The UAE, as you read here, spends more to influence American foreign policy than any other country on earth. Do Americans benefit from having such a pot stirred? It is time America disengaged from the Middle East and the Muslim world in general. Let these countries fight their own ancient battles. Our national security is not at stake. Continued involvement in the Muslim world only makes America less safe. A policy of non- intervention is the policy that will best keep America safe.

In other words, a senior Treasury official responsible for U.S. policy toward the Emirates leaves the U.S. government and forms a new lobbying company, which is then instantly paid millions of dollars by the very same country for which he was responsible, all to use his influence, access and contacts for its advantage. The UAE spends more than any other country in the world to influence U.S. policy and shape domestic debate, and it pays former high-level government officials who worked with it – such as Epstein and his company – to carry out its agenda within the U.S.

What did Camstoll do for these millions of dollars? They spent enormous of amounts of time cajoling friendly reporters to plant anti-Qatar stories, and they largely succeeded. Their strategy was clear: target neocon/pro-Israel writers such as the Daily Beast‘s Eli Lake, Free Beacon‘s Alana Goodman, Iran-contra convict Elliott Abrams, The Washington Post‘s Jennifer Rubin, and American Enterprise Institute’s Michael Rubin – all eager to promote the Qatar-funds-terrorists line being pushed by Israel. They also targeted establishment media figures such as CNN’s Erin Burnett, Reuters’ Mark Hosenball, and The Washington Post‘s Joby Warrick.

In the latter half of 2013, Camstoll reported 15 separate contacts with Lake, all on behalf of UAE’s agenda; in the month of December alone, there were 10 separate contacts with Goodman. They also spoke multiple times with Warrick. At the same time, they were speaking on behalf of their Emirates client with their former colleagues who were still working as high-level Treasury officials, including Kate Bauer, the Treasury Department’s Emirates-based Financial Attaché, and Deputy Assistant Secretary Danny McGlynn.

As I write this, Dick and I are in Gevrey-Chambertin in the heart of Burgundy, staying at Les Deux Chevres—a 15^th C-16^th C. compound owned and restored by an English gentleman and his artistic wife. Les Deux Chevres abuts Domaine Armand Rousseau, perhaps the most respected wine producer in Gevrey-Chambertin.

The venerable village of Gevrey is surrounded by hectare after hectare of grape vines that don’t look like much, but are the stuff legends are made from. We covered much of the same territory on a bike tour through the Cote d’Or with Butterfield & Robinson four or five years ago when we were just beginning to learn about the history and importance of terroir.

Home to nine Grand Cru vineyards, Gevrey-Chambertin produces some of the world’s most prestigious wines. The Grand Cru wines, of course, attract the most attention, but the village’s standard appellation wines are also highly regarded. These full-bodied wines have a specific intensity, color and flavor, along with an impressive longevity. Well-made examples can develop in the bottle for decades.

Grazing on the hillsides throughout Burgundy are the renowned white Charolais cattle. Charolais, one of the oldest beef cattle breeds in the world, originated in the Charolles and Nieve sections of France. Registration books go back to the 1500s, although their origins as draught animals are thought to go back to the 9^th C.

Charolais excel in converting grass into lean beef, which is perfectly marbled and meltingly tender. As someone explained to us, its exceptional flavor is juicy and buttery without being fatty. Charolais beef was among the first French foods to earn the coveted French Label Rouge—a certification for top-quality meat and poultry. Taste must stand out; but as important, method of production must be strictly followed. Charolais must be range-raised for up to 10 months and free of growth hormones and anabolic steroids.

The real treat is that Charolais beef makes utterly delicious hamburgers. While staying in Gevrey-Chambertin, we drove to Fixin for lunch at Au Clos Napoleon. There we had hand-chopped Charolais beef burgers on what was more like a pate a choux than a bun—eggy and ethereal. Frites? Mais oui, along with a delicious smear of “catsup” cassis across our plates.

Bon appetite,

Debbie

Click to view:

As you can see money isn’t the issue at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), as Democrats will have you believe. Big government is the killer as Cato’s Chris Edwards illustrates here:

In an editorial today, the Wall Street Journal discusses Democratic complaints linking Ebola with supposedly falling spending on the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Let’s take a look at the data with the Downsizing Government chart tool. Click open Health and Human Services, then click on CDC. Hold your mouse over the line to see the data.

