THE FOUNDATION
"History, in general, only informs us what bad government is." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKS
American Soldiers in Iraq Can't Get Medals
The 1,600 ground troops in Barack Obama's merry little not-a-war in Iraq and Syria are ineligible to receive medals because the commander in chief has not named the mission anything more than a "counterterrorism operation." The Hill reports that in order for troops to receive an award designating they were part of a particular operation, the operation must be named -- something usually done early on. The American soldiers degrading ISIL are ineligible to receive the Iraq Campaign Medal because they weren't deployed before Dec. 31, 2011. While Obama uses the same Authorization to Use Military Force that brought America into Iraq, he won't use that same logic to give the soldiers medals for risking their lives. He would rather forget he's back in Iraq, fighting al-Qaida in Iraq still led by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (but now called ISIL) and using the legal justification he originally opposed for doing so. Obama doesn't name the operation because then it would define what he's doing. More...Comment | Share
Clapper Rebuts Obama's 'Underestimated' Charge
Over the weekend, Barack Obama threw the intelligence community under the bus, saying Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and his agencies "underestimated what had been taking place in Syria." It was unbecoming of the commander in chief to scapegoat intelligence for his own lies, distortions and ignorance. And Clapper agrees -- sort of. He sent a memo to his staff Tuesday saying, "I'm proud of the [intelligence community's] efforts over the past two years to monitor, assess and call attention to the expansion of ISIL, and I know the president has found that work to be critical to developing his strategy." He was gracious toward his boss, asserting that Obama appreciates the intelligence community. (Obama appreciates them so much he skips 60% of their briefings.) But it's clear Clapper wanted to send a message that the intelligence community hadn't "underestimated" anything. More...Comment | Share
Secret Service Director Resigns
After 18 months on the job, Julia Pierson resigned from her position as Secret Service director. Secret Service veteran Joseph Clancy filled her spot temporarily and will try to piece together the trust in the Secret Service. "Problems at the Secret Service pre-date Ms. Pierson's tenure as director, and her resignation certainly does not resolve them," Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) said in a statement. "While serious questions surround the Secret Service, Director Pierson served her country with honor and has my gratitude for her efforts." The Washington Post reports the last straw for Pierson was that Barack Obama rode in an elevator with an armed felon, and she was not completely honest with Congress. She will be remembered as the first woman to lead the Secret Service and the first Obama official to take responsibility for her shortcomings -- assuming she left of her own accord. More...Comment | Share
China to U.S.: Stay Out of Hong Kong
China doesn't have the most stellar record when it comes to dealing with protests. Or political dissent of any kind, for that matter. Its handling of protests in what is supposed to be an autonomous Hong Kong is no different, as police have responded with tear gas and batons. Hundreds of thousands have taken to the streets to demand a measure of self-government from Communist Beijing. The Wall Street Journal editorializes, "The experience of Hong Kong under Chinese rule shows that the subsidiary institutions of a free society -- rule of law, civil liberties, an independent civil society, free markets -- can't survive long in the face of authoritarian assault." The White House is busy dealing (or not) with ISIL, Russia, Afghanistan, the Secret Service and so on, but it did manage to find time to release this statement: "The United States has consistently supported the open system that is essential to Hong Kong's stability and prosperity, universal suffrage, and the aspiration of the Hong Kong people." China responded to this sternly worded warning with a simple message: Back off.Comment | Share
DeLay Acquitted, Democrats Hardest Hit
Texas Democrats are on a rocky roll. Not long after Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg (D-UI) and her lackeys lashed out at Gov. Rick Perry for alleged abuse of power, the long-awaited conclusion of another attempted legal lynching comes in. "Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was found not guilty [Wednesday] by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals," Breitbart reports. "This is the highest appellate court in Texas for criminal cases and thus brings DeLay's political persecution to an end." Democrats had targeted DeLay for many years, with Lehmberg's mentor and predecessor, Ronnie Earle, charging him with money laundering and conspiracy. In reality, Democrats were mad because DeLay was beating them soundly. "I am elated that I can now get on with my life," DeLay said. "After nine long years I am finally free." Let's hope Perry can soon say the same. More...Comment | Share
Don't Miss Alexander's Column
Read Holder: Obama's Criminal Co-Conspirator, on the damage done by the resigning attorney general.If you'd like to receive Alexander's Column by email, update your subscription here.
