The Obama administration has made appeasement the core of their foreign policy. They have given in to unpopular and unrealistic demands from China, Russia, Palestine and, of course, Iran. The Obama administration has turned a blind eye to illegal military aggression committed by Russia, Syria, North Korea and, of course, Iran. The President and his State department have openly declared they will sacrifice American interests to hostile governments if necessary to attain peace. This includes, of course, Iran.


Is President Obama’s 2015 nuclear treaty with Iran as bad as the Munich Agreement of 1938? We can’t know for sure the future consequences of the new agreement. But we can compare the current militant theocratic government of Iran with the militant fascist government of Germany of the 1930s. Dennis Prager offers a short but concise comparison in The Iran Deal Appeases the Greatest Evil of Our Time. You can decide for yourself if Prager is guilty of hyperbole or accurately describing a dangerous response to a threat to world peace … again.


I disagree with Paul Krugman on just about everything.  But his recent piece in the NY Times has some significant insights.

Put it this way: If unemployment rises from 6 to 7 percent during an election year, the incumbent will probably lose. But if it stays flat at 8 percent through the incumbent’s whole term, he or she will probably be returned to power. And this means that there’s remarkably little political pressure to end our continuing, if low-grade, depression.

Krugman’s hindsight is spot on regarding Obama’s re-election and our ongoing economic ennui. His closing correlation between what’s happening now and what happened in the 30’s is scary.  Now, as then, Americans seem to be settling for mediocre solutions from mediocre leaders.  We are willing to accept a lower standard of living and reductions in our personal liberties just to “get along.”    Of course, Krugman’s solution is bigger government run by those same leaders.  I think that would just lead to even  more bureaucracy and even more mediocrity.  And, as Krugman points out, the 30’s depression really only ended with WWII.  Not a solution that any of us wants.

In the 1934 book, “The Logic of Scientific Discovery,” Karl Popper wrote:

“Long-term prophecies can be derived from scientific conditional predictions only if they apply to systems which can be described as well-isolated, stationary, and recurrent. These systems are very rare in nature; and modern society is not one of them.”

Is political science a “real” science?  Here is an argument for and here is an argument against.  What do you think?