THE FOUNDATION
"The only foundation of a free Constitution, is pure virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our people, in a great measure, than they have it now, they may change their rulers, and the forms of government, but they will not obtain a lasting Liberty." --John Adams, letter to Zabdiel Adams, 1776TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKS
Why Cops Focused on Garner
Another twist in the Eric Garner saga. According to New York Congressman Peter King, "The district attorney of Staten Island is a man of unimpeachable integrity. ... The highest ranking officer at the scene was an African-American female sergeant [Kizzy Adoni]. She was there the whole time. The reason that the cops were there that day is the local merchants -- this is a minority neighborhood, these are minority business people -- went to police headquarters and the chief of the department, who is an African-American. They complained that Eric Garner was disrupting the area and preventing people from coming into their stores. [Police] were there at the request of minority shop owners, under the direction of an African-American police chief, and under the supervision of an African-American sergeant." King added, "I've seen a number of people taken down -- this was a takedown. If someone is resisting arrest it often takes four or five cops to get them down. You have to subdue the person on the ground. The officers said, 'Put your hands behind your back,' and he wouldn't. ... I've seen guys held down. ... If they had let up on the tension and he got up it would've started all over again." If those facts don't undermine the Left's race-bait narrative, we don't know what does.Comment | Share
'Centuries of Racism' to Blame for Garner's Death?
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio says that Eric Garner's death was tragic because it's part of a large and long-term pattern of racism in our nation. "It's a conversation that's really much less about any one case," de Blasio said. "It's something much bigger. ... It's kind of tragic that we are not surprised when one of these tragedies occurs, you know. And by the way, even beyond the question of racism in America -- and I've said very very clearly in these last days, let's be clear about, this is not based on decades of racism, this is based on centuries of racism -- we've become somehow used to the notion that these tragedies will occur." Garner's death had nothing to do with race, but leftists really want this round peg to fit into their square hole. As National Review's Kevin Williamson writes, "For the Left, this is all tribal, white hats vs. black hats." If you're on the "wrong side," you're racist -- end of debate. And, for leftists, police happen to be on the wrong side. We refer the mayor to Peter King's comments about the black police sergeant overseeing the takedown.Comment | Share
Blacks Protesting Racism Won't Let Whites Join Them
If you think Michael Brown's death was justified, the Left says you're racist. And if you're a white person who doesn't think that and wants to show solidarity with black protesters, well, get to the back of the bus. The College Fix reports, "Organizers of a recent Ferguson protest at the University of Missouri requested 'only people of color' take part in the event's 'die-in,' one element of a larger demonstration that prompted at least two classes to be shelved so students could participate. 'During the demonstration we will hold a "die-in" in the student center. We are asking that only people of color be the ones to do so,' event organizers stated in an email obtained by The College Fix. 'We are asking non-people of color to stand holding hands in solidarity.'" Do they also have to drink from separate water fountains? More...Comment | Share
November Jobs Report Short of a Christmas Miracle
The November jobs report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics gave some cause for hope: Hiring jumped during November (which makes 2014 the best year for hires since 1999), even while the unemployment rate froze and wages barely rose to float above inflation. Here's what BLS disclosed: "Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 321,000 in November, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.8 percent. ... Job gains were widespread, led by growth in professional and business services, retail trade, health care, and manufacturing." The U-6 measure of unemployment ticked down one-tenth of a percent to 11.4%. In the hiring statistic, 50,000 jobs were added to the retail industry, but how many happened because of seasonal hiring? Some stores start hiring early for the holiday boom -- which didn't really happen this year -- in October. More...Comment | Share
China Overtakes U.S. as Number One Economy
Barack Obama said he would fundamentally change America, and he has. New data reveal that China, a close Russian ally that has done its own fair share of saber rattling, finally overtook the United States as the world's top economic powerhouse. This marks the first time America has relinquished this ranking since Ulysses S. Grant occupied the Oval Office. According to MarketWatch, "The International Monetary Fund recently released the latest numbers for the world economy. And when you measure national economic output in 'real' terms of goods and services, China will this year produce $17.6 trillion -- compared with $17.4 trillion for the U.S.A. As recently as 2000, we produced nearly three times as much as the Chinese. To put the numbers slightly differently, China now accounts for 16.5% of the global economy when measured in real purchasing-power terms, compared with 16.3% for the U.S." Obama's all-out attack on American exceptionalism has us increasingly looking up at our adversaries. Most sobering of all, the U.S. could easily recapture this title -- if only Obama would loosen the regulatory shackles. More...Comment | Share
For more, visit Right Hooks.
|
RIGHT ANALYSIS
Is Republican Amnesty Opposition a Fig Leaf?
|
In the spring and summer of 2013, Congress seemed on its way to passing amnesty with the “Gang of Eight” bill. But while the Senate sold out, the House stood strong. Since then, the lower chamber has been the backstop against Democrats' desire to add a huge new class of government-dependent voters to its ranks, as well as an influx of low-wage workers to satisfy big business interests such as those represented by the national Chamber of Commerce.
