This week on Newsmax TV, conservative commentator Michael Savage said something conservative cable news consumers may never have expected to hear: praise for President Joe Biden’s restraint with regard to dealing with Putin and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
On the Prime News show with Jen Pellegrino, Savage affirmed that in his opinion Biden’s restraint thus far is preventing what could easily become a wider conflict. Of specific issue on the topic were the MiG jets that Poland offered to Ukraine. While acknowledging the intent of the offer, Savage was dismissive of the ramifications, suggesting that the jets were antiquated old fighters that the Russians would likely shoot out of the sky and that the jets were moot because the Russians have already or will soon bomb Ukrainian airstrips into cratered and useless fields.
Further stated by Savage—to paraphrase—was that any no-fly zones enforced by U.S. or NATO aircraft could lead to a shoot-down that might precipitate a devastatingly larger war.
The segment stood out because any praise or even grudging respect for anything Biden and his administration have done since taking office has been for the most part utterly absent from conservative programming. So transgressive was the Savage opinion that co-host Mercedes Schlapp hastened to interject before going to commercial that, “Reagan and Trump were the presidents who controlled Putin.”
At Newsmax, a staunchly pro-Trump cable channel, any positive commentary about Biden must immediately be countered by its opposite, reminders about his abject failure.
And for good reason. Everything Joe Biden and his minions have touched have turned into the opposite of gold—as in “crap.” The economy, energy, crime, the border, Afghanistan, the full gamut of policymaking generally, have all been grievously mishandled since Biden’s ascension to the Oval Office and/or intentionally manufactured to produce anti-American results. For Trump supporters, who flocked to Newsmax in the wake of Fox News’ coverage of the election, any slight intimation that Biden has done a good job on anything is perceived as vomitous claptrap. The egregiousness of the Russian hoax and widespread suspicions about the integrity of the 2020 election created a mindset that electoral payback and zero credit are the order of the day for both the midterm and general cycles that loom.
In this commentary environment, there can only be condemnation for Biden, which he and his party so demonstratively deserve. That’s why Savage’s statement about the good job of restraint Biden is doing was jarring for Newsmax viewers to hear. It’s not like Savage hasn’t been jarring before. He’s been banned in Boston and virtually everywhere else, including the United Kingdom, for his oft-controversial commentary. But his statements and opinions usually paint a target squarely on the backs of the Democrats and the left.
The very thought that Biden’s course of action in Ukraine might be forestalling a wider—possibly nuclear—war, and thus potentially salvaging his nightmare of a presidency, is anathema to millions who rue the day he was “elected” to the highest office.
For the sake of discussion, take Savage’s opinion at face value. What if Biden went gung-ho and took aggressive steps that indeed could draw the United States and NATO into what could become a Europe-wide conflict? In the fog of war, you can’t necessarily have it both ways. Some commentators, while adamantly stating that they will never support boots on the ground, are nonetheless arguing for actions that might cause Putin to designate the U.S. as an enemy combatant on the world stage. Once that happens, any obscurity that might occur when the air-to-air missiles start flying could act as a trip-wire and draw America into a hot, not cold, war.
When the Pentagon announced that they wanted no part of the Polish MiG shipment, they sent a strong signal of the kind of foreign policy restraint that Mr. Savage is talking about. The effectiveness of those aircraft might have been negligible, and to make matters worse, had the jets been allowed to land at Ramstein, who knows how Putin’s generals would have responded to what in their minds may amount to direct U.S. military aid to Ukraine and an act of war?
It is extremely complicated. In the wake of Savage’s comments comes a report that the Pentagon is looking to revive a Trump-implemented team to fast-track weapons to European nations concerned about Russian aggression. Complicating things further: the issue of Biden corruption in dealings with both Ukraine and Russia form a troubling backdrop against military and foreign policy decision-making at the White House.
In the final analysis, the key questions before world leaders involved in handling the crisis of the Ukraine invasion are: what is prudent in support of Ukrainian military resistance to the invasion, and what might prove disastrous? What actions would represent in Putin’s mind a bridge too far? And finally, just how worthy, in terms of potential blood and treasure, is the goal of keeping Ukraine from the firmament of the Russian bear.
Because despite the heroic efforts of Ukrainian men and women and President Zelenskyy, which are rightfully acknowledged and lauded, the prospect of the wrong moves placing a world war on the table is real.
Has Michael Savage identified the first and only thing that Biden has not made an utter catastrophe of?
Discuss.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member