Daily Digest
February 10, 2015
THE FOUNDATION"[P]osterity will be indebted for the possession, and the world for the example of the numerous innovations displayed on the American theatre, in favor of private rights and public happiness." --James Madison, Federalist No. 14, 1787TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKSParis Attack Just a Random Shooting, Says ObamaNot only does Barack Obama refuse to admit that ISIL and its ilk are driven by Islamic ideology, he can't even say that the group has a hit list. After an Islamic militant captured shoppers in a Jewish market in Paris, killing four Jews, Obama basically likened it to a group of gangsters roughing up Katz Deli in New York City. In an interview with Vox, Obama said, "It is entirely legitimate for the American people to be deeply concerned when you've got a bunch of violent, vicious zealots who behead people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris. ... It is right and appropriate for us to be vigilant and aggressive in trying to deal with that -- the same way a big city mayor's got to cut the crime rate down if he wants that city to thrive." But combatting Islamic extremism isn't the same as keeping the peace as the Italian Mafia and Russian thugs battle over who gets to collect trash and distribute cocaine. Fox News analyst Charles Krauthammer asserted, "The reason [Obama] doesn't have a strategy [to fight radical Islam] is because he thinks there is no need for a strategy because it is random violence." Either Obama is deluding himself, or he brought political obfuscation to the next level. More...Comment | Share 'Settled Science' and Data TamperingArctic sea ice was supposed to have melted by now. Polar bears extinct. Sea levels at devastating highs. Civilization on the cusp of socioeconomic disaster. Alarmists' predictions never materialize, but doom is looming, they assure us. Interestingly, the diabolical Leftmedia never question the various narratives, but when it comes to evidence of scientific fraud they act like it's simply part of the process necessary to narrow down the preconceived day of Climate Armageddon. The federal government is actively manipulating global temperature data to fit the narrative, which London Telegraph writer Christopher Booker reminds us "is the biggest science scandal ever." In fact, he notes, "When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records -- on which the entire panic ultimately rested -- were systematically 'adjusted' to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified." The science is "settled," the Left lectures. So long as you ignore massive collusion and fraud.Comment | Share The Myth of the One-in-Five Statistic GrowsAs Mark Twain observed, there are lies, damned lies and statistics. Barack Obama dished out all of it in a PSA about sexual violence that ran during the Grammy Awards. He claimed, "Right now, nearly one in five women in America has been a victim of rape or attempted rape. And more than one in four women has experienced some form of domestic violence." The lie works because it's repeated -- often. So for the viewers who just wanted to witness Sam Smith sweeping Grammy win after Grammy win, the statistic sounded true. Last summer, commentator George Will questioned the one-in-five statistic of rape on college campuses, arguing it was so inflated and didn't make any logical sense that it was only good as government propaganda. Furthermore, Washington Examiner commentator Ashe Schow notes that Obama not only repeated a suspect statistic, but he stretched the truth even further. The statistic was traditionally used by progressives to talk about rape on college campuses. But then Obama went and applied it to all women in the United States. After all, he's got a "war on women" to maintain. More...Comment | Share House GOP Works on Life-at-Conception BillIn the wake of the House debacle over the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, a group of 50 Republicans is working an another bill to establish life at conception. Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV) explains, "There are thousands of unborn babies who need us to fight tirelessly on the issue of human life. I cannot think of a more important role for a benevolent society than to offer protection for the right to life of the most vulnerable among us." Republicans see an opening in none other than the reasoning behind the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade. Justice Harry Blackmon wrote, "If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case [i.e., "Roe"], of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [Fourteenth] Amendment." It's guaranteed Barack Obama will veto the bill, but it's worth putting our representatives on the record regarding the clear science of when life begins. If Democrats claim to be the Party of Science™, this shouldn't be a difficult question.Comment | Share Hotline for Illegals, Not So Much for VetsThe Department of Homeland Security set up a hotline for people who believe their rights have been violated. Illegal aliens who believe so, that is. In the wake of Barack Obama's amnesty, U.S. Customs and Border Protection advised illegals to "please tell us about your experience" if they feel they've been treated "contrary to the new DHS enforcement priorities." Shawn Moran, vice president of the National Border Patrol Council, says it's an insult: "Instead of supporting our agents, this administration has decided it is more important to find new ways to solicit complaints and invite ridicule against them." Meanwhile, compare that "customer service" to the treatment of veterans. There are hundreds of thousands of veterans awaiting help from the Department of Veterans Affairs in a variety of ways, from home-loan assistance to disability benefits to health care. Veterans quickly became far too familiar with the incredible lack of responsiveness by the VA. It is a near impossibility to actually reach a human being at the VA by telephone, and, if you ever do, good luck getting anything useful out of them. To see such shameful treatment of our veterans while Obama's administration is placing funds into a program designed to assist people here illegally is beyond appalling. More...Comment | Share For more, visit Right Hooks.