Between 2000 and 2014, CDC outlays almost doubled in 2014 constant dollars, from $3.5 billion to $6.8 billion. Outlays have dipped the last few years, but that’s after a Bush-Obama spending boom. CDC outlays have quadrupled in constant dollars since the late 1980s.

The chart below shows CDC spending since 1970 in constant, or inflation-adjusted, dollars. The data is sourced from the Office of Management and Budget public database, available here.

You will not believe what you are about to read on how countries around the world think about free markets. Really quite astounding! Read Cato Institute Senior Fellow Dan Mitchell’s full review here:

Every so often, I share polling data from other nations that is either encouraging or puzzling. Looking through the archives, here are some memorable examples.

*Americans are more libertarian than Europeans.

*On the other hand, the French support spending cuts by a 4-1 margin.

*More than 90 percent of Greeks and Italians see government as an obstacle to business.

*Nearly 70 percent of Labor voters in the United Kingdom would favor class-warfare tax policy even if tax revenues didn’t increase.

*People in 20 out of 21 nations preferred Obama over Romney.

*Italians supposedly are more fiscally conservative than Americans. As are Germans.

*But Americans are more likely than anybody else to think there is too much red tape.

Some of those results make sense, while others were a big surprise.

But nothing was as surprising as the results we’re looking at today.

First, some background. According to Wikipedia, Vietnam “is one of the world’s four remaining single-party socialist states officially espousing communism.”

Yet according to a global public opinion survey from Pew Research, citizens of that communist nation are the world’s most pro-capitalist people. Asked to agree or disagree with the statement that people are better off in a free market economy, 95 percent of them chose capitalism.

This fall Americans have a chance to throw out the big government interventionists. Thanks to the Cato Institute’s Dan Mitchell for producing a small government template for all America-first candidates. Here Dan explains the worldwide model that Hong Kong has become with it’s 15% flat tax. It is time the Washington elite began to do what is best for America. The voters have a chance to follow the lead of Hong Kong this fall. Small government candidates abound.

I’ve had ample reason to praise Hong Kong’s economic policy.

Most recently, it was ranked (once again) as the world’s freest economy.

And I’ve shown that this makes a difference by comparing Hong Kong’s economic performance to the comparatively lackluster (or weak) performance of economies in the United States, Argentina, and France.

But perhaps the most encouraging thing about Hong Kong is that the nation’s top officials genuinely seem to understand the importance of small government.

Here are some excerpts from a recent speech delivered by Hong Kong’s Financial Secretary. He brags about small government and low tax rates!

Hong Kong has a simple tax system built on low tax rates. Our maximum salaries tax rate is 15 per cent and the profits tax rate a flat 16.5 per cent. Few companies and individuals would find it worth the risk to evade taxes at this low level. And that helps keep our compliance and enforcement costs low. Keeping our government small is at the heart of our fiscal principles. Leaving most of the community’s income and wealth in the hands of individuals and businesses gives the private sector greater flexibility and efficiency in making investment decisions and optimises the returns for the community. This helps to foster a business environment conducive to growth and competitiveness. It also encourages productivity and labour participation. Our annual recurrent government expenditure has remained steady over the past five years, at 13 per cent of GDP. …we have not responded irresponsibly to…populist calls by introducing social policies that increase government spending disproportionally. …The fact that our total government expenditure on social welfare has remained at less than 3 per cent of our GDP over the past five years speaks volumes about the precision, as well as the effectiveness, of these measures.

Even now, after so many words have been written about the Affordable Care Act, it is distressing to realize that had just one Senate Democrat opposed Obamacare, the law would not have passed the Senate as it did. Just one nay would have forced improvements in the law, making Obamacare far less destructive than it is today.

Many Democratic Senate candidates are now running on Obama denial. But not one Democratic incumbent voted against President Obama’s stimulus. Not one voted against Dodd-Frank’s too-big-to-fail for large banks. Not one Democratic senator voted against Majority Leader Harry Reid’s gutting of the 60-vote rule for presidential nominations. The consequences? Mr. Obama was able to pack the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals with three liberal judges, which will make challenging his rule-by-regulation on oil and gas that much harder.

Read here from the WSJ how Democratic incumbents—from Mary Landrieu to Mark Udall to Mark Begich—are jumping through hoops in almost comic denial of their lock-step support of President Obama over the last six years.