Quote of the Day

I would much prefer to bring them down as soon as possible. I think they’ve made the biggest financial mess that any government’s ever made in this country for a very long time, and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people’s money. It’s quite a characteristic of them. They then start to nationalise everything, and people just do not like more and more nationalisation, and they’re now trying to control everything by other means. They’re progressively reducing the choice available to ordinary people.

Margret Thatcher
February 5, 1976

Bringing them down is easier said than done. The world has been struggling with them for over 125 years now. Even though socialists, and their ideological kin the communists, have murdered over 200,000,000 of their own citizens there are still 100s of millions of people clamoring for more. Then there is the tremendous economic and ecological damage these political systems add to the rivers of blood they create. No right-thinking person can defend this history. Yet this cancer is still gnawing away. It seems to never give up.

Prepare appropriately.

Quote of the Day

U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels. 

The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.” The key phrase, buttressed by the documents, is “led to believe.”

National Security Archive
December 12, 2017
NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard | National Security Archive

If you have been following the comments here you will already know the context for this, but I include some snippets for those not reading the comments:

Words were given and hands shaken that NATO would not move one inch east if the soviets collapsed.

…

all that in exchange for NATO not moving one inch east.

You could find many other such claims on the Internet that the U.S. and/or NATO agreed to no expansion of NATO toward Russia. The problem is, if you read the available documents (I have now spent several hours trying to figure out what happened) I cannot find anything than refutes the summations given by Copilot and Grok:

Copilot:

There was no formal, written treaty or agreement committing NATO to halt expansion eastward. The phrase “not one inch eastward” comes from verbal assurances given by U.S. Secretary of State James Baker to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 during talks on German reunification. These were informal diplomatic assurances, not binding agreements.

🧾 What actually happened

• James Baker’s assurance (Feb 9, 1990): In a meeting with Gorbachev, Baker said NATO would move “not one inch eastward” if Germany remained in NATO. This was part of broader discussions about Soviet security concerns during German reunification.
• Other Western leaders: German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, British Prime Minister John Major, and others also gave similar verbal assurances about NATO’s jurisdiction not expanding eastward.
• No treaty signed: Despite these assurances, no written agreement or binding treaty was ever concluded. NATO’s official position is that enlargement decisions are made collectively and were never legally restricted.
• Russian perspective: Russian officials have long argued that these verbal promises were broken when NATO later admitted Eastern European countries. Gorbachev himself gave conflicting accounts—sometimes confirming he received assurances, other times saying no formal promise was made.

Grok:

No, there was no legally binding commitment – neither written nor oral – by the United States, NATO, or any Western leader that NATO would never expand eastward beyond Germany in exchange for Russia’s consent to German reunification or anything else.

What actually happened in 1990 (the relevant negotiations)

During the “Two-Plus-Four” talks (1990) on German reunification, several Western leaders (especially U.S. Secretary of State James Baker, German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, and others) used informal, oral phrasing with Mikhail Gorbachev such as:

• “NATO’s jurisdiction would not shift one inch eastward from its present position” (Baker to Gorbachev, 9 February 1990).
• Similar wording from Kohl, Manfred Wörner (NATO Secretary General), and others.

These statements were explicitly about the territory of East Germany – i.e., NATO military structures (troops, bases, nuclear weapons) would not be extended into the former GDR after reunification. Gorbachev himself later confirmed in interviews (e.g., 2014) that the discussions were only about East Germany, not Poland, Hungary, or any other country.

No treaty, protocol, or written document from 1990 contains any promise about NATO’s future enlargement beyond Germany.

Aside, from the lack of a written agreement, it seems to me that a few representatives of NATO would not be in a position bind all of NATO, even temporarily, to not expand the organization. Baker could not bind the U.S. to such an agreement without the backing of at least an executive order, and, more likely, ratification by the Senate. And a similar thing would apply to all the other politicians from other countries.

I do not dispute that no expansion of NATO is in the interests of Russia. That they failed to get these assurances into a written agreement is on them. Not the U.S. of today or all of NATO. It is as if you were given assurances by a used car salesman of a never-ending warranty, paid for the car without getting it in writing, and then two years later complained when you find out you don’t have an infinite warranty on the car. If you were to take your compliant to a judge you would be laughed out of the court.

And I think laughter directed at Russia for claiming they had an agreement would be appropriate. They know better. They are just using that as propaganda to justify the violation of their written agreements.

Quote of the Day

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted in favor of a resolution condemning socialism Friday morning, with several Democrats crossing the aisle to rebuke “socialist policies” in the U.S. following Zohran Mamdani’s recent election as the mayor-elect of New York City.

Eighty-six Democrats joined Republicans in supporting the measure in a 285-98 vote. Two members, Rep. Deborah Ross, D-Pa., and Rep. Janelle Bynum, D-Ore., voted present. 

Notably, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. — who endorsed Mamdani just days before the mayoral election — also voted in favor of the measure. 

The resolution, introduced by Rep. Maria Salazar, R-Fla., highlights a list of the economic system’s failures and serves as a rebuke of political forces inching toward more socialist platforms. Among other items, it asserts that socialism has led to famine and mass murder under the Cuban Castro regime, the Chinese rule of Mao Zedong, the ongoing Venezuelan regime of Nicolás Maduro and others.  

“Resolved by the House of Representatives that Congress denounces socialism in all its forms and opposes the implementation of socialist policies in the United States,” the text reads.

Leo Briceno
November 21, 2025
86 Dems vote with Republicans to condemn socialism in wake of Mamdani’s mayoral victory

Give me a break. Don’t urinate on head and tell me it is raining. Probably 90% or more of those congressmen are eager to continue existing, and create new, socialist policies.

Ask them about “Social Security”, Medicare, Medicaid, “Food Stamps”, Public Education, Unemployment Insurance, Farm Bill Subsidies, FEMA, WIC, Progressive Federal Income Tax, Public Housing Assistance, and Federal Student Aid. This vote was about weathervanes aligning with the wind. It had nothing to do with political philosophy and/or principles (other than getting reelected).

This reinforces my assertion that all politicians should be regarded as criminal suspects, continually investigated, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. It should be a fourth branch of government, given generous funding, and constitutionally require congressional hearings if the guillotine in the plaza hasn’t been used in the previous five years.