Don't Miss Patriot HumorCheck out Commiseration.If you'd like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here. RIGHT ANALYSISProjecting Weakness Won't Bring Peace
Anyone who has been remotely paying attention to world events knows there are several legitimate national security threats. One is the rise of the Islamic State, which continues to slaughter innocents and create major instability in the Middle East. While the NSS identifies the Islamic State as a threat, Obama still fails to identify Islamic extremism and Islamic terrorism as a threat to the United States and the rest of the free world. Instead, the word "Islamic" is replaced by the word "violent." Nowhere in the document can it be seen that violent extremism is perpetrated at the hands of Islamists. Nile Gardiner of The Heritage Foundation notes, "The document steadfastly refuses to identify the ideological nature of the foe the United States is confronting, a brutal and vicious adversary that has made huge gains in Iraq and Syria under Obama's watch. ... Nor does the document outline a concrete strategy for defeating Islamist terrorism, from Iraq to Nigeria and Pakistan to Yemen." Releasing this NSS without acknowledging radical Islam as a threat isn't naïve -- it's absurd. Why can't Obama for once call our enemies what they are? We have heard him call ISIL "the JV team," hail Islam as the "Religion of Peace™," and insists that the Islamic terrorist attacks in Paris were just random shootings. Moreover, he still insists pulling our troops out of Iraq was the right thing to do even though it left a vacuum for the Islamic State to fill, and therefore negated almost everything for which our troops bled and died. And now that we've left, Obama will reportedly seek an authorization for the use of military force against ISIL. Meanwhile, a second threat is Iran -- that is, a nuclear-armed Iran. The NSS mentions the ongoing negotiations over Iran's nuclear program and the administration's goal of reaching a nuclear accord. Why is Obama so adamant about helping Iran acquire nuclear capabilities even though the nation's leadership vowed to destroy Israel and the United States? While the commander in chief appeases Iran, Houthi rebels, a terrorist militia in Yemen reportedly backed by Iran, have essentially taken over the Yemeni government. Soft diplomacy doesn't work when dealing with radical Islamists. Furthermore, Thomas Donnelly of The Weekly Standard writes, "[T]he most revealing section is that which asserts the administration's determination to 'lead with a long-term perspective.'" If leading by long-term perspective means waiting until the next president takes office to battle our real enemies, then Obama is well on his way because the new strategy doesn't clearly define who our enemy is. So far, Obama's diplomatic efforts have failed. All the while, he has downsized the military in the face of growing threats. Our military remains technologically superior, albeit with a smaller force. To make matters worse, veteran journalist Bob Woodward claims several of our top commanders complain "there is no strategy" and that they are being "micromanaged" by people in the White House -- including National Security Advisor Susan Rice. Yep, the same Susan Rice involved in the Benghazi talking points fiasco. If this is the case, then it's no wonder our top commanders are unclear on Obama's strategy. Overall, the new NSS dismisses radical Islam as a threat and aims to tolerate a nuclear powered Iran. Instead of following Ronald Reagan's proven strategy of peace through strength, Obama has decided that our nation will follow his strategy of peace through weakness. So far, it hasn't worked. But it seems he will continue on this path until we elect a president who knows that our greatest national security threat isn't the changing climate. Comment | Share Is Hillary Really Inevitable?
