THE FOUNDATION
"It is of great importance to set a resolution, not to be shaken, never to tell an untruth. There is no vice so mean, so pitiful, so contemptible; and he who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world's believing him." —Thomas Jefferson, 1785TOP RIGHT HOOKS
What 'Doesn't Happen in Other Countries'?
|
Wait, what? Obama is in Paris, where they just endured a jihadist attack in which Islamic State terrorists killed 130. Most of the dead were killed in mass shootings. Earlier this year, Paris' Charlie Hebdo offices were attacked, again by Islamofascists wielding rifles, and 11 were killed.
Obama did seem to catch himself, though, and went on about being "rightly determined to prevent terrorist attacks wherever they occur." But his problem is that he always thinks he's the smartest, sensible and most compassionate guy in the room. He saw a chance to bash America before the rest of the world while waxing eloquent about gun control, and he seized it, only to utter something completely senseless.
Comment | Share
Syrian Refugees = English Pilgrims, Says Obama
"Nearly four centuries after the Mayflower set sail, the world is still full of pilgrims — men and women who want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families," Barack Obama told us over the Thanksgiving holiday. "What makes America America is that we offer that chance." He was, of course, making the argument that we should open the doors to Syrian refugees, some of whom we've warned may be radical Islamists bent on our destruction. Such a Trojan horse isn't wise. But on the bright side, Obama had something positive to say about Christian pilgrims...Meanwhile, in completely unrelated news (we're sure), a survey last year of both Arabs and a subset of Syrian refugees found that the vast majority had a "negative view" of the Islamic State. It's understandable that true refugees would have a rather dour opinion of the jihadis forcing them from their homes. But the disturbing reality is the flip side — 13% of Syrian refugees had a positive opinion of the Islamic State. Given that Obama completely underestimated the growth of the Islamic State and has based his policy on either political expediency or cooked intelligence, do we really trust his administration to vet refugees and weed out Islamic State sympathizers? While 13% is minuscule when you're counting votes, it's an enormous threat when considering potential terrorists being allowed into the country.
Comment | Share
Iran Seeks to Hide Its Efforts to Make an A-Bomb
Iran threatened Sunday to walk away from the United Nations agreement limiting its nuclear program unless a UN report investigating whether or not the county tried to weaponize its nuclear program in the past is spiked. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) must release, no later than Dec. 15, a report exploring the possible military dimensions of Iran's nuclear program. The head of the IAEA said last week that the investigation — dubbed the PDM file — will not be a "black and white assessment," but it's still too uncomfortable for Iran. It's a big deal, as some countries like France will use the report to decide whether or not to lift economic sanctions against Iran as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. And while the report has always been part of the plan, Iran is back at the negotiation table, trying to keep its nuclear history in the dark. "Without the closure of the file regarding past issues, there is no possibility of implementing the JCPOA," said Admiral Ali Shamkhani, a top Iranian security official Sunday. "The P5+1 must choose between the JCPOA and leaving open the so-called PMD file."You can expect the Obama administration to scurry back to the negotiation table, trying to ensure peace at any cost with a deal Iran never signed. But it would be better if the U.S. let the deal fall apart. As President Ronald Reagan said in his "A Time for Choosing" speech during the Cold War, "Every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face — that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand — the ultimatum."
Comment | Share
Don't Miss Patriot Humor
Check out M&Ms.If you'd like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here.
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Rebuking the Islamic State by Fighting Climate Change?
By Paul Albaugh
|
During a press conference last week, Barack Obama announced his intentions to attend this Global Climate Conference, oh so bravely in the face of terrorism. Some of his comments were perhaps the most laughable if not dangerously ignorant remarks ever uttered from a commander in chief. He proclaimed, “What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children.”
Powerful rebuke? This isn't just weak rhetoric, it's madness. It's also a lie. Does Obama or anyone else in the world really believe that the Islamic State will consider this meeting in Paris as a rebuke to jihad? The message this sends to the Islamic State is that world leaders are more concerned with the false threat of the world burning up than they are about a large group of terrorists committed to killing innocent people.
Keep in mind that this climate change summit is being held by the United Nations. The UN can turn out an estimated 40,000 people from 195 different nations to address the “threat” of climate change, but it somehow can’t get that many people on board to hold a conference to fight Islamic terrorism. As Investor's Business Daily notes, “That would require hard work and genuine dedication. Fighting global warming is easy, though. It's not a real enemy. It didn't kill and maim hundreds in Paris.”
The fact that so many of these world “leaders” are more concerned with the perceived threat of climate change instead of the real threat of Islamic extremism is not only alarming, its nefarious.
And if you thought that these climate talks would result in a treaty that would never be passed by Congress, think again. On the eve of this climate change summit, France conceded to Obama's demand that any accord reached on the world's temperature won't be called a "treaty." And it might not even feature emissions reductions targets that are legally binding.
Team Obama would certainly be delighted if the word “treaty” could be left out of these talks, because Obama takes every opportunity possible to push his agenda without having to get congressional approval. He has used this same tactic for the Clean Power Plan and the Iran nuke deal. And now he is hoping it can work again.
Yet as determined as Obama and other world “leaders” are in reaching a global agreement to fight climate change, it may not be achievable under the current benchmark that is bringing so many world leaders together in the first place. That benchmark is two degrees Celsius — a number warming alarmists have been talking about for decades.
