Tag Archive: politics


School punishment by racial quota
By Thomas Sowell November 18, 2014 12:25 pm
If anyone still has any doubt about the utter cynicism of the Obama administration, a recent agreement between the federal government and the Minneapolis Public Schools should open their eyes.

Under the Obama administration, both the Department of Education and the Department of Justice have been leaning on public schools around the country to reduce what they call the “disproportionate” numbers of black male students who are punished for various offenses in schools.

Under an implicit threat of losing their federal subsidies, the Minneapolis Public Schools have agreed to reduce the disparity in punishment of black students by 25 percent by the end of this school year, and then by 50 percent, 75 percent and finally 100 percent in each of the following years. In other words, there are now racial quota limits for punishment in the Minneapolis schools.

If we stop and think — as old-fashioned as that may seem — there is not the slightest reason to expect black males to commit the same number of offenses as Asian females or any other set of students.

When different groups of human beings have behaved differently in all sorts of ways, in countries around the world, for thousands of years of recorded history, why would we accept as dogma that the only reason one set of students gets punished more than others is because the people who are doing the punishing are picking on them?

Politically — which is the way the Obama administration looks at everything — any time they can depict blacks as victims, and depict themselves as their rescuers, that means an opportunity to get out the black vote for Democrats.

On the surface, this may look like a favor to blacks. But only on the surface.

Anyone with common sense knows that letting a kid get away with bad behavior is an open invitation to worse behavior in the future. Punishing a kid for misbehavior in school when he is 10 years old may reduce the chances that he will have to be sent to prison when he is 20 years old.

Other schools in other cities, which have also caved under pressure from the federal government, and agreed to lighten up on black kids who misbehave, have reported an increase in misbehavior, including violence. Who would have thought otherwise?

Letting kids who are behavior problems in schools grow up to become hoodlums and then criminals is no favor to them or to the black community. Moreover, it takes no more than a small fraction of troublemakers in a class to make it impossible to give that class a decent education. And for many poor people, whether black or white, education is their one big chance to escape poverty.

The people in the Obama administration who are pushing this counterproductive policy are not stupid. They are political, which is worse. They know what they are doing and they are willing to sacrifice young blacks to do it.

This punishment issue made me think back to the 8th grade, when I was punished by being kept after school, more often than any other kid in the class — black, white, Hispanic or whatever. I was bored in school and did various pranks to liven things up.

One day, after school, as I sat alone among the empty chairs in the classroom, the teacher said, sarcastically: “Well, here we are again, Sowell, just the two of us!”

“Good grief, Miss Sharoff,” I said. “If we keep staying in after school together all the time, people will begin to talk.”

“We will just have to live with the scandal,” she said, without even looking up from the papers she was correcting.

Thank heaven there was no Obama administration to exempt me from punishment. Who knows how I might have ended up?

Years ago, there was a study of a working class community where there were black, Hispanic and Italian kids, and where many of the cops were Italian. When a black or Hispanic kid broke the law, the police took him down to the station and booked him. But, if an Italian kid did the same thing, they reacted differently.

The Italian cop would take the Italian kid out into an alley and rough him up. Then he would take him home to his family, tell them what had happened and leave him there — where the kid could expect another beating, instead of the wrist-slap punishment of the law. Those cops understood the realities of life that politicians ignore. And they were doing a favor to their own.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is http://www.tsowell.com. To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at http://www.creators.com

The U.S. Government Is Borrowing About 8 Trillion Dollars A Year
By Michael Snyder, on September 29th, 2014

National Debt – Public DomainI know that headline sounds completely outrageous. But it is actually true. The U.S. government is borrowing about 8 trillion dollars a year, and you are about to see the hard numbers that prove this. When discussing the national debt, most people tend to only focus on the amount that it increases each 12 months. And as I wrote about recently, the U.S. national debt has increased by more than a trillion dollars in fiscal year 2014. But that does not count the huge amounts of U.S. Treasury securities that the federal government must redeem each year. When these debt instruments hit their maturity date, the U.S. government must pay them off. This is done by borrowing more money to pay off the previous debts. In fiscal year 2013, redemptions of U.S. Treasury securities totaled $7,546,726,000,000 and new debt totaling $8,323,949,000,000 was issued. The final numbers for fiscal year 2014 are likely to be significantly higher than that.

So why does so much government debt come due each year?

Well, in recent years government officials figured out that they could save a lot of money on interest payments by borrowing over shorter time frames. For example, it costs the government far more to borrow money for 10 years than it does for 1 year. So a strategy was hatched to borrow money for very short periods of time and to keep “rolling it over” again and again and again.

This strategy has indeed saved the federal government hundreds of billions of dollars in interest payments, but it has also created a situation where the federal government must borrow about 8 trillion dollars a year just to keep up with the game.

So what happens when the rest of the world decides that it does not want to loan us 8 trillion dollars a year at ultra-low interest rates?

Well, the game will be over and we will be in a massive amount of trouble.

I am about to share with you some numbers that were originally reported by CNS News. As you can see, far more debt is being redeemed and issued today than back during the middle part of the last decade…

2013

Redeemed: $7,546,726,000,000

Issued: $8,323,949,000,000

Increase: $777,223,000,000

2012

Redeemed: $6,804,956,000,000

Issued: $7,924,651,000,000

Increase: $1,119,695,000,000

2011

Redeemed: $7,026,617,000,000

Issued: $8,078,266,000,000

Increase: $1,051,649,000,000

2010

Redeemed: $7,206,965,000,000

Issued: $8,649,171,000,000

Increase: $1,442,206,000,000

2009

Redeemed: $7,306,512,000,000

Issued: $9,027,399,000,000

Increase: $1,720,887,000,000

2008

Redeemed: $4,898,607,000,000

Issued: $5,580,644,000,000

Increase: $682,037,000,000

2007

Redeemed: $4,402,395,000,000

Issued: $4,532,698,000,000

Increase: $130,303,000,000

2006

Redeemed: $4,297,869,000,000

Issued: $4,459,341,000,000

Increase: $161,472,000,000

The only way that this game can continue is if the U.S. government can continue to borrow gigantic piles of money at ridiculously low interest rates.

And our current standard of living greatly depends on the continuation of this game.

If something comes along and rattles this Ponzi scheme, life in America could change radically almost overnight.

In the United States today, we have a heavily socialized system that hands out checks to nearly half the population. In fact, 49 percent of all Americans live in a home that gets direct monetary benefits from the federal government each month according to the U.S. Census Bureau. And it is hard to believe, but Americans received more than 2 trillion dollars in benefits from the federal government last year alone. At this point, the primary function of the federal government is taking money from some people and giving it to others. In fact, more than 70 percent of all federal spending goes to “dependence-creating programs”, and the government runs approximately 80 different “means-tested welfare programs” right now. But the big problem is that the government is giving out far more money than it is taking in, so it has to borrow the difference. As long as we can continue to borrow at super low interest rates, the status quo can continue.

But a Ponzi scheme like this can only last for so long.

It has been said that when the checks stop coming in, chaos will begin in the streets of America.

The looting that took place when a technical glitch caused the EBT system to go down for a short time in some areas last year and the rioting in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri this year were both small previews of what we will see in the future.

And there is no way that we will be able to “grow” our way out of this problem.

As the Baby Boomers continue to retire, the amount of money that the federal government is handing out each year is projected to absolutely skyrocket. Just consider the following numbers…

-Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid. Today, more than 70 million Americans are on Medicaid, and it is being projected that Obamacare will add 16 million more Americans to the Medicaid rolls.

-When Medicare was first established, we were told that it would cost about $12 billion a year by the time 1990 rolled around. Instead, the federal government ended up spending $110 billion on the program in 1990, and the federal government spent approximately $600 billion on the program in 2013.

-It is being projected that the number of Americans on Medicare will grow from 50.7 million in 2012 to 73.2 million in 2025.

-At this point, Medicare is facing unfunded liabilities of more than 38 trillion dollars over the next 75 years. That comes to approximately $328,404 for every single household in the United States.

-In 1945, there were 42 workers for every retiree receiving Social Security benefits. Today, that number has fallen to 2.5 workers, and if you eliminate all government workers, that leaves only 1.6 private sector workers for every retiree receiving Social Security benefits.

-Right now, there are approximately 63 million Americans collecting Social Security benefits. By 2035, that number is projected to soar to an astounding 91 million.

-Overall, the Social Security system is facing a 134 trillion dollar shortfall over the next 75 years.

-The U.S. government is facing a total of 222 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities during the years ahead. Social Security and Medicare make up the bulk of that.

Yes, things seem somewhat stable for the moment in America today.

But the same thing could have been said about 2007. The stock market was soaring, the economy seemed like it was rolling right along and people were generally optimistic about the future.

Then the financial crisis of 2008 erupted and it seemed like the world was going to end.

Well, the truth is that another great crisis is rapidly approaching, and we are in far worse shape financially than we were back in 2008.

Don’t get blindsided by what is ahead. Evidence of the coming catastrophe is all around you.

The Government Is Controlling Private Property to Save Frog Species Not Seen in 50 Years

Scott Blakeman / August 29, 2014

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is seeking to protect the dusky gopher frog on the Endangered Species List by designating over 1,500 acres of private property in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana as a “critical habitat” for the embattled amphibian.

But here’s the kicker: The frog hasn’t been seen on the land in question for over 50 years.

The federal government has the ability through the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to designate land as “critical habitat” subjecting it to additional regulations. But the government can’t simply claim that private property is “critical habitat” without first conducting an economic analysis to determine the economic impact. If the analysis shows that the cost of creating a critical habitat burdens the property owner and outweighs the perceived benefit to the endangered species, the land can be exempted from the regulation.

In the case of the St. Tammany property, the economic analysis produced by the USFWS revealed that the “designation could preclude all development on the land, causing the landowners to lose as much as $36 million.” Meanwhile, the land is not actively benefitting a single dusky gopher frog. But the plans to make the land a critical habitat proceed. This is a federal land grab at its worst. And, unfortunately, the courts are complicit.

Oral arguments were heard in a U.S. district court last week regarding the situation. U.S. Department of Justice attorney Mary Hollingsworth noted that the property in dispute is a good prospective breeding ground for the frog and is “in very good shape and could be used today if the frogs were there.”

But, as noted earlier, the intriguing thing is that the frogs aren’t there – and they haven’t been seen there or anywhere in Louisiana for 50 years. Moreover, calling the land suitable for the frog is debatable at best. Pacific Legal Foundation lawyer M. Reed Hopper noted that “this land does not include the physical and biological features that are critical for the dusky gopher frog, so it’s no surprise that there aren’t any frogs on the property.” The government wants to effectively restrict use of private land that could cost the landowners millions to protect a creature that doesn’t live, and possibly could not even survive, there.

Unfortunately, the court’s decision allows this inanity to proceed. Pacific Legal Foundation reported that a federal judge “reluctantly” upheld the designation of this unsuitable area as “critical habitat.” The judge acknowledged the ESA appears to go too far but suggested that is a matter for Congress to address and not the courts.” The Foundation called the action by the USFWS to not follow its own rules an “irrational decision.”

An “irrational decision” is a good way to put it. Moreover, it’s outrageous that the government could restrict development of private property and cost a family $36 million dollars, not to mention the cost in jobs and economic activity of not productively using the land. And the deeper issue of excessive government intervention shouldn’t be forgotten. M. Reed Hopper says it well:

“Essentially this is sort of a test case for the Fish & Wildlife Service. This is the first time they’ve ever extended their authority this far, and if they get away with it here, they’re likely to do it in the future.”