The House's unwillingness to bend to Barack Obama's demands led the president to break his constitutionally sworn oath to faithfully execute the laws by unilaterally giving “*permisos*” to nearly five million illegal immigrants, for whom existing immigration law would not be enforced.
That planned back-door amnesty, when coupled with the ongoing budgeting by continuing resolution (CR) that expires next week, gave Republicans an opportunity to flex their muscles going into a term in which they will regain the majority in the Senate to match the one they currently enjoy in the House. While conservatives lament the need to address the budget during a lame-duck session of Congress, the one slight advantage it might have became apparent when Obama took immigration into his own hands last month.
A weak-kneed Republican plan for resisting Obama's immigration overreach has now emerged. Step one was passing a meaningless fig leaf of a bill sponsored by Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL), which would make it illegal for Obama to change immigration law via executive authority. That bill passed the House on Thursday by a 219-197 vote, which included three Democrat votes.
According to The Hill, "The seven Republican no votes were Reps. Mike Coffman (Colo.), Mario Diaz-Balart (Fla.), Jeff Denham (Calif.), Louie Gohmert (Texas), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Fla.) Marlin Stutzman (Ind.) and David Valadao (Calif.). With the exceptions of Gohmert and Stutzman, who thought the bill did not go far enough, these Republicans are supportive of immigration reform." Several of them have large Hispanic constituencies.
Regardless, the Senate won't take up the bill. Even if it did, Obama would surely veto it. The Yoho bill simply provides cover for Republicans to say they voted against the Obama amnesty. Hey, it wasn't their fault the Senate did nothing.
The GOP's next step in this charade is to pass what's being called the CRomnibus, a spending bill that funds all of the government through Sept. 30 (the omnibus part) except the Department of Homeland Security, which is extended only through a short continuing resolution (the CR part). Terrified of being blamed for another government “shutdown,” Republicans are punting their budgetary leverage away with the DHS exception. But it appears to be a bill Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can live with, and that's the important hurdle to cross right now, particularly as Senate Republicans aren't very willing to stand up against amnesty.
So far, things have played out more or less as we thought they would. Of course, the Left would blame any government shutdown on Republicans, but at this point it's beginning to look like immigration reform by fiat may be Barack Obama's hill to die on, not the House GOP's.
This fight will demand even more vigilance. A big drawback to this strategy is that Democrats essentially maintain control of the purse strings until September, when the 2016 election will be in sight (although, to be sure, passing the budget in regular order earlier this year would have achieved the same result). Beginning in January, though, the GOP can create its own budget priorities and deliver them on schedule -- something unseen in Washington in quite some time. Assuming they pass a package with funding for executive amnesty stripped out, it will be Obama holding the country hostage by having flouted the Rule of Law.
Comment | Share
Operation Incoherent Resolve
|
The plan calls for a buffer zone along a portion of the 500-mile western border between Syria and Turkey in which Syrian rebels could move freely. In exchange, U.S.-led air strikes originating from Incirlik Air Base would execute pinpoint strikes on ISIL forces in that zone.
Allowing the U.S. over-flight rights from inside Turkey can make for a more effective air campaign against ISIL forces on the ground. To this point, aircraft had to fly their sorties from the Persian Gulf, nearly 1,000 miles away. Now, planes can stay in the air up to an additional six hours, remaining "on station" to locate and strike targets called out by drones or from the ground.
However, Turkey's inclusion doesn't necessarily signal a positive turning point. In fact, things are likely to get even more complicated. Turkey's relative indifference to ISIL's rise helped create the situation in the first place. The Turkish government was eager to see the fight against Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad succeed, so it was content to see ISIL fighters launch attacks against Assad from positions along the Turkish border.
To this point, U.S. forces have been walking a fine line between supporting Syrian rebels in their fight against ISIL while trying not to engage with Assad's forces, which are also fighting against the rebels. Some in Washington worry that this new deal with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan could lead to direct confrontation between U.S. and Syrian forces. U.S.-led airstrikes against ISIL targets inside Syria constantly run the risk of setting off Syrian air defense forces against U.S. planes, forcing the air campaign to operate within guidelines too strict to lead to success. Erdogan heralded his talks with Joe Biden for leading to a new level of cooperation, but he has also railed against Western leaders who "like the conflicts, fights and quarrels of the Middle East" because they work to Western advantage.
