Dems’ phony Kamala ‘joy,’ why no Iran attack? and other commentary

Libertarians: The Democrats’ Fake Kamala “Joy”

Democrats have successfully persuaded Americans that “Americans are reacting with joy to the prospect of Kamala Harris becoming president.” Reason’s Matt Welch quips..

No doubt the convention delegates “felt a general sense of euphoria at no longer having to feign enthusiasm for an octogenarian who was declining both mentally and in the polls.”

But there were “grotesque hacks” like “one of the biggest public policy villains in modern American society, American Teachers President Randi Weingarten,” who was “perhaps the single biggest driver of families away from the ‘free’ education system” during the COVID-19 pandemic.

And “the everyday product of Democratic-led governance is real-world policy catastrophe in places like Chicago.”

“Democrats are trying to embrace Harris’ candidacy as a joyous emotion they didn’t even know they were experiencing. I don’t blame those who succumb to that emotion, but I won’t join them.”

Middle East Desk: Why no attack on Iran?

“It has been almost a month since Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in his guesthouse in Tehran.” As The Hill’s Dov Zakheim points out: — and “Tehran has yet to act.”

Why? Because the Biden administration has “committed to defending Israel from Iranian aggression, but has made it clear that it will not support Israeli offensive operations against Iran.”

However, there is currently a “nuclear missile submarine, the USS Georgia,” in the region, which is an “offensive weapon” and therefore not very useful against drones.

“It’s not at all clear that President Biden would actually order an attack on Iran,” but as a lame duck he would face “far fewer constraints.”

Thus, “that possibility is in itself an additional deterrent that the ayatollahs must take into account.”

Conservatives: Republicans, fight!

“If Republicans lose in November, that’s a given.” Thomas Sowell wrote in The Wall Street Journal:.

Biden’s policies have been “rejected by the public in poll after poll,” so “why is this election so close?”

“The media is on the side of the Democrats,” Fine said. “Colleges have become indoctrination centers that promote ideology favorable to Democratic policies.”

But the Republican Party faced a similar challenge “when Ronald Reagan won two consecutive presidential elections in a landslide victory.”

Reagan was successful because he spoke to voters “as if they were adults who understood the issues,” rather than “in political jargon and witty jokes.”

“Some Republicans today” understand that, but “they’re not going to run for president this year.”

White House Watch: Who runs the country?

“Biden has been missing since he was forced to hand over the Democratic nomination to Vice President Kamala Harris,” he said, adding, “This appears to be the game plan leading up to Inauguration Day.” Jordan Schachtel of The Dossier said:

“So who exactly is running the country?”

“Reportedly, real power lies with select members of the White House Domestic Policy Council and the National Security Council, along with prominent outside donors and organizers,” yet the media and the White House “refused to acknowledge the obvious reality that neither the president nor Kamala Harris make policy decisions on a day-to-day basis.”

“It would be great to know who or what organization is commanding our forces, but we just don’t have the answers.”

From the right: Harris’ hollow acceptance speech

On Thursday night, he noted, Kamala Harris “delivered a poised, confident, confident and competently crafted speech.” Jim Geraghty of National Review.

However, “words that never appeared in Harris’ acceptance speech include ‘inflation,’ ‘fentanyl,’ ‘domestic,’ ‘illegal,’ ‘immigration,’ ‘unemployment,’ and ‘poverty.'”

It was a “great speech for a challenger to President Biden’s failed record,” but “the gap between Harris’ rhetoric and policy is still a bit too large to bridge.”

“Even a mercurial candidate like Donald Trump can discern a reaction” to her promises to “create jobs, grow the economy, and lower the cost of everyday necessities.” Why has she “done none of that for the past four years” when she is “the current vice president?”

— Edited by The Post Editorial Board