Of that number, The Wall Street Journal's Gautam Naik writes, "Many researchers have argued that a rise in the planet’s average global air temperature of two degrees or more above preindustrial levels would usher in catastrophic climate change. But many others, while convinced the planet is warming, say two degrees is a somewhat arbitrary threshold based on tenuous research, and therefore an impractical spur to policy action."
So the claim that there is consensus that man-made climate change is a fact is, well, a lie.
As George Will put it, "Everything is said to confirm global warming, and global warming is now said to cause everything else. It is a theory which can no longer be refuted, which means it is no longer a scientific theory."
In reality, the so called scientific consensus on global warming “emerged from a political agenda, not a scientific analysis,” says Mark Maslin, who is a professor of climatology at the University of London. Moreover, the UN’s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change doesn’t even acknowledge the two degree Celsius figure in any of its reports.
Further, The Washington Post notes that mathematics may pose a greater problem than politics for these climate change attendees. For all the hype about ensuring that our worldwide carbon emissions are controlled to prevent global warming, some scientists and analysts suggest that the two degree Celsius target may be out of reach. They state that “sticking to two degrees may require extremely harsh cuts that could damage economies, or the assumption of future technologies that have not been invented yet.”
It is imperative that Americans pay close attention to what comes out if this climate conference. We know that the UN is corrupt and we know that Obama never lets a "crisis" go to waste. And while we don’t consider climate change to be a crisis or a threat to national security, he and most leftists do. We hope wrangling bureaucrats don't manage much damage, but in the meantime, we will just have to wait and see.
On a final note, if these world leaders are so concerned about carbon emissions causing global warming, then why aren’t they concerned about the estimated 300,000 tons of C02 that will be emitted by all of those traveling to Paris?
Comment | Share
|
MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE
- ANALYSIS: Thanksgiving Surprise: Thousands of New Regulations
- Obama's Climate Change Regs Have Crushed West Virginia
- Putin Levies Sanctions on Turkey
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
- Todd Starnes: University President Rebukes 'Self-Absorbed, Narcissistic' Students
- E. Calvin Beisner: Obama's Environmental Legacy Hangs in the Balance of the Courts
- Michael Barone: History Returns Violently in the Mediterranean and Beyond
TOP HEADLINES
- Chicago Man Plotted to Kill 16 White People to Avenge Teen Shot by Cop
- State Dept. Releases 7,800 New Clinton Emails
- That's Dirty: Paris Climate Talks to Emit 300,000 Tons of CO2
OPINION IN BRIEF
Todd Starnes: "A chapel sermon on love left a student at Oklahoma Wesleyan University feeling 'offended' and 'victimized.' But instead of capitulating to the offended young scholar, OWU President Everett Piper pushed back with a blistering rebuke of what he called 'self-absorbed and narcissistic' students. ... The student felt offended because the 'homily on love made him feel bad for not showing love,' he explained. 'In his mind, the speaker was wrong for making him, and his peers, feel uncomfortable.' Dr. Piper offered some wise advice for the young man. 'If you want the chaplain to tell you you’re a victim rather than tell you that you need virtue, this may not be the university you’re looking for,' he wrote. 'If you want to complain about a sermon that makes you feel less than loving for not showing love, this might be the wrong place.' ... The modern-day collegian is a fragile snowflake who needs psychological help for such atrocities as reading the works of a white author or attending Taco Night at the campus dining hall. Humorous? You bet! Dangerous? Absolutely. A recent Pew Research poll revealed that 40 percent of millennials support a crackdown on offensive speech. Dr. Piper warned that could set the stage for a problem that transcends college campuses. ... The nation needs more academic leaders like Dr. Piper — a grownup willing to say what needs to be said to coddled collegians. It’s time to put on your big-boy pants, kids."Comment | Share
SHORT CUTS
Insight: "Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion." —Edmund Burke (1729-1797)Alpha Jackass: "We should not fail to see the context in which this vile assault [at a Colorado Planned Parenthood clinic] took place. Last summer, a right-wing group began releasing videos with unsubstantiated allegations. Since that time the Republican Congress have made it their mission to push these unsubstantiated allegations. Republicans shouldn't waste their time. I would hope that they would give up before they match the millions of dollars, last count more than $ 5 million, they've wasted on the so-called Benghazi 'Let's Get Secretary Clinton' Committee." —Harry Reid
Braying Jenny: "It's America. You are free to have your speech. The language you choose matters. You are not free from the judgment of the consequences of your hate-filled rhetoric." —NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue, blaming abortion critics for last week's attack on a Planned Parenthood facility (Memo to Hogue: None of us are "free from the judgment of consequences." That includes abortionists.)
Belly laugh of the week: "I’ve worked for Mr. Trump now for a long time, and I can tell you that Mr. Trump’s memory is fantastic, and I’ve never come across a situation where Mr. Trump has said something that’s not accurate." —Trump adviser Michael Cohen
Demo-gogues: "We salute the people of Paris for insisting this crucial conference go on. An act of defiance that proves nothing will deter us from building the future we want for our children. What greater rejection of those who would tear down our world than martialing our best efforts to save it." —Barack Obama
Upright: “No matter how you feel about the issue about the environment, the climate, there’s no way any reasonable person could conclude that the most immediate threat we face to our security is what the climate’s going to look like in 25 or 30 years.” —Marco Rubio
And last... "[I]f so many on the left really believe rhetoric is the motivating factor behind [tragic] incidents, then what is their solution to stopping it? All roads lead to only one frightening answer, which is why, in the face of the Left’s response to horrific incidents they find politically advantageous, we must continue to speak up and speak out." —Stephen Miller
Comment | Share
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson
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