Unlike the Republican presidential field, which is well populated and already out on the trail, Clinton is facing little opposition among Democrats. She can afford to take her time in making her announcement. The only serious name that keeps coming up as a challenger is Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). (We know, we left Joe Biden off the "serious name" list.) Despite a growing attempt to draft Warren, she has remained relatively silent on the matter. The danger Clinton faces with a dearth of challengers is that her nomination will look more like a coronation. That's what she and her supporters expected in 2008, but we all know how that turned out. Iowa Democrat activist Anne Kinzel says, "The hacks think Hillary is entitled to be president. I think she is one of those people who has lost the sense of why they are in politics." That sentiment seems to be spreading. Former Obama adviser David Axelrod told USA Today that Clinton has to project a fresh message about where she wants to take the country: "I think she has to approach the campaign like a challenger, not like a front-runner -- like an insurgent." Odd advice for a woman who has been plotting a White House run since at least 2000, and perhaps 1993 if you consider that whole "co-presidency" thing her and Bill had going on. Clinton's operation, whenever it kicks in, will not leave anything to chance. Fundraising, public appearances and media relations will all be well orchestrated. It's Clinton's truckloads of political baggage that will be the problem. One interesting tidbit that recently surfaced thanks to Axelrod's upcoming memoir was Clinton's plan to get John Edwards out of the 2008 race by offering him the attorney general slot in exchange for his endorsement. This was before Edwards' career went up in smoke thanks to his own scumbag behavior. He cheated on his wife while she was dying of cancer, fathered an illegitimate child and lied about it, and then used campaign funds to support his mistress and cover it all up. Yeah, he would've made a great AG. We can't be sure how Clinton would have handled the Edwards debacle when it did blow up, and it would have sooner or later. There's little doubt the Leftmedia will circle the wagons rather than ask Clinton about her 2008 plans for Edwards. After all, it doesn't exactly burnish her credentials as a champion of women's causes -- especially after she stood by her man, Bill, for little other reason than vain ambition. But at this point, what difference does it make, right? Comment | Share For more, visit Right Analysis.
TOP 5 RIGHT OPINION COLUMNS
 OPINION IN BRIEFPlato (429-347 BC): "Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehood's school. And the one man who dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool."Columnist Arnold Ahlert: "Right now there is more than $1 trillion dollars of outstanding student debt, with each student from the class of 2013 amassing an average of $28,400. The current default rate has fallen to 13.7 percent from 14.7 percent the previous year, but the Obama administration was still forced to raise its estimated cost for student loans by $22 billion. Why? Because the Obama administration is rigging the payback system. 'The government is on pace to forgive billions of dollars more in student loans than previously thought as droves of borrowers enroll in federal repayment plans,' the Wall Street Journal reports. The additional $22 billion is needed 'due to plans that peg monthly student-loan payments to borrowers' income and permit balances to be forgiven in as little as 10 years.' That's not a repayment plan. It's nothing more than welfare, ultimately backed up by the taxpayer. Why the taxpayer? Because universities themselves have no skin in the game. They get paid in full, no matter how many students default on their loans. And that's because the Obama administration nationalized the student loan program in 2010 -- as part of ObamaCare, no less. So what do universities who have no worries about the bottom line do? Pay professors more. Hire legions of worthless 'diversity' specialists that now inhabit the bureaucracies of campuses across the nation. Build more expensive and fancier campus facilities designed to attract more students -- all of which contribute to tuition costs that are completely out of control." Comment | Share Columnist Burt Prelutsky: "[I]f those who follow Islam are as peace-loving as those who are Christians, why is it that so many senseless murders are accompanied by shouts of 'Allah Akbar!' and so rarely by anyone referencing Jesus Christ? Furthermore, if those shouting 'Allah Akbar' as they mow down, behead and crucify infidels aren't -- as Obama and other liberals insist -- true Muslims, how is it the pinheads are always so quick to label those who kill abortionists true Christians? And if we're all the same under our skins, how it is that only the Islamics regard rape and the aforementioned crucifixions and beheadings, as a natural instrument of warfare? For that matter, how is it that some of us regard dogs as members of our family while others, who are allegedly our civilized equals, regard them as merely an optional source of protein? No matter what the adolescent 'Kumbaya' crowd says, there are savages who would be right at home in the eighth century all around the planet. They are as different in every way that matters from us as we are from a field of cow pies. And I, for one, say: 'Viva la difference!'" Comment | Share
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. |
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
THE PATRIOT POST 02/10/2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment