so many ways , the Trump era has no precedent .
Moreover , we should be reminded that elections are relative ; that is , it ’ s one candidate against the other candidate .
And with that in mind , we can recall an old joke from Ronald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two about elections : In the Gipper ’ s telling , two men are walking in the woods , and they come across a menacing bear—whereupon the first man bends down to put on his sneakers .
And then the second man says , “ Hey , you can ’ t outrun the bear !
” To which the first man responds , “ I don ’ t have to outrun the bear—I just have to outrun you !
” And that ’ s how elections work : Trump wasn ’ t popular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ managed to beat Hillary Clinton , because she was even more unpopular—at least in the key states .
And as for 2020 , yes , Trump is behind Joe Biden in the polls , and yet even so , one prominent betting site , PredictIt , shows Trump as the favorite to win a second term .
Evidently , gamblers figure that a lot will happen between now and November 3—and who can disagree ?
Still , Trump has a lot of work to do .
And so let ’ s look again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provides clues as to where Trump will go , looking for targets of opportunity , allowing him to say , in effect , You might not like me—but look at what ’ s worse .
For instance , there ’ s Congress , at 59 percent approval , a point lower than Trump ’ s .
Admittedly , a one-point differential isn ’ t much , but if the 2020 election is close , that single point could spell the difference between winning and losing .
With that in mind , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as he long has been , against Nancy Pelosi , Chuck Schumer , et al .
Indeed , if the Trump campaign knows past presidential history , it knows that back in the 1948 presidential election , a not-particularly popular incumbent , Harry Truman , chose mostly to ignore his actual Republican challenger , Thomas E. Dewey , preferring to run against the “ Do Nothing ” Republicans who controlled Congress .
Yes , there was something deeply asymmetric about Truman ’ s campaign that year ; the 33rd president was , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ branch of the federal government , namely , Congress—and yet it worked.Truman was re-elected .
So we can see the potential parallel today : Even if Biden is the nominee , Trump might choose to run against bicoastal liberals in Congress—and who ’ s to say that he can ’ t ?
Yet Trump might look at that Gallup poll and conclude that he has an even better target than Congress , namely , the media .
Just 44 percent of Americans approve of the Fourth Estate , and a massive 55 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the potential for some even more profound asymmetry : Trump could ignore elected officials and run , instead , against “ fake news.
” In fact , he ’ s already been doing that ; we might ask ourselves : How many times has Trump attacked “ lying media ” ?
Nobody can count that high , but here ’ s a representative tweet , just from March 25 : Here we can see all the anti-media dynamics Trump might need for his re-election campaign : In his reckoning , the Mainstream Media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a way of sabotaging his re-election campaign .
( And Trump is hardly alone in his suspicions about the media ; on March 29 , Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted , “ Some in our media can ’ t contain their glee & delight in reporting that the U.S. has more # CoronaVirus cases than # China.
” ) Indeed , Trump ’ s daily White House press briefings have turned , by mutual agreement , into a ritualistic rumble–the president vs. the press .
So maybe the president can imagine putting together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters who like him ; and second , voters who dislike the media .
As this author has noted here at TAC , that ’ s the playbook that Richard Nixon ran in 1972 , albeit his administration ’ s media-bashing seems gentle by the standards of today .
Still , Nixon won a second term in a landslide—and that ’ s an election that Trump himself is old enough to remember .
To be sure , Democrats remember 1972 as well , and that ’ s one reason why they shunned the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the more centrist Biden .
And yet a look back at history reminds us that media events have a way of intruding into the best-laid political plans .
For instance , 136 years ago , way back on October 29 , 1884 , a Presbyterian minister , Samuel Burchard , spoke at a New York City political dinner featuring the Republican presidential nominee , James G. Blaine .
With just a week remaining in that year ’ s campaign , Burchard declared , “ We are Republicans , and don ’ t propose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the party whose antecedents have been rum , Romanism and rebellion.
” We should hasten to note that Burchard was just a private citizen , albeit one with the gift of alliteration .
And yet in that alliterative triptych , Burchard managed to inflame just about every important Democratic group : “ rum ” ( the Irish ) , “ Romanism ” ( Catholics ) , and “ rebellion ” ( the South ) .
Burchard ’ s words spread like a contagion ; the following Sunday they were recited in Catholic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the November election , Blaine lost New York State , as the GOP lost the presidency for the first time in 28 years .
As a rueful Blaine said later , “ I should have carried New York by 10,000 votes if the weather had been clear and Dr. Burchard had been doing missionary work in Asia Minor or China.
” More recently , and increasingly , the liberal media have found themselves being part of the political story—and not always in a way that helps Democrats .
For instance , on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Post reporter , Michael Weisskopf , wrote that Christian voters were “ largely poor , uneducated , and easy to command.
” These words were immediately seized upon , and “ owned , ” by the Christian Right , and by Republicans overall .
And the following year , spearheaded in many places by angry evangelicals , the GOP took over the House and the Senate .
It would be a vast stretch to say that a single nasty quote did the trick for the GOP , and yet even the most casual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christians is common .
And so in an almost biblical way , contempt begot counter-contempt , and that ’ s how we got to our current state of polarization , red vs. blue .
Indeed , in our time , the MSM hits keep coming .
We might recall that in January a primetime CNN segment—not involving any elected Democrat—dissolved into a cackle-fest at the expense of Trump supporters .
The conservative response to the segment was swift : “ What Don Lemon and Rick Wilson reveal about the ruling class ” —that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And the Republican National Committee immediately ran a spot putting the burden of media nastiness on Democrats : “ They think you ’ re a joke .
Prove them wrong in November.
” And what was the headline that The New York Times ran atop an op-ed on March 27 ?
Oh yes : “ The Road to Coronavirus Hell Was Paved by Evangelicals.
” One evangelical , Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri , spoke for many millions when he rebuked the op-ed vias tweet : So we can see the dynamic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans , and Christians , in whatever order suits it at the moment .
And in response , Trump & Co. attack the media , liberals , and Democrats—and just to make things easy , Trump attacks all three at the same time .
For their part , the Democrats , having become comfortable in their blue-dot citadels , might not be able to see just how much the arrogance of their favorite newspaper , the Times , is hurting them—and hurting them not just among committed Christians .
Yes , we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe even doomy , cycle of tit-for-tat ; many will say it does nothing to solve the problems of the nation , starting with the coronavirus .
Yet Trump long ago proved his determination to pound on an opponent ’ s weakness .
And for the Democrats , a key weakness , as Gallup shows , is the media .
Biden might be able to beat Trump , but he might not get the chance , because Trump will be too busy beating the media .

