π΄ Website π https://u-s-news.com/
Telegram π https://t.me/usnewscom_channel
Mail call: Time To Privatize the USPS
The United States Postal Service βlost $9.5 billion shuffling paper around the country in fiscal year 2024β and is projecting another β$6.9 billion loss in fiscal year 2025,βΒ so The Free Pressβ Charles Lane wonders,Β βwould privatization be so terrible?β Our βpeer nations, including Germany, Japan, Britain, Portugal and the Netherlands, have adopted postal privatization.β Todayβs system just doesnβt work: Americans send βone another six billion text messages daily. Half the people surveyed in 2021 hadnβt received a personal letter in five years; 14 percent had never received one.β βThis is the age of drones, driverless vehicles, and artificial intelligence. If thereβs any part of the federal apparatus that could use a dose of radical disruption, itβs the postal service.β
From the right: The Leak Double Standard
βBy all means, letβs talk about βleaksβ in the wake of [last] weekβs Signal fiasco,β quips The Wall Street Journalβs Kimberley A. Strassel. Yes, βWashington should be concerned that Trump officials blunderingly added a journalist to a Yemen war-planning chat.β But βCompare that with the torrent of leaks that began in the runup to Mr. Trumpβs first election.β They ranged from a βscandalous, fact-free βdossierβ on fake Trump-Russia collusionβ to Jared Kushnerβs security clearance. The Senate found β125 news articles containing leaked government information potentially damaging to national security in the first four months of Mr. Trumpβs term.βΒ βHallelujahβ that the left and the media βthink leaks are a problem,β but until they join with GOP electeds fighting against leaks itβs just one more double standard.Β
Mideast desk: Why Trump Canβt Beat Houthis
βAttacking the Houthis, who have always given Tehran a big strategic bang for their buck, isnβt likely to cause significant long-term damage,β arguesΒ Reuel Marc Gerecht at UnHerd. Indeed, our sparse attacks βare likely refortifying an old Iranian doctrine: that the Islamic Republicβs enemies are willing to attack the clerical regimeβs proxies, but not Iran directly.β βUntil Iranian supplies are cut off directly, check-mating the Houthis is impossible. βThe US and allied naviesβ are βunlikely to do better until the United States is willing to attack Iranian ports β the primary entrepΓ΄ts for the Houthis.β Yet βTrump still believes that a nuclear deal with Khamenei is possible. And until he abandons this idea, heβll likely have no more success against the Houthis than his predecessor.β
Libertarian: Signalβs SurpriseΒ Endorsement
βSomething of valueβ we learned from journo Jeffrey Goldberg being included on a Team Trump group chat was that βgovernment officials use the popular encrypted messaging appβ Signal βbecause the intelligence community considers it secure,βΒ observes Reasonβs J.D. Tuccille.Β We βshould consider that an endorsement of this technology.β The fact that βadministration officials including several from the intelligence community are willing to hold a conversation on the appβ is βtestimony to the security of the software,β as was CIA Director John Ratcliffe saying that using Signal is standard at the CIA at a March Senate hearing. Still, Tuccille warns, βNothing is completely safe, of course. People developing security are in a constant race with those trying to compromise it.β
Liberal: Democratsβ Abundance Aversion
βWithout an abundance agenda this country is more likely to limp along than to soar,βΒ laments the Liberal Patriotβs Ruy Teixeira. The countryβs βshockingly expensive and slow infrastructure projectsβ hinder βdelivering what its people need.β One reason βis an overly burdensome environmental review process.β For Democrats, βcheap, reliable, plentiful energyβ must βunderpin any abundance agendaβ but the party βremains committed to rapid decarbonization.β Dems βseem to forget that working-class voters have little interest in an energy transition.β An uncomfortable truth: The abundance agenda βis incompatible with the modern Democratic Party.β The party puts βideology and special interests ahead of good governanceβ β and βworking-class votersβ β which explains why βDemocrats will not necessarily be the natural party of abundance that voters actually want.β
β Compiled by The Post Editorial Board