In the Washington Post, William Wan, Tanya Sichynsky and Sandhya Somashekhar say that “There are Two Americas”—an assertion made famous by the infamous 2004 Democrat vice-presidential candidate Senator John Edwards. All are were correct and the Washington Post writers outline the many ways in which the partitioning has been made flesh.
To Kelcey Caulder, 22, the division is painfully real. The college student from Athens, Ga., feels its looming presence every time she thinks about her grandma, a Trump supporter and ardent opponent of abortion rights.
They haven’t talked much since Caulder’s grandma found out that Caulder was voting for Democrat Hillary Clinton and told her granddaughter bluntly, “You’re going to hell.”
Caulder tried to be understanding.
“I think, in her way, she was trying to be protective of me,” Caulder said. “She wasn’t saying ‘Kelcey, go to hell.’ It was more like she was saying, ‘Kelcey, don’t you know this could send you to hell?’ ”
But when her grandma unfriended her on Facebook, Caulder said, it was hard not to take it personally. Now, she is nervous about Thanksgiving, although she hopes the family dinner could be a chance to reconcile.
Korey, a student at the Georgetown University Law Center, said he is skipping Thanksgiving altogether because of lingering resentments in his family over the election. After he posted an anti-Trump message on Facebook, his father stopped talking to him, and his mother’s ex-husband threatened to write him out of his will.
Korey, who asked to be identified by only his first name to avoid further angering his relatives, said he’s not ready to reconcile. In fact, he said, he plans to confront his father over his willingness to overlook offensive statements by Trump about immigrants, minorities, disabled people and women just to beat the Democrats.
Edward and the authors of the WaPo piece point to several dividing lines, but I’d like to draw attention to another—one to which they seem oblivious.
There are two types of Americans: people who look to flawed human beings to be their Savior and people who do not. Very many Trump supporters and Clinton supporters fall on the same side of that particular delineation.
[W]e are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.
Make America great again!
The implication is that both men will do these things and their followers will be fundamentally transformed and great if we choose them to be our leader. It’s not an accident that mockers have referred to the two as Chocolate Jesus and Orange Jesus, respectively. And it also explains the animosities, even among kin.
By the way, I don’t remember any great overarching slogan from Hillary Clinton. That may be emblematic of her presidential defeats against both men. However, many of her supporters even imbued Messianism into her persona.
This proves that when God is absent, people will create their own gods. Don’t do that.
There are thousands–maybe hundreds of thousands–of explanations about why Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton last week that you can find online and in print, as well as why the Republicans maintained control of Congress and gained governorships.
Here’s another one, although this discussion confronts one angle, what I call “inevitable leftism.” Barack Obama was the “Hope and Change” candidate for president in 2008; four years later, “Forward” was his rallying cry. Some conservative pundits noticed that “Forward” has a long history as a communist and socialist slogan.
Leftists, Obama is one, firmly believe that their cause is one of inevitable success, that humanity is headed towards–choose your term–a collectivist, socialist, or communist utopia. They view popular leaders such as Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan, as atavistic aberrations, mere potholes that can be paved over when the time is right, sooner, as opposed to later.
Except when they are wrong.
The French Revolution, still idealized by the Left, deposed a king and disestablished the Roman Catholic church, and replaced the Ancien Régime with an atheist republic that executed thousands, which was quickly transformed into a dictatorship led by an Italian. Along the way the days and months were renamed in a new decimal calendar–hours and minutes were divided by ten too, as were weights and measures. A couple of decades later there was a king again in France, the Catholic church was the state religion–but the metric system survived, yet strangely enough, it still hasn’t completely caught on in the United States.
Maximilien Robespierre, the guiding force of the French Revolution, and his inner circle were certain they were guiding the world on the right path. He may have even held on to that belief as he walked up to the guillotine, two years after Louis XVI after made the same, final stroll.
The Russian Revolution’s state, the Soviet Union, was similarly hailed by the Left as a societal inevitably, it also led to regicide, and tens of millions were killed. Because the USSR survived much longer than the French Republic, it succeeded in shattering Russian culture. But the surviving Russian nation is a South American-style sham democracy run by a thug, not a nation consisting of a populace that lives “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Barack Obama is not a psychopath or a murderer. But he’s a leftist, albeit one along the lines of French President François Hollande. Obama decided that America needs government-run health care in 2009 but he knew that what the Democrats euphemistically call single-payer would be unpopular, so a hybrid program, quickly dubbed ObamaCare, was developed as a bridge to that health care utopia. ObamaCare is deeply unpopular, and it was one reason for Trump’s win. The president-elect says he will repeal most of ObamaCare. The Democrats’ push for gay marriage is another page from the book of Dem inevitability, but only 21 nations allow same-sex marriages, none of them are in Asia, and South Africa is the only country in Africa that allows it.
It was the Democrats who, through their many friends in the judiciary, that created the so-called crisis surrounding the minuscule segment of the population who feel compelled to use the washrooms and the locker rooms–even in high school–of the opposite gender. They view choose-your-own-bathroom as their next social inevitability. The Democrats are the party of the confused horny teenage boy who wants to shower with girls.
Next year France will hold a presidential election. Marine Le Pen, a far-right politician with a fierce anti-immigrant stance, whose election as president last year ago seemed as likely as Trump moving in to the White House was, is confident of her chances. Hollande hasn’t declared himself as a candidate. Is Le Pen, another atavistic aberration, the inevitability of France?
France is ten percent Muslim. With the higher birth rates of its Muslim citizens a majority Muslim France could be possible by the end of the century. Gay marriage has been legal in France since 2013. Will it be in 2113?
The policy of open borders is also viewed as the next level of human achievement by the Left. It has worked well for the European Union, but there’s a big difference between thousands Germans buying homes in Italy and thousands of Middle Eastern migrants arriving in ramshackle boats there. Democrats, and even some Republicans, have been ignoring calls from ordinary citizens, now dubbed “the Forgotten Man,” to secure the southern border for decades. Opposition to open borders was the main reason why British voters voted to leave the EU.
Of course no one can predict the future. Not even leftists, even though they never tire in telling you how smart they are.
In the United States the hubris of inevitability led to the defeat of the Left last week.
I was at Lucianne.com looking for ideas for a post when I noticed these two pieces within five posts of each other that were interesting. One pushing a Reuters story from the 19th:
The other posting a mediate story saying the exact opposite:
I thought they would make an interesting contrast so I tried to pull up both stories, the Mediaite story dated today came up easy.
However when I tried to click on the Reuters link I kept getting “page not found”.
I tried a search for the title and found multiple results such as this one at Forbes:
Trump Visits Baton Rouge, Despite Governor’s Request Not To
‘We welcome him to Louisiana…but not for a photo-op,’ the Democratic governor said.
U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and his running mate toured the flood-damaged city of Baton Rouge on Friday, despite the Democratic Louisiana governor’s urging not to make political stops in areas affected by recent deadly rains.
Trump’s motorcade drove past piles of possessions and building materials that had been ripped out of flooded homes en route to Greenwell Springs Baptist Church in a flood-ravaged portion of East Baton Rouge Parish.
“You’re all going to be fine, you’re going to be fine,” Trump told several dozen supporters gathered outside, many asking for autographs and selfies.
But for the life of me I couldn’t find the story at Reuters. So I went to the Reuters site and looked for the story. There was no sign of it, but I DID find this story, with a time stamp a few hours later with this title:
Trump tours flooded Louisiana, Obama to visit next week
And when I looked at the body of the story it seemed awfully…familiar (emphasis mine)
U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump toured flood-battered Louisiana on Friday, shrugging off the Democratic state governor’s plea for politicians not to stop in areas affected by deadly rains.
President Barack Obama said he was also eager for a firsthand look at the damage done by floods that damaged more than 40,000 homes and killed at least 13 people, announcing plans to visit Baton Rouge on Tuesday.
Obama’s travel requires a massive retinue of Secret Service agents and assistance from local and state law enforcement officials, so the White House usually waits to visit disaster zones to avoid tying up police and emergency resources needed elsewhere.
On Friday, Trump’s motorcade drove past piles of possessions and building materials that had been ripped out of flooded homes en route to Greenwell Springs Baptist Church in a hard-hit portion of East Baton Rouge Parish.
“You’re going to be fine,” Trump told several dozen supporters gathered outside, many asking for autographs and selfies.
LA governor John Bel Edwards found his original statement had not gone over well and decided to revise it, apparently Reuters found that their old story noting the president would not be visiting for a while wasn’t playing well either so they decided to :
Delete the original story
Rewrite the headline to emphasize that president Obama was visiting Louisiana
Insert new copy into the old story suggesting president was ALWAYS going to visit while making an excuse for his failure to do so before the Trump visit.
Or put simply, the attempt to advance the narrative of Trump as an opportunist for visiting Louisiana and Obama as responsible by not visiting had not only failed but proved inconvenient. So Reuters decided, rather than write a new story to show the president’s change of heart and showing him forced to visit in reaction to Donald Trump’s move, decided to rewrite history to push the narrative of the president planning to visit this week all along.
There are many words to describe this, I choose “dishonest” and “dishonorable”.
Personally I disagree, I suspect American journalism was always like this, it’s just that thanks to the net it’s not possible to hide these trick anymore.
Today starts the last two weeks of our 6 week tryouts for Da Magnificent Prospects You can check out their work Monday evening, Tuesday at Noon, All Day Thursday and Saturday at noon. If you like what you see from them consider hitting DaTipjar in support of them (and please mention their name when you do) as both internet hits and tipjar hits will be part of scoring who stays & who goes.
(If you can’t see DaTipJar button below on their posts use the one on the 2nd column on the right)
Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.
Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.
No one will do anything at all about the fact that the President of the United States took $400 million in cash, put it on a plane, sent it to Iran as ransom for American hostages, and did so without congressional approval, which is how all US Treasury transactions are supposed to be handled, according to the U.S. Constitution.
It is far from the first time that President Barack Obama violated or ignored the Separation of Powers outlined in the Constitution, and, of course, that’s the point. This president figured out a long time ago that he could get away with pretty much anything, and not have to suffer impeachment, censure, or even too much harsh language from the other two governmental branches or the long ago-hijacked Big Media.
Why not? Because, as we all know, it is no longer about what the purpose of the executive branch is, nor what its constraints are, but about who is doing the executing and the color of the skin of the executor.
Ours had become a nation of men rather than one of laws. Of course that was the intent all along of the Fundamental Transformation, was it not?
So now, the Executor can lift money from the Treasury, out in the open, arrange for money to be paid to an avowed enemy–ostensibly bowing to the terms of a set of kidnappers. All the other times it was people-for-people, this time it’s money-for-people
So now, those of us who have been watching this happen—watching the build-up of the mountain of lawlessness by this Administration are asking ourselves and each other the musical question: what’s next?
Because there are much worse things that this Administration can do. As a matter of fact, I’d wager that, by the time we get an answer to the question “what’s next,” the next Big Crime will already be done.
SHREVEPORT – On July 8, 2016, Baton Rouge police officer Montrell Williams posted this to his Facebook account:
Today he is dead.
Yesterday, three Baton Rouge police officers were killed and three others injured – one is critical and on life support. The officers were ambushed while responding to a call of a man with a rifle at a convenience store near police headquarters. The shooter, Gavin Eugene Long of Kansas City, MO, is dead and it appears he was acting alone. As is always the case, early reports are sketchy and there is a lot still to be learned here, but please don’t let me hear anyone say, “What were his motives?” I think his motives were clear.
There may or may not be a connection, but less than 24 hours before the shooting on Sunday, the Black Panthers had a meeting in Baton Rouge for the purpose of forming a new chapter there. The chapter was formedand names gathered for potential members.
Cleveland police officer and Police Patrolmen’s Association President Steve Loomis said it best:
“The president of the United States validated a false narrative and the nonsense that Black Lives Matter and the media are pressing out there to the public — validated with his very divisive statements. And now we see an escalation. This has got to end. We need some leadership in this country to come forward and put an end to this. I don’t care if it’s clergy, I don’t care who it is, but somebody has got to step up and put an end to this because it’s the false narrative and very influential people that are politicizing the false narrative. Absolutely insane that we have a president of the United States and a governor of Minnesota making the statements that they made less than one day after those police involved shootings. And those police involved shootings, make no mistake, are what absolutely has triggered this rash of senseless murders of law enforcement officers across this country. It is reprehensible. And the President of the United States has blood on his hands and it will not be able to come washed off.”
I agree with him.
However, none of that brings back the officers in Dallas or in Baton Rouge who have been killed this month.
The ripple effect of this is crushing. Montrell Williams had been an officer in Baton Rouge for ten years; he had a wife, a new baby, a family. They are devastated.
Officer Matthew Gerald served multiple Army tours in Iraq and had been with the department since October. His family is devastated.
Brad Garafola’s wife found out her husband was killed when she was stopped by police cars on her way to meet him at a convenience store. He leaves four children.
Personally, I’m at a loss right now; I’m angry, frustrated, and depressed. I wish we had a national leader who could bring peace rather than division. I wish we had a man of character to lead us rather than a community agitator. This was not Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream. Not at all. This is not what we want to teach our children and this is not the mess we want to leave to them.
Today’s news is a vindication for conspiracy theorists, especially those who contend that a Clinton cabal exists. But I think that there is an overarching cabal; one that includes the entire Democrat Party and most of the GOP. It’s is one which intends to destroy the Rule of Law in America by handing over America’s secrets to foreign actors, hiding and/or destroying the evidence of the betrayals, and, when the cabal members are caught red-handed, allowing the members to escape legal prosecution.
Remember when President Obama visited Russia in 2012 and had an audience with Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev? This sotto voce assertion to the Russian leader was caught by the microphone, accidentally, to be sure.
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I’ll have more flexibility.”
Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to [President] Vladimir [Putin].”
Lots of commentary on what the president meant by that, but what I’m thinking is that we are seeing a possible explanation of the meaning now.
Recall that there were many State Department computer network breaches during Hillary Clinton’s tenure there. I contend that she had email servers installed in her home in order to make it easier for foreign entities–like the Russian leadership–to access the information, something which, obviously, would not be detected by the State’s IT department and would not, therefore, end up in the news. Of course, President Obama knew what was going on and I contend that this is part of what he was referring to in his conversation with PM Medvedev.
And FBI Director James Comey—either part of the cabal or being strong-armed by it—declines to prosecute Mrs. Clinton even while he admits that she blatantly violated 18 U.S. Code § 793 and 18 U.S. Code § 2071.
And when one considers the mishandling of classified materials by Clinton Administration appointees like his CIA director John Deutch, and his National Security Advisor Sandy Berger and their subsequent pardon and slap on the wrist, respectively, it’s beginning to seem more ridiculous to assert that there is not a conspiracy.
So, now the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign can proceed apace. It’s her turn, after all and she has done her service to her master(s).
Such an innocent time it was in 2008 when Hillary Clinton was running against Barack Obama for the Democrat Party presidential nomination…
Ted Kennedy was still alive back then. Irony, however, was long dead and stinking. But eight years along, we’re getting many revelations about who is above and below whom on each level of the SJW hierarchy. Back then we found out where white women stood in relation to black people as a whole.
The Great Identity Politics War is like the Mother of all Pile-ups; I just can’t look away!
The latest salvo sees Ted Kennedy’s endorsement of Barack Obama cause New York’s NOW chapter to flip out.
Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard. Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few. Women have buried their anger that his support for the compromises in No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bogus drug benefit brought us the passage of these flawed bills. We have thanked him for his ardent support of many civil rights bills, BUT women are always waiting in the wings.And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment! He’s picked the new guy over us. [SNIP]
This latest move by Kennedy, is so telling about the status of and respect for women’s rights, women’s voices, women’s equality, women’s authority and our ability – indeed, our obligation – to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President that is the first woman after centuries of men who “know what’s best for us.”
I suppose that the 70+% of black women who voted for Obama in the South Carolina primary aren’t really women. Or perhaps black women are too stupid to figure out that Hillary Clinton has their best interest at heart while Obama couldn’t possibly have that, being a tripod and all. And see how these tripods stick together?
Alfred Hofstadter:So, after your husband passed, you never remarried? Mary Cooper: No, just focused on work and the church. Alfred Hofstadter:Ah. And what do you do? Mary Cooper: I work at the church. Alfred Hofstadter:Well, they’re lucky to have you. Mary Cooper: Well, thank you. Alfred Hofstadter: You’re welcome. Amy: [To Sheldon] Do you realize what’s happening here? Sheldon Cooper:Yeah, I do. They’re filling up on bread and ruining their meal.
The Big Bang Theory The Convergence Convergence 2016
I’ve been watching in disbelief as Barack Obama goes whole hog defending Islam on TV and watching CNN & the entire MSM not only highlighting those words and attacks on Donald Trump while being completely stunned that Mr. Trump is not backing down from his previous statements.
It’s as if the entire MSM has become Sheldon Cooper (without the genius) completely oblivious to what his happening in front of their faces.
The gist is post Orlando Donald Trump suggests Barack Obama might not be all that down on defeating Radical Islam and gets the MSM to repeat that charge.
So how does the White House react? Do they ignore it and pursue the investigation of the terror attack? Does the president maintain a dignified silence while allowing surrogates in government to play the “have you no decency” card?
Nope, he respond in person and he doesn’t just respond in person he both defends Islam and defends not talking about radical Islam.
Yes you read that right. Less that 2 days after the most successful Islamic Terror attack on the US since 9/11 Donald Trump manages to get Barack Obama to defend Islam while the blood is still on the floor at Pulse.
But that’s not all, As soon as President Obama was done speaking MSM was covering his words, agreeing with his words, and contrasting his approach to the attacks in Orlando to Mr. Trump. They go all in spending the entire rest of the day repeating this again and again.
So let’s summarize:
After Islamic Terror attack Trump suggests Obama might be weak on Islamic terror
Obama responds by attacking Trump and defending Islam…two days after Islamic Terror attack.
Media repeats and amplifies Obama’s response defending Islam and repeating Trump’s attack. All of this Two days after an successful Islamic Terror attack.
The end result? Within a few days after the single most successful Islamic Terror attack since 9/11 by a man who Obama’s FBI decided was not a threat, Barack Obama is associated with Defending Islam from Trump, while Trump is associated with defending America from radical Islam.
Tuesday was Trump’s birthday, I don’t think the MSM or Barack Obama could have given him a better present.
Donald Trump has completely punked them, The country hasn’t seen such incompetence since the 1962 Mets. If Casey Stengel was a media guy he would be screaming: “Can’t anyone play this game?”
The answer to that question is apparently: Donald Trump.
Exit Question: How much would Donald Trump have paid to get such an image on CMM:
Michael:My father is no different than any powerful man, any man with power, like a president or senator. Kay Adams:Do you know how naive you sound, Michael? Presidents and senators don’t have men killed. Michael:Oh. Who’s being naive, Kay?
The Godfather 1972
Yesterday at the end of his show Jake Tapper put out a tweet under his show’s account that depressed me a tad.
Now the reason for this depression has nothing to do with Mr. Trump’s words or implications concerning President Obama motives per se.
No the reason is that seven years ago when I started this blog in 2008 that tweet is something I might have sent if a person made such an implication concerning an American President.
But after seven years of watching Barack Obama in action the implication or even suggestion that President Barack Obama, the man whose political career began in the home of a Terrorist, might have a soft spot for radical Islam is so unremarkable that Mr Tapper’s tweet seems almost quaint.
I miss both my previous days of innocence and having a president who is unquestionably on the side of America.
While hanging out yesterday at Ace’s yesterday [sic; December 9, 2009] as he was flogging racists, I happened to mention that many if not most black Americans view the federal government as beneficial and friendly. Some other commenters were surprised and I was surprised at their surprise, because it isn’t difficult to figure out why this is. Whether it’s the Emancipation or the desegregation of the Armed Forces or Brown v. Board or the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, the federal government for the most part had seemed to be on the side of the black American as his constitutional rights were being oppressed by state or local governments.
What needs to be spelled, however is what the federal government did in the above-mentioned areas: it legally removed obstacles to the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of Americans who are black. And that is what it was supposed to do.
The present problem in my unlearned opinion is this: the federal government began overstepping its bounds during the Great Depression and did so most infamously in the late sixties via the Great Society programs. Doing more that getting local racists out of the way, the federal government sought to and succeeded in making itself the suppliers of life, liberty and, putatively, the happiness of many black Americans. (Try telling a senior of any race that Social Security is sending the country to financial ruin. You’ll get an earful about her “rights”.)
And even many black Americans who do not rely on the federal government still view the fed as our friend because of that history.
What’s needed in order to change this perception is obvious: education–not a new education but the old one, one which contains an objective explanation of the role of government.
Simply put, the role of the American government is to remove obstacles to liberty of the People–even when that obstacle is American government itself. Supplying all of one’s needs is not government’s role. That’s God’s purview.
