Last week, Donald Trump challenged Joe Biden to a golf match, continuing a stand-out moment in a debate filled with stand-out moments in which the presumptive presidential candidates argued about which one of them could hit a golf ball the farthest and who had the lower handicap. On the surface, the discussion seemed childish and certainly not relevant for a presidential debate. Those two minutes, however, may reveal more about aspects of the character of these two men running for president than initially meets the eye. Golf is a simple game enjoyed by millions of people. The objective seems easy enough: Hit a small ball into a small hole hundreds of yards away in as few strokes as possible. Whoever does it in the least strokes, wins. A Test of Honesty However, as the late, great economist Armen Alchian asked in 1977, “Despite their intense interest in sports, no golf courses exist in the Socialist-Communist bloc. Why is golf solely in capitalist societies?”  He answered, “Because it is not merely a sport. It is an activity, a lifestyle, a behavior, a manifestation of the essential human spirit… [it requires] self-reliance, independence, responsibility, integrity and trust.” (READ MORE: The Ballot and the Bullet Against Trump) Golf requires these characteristics because of the ease with which one can cheat. Despite each hole being hundreds of yards in length, mere inches can make all the difference. A ball that takes an unlucky bounce can be caught behind a tree, forcing a player to take an extra stroke. Moving the ball to a more advantageous position can be done easily without detection. (It is rumored that Bill Clinton was famous on the course for his “foot wedge.”) Playing partners are also often reluctant to closely monitor one another. As P.G. Wodehouse said, “The man who can go into a patch of rough alone, with the knowledge that only God is watching him, and play his ball where it lies, is the man who will serve you faithfully and well.” This is one reason why golf is the preferred sport of business leaders. The objective of meeting on a golf course is not simply to play golf. It is because by playing golf, you learn about your playing partner’s character. Are they the sort of person who can be trusted? Are they as good as their word? Do they accurately report their scores? Or do they report a better score than they earned? Do they make excuses for poor scores? Or do they accept them unquestioningly? Do they lose their composure after a bad shot, or can they accept mistakes and move on? If someone lies about their performance in a game like golf, they are likely the sort of person who will lie about more serious matters. These are wonderful characteristics to know about potential business partners, or indeed anyone with whom you engage in any major economic transaction. What Golf Reveals About Presidential Hopefuls So when Joe Biden and Donald Trump argued about their respective golf games, the American people got a good look at the character of the two men. President Biden claimed to know he was a six (or was it eight?) handicap when he was vice president. To be fair, there is some evidence to back up his claim. In 2015, Golf Digest published an article claiming Biden had a 6.3 handicap. The same article, however, also quoted John Kasich (then governor of Ohio and Republican presidential hopeful) as saying, “Joe Biden told me that he was a good golfer, and I’ve played golf with Joe Biden…. I can tell you that’s not true, as well as all of the other things that he says.” (READ MORE: The Lies of the Biden Presidency Are a Problem) Likewise, Donald Trump knows whether the club championships that he’s won are legitimate or if he is engaging in mere puffery. In 2019, the Guardian published evidence that these club championships may have been less impressive than the public was led to believe. Golf is a wonderfully clear sport. As Armen Alchian writes, “A stroke was taken or it wasn’t; the ball is out of bounds or it isn’t; on the green or it isn’t; in the cup or it isn’t.”  The temptation to misreport one’s score is omnipresent. But to do so would fundamentally destroy the game and one’s reputation. As Golf Digest reports, “There is no worse designation for a golfer than a cheater.” Perhaps it is no coincidence that the same country that invented golf also produced the moral philosopher and economist, Adam Smith. Smith emphasized the critical role played by trust and integrity in every human relationship, especially in the workings of a market economy and a flourishing commercial society. Smith understood that a person is either trustworthy or they are not; either they have integrity or they do not. (READ MORE: Kamala Kamala Chameleon: Shameful Pretender) For an American president, these characteristics are of the highest importance. But on a more mundane level, market economies depend vitally on such norms. Without them, we are left with overmighty government trying, invariably