For more, visit Right Hooks.
|
RIGHT ANALYSIS
'In the Unlikely Event Ebola Does Reach Our Shores...'
|
| Ebola patient Nancy Writebol in August |
Duncan left Liberia on Sept. 19, arriving in Dallas the next day. He reported feeling sick on Sept. 24 and sought treatment on Sept. 26. He wasn't admitted to the hospital until Sept. 28, however, when he was critically ill. Duncan never should have been allowed into the country in the first place.
According to The New York Times, "Officials said Wednesday that they believed Mr. Duncan came into contact with 12 to 18 people when he was experiencing active symptoms and when the disease was contagious, and that the daily monitoring of those people had not yet shown them to be infected." That includes five children from four schools, as well as three paramedics.
The World Health Organization estimates more than 7,100 people in West Africa have contracted Ebola, and more than 3,300 have died -- 1,800 in Liberia alone. That's more than all other Ebola outbreaks since 1976 combined. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimates 1.4 million people could become infected by January unless it's stopped.
The White House announced Wednesday it will not impose travel restrictions, which is nigh inexplicable. The State Department banned flights to Israel in July as a political stunt, but isn't bothering to prevent another Ebola carrier from entering the U.S. now. Some 13,000 people in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea -- the three nations affected -- have visas to enter the U.S.
Yet CDC has assured Americans that the risk of epidemic here is low. "We're stopping it in its tracks in this country," says CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden. "There's all the difference in the world between the U.S. and parts of Africa where Ebola is spreading."
Preventative measures and treatment are indeed far superior in the U.S., and while Ebola is deadly in each of its variant forms -- it is much like AIDS or HIV -- transmission requires substantial direct contact with an infected person. It is not airborne, nor is it spread through casual contact. This common strain of Ebola was first identified in 1976 and is a very stable virus with no record of mutation, making it more virulent.
That said, there is no cure. And given that in the last few months the CDC’s stellar status was tarnished by reports that its personnel were careless with some deadly pathogens -- including anthrax, avian flu and smallpox -- it’s understandable many Americans question CDC’s assessment of the Ebola risk.
Indeed, Dr. Jesse Goodman, a former top scientist at the Food and Drug Administration, warns, "It is quite appropriate to be concerned on many fronts. ... [S]everal people were exposed before the individual was placed in isolation, and it is quite possible that one or more of his contacts will be infected."
On the other hand, Barack Obama said recently, "The chances of an Ebola outbreak here in the United States are extremely low ... [even] [i]n the unlikely event that someone with Ebola does reach our shores." Yes, and we could keep our doctor and our insurance, too.
And just for the record, Ebola is not caused by climate change. Nor is it a plot by whites to kill blacks, as Louis Farrakhan insists.
So what should you do?
We’ve learned how to restrain the spread of these diseases because of our notable early detection of outbreaks and well-rehearsed preventive measures to contain and isolate the infected. Early detection and containment is critical when dealing with bacterial and viral infections.
While the CDC's risk assessment regarding the threat of an Ebola epidemic in the U.S. is correct, we recommend you review their Ebola fact sheet, as well as The Patriot Post's resources for Two Step Individual Readiness Plan for sheltering in place. Keep an eye on the situation.
Comment | Share
The Trouble With (Early) Voting
|
| Headed to the polls |
Those who find this argument convincing will be appalled by this week's Supreme Court decision blocking the opening of early voting in Ohio on Sept. 30. Yes, you read that correctly: September 30. A full 35 days before Election Day. SCOTUS’s 5-4 decision sides with the state of Ohio, which had requested the Court stay a decision by lower courts against a plan passed by the Ohio legislature to decrease the early voting period from 35 days to 28 days.
The revision was apparently a problem because, you see, having just 28 days to vote is downright disenfranchisement! Indeed, groups like the ACLU and NAACP, which opposed the decrease, claimed the only reason to reduce early voting is to discourage turnout. Never mind that it’s called Election Day -- not Election Week or Election Month. Or, in this case, Election Month-and-Then-Some.