It's difficult to judge just how much Turkey can be trusted as an ally in this fight. Israeli intelligence recently indicated that Hamas has moved its outside-Gaza headquarters from Damascus to Istanbul. Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon warned in a meeting with former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel that Turkey has close ties to Hamas. If that is true, and the Turkish government remains complicit in Hamas launching terrorist attacks from its new Istanbul base, then Turkey could officially be considered a state sponsor of terrorism.
Further complicating matters is the involvement of Iran in the fight. Eager to see the destruction of ISIL to prevent a greater Sunni presence in the region, Iran has engaged in a number of airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq, in proximity to the U.S.-led campaign. Secretary of State John Kerry confirmed U.S. knowledge of the Iranian campaign, but insists there is no cooperation with Iran. Essentially, Kerry says, we're fighting on the same side with Iran, but we're not fighting alongside them.
In fact, the Iranians have had better success in their proxy war against ISIL than we have to this point. Iraqi forces scored notable victories against the Islamic State with Iranian air support and military aid. Even Iran's terrorist proxy, Hezbollah, may have pitched in to help win the fight.
Furthermore, Russia has gotten in on the act. Long a supporter of the Assad regime, Moscow has been prodding Assad officials and some rebel leaders to cobble together an agreement to leave Assad in power and effectively neutralize anti-Assad rebel groups. This would create an alliance of forces against ISIL, but it would do so on Russian terms.
Russian and Iranian actions could sideline American attempts to lead the fight against ISIL -- which would seem to suit Obama just fine. So far, the U.S. coalition has amounted to pretty much what Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called it: "empty, shallow and biased." Obama's actions in the Middle East throughout his presidency -- the so-called "red line" against Syria, foolish back channel talks with Iran, pulling out of Iraq only to send forces back in -- have led many to question America's stance like never before.
The Obama administration destroyed U.S. credibility in the region because it doesn't have a coherent policy. Obama has gone back on his word and contradicted himself too many times. He has allied with known terrorist supporters to fight other known terrorists, all of whom, with the exception of Turkey, America has been in conflict with at some point in the last 15 years. The situation is so confused, and the payoff so far away, it's worth questioning just what exactly we are trying to accomplish in the Middle East. The White House doesn't seem to know.
Comment | Share
For more, visit Right Analysis.
|
|
|
TOP 5 RIGHT OPINION COLUMNS
- Jonah Goldberg: Cig Taxes Factored Into Garner's Death
- David Harsanyi: Yes, Stupid Laws Help Kill People
- Linda Chavez: Ferguson vs. New York City
- Tony Perkins: Babies 'R' U.S.?
- Arnold Ahlert: Rushing the National Defense Authorization Act
OPINION IN BRIEF
British economist Herbert Spencer (1820-1903): "That which fundamentally distinguishes the slave is that he labors under coercion to satisfy another's desires. The relation admits of many gradations. Oppressive taxation is a form of slavery of the individual to the community as a whole. The essential question is -- How much is he compelled to labor for other benefit than his own, and how much can he labor for his own benefit?"Columnist Jonah Goldberg: "[R]easonable people can disagree on whether illegally excessive force was to blame [for Eric Garner's death]. ... But you know what reasonable people can’t dispute? New York’s cigarette taxes are partly to blame for Eric Garner’s death. ... You can talk all day about how 'government is just another word for those things we do together,' but what makes government work is force, not hugs. If you sell raw-milk cheese even after the state tells you to stop, eventually people with guns will show up at your home or office and arrest you. If you resist arrest, something very bad might happen. You might even die for selling bootleg cheese. Everyone agrees: No one should die for selling bootleg cigarettes. But if you pass and enforce a law against such things, you increase the chances things might go wrong. That’s a fact, whether it sounds callous to delicate ears or not."
Comment | Share
Columnist David Harsanyi: "Garner wasn’t targeted for death because he was avoiding taxes, but nonetheless, prohibitive cigarette taxes unnecessarily generate situations that make events such as this possible. We frame violence in this way all the time. We often talk about unintended consequences. When we discuss how women who immigrated to this country illegally can be the helpless victims of domestic violence, we also blame unfair laws for creating the situation. When we talk about the war on drugs and how it creates millions of nonviolent criminals and needless abuse by the Drug Enforcement Administration and others, liberals have little problem blaming the underlying policy that makes all of that possible."
Comment | Share
No comments:
Post a Comment