No, this is not a post about the Italian Mafia. Although, there are definite similarities with the threats and intimidation. A friend who is a retired police officer likens them to a criminal gang. However, having grown up in New Jersey, I believe "The Mob" is a more accurate description. We are already well past De Niro's "Fuck Trump" on live TV at the Tony Awards. We are past Samantha Bee and the "C" word. We are well past Hillary's "basket of deplorables."
We are past the name calling and cursing. Now, we are at incitement. Peter Fonda expressed that he would like to see "Barron Trump ripped from his mother's arms and put in a cage with pedophiles." Maxine Waters, Dem. Rep. from California, said this at a weekend rally in Los Angeles: "If you see anybody from that (Trump's) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." Not welcome anywhere? What does that mean? They need to leave the country? Maybe, they need to be dead?
Waters continued on MSNBC: "the people are going to turn on them, they're going to protest, they're going to absolutely harass them." Waters is not the only one to think this way. When DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielson was dining out last week, a Mob accosted her, yelling "shame," and "if kids don't eat in peace, you don't eat in peace." On Friday, the Mob was outside her home yelling "no justice, no sleep." And: "Secretary Nielson and everyone else who has carried out these brutal and cold-blooded orders (at the border), to rip apart families should never be allowed to eat and drink in public again."
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders was asked to leave, with her family, from the Red Hen restaurant in Virginia, because the restaurant has "certain standards." Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi had to leave a movie theater after a Mob shouted at her about immigration and health care. And, in case you have any doubt about what the Mob thinks of you, here's MSNBC commentator Donny Deutsch: "We can no longer say Trump's the bad guy. If you vote for Trump, you're the bad guy. If you vote for Trump, you are ripping children from parents' arms." Don't we lock up bad guys? Is that what they want for 63 million Trump voters?
The Mob has been upset for quite some time, most often when they have been unable to get their policies enacted through the democratic process. Like all Mobs, they really do not believe in democracy. So, when democracy did not work for them, they litigated. They sued, and tried to shut down businesses that did not adhere to their agenda. Now, we are past that. Now, we are at outright harassment and intimidation. I am inclined to say that ultimately these tactics will result in violence. When you get in someone's face, sooner or later they will push back.
However, we are even past the possibility of violence. Recall last year a Trump hater shot up a Congressional Republican baseball practice, nearly fatally wounding Rep. Steve Scalise, and also wounding two Capitol Police officers and other staffers. Here are some comments from the shooter's Facebook page. "Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy." "It's Time to Destroy Trump & Co."
And let's not forget, like the other Mob, this Mob hates the police also. Obama and his AG Eric Holder, had a war on cops. (By way of comparison, Trump has a war on criminal gangs.) Wikileaks has published the names of over 9000 former and current employees of ICE. I cannot see any legitimate reason for doing so. Do they want harm to come to the people who protect us? Democratic Congress members now want to eliminate one entire police force - ICE. They want to eliminate the agency that protects our borders, our safety and our sovereignty. (As an aside, "sovereignty" is a word you will never hear from democrats nor read in the mainstream media. They do not believe in national sovereignty.) The measure to eliminate ICE either has been or will be introduced by Representatives Mark Pocan (D-WI), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA). So what if drugs, criminal gang members and terrorists get in to our country? It is the police who are the bad guys, as far as The Mob is concerned.
By now, I am sure you have figured out who The Mob is - it is the Democratic Party. They may not have hired hit men, but in every other way they resemble The Mob. The harassment. The intimidation. The threats. And the very real possibility of violence by both their actions and their war on police. I don't belong to The Mob. Do you?
Monday, June 25, 2018
Sunday, June 17, 2018
North Korea
It would be nice if the mainstream media could make up their minds. First, Trump was going to get us into nuclear war with North Korea, calling Kim Jong Un "Little Rocket Man," and all. Then, it was how dare Trump sit down with Kim and give him credibility on the world stage. True, he did seem to be excessively effusive about Kim. But the media does not get Trump's approach. It's the old carrot and stick.
Former undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman had an Op-Ed in the 6/14/18 USA Today. Secretary Sherman was the lead negotiator on the Iran nuclear deal, and was previously involved with the prior North Korean nuclear deal. She described the Singapore summit as not "much more than bluster and balloons." Really, what did she expect from an initial sit down? Kim did declare a "firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula." But, words are cheap, especially so from dictators. So, we won't know until we know.
Secretary Sherman: the "official statement (signed by Trump and Kim) was far weaker than at least three previous documents signed by North Korea in years past. Unlike the agreements negotiated in 1992, 1994 and 2005, Tuesday's joint statement includes no verification requirements or framework to guide upcoming negotiations." What? Is that for real? Just how tough were the three prior agreements if Kim now has an estimated 60 nuclear weapons and a robust ballistic missile program?
Secretary Sherman continued that Trump does not understand that "any potential agreement would be durable only if South Korea, Japan, China and Russia are on board." Well, unlike Obama's deal with Iran, Trump says he wants any deal approved by the US Senate. Just what the Constitution demands. Why didn't Obama, the Constitutional law professor, know that?
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says the sanctions will remain in place until there are results. Pompeo also expressed the Administration's expectations that results will be seen within 2 1/2 years - by the end of Trump's (first) term. And just how impressed should we be with the Iran deal Ms. Sherman negotiated. No inspections on military bases. Continued development of Iran's ballistic missile program. And, of course, no requirement that Iran cease its terror supporting activities throughout the Middle East and elsewhere in the world. But wait, I thought one of the criticisms of Trump was that he didn't insist on movement of the humanitarian issues in North Korea. Isn't stopping terrorist attacks a humanitarian issue? I guess not when the deal was Obama's.
I think that Caroline Glick had, perhaps, the best take on the Singapore summit. As with any such summit, there is no guarantee that the other side will agree to any deal. Glick: "Democratically elected leaders have a greater tendency than dictators to become convinced that their political survival is dependent on their ability to deliver the deal." And: "If a leader believes his future depends on getting a deal, the likelihood that he will accept a terrible deal skyrockets." Gee, that sounds an awful like Obama, who was willing to pass up on the missiles, support for terrorism, inspection on military bases, and a $150 billion present in order to get the deal that he believed would be his major foreign policy achievement.
But Trump is not Obama. Iran came to the table because Obama kept offering more and more to the Iranians. Sure, Trump is holding off on joint military exercises with South Korea; but those exercises can just as easily be reinstated. North Korea came to the table out of fear of Trump. That's a good thing. Because Kim undoubtedly understands that if he messes with Trump, he has no guarantee that he will remain in power. The Ayatollahs never feared that from Obama. A little fear goes a long way.
Former undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman had an Op-Ed in the 6/14/18 USA Today. Secretary Sherman was the lead negotiator on the Iran nuclear deal, and was previously involved with the prior North Korean nuclear deal. She described the Singapore summit as not "much more than bluster and balloons." Really, what did she expect from an initial sit down? Kim did declare a "firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula." But, words are cheap, especially so from dictators. So, we won't know until we know.
Secretary Sherman: the "official statement (signed by Trump and Kim) was far weaker than at least three previous documents signed by North Korea in years past. Unlike the agreements negotiated in 1992, 1994 and 2005, Tuesday's joint statement includes no verification requirements or framework to guide upcoming negotiations." What? Is that for real? Just how tough were the three prior agreements if Kim now has an estimated 60 nuclear weapons and a robust ballistic missile program?
Secretary Sherman continued that Trump does not understand that "any potential agreement would be durable only if South Korea, Japan, China and Russia are on board." Well, unlike Obama's deal with Iran, Trump says he wants any deal approved by the US Senate. Just what the Constitution demands. Why didn't Obama, the Constitutional law professor, know that?
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says the sanctions will remain in place until there are results. Pompeo also expressed the Administration's expectations that results will be seen within 2 1/2 years - by the end of Trump's (first) term. And just how impressed should we be with the Iran deal Ms. Sherman negotiated. No inspections on military bases. Continued development of Iran's ballistic missile program. And, of course, no requirement that Iran cease its terror supporting activities throughout the Middle East and elsewhere in the world. But wait, I thought one of the criticisms of Trump was that he didn't insist on movement of the humanitarian issues in North Korea. Isn't stopping terrorist attacks a humanitarian issue? I guess not when the deal was Obama's.
I think that Caroline Glick had, perhaps, the best take on the Singapore summit. As with any such summit, there is no guarantee that the other side will agree to any deal. Glick: "Democratically elected leaders have a greater tendency than dictators to become convinced that their political survival is dependent on their ability to deliver the deal." And: "If a leader believes his future depends on getting a deal, the likelihood that he will accept a terrible deal skyrockets." Gee, that sounds an awful like Obama, who was willing to pass up on the missiles, support for terrorism, inspection on military bases, and a $150 billion present in order to get the deal that he believed would be his major foreign policy achievement.
But Trump is not Obama. Iran came to the table because Obama kept offering more and more to the Iranians. Sure, Trump is holding off on joint military exercises with South Korea; but those exercises can just as easily be reinstated. North Korea came to the table out of fear of Trump. That's a good thing. Because Kim undoubtedly understands that if he messes with Trump, he has no guarantee that he will remain in power. The Ayatollahs never feared that from Obama. A little fear goes a long way.
Saturday, June 16, 2018
Israel - at the U.N., in the L.A. Times, and in the Latest Poll of American Jews
I'll start with the most disappointing. The AJC (American Jewish Committee) recently released the results of a new poll comparing the attitudes of American Jews with Israeli Jews. While 77% of Israeli Jews either strongly approve or somewhat approve of President Trump's handling of US-Israeli relations, that number dwindles to 34% for American Jews. And while a significant 85% of Israeli Jews approve of the moving of the US embassy to Jerusalem, only 46% of American Jews approve. I'll let the numbers speak for themselves.
The June 10, 2018 Sunday edition of the Los Angeles Times had a front page story with this headline: "Lifelong Injury." The article discusses the thousands (per the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza) of Palestinians injured by Israeli bullets at the Gaza border with Israel. Never mind that Hamas has been sending tens of thousands of their people to mass at the Israeli border trying to breach the security barrier and/or throwing various weapons at Israeli troops. The article continues inside for 2 1/2 pages with plenty of pictures.
Here's a fun quote from the Times article: "...Israel accuses the militants of diverting funds for public services to military activities, an allegation Hamas denies." That's it, then? They just accept Hamas' denial? All of Hamas' rockets and missiles do not cost anything. All of the sophisticated tunnels built by Hamas, with tons of concrete and electrical wiring and ventilation cost nothing. Right.
The Times: "The (weekly border) protests, called to demand the lifting of the blockade and a right to return to ancestral homes in what is now Israel, were an exciting distraction from the grinding poverty." Maybe it would be better to not risk life and limb and do whatever may be possible to help your situation. Maybe show up at Hamas headquarters and protest their unwillingness to create a civil society to benefit their people. And let me ask the Times, assuming I lost my senses and decided I wanted to return to my ancestral home in Russia, would the Times care? I trust they do know about the Russian pogroms of the Jews.
This past Wednesday, the UN General Assembly passed yet another anti-Israel resolution. The resolution condemned Israel for what they said was "excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate" force against the Gazans during their mass efforts to breach the border with Israel. The resolution also called for "an international protection mechanism" for the Palestinians. My conclusions? The world only supports the Jews when they are being killed. If a General Assembly resolution had the same enforcement capabilities as a Security Council resolution, the world would be only too happy to send in troops to eliminate Israel.
The measure was propounded by Turkey and Algeria, and passed with 120 votes in favor, 8 opposed and 45 abstentions. Voting no were the US, Australia, Israel of course and some small Pacific Island nations. As the US has no veto power in the General Assembly, our Ambassador, Nikki Haley was unable to prevent passage of the measure. However, she did propose an amendment to the measure, specifically condemning Hamas for the firing of their rockets into Israel, the digging of the tunnels into Israel and the frequent border attacks.
That amendment actually passed by a vote of 62 in favor, 58 against and 42 abstentions. However, because of General Assembly rules, an amendment would have to pass with a 2/3 vote. The takeaway? I would have to give credit to President Trump and Ambassador Nikki Haley (along with Israel's Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon) for helping to slowly but surely change the anti-Israel sentiment at the UN.
The June 10, 2018 Sunday edition of the Los Angeles Times had a front page story with this headline: "Lifelong Injury." The article discusses the thousands (per the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza) of Palestinians injured by Israeli bullets at the Gaza border with Israel. Never mind that Hamas has been sending tens of thousands of their people to mass at the Israeli border trying to breach the security barrier and/or throwing various weapons at Israeli troops. The article continues inside for 2 1/2 pages with plenty of pictures.
Here's a fun quote from the Times article: "...Israel accuses the militants of diverting funds for public services to military activities, an allegation Hamas denies." That's it, then? They just accept Hamas' denial? All of Hamas' rockets and missiles do not cost anything. All of the sophisticated tunnels built by Hamas, with tons of concrete and electrical wiring and ventilation cost nothing. Right.
The Times: "The (weekly border) protests, called to demand the lifting of the blockade and a right to return to ancestral homes in what is now Israel, were an exciting distraction from the grinding poverty." Maybe it would be better to not risk life and limb and do whatever may be possible to help your situation. Maybe show up at Hamas headquarters and protest their unwillingness to create a civil society to benefit their people. And let me ask the Times, assuming I lost my senses and decided I wanted to return to my ancestral home in Russia, would the Times care? I trust they do know about the Russian pogroms of the Jews.
This past Wednesday, the UN General Assembly passed yet another anti-Israel resolution. The resolution condemned Israel for what they said was "excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate" force against the Gazans during their mass efforts to breach the border with Israel. The resolution also called for "an international protection mechanism" for the Palestinians. My conclusions? The world only supports the Jews when they are being killed. If a General Assembly resolution had the same enforcement capabilities as a Security Council resolution, the world would be only too happy to send in troops to eliminate Israel.
The measure was propounded by Turkey and Algeria, and passed with 120 votes in favor, 8 opposed and 45 abstentions. Voting no were the US, Australia, Israel of course and some small Pacific Island nations. As the US has no veto power in the General Assembly, our Ambassador, Nikki Haley was unable to prevent passage of the measure. However, she did propose an amendment to the measure, specifically condemning Hamas for the firing of their rockets into Israel, the digging of the tunnels into Israel and the frequent border attacks.
That amendment actually passed by a vote of 62 in favor, 58 against and 42 abstentions. However, because of General Assembly rules, an amendment would have to pass with a 2/3 vote. The takeaway? I would have to give credit to President Trump and Ambassador Nikki Haley (along with Israel's Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon) for helping to slowly but surely change the anti-Israel sentiment at the UN.
The Left's Non-Stop Hate
(Editor's note. This post contains language not used by this writer in the blog. However, as all the expletives come from the mouths of Leftists, I thought it was important to show the extent of their hatred.)
Last Sunday night the Tony Awards were telecast, and Robert De Niro was on stage introducing Bruce Springsteen. It was towards the end of the show, which I understand was relatively free of politics until that moment. De Niro walked up to the microphone and, and with arms raised and clenched fists, said: "First, I want to say fuck Trump. It's no longer down with Trump, it's fuck Trump." Nearly the entire audience stood and applauded. I can only imagine if during the Obama presidency, someone at one of these award shows got up and said the same thing about Obama. Would they have been beaten? I am sure they would have been roundly booed and forced off the stage. And that would have been the proper reaction to such a comment about a sitting President. But not for the lemmings in this audience.
Not to be outdone, the Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough, came out with this: "I know children are being ripped from their mother's arms even while they're being breast fed. I know children are being marched away to showers, marched away to showers. Being told they are - just like the Nazis - said that they were taking people to the showers and then they never came back." Disgusting. Not only does he diminish the horrors of the Holocaust with such a comment, but he alleges that American immigration policy is tantamount to genocide. Just sick.
Kathy Griffin (recall her holding up the fake, decapitated head of Trump) is not happy with her fellow comedian Kevin Hart. You see, as Hart is black, she just cannot understand why he won't discuss/mock Trump in his stand-up act. "I personally think it's a pussy move because he's a black man." So, Hart gets no respect because, even if he should agree with Griffin about Trump, he chooses not to use it in his act. How dare he!
During the last presidential election we were told how so many Trump supporters fit into a basket of deplorables. We have now learned from the just released DOJ's Inspector General's report what some in the FBI thought of Trump supporters. Said one agent: "Trump supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS (pieces of shit) that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing." Actually, some Obama supporters thought they would get lots of free stuff from him. And, under Trump, unemployment is significantly down - so, yes, people are getting jobs.
And this from another agent: "I would have brunch with Trump and a bunch of his supporters like the ones from Ohio that are retarded." I guess the elitists do not worry about being politically incorrect, at least as regards Trump supporters.
A final thought. Obviously, conservatives view the world differently from the way the Left does. But there is a further underlying difference. While conservatives disagree with the Left on virtually everything, we can understand the origin of their beliefs. Leftists, however, do not understand the origins of our beliefs. They do not understand how we could have voted for Trump and will do so again. After all, they cried when Trump won. Everything happening now is just so sad. And Trump's election will mean the end of America and even Western civilization. As the New York Times put it in one of their recent editorials: "Assuming that American democracy endures..." (under Trump). If I tried to explain to a Leftist that many conservatives felt the same way about the Obama Presidency, they would look at me in utter disbelief. As they cannot understand conservatives, the obvious conclusion - to them - is that we must be evil. Hence, the bitter hatred.
Last Sunday night the Tony Awards were telecast, and Robert De Niro was on stage introducing Bruce Springsteen. It was towards the end of the show, which I understand was relatively free of politics until that moment. De Niro walked up to the microphone and, and with arms raised and clenched fists, said: "First, I want to say fuck Trump. It's no longer down with Trump, it's fuck Trump." Nearly the entire audience stood and applauded. I can only imagine if during the Obama presidency, someone at one of these award shows got up and said the same thing about Obama. Would they have been beaten? I am sure they would have been roundly booed and forced off the stage. And that would have been the proper reaction to such a comment about a sitting President. But not for the lemmings in this audience.
Not to be outdone, the Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough, came out with this: "I know children are being ripped from their mother's arms even while they're being breast fed. I know children are being marched away to showers, marched away to showers. Being told they are - just like the Nazis - said that they were taking people to the showers and then they never came back." Disgusting. Not only does he diminish the horrors of the Holocaust with such a comment, but he alleges that American immigration policy is tantamount to genocide. Just sick.
Kathy Griffin (recall her holding up the fake, decapitated head of Trump) is not happy with her fellow comedian Kevin Hart. You see, as Hart is black, she just cannot understand why he won't discuss/mock Trump in his stand-up act. "I personally think it's a pussy move because he's a black man." So, Hart gets no respect because, even if he should agree with Griffin about Trump, he chooses not to use it in his act. How dare he!
During the last presidential election we were told how so many Trump supporters fit into a basket of deplorables. We have now learned from the just released DOJ's Inspector General's report what some in the FBI thought of Trump supporters. Said one agent: "Trump supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS (pieces of shit) that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing." Actually, some Obama supporters thought they would get lots of free stuff from him. And, under Trump, unemployment is significantly down - so, yes, people are getting jobs.
And this from another agent: "I would have brunch with Trump and a bunch of his supporters like the ones from Ohio that are retarded." I guess the elitists do not worry about being politically incorrect, at least as regards Trump supporters.
A final thought. Obviously, conservatives view the world differently from the way the Left does. But there is a further underlying difference. While conservatives disagree with the Left on virtually everything, we can understand the origin of their beliefs. Leftists, however, do not understand the origins of our beliefs. They do not understand how we could have voted for Trump and will do so again. After all, they cried when Trump won. Everything happening now is just so sad. And Trump's election will mean the end of America and even Western civilization. As the New York Times put it in one of their recent editorials: "Assuming that American democracy endures..." (under Trump). If I tried to explain to a Leftist that many conservatives felt the same way about the Obama Presidency, they would look at me in utter disbelief. As they cannot understand conservatives, the obvious conclusion - to them - is that we must be evil. Hence, the bitter hatred.
Tuesday, June 5, 2018
A Potpourri of News
I had to laugh. Seven Democratic Senators, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, put out a statement outlining mandatory provisions for any deal President Trump may make with North Korea. 1. The dismantlement and removal of all nuclear, chemical and biological weapons from the country. 2. Complete and verifiable denuclearization of No. Korea, with the removal of all items related to nuclear production. 3. The end of their ballistic missile program. 4. Inspections anywhere and anytime. 5. The deal must be permanent. (Info from the 6/4/18 online edition of National Review.) Why was I laughing? Where were these Senators when then President Obama was making his deal with Iran? Hypocrites! (Yes, Schumer opposed it - until Trump wanted to back out. Then Schumer supported it.)
Out of Hanover, New Jersey, is a story about the High School cheer team. It seems that one girl complained to her Mom that she did not make the cut. The students are judged on their ability to jump, do choreography and the like. Well, that girl's Mom would have none of it, and complained to the District. The superintendent, like all good wimpy bureaucrats, caved in. He decided that ALL 11th and 12th grade cheerleaders would be on the school's elite squad, regardless of their skills. One former head cheerleader, clearly annoyed by that decision, explained that her sister did not make the squad after trying out. Their Mom told that daughter "You better get to work." There's a great Mom. No excuses. No blaming the person who made the decision or the unfairness of not every girl qualifying. No - get to work! Try harder! Which Mom is raising the stronger child? Which child will be better able to deal with life's challenges? (From CBS New York online.)
Trump uninvited the Super Bowl champs Philadelphia Eagles after a number of players said they would not go. That was a mistake. However many did show, along with their many fans, would have been able to celebrate at the White House. So what if you can't get everybody on board. Yes, once upon a time not that long ago, no one would have passed on an opportunity to be at the White House and meet the President. But those days are over.
And shame on Fox News. They initially put up pictures of Eagle players kneeling, suggesting that the kneeling occurred during the playing of the anthem. They had to apologize, because it turned out the players were kneeling in prayer prior to the game. No Eagle player kneeled during the playing of the anthem all year, although some stood with a raised, clenched fist. Still, Fox is a large enough company to not make these mistakes. A couple players complained that Fox was just in the tank for Trump. Oh come on - almost the entire mainstream media was in the tank for Obama for eight years. Did they complain about that?
This adherence to "identity politics" has got to stop. The idea that we judge people based on what "group" they belong to, instead of as individuals based on their words and deeds, is wrong and even evil. Do you want to be judged based on how the conventional wisdom (i.e. current political correctness) perceives whatever group you may belong to? If you are on a college campus and a Jew, then you are out of favor. In his recent book, "Suicide of the West" (Crown Forum/Random House, 2018), Jonah Goldberg tells us he took a look at the 2015 Yale University course catalog. Here's what he found: "Yale offered at least twenty-six courses on African-American studies, sixty-four courses on 'Ethnicity, Race and Migration,' and forty-one courses under the heading 'Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies."
In the 5/28/18 USA Today, Alia Dastagir had a piece on implicit bias. "While I struggled with a deep sense of class shame and the message that I was 'less than,' (apparently she grew up somewhat poor) I still always knew that I was white and that made me 'better than' poor people of color." What? My family was lower middle class. We never had extra money for much of anything. But, being white, I never was told by my parents, nor did I feel, that I was better than poor people of color. It's the difference between the classical liberal democrats, my parents, and today's Leftists. We were taught to treat everyone the same; another bygone belief filled with wisdom, compared to the shallowness of Leftist thinking.
Recently, Kuwait put forth a proposed resolution at the UN Security Council. The resolution expressed "grave concern" about violence in the Palestinian territories. It called on the Secretary General to issue a report within 60 days to ensure "the safety, protection and well=being of the Palestinian civilian population under Israeli occupation." It also called for an "international protection mechanism." Would that be sending troops in to fight against Israeli forces, even though there was zero mention or concern about Hamas terrorist attacks against Israelis? But, no fear; out of 15 members of the UNSC, 10 members voted in favor, 4 abstained, and the USA thankfully vetoed. One vote against, thanks to President Trump. As the US has a veto, the measure did not pass. But voting in favor were those two outstanding European countries - France and Sweden. Of course, it could be strictly coincidental that they both have large Muslim populations. Abstaining were three European countries - the UK, the Netherlands, and Poland. Sad.
And last, but certainly not least, is the Supreme Court decision regarding the Colorado baker who refused to make a cake for a gay wedding. SCOTUS ruled 7-2 that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission did not fairly consider Mr. Phillips religious beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman. Mr. Phillips said that he offered cakes "off the shelf," but those were rejected. One of the commission members said that the use of religious beliefs in a manner that hurts others "is one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric that people can use." The Court was quite concerned over the commission's overt hostility to religion. Religion is one of those things protected by the First Amendment. While there is nothing in the Constitution about marriage, and certainly not about gay marriage, SCOTUS only a few years back interpreted the Constitution to include this right to gay marriage.
These cases involving competing rights, especially Constitutional rights, do not make for good law. However, the Court found a way to make a narrow decision based on the specific facts of the case. No one should think that that any business would be allowed to refuse to sell to gay couples for their wedding if the product in question is prepackaged. The USA Today had a different take in their 6/5/18 editorial. "Phillips has an absolute right to his religious beliefs against gay marriage, but when the practice of those beliefs infringes on the rights of others to equal treatment, it goes too far." So, believe what you want, but don't actually practice your beliefs? That is an unsatisfactory result.
A number of liberal and Reform Jewish groups expressed their displeasure with the decision. I would ask them to ponder this. Imagine a Jewish baker whose family was murdered in the Holocaust. In walks a neo-Nazi couple asking the baker to make their wedding cake with swastikas covering the top and sides of the cake. I hesitate to think what these liberal Jews might require of that baker.
Out of Hanover, New Jersey, is a story about the High School cheer team. It seems that one girl complained to her Mom that she did not make the cut. The students are judged on their ability to jump, do choreography and the like. Well, that girl's Mom would have none of it, and complained to the District. The superintendent, like all good wimpy bureaucrats, caved in. He decided that ALL 11th and 12th grade cheerleaders would be on the school's elite squad, regardless of their skills. One former head cheerleader, clearly annoyed by that decision, explained that her sister did not make the squad after trying out. Their Mom told that daughter "You better get to work." There's a great Mom. No excuses. No blaming the person who made the decision or the unfairness of not every girl qualifying. No - get to work! Try harder! Which Mom is raising the stronger child? Which child will be better able to deal with life's challenges? (From CBS New York online.)
Trump uninvited the Super Bowl champs Philadelphia Eagles after a number of players said they would not go. That was a mistake. However many did show, along with their many fans, would have been able to celebrate at the White House. So what if you can't get everybody on board. Yes, once upon a time not that long ago, no one would have passed on an opportunity to be at the White House and meet the President. But those days are over.
And shame on Fox News. They initially put up pictures of Eagle players kneeling, suggesting that the kneeling occurred during the playing of the anthem. They had to apologize, because it turned out the players were kneeling in prayer prior to the game. No Eagle player kneeled during the playing of the anthem all year, although some stood with a raised, clenched fist. Still, Fox is a large enough company to not make these mistakes. A couple players complained that Fox was just in the tank for Trump. Oh come on - almost the entire mainstream media was in the tank for Obama for eight years. Did they complain about that?
This adherence to "identity politics" has got to stop. The idea that we judge people based on what "group" they belong to, instead of as individuals based on their words and deeds, is wrong and even evil. Do you want to be judged based on how the conventional wisdom (i.e. current political correctness) perceives whatever group you may belong to? If you are on a college campus and a Jew, then you are out of favor. In his recent book, "Suicide of the West" (Crown Forum/Random House, 2018), Jonah Goldberg tells us he took a look at the 2015 Yale University course catalog. Here's what he found: "Yale offered at least twenty-six courses on African-American studies, sixty-four courses on 'Ethnicity, Race and Migration,' and forty-one courses under the heading 'Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies."
In the 5/28/18 USA Today, Alia Dastagir had a piece on implicit bias. "While I struggled with a deep sense of class shame and the message that I was 'less than,' (apparently she grew up somewhat poor) I still always knew that I was white and that made me 'better than' poor people of color." What? My family was lower middle class. We never had extra money for much of anything. But, being white, I never was told by my parents, nor did I feel, that I was better than poor people of color. It's the difference between the classical liberal democrats, my parents, and today's Leftists. We were taught to treat everyone the same; another bygone belief filled with wisdom, compared to the shallowness of Leftist thinking.
Recently, Kuwait put forth a proposed resolution at the UN Security Council. The resolution expressed "grave concern" about violence in the Palestinian territories. It called on the Secretary General to issue a report within 60 days to ensure "the safety, protection and well=being of the Palestinian civilian population under Israeli occupation." It also called for an "international protection mechanism." Would that be sending troops in to fight against Israeli forces, even though there was zero mention or concern about Hamas terrorist attacks against Israelis? But, no fear; out of 15 members of the UNSC, 10 members voted in favor, 4 abstained, and the USA thankfully vetoed. One vote against, thanks to President Trump. As the US has a veto, the measure did not pass. But voting in favor were those two outstanding European countries - France and Sweden. Of course, it could be strictly coincidental that they both have large Muslim populations. Abstaining were three European countries - the UK, the Netherlands, and Poland. Sad.
And last, but certainly not least, is the Supreme Court decision regarding the Colorado baker who refused to make a cake for a gay wedding. SCOTUS ruled 7-2 that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission did not fairly consider Mr. Phillips religious beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman. Mr. Phillips said that he offered cakes "off the shelf," but those were rejected. One of the commission members said that the use of religious beliefs in a manner that hurts others "is one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric that people can use." The Court was quite concerned over the commission's overt hostility to religion. Religion is one of those things protected by the First Amendment. While there is nothing in the Constitution about marriage, and certainly not about gay marriage, SCOTUS only a few years back interpreted the Constitution to include this right to gay marriage.
These cases involving competing rights, especially Constitutional rights, do not make for good law. However, the Court found a way to make a narrow decision based on the specific facts of the case. No one should think that that any business would be allowed to refuse to sell to gay couples for their wedding if the product in question is prepackaged. The USA Today had a different take in their 6/5/18 editorial. "Phillips has an absolute right to his religious beliefs against gay marriage, but when the practice of those beliefs infringes on the rights of others to equal treatment, it goes too far." So, believe what you want, but don't actually practice your beliefs? That is an unsatisfactory result.
A number of liberal and Reform Jewish groups expressed their displeasure with the decision. I would ask them to ponder this. Imagine a Jewish baker whose family was murdered in the Holocaust. In walks a neo-Nazi couple asking the baker to make their wedding cake with swastikas covering the top and sides of the cake. I hesitate to think what these liberal Jews might require of that baker.
Thursday, May 24, 2018
"The N.F.L. Kneels to Trump" - so Says the New York Times
The NFL just announced their new policy with regards to players kneeling during the national anthem. "All team and league personnel on the field shall stand and show respect for the flag and the anthem." In their 5/24/18 lead editorial, the Times asserts that "the league capitulated to a president who relishes demonizing black athletes." Wow - straight to the race card. I almost cannot remember when editorials in the MSM actually relied on facts and logic to bolster their editorial arguments - rather than relying on demagoguery and demonization and vilification.
The Times thought it would be amusing to see players stand with "holding black-gloved fists in the air," or "holding signs protesting police brutality." Hmmm. I never did understand the connection between protesting perceived "police brutality" and not standing for the anthem. It seems to me that the kneelers are saying they will not stand for the flag until the country is perfect in their eyes - which will never happen.
So, let's take a look at some of the assumptions made by the Times and the kneelers. According to the Sporting News (10/15/17), the TV audience for the NFL through the first five weeks of the 2017 season was 15.156 million, down 7.42% from 2016's first five weeks of 16.371 million, and down 18% from 2015's first five weeks of 18.438 million viewers. Recall that Colin Kaepernick started the kneeling during the preseason games of 2016.
A reasonable person might ask if the owners looked at the numbers and decided that, from a business perspective, something needed to be done to reverse the downward spiral. A reasonable person might also conclude that there could be multiple factors affecting audience viewership. Ah, but not the New York Times. For the New York Times, somehow, the entire story was about President Trump being a racist. What a bunch of... No, I won't go there. The last blog post was harsh enough, although some of those descriptive terms could easily apply to the editorial writers of the Times. Is there anything happening in the world which the Times sees as negative that they cannot attribute to Trump? I don't think so.
And what about this police brutality? Are blacks always unfairly singled out by the police? I have no doubt that it happens sometimes. But what to make of the crime statistics? NBC reported that from 1980 through 2008, blacks committed 52% of the homicides, even though they make up about 13% of the population.
According to one source (The Mercury News), the number of people killed by police remained almost the same from 2016 to 2017. The paper also reported a sharp decline in the number of unarmed blacks killed by police from 2015's 36 to 17 in 2016 and 19 in 2017. Of course, those numbers are the proverbially "drop in the bucket" compared to the nationwide killing of blacks by other blacks. In 2015 that number was 2380, according to the FBI's Uniformed Crime Statistics.
Conclusions? Always blame Trump. Cops are evil. Never allow facts or the truth to interfere with the agenda.
The Times thought it would be amusing to see players stand with "holding black-gloved fists in the air," or "holding signs protesting police brutality." Hmmm. I never did understand the connection between protesting perceived "police brutality" and not standing for the anthem. It seems to me that the kneelers are saying they will not stand for the flag until the country is perfect in their eyes - which will never happen.
So, let's take a look at some of the assumptions made by the Times and the kneelers. According to the Sporting News (10/15/17), the TV audience for the NFL through the first five weeks of the 2017 season was 15.156 million, down 7.42% from 2016's first five weeks of 16.371 million, and down 18% from 2015's first five weeks of 18.438 million viewers. Recall that Colin Kaepernick started the kneeling during the preseason games of 2016.
A reasonable person might ask if the owners looked at the numbers and decided that, from a business perspective, something needed to be done to reverse the downward spiral. A reasonable person might also conclude that there could be multiple factors affecting audience viewership. Ah, but not the New York Times. For the New York Times, somehow, the entire story was about President Trump being a racist. What a bunch of... No, I won't go there. The last blog post was harsh enough, although some of those descriptive terms could easily apply to the editorial writers of the Times. Is there anything happening in the world which the Times sees as negative that they cannot attribute to Trump? I don't think so.
And what about this police brutality? Are blacks always unfairly singled out by the police? I have no doubt that it happens sometimes. But what to make of the crime statistics? NBC reported that from 1980 through 2008, blacks committed 52% of the homicides, even though they make up about 13% of the population.
According to one source (The Mercury News), the number of people killed by police remained almost the same from 2016 to 2017. The paper also reported a sharp decline in the number of unarmed blacks killed by police from 2015's 36 to 17 in 2016 and 19 in 2017. Of course, those numbers are the proverbially "drop in the bucket" compared to the nationwide killing of blacks by other blacks. In 2015 that number was 2380, according to the FBI's Uniformed Crime Statistics.
Conclusions? Always blame Trump. Cops are evil. Never allow facts or the truth to interfere with the agenda.
The Democrat's and Mainstream Media's Inability to Tell the Truth
Recently, President Trump had a meeting with a group of California public officials who oppose the State's sanctuary law. The Sheriff of Fresno County told Trump: "There could be an MS-13 gang member I know about, if they don't reach a certain threshold, I cannot tell ICE about them." Trump, clearly speaking about MS-13 replied as follows: "We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in - and we're stopping a lot of them - but we're taking people out of the country. You wouldn't believe how bad these people are. These aren't people, these are animals, and we're taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that's never happened before."
(Note: In an earlier post I commented on how we went from Obama's and Holder's war on cops, to Trump's and Sessions' war on criminal gangs, including MS-13. And by the way, MS-13's motto is "mata, viola, controla" - kill, rape, control.)
I get that the Left, which includes most of the MSM, has a visceral hatred of Donald Trump. The following comments are not only a reflection of that hatred, but yet another example of how their issues always supersede the truth. As Dennis Prager has said, and as this blog has noted, truth is simply not an issue for the Left. Let's take a look at some Tweets and comments.
The New York Times: "Trump lashed out at undocumented immigrants during a White House meeting, calling those trying to breach the country's borders "animals." Lie!
CBS: Claims Trump used "harsh rhetoric to describe 'some undocumented immigrants' during a California sanctuary state round table. Lie!
ABC: "President Trump refers to some who cross the border illegally as 'animals,' not people. Lie by omission! "Some" who cross the border illegally? He was specifically replying to the Sheriff's comments about MS-13.
Andrea Mitchell of NBC: Claimed Trump called "people trying to get into the country 'animals' not people." Not all people - lie by omission!
John Harwood of CNBC: "However repugnant their actions, MS-13 gang members are human beings IMHO (in my humble opinion)." Now, perhaps certain religious tenets accept that we are all God's children and therefore...what,everyone should be treated the same? I don't know. But I have friend who is a retired cop who would love to have some of these people on the Left see the handiwork of MS-13, and then ask what they might call them.
The NY Daily News: "Trump hurls hate at immigrants: 'these aren't people - these are animals.'" Lie!
And the leading Democrats comments? Nancy Pelosi: "When the President of the United States says about undocumented immigrants, 'these aren't people, these are animals,' you have to wonder, does he not believe in the spark of divinity, the dignity and worth of every person?" I would be extremely reluctant to ask the House Minority Leader (and future Speaker if the Dems take back the House in November) what she would say about history's mass murderers - Hitler, Stalin, Mao and others? Would she be talking about their "spark of divinity?" Horrifying!
Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader: "When all of our great-great=grandparents came to America they weren't 'animals,' (which is irrelevant) and these people aren't either." Do you get the picture yet? The Democrats are so enamored of open borders that they really do not care at all about who might be coming into our country. Gang members? Terrorists? They have no concern for the safety and well-being of American citizens. So, one might ask, why do my friends on the Left keep voting these people into office? They've already told me that Israel is not the main issue - see the last post. Maybe unrestrained immigration is not an issue either.
I'll end with California's long-time Senator, Diane Feinstein: "Immigrant's are not 'animals.'" (Trump never said they were.) The president's statement was deeply offensive and racist. (Ah, the race card.) Immigrants are our family and friends and they make significant contributions to our country." (Yes they do, and what a nice deflection by the Senator.)
Some questions for my friends on the Left. Do you also side with criminal gangs? Do you even wonder why these leaders of the Democratic Party sided with the worst gang members over our President? When do you say "enough!"
(Note: In an earlier post I commented on how we went from Obama's and Holder's war on cops, to Trump's and Sessions' war on criminal gangs, including MS-13. And by the way, MS-13's motto is "mata, viola, controla" - kill, rape, control.)
I get that the Left, which includes most of the MSM, has a visceral hatred of Donald Trump. The following comments are not only a reflection of that hatred, but yet another example of how their issues always supersede the truth. As Dennis Prager has said, and as this blog has noted, truth is simply not an issue for the Left. Let's take a look at some Tweets and comments.
The New York Times: "Trump lashed out at undocumented immigrants during a White House meeting, calling those trying to breach the country's borders "animals." Lie!
CBS: Claims Trump used "harsh rhetoric to describe 'some undocumented immigrants' during a California sanctuary state round table. Lie!
ABC: "President Trump refers to some who cross the border illegally as 'animals,' not people. Lie by omission! "Some" who cross the border illegally? He was specifically replying to the Sheriff's comments about MS-13.
Andrea Mitchell of NBC: Claimed Trump called "people trying to get into the country 'animals' not people." Not all people - lie by omission!
John Harwood of CNBC: "However repugnant their actions, MS-13 gang members are human beings IMHO (in my humble opinion)." Now, perhaps certain religious tenets accept that we are all God's children and therefore...what,everyone should be treated the same? I don't know. But I have friend who is a retired cop who would love to have some of these people on the Left see the handiwork of MS-13, and then ask what they might call them.
The NY Daily News: "Trump hurls hate at immigrants: 'these aren't people - these are animals.'" Lie!
And the leading Democrats comments? Nancy Pelosi: "When the President of the United States says about undocumented immigrants, 'these aren't people, these are animals,' you have to wonder, does he not believe in the spark of divinity, the dignity and worth of every person?" I would be extremely reluctant to ask the House Minority Leader (and future Speaker if the Dems take back the House in November) what she would say about history's mass murderers - Hitler, Stalin, Mao and others? Would she be talking about their "spark of divinity?" Horrifying!
Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader: "When all of our great-great=grandparents came to America they weren't 'animals,' (which is irrelevant) and these people aren't either." Do you get the picture yet? The Democrats are so enamored of open borders that they really do not care at all about who might be coming into our country. Gang members? Terrorists? They have no concern for the safety and well-being of American citizens. So, one might ask, why do my friends on the Left keep voting these people into office? They've already told me that Israel is not the main issue - see the last post. Maybe unrestrained immigration is not an issue either.
I'll end with California's long-time Senator, Diane Feinstein: "Immigrant's are not 'animals.'" (Trump never said they were.) The president's statement was deeply offensive and racist. (Ah, the race card.) Immigrants are our family and friends and they make significant contributions to our country." (Yes they do, and what a nice deflection by the Senator.)
Some questions for my friends on the Left. Do you also side with criminal gangs? Do you even wonder why these leaders of the Democratic Party sided with the worst gang members over our President? When do you say "enough!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)