Though the frog may be little, through the Endangered Species Act, this amphibian is trashing private property rights that should be protected under the Constitution, potentially costing people millions, and setting a dangerous precedent for the future.

New Iranian Law Proposes 74 Lashes for Dog Owners
A new law proposed in Iran would make walking, owning or selling a dog a crime punishable by 74 lashes and a fine of $370 to $3,700.
Sun, November 9, 2014
PrintPrintEmailEmail
An Iranian woman stands in front of a bank as she holds a dog in Tehran. The entrance of dogs and other pets into

A new law proposed in Iran would make walking, owning or selling a dog a crime punishable by 74 lashes and a fine of 10 to 100 million rials ($370 to $3,700). Violators could also be arrested.

Although the bill was proposed by 32 hardline MPs, many of 290 members of Iran’s Majles (parliament) are conservatives who sympathize with the hardliners.

The target of the bill appears to be young people as well as wealthy Iranians who are drawn to imitate Western culture. Even though coming into contact with dogs (especially the mucous membranes) is considered najis (unclean) in Islamic law, dogs are kept as pets by some Iranians. Most owners keep their dogs inside, but some – from the more affluent neighborhoods – can be seen walking their dogs outside, raising the ire of the Iranian morality police.

The legislation, reported in the reformist newspaper Shargh, reads in part, “Anyone who takes a pet like a monkey or a dog in public … damages the Islamic culture.” The legislation also warned that such animals damage “the health and tranquility of the people – particularly children and women.”

According to the new legislation, the animals would be confiscated and sent to a zoo, forest or desert. Dogs used by police, hunters, shepherds, farmers and fishermen are exempt from the legislation.
A similar bill was introduced to the parliament three years ago, but was dropped by MPs after concluded that more important laws were on their agenda.

However, Iranian morality police currently stop dog owners and either warn them or confiscate their animals.General Esmail Ahmadi Moghaddam said two years ago that his force would deal with Iran’s police chief ho carry dogs in public.”

German Football ‘Hooligans’ Take Up Battle Against Salafists
A group of nearly 5,000 football hooligans gathered in the city of Cologne to protest the spread of Islamic extremism in the country.
BY SOEREN KERN Mon, November 10, 2014
A group of nearly 5,000 football hooligans from across Germany gathered in the western city of Cologne on October 26 to protest the spread of Islamic extremism in the country.

The watershed march was organized by a new initiative called “Hooligans against Salafists,” better known by its German abbreviation, HoGeSa, short for Hooligans gegen Salafisten.

HoGeSa is a burgeoning alliance between hooligans from rival football clubs who have temporarily set aside their mutual hatred for each other in order to unite against a common enemy: radical Salafists who want to replace Germany’s democratic order with Islamic Sharia law.

The alliance has its roots in a hidden Internet forum called GnuHoonters (homophone of “New Hunters”) formed in 2012 between 17 different hooligan groups from across Germany. GnuHoonters was established primarily to fight anarchists, Marxist-Leninists and other left-wing extremists in the country.

In 2013, some 300 members of GnuHoonters set up another hidden Internet forum called “Because Germans Still Dare” (Weil Deutsche sich’s noch trauen), aimed at developing an action plan to fight the leaders of Germany’s Salafist scene.

After the forum was hacked in early 2014 and its secrets were spilled to the public, the group adopted the name “Hooligans against Salafists” and began operating openly. Initially, HoGeSa’s activities were limited to the Internet and social media, through which it developed a considerable following. Its Facebook page, for example, had more than 40,000 followers before it was recently shut down by Facebook censors.

On September 28, 2014, around 300 HoGeSa members met in person for the first time in Dortmund, a city in the German state of North-Rhine Westphalia that has a large Muslim population. Similar meetings were also held in the cities of Essen, Mannheim and Nuremberg.

These