A new poll from Gallup reveals some of the contours of the 2020 presidential campaign, which are likely to stay in place, no matter what the ultimate impact of the current health crisis.
The March 25 poll asked Americans to give their approval/disapproval ratings for selected individuals and institutions in terms of their response to the coronavirus. Not surprisingly, U.S. hospitals were rated on top, with an 88 percent positive rating.
Meanwhile, President Trump was at 60 percent. Some will say that Trump’s approval rating is unimpressive, given that past crises—resulting in the rally-‘round-the-flag effect—have sent presidential ratings soaring into the 80s, even 90s. And that may well be true, although, of course, in so many ways, the Trump era has no precedent.
Moreover, we should be reminded that elections are relative; that is, it’s one candidate against the other candidate. And with that in mind, we can recall an old joke from Ronald Reagan, who knew a thing or two about elections: In the Gipper’s telling, two men are walking in the woods, and they come across a menacing bear—whereupon the first man bends down to put on his sneakers. And then the second man says, “Hey, you can’t outrun the bear!” To which the first man responds, “I don’t have to outrun the bear—I just have to outrun you!”
And that’s how elections work: Trump wasn’t popular in 2016, and yet he still managed to beat Hillary Clinton, because she was even more unpopular—at least in the key states. And as for 2020, yes, Trump is behind Joe Biden in the polls, and yet even so, one prominent betting site, PredictIt, shows Trump as the favorite to win a second term. Evidently, gamblers figure that a lot will happen between now and November 3—and who can disagree?
Still, Trump has a lot of work to do. And so let’s look again at that Gallup Poll, because it provides clues as to where Trump will go, looking for targets of opportunity, allowing him to say, in effect,You might not like me—but look at what’s worse.
For instance, there’s Congress, at 59 percent approval, a point lower than Trump’s.
Admittedly, a one-point differential isn’t much, but if the 2020 election is close, that single point could spell the difference between winning and losing.
With that in mind, it’s not hard to see Trump railing, as he long has been, against Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, et al. Indeed, if the Trump campaign knows past presidential history, it knows that back in the 1948 presidential election, a not-particularly popular incumbent, Harry Truman, chose mostly to ignore his actual Republican challenger, Thomas E. Dewey, preferring to run against the “Do Nothing” Republicans who controlled Congress. Yes, there was something deeply asymmetric about Truman’s campaign that year; the 33rd president was, in effect, running against a different branch of the federal government, namely, Congress—and yet it worked.Truman was re-elected.
So we can see the potential parallel today: Even if Biden is the nominee, Trump might choose to run against bicoastal liberals in Congress—and who’s to say that he can’t?
Yet Trump might look at that Gallup poll and conclude that he has an even better target than Congress, namely, the media. Just 44 percent of Americans approve of the Fourth Estate, and a massive 55 percent disapprove.
So now we can see the potential for some even more profound asymmetry: Trump could ignore elected officials and run, instead, against “fake news.” In fact, he’s already been doing that; we might ask ourselves: How many times has Trump attacked “lying media”? Nobody can count that high, but here’s a representative tweet, just from March 25:
The LameStream Media is the dominant force in trying to get me to keep our Country closed as long as possible in the hope that it will be detrimental to my election success. The real people want to get back to work ASAP. We will be stronger than ever before!
Here we can see all the anti-media dynamics Trump might need for his re-election campaign: In his reckoning, the Mainstream Media are trying to sabotage the country, as a way of sabotaging his re-election campaign. (And Trump is hardly alone in his suspicions about the media; on March 29, Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted, “Some in our media can’t contain their glee & delight in reporting that the U.S. has more #CoronaVirus cases than #China.”)
Indeed, Trump’s daily White House press briefings have turned, by mutual agreement, into a ritualistic rumble–the president vs. the press.
So maybe the president can imagine putting together a two-part victory coalition: first, voters who like him; and second, voters who dislike the media.
As this author has noted here at TAC, that’s the playbook that Richard Nixon ran in 1972, albeit his administration’s media-bashing seems gentle by the standards of today. Still, Nixon won a second term in a landslide—and that’s an election that Trump himself is old enough to remember.
To be sure, Democrats remember 1972 as well, and that’s one reason why they shunned the George McGovernish Bernie Sanders in favor of the more centrist Biden. And yet a look back at history reminds us that media events have a way of intruding into the best-laid political plans.
For instance, 136 years ago, way back on October 29, 1884, a Presbyterian minister, Samuel Burchard, spoke at a New York City political dinner featuring the Republican presidential nominee, James G. Blaine. With just a week remaining in that year’s campaign, Burchard declared, “We are Republicans, and don’t propose to leave our party and identify ourselves with the party whose antecedents have been rum, Romanism and rebellion.” We should hasten to note that Burchard was just a private citizen, albeit one with the gift of alliteration. And yet in that alliterative triptych, Burchard managed to inflame just about every important Democratic group: “rum” (the Irish), “Romanism” (Catholics), and “rebellion” (the South).
Burchard’s words spread like a contagion; the following Sunday they were recited in Catholic churches across New York City. And in the November election, Blaine lost New York State, as the GOP lost the presidency for the first time in 28 years. As a rueful Blaine said later, “I should have carried New York by 10,000 votes if the weather had been clear and Dr. Burchard had been doing missionary work in Asia Minor or China.”
More recently, and increasingly, the liberal media have found themselves being part of the political story—and not always in a way that helps Democrats. For instance, on February 1, 1993, a Washington Post reporter, Michael Weisskopf, wrote that Christian voters were “largely poor, uneducated, and easy to command.”
These words were immediately seized upon, and “owned,” by the Christian Right, and by Republicans overall. And the following year, spearheaded in many places by angry evangelicals, the GOP took over the House and the Senate. It would be a vast stretch to say that a single nasty quote did the trick for the GOP, and yet even the most casual observer knows that such media contempt for Christians is common. And so in an almost biblical way, contempt begot counter-contempt, and that’s how we got to our current state of polarization, red vs. blue.
Indeed, in our time, the MSM hits keep coming. We might recall that in January a primetime CNN segment—not involving any elected Democrat—dissolved into a cackle-fest at the expense of Trump supporters. The conservative response to the segment was swift: “What Don Lemon and Rick Wilson reveal about the ruling class”—that was the headline in The Washington Examiner. And the Republican National Committee immediately ran a spot putting the burden of media nastiness on Democrats: “They think you’re a joke. Prove them wrong in November.”
And what was the headline that The New York Times ran atop an op-ed on March 27? Oh yes: “The Road to Coronavirus Hell Was Paved by Evangelicals.”
One evangelical, Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, spoke for many millions when he rebuked the op-ed vias tweet:
Actually, this unbelievable piece of hate-mongering deserves a little more comment. If you hate Christians & want to denigrate & mock them, I feel sorry for you. But blaming them for a pandemic fanned into flame by the #China Communist Party? That’s sick.
So we can see the dynamic here: The MSM attacks Trump, Republicans, and Christians, in whatever order suits it at the moment. And in response, Trump & Co. attack the media, liberals, and Democrats—and just to make things easy, Trump attacks all three at the same time.
For their part, the Democrats, having become comfortable in their blue-dot citadels, might not be able to see just how much the arrogance of their favorite newspaper, the Times, is hurting them—and hurting them not just among committed Christians.
Yes, we are in the midst of a powerful, maybe even doomy, cycle of tit-for-tat; many will say it does nothing to solve the problems of the nation, starting with the coronavirus.
Yet Trump long ago proved his determination to pound on an opponent’s weakness. And for the Democrats, a key weakness, as Gallup shows, is the media. Biden might be able to beat Trump, but he might not get the chance, because Trump will be too busy beating the media.


theamericanconservative--2020-04-01--The World Health Organization is Out of Control