We all remember President Obama’s statement containing the assertion that one of the flaws of the US Constitution was that is only contained a list of “negative rights,” meaning negative government “rights.” The idea that a Harvard-trained lawyer thinks that the government has rights or that there was no list of positive responsibilities assigned to government was mockable. (Hey, you voted for him.)
But what the statement betrayed was a widespread misconception present in those of us who aren’t lawyers of any variety of a friendly fed whose role is to insert itself between God and man’s liberty and to redistribute wealth (aka stealing). The notion that the founders “forgot” to address this is hilarious.
So when the Democrats came to full power [in 2009], they began to build on the foundation that Democrat Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson laid. The good news? Between Socialized Medicine, Cap and Trade, TARP, etc., the federal government’s active role in overstepping its bounds–in crippling America–is opening the eyes of Americans of all races. The bad news: there may not be an America left when the federal locusts finish.
Below, courtesy of Monty Python’s Life of Brian, is more proof that there is a Monty Python bit for every occasion, even when the characters are living in the first century AD.
Stan: I want to be a woman. From now on I want you all to call me Loretta. Reg: What!? Stan: It’s my right as a man. Judith: Why do you want to be Loretta, Stan? Stan: I want to have babies. Reg: You want to have babies?!?!?! Stan: It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them. Reg: But you can’t have babies. Stan: Don’t you oppress me. Reg: I’m not oppressing you, Stan — you haven’t got a womb. Where’s the fetus going to gestate? You going to keep it in a box?
Stan/Loretta, presumably has male genitalia. That makes him a man. Another character in that scene, Judith, has female genitalia. She’s a woman. We know that for sure because we later see what the Pythons call her “naughty bits” in the funniest nude scene in the history of cinema.
Liberals, led by their chieftain Barack Obama, side with the Stan/Lorettas of the world, they believe that a person’s gender–biological logic be damned–is whatever they want it to be.
Society somehow survived having separate male and female public bathrooms all of these years. But about a decade ago men-who-think-they-are-women and women-who-think-they-are-men began to demand access to the washrooms and locker rooms that don’t match their body parts.
The Battle of the Bathroom has reached into public schools.
And now Barack Obama’s Justice Department wants to strong-arm government schools into allowing confused youths–yes, I know what I’m writing–who believe they are a different gender, access to opposite sex washrooms and locker rooms.
What if the schools want to keep their private facilities the way they’ve been for decades?
Federal funding could be shut off–and there will be an open-door policy for peeping toms and rapists in public female bathrooms.
Hope and change baby, especially for the miniscule percentage of the population–0.3 percent, according to the New York Times–that identify as transgendered. I And I suspect that figure is too high.
In his final year of office Barack Obama is putting his final touches on his legacy. To me Obama is the Bathroom President. It’s how I will remember him. His legacy is set in porcelain.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is general thought of favorably, but, in reality, it is a ticking time bomb as Barry Goldwater foresaw. It is the ideological basis for the reinterpretation of Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972.
Public services—buses, trains, etc.– were segregated by law, but so were privately owned businesses—that is, businesses not “owned” by any level of government. And, while these laws were directed at black Americans, they didn’t just apply to them, but to all other Americans as well. Therefore, even if a white business owner did not want to segregate his business, he was compelled to do so under pain of prosecution. The issue was freedom and government did what it usually does: curtail it for all concerned.
Fast forward to the Civil Rights Act. It outlaws discrimination in public services—that is, services which are paid for by taxpayers: public transportation, public schools, public parks, etc. That’s a good thing. However, it refers to private businesses (“accommodations”) as public services.
This is part of what Barry Goldwater objected to with respect to the CRA. For his principled stand, he lost the 1964 presidential election—badly—and has long been labelled a racist.
One wonders if the conflation in the CRA language was done on purpose—to taint the document that underscored the [14th] Amendment. Or, perhaps the purpose was to make government control of individuals and their money easier.
With President Obama having ordered all public school districts in the nation to allow any student to enter and use any public school bathroom and locker-room at any time, I don’t wonder about the speculation mentioned my last sentence any longer.
The bomb was detonated.
When meaning is hollowed out, words can mean whatever those in power want them to mean and the powerful use this mutability of meaning in our miseducated minds toward their own purposes–purposes which usually involves the accrual of more power to themselves and the insertion of more chaos in the lives of ordinary citizens. In the CRA, private businesses became “public” accommodations, which lead to the persecution of florists and bakers many years down the road. In Title IX, discrimination against women becomes discrimination against those who say that they think they are women…
This postmodern foundation for chaos has been there for fifty-two years, embedded in a seemingly just Act of Congress designated to ensure the rights of all Americans. What better place to hide a bomb?
Now let’s see what the aftermath of the explosion will be.
Colonel Ahmed: “Not the President of America, sir. The President of Earth.” Doctor Who, Death in Heaven.
Not content with “fundamentally transforming” America, Barack Obama is in Europe right now causing mischief. During a joint press conference with German Prime Minister Angela Merkel that concluded a few hours ago Obama praised her open borders policy on Syrian migrants, declaring that she “is on the right side of history on this.”
Meanwhile, fueled largely by opposition to increased immigration from the Middle East, far-right political parties are gaining strength in Europe.
While Obama was in Great Britain last week the conservative-leaning Telegraph published his op-ed where he urged the UK to reject isolationism and vote “No” on June’s referendum, dubbed “Brexit,” which will decide if Britain will remain in the European Union. Later he threatened Britons by placing their nation “at the back of the queue” in regards to any trade deals with the United States.
Obama is an internationalist rather than a standard American politician. He favors a much stronger United Nations, and while a senator he sponsored a bill that would impose a tax on Americans to fight poverty in other countries. Obama’s view of sovereign nations is likely that they should be administrative units along the lines of counties in US states. Not that Obama cares much for local units of American government. His administration has initiated a creeping federalization of local police departments. All of this assists in explaining Obama’s hostility to Brexit.
Look for Obama to push internationalization of governments after he leaves the White House. Of course if that push succeeds the UN will need a proper leader, not a glorified clerk like the general secretary position.
I’m sure Obama has someone in mind. Someone with a Kenyan father and a Kansas mother who grew up in multi-racial Hawaii would be perfect, he likely believes.
Obama has always viewed himself as larger than the American presidency.
If you read the speech Pres. Obama gave in Havana yesterday, you’ll find that he dedicated all of two paragraphs to the usual platitudes he resorts to after every terrorist attack,
We will do whatever is necessary to support our friend and ally, [insert country name here] in bringing to justice those who are responsible . . . We can and we will defeat those who threaten the safety and security of people all around the world.
We have heard it before, and will continue to hear it. Just this year there have been 22 Islamist attacks around the world, leaving hundreds dead and thousands wounded. Notice how “those who threaten the safety and security” are never called what they are, Islamists, since it does not fit the narrative. As Andrew McCarthy points out,
The dangerous flipside to our government’s insistence on making up its own version of Islam is that anyone who is publicly associated with Islam must be deemed peaceful.
However, Obama – in his pursuit of a legacy – went to Havana to bury the Cold War, but not the Communist Castro regime, so he rolled out his speech.
Unlike Antony, who went to bury Caesar and not to praise him, Obama (who elevated Communist tyrant Raul Castro to the title of “president”) praised the “system of education which values every boy and every girl,” while ignoring that the purpose Cuba’s educational system is to indoctrinate every Cuban child to the service of the government into reporting any anti-regime activity of their parents to the neighborhood Comité de la Revolución.
Likewise, Obama believes that lifting the so-called embargo will magically mean that,
It should be easier to open a business here in Cuba. A worker should be able to get a job directly with companies who invest here in Cuba. Two currencies shouldn’t separate the type of salaries that Cubans can earn. The Internet should be available across the island so that Cubans can connect to the wider world and to one of the greatest engines of growth in human history.
The embargo was put in place after the Communist regime expropriated private property – for which American citizens have never been compensated. Dozens of foreign countries have transacted business in Cuba ever since.
The facts are that to this day all commercial, civic, and public activity is tightly controlled by an oppressive regime. All business activity must be funneled through the government, including the tourism industry, which is owned by the military. All lawyers in Cuba work for the government. All foreign business proposals are reviewed in the light of what will benefit the government. You do business in Cuba, you pay the government, which in turn pays the workers a legal maximum salary of about US$20/month.
And, by the way, the two currencies Obama mentioned remain firmly in place.
I do not wish to think, or speak, or write, with moderation. . . . I am in earnest — I will not equivocate — I will not excuse — I will not retreat a single inch — AND I WILL BE HEARD.
William Lloyd Garrison
This post was originally scheduled for Tuesday at 1 PM with the Brussels attacks I’ve moved it to today I’d like to segregate the words I wrote Monday before I expand on them in light of the Brussels attack, first my original words…
Monday we wrote about the reality of Islam in Europe
Today Barack Obama is in Cuba, praising a brutal dictatorship in a way that I never thought I’d see a US president do in my lifetime.
The Center for a Free Cuba just received information directly from Cuba that Berta Soler, the leader of the Ladies in White, and her husband, former political prisoner Angel Moya, a few minutes ago were detained by Cuba’s political police.
Ms. Soler is one of the Cubans that President Obama is expected to meet. Apologists for the regime have said that no only she is a counterrevolutionary and an enemy of the people, but an ungrateful black woman.
Many Cubans have wondered publicly about the irony of a black American President meeting with a white Cuban military oligarchy that keeps most Cuban blacks at the very bottom of the economy. The majority of Cubans are not white, but the overwhelming majority of the ruling class is.
“President Castro, I think, has pointed out that in his view making sure that everybody is getting a decent education or health care, has basic security and old age, that those things are human rights as well. I personally would not disagree with him,” Obama said.
“But it doesn’t detract from some of these other concerns. And the goal of the human rights dialogue is not for the United States to dictate to Cuba how they should govern themselves, but to make sure that we are having a frank and candid conversation around this issue. And hopefully that we can learn from each other.”
Obama made the comment at a joint press conference with the Cuban Communist dictator.
All of this brings to mind one person.
On July 8th 2010 she released the book the Post american presidency The Obama Administration’s War on America
Geller bluntly said Barack Obama’s priorities are not American priorities, she bluntly warned us that in his upbringing and his priorities America is the villain and our enemies are the heroes.
She was laughed at, called a hate monger and widely insulted. And when radical islamists tried to kill her, the media blamed her and frankly in my opinion were disappointed that they failed.
As I watch the image of Barack Obama in Cuba celebrating one of the worst dictatorships in the history of the Western Hemisphere as they demand the return of Gitmo and attack the United States it would seem Pam Geller was understating the issue. We have not seen an American President so committed to the defeat of the United States since Jefferson Davis
If only we had listened to her in 2012.
