Wednesday, December 30, 2015

The Schlong Also Rises

By Scott Johnson

Donald Trump has proved himself to be a man with substantial insight into the mind of the average Republican voter, a category in which I place myself (in case that's not obvious from my comments here over the past many years). Having made illegal immigration and American greatness the primary themes of his campaign, he floated to the top of a competitive field and has if anything continued to increase his lead over the rest of the field, at least as measured by the national polls so far. I think Trump's candidacy represents a reaction to the Age of Obama among Republican voters.
Obama's promotion of illegal immigration represents a larger component of the Obama syndrome. It stands for Obama's promotion of lawlessness for political purposes.

Bret Stephens assesses Obama's approach to foreign policy in his book America In Retreat: The New Isolationism and the Coming Global Disorder (now available in paperback). David Bernstein takes the measure of Obama's lawlessness in Lawless: The Obama Administration's Unprecedented Assault on the Constitution and the Rule of Law. These books are essential guides to the Age of Obama.

Except insofar as they take up the issue of immigration, Republican candidates haven't made a theme of Obama's lawlessness or the restoration of the rule of law. (Ted Cruz, incidentally, contributed the foreword to Bernstein's book.) I think the theme badly needs a spokesman in the campaign. Bernstein himself shows what a useful tool it was in Obama's hands in the 2008 campaign.

Obama's promotion of illegal immigration, Obama's rule by executive decree, Obama's disparagement of law enforcement in the service of the racial hustle, Obama's assault on the rule of law — there seems to be a method to this madness. They all take us closer to the status of a Third World country.

In the 1968 presidential campaign, Richard Nixon promised the restoration of law and order in response to the riot culture that has seen its return over the closing years of the Age of Obama. Nixon smartly called out LBJ Attorney General Ramsey Clark as a conscientious objector in the war against crime.

Obama is something worse than a conscientious objector; he is more of an agitator-in-chief. If updated with the necessary changes and elaborated properly, it is a theme that would make an important contribution to the campaign.

Tuesday, December 29, 2015

2016 Election - Will America Become A Failed Socialist Nation?

 YES, WE ARE ALMOST DONE. 

JUST ONE ELECTION DECIDES OUR FATE.

II HILLARY GETS ELECTED, WE ARE FINISHED!

ALMOST THERE!

There are 8 levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a socialist/communist state.  The first is the most important.

 5 OF THE 8 ARE DONE - THE LAST 3 ARE ALMOST THERE!

 1.  Healthcare:  "Control healthcare and you control the people."  DONE!

 2.  Poverty:  "Increase the poverty level as high as possible."  Poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.  DONE!

 3.  Debt:  "Increase the national debt to an unsustainable level."  That way you are able to increase taxes and this will produce more poverty.  DONE!

 4.  Gun Control:  "Remove the ability of people to defend themselves from the Government."  That way you are able to create a police state - total local control.  ALMOST THERE!

 5.  Welfare:  "Take control of every aspect of their lives" (food, housing and income).  DONE!

 6.  Education:  "Take control of what people read & listen to take control of what cHildren learn in school."  ALMOST THERE!

 7.  Religion "Remove faith in God from the Government and school."  ALMOST THERE!

 8.  Class Warfare:  "Divide the people into the rich and poor. Racially divide."  This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to tax the rich with full support of the voting poor.  DONE!

 We are ripe for our country being turned into a failed socialist nation, like Cuba and North Korea.

The fate of America rests in the hands of the voters in the 2016 Election.

Sunday, December 27, 2015

Elites and media really hate Donald Trump’s voters

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Elites and media really hate Donald Trump's voters, Michael Walsh writes:

In the movie business, there's something called the "cheer moment," when the long-suffering hero finally decks his tormentor with a satisfying right cross. What the Beltway Republicans fail to understand is that their conservative base — which gave them stunning congressional victories in 2010 and 2014 and has nothing to show for it — has been longing for precisely that moment since Reagan crushed Mondale 49-1 in 1984.

The Trumpkins are sick of winning and having nothing to show for it, and their vengeance will be terrible. Maybe the Establishment should stop belittling them and listen instead.

See also: past hatred of establishment GOP and DNC-MSM for libertarians, Tea Party voters, Perot voters, and any group whose goal is the most radical of all: for government to leave you the hell alone. I'm not at all sure that's Trump's goal for government, but then, as Glenn has noted, "Trump and Sanders are just symptoms. The real disease is in the ruling class that takes such important subjects out of political play, in its own interest. As Angelo Codevilla wrote in an influential essay in 2010, today's ruling class is a monoculture that has little in common with the rest of the nation."