Here’s the issue. By reducing early voting from 35 to 28 days, the legislature eliminated the so-called “Golden Week,” during which an individual may register to vote and cast his or her vote on the same day (the deadline to register in Ohio is Oct. 6). It also eliminated voting on the Sunday immediately before the election. Because many minorities vote on this Sunday, SCOTUS’s ruling is now being castigated as complicit in a concerted racial attack. Never mind that voters of any race still have an absurd four weeks to hit the ballot box.
To put this in perspective (because, sadly, it apparently needs to be), Ohio is still among the more permissible states in the nation when it comes to early voting. Indeed, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, the Buckeye State is one of 33, plus the District of Columbia, which allow some form of early voting. And whereas the average early voting period begins 22 days before Election Day and lasts for 19 days, Ohio’s early voting period will now begin 28 days before Election Day and end the Monday before the election.
How, then, has the Court’s decision discouraged turnout? The ACLU hyperbolically claims it has “dramatically slashed early voting opportunities” to the point of “depriv[ing] many Ohioans of the opportunity to vote.”
Perhaps instead of claiming voting is too restricted and difficult, the nation should be more concerned that voting is entirely too easy. David Harsanyi, Senior Editor at The Federalist, argues, “Most Americans don’t really care about contemporary political issues or the rudimentary workings of their government. But they sure do love voting. And the biggest fans of ‘democracy’ treat this orgy of vacuous lever-pulling as if it were sacred or patriotic.”
According to a recent study by the Annenberg Public Policy Center, only 36% of Americans can name the three branches of government, and 35% cannot name even one. No wonder the Left wants to make sure the polls are open weeks in advance -- so ignorant voters can vote to populate branches they can’t even identify.
Samuel Adams once wrote, “Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual -- or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country.”
Voting is not simply a right in our Republic; it is a civic duty that each American should exercise as a sacred charge. That includes knowing enough to form a rational opinion about the subjects and candidates on which voters cast ballots. In this week during which Ohioans are now "deprived" of voting, perhaps they -- and the rest of the nation -- should focus on learning the basic civics of our nation, and take time to understand exactly how solemn a duty voting is.
Comment | Share
For more, visit Right Analysis.
|
|
|
TOP 5 RIGHT OPINION COLUMNS
- R. Emmett Tyrrell: Can It Happen Here?
- Victor Davis Hanson: Bomb or Occupy -- or Neither?
- Larry Elder: When Paul Became Muhammad
- Larry Kudlow: None Can Call It Treason
- George Will: A New Case for Term Limits
OPINION IN BRIEF
British author John Ruskin (1819-1900): "The highest reward for man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it."Columnist R. Emmett Tyrrell: "Can it happen here? It is happening in Europe where French polls show that the National Front’s Marine Le Pen would win the election for president if elections were held tomorrow. Something like it has happened in Italy where an anarchist comedian, the happily named Beppe Grillo, garnered 25 percent of the vote last year. Most spectacularly, it almost happened in the United Kingdom last month. What am I talking about? An election in which the lowly voters overcome the professional pols and vote their minds. ... Here in the United States there is grumbling at the base of both parties. ... At the end of every election the professional politicians of both parties return to cutting their deals, securing their sinecures, and making money. ... Can it happen here? In both parties, we have the ingredients for [a] new [political] order. ... The forthcoming elections should be followed with a jeweler’s eye."
Comment | Share
Historian Victor Davis Hanson: "It is popular to think that America’s threats can be neutralized by occasional use of missiles, bombs and drones without much cost. But blowing apart a problem for a while is different than ending it for good. ... Obama now promises to destroy the Islamic State in Syria, solely through air power. And he assures that he will safely pull nearly all U.S. troops out of Afghanistan at the end of the year. More likely, Syria will remain a dangerous mess like Libya, and Afghanistan will end up like Vietnam or Iraq. Victory on the ground and occupations can end a problem but are unpopular and costly. Bombing is easy, forgettable, and ends up mostly as a temporary Band-Aid. If we cannot or will not solve the problem on the ground, end an enemy power, and then reconstitute its government, then it is probably better to steer clear altogether than to blow up lots of people and things -- and simply go home."
Burt Prelutsky: "If Barack Obama ever gets around to writing his own presidential memoir, I assume it will deal with the 18 toughest rounds of golf he played during his time in office."
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform -- Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen -- standing in harm's way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.
No comments:
Post a Comment