I predict if our republic does not fall, 50 years from now after I’m dead and gone, people will look back at Pam Geller and speak about her the same way we now speak about William Lloyd Garrison. But if it happens in my lifetime instead, nobody will be more delighted than I.
Since I wrote those words but Before the Brussels attack Pam Geller put up a post saying this:
The Paris terrorist got most help from his neighbors, not ISIS. This is typical, but largely kept from the public. The media and cultural narrative runs counter to reality. There were marches and demonstrations of support for Muhammad Merah, the French Muslim who staged a series of Islamic attacks including opening fire on a Jewish Day school, as well as mowing down French soldiers. Every time there is a jihad attack, the Muslim community goes on the offense — accusing law enforcement of “entrapment” or blaming “islamophobia.” Never do we see the Muslim community calling for reform or looking inward to address the problem of violence and hatred in Islam.
I suspect many of those same people who aided and abetted the Paris Bomber to evade police will do their part to make sure authorities get no aid in capturing any of those involved in Brussels who might still be at large.
and I regret to say nothing I’ve seen in the last 24 hours made this prediction from Pam Geller from yesterday any less likely:
After these monstrous acts, world leaders proclaim “we are at war” and do nothing. And my colleagues and I continue to be blacklisted and marginalized, despite being right about it all.
If your Doctor or Mechanic was as deep in denial as to the condition of your health or your car you’d sue them for every cent they had.
A certain advocate for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign had this to say while recently campaigning for her:
[I]f you believe we can all rise together, if you believe we’ve finally come to the point where we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that where we were practicing trickle-down economics with no regulation in Washington, which is what caused the crash, then you should vote for her.
The advocate’s name is Bill Clinton.
He takes a shot at George W. Bush in that quote, but that’s to be expected. The fun part of trying to figure out what Bill’s motives are is to remember that Hillary Clinton is part of that “awful legacy.” And let’s not forget about that day during the “awful legacy” when President Obama said, “I don’t have time for this,” and let President Clinton recall his glory days for a few minutes.
But back to President Clinton’s original words: awful legacy. I contend that they came from the bottom of his heart, logic notwithstanding. It’s no doubt that Bill Clinton despises Barack Obama and has been looking for a way to get back at him ever since the 2008 presidential campaign, when then-Senator Obama implied that Clinton was racist after it was leaked that the former president said this in private about the senator:
“A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”
It was probably more of a status thing than a race thing, but one can’t help but be amused at the notion that the First Black President is still smouldering about smear by the Second one. Delicious.
You can once and for all drop any lingering belief you may possess that Barack Obama is a bi-partisan unifier. A Chicago Democrat in the Illinois House who believed in compromising is now a lame duck because of our leftist president.
Illinois has been locked in a budget battle for nine months. The primary combatants are Republican political newcomer Bruce Rauner, the first Land of Lincoln governor to win a majority of voters since 2002, and House Speaker Michael Madigan, who has led the lower chamber in Springfield for 30 of the last 32 years. He’s also chairman of the Illinois Democratic Party. His daughter, Lisa, has been the state’s attorney general since 2003.
If there is a poster child for the problems of America’s fifth-largest state–a declining population, deficit spending, woefully underfunded public pensions–it’s Michael Madigan, who has been a member of the Illinois House since 1971.
Last month President Barack Obama, whose first public office was as an Illinois state senator, spoke to the General Assembly where he hailed the graces of compromise and working across the aisle with the opposition.
“Where I’ve got an opportunity to find some common ground, that doesn’t make me a sellout to my own party,” Obama said that day, after which Rep. Ken Dunkin (D-Chicago) stood and cheered.
“We’ll talk later, Dunkin,” Obama quickly replied and then continued his speech.
And so Obama talked.
Dunkin is the type of politician Obama who was able to “find some common ground” with Governor Rauner. Madigan’s gerrymandering talents created super-majorities in both chambers of the General Assembly–with not a vote to spare. But Dunkin defied Boss Madigan several times by preventing several overrides of several Rauner vetoes.
Madigan responded predictably by directing funding to the campaign of his primary opponent, Juliana Stratton. She also received Obama’s endorsement and the president–and here’s the”We’ll talk later” part–appeared in a Stratton radio spot and narrated a TV ad for her.
Shouldn’t Obama be focused on defeating ISIS, tackling the federal deficit, and creating jobs? No, he has better things to do, it seems, such as sticking his nose in a state legislature race that means nothing to a family of four in, let’s say Ohio, that is struggling to get by.
Television advertisements in the expensive Chicago TV market are unheard of in state representative races.
Republican interests contributed heavily to Dunkin’s campaign.
Last Tuesday was primary day in Illinois–and Stratton easily bested Dunkin. The Democratic Machine defeated the compromiser.
Obama is a fraud. He should be ashamed of himself but of course he isn’t.
John Ruberry regularly blogs and Marathon Pundit. He’s a life long resident of ILL-inois.
Two months after I returned from my urban exploration trip to Detroit David Maraniss’ Once in a Great City: A Detroit Story was published.
For me the timing couldn’t have been better, As I drove west to my home in the Chicago area I mused, “What in the hell went wrong with Detroit?”
Maraniss, who was born in Detroit, is the author of biographies of Bill Clinton, Vince Lombardi, and Barack Obama. More on the Obama book later.
After seeing Chrysler’s two-minute long Super Bowl commercial for the 200c that featured the Motor City that aired five years ago, Maraniss wondered the same thing I did and decided to write a Detroit book.
Rather than focusing on the deadly 1967 riots that hastened white flight and the exit of thousands of businesses, Maraniss zooms in on a period where Detroit seemed poised to join New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles as an American Great City: the fall of 1962 through the spring of 1964. Detroit’s Big Three were building cars than ever. The city’s long unfulfilled goal of hosting the Summer Olympics finally seemed within reach. Liberal Democrat Jerome Cavanaugh, Detroit’s version of John F. Kennedy, was forward-thinking on civil rights, as was Michigan’s Republican governor, George Romney. Motown Records was enjoying its first taste of national exposure–with greater glory yet to come. The Reverend C.L. Franklin, father of Aretha Franklin, organized a Civil Rights march led by Martin Luther King; and MLK was warmly greeted at the airport by Cavanaugh’s pick for police commissioner, another liberal, George Clifton Edwards, Jr. The president of the United Auto Workers, Walter Reuther, was a prominent supporter of civil rights too.
The foundation seemed solid for what was then American’s fifth-most populous city. But there were noticeable cracks. Shortly before the International Olympic Committee vote on its choice for host city of the 1968 summer games, an open housing bill in the Detroit Common Council was overwhelmingly defeated, which led supporters of that bill to appeal to IOC members to deny Detroit the games. Local black nationalist Albert Cleage was gaining support and Malcom X spoke at a Detroit church where he condemned King’s call for non-violence in his Message to the Grass Roots address, where the few whites in the audience were forced to sit in their own section. Edwards’ push to pivot the Detroit Police Department away from its racist legacy was meeting resistance from rank-and-file cops and the DPD brass.
Interestingly, Maraniss intersperses excerpts from letters from white racists to Cavanaugh and Romney several times in Once in a Great City. He also includes a quote from Rush Limbaugh II about where he lived “prided itself that it never allowed a Negro to live in it and no Negro lived there permanently.”
What the heck does Rush Limbaugh’s father have to do with Detroit? Nothing. However, in his Obama biography Maraniss points out many inconsistencies–or should I say lies?–within the future president’s Dreams from My Father memoir. Rather than being happy about the unexpected publicity about the book from the conservative radio host and others, Maraniss responded in anger to those attacks on a president that he supports. Which explains the author’s end-around attack on the younger Limbaugh. Such pettiness has no place in a serious book.
Something else happened in 1962 in Detroit that would hasten its demise, which Maraniss mentions only twice. Three months before the timeline of this book begins, Detroit’s municipal and commuter income taxes went into effect. Those are good reasons not to live or work in such a place.
Near the end of the book President Lyndon B. Johnson, after departing from Air Force One in Detroit on his way to the University of Michigan to give what became known as his Great Society Speech, offered remarks that seem comical today. “Prosperity in America must begin here in Detroit,” he told cheering crowds brought in for the occasion. “You folks in Detroit put American citizens on wheels, you have the American economy on the move. Unemployment in Detroit is down, profits are up, wages are good, and there is no problem too tough or too challenging for us to solve.”
But for LBJ Big Government was the solution to every problem. The Model Cities program, which Cavanaugh bought into big-time, was perhaps one of the biggest debacles of the Great Society.
Despite its flaws I heartily recommend this book. Because another city–Chicago perhaps, which also recently bid on an Olympics–may be the next Detroit.
Unless you live outside America, you’ve seen the GEICO insurance television commercials with the tag line, “It’s what you do.” Such as this one about golf commentators whispering regardless of the situation.
Can you say “quid pro quo?” Can you say “hostages?”
Also part of the the hostage exchange was the release of seven Iranians who were imprisoned for violating our trade embargo with the theocracy.
“Empowering Iran with sanctions relief is like Neville Chamberlain writing a $150 billion check to Adolf Hitler before WWII hoping he’ll behave,” Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said shortly after the swap news became public. “This Iran deal is an insane disaster and this White House has lost its mind.”
I’m not so sure the White House lost its mind. President Obama and his oval office sycophants are leftists who believe America is too strong and it needs to be put in its place. That explains why on the day of his final State of the Union address President Obama not only didn’t mention the capture and video humiliation of ten US sailors by Iran in the Persian Gulf, but also his failure to condemn it at all.
And to drive the point home, Obama’s poltroon secretary of state, John Kerry, thanked Iran for releasing the sailors that they shouldn’t have seized.
Our policy with Iran should be regime change. Then maybe Iran can drop their pastime of hostage taking.
If you remain indifferent in time of adversity, your strength will depart from you. Rescue those who are being dragged to death, and from those tottering to execution withdraw not. If you say, “I know not this man!” does not he who tests hearts perceive it? He who guards your life knows it, and he will repay each one according to his deeds.
Barack Obama: ” I told you earlier all the talk of America’s economic decline is political hot air. Well, so is all the rhetoric you hear about our enemies getting stronger and America getting weaker. The United States of America is the most powerful nation on Earth. Period. It’s not even close. “ Jan 12, 2016
Joe Biden: “One of the boats had engine failure and drifted into Iranian waters. The Iranians picked up both boats, as we have picked up Iranian boats that needed to be rescued and took them to — I’m not sure exactly where. I don’t want to misspeak here. And realized they were there and distressed, and said they would release them, and they released them like ordinary nations would do.