ineffectually, to fill the gap. And that is not good for the economy or society’s well-being as a whole. David Hebert is a Senior Research Fellow with the American Institute for Economic Research. John Pinheiro is the Director of Research at the Acton Institute. The views expressed here are their own. The post Your Word, Your Golf Handicap, Our Economy appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Elbridge Colby served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development in the Trump administration and is credited with shifting U.S. defense strategy from its focus on the global War on Terror and “small wars” to great power competition, especially in Asia, as outlined in the January 2018 National Defense Strategy. Should Trump regain the White House, Colby will likely play a major role in shaping, if not leading, the country’s national security policy. A Thinly Stretched American Military Recently, writing in the Financial Times, Colby, in advance of the much-heralded 75th anniversary of NATO, poured cold water on the idea promoted by the Biden administration and other NATO leaders that Russia’s war in Ukraine is the greatest threat to global peace and stability and that the U.S. should continue to take primary responsibility for the defense of Europe, while simultaneously dealing with China’s challenge in the western Pacific. Colby calls this unrealistic, and recommends instead strategic prioritization by “focusing resources and willpower where America’s most important interests are endangered — Asia.” (READ MORE: NATO Reporters Want Biden Out) The United States, Colby writes, simply does not have a military large enough to fight two large wars in Europe and Asia. We are currently spread too thin, and if fighting broke out simultaneously with Russia and China our vulnerabilities would be exposed because there are “not enough resources to go around.” Part of being strategic is choosing which threat to prioritize and distributing resources accordingly. We haven’t done that. The so-called “pivot” to Asia under Obama was little more than rhetoric. Trump started to move in that direction in the second half of his presidency by deploying more resources to Asia, identifying China as the principal global threat, and pushing our NATO allies to pony up more for Europe’s defense. Russia was quiescent when Trump was president. Its aggression against Ukraine occurred in 2014 when Obama was president, and in 2022, when Biden was president. Our Interests in Asia Are Greater Than Those in Europe The Biden administration has no strategy. It is not prioritizing threats. It portrays Russia’s war against Ukraine as akin to Hitler’s attack on Czechoslovakia in the late 1930s. At his NATO press conference, the president reiterated that if Putin wins in Ukraine, Poland or some other NATO country will be next on his list, even though Russia has, at great cost, gained tenuous control of only about 18 percent of Ukraine’s territory. Colby does not recommend abandoning Europe, but he does write that our allies in Europe must “take primary responsibility for their own defence.” “European rearmament,” he states, “is the way” to defend Europe while shifting U.S. resources to Asia to deal with the greater threat. That has been Trump’s position all along. (READ MORE: Appeasement Didn’t Bear Good Fruit in the Middle East) NATO must be reformed, Colby says, with Europe taking the lead in providing the resources and manpower for its defense. The United States, Colby recommends, “must withhold forces from Europe that may be needed for Asia, even in the event of Russia attacking first … because if the US ties down or loses key forces for a defence of Taiwan in a less significant European fight, it is asking for China to attack.” Colby recognizes two uncomfortable but pertinent facts: Our resources are not unlimited and we have greater interests at stake in Asia than in Europe. The unipolar moment for the United States is over. This isn’t “weakness” or “appeasement” or “isolationism.” It is, instead, realism. It was Walter Lippmann who long ago defined an effective foreign policy as one that aligns commitments with resources. As Colby notes, “we are not in a world of perfect solutions. Those who pretend that we are may be the most dangerous of all. Better to face reality and implement strategies for it. That’s the only responsible course.” Just so. READ MORE: US Navy Works to Deter Full-Scale War The post Former Trump Defense Official Makes the Case for Prioritizing Asia Over Europe appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

JD Vance: A Bridge to America's Future

What We Must Learn From Trump Shooting

NBC Omits Biden Scolding Lester Holt as a Trump Enabler

Republicans Backing Away From Most Important Issue of Our Day

Republicans Have the Wind at Their Backs

A Ruling in Favor of DIY Distillers Affirms Limits on Congressional Power

God's Hand on Donald J. Trump

Democracy Thrives in Darkness