WHO Chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus via video link as he delivers a news briefing on COVID-19 ( novel coronavirus ) from the WHO headquarters in Geneva on March 30 , 2020 .
( Photo by -/AFP via Getty Images ) As the United Nations ’ dedicated public health agency , one might assume that the World Health Organization ( WHO ) is doing everything in its power to fight the deadly coronavirus .
Unfortunately , the lavishly taxpayer-funded global bureaucracy has fallen down on the job , seeming more concerned with vindicating China than providing leadership to the rest of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” to the WHO totaling roughly half a billion dollars , U.S. taxpayers deserve better .
They should demand greater transparency and oversight before more money is wasted propping up a failed organization .
From day one , the WHO sat idly by as the Chinese government covered up COVID-19 and facilitated the spread of the disease across the globe .
Despite Beijing ’ s assertions to the contrary , COVID-19 was first reported in Wuhan , China , in November 2019 .
It spread unabated from there .
The late Chinese ophthalmologist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pattern of cases the following month .
Yet President Xi Jinping ’ s brutal regime promptly hauled the doctor and his colleagues before the secret police and forced them to stop warning other doctors about the impending pandemic .
To quote New York Times contributor Nicholas D. Kristof , the Chinese government felt an obligation to act and “ act decisively they did—not against the virus , but against whistle-blowers who were trying to call attention to the public health threat.
” When this obfuscation became a matter of public record , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accountable for its grave misdeeds .
Instead , WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus hailed President Xi ’ s “ political commitment ” and “ political leadership ” in containing the coronavirus .
When Dr. Tedros claimed that “ China is actually setting a new standard for outbreak response , ” he wasn ’ t kidding .
It ’ s hardly typical for a country to thoroughly cover up such a deadly disease for such a long time and then refuse to allow in a WHO advance team ( for two weeks ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authorities then suggested that China ’ s approach be replicated around the world , despite reported cases of the authorities arresting people for stepping outside of their apartments and playing Mahjong at home without masks .
For all of this kowtowing to China , the WHO hasn ’ t even managed to extract dependable disease spread information from local authorities .
On March 24 , the online publication “ Our World in Data ” ( based at the University of Oxford ) reported that WHO data is simply too unreliable to use for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ researchers noted , “ In published WHO Situation Reports were several inconsistencies in the number of total confirmed cases , and new confirmed cases that we noticed between the WHO Situation Reports and the WHO Dashboard , which also presents these statistics.
” Even worse , “ these errors are not communicated by the WHO itself ” and require the attention of astute public health researchers to tease out .
Despite inconsistent and unreliable data , the WHO remains as determined as ever to provide “ information ” to the public via mobile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ released its “ MyHealth ” app for iOS and Android where users can find the “ latest numbers ” and “ myth-busters ” pertaining to the pandemic .
But the numbers presented simply parrot the inaccurate WHO data that “ Our World in Data ” has ceased relying on .
There ’ s legitimate concern that the Xi-centric WHO will uncritically report Chinese infection numbers supplied by local authorities , who , according to the U.S.-based Chinese blogger and biochemist Fang Zhouzi , “ are lying about the statistics for the sake of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terribly surprising that China has been playing public health games and has even blamed the U.S. Army for the coronavirus .
It ’ s even more disappointing to see the WHO parrot Chinese government talking points and present blatantly inaccurate information to scientists and patients around the world .
And American taxpayers are funding all this .
It is time for the Trump administration and Congress to hold the WHO accountable for coddling dictators and failing to open up about their flawed statistics .
There ’ s simply too much at stake for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the director of policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance .

As the United Nations’ dedicated public health agency, one might assume that the World Health Organization (WHO) is doing everything in its power to fight the deadly coronavirus. Unfortunately, the lavishly taxpayer-funded global bureaucracy has fallen down on the job, seeming more concerned with vindicating China than providing leadership to the rest of the world.
With annual “contributions” to the WHO totaling roughly half a billion dollars, U.S. taxpayers deserve better. They should demand greater transparency and oversight before more money is wasted propping up a failed organization.
From day one, the WHO sat idly by as the Chinese government covered up COVID-19 and facilitated the spread of the disease across the globe. Despite Beijing’s assertions to the contrary, COVID-19 was first reported in Wuhan, China, in November 2019. It spread unabated from there.
The late Chinese ophthalmologist Li Wenliang started to notice a suspicious pattern of cases the following month. Yet President Xi Jinping’s brutal regime promptly hauled the doctor and his colleagues before the secret police and forced them to stop warning other doctors about the impending pandemic. To quote New York Times contributor Nicholas D. Kristof, the Chinese government felt an obligation to act and “act decisively they did—not against the virus, but against whistle-blowers who were trying to call attention to the public health threat.”
When this obfuscation became a matter of public record, the WHO had an obligation to hold China accountable for its grave misdeeds. Instead, WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus hailed President Xi’s “political commitment” and “political leadership” in containing the coronavirus. When Dr. Tedros claimed that “China is actually setting a new standard for outbreak response,” he wasn’t kidding. It’s hardly typical for a country to thoroughly cover up such a deadly disease for such a long time and then refuse to allow in a WHO advance team (for two weeks) once the disease becomes apparent. WHO authorities then suggested that China’s approach be replicated around the world, despite reported cases of the authorities arresting people for stepping outside of their apartments and playing Mahjong at home without masks.
For all of this kowtowing to China, the WHO hasn’t even managed to extract dependable disease spread information from local authorities. On March 24, the online publication “Our World in Data” (based at the University of Oxford) reported that WHO data is simply too unreliable to use for statistical reports on the coronavirus. The researchers noted, “In published WHO Situation Reports were several inconsistencies in the number of total confirmed cases, and new confirmed cases that we noticed between the WHO Situation Reports and the WHO Dashboard, which also presents these statistics.” Even worse, “these errors are not communicated by the WHO itself” and require the attention of astute public health researchers to tease out.
Despite inconsistent and unreliable data, the WHO remains as determined as ever to provide “information” to the public via mobile apps. On March 30, it released its “MyHealth” app for iOS and Android where users can find the “latest numbers” and “myth-busters” pertaining to the pandemic. But the numbers presented simply parrot the inaccurate WHO data that “Our World in Data” has ceased relying on. There’s legitimate concern that the Xi-centric WHO will uncritically report Chinese infection numbers supplied by local authorities, who, according to the U.S.-based Chinese blogger and biochemist Fang Zhouzi, “are lying about the statistics for the sake of the economy.”
It isn’t terribly surprising that China has been playing public health games and has even blamed the U.S. Army for the coronavirus. It’s even more disappointing to see the WHO parrot Chinese government talking points and present blatantly inaccurate information to scientists and patients around the world. And American taxpayers are funding all this.
It is time for the Trump administration and Congress to hold the WHO accountable for coddling dictators and failing to open up about their flawed statistics. There’s simply too much at stake for deflection and misinformation.
Ross Marchand is the director of policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.


theamericanconservative--2020-04-02--China’s Cartels: Those Who Control the Medicines Control the World