Jan 13, 2016
John Kerry “I want to express my gratitude to the Iranian authorities for their cooperation is resolving this matter quickly”
Jan 13, 2016
I don’t expect any better from Barack Obama, Joe Biden or John Kerry, to them the humiliation of America is a feature not a bug. Nor do I expect better from the press who believes the same or any of their enablers in the Democrat party. In this I disagree with Noah Rothman:
Admin defenders who bent over backwards to pretend this was just a friendly misunderstanding should be ashamed. pic.twitter.com/HdKO28Dbsw
Yesterday Iran seized two U.S. Navy patrol boats and was holding ten crew members for “trespassing” in Iranian waters near a major naval base. The White House rushed to assert that “there is nothing to indicate this was anything hostile on the part of any entity in Iran,” or, as Pete put it,
Because NOTHING say “not hostile” like seizing the armed forces of another country.
The White House said that President Obama would not mention the incident in his State of the Union speech.
Now, I have made it a policy to not watch SOTUs, no matter what POTUS is in office, At best,
The State of the Union (STFU) is a sordid spectacle of self-congratulation and excess more appropriate to an Imperial Autocracy than a Constitutional Republic.
Besides, since the most compelling news story of the day broke late enough to not be entered into the teleprompter, we already knew every word of what was going to be said.
The U.S. military said early Wednesday that the sailors left Farsi Island aboard the same two patrol boats they were traveling on before losing contact with the Navy and being taken into Iranian custody. After leaving Iran, the two U.S. boats were met in international waters by the USS Anzio, a cruiser. New crews were placed on the two smaller U.S. boats to complete the trip to Bahrain. The original crew members were given quick medical checks onboard the Anzio, then were transferred to the U.S. carrier Harry S. Truman, and placed on flights to a shore location in the region.
Anyone watching the SOTU has to expect to see partisans jumping up and applauding vigorously at prefabricated presidential bromides that had been filtered through focus groups reactions for fuller boredom. The more inane the speech, the bigger the applause. It’s quite a disconnect.
Instead of watching, I read the transcript (if you want, here’s the video). About the only thing that was mildly interesting was that Obama appears to have put Joe Biden in charge of curing cancer,
You know, last year, Vice President Biden said that, with a new moon-shot, America can cure cancer. Last month, he worked with this Congress to give scientists at the National Institutes of Health the strongest resources that they’ve had in over a decade.
Well, so — so tonight, I’m announcing a new national effort to get it done. And because he’s gone to the mat for all of us on so many issues over the past 40 years, I’m putting Joe in charge of mission control.
Joe Biden may have “gone to the mat for all of us on so many issues over the past 40 years,” but none of those qualify him for such mission. It’s just another instance of many where Obama says something and believes the problem is “taken care of” because he spoke about it – especially if increases government spending and involvement.
Not mentioning the Iranian boat incident appears to have “taken care of ” that. Government spending apparently was not increased; not sure about government involvement.
So instead of watching the SOTU, I rented Shaun the Sheep, the Movie based on the Aardman tv series. Unlike the SOTU, it was is fun, fast-paced, funny, and, best yet, it has no dialogue.
Shaun won the night.
Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.
If he will go to the Ohio River, I’ll give him rations. Let him go north, my business is down south
William Tecumseh Sherman on John Hood’s invasion of Tennessee
If I’m Barack Obama & Hillary Clinton, I’m not very happy right now.
Times remain hard, Obamacare continues to self destruct, Thanks to the Bill Cosby story and Donald Trump’s willingness to fight back Bill Clinton is a powerkeg rather than an asset. Black Lives matter continues to alienate voters, Student protesters continue to make the left look bad and the continued success of ISIS and related terrorists combined with a newly aggressive Russia & China continue to make Obama look like the week and feckless leader he is.
I can see Obama now: If only there was some kind of a breakthrough, a story that can take the attention of the media off of these failures, a story that reinforces the unpopular leftist memes that they believe in, a story that takes the focus off of the threat of ISIS and puts it elsewhere. A story that allows me to look strong and presidential with an enemy I’d actually be willing to take on. A story that gives me an excuse to push my agenda.
But where am I going to find idiots useful enough to provide this to me?
Three of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s sons and what they claim are 150 militia members have occupied a federal building in eastern Oregon in order to keep two local ranchers out of prison, according to local reports.
The group is believed to be heavily-armed.
According to The Oregonian, the group seized the headquarters building at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge about 50 miles outside Burns, Ore. The remote facility was closed and unoccupied at the time.
Now I’m not going to pretend I know the details of this these two local ranchers case. It would not surprise me one bit if the Government has been exceeding their authority in their treatment of these two ranchers or were being selective in the prosecution of them.
But let me say that this move shows that Al Bundy has more sense than the sons of Cliven Bundy. Tabitha Bliss has nailed it:
Perfect timing for the regime. Federal provocateurs, sociopaths and idiots with a John Brown complex are writing c…https://t.co/jr7n9sJLWp
Barack Obama wants to push a gun control agenda, now he has an armed occupation of a federal location to argue for it.
It doesn’t matter if the location is harder to find than Barack Obama’s college papers and had less people than that Martin O’Malley event in Iowa this week. It’s a federal building and to take it over with a bunch of armed men creates a Win Win Win situation for the very government these people claim to hate.
It creates a political win: Barack Obama now has bonafide crisis and a talking point to argue for gun control, gun seizure and while Barack Obama is terrified of taking on Putin or ISIS he now has an enemy he can go up against that he can go after with pleasure, Americans in America.
It Creates a Media win: The MSM has an excuse to ignore any and every other story out there and focus on this action. It doesn’t matter if the only thing in danger is a bunch of birds. The narrative that “domestic terror” from the right is going to be played big and the media and administration will paint with a very broad brush, as opposed to the fine tip pen that they use when talking about radical Islam.
It creates a legal win: No matter how you slice it this is a violation of federal law. No amount of spin, argument or justification makes it otherwise, and if at any point a federal agent is injured by any of these guys, the full wrath of the administration will come down on them and popular opinion will be with them.
As far as a siege itself it’s again Win Win Win Win for Obama and company, all the options work for them.
They can do the really smart thing and pretty much ignore them not risking any lives. At worst these guys stay there for years living off what they brought until they get bored and start to leave then the police and federal marshals can arrest them at their leisure. Thus the administration appears prudent both with the lives of federal agents but of misguided Americans
They can do the pretty smart thing and just box them in and wait. By putting resources around the area they can create a de facto Federal prison neutralizing these guys as a threat. If it’s done right it can minimize the danger to the agents boxing them in and if they are foolish enough to try an armed breakout, they are likely to pay a huge price at minimal cost to the people containing them. Again the administration gets to look both prudent and strong.
They can do the risky thing and move in to provoke gunfire and then lay down a close siege. This risks federal lives and would likely drain resources better used against the terror threat. But again it allows the administration to pretend they are on the side of law and order, particularly if federal agents are fired upon or injured.
They can go full ruby ridge and attack. This is a most foolish thing as it would cost lives for very little gain, but even if federal lives are lost the administration can play the muscle card and can count on the media to spin it as a necessity. Hopefully federal agents would use to do something this foolish and risk death for the political advantage of this administration.
All these fools have done is enable the people they hate the most, this is the definition of useful idiot. If they’re smart they’ll take my advice, declare victory and go home, fast!
Note: Some of you might be wondering why I’m making utilitarian arguments to persuade these guys & their supporters instead of moral ones. I suspect those arguments would be as effective a “killing Jews is wrong” argument to Palestinians.
Update:Erick & Ed note the double standards, the stupidity and the moral argument against.
The National Security Agency (NSA) swept up conversations with U.S. lawmakers as it monitored lobbying on the Iran nuclear deal by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his aides.
If you are shocked or angry about this, then you simply haven’t paid attention. After all if you’ve demonstrated that there are no consequences to any actions that our Chicago thug in chief takes why would he show any restraint on spying on congress? An abusive husband doesn’t stop unless there is a price.
Ron Fournier notwithstanding…
Democrats: If you allow your guy to do this, no complaints when the next GOP POTUS runs amuck with Obama precedent. https://t.co/KzhVIthK9d
— In November, there were at least 1,447 politically-motivated arrests across the island. It was the second consecutive month the tally had broken 1,000, and it was the highest count since at least January 2010.
— That brought the count for the year to at least 7,686, making it a real possibility that by the end of 2015 the Castro secret police may break a record — 8,889 — it set just last year.
As far as the Cuban economy goes, the oppressive Communist regime gets a pass:
Last week, we posted how the Paris Club of creditor nations was close to finalizing a deal restructuring Castro’s $11.1 billion debt with the group.
The deal has now been finalized.
Here are the terms:
First, the Paris Club will forgive $8.5 billion of the debt.
As for the remaining $2.6 billion — repayment is structured over 18 years and annual payments gradually increase from 1.6% of the $2.6 billion ($40 million) in 2016 to 8.9% in 2033.
That’s right, ladies and gentleman, Castro will be spared any burden for his financial irresponsibility for the rest of his life.
It will be the Cuban people — in 2033 — when Raul Castro turns 102 years-old, or is dead, who will pay the heaviest burden of this debt.
Castro will now also get a new credit card from the Paris Club.
As one foreign banker stated, “this is an astoundingly generous deal, a fabulous agreement for Cuba.”
The president explained his thinking, or part of it, to Yahoo:
“Our original theory on this was not that we were going to see immediate changes or loosening of the control of the Castro regime, but rather that over time you’d lay the predicates for substantial transformation,” he said.
“The more that they see the benefits of U.S. investment, the more that U.S. tourist dollars become woven into their economy, the more that telecommunications is opened up so that Cubans are getting information, unfettered by censorship, the more you’re laying the foundation for the bigger changes that are going to be coming over time,” he added.
This theory is utterly without bases in theory or fact. First, he assumes his deal with Castro is actually going to bring all those reforms, especially an end to censorship. So far the regime has actually cracked down, not opened up.
Moreover, the president’s theory that more tourism will bring political reform is bizarre. Has it done so in China? In fact, Cuba has long traded freely with every single country in the world except the US, and has had tens of thousands of tourists from Europe and Canada. Is there something magical about American tourists that will force Fidel and Raul to give up communism?
But the president appears to believe Raul may not really be a communist anyway. “I do see in him a big streak of pragmatism. In that sense, I don’t think he is an ideologue,” Obama told Yahoo.