Thursday, December 24, 2015

The Global Warming Hoax

What's Really Going On With the Earth's Climate


By John Hinderaker

The Earth's climate is changing, as it has for millions of years. Recent changes, however, are mild and benign, as opposed–for example–to being plunged into another ice age. The most accurate record we have of modern temperatures comes from satellites. Their readings are, in fact, the only transparent, uncorrupted temperature records in existence. Surface temperature records are unreliable because of siting issues, poor coverage of the oceans, failure to recognize the urban heat island effect, and deliberate falsification by alarmist climate scientists, who constantly revise temperatures recorded decades ago to make the past look cooler. The problem with satellite temperature data, of course, is that it only goes back to 1978. 

That said, we now have 37 years of satellite data. What trends to those records reveal? Anthony Wattsprovides an excellent summary:

The average temperature of Earth's atmosphere has warmed just over four tenths of a degree Celsius (almost three fourths of a degree Fahrenheit) during the past 37 years, with the greatest warming over the Arctic Ocean and Australia, said Dr. John Christy, director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. Microwave sounding units on board NOAA and NASA satellites completed 37 complete years of collecting temperature data in November, giving us nearly global coverage of climate change during that time.

If that trend was to continue for another 63 years, the composite warming for the globe would be 1.1 C (about 2 degrees Fahrenheit) for the century, Christy said. That would put the average global temperature change over 100 years well under the 2.0 C (3.6 degrees F) goal set recently at the climate change summit in Paris.

Are the alarmists trying to set a low bar that will be achieved regardless of any changes in CO2 emissions, and then claim credit for saving the planet?

Watts notes that a "1.2 C or 2.2 degrees F rise over 100 years would be roughly equal to the warming seen most spring days between 10 a.m. and noon." Interestingly, however, the warming over the last 37 years has not been uniform. The North Pole and Australia have warmed the most, while other regions, like Antarctica, have cooled. Here are the basic data, expressed in average temperature change per decade:

Global average trend.: +0.11 C (about 0.20 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade since December 1978.

Northern Hemisphere: +0.14 C (about 0.25 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade since December 1978.

Southern Hemisphere: +0.09 C (about 0.16 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade since December 1978.

Tropics: +0.10 C (about 0.18 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade since December 1978.

Of course, the trends of the last 37 years may not continue. The Earth might warm more rapidly over the next century, or it might begin to cool. But the best data that we have, the satellite records, reveal only mild and benign warming. 

They also conclusively refute the computer models on which the alarmist project is based; only a fraction of the warming predicted by the models has taken place. To quote, once again, the great physicist Richard Feynman:

It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

News From The 2016 Campaign Trail - Complied By The RNC

RNC Complied News Also Available Via FlipBoard: https://flipboard.com/@rnc/rnc-morning-reads-jht598j5                  

 

MORE DEBATE FALLOUT: Democrat Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, a combat veteran and DNC Vice Chair, criticized Hillary Clinton's comment that we're "finally where we need to be" in the fight against ISIS. The Daily Caller reportsDemocratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard criticized Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton's ISIS strategy explaining, "We've got a strategy executed frankly, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense." … Tapper asked Gabbard to comment on Clinton's statement from the last Democratic debate where Clinton siad, "We are where we need to be in the fight against ISIS." "I would heartily disagree with that," Gabbard insisted. "We've got a strategy executed frankly, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense." The Major in the Hawaii National Guard said, "We are not where we need to be."

 

DNC Vice Chair Gabbard: "Heartily Disagree" With Clinton ISIS Assessment

 

 

Click Here To Watch

 

The DNC data debacle has left many Democrat tech gurus questioning the security of the party's data infrastructure. MSNBC reportsWhile the initial crisis has been resolved, there's still more fallout to come from the data breach that rocked the Democratic primary last week. In addition a yet-to-begin investigation and a still-pending lawsuit, the repercussions could cause lasting damage to the campaigns of both Hillary Clinton and especially Bernie Sanders … But neither campaign is quite ready to let the issue go … More broadly, the breach has led many Democratic data officials, regardless of which candidate they support, to question the security of the party's current data scheme, which is almost entirely dependent on a single vendor. The breach could undermine trust in the DNC and the vendor for a long time to come.

 

Hillary Clinton is lowering expectations about her fourth quarter fundraising haul as Sanders builds momentum. POLITICO reportsHillary Clinton's donors say they think Bernie Sanders will raise more money in the fourth quarter than their candidate for the first time ever – a testament to the underdog's online cash juggernaut and harbinger of donor fatigue among the front-runner's backers … Low-balling your candidate's fundraising totals is a time-honored practice in presidential politics … But the concern appears to be real. Over the past few days, Clinton's advisers have taken steps to stoke donor enthusiasm: Bill and Chelsea Clinton, who on Monday announced she is pregnant with her second child, have stepped up their fundraising for the campaign. They are expected to become even more involved in the campaign beginning in January.

 

An online push by the Clinton campaign targeting Hispanics backfired. The Hill reportsA post on Hillary Clinton's website meant to showcase how the former secretary of State is like "your abuela" — Spanish for grandmother —  is drawing mockery online. In a post called "7 things Hillary Clinton has in common with your abuela," the campaign says Clinton is like an ordinary Hispanic grandmother because she "worries about children everywhere," "reads to you before bedtime" and demands "respeto" – Spanish for respect … The post was pilloried by Twitter users, who said Clinton never had to face the hardships of their own Hispanic grandmothers. The hashtags #notmyabuela and #nomiabuela shot to the top of the trending list on Twitter. Screenshots posted on Twitter suggest the Clinton campaign changed the headline on the post, which originally said: "7 ways Hillary Clinton is just like your abuela."

 

Hillary Clinton raised the possibility of shutting down as many as half of the country's schools. The Washington Free Beacon reportsHillary Clinton has the support of powerful teachers' unions, but they may not like what she just said at an Iowa school on Tuesday. Speaking at Keota Junior-Senior High School in Keota, Iowa, Clinton said that underperforming schools would be closed under her administration. "This school district and these schools throughout Iowa are doing a better-than-average job," Clinton said. "Now, I wouldn't keep any school open that wasn't doing a better-than-average job. If a school's not doing a good job, then, you know, that may not be good for the kids, but when you have a district that is doing a good job, it seems kind of counterproductive to impose financial burdens on it." By Clinton's logic, about 50 percent of the schools in the United States would be shuttered as a result of this policy.

 

An ethics watchdog said Hillary Clinton was "in a league of her own" when it comes to unethical behavior. The Washington Examiner reportsAn ethics watchdog group argued that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is "in a league of her own" when it comes to ethics violations, and therefore reserved a separate category for her outside of its list of the top seven offenders of 2015. The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust cited four examples of ethics violations it said Clinton committed this year alone when explaining its decision to exclude Clinton from its rankings of the "top congressional and campaign ethics violators of 2015," a list the group made public Tuesday. "During her time as secretary of state, overwhelming evidence shows, primarily through the State Department's release of her emails, that she abused her official position," FACT wrote of Clinton. "Since becoming a presidential candidate, she has on numerous occasions violated campaign and ethics laws."

 

Voters are less confident about the economy heading into 2016. POLITICO reportsDespite relatively steady views on the economy over the past year, Americans are less confident in next year's economy than they were in January 2015, according to a new Pew Research Center poll out Tuesday. Just over one in two Americans (54 percent) expect economic conditions in 2016 to remain the same, 22 percent project they'll get worse and 20 percent foresee an improvement. But those numbers are lower than last January when 31 percent thought things would improve, 17 percent thought there would be a downturn and 51 percent expected things to remain the same.

 

The Republican-led Congress is tightening the screws on Obama's EPA. The Wall Street Journal editorializesThe EPA received $8.1 billion or $451 million less than Mr. Obama had demanded, and no increase from the year before. Congress has cut the EPA's allowance by $2.1 billion, or 21%, since fiscal 2010. This has forced the EPA to cut more than 2,000 full-time employees over the same period, and its manpower is now at the lowest level since 1989. Mr. Obama sought an additional $72.1 million to turbocharge his extralegal climate rule on power plants … Congress denied every penny. It also denied the nearly $30 million extra that Mr. Obama wanted for the legal department that defends the agency in court … The budget also zeroed out the nearly $44 million increase Mr. Obama sought for his "water quality protection" initiatives … Republicans were able to insert a few modest policy riders in the budget. Congress barred the EPA from attempting to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from livestock, and it added a requirement that the Administration inform Congress how much it is spending on climate initiatives across the federal bureaucracy … The budget pressure on the EPA and the use of the Congressional Review Act show that GOP control of Congress has made a difference.

 

IN THE STATES 

 

In Iowa, Bernie Sanders slammed the DNC's favoritism toward Hillary Clinton and called for an investigation into the embarrassing data breach. The Des Moines Register reportsSen. Bernie Sanders didn't mince words Monday night, saying Democratic leaders aren't doing themselves any favors airing debates at times when few people are watching. "Is that an accident? No, I don't think it was," Sanders told The Des Moines Register. "I think it was intentionally designed to make sure that I and Gov. (Martin) O'Malley get less exposure." While the Republican debates have garnered more viewers in their weekday prime-time slots, the Democrats have so far scheduled two of their three debates for Saturday evenings. The Nov. 14 debate in Des Moines aired concurrently with an Iowa football game and last weekend's contest in New Hampshire was scheduled for the Saturday before Christmas. Sanders blames the Democratic National Committee for trying to tip the scales in favor of front-runner Hillary Clinton.

 

In Nevada, Bernie Sanders is going up with a new TV ad. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reportsThe campaign of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Democratic candidate for president, launched television ads in Nevada on Tuesday. His efforts join others who are ramping up advertising efforts in advance of the February caucuses. The one-minute spot gives Nevada voters an introduction to Sanders, putting his life and policy goals in broad strokes. The ad tells of Sanders' path as the son of a Polish immigrant who grew up in Brooklyn, N.Y., and went on to become mayor of Burlington, Vt., before his election to House of Representatives and then the Senate. It gives snippets of his platform of wanting free public college tuition and fighting for wage equality and rejecting politics as usual.

 

In Pennsylvania, Harry Reid praised Democrat Senate candidate Katie McGinty for her work on a state budget proposal that "raised taxes on all Pennsylvanians and was rejected by every member of the legislature." The Allentown Morning Call reportsDemocratic U.S. Senate candidate Katie McGinty is getting a little holiday fundraising help from the Senate's top Democrat. In an email from his leadership PAC, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid urged support for McGinty, touting her work on Gov. Tom Wolf's state budget proposal during her six months as his chief of staff … Toomey campaign spokesman Steve Kelly said the state budget that Reid praised "raised taxes on all Pennsylvanians and was rejected by every members of the Legislature."

 

 

 


Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Washington’s Willful Ignorance; What they refused to ask Tashfeen Malik.

From The Wall Street Journal

By James Taranto

The New York Times had an important scoop over the weekend:

Tashfeen Malik, who with her husband carried out the massacre in San Bernardino, Calif., passed three background checks by American immigration officials as she moved to the United States from Pakistan. None uncovered what Ms. Malik had made little effort to hide—that she talked openly on social media about her views on violent jihad.
She said she supported it. And she said she wanted to be a part of it. . . .
Had the authorities found the posts years ago, they might have kept her out of the country. But immigration officials do not routinely review social media as part of their background checks, and there is a debate inside the Department of Homeland Security over whether it is even appropriate to do so.

That is a dramatic understatement, a whistleblower later told ABC News. The DHS's ignorance of Malik's social-media policies was the result of a strict policy:

Fearing a civil liberties backlash and "bad public relations" for the Obama administration, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson refused in early 2014 to end the secret U.S. policy that prohibited immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of all foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas, according to a former senior department official.
"During that time period immigration officials were not allowed to use or review social media as part of the screening process," John Cohen, a former acting under-secretary at DHS for intelligence and analysis. 

In the fall of 2014, the department began a few "pilot programs" to screen social-media postings, "but current officials say that it is still not a widespread policy. A review of the broader policy is already underway, the DHS said."

"Already." After one attack on America and 14 American civilians killed. 

DHS appears to operate under the assumption that nonresident aliens applying for admission to the U.S. enjoy the full range of civil liberties under the U.S. Constitution. That Times report ends with an odd observation that points in the same direction.

On social media, Fehda Malik [the dead terrorist's sister] has made provocative comments of her own. In 2011, on the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, she posted a remark on Facebook beside a photo of a plane crashing into the World Trade Center that could be interpreted as anti-American.
Social media comments, by themselves, however, are not always definitive evidence. In [Malik's native] Pakistan—as in the United States—there is no shortage of crass and inflammatory language. And it is often difficult to distinguish Islamist sentiments and those driven by political hostility toward the United States. At the time Fehda Malik's comment was posted, anti-American sentiment in Pakistan was particularly high; four months earlier, American commandos had secretly entered Pakistan and killed Osama bin Laden.

Read today's full column »

Monday, December 14, 2015

2016 Election News Complied By The RNC

Hillary Clinton is facing a federal ethics complaint after she used her office at the State Department to benefit a campaign donor with ties to her son-in-law. Time Magazine reportsA conservative watchdog group has called for another federal investigation into Hillary Clinton's communications during her time as secretary of state, accusing Clinton of giving special government access to an investor in a deep-sea mining company because of his connections to Clinton's son-in-law … "It appears that then Secretary Hillary Clinton gave a private company special access to the State Department based upon the company's relationships with Secretary Clinton's family members and donors to the Clinton Foundation," the group says in the complaint first obtained by TIME.

 

ICYMI: A CLINTON COVER-UP? The State Department claimed late Friday it "can't find" any emails belonging to Brian Pagliano, the top Clinton aide who was paid on the side to maintain her secret server. POLITICO reportsThe State Department has told Senate investigators it cannot find backup copies of emails sent by Bryan Pagliano, the top Hillary Clinton IT staffer who maintained her email server but has asserted his Fifth Amendment right and refused to answer questions on the matter. State officials told the Senate Judiciary Committee in a recent closed-door meeting that they could not locate what's known as a ".pst file" for Pagliano's work during Clinton's tenure, which would have included copies of the tech expert's emails, according to a letter Chairman Chuck Grassley sent to Secretary of State John Kerry that was obtained by POLITICO.  The department also said the FBI has taken possession of Pagliano's government computer system, where traces of the messages are most likely to be found.

 

Hillary Clinton is struggling to excite younger women. The New York Times reportsThat Mrs. Clinton's candidacy has not yet sparked among young women the kind of excitement about making history that Mr. Obama generated among black voters in 2008 speaks to the progress that women have made, said Erin Gloria Ryan, 32, formerly the managing editor of the feminist website Jezebel … The generational gap haunted Mrs. Clinton in the 2008 primary: In Iowa, Mr. Obama took 51 percent, John Edwards 19 percent and Mrs. Clinton just 11 percent of the caucus vote among women younger than 24. The only demographic cohort that Mrs. Clinton won, exit polls showed, was women older than 65.

 

Clinton's campaign events are "curiously mechanical and lacking in electricity." POLITICO reportsEight months into the campaign slog, Hillary Clinton's events on the road are medium in size, predictable in nature. Emblematic of the candidate, her town halls and rallies are often controlled, substantive, and almost never veer off script. They often leave attendees hugely impressed with Clinton's knowledge of the issues, but not necessarily in love. The rallies are, at bottom, a microcosm of Clinton's campaign so far – methodical, professional, but also curiously mechanical and lacking in electricity … But around the edges lurk the detractors, constant reminders on the trail of how divisive Clinton has been during her two decades in public life and the baggage that trails her.

 

President Obama is changing his public relations strategy regarding ISIS but not his failed military strategy. CNN reportsPresident Barack Obama will visit the Pentagon on Monday to review the military campaign against ISIS with national security advisers, his first visit since attacks in San Bernardino and Paris. White House press secretary Josh Earnest cautioned on Friday that no major policy shifts would come as a result of the meeting but that it is more of an "update" … Obama's ISIS policy has been under renewed scrutiny from Republicans following attacks on Paris and in San Bernardino. A CNN/ORC poll -- taken before the San Bernardino attack -- found that 60% of Americans disapproved of the President's handling of terrorism while 38% approved.

 

While Democrats continue to emphasize climate change and gun control in the wake of the San Bernardino terrorist attack, Americans rate terrorism as the No. 1 problem facing the country. Gallup findsAfter the deadly terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California, Americans are now more likely to name terrorism as the top issue facing the U.S. than to name any other issue -- including those that have typically topped the list recently, such as the economy and the government. About one in six Americans, 16%, now identify terrorism as the most important U.S. problem, up from just 3% in early November. This is the highest percentage of Americans to mention terrorism in a decade, although it is still lower than the 46% measured after 9/11.

 

The Visa vetting process overlooked inflammatory Islamist social media postings from one of the San Bernardino attackers. The New York Times reportsTashfeen Malik, who with her husband carried out the massacre in San Bernardino, Calif., passed three background checks by American immigration officials as she moved to the United States from Pakistan. But none uncovered what Ms. Malik had made little effort to hide — that she talked openly on social media about her views on violent jihad. She said she supported it. And she said she wanted to be a part of it. American law enforcement officials said they recently discovered those old — and previously unreported — postings as they pieced together the lives of Ms. Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, trying to understand how they pulled off the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil since Sept. 11, 2001. Had the authorities found the posts years ago, they might have kept her out of the country.

 

Another ObamaCare program is failing to meet expectations. Kaiser Health News reportsA health law insurance program that was expected to boost consumer choice and competition on the marketplaces has slipped off course and is so far failing to meet expectations …"Conceptually, the idea just didn't have legs," says Linda Blumberg, a senior fellow at The Health Policy Center at the Urban Institute. "It's too hard to find an insurer who could suddenly compete across the breadth of states and do better on rates than existing insurers." The multi-state plan program's halting start threatens to undermine one of the key tenets of the health law: that boosting competition in the individual market will lead to lower premiums and better coverage. It doesn't help that health insurance co-ops are shutting down in a dozen states.

 

IN THE STATES …

 

In Kansas, residents are up in arms about the possibility of terrorists being unilaterally moved to Leavenworth. WIBW-TV in Topeka reportsPresident Barack Obama's plans to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay continue to spark concern -- especially in Leavenworth, Kansas … But like many Americans, the residents of Leavenworth aren't so accepting of the rest. Community members expressed their concern about the possible transfer during a town hall meeting at the Heritage Center Friday. Representatives Lynn Jenkins (R-KS) and Mike Pompeo (R-KS) held the meeting to discuss the President's plan and hear from the Leavenworth citizens. "I want to know how can we get this point across to President Obama, that he is terrorizing the American people by what he's doing," said one Leavenworth resident. Another resident followed, "before they even get here, as soon as we know for a fact they're coming...the value of our housing will go down."

 

In Kentucky, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is earning praise for keeping his promise to pass legislation repealing ObamaCare. The Bowling Green Daily News editorializesAll too often, we hear promise after promise from candidates seeking to be elected or re-elected. And all too often, those promises don't come to fruition. It's a sad reality, because the voters put their trust in the candidates to do what they pledged to do. So, when politicians do keep their promises, they deserve credit. Last fall, U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., promised that if he were re-elected to the Senate he would get the necessary votes to vote to repeal Obamacare. Early this month, McConnell stuck to that promise and almost on a party-line vote passed legislation that would repeal Obamacare. Similar legislation to repeal Obamacare passed the House in late October.

 

In New York, Clinton's close ties to Wall Street are causing problems for her campaign. WNYC reportsOne former tech worker, Dave Mariansky, who was laid off, as he put, it, by Carly Fiorina when she ran Hewlett-Packard, described himself as a Clinton supporter...but. "I'm a little worried about her ties to Wall Street," he told me. "Which I don't understand fully. Bernie's the total opposite of that." A lot of people don't seem to understand her corporate ties fully. And Sanders is making the most of it. His has a simple message: Income inequality is the biggest problem the country faces, and he's the candidate who can really take it to the billionaires, because he doesn't take their money… At the last Democratic debate, Sanders landed his anti-Wall Street critique with particular sharpness. "I mean, let's not be na├»ve about it," Sanders said. "Why, over her political career, has Wall Street been a major — the major — contributor to Hillary Clinton? Now maybe they're dumb, and they don't know what they're going to get, but I don't think so."

 

In Ohio, a local health insurance company is pulling out of the federal ObamaCare exchange. The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports: Cleveland-based insurer HealthSpan is disbanding its physicians network and has notified brokers it will stop paying commissions for small group and individual customers, citing concerns about its financial viability in those markets. The company, which insures 200,000 people statewide, also said it has laid off employees in its small group and individual sales units. The decision to back away from those markets raised alarms among local brokers who stand to lose commissions and assistance from HealthSpan in serving their clients … HealthSpan is not the only insurer to pull away from the individual market focused on people who buy plans through the federal exchange created under the Affordable Care Act. UnitedHealthcare has also expressed concerns about its financial performance in the market, signaling that it may pull out in 2017.

 

In Rhode Island, the Clinton Foundation is coming under fire for its questionable business practices. The Providence Journal editorializesBut it's also clear that the foundation is not run with the transparency and integrity that one would expect from a major non-profit headed by a former U.S. president and his presidential candidate wife. As we've noted before, among other problems, the Clinton Foundation was placed on watchdog group Charity Navigator's "Watch List" because of its "atypical business model," whereby it does not distribute grants, but rather performs its work in-house. This shields the organization from the transparency that is typically expected of charities. And we've also noted the appalling conflict of interest that the Clinton Foundation subjected Hillary Clinton to while she served as secretary of state: the foundation continued to accept funds from foreign governments while Ms. Clinton was serving as the nation's top diplomat. The foundation also botched its tax filings for several years. And now comes strange news from South America. As the website the Washington Free Beacon first reported, the Clinton Foundation has been operating a $20 million private equity fund in Colombia. The fund is run by Clinton Foundation staffers, and operates out of its Bogota offices — an odd undertaking for a charity, to say the least … The nagging questions regarding the Clinton Foundation continue to fester. The Clinton Foundation is devoted to doing good in the world, but its myriad problems — the opacity, the conflicts of interest — are not doing any good for the American people's trust in Ms. Clinton, or for her presidential hopes.

 

In Texas, Republican Congressman Will Hurd is helping lead the fight to secure the homeland from radical Islamic terrorists. The Dallas Morning News reports: San Antonio Republican Rep. Will Hurd has more hands on experience dealing with terror threats then most. Hurd is a former undercover CIA officer, who is touting legislation that passed the House this week to tighten the visa waiver program, which Hurd calls "a weak spot" in U.S. defenses. "I was the guy in the back alleys at four o'clock in the morning, chasing bad guys like al-Qaeda and the Taliban," Hurd said in the weekly Republican address. "So when we talk about the threat we're facing right now — from ISIS and other terrorist groups — I know from first-hand experience, that they are a clear and present danger to the United States." This is second security bill prompted by the Paris attacks to pass the House, but much less controversial than legislation cracking down on the Syrian refugee program, passed last month. The visa waiver program bill, which passed 407 to 19, is also backed by the White House.

Saturday, December 12, 2015

Trumpet Has It Right

 By Paul R. Hollrah

 

The fight for global dominion by the greatest evil in history, the radical forces of Islam, has been going on for more than 1200 years.  In 732 AD the Muslim Army, moving to occupy Paris, was defeated by Charles Martell at the Battle of Tours.  Muslims retreated to their own part of the world for brief periods, but continued their efforts to expand their empire until the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918. The years that followed were but a brief respite. 

 

Islam's conquest of the habitable portions of the Earth has been going on for 1,400 years.  For most of that time the conflicts have been limited geographically to Europe and the Middle East.  But now, for the first time, Islam is attempting to invade and conquer the United States by using our freedomsour laws, and our tradition of openness against us.  

 

Unfortunately, far too many Americans, focused as they are on the exigencies of their daily lives, are so insulated from reality that they appear not to notice.  They appear totally unaware that the Muslim world is rapidly imposing what the Quran refers to as hijrah, or jihad by emigration.  The mass migration of Muslims from Africa and the Middle East to Europe, the British Isles, and North America is exactly what Mohammed had in mind when he wrote, "And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many locations and abundance, and whoever leaves his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him, his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah (Sura 4:100)."

 

With the creation of the ISIS caliphate in Iraq and Syria, millions of refugees move westward into Europe, Scandinavia, and the British Isles, while hordes of black African Muslims sail north across the Mediterranean on anything that floats, attempting to invade Spain, France, and Italy. Many of those on board who are identified as non-Muslims are tossed into the sea and left to drown.  Yes, these are the "peace-loving" refugees that Barack Obamaliberals and Democrats, and the Republican congressional leadership expect us to welcome with open arms.  And while the mass migration of Musliminto Western Europe will likely destroy the age-old cultures of those countries in a few short years, it is clear that the United States is their ultimate target.       

 

So who are these people?  An April 17, 2015, article in The Counter Jihad Report, by Y.K. Cherson, provides some startling statistics on Islamic terrorism.  Cherson tells us that, in 2011, Sunni Muslims accounted for the greatest number of terrorist attacks and fatalities for the third year in a row.  Over 5,700 incidents were committed by Sunnis, accounting for nearly 56% of all attacks and about 70% of 12,533 fatalities.  Cherson quotes a U.S. State Department report which tells us that, in 2013, a total of 9,707 terror attacks occurred worldwide, resulting in more than 17,800 deaths and more than 32,500 casualties.  Just three Muslim terror groups… the Taliban, ISIS, and Boko Haram… were responsible for 5,655 (31.8%) of the 17,800 deaths.  

 

So what is it that motivates them to come to the United States?  Why do they want to come here?


Since there is little chance that a large Muslim population will ever make a positive contribution to our culture or to our wellbeingwe are forced to ask why they would want to live in a land where they are not wanted or needed.  They have made it abundantly clear that they have no intention of assimilating into American culture; they want only to transplant their Muslim culture in the fertile soil of the U.S.  Americans will never allow that to happen, so why do they insist on a confrontation that can only result in protracted violence and bloodshed?

 

In a speech titled the "First State of Homeland Security Address" at the National Defense University on December 7, 2015, Congressman Michael McCaul (R-TX), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, had some sobering words for his audience.  He reminded his audience that, as recently as his 2015 State of the Union Address, Barack Obama assured us that "the shadow of crisis has passed" in the war against radical Islam.

 

Nevertheless, McCaul reported that, in the past year, the FBI has undertaken investigations into more than 1,000 cases of home-grown terrorists, across all 50 states.  As a resultthe FBI has identified 19 ISIS-connected terror plots in the U.S., including plans to murder numbers of tourists on Florida beaches, plans to set off pipe bombs on Capitol Hill, plans to bomb New York City's famous landmarks, and plans to live-stream a massive attack on an American college campus. Still, many Americans and most political leaders, of both parties, appear blithely unconcerned about the immediacy of the danger… apparently more concerned about being politically correct than they are about the life-or-death nature of the threat.

 

In previous columns I have attempted to draw attention to the inability of many Americans to intellectually process the clear and present danger posed by Muslim immigration.  I have reminded readers of estimates that only 5% (one of every twenty) of the world's 1.4 billion Muslims are radicalized.  That statistic may give liberals and Democrats a degree of comfort, but the rest of us are clearly not comfortable with the idea of some 75 million suicide bombers and potential mass murderers running around amongst us with hate in their hearts for non-Muslims.

  

To put that number into perspective, we might recall that, at the height of WW II, the combined uniformed forces of Germany, Japan, and Italy numbered only 34.4 million… and, unlike their  Muslim counterparts, they were all people who treasured life over death. 

 

To make the threat of radical Islam a bit more understandable for all those gullible Americans who profess no fear of Muslim immigration, I've asked how they might react if we offered them a bowl containing 100 M&M candies, but with the admonition that five of the pieces were toxic (poisonous).  How many pieces of candy would they eat?  

 

The point is, Islam is the only religious movement on Earth that proposes to extend its control to every corner of the Earth by terror, murder, and oppression.  And since the 95% of Muslims who are either "moderate" or "un-radicalized" appear unwilling to play an active role in keeping their radicalized brethren in check, we have no alternative but to prohibit them from residing within the civilized nations of the Earth.  That is precisely whDonald Trump has suggested that the United States call at least a temporary halt to all Muslim immigration.

The reaction to his suggestion was swift and predictable.  Liberals, Democrats, and members of the mainstream media were quick to denounce him, while members of his own party called upon him to withdraw from the Republican presidential primaries.  The most powerful Republican in America, House Speaker Paul Ryan, took the unusual step of calling a press conference to denounce Trump, saying, "Normally, I do not comment on what's going on in the presidential election.  I will take an exception today.  This is not conservatism.  What was proposed yesterday is not what this party stands for and, more importantly, it is not what this country stands for."  So how will they react when the polls show that the people agree with Trump?  What all those naysayers apparently fail to understand is that most Americans do not want Muslims living in their neighborhoods, nor do they want to increase our existing Muslim population.  

One would think that members of Congress would have at least a minimal understanding of current immigration law.  For example, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Public Law 82-414, Section 212(a), provides no less than 31 conditions under which "classes of aliens shall be ineligible to receive visas and shall be excluded from admission into the United States."

Included among these, Section 212(a)(19) bars entry to "any alien who seeks to procure, or has sought to procure, or has procured a visa or other documentation, or seeks to enter the United States by fraud, or by willfully misrepresenting a material fact."  Can all of the "refugees" now seeking asylum in the U.S. provide indisputable evidence that all of the information they have provided is factual and verifiable?  Section 212(a)(27) bars all aliens "who the consular officer or the Attorney General knows, or has reason to believe, seek to enter the United States solely, principally, or incidentally, to engage in activities which would be prejudicial to the public interest, or endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States."

 

Section 212(a)(28) of the Act denies access to all aliens "who are anarchists, or who have at any time been members of or affiliated with any organization that advocates or teaches the overthrow of the government of the United States by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means." There are many more provisions of the Act under which Muslims could be barred from entering the United States.  This is precisely what Donald Trump is suggesting and it is precisely this law that Jimmy Carter used in his Executive Order of April 7, 1980, in which he invalidated the visas of all Iranians in the country and prohibited the issuance of new visas to Iranians for the duration of the Iranian hostage crisis.  

 

In its editorial of December 8, 2015, the New York Times sided with Trump, saying, "As the (Supreme Court) observed in its 1977 decision in Fiallo v. Bell'In the exercise of its broad power over immigration and naturalization, Congress regularly makes rules that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.'

 

"In the context of noncitizens seeking initial entry into the United States, due process protections don't apply, either. Indeed, contrary to the conventional understanding, President Trump could implement the scheme on his own, without Congress's approval. The Immigration and Nationality Act gives the president the authority to suspend the entry of 'any class of aliens' on his finding that their entry would be 'detrimental to the interests of the United States"  

 

While many may wish to come to America, for good or for ill, we have no obligation… legal, moral, or economic… to take into our country, people whose values are totally foreign to our own.  And while the politically correctthe mainstream media, and establishment Republicans may disagree with Trump's suggestion, they will soon find that it is they who are on the outside, looking in.  The people are with Trump.