The vital drugs and supplies needed to treat coronavirus are in the hands of a government that has already weaponized them .
If the coronavirus pandemic has taught us anything , the United States is unprepared for a disease outbreak or biowarfare because we no longer make the medicines necessary for survival .
Shortages of masks , ventilators , and respirators have made headline news but shortages of critical medicines have remained largely out of public view .
On February 27 , 2020 , the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) reported the shortage of a drug caused by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agency didn ’ t name the drug because it would cause hoarding .
Since then , the FDA has gone silent about shortages .
Meanwhile , U.S. drug wholesalers are “ allocating ” critical generic drugs , an industry euphemism for rationing .
How dependent are we on China for medicines to care for people with severe cases of coronavirus ?
China is the source of 90 percent of the chemical starting materials needed to manufacture common generic drugs that help people recover .
They include medicines to increase dangerously low blood pressure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for bacterial infections , and propofol given when patients are placed on a ventilator to help them breathe .
How Did the U.S .
Become Dependent on China ?
Generic drugs are 90 percent of the medicines Americans take .
Thousands of them are made with chemical starting materials from China .
China ’ s dominance escalated after the U.S. granted most-favored nation trading status to China .
Within three years of the U.S.-China Trade Relations Act in 2000 and China joining the World Trade Organization ( WTO ) , the last aspirin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doors , the last facility making Vitamin C went out of business , and the only remaining penicillin plant announced its closure .
Now , the U.S. has virtually no capacity to manufacture antibiotics .
A common view is that production has shifted to China because of lower labor costs and weaker regulations .
There ’ s more to the story .
Western companies can not compete successfully because the free market doesn ’ t exist in generic drug and chemical ingredient manufacturing .
China ’ s cartels fueled by government subsidies undercut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of business .
Western firms aren ’ t competing against Chinese companies .
They are competing against the Chinese government .
China is moving up the value chain and makes 10 percent of the generic drugs in the U.S .
The first was an HIV/AIDS medicine .
Other generics made in China by domestic companies and sold in the United States include : antibiotics , anti-depressants , birth control pills , chemotherapy for cancer treatment for children and adults , medicine for Alzheimer ’ s , diabetes , Parkinson ’ s , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As China ramps up production of generic drugs for American hospitals , pharmacies and home medicine cabinets , U.S. and other western manufacturing is collapsing .
Mylan , a U.S.-based generic company , announced last year that it was merging with Pfizer .
Around the same time , Pfizer announced the opening of its global generic headquarters in China .
Sandoz , a European company , and Teva , an Israeli company , announced in early 2019 that they will discontinue production of many medicines .
Long before the coronavirus hit the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medicines were in short supply or unavailable altogether .
At a Senate Small Business Committee hearing chaired by Senator Marco Rubio in March 2020 , a Johns Hopkins professor said that its hospital has 200 to 300 drugs in shortage , far more than the 98 officially reported by the FDA .
Now , in the middle of a global pandemic we face a perfect storm .
Production in China has been shut down .
China has withheld exports of masks and other protective gear , and it is likely that China has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hospital recently and talked with doctors about the availability of critical drugs .
They said they could not obtain a critical antibiotic to treat pneumonia .
Many other antibiotics are being rationed .
More than 100 countries affected by the coronavirus are competing for a limited global supply of critical medicines whose production depends so decidedly on a single country .
Hungary , the UK , India and other countries have sealed their borders to prohibit exports of essential medicines .
Although India has a very large generic drug industry , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chemical starting materials to make drugs .
If You Control Medicines You Control the World China relishes its geopolitical leverage .
As the number of coronavirus cases climbed in the U.S. last month , China ’ s official news outlet issued this threat , “ If China announces that its drugs are for domestic use and bans exports , the United States will fall into the hell of a new coronavirus epidemic.
” China ’ s threats to withhold medicines are not new .
More than a decade ago the Chinese government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failed act as it wished .
No trade kerfuffle existed at that time .
Make no mistake , China knows precisely where the U.S. is vulnerable .
Meanwhile , the FDA and industry are scrambling to pinpoint those medicines where we are solely or mostly dependent on China .
In July 2019 , the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission held a hearing on U.S. dependence on China for medicines .
During the hearing , a representative from the Department of Defense testified about the risks to the military of medicines made with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ triggered a spellbinding account by a commissioner , a retired Army colonel with a distinguished record of military service .
He talked about his three different blood pressure medicines whose key ingredients were made in China and contained rocket fuel .
If he was getting contaminated drugs , active duty military people were probably getting them too , he opined .
The retired Army colonel was one of millions of Americans whose blood pressure medicines were contaminated with carcinogens .
In July 2018 , the FDA announced the first of many recalls .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most troubling was the manufacturer in China whose active ingredient contained more than 200 times the acceptable limit of the rocket fuel carcinogen , per pill .
Even worse , the company knew its product did not meet U.S. standards but sold it anyway Meanwhile , the coronavirus landed on the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt last month as it was patrolling the South China Sea .
More than two dozen crew members have been infected .
The carrier was forced to make an emergency stop in Guam so all 5,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Make no mistake , the United States faces an existential threat posed by China ’ s control over the global supply of the ingredients and chemical materials to manufacture critical drugs .
In the hands of an adversary , medicines can be weaponized .
They can be made with lethal contaminants or sold without any real medicine in them , rendering them ineffective .
The director of the White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy , Dr. Peter Navarro , drafted an Executive Order with Buy American medicine provisions for the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national stockpile .
An avalanche of opposition from special interests has erupted .
They claim that making medicines in the United States would somehow disrupt the medicine supply chain .
As noted , it was already in shambles before coronavirus , plagued with poor quality medicines in persistent shortage .
The generic drug industry circulated a draft letter to the White House on March 24 , 2020 , which stated that medicines made in America would “ destabilize the ( medicine ) supply chain.
” Two days later , Chinese Premier Xi Jinping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virtual G20 meeting .
He said global supply chains need to “ remain stable.
” Premier Xi added that China will increase its supply of active pharmaceutical ingredients to the international market .
The generic industry is not opposed to China ’ s growing nationalism and monopoly position , yet it fiercely opposes the United States salvaging a bare minimum of manufacturing capability for our national security .
The fate of the Executive Order is uncertain .
Washington lobbyists are working overtime to increase our dependence on a country that has threatened to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
[ Editor ’ s Note : This story is featured in the forthcoming May/June issue of The American Conservative ] Rosemary Gibson is senior advisor at the Hastings Center and author of China Rx : Exposing the Risks of America ’ s Dependence on China for Medicine .
Follow her on Twitter @ Rosemary100 .

If the coronavirus pandemic has taught us anything, the United States is unprepared for a disease outbreak or biowarfare because we no longer make the medicines necessary for survival.
Shortages of masks, ventilators, and respirators have made headline news but shortages of critical medicines have remained largely out of public view.
On February 27, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported the shortage of a drug caused by the coronavirus outbreak in China. The agency didn’t name the drug because it would cause hoarding. Since then, the FDA has gone silent about shortages. Meanwhile, U.S. drug wholesalers are “allocating” critical generic drugs, an industry euphemism for rationing.
How dependent are we on China for medicines to care for people with severe cases of coronavirus? China is the source of 90 percent of the chemical starting materials needed to manufacture common generic drugs that help people recover. They include medicines to increase dangerously low blood pressure such as norepinephrine, the antibiotic azithromycin for bacterial infections, and propofol given when patients are placed on a ventilator to help them breathe.
How Did the U.S. Become Dependent on China?
Generic drugs are 90 percent of the medicines Americans take. Thousands of them are made with chemical starting materials from China.
China’s dominance escalated after the U.S. granted most-favored nation trading status to China. Within three years of the U.S.-China Trade Relations Act in 2000 and China joining the World Trade Organization (WTO), the last aspirin manufacturing plant in the U.S. shut its doors, the last facility making Vitamin C went out of business, and the only remaining penicillin plant announced its closure. Now, the U.S. has virtually no capacity to manufacture antibiotics.
A common view is that production has shifted to China because of lower labor costs and weaker regulations. There’s more to the story.
Western companies cannot compete successfully because the free market doesn’t exist in generic drug and chemical ingredient manufacturing. China’s cartels fueled by government subsidies undercut U.S. and other companies, driving them out of business. Western firms aren’t competing against Chinese companies. They are competing against the Chinese government.
U.S. Generic Drug Manufacturing is Collapsing
China is moving up the value chain and makes 10 percent of the generic drugs in the U.S. The first was an HIV/AIDS medicine. Other generics made in China by domestic companies and sold in the United States include: antibiotics, anti-depressants, birth control pills, chemotherapy for cancer treatment for children and adults, medicine for Alzheimer’s, diabetes, Parkinson’s, and epilepsy, to name a few.
As China ramps up production of generic drugs for American hospitals, pharmacies and home medicine cabinets, U.S. and other western manufacturing is collapsing. Mylan, a U.S.-based generic company, announced last year that it was merging with Pfizer. Around the same time, Pfizer announced the opening of its global generic headquarters in China. Sandoz, a European company, and Teva, an Israeli company, announced in early 2019 that they will discontinue production of many medicines.
Long before the coronavirus hit the U.S. homeland in earnest, hundreds of medicines were in short supply or unavailable altogether. At a Senate Small Business Committee hearing chaired by Senator Marco Rubio in March 2020, a Johns Hopkins professor said that its hospital has 200 to 300 drugs in shortage, far more than the 98 officially reported by the FDA.
Now, in the middle of a global pandemic we face a perfect storm. Production in China has been shut down. China has withheld exports of masks and other protective gear, and it is likely that China has been withholding domestically-produced medicines.
I visited a hospital recently and talked with doctors about the availability of critical drugs. They said they could not obtain a critical antibiotic to treat pneumonia. Many other antibiotics are being rationed.
More than 100 countries affected by the coronavirus are competing for a limited global supply of critical medicines whose production depends so decidedly on a single country.
Hungary, the UK, India and other countries have sealed their borders to prohibit exports of essential medicines. Although India has a very large generic drug industry, it depends on China for 70 percent of the chemical starting materials to make drugs.
If You Control Medicines You Control the World
China relishes its geopolitical leverage. As the number of coronavirus cases climbed in the U.S. last month, China’s official news outlet issued this threat, “If China announces that its drugs are for domestic use and bans exports, the United States will fall into the hell of a new coronavirus epidemic.”
China’s threats to withhold medicines are not new. More than a decade ago the Chinese government threatened drug shortages if the federal government failed act as it wished. No trade kerfuffle existed at that time.
Make no mistake, China knows precisely where the U.S. is vulnerable. Meanwhile, the FDA and industry are scrambling to pinpoint those medicines where we are solely or mostly dependent on China.
Rocket Fuel in Generic Drugs
In July 2019, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission held a hearing on U.S. dependence on China for medicines. During the hearing, a representative from the Department of Defense testified about the risks to the military of medicines made with key ingredients from China.
This testimony triggered a spellbinding account by a commissioner, a retired Army colonel with a distinguished record of military service. He talked about his three different blood pressure medicines whose key ingredients were made in China and contained rocket fuel. If he was getting contaminated drugs, active duty military people were probably getting them too, he opined.
The retired Army colonel was one of millions of Americans whose blood pressure medicines were contaminated with carcinogens. In July 2018, the FDA announced the first of many recalls. While many manufacturers recalled their products, the most troubling was the manufacturer in China whose active ingredient contained more than 200 times the acceptable limit of the rocket fuel carcinogen, per pill. Even worse, the company knew its product did not meet U.S. standards but sold it anyway
Meanwhile, the coronavirus landed on the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt last month as it was patrolling the South China Sea. More than two dozen crew members have been infected. The carrier was forced to make an emergency stop in Guam so all 5,000 people on board could be tested.
Make no mistake, the United States faces an existential threat posed by China’s control over the global supply of the ingredients and chemical materials to manufacture critical drugs. In the hands of an adversary, medicines can be weaponized. They can be made with lethal contaminants or sold without any real medicine in them, rendering them ineffective.
Same Talking Points: Generic Drug Industry and Premier Xi Jinping
The director of the White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, Dr. Peter Navarro, drafted an Executive Order with Buy American medicine provisions for the U.S. military, VA, and the strategic national stockpile.
An avalanche of opposition from special interests has erupted. They claim that making medicines in the United States would somehow disrupt the medicine supply chain. As noted, it was already in shambles before coronavirus, plagued with poor quality medicines in persistent shortage.
The generic drug industry circulated a draft letter to the White House on March 24, 2020, which stated that medicines made in America would “destabilize the (medicine) supply chain.” Two days later, Chinese Premier Xi Jinping used a similar talking point during a virtual G20 meeting. He said global supply chains need to “remain stable.”
Premier Xi added that China will increase its supply of active pharmaceutical ingredients to the international market. The generic industry is not opposed to China’s growing nationalism and monopoly position, yet it fiercely opposes the United States salvaging a bare minimum of manufacturing capability for our national security.
The fate of the Executive Order is uncertain. Washington lobbyists are working overtime to increase our dependence on a country that has threatened to kill us. Let that sink in.
[Editor’s Note: This story is featured in the forthcoming May/June issue of The American Conservative]
Rosemary Gibson is senior advisor at the Hastings Center and author of China Rx: Exposing the Risks of America’s Dependence on China for Medicine. Follow her on Twitter @Rosemary100.


theamericanconservative--2020-04-02--A New Viral Infection: Leaders Seizing Power, Police Bullying Citizens

In Europe especially , security crackdowns and surveillance have risen to new levels in the name of public health .
A police officer adheres to social distancing measures as he talks with a cyclist in Leeds , northern England , on March 30 , 2020 , as life in Britain continues during the nationwide lockdown to combat the novel coronavirus pandemic .
( Photo by OLI SCARFF/AFP via Getty Images ) Mass surveillance is only ever in the news for two reasons—either because a whistleblower has exposed structural government overreach ( as happened with Edward Snowden ) or because nations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Over the past two decades , those threats have usually come either from migration or terrorism .
Yet COVID-19 is something different : a global pandemic .
And it ’ s allowing governments to increase their surveillance states beyond what they would even typically do in a crisis .
In Europe , currently paralyzed by the novel coronavirus , the European Union has dropped its new privacy standards completely .
In a conference call with telecom executives , the EU ’ s commissioner for the internal market , Thierry Breton , demanded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in order to track the movement of the virus .
As with other data collections , this is supposed to be anonymous—but that amounts to little once closely analyzed .
It does not take much deductive ability to figure out that the phone moving in and out of your home belongs…to you .
In the UK , policy departments have used drones to track the personal movements of those taking walks in the countryside , which they ’ ve then publicized on Twitter for the purpose of shaming them .
This video belongs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a law enforcement tweet : In Italy , mayors are publicly berating their own citizens for going on jogs by themselves , while in Belgium , law enforcement is harassing people outside of supermarkets for not buying “ essential ” goods .
One lady who bought a few Coke bottles was humiliated by a policeman , who demanded , “ Are you preparing for diarrhea or what ?
Go , get your papers.
” Another man ( towards the end of the video ) can be seen getting shoved around just for having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A journalist in Taiwan testified to the direct effects of heightened personal tracking in a chilling Twitter testimony : “ My phone , which is satellite-tracked by the Taiwan gov to enforce quarantine , ran out of battery at 7:30 AM .
By 8:15 , four different units called me .
By 8:20 , the police were knocking at my door.
” All over Asia , authorities are using tools ranging from Bluetooth-based contact tracing apps to smartphone-linked wristbands to credit card records to even CCTV cameras installed outside people ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soon start crossing borders .
Google and Facebook want to share location data with governments , including the American administration .
This is likely a breach of user agreements ; it ’ s also likely to be unconstitutional were the American government to do it .
Not that that would be news anyway , since the Senate used the coronavirus as cover to pass a 77-day extension of FISA surveillance .
No matter what legitimacy we want to ascribe to these emergency measures , we ought to recognize that they usually outlast emergencies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world introduced emergency measures to tackle terrorism ; 20 years later , the wars still haven ’ t ended and the surveillance has been institutionalized .
Following the 2008 financial crisis , governments introduced emergency measures to save the economy ; 12 years later , corporate bailouts are established and accepted like never before .
Following terrorist attacks in Europe in 2015 , governments introduced emergency measures to reduce the harm done to citizens ; five years later , most of them are still allowing house searches without warrants and deploying militarized police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terrorism , governments have eroded civil liberties .
And because there will always be a terrorist organization to fight , chances are we will never return to how it was before .
If they hated us for our freedom , it should only be a mild dislike by now .
Emergency rules are easily implemented , yet awfully hard to get rid of .
This is particularly true if the threat has no expiration date .
Viruses tend to be similar , as the coronavirus has the ability to reappear in different forms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep emergency measures “ as long as necessary ” will soon find that the definition of “ necessary ” is made by those interested in yielding as little power as possible .
There are more reasons to oppose the surveillance state than just its unconstitutionality .
Surveillance leads to self-censorship and provides the government with the ability to establish authoritarian rule .
It ’ s been fascinating to watch those who love to call their political opponents “ fascist ” suddenly grow comfortable with giving government everything it needs for potentially authoritarian tools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus isn ’ t the only real and endemic threat , we do so at our expense .

Mass surveillance is only ever in the news for two reasons—either because a whistleblower has exposed structural government overreach (as happened with Edward Snowden) or because nations are readying to fight a common threat. Over the past two decades, those threats have usually come either from migration or terrorism.
Yet COVID-19 is something different: a global pandemic. And it’s allowing governments to increase their surveillance states beyond what they would even typically do in a crisis. In Europe, currently paralyzed by the novel coronavirus, the European Union has dropped its new privacy standards completely. In a conference call with telecom executives, the EU’s commissioner for the internal market, Thierry Breton, demanded that mobile phone data be handed over in order to track the movement of the virus. As with other data collections, this is supposed to be anonymous—but that amounts to little once closely analyzed. It does not take much deductive ability to figure out that the phone moving in and out of your home belongs…to you.
In the UK, policy departments have used drones to track the personal movements of those taking walks in the countryside, which they’ve then publicized on Twitter for the purpose of shaming them. This video belongs in a Mission Impossible trailer, not a law enforcement tweet:
Despite posts yesterday highlighting issues of people still visiting the #PeakDistrict despite government guidance, the message is still not getting through. @DerPolDroneUnit have been out at beauty spots across the county, and this footage was captured at #CurbarEdge last night. pic.twitter.com/soxWvMl0ls — Derbyshire Police (@DerbysPolice) March 26, 2020
In Italy, mayors are publicly berating their own citizens for going on jogs by themselves, while in Belgium, law enforcement is harassing people outside of supermarkets for not buying “essential” goods. One lady who bought a few Coke bottles was humiliated by a policeman, who demanded, “Are you preparing for diarrhea or what? Go, get your papers.” Another man (towards the end of the video) can be seen getting shoved around just for having too few items in his shopping cart.
A journalist in Taiwan testified to the direct effects of heightened personal tracking in a chilling Twitter testimony: “My phone, which is satellite-tracked by the Taiwan gov to enforce quarantine, ran out of battery at 7:30 AM. By 8:15, four different units called me. By 8:20, the police were knocking at my door.”
All over Asia, authorities are using tools ranging from Bluetooth-based contact tracing apps to smartphone-linked wristbands to credit card records to even CCTV cameras installed outside people’s homes.
This war on privacy will soon start crossing borders. Google and Facebook want to share location data with governments, including the American administration. This is likely a breach of user agreements; it’s also likely to be unconstitutional were the American government to do it. Not that that would be news anyway, since the Senate used the coronavirus as cover to pass a 77-day extension of FISA surveillance.
No matter what legitimacy we want to ascribe to these emergency measures, we ought to recognize that they usually outlast emergencies. After 9/11, governments around the world introduced emergency measures to tackle terrorism; 20 years later, the wars still haven’t ended and the surveillance has been institutionalized. Following the 2008 financial crisis, governments introduced emergency measures to save the economy; 12 years later, corporate bailouts are established and accepted like never before. Following terrorist attacks in Europe in 2015, governments introduced emergency measures to reduce the harm done to citizens; five years later, most of them are still allowing house searches without warrants and deploying militarized police forces.
Under the guise of fighting terrorism, governments have eroded civil liberties. And because there will always be a terrorist organization to fight, chances are we will never return to how it was before. If they hated us for our freedom, it should only be a mild dislike by now.
Emergency rules are easily implemented, yet awfully hard to get rid of. This is particularly true if the threat has no expiration date. Viruses tend to be similar, as the coronavirus has the ability to reappear in different forms. Those arguing that we need to keep emergency measures “as long as necessary” will soon find that the definition of “necessary” is made by those interested in yielding as little power as possible.
There are more reasons to oppose the surveillance state than just its unconstitutionality. Surveillance leads to self-censorship and provides the government with the ability to establish authoritarian rule. It’s been fascinating to watch those who love to call their political opponents “fascist” suddenly grow comfortable with giving government everything it needs for potentially authoritarian tools.
If we do not realize that the virus isn’t the only real and endemic threat, we do so at our expense.
Bill Wirtz comments on European politics and policy in English, French, and German. His work has appeared in Newsweek, the Washington Examiner, CityAM, Le Monde, Le Figaro, and Die Welt.


theamericanconservative--2020-04-02--The Afghan Air Force Gets More Money Than Infectious Disease Prevention

U.S. President Donald Trump depart and Dr. Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , depart a briefing on the coronavirus pandemic , in the press briefing room of the White House on March 24 , 2020 in Washington , DC .
( Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images ) There are certain moments in history that are so disastrous that they force a nation to think long and hard about its priorities .
What truly matters to the health , welfare , security , and prosperity of the United States ?
Is taxpayer money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allocated to the right things ?
How could we have been so unprepared for a threat that was staring us all in the face ?
The coronavirus storming the United States is just such a moment .
The virus is nothing short of a global health epidemic .
As of this writing , it has claimed the lives of nearly 38,000 people in over 160 countries and sickened hundreds of thousands .
Approximately 165,000 cases in the United States have been reported , with over 3,100 Americans having succumbed to the disease .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York State , where the virus taken a horrifying toll .
Between March 30 and 31 , an additional 332 New Yorkers died from complications .
The deaths are , of course , tragic .
But just as disturbing is the state of America ’ s health care system .
It is completely overwhelmed and may have already reached a breaking point .
Doctors in the New York City area are venting to journalists about the apocalyptic scenes in their hospitals , where dozens upon dozens of patients are overflowing the waiting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up to single ventilators and entire hospital wards repurposed to treat the disease .
Health care professionals are working multiple 12-hour shifts with little to no sleep in order to keep pace .
For weeks , New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio have been candid about the lack of hospital space and ICU beds—so much so that state authorities , the Army Corps of Engineers , and private medical organizations are all scrambling to build temporary field hospitals in Central Park , the Javits Center , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Queens .
Some hospitals in Brooklyn and Queens are de facto war zones , with doctors doing their best despite a gap in the most basic of medical supplies .
An emergency room physician at Brookdale Hospital in Brooklyn couldn ’ t have been any clearer : “ We need gowns , we need gloves , we need masks , we need more vents [ ventilators ] .
We need more medical space .
We need psychological support as well.
” Translation : we don ’ t have the resources to continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t get them soon , doctors will have to make painful choices about who to save .
All of which is to say that if the coronavirus teaches policymakers anything , it should be that America ’ s priorities need a deep and systemic reset .
There is not much the federal government can do about staffing or equipment shortages at individual hospitals .
But what it can do is begin to re-evaluate the nation ’ s priorities at a macro-level .
It ’ s inexcusable that the Afghanistan national security forces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health professionals are literally making their own personal protective gear at home and borrowing ventilators from animal hospitals .
Budget numbers don ’ t tell the whole story , of course .
And side-by-side comparisons can be iffy .
But they can also be an effective way of demonstrating just how atrocious the United States has become at prioritization .
Consider the budget for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , the branch of the National Institutes of Health that Dr. Anthony Fauci directs .
The Trump administration requested $ 5.4 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fauci ’ s department , about 14 percent of NIH ’ s total budget request ( $ 38.694 billion ) .
On the surface , this sounds like a lot of money .
But it ’ s peanuts compared to what the Pentagon receives on an annual basis .
The Defense Department is freighted with overhead , questionable spending practices , and failed audits , yet its budget continues to increase as senior officials convince lawmakers that anything less would be risky .
This is the same department whose former secretary , Jim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s been forced to spend taxpayer dollars on facilities that simply aren ’ t needed anymore .
This is also the same department that has a $ 400,000 toilet problem aboard the U.S. Navy ’ s two newest aircraft carriers .
The Pentagon spent more money in a single month in 2018 ( $ 61 billion ) than the Food and Drug Administration , Health Resources and Services Administration , Centers for Disease Control , and National Institutes of Health were legally entitled to spend in an entire year—a combined $ 59.2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in fiscal year 2019 , Congress appropriated $ 4.9 billion for the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund .
That fund covers the costs of everything from ammunition and aircraft maintenance to personnel and salaries ( the Afghan government is almost completely dependent on U.S. and foreign donor support ) .
This $ 4.9 billion figure is more than three and a half times what Congress appropriated that year for combating opioids , which continue to ravage cities and small towns alike .
Indeed , Washington devoted more taxpayer money to the Afghan Air Force @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than to the research and prevention of emerging infectious diseases ( $ 624 million ) .
Or consider this : the Centers for Disease Control received $ 834.86 million for public health preparedness and response—the very capabilities the United States is now so desperately in need of .
Egypt , meanwhile , was the beneficiary of $ 1.4 billion in U.S. foreign assistance , more than 90 percent of which went to a military that has proven incapable of snuffing out a disorganized cluster of jihadists in the Sinai desert .
Critics will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them as an apples and oranges comparison .
This is exactly what Richard Haass , the president of the Council on Foreign Relations , did on Twitter when former FBI special agent Ali Soufan noted the immense disparity between the financial resources dedicated to forever wars versus domestic needs .
But this itself is a too-clever-by-half argument .
It ultimately defends a status quo whose dismal and depressing results we ’ re seeing in real time .
Once this public health crisis is over , more Americans will feel the same way—if they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a silver lining to the coronavirus tragedy , it ’ s that the physical and psychological scars of the disease will compel Washington to look in the mirror and engage in some uncomfortable but absolutely necessary reflection about how the nation got so sidetracked .
It would be a loss of epic proportions if we didn ’ t learn from this opportunity .
Daniel R. DePetris is a columnist at the Washington Examiner and a contributor to the National Interest .

There are certain moments in history that are so disastrous that they force a nation to think long and hard about its priorities. What truly matters to the health, welfare, security, and prosperity of the United States? Is taxpayer money being spent wisely? Is it being allocated to the right things? How could we have been so unprepared for a threat that was staring us all in the face?
The coronavirus storming the United States is just such a moment.
The virus is nothing short of a global health epidemic. As of this writing, it has claimed the lives of nearly 38,000 people in over 160 countries and sickened hundreds of thousands. Approximately 165,000 cases in the United States have been reported, with over 3,100 Americans having succumbed to the disease. Forty-one percent of those cases are in New York State, where the virus taken a horrifying toll. Between March 30 and 31, an additional 332 New Yorkers died from complications.
The deaths are, of course, tragic. But just as disturbing is the state of America’s health care system. It is completely overwhelmed and may have already reached a breaking point.
Doctors in the New York City area are venting to journalists about the apocalyptic scenes in their hospitals, where dozens upon dozens of patients are overflowing the waiting rooms, with multiple COVID-19 victims hooked up to single ventilators and entire hospital wards repurposed to treat the disease. Health care professionals are working multiple 12-hour shifts with little to no sleep in order to keep pace. For weeks, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio have been candid about the lack of hospital space and ICU beds—so much so that state authorities, the Army Corps of Engineers, and private medical organizations are all scrambling to build temporary field hospitals in Central Park, the Javits Center, and the Billy Jean King tennis center in Queens. Some hospitals in Brooklyn and Queens are de facto war zones, with doctors doing their best despite a gap in the most basic of medical supplies.
An emergency room physician at Brookdale Hospital in Brooklyn couldn’t have been any clearer: “We need gowns, we need gloves, we need masks, we need more vents [ventilators]. We need more medical space. We need psychological support as well.” Translation: we don’t have the resources to continue treating patients. And if we don’t get them soon, doctors will have to make painful choices about who to save.
All of which is to say that if the coronavirus teaches policymakers anything, it should be that America’s priorities need a deep and systemic reset. There is not much the federal government can do about staffing or equipment shortages at individual hospitals. But what it can do is begin to re-evaluate the nation’s priorities at a macro-level. It’s inexcusable that the Afghanistan national security forces receive predictable funding while America’s health professionals are literally making their own personal protective gear at home and borrowing ventilators from animal hospitals.
Budget numbers don’t tell the whole story, of course. And side-by-side comparisons can be iffy. But they can also be an effective way of demonstrating just how atrocious the United States has become at prioritization.
Consider the budget for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the branch of the National Institutes of Health that Dr. Anthony Fauci directs. The Trump administration requested $5.4 billion in its FY2021 budget request for Fauci’s department, about 14 percent of NIH’s total budget request ($38.694 billion). On the surface, this sounds like a lot of money. But it’s peanuts compared to what the Pentagon receives on an annual basis. The Defense Department is freighted with overhead, questionable spending practices, and failed audits, yet its budget continues to increase as senior officials convince lawmakers that anything less would be risky.
This is the same department whose former secretary, Jim Mattis, admitted to Congress that it’s been forced to spend taxpayer dollars on facilities that simply aren’t needed anymore. This is also the same department that has a $400,000 toilet problem aboard the U.S. Navy’s two newest aircraft carriers. The Pentagon spent more money in a single month in 2018 ($61 billion) than the Food and Drug Administration, Health Resources and Services Administration, Centers for Disease Control, and National Institutes of Health were legally entitled to spend in an entire year—a combined $59.2 billion.
Or consider another comparison: in fiscal year 2019, Congress appropriated $4.9 billion for the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund. That fund covers the costs of everything from ammunition and aircraft maintenance to personnel and salaries (the Afghan government is almost completely dependent on U.S. and foreign donor support). This $4.9 billion figure is more than three and a half times what Congress appropriated that year for combating opioids, which continue to ravage cities and small towns alike. Indeed, Washington devoted more taxpayer money to the Afghan Air Force in FY2019 ($1.728 billion) than to the research and prevention of emerging infectious diseases ($624 million).
Or consider this: the Centers for Disease Control received $834.86 million for public health preparedness and response—the very capabilities the United States is now so desperately in need of. Egypt, meanwhile, was the beneficiary of $1.4 billion in U.S. foreign assistance, more than 90 percent of which went to a military that has proven incapable of snuffing out a disorganized cluster of jihadists in the Sinai desert.
Critics will look at these numbers and blithely dismiss them as an apples and oranges comparison. This is exactly what Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, did on Twitter when former FBI special agent Ali Soufan noted the immense disparity between the financial resources dedicated to forever wars versus domestic needs.
But this itself is a too-clever-by-half argument. It ultimately defends a status quo whose dismal and depressing results we’re seeing in real time. Once this public health crisis is over, more Americans will feel the same way—if they didn’t already. If there is a silver lining to the coronavirus tragedy, it’s that the physical and psychological scars of the disease will compel Washington to look in the mirror and engage in some uncomfortable but absolutely necessary reflection about how the nation got so sidetracked. It would be a loss of epic proportions if we didn’t learn from this opportunity. Daniel R. DePetris is a columnist at the Washington Examiner and a contributor to the National Interest.


theamericanconservative--2020-04-03--Call Me a Skeptic: We May Never Go Home Again

Call Me a Skeptic : We May Never Go Home Again We are living through an inflection point in American history , one that may change who we are forever .
“ Depend upon it , sir , when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight , it concentrates his mind wonderfully , ” said Samuel Johnson .
And as it is with men , so it is with nations .
Monday , Dr. Deborah Birx , White House coronavirus response coordinator , projected some 100,000 to 200,000 U.S. deaths from the pandemic , “ if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreed with Dr. Anthony Fauci ’ s estimate that , if we do “ nothing , ” the American dead could reach 2.2 million .
That 2 million figure would be twice as many dead as have perished in all our wars from the American Revolution to the Civil War , World War I and II , and Korea and Vietnam .
This does indeed concentrate the mind wonderfully .
Now add to this slaughter of our countrymen a market plunge steeper than the 1929 Crash and a 1930s-style Depression .
Wall Street @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30 % of our GDP and unemployment reaching 35 % .
On March 3 , Super Tuesday , we were caught up in the 14 primary contests after Joe Biden ’ s stunning victory in South Carolina , which broke the momentum of Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ wins in Iowa , New Hampshire and Nevada .
What March 2020 produced and what it appears to portend is a sea change in U.S. history , an inflection point , an event after which things never return to what they were .
The coronavirus crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events that alter the character of the country and the course of the republic .
Consider what has happened in three weeks .
The Republican Party , the party of small government and balanced budgets , approved with but a single dissent a $ 2 trillion emergency bill .
There is talk now of a second $ 2 trillion bill , this one for infrastructure .
In a single month then , a Republican Senate and president grew the federal budget by 50 % and are looking to double that .
For years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s poaching of the powers of the other branches .
Now Democrats are demanding to know why Trump has not shut down the economy by presidential decree and not used his latent dictatorial powers to order U.S. companies to produce what the nation ’ s hospitals demand .
Democrats who long accused Trump of xenophobia and racism for seeking to close the borders to migrants entering the country illegally are now silent as Trump closes America to the world .
First Amendment free press champions are calling for Trump ’ s White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because the president is spouting propaganda and lies .
The problem : The people are watching and approving of what the media think the people ought not see .
If people in a crisis will jettison lifelong beliefs like this readily , how enduring will their professed belief in democracy itself prove ?
The president thinks this will be a V-shaped recession , that once the economy hits bottom and turns up , it will soar , as in 1946 when pent-up demand from World War II was unleashed and America began to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rapidly as it had weapons of war .
Perhaps .
But put me down as a skeptic .
You can ’ t go home again .
The shattering events of March , followed by what is coming in April and May , will have lasting impacts on the hearts and minds of this generation .
That once-insatiable appetite for Chinese-made goods at the mall—will it really return ?
Will Americans , after having “ socially distanced ” for months from family and friends , be reassured of their safety and pack into restaurants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roosevelt in Guam offloading scores of sailors infected with coronavirus , will Americans be up for a clash with a China that is even today asserting its claims to the South China Sea ?
Will Americans who survive this crisis care whether Iranian-backed Shiites dominate Iraq or Saudi-backed Sunni prevail in Yemen ?
If March shocked this nation as severely as 9/11 , what is coming may be even more sobering .
Are millions of unemployed workers without the cash to pay for or to find medicine and groceries likely to stay indoors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criminals being given early release from virus-infested jails and prisons without the means to provide for themselves and their families , how will they react to weeks of mandatory sheltering in place ?
Will MS-13 and its thousands of members , and its rival gangs that live off narcotics sales , comply ?
Americans have done well in staying home in March .
Will they do so through April , May and perhaps June ?
Or will the system gradually break down just as the second wave of the virus in the fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America , there is a tradition of self-sacrifice .
But there have also almost always been not a few whose mindset is that of the Fort Lauderdale spring-breakers .
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon ’ s White House Wars : The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever .

“Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully,” said Samuel Johnson.
And as it is with men, so it is with nations.
Monday, Dr. Deborah Birx, White House coronavirus response coordinator, projected some 100,000 to 200,000 U.S. deaths from the pandemic, “if we do things almost perfectly.” She agreed with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s estimate that, if we do “nothing,” the American dead could reach 2.2 million.
That 2 million figure would be twice as many dead as have perished in all our wars from the American Revolution to the Civil War, World War I and II, and Korea and Vietnam.
This does indeed concentrate the mind wonderfully.
Now add to this slaughter of our countrymen a market plunge steeper than the 1929 Crash and a 1930s-style Depression. Wall Street analysts are talking of a wipeout of 30% of our GDP and unemployment reaching 35%.
What a difference a month can make.
On March 3, Super Tuesday, we were caught up in the 14 primary contests after Joe Biden’s stunning victory in South Carolina, which broke the momentum of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ wins in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada.
What March 2020 produced and what it appears to portend is a sea change in U.S. history, an inflection point, an event after which things never return to what they were.
The coronavirus crisis seems to be one of those epochal events that alter the character of the country and the course of the republic.
Consider what has happened in three weeks.
The Republican Party, the party of small government and balanced budgets, approved with but a single dissent a $2 trillion emergency bill. There is talk now of a second $2 trillion bill, this one for infrastructure.
In a single month then, a Republican Senate and president grew the federal budget by 50% and are looking to double that.
For years, Democrats raised alarms about Trump’s poaching of the powers of the other branches. Now Democrats are demanding to know why Trump has not shut down the economy by presidential decree and not used his latent dictatorial powers to order U.S. companies to produce what the nation’s hospitals demand.
Democrats who long accused Trump of xenophobia and racism for seeking to close the borders to migrants entering the country illegally are now silent as Trump closes America to the world.
First Amendment free press champions are calling for Trump’s White House briefings not to be carried on TV because the president is spouting propaganda and lies. The problem: The people are watching and approving of what the media think the people ought not see.
If people in a crisis will jettison lifelong beliefs like this readily, how enduring will their professed belief in democracy itself prove?
The president thinks this will be a V-shaped recession, that once the economy hits bottom and turns up, it will soar, as in 1946 when pent-up demand from World War II was unleashed and America began to churn out cars and consumer good as rapidly as it had weapons of war.
Perhaps. But put me down as a skeptic. You can’t go home again. The shattering events of March, followed by what is coming in April and May, will have lasting impacts on the hearts and minds of this generation.
That once-insatiable appetite for Chinese-made goods at the mall—will it really return? Will Americans, after having “socially distanced” for months from family and friends, be reassured of their safety and pack into restaurants in July?
Observing the carrier Theodore Roosevelt in Guam offloading scores of sailors infected with coronavirus, will Americans be up for a clash with a China that is even today asserting its claims to the South China Sea?
Will Americans who survive this crisis care whether Iranian-backed Shiites dominate Iraq or Saudi-backed Sunnis prevail in Yemen?
If March shocked this nation as severely as 9/11, what is coming may be even more sobering.
Are millions of unemployed workers without the cash to pay for or to find medicine and groceries likely to stay indoors for weeks or months?
All those criminals being given early release from virus-infested jails and prisons without the means to provide for themselves and their families, how will they react to weeks of mandatory sheltering in place?
Will MS-13 and its thousands of members, and its rival gangs that live off narcotics sales, comply?
Americans have done well in staying home in March. Will they do so through April, May and perhaps June? Or will the system gradually break down just as the second wave of the virus in the fall appears?
In times of crisis in America, there is a tradition of self-sacrifice.
But there have also almost always been not a few whose mindset is that of the Fort Lauderdale spring-breakers.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.