Cubans living in the island-prison are aware that there’s no relief in sight, in spite of Obama’s pretty words. Things are bad enough that
Cuban immigration to the United States grew by almost 80 percent in 2015 out of fear that the thaw in relations between Washington and Havana might at any time put an end to the advantages Cubans currently enjoy the minute they set foot on U.S. territory.
The world has a new Islamic republic. On Friday Gambia’s strongman president, Yahya Jammeh, declared the impoverished west African nation that is almost completely surrounded by Senegal, a Muslim state. Other such nations are Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Mauritania–none of which are well-known for freedom or prosperity.
Jammeh promises freedom of religion to the citizens of Africa’s smallest non-island nation.
Jeffrey Smith, a senior advocacy officer at the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights told Al Jazeera that day, “Gambia is not a country of laws but is rather ruled by the whims of Yahya Jammeh.”
Jammeh seized control of Gambia in a bloodless coup in 1994 and while there have been elections since then, of course in the African tradition he has won each with resounding majorities.
What of those whims that Smith mentioned?
Jammeh detests gays. In speech given earlier this year the despot warned them, “If you do it [in Gambia] I will slit your throat,” adding, “if you are a man and want to marry another man in this country and we catch you, no one will ever set eyes on you again, and no white person can do anything about it.”
For the first time in a month I woke up at 5 AM (day off) and with daily mass in the evening I turned on Morning Joe and saw something amazing.
The discussion was why Donald Trump was perceived as he was and turned instantly to Barack Obama noting that Paris happened after he said ISIS was contained and San Bernardino happened after he said ISIS can’t strike here. The pièce de résistance was when
Jon Meacham called it a malaise among the people like the Carter years and NOBODY AT THE TABLE CONTESTED IT.
Now for people like Glenn Reynolds and myself this is no big deal, I started my (Chester) Arthur (Jimmy) Carter watch during my first week of blogging (day 4 actually Dec 2 2008)
You sometimes get a rookie pitcher with a winning season but usually not. I’m hoping for Chester Arthur but I’m expecting Jimmy Carter.
But for the Morning Anchor show of MSNBC to say this in their first hour and have no liberal at the table contest it is amazing.
What was their explanation? ISIS. People are more afraid of a terror attack then at any time since 9/11. It’s brings to mind an early episode of the original Star Trek series: What are little girls made of?
Kirk:Emotion, Ruk? You disapprove of Miss Chapel’s orders to save my life? Ruk: To maintain your existence would be illogical. Kirk:Why? Can’t your memory banks solve a simple equation like that? …
Just as conservative bloggers and writers have been doing our best to counter the programing that the MSM has given the public concerning the Obama administration, Kirk presses the Android Rok to see the danger to him that he has been conditioned to avoid and finally gets a breakthrough…
Kirk:The danger to you is Korby. Ruk:I was programmed by Korby. I cannot harm him. Kirk:The old ones programmed you, too, but it became possible to destroy them. RUK: [Excited] That was the equation! Existence! Survival must cancel out programming.
Realizing that this administration will get them killed has finally overridden the MSM & culture’s programming.
Too bad for America they didn’t figure this out four years ago.
Incidentally I dropped Arthur / Carter watch in the first year when it became clear which one he was going to be. Walter Russell Mead said in 2001 that Jimmy Carter was the best case scenario for Obama. He hasn’t even managed that.
The Paris Terror Attacks—perpetrated by Muslims—seem to be short-sighted, from a strategic point of view—but they are not. Yes, I suppose it’s silly to talk about cogent strategy from persons subscribing to an ideology which has as one of its penultimate goals to die for its deity while taking non-believers along and who seem to be incapable of using any other “strategy,” but I’m not talking about them. I’m talking about the EU and people like German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Several of the European heads of government, the EU, and whoever else runs things on that continent seem intent on flooding every part of it with “refugees” from Islamic countries. Millions of them. And the normal, everyday citizens of these countries do not like it one bit–especially, citizens of this town. But what can keep those citizens from doing something like, say, overthrowing their governments or rounding up Muslims at the muzzle of a whole lot of guns? Being afraid of their new neighbors.
Can you sense where I’m going? I’ll get you to the destination quickly: the EU wants the immigrants to perform acts of terror and will continue to let them happen, the French president’s bravado notwithstanding. They know what these people—these Muslims–believe, know what some of them have been doing and know what they are thirsty to do again. And again. Why else would they allow hundreds of thousands of single young men from countries who view infidels as marks and women as booty (meant in both senses) to flood into the continent? And as we saw yesterday and long before, it doesn’t take a million; it only takes a few.
The European elites want the citizens cowed; in fear of being raped, shot, and/or blown up. Cowed citizens will do anything to keep the peace and are more compliant. So what, I hear you ask, do the elites want of the European citizen? To submit to protection; the protection of a One-World government…and One-World religion. And the only way that there will be peace under those circumstances is if that One-World religion is Islam.
Sounds crazy, does it not? Evil often looks like insanity.
With so many posts out there on the latest fruit born of Leftism—the University of Missouri situation—I think that it’s necessary to pull back the “camera” to look at the larger destruction going on around us. The following is an excerpt from yet another old post of mine–with edits and more.
Around the right side of the political blogosphere, one can read the posts and comments of many who excoriate President Obama for his “stupidity.” These people don’t get it. Those who look at the Obama Administration’s policies and programs and observe President Obama’s obliviousness and lack of empathy in the face of on-going national crises and, as a result, make a summary low judgment of the president’s intellect do so with the premise that the man really is trying to improve the economy, social and racial conditions in the USA.
That premise is wrong.
This is what people need to realize about destruction: it is the total opposite from building/improving. This seems like an obvious truth, but when comparing the concepts, we must take it further. Construction of anything requires carefully ordered planning and implementation. For example, when constructing a solid, stable building, the architect recommends proven construction methods, using the right materials, and on a solid foundation. But before doing these things, the builder gains certain knowledge of future purpose(s) of the building and, from there, makes his decisions on how to proceed.
Destruction, however, is not only opposite in purpose; it is so in methodology. (We’re talking malicious destruction here.) Using the building analogy again, think of what happens when someone blows up a building—or flies an aircraft into it. Are any orders or rules to be followed for the goal to be achieved? No. In fact, the more chaos perpetrated by malicious destruction, the faster a building disintegrates. The same is true for a nation.
President Obama, the Democrat Party, and whoever sits behind the scenes sow method after method of chaos—and, in some cases, inaction is the chaos sowed. They stab the giant repeatedly, hoping it will finally fall, hoping for utter destruction. And remember this: President Obama is the wrecking-ball, not the wrecker. This began way before he came on the scene. He is merely doing what a century of Gramscian infiltration designed him to do.
Last Wednesday in a Rose Garden ceremony Vice President Joe Biden, with President Obama at his side, announced that he will not be a candidate for president in 2016, although he certainly sounded like one.
And Biden heralded art of compromise in his address.
I believe we have to end the divisive partisan politics that is ripping this country apart. And I think we can. It’s mean-spirited. It’s petty. And it’s gone on for much too long. I don’t believe, like some do, that it’s naïve to talk to Republicans. I don’t think we should look at Republicans as our enemies. They are our opposition; they’re not our enemies. And for the sake of the country, we have to work together.
Eloquent words. But as hollow as a carved pumpkin.
The definition of compromise that contemporary Democrats believe in is that they hold fast to their positions while calling on Republicans to change their stands. If they don’t liberals label them obstructionists or worse. Examples? Obama has called his political opponents “hostage takers” and “enemies.” His still-unpopular ObamaCare law was passed by Congress with no Republican votes.
Prior to his election as president Obama was a US senator from Illinois, nominally representing me in Washington. His predecessor was Peter Fitzgerald, a Republican. Like Obama, Fitzgerald moved up from the Illinois state Senate to to the US Capitol and for two years he served with the future president in Springfield.
He was a very partisan and ideological Democrat who represented a district that really was probably 90 percent Democrat, and certainly I saw him as reflective of his district in that he was just one of those state senators from Chicago who viewed the Democratic party as being right 100 percent of the time and the Republican party wrong 100 percent of the time. He’s not one to work across party lines.
Yet in last week’s Rose Garden speech, Biden parroted the myth that his boss believes that “compromise is not a dirty word.”
But in reality Obama has his own definition of what compromise and that is “I win and you lose.”
A year ago a third presidential campaign by Joe Biden would have been greeted by guffaws from Anchorage to Key West. But the plummeting opinion poll numbers of struggling frontrunner Hillary Clinton have re-opened the trap door for the vice president. Clinton’s primary opponent is socialist Bernie Sanders–but few people think the Vermont senator can win in the general election. The three other Democratic major candidates, Jim Webb, Martin O’Malley, and Lincoln Chafee, are hovering around one percent in the polls.
Biden’s first run for the presidency, in the 1988 race, never made it past the autumn of 1987 after he was a confronted by a series of plagiarism allegations. His second plunge eight years ago effectively ended on the day he announced when he said of Barack Obama, “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, … I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
Biden’s campaign never recovered from that blunder and he dropped out the the race shortly after the Iowa Caucuses, but his fortunes dramatically changed when the clean Obama chose Biden as his running mate.
Biden is a gaffe machine–here are some of his greatest hits.
“In Delaware, the largest growth of population is Indian Americans, moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking.” June 17, 2006.
Is Biden proud that Delaware was a slave state?
“You don’t know my state. My state was a slave state … my state is the 8th largest black population in the country.” August 27, 2006.
Crazy Uncle Joe said this to Obama–and it was captured on video–after he signed the ObamaCare bill.
“Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be Vice President of the United States of America. Let’s get that straight. She’s a truly close personal friend. She is qualified to be President of the United States of America. She’s easily qualified to be Vice President of the United States of America. Quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me. But she’s first rate.” Sept 10, 2008.
Well now, phony profilescreated after death not withstanding there is one thing we have established on the record from named witnesses present in the room as he was killing people.
The killer in Oregon was deliberately targeting Christians
Now if I was the president of the US
Whose policies were extremely anti christian
Who was suing catholic nuns in order to force them to abet commit mortal sin.
Who has been ignoring the slaughter of christians worldwide.
Whose party regularly attacks christian belief as “hate speech”
Whose closest supporters spent the last 26-38 hours going absolutely batshit nuts over the single most popular religious figure in the world meeting with Kim Davis the Christian most hated by my supporters
I think that even if it did take people’s minds off of Syria for a week, if people politicize a mass murder committed by a young black man specifically targeting Christians in a zone so gun free even the guards who were supposed to protect the student weren’t allowed to have them, it just might not work out so well for my party in general and for me in particular.
As for the 26 year old scumbag who did this – there’s a lot of information swirling around about him on various internet sites and not all of it is reliable. It is probably best to step back for a day or two to see how things shake out, before much is said about him. One thing is certainly safe to say: He did not like Christians.
Let’s be clear on this. Obama does not care about dead bodies in the street. If he did he’d set up a tent in Chicago so he could be on site as a dozen or so people are killed or wounded each weekend. He won’t do that because those people are primarily black or Hispanic and he knows his liberal base thinks that is just what minorities do. If he was really interested in dead bodies he’d be down on the Arizona-Mexico border where the actions of his own Justice Department have made that area a war zone by illegally passing weapons to unauthorized buyers. If he actually cared he would have shown some vague interest when a military recruiting station was shot up in Chattanooga. He is, allegedly, the commander-in-chief. But he couldn’t show concern because the shooter was a Muslim radical (or radical Muslim, YMMV). He could have shown concern when three Muslim students were gunned down in North Carolina but the shooter was one of his lunatic supporters.
If the reports are correct, men and women declared their faith and died for it. That is the classic definition of a martyr, and may their families be comforted by the words of the Savior: “Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven.”
That leads to a sobering question for any Christian: “Is your belief strong enough that you would declare it openly if you knew it meant your death?”
They’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love, yes they’ll know we are Christians by our love.
With the Pope in America it seems a good time to address the question that has come up. Is Barack Obama a Christian as the media insists?
Forgetting for a moment that the media’s actions suggest that there is something wrong with being a non Christian, a Muslim for example, there is a big trap for Christians of all stripes in making presumptions about Barack Obama’s Christianity which C. S. Lewis talks about in the Screwtape letters: (emphasis mine)
I have been writing hitherto on the assumption that the people in the next pew afford no rational ground for disappointment. Of course if they do-if the patient knows that the woman with the absurd hat is a fanatical bridge-player or the man with squeaky boots a miser and an extortioner-then your task is so much the easier. All you then have to do is to keep out of his mind the question “If I, being what I am, can consider that I am in some sense a Christian, why should the different vices of those people in the next pew prove that their religion is mere hypocrisy and convention?”You may ask whether it is possible to keep such an obvious thought from occurring even to a human mind. It is, Wormwood, it is! Handle him properly and it simply won’t come into his head.
Remember salvation isn’t graded on a curve, the job of a Christian is not to be better than the person in the next pew, the job is to strive for Sainthood, to follow Christ.
The second trap however is one the media and the White House has fallen into.
The media constantly jumps at any suggestion that the president is something other than a Christian, in fact for the last week the media has gone on the offensive attacking any candidate who does not affirm Barack Obama’s status as a Christian in good standing.
But they forget something very important, something Christ told us himself:
“A good tree does not bear rotten fruit, nor does a rotten tree bear good fruit. For every tree is known by its own fruit. For people do not pick figs from thornbushes, nor do they gather grapes from brambles.
A good person out of the store of goodness in his heart produces good, but an evil person out of a store of evil produces evil; for from the fullness of the heart the mouth speaks. “Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ but not do what I command? I will show you what someone is like who comes to me, listens to my words, and acts on them. “
Or put simply, the media would not have to constantly proclaim the President’s Christianity if his action proclaimed it.
So, two points, every time the Media promotes the President’s christianity it highlights his lack of the fruits of christianity, but while this is true, rather than worrying about the president’s Christianity and he fruit he bears the first job of a Christian is to bear fruit of its own.
Assad is still in office and it appears likely that the despot will still head Syria’s government after Obama returns to Chicago in sixteen months.
In 2013 France was within hours of leading a military strike against Syria–but Obama backed off when he told his French counterpart that he wanted to get congressional approval before permitting American participation. Obama knew what he was doing–no president can get authorization from Congress for a military attack in a few hours unless there is an amphibious assault on our eastern seaboard.
Oddly enough Obama did not request approval from Congress for American forces to participate in multi-national attack on Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya.
Where are we three years after Assad crossed Obama’s red line?
At least 300,000 Syrians have been killed in the civil war and over four million refugees have left Syria. Over 12 million Syrians need humanitarian help and over seven million Syrians have been uprooted but remain in that unhappy nation. These are huge numbers–and keep in mind that there are only 17 million Syrians.
The Syrian crisis has spread beyond the Middle East. Scenes of Syrians camping out in Hungary and Austria are a prelude of what will soon be common throughout the European Union. The ultimate goal of many Syrian refugees is not Muslim Turkey or Arabic Jordan or Lebanon, but the social welfare benefits of the most generous EU states such as Sweden and Germany.
Will the Syrian influx snap the European Union safety net?
We will find out–but by then Obama won’t be president and that red line might have arrived on America’s shores.
Over the next few years you are going to be branded as bigots, hated and derided. You will be portrayed in every form of culture, plays, TV series and movies as people to be shunned and no member of the media will fail to come after you for your offenses against the twin sacraments of Abortion & Gay Marriage…The days of easy Christianity are over Now is the time to decide.
DaTechGuy March 29th 2013
One of the arguments I repeatedly hear from our friends on the left is that Kim Davis is the next George Wallace on Twitter an example:
I really find such tweets a lot of fun because the depth of historical ignorance they show is astounding
For all his: “segregation today, segregation tomorrow segregation forever” bluster and his showboat blocking of a schoolhouse door, George Wallace proved to be a pol whose primary concerning was getting power and obtaining more. Wallace used his showboat stance for political gain, using it, when term limited in office, to elect his wife as governor, using it to repeal his state’s term limit rule allowing him to run against his wife’s former Lt gov (she died of cancer in office) serving several more terms.
Furthermore he used it highlight himself nationally to peruse four presidential campaigns, the first abruptly pre-empted by JFK’s assassination, the 2nd on a third party ticket where he became one of the few 3rd party candidates ever to win states multiple states, the third for the Democrat nomination in 1972, a race he was doing well in until an attempted assassination attempt ended his campaign and left him in a wheelchair for life, and a fourth in 1976 which didn’t gain much traction.
Wallace didn’t go to jail or risk penalties for his beliefs because he didn’t have any other than “George Wallace deserves to be elected” , when segregation was popular he trumped segregation, when it became unpopular suddenly decided he spoke against it. In fact it seems to me that when it came to pols following in Wallace’s footstep the people are not Democrats like Kim Davis but Democrats like Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who, as you might have forgotten, abruptly changed their position when it appeared large gay donors were closing their purses.
And once they did by an astounding coincidence the entire democrat party from Bill Clinton who signed the Defence of Marriage act to every single Democrat pol who said things like this:
suddenly decided that anyone who didn’t beleve in gay marriage was a bigot. As Dave Weigel put it.
The new Democratic advocates for SSM fall into two camps. The first consists of people who always liked the idea of this but worried about losing national elections. In his memoir, Democratic consultant Bob Shrum remembers John Kerry fretting that the Massachusetts Supreme Court had forced Democrats to talk about gay marriage before they were ready to. “Why couldn’t they just wait a year?” he asked Shrum, mournfully. The second camp consists of people who really do oppose the idea of gay people getting married. Republicans argued that this second camp was tiny, and that liberals were hiding behind it. They were right!
There are two words to describe this: Political opportunism. That sounds very George Wallace to me.
Contrast all of this with Kim Davis. Davis didn’t seek publicity, those who choose to force her hand did, as marriage licences were available just a few miles away. Even as the country’s media and elites demonized her and pundit after pundit attacked her she went to court to defend her position citing her religious beliefs seeking a compromise that would allow her to function without her name being one marriage certificates.
When ordered to jail, she didn’t put on a show, she went to jail and when released during the middle of a rally in her support (a rally used by at least one presidential candidate to showboat a bit) rather than talking politics or anything of that nature she praised God while her lawyers, speaking to media stated that she would not be doing anything different to violate her conscience:
Doesn’t sound very Wallace. In fact, instead of political opportunism that’s a classic example of civil disobedience. Violate law, take penalty. That’s how it works.
Furthermore we’ve had several tweets talking about her disobeying the “law” and noting that some of her defenders have been upset other locations violating federal laws (such as sanctuary cities). There is an excellent answer to these statments that I can’t take credit for writingemphasis mine
Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”
Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.
Yes, these questions are still in my mind. In deep disappointment I have wept over the laxity of the church. But be assured that my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. Yes, I love the church. How could I do otherwise? I am in the rather unique position of being the son, the grandson and the great grandson of preachers. Yes, I see the church as the body of Christ. But, oh! How we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and through fear of being nonconformists.
That is an excellent summation of what Kim Davis has done, she has stood up against an unjust “law” rejecting the fear of nonconformity and vividly illustrated the attempt to to create a de facto religious test for office, to wit, if you are christian you may not hold public office in the United States unless you are what we call a “cafeteria catholic” or protestant, willing to ignore or even violate you beliefs for the sake of political office.
Now some have argued that Davis wasn’t in jail to protest a religious test for office she was in jail for contempt of court for violating a judge’s order based on her religion and they would be right.
However they forget that the person who wrote that excellent summation of what Kim Davis did, some fellow by the name of Martin Luther King, did so while in jail, not for protesting segregation, but for parading without a permit and as for legalities King had a few things to say about that too: emphasis mine again
of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.
You know this is the type of language that Democrat pols and our friends on the left have labeled “christofacist” or a “homophobe” or a “bigoted” comparing it to the words of the mullas in Iran, Saudi Arabia & ISIS.
Who knew they hated Martin Luther King so much?
Closing thought: Given the choice between loyalty to a political party willing to join you when the political wind is with you and likely willing drop you twice as fast if the wind changes and loyalty to a God who love yous and sent his son to die for the redemption of our sins, I, along with Kim Davis, Martin Luther King and Pope Francis suggest the latter.
In an unusual legal move, the Obama administration has taken the legal side of the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization in a federal court case that American terrorism victims’ families had already won.”
via Ed Driscoll. Can we stop pretending that there is anything “unusual” Barack Obama’s Administration doing things that help people who want to kill Americans, jews & Christians.
Just a reminder Pam Geller and Robert Spencer saw this years ago and wrote about it over five years ago
At the time they were called extremists and hate mongers. Even when terrorists tried to murder them they were blamed for provoking them yet every day that goes by proves them right.
Iranian TV (Al-Alam) interviewed fighters from the Gaza branch of Fatah’s Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, while standing inside an attack tunnel claimed to be 3.5 km long, and opening inside Israel. The purpose of the tunnel is to facilitate larger scale terror attacks from Gaza into Israel.
The announcement that Fatah’s Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, internationally recognized as a terror organization, is asking for money from Iran comes at the same time that the PA has announced that Mahmoud Abbas will be vising Iran. As Palestinian Media Watch reported yesterday, senior PLO official Abbas Zaki, said that strengthening ties with Iran is “an inevitable step if we [the Palestinians] want to confront the Israeli occupation.”
Well it’s a good thing our President is fighting to keep tough sanctions on Iran to keep them from funding these terrorists who want to slaughter Jews… oh wait
Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.
This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make “disparate impact” cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds.
Big Brother Barack wants the databases operational before he leaves office, and much of the data in them will be posted online.
So civil-rights attorneys and urban activist groups will be able to exploit them to show patterns of “racial disparities” and “segregation,” even if no other evidence of discrimination exists.
When governments collect data their intentions are not always benign. William the Conqueror did not authorize the Domesday Day Book–the most extensive collection of economic data during the Middle Ages–out of curiosity. The English king was seeking taxing possibilities. Fear of new and additional taxes by the populace prevented the Russian Empire–a totalitarian state, I need to emphasize–from conducting its only census until 1897.
The Post writer superbly summarized Obama’s goal in his racial data mining. By attacking the majority culture–white Americans–the most liberal president ever hopes to continue “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” and to “spread the wealth around” even while he is walking the streets of Chicago in retirement with a Republican successor in the White House. Most federal agencies, particularly activist ones such as the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, are dominated by hard-core leftists who enjoy civil service protection. Another president can only fire the top officials.
Congress can perhaps prevent this assault on most Americans by blocking funding on Obama’s twisted fairness scheme. But the Republican majorities in the House and Senate don’t seem interested in challenging Obama–campaign promises notwithstanding.
A key part of President Obama’s legacy will be the fed’s unprecedented collection of sensitive data on Americans by race. The government is prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.”
Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.
The NY Post notes multiple sources of data and touches on the collection of disciplinary data collected by school districts and states. The NY Post’s article cites the Civil Rights Data Collection survey (CRDC), but misses key information about it.
Missouri Education Watchdog notes that the CRDC goes back to 1968, but in recent years has expanded what is collected and how often. Also in the Missouri Education Watchdog piece is mention of the AFFH as a vehicle for ‘solving’ disproportionate education spending.
I want to look a bit closer at the student data so that the public can see just how rich a source of information it will be in the wrong hands.
Some student data history By Law, the U.S. Department of Education is prohibited from creating a national database or system. However, in 2009, states were incentivized with Stimulus funds to build Statewide Longitudinal Database Systems (SLDS).
The U.S. Department of Education is also prohibited from dictating standards or curriculum, but with the advent of Common Core, the Race To The Top grant money was used again to fiscally rope states into using the standards.
In 2013 testimony before a Missouri legislature Education committee, American Principles Fellow Jane Robbins laid bare the path of the data collected by these systems:
Here is an example of what the U.S. Department wants to do with student data. It is now in a joint venture with the U.S. Department of Labor to use education data for workforce-training programs. The Department of Labor makes no bones about its intention to access “individual-level data” from education records. With access to students’ personal information from the SMARTER Balanced tests and elsewhere, and with the new regulations that gut the protections of federal privacy law, there are very few obstacles in the path of the federal bureaucrats’ knowing — and sharing — everything there is to know about our children.
I encourage the public to read Robbins’ whole testimony. In addition Home School Defense League has a 2013 article on this topic well worth your time.
The Race To The Top grant also required states to construct an enhanced Statewide Longitudinal Database System (SLDS) or P-20 database. P-20 tracks the child from Pre-K through entry into the workforce. No child’s data will go unmined.
Some of the data sets going into the SLDS include items that have been collected on children for a number of years and many of which are benign.
However, some of the data being collected on our kids isn’t so benign, as evidenced by the type of information being collected by an invasive and arguably illegal ‘health assessment form‘ in North Carolina.
Invasive Mining Of Our Children
The North Carolina ‘health assessment form‘ was created by the Dept. of Health and Human Services (DHHS) in conjunction with the Department of Public Instruction (DPI). The form includes querying whether or not the child’s genitals are ‘normal or abnormal’ and various emotional and social development questions.
What’s worse is the signature panel on it, whereby parents are being asked to sign over their child’s medical and developmental history to DPI and DHHS. These two agencies can then contact and discuss your child’s medical history without the parents.
This North Carolina health assessment form also asks for the child’s date of birth, health insurance information and race.
It is unclear if this data is in any one or multiple North Carolina databases, including the SLDS. However, some database has it, since this form is already directly being used to ‘track the fat kids‘.
Since we can ‘track the fat kids’, this data can definitely be used to track the white kids, the black kids, the latino kids… You get the picture — Big Brother for Social Justice.
A.P. Dillon resides in the Triangle area of North Carolina and is the founder of LadyLiberty1885.com.
Her current and past writing can also be found at IJ Review, StopCommonCoreNC.org, Heartland.org and Watchdog Wire NC.
Catch her on Twitter: @LadyLiberty1885
HUD will review racial demographics in suburbs such as mine, Morton Grove, Illinois, and look for what it may view as patterns of segregation. HUD will propose solutions, mainly adding affordable housing for minorities. If the town balks, federal funding will be yanked because HUD says the municipality will be in violation of the Fair Housing Act.
The federal record on integration is a bad one. The first house I lived in was in Chicago’s then-all white Roseland neighborhood. We moved out in 1968. And because unscrupulous real estate agents were engaged in panic-peddling based upon race fears, my parents sold their home at a loss, although to be fair our suburban home was a much better one. Three years later we visited the old neighborhood–it was then nearly all-black–and about one-third of the houses, including our bungalow, were boarded up. All of these home were in default of Federal Housing Administration loans as the orange signs on each house informed us. Roseland never recovered. Fifteen years later Barack Obama worked as a community organizer there–yet Roseland remains poverty-stricken and a high crime area. In fact, early this morning two men were shot while riding in a van in the unhappy neighborhood.
It was in the 1970s that the federal government pursued school busing to integrate urban public schools. For a brief period they were–until white families moved to the suburbs or sent their children to expensive private schools.
By the late 1990s, newly married and a father, I lived with my wife and daughter in a marginally dangerous Chicago neighborhood so we could save money for a decent down payment on a suburban home. Mrs. Marathon Pundit and I did not want to raise our daughter in such a place nor subject her to Chicago’s wretched schools. The suburb we live in is integrated–it is 30 percent Asian-American. But our black and Hispanic population is negligible.
Will HUD bureaucrats try to fix this “inequity” by decimating suburbs such as mine? The federal government’s record on such “repairs” is a bad one.
Housing is one of the more difficult markets to manipulate for social outcomes. Homeowners always have the option of packing up and moving on when the nature of their communities no longer meets their needs. They won’t be trapped by government mandates in communities where they don’t feel comfortable.
It’s a nice thought that there can be suburbs where $1 million estates sit right next to $800 a month apartments, and everybody gets along just fine. The reality is that efforts to coerce economic diversity in housing almost always end up destroying neighborhoods.
This rule is basically forced economic integration. It’s making sure everyone gets their ‘fair share’ — or in this case, their fair house as determined by HUD.
This is the federal government engaged in social engineering, the consequences of which will ripple through politics, voting, taxes and education, and that’s just for starters. Consider how this will play out with amnesty and illegal immigration?
How have you never heard of this before? Our absent media strike again. This rule is so explosive, one has to entertain the media has been absent on purpose. It wouldn’t be the first time a national landscape game changer went unreported on — try finding media reports on Common Core prior to 2010.
The absent media will now begin engaging in their appointed roles as sales persons for Obama’s radical policies.
The secretary of HUD, Julian Castro, said this in his statement released yesterday:
“As a former mayor, I know firsthand that strong communities are vital to the well-being and prosperity of families,” said HUD Secretary Julián Castro. “Unfortunately, too many Americans find their dreams limited by where they come from, and a ZIP code should never determine a child’s future. This important step will give local leaders the tools they need to provide all Americans with access to safe, affordable housing in communities that are rich with opportunity.”
Got that? You don’t need to work for what you want. The American Dream will be given to you by the government… because it’s only fair. This is a power grab; centralized control maneuver based on radical priorities which run counter to the definition of a free society.
Stanley Kurtz an article from yesterday about AFFH at National Review Online. Please go read it.
In the article, Kurtz notes that Julian Castro is being seen as a potential running mate for Hillary Clinton. Team Hillary might not be interested though, according to Hot Air.
Kurtz’s July 8th article also mentions a Washington Post article, which focuses mainly on race. The Washington Post article also picks up the ‘Civil Rights’ theme, quoting the Sherrilyn Ifill who is president of the NCAAP’s Legal and Education Defense fund, “Housing discrimination is the unfinished business of civil rights,”.
Towns will be data sets, people will just be numbers
Reading the AFFH rule document, it seems clear that towns will become data sets and people will be just numbers within them. This looks like trying to force outcomes based on data but that data can and likely will be manipulated, skewed and cherry-picked.
That turns the attention to data sources. The census is mentioned, but for a social engineering job as vast and far-reaching as this, HUD will need more data. They’ll need access to a wide range of databases from every government agency one can think of.
HUD needs data that will get planning ahead of the curve, though. HUD will eventually want to predict what areas needs more ‘fairness’. One set of databases I can think of which will allow for that level of prediction is the Statewide Longitudinal Database System or SLDS for short.
The short version: states took the federal Race To The Top grant money and then had to build a database system that reports back to the fed. These SLDS’s track every single school child from the moment they enter the public school system.
The data these SLDS’s contain would arguably allow HUD to predetermine cities and towns just like Common Core and it’s tests are predetermining the futures and jobs of children.
We’ve seen this movie before
If you don’t believe our cities and towns can be engineered by the government, you’re nuts.
Consider the rulings the Supreme Court has made in the last month alone. Factor in that recently the SCOTUS upheld a circuit court’s earlier ruling which said that disparate impact is applicable to the Fair Housing Act.
What does that mean? That means that borrowers who feel they were discriminated against can bring a class-action lawsuit against the lender(s) regardless of whether that lender(s) policies are found to be purposefully discriminatory.
Through AFFH, the Capitol will have its way with Panem.
A.P. Dillon resides in the Triangle area of North Carolina and is the founder of LadyLiberty1885.com.
Her current and past writing can also be found at IJ Review, StopCommonCoreNC.org, Heartland.org and Watchdog Wire NC.
Catch her on Twitter: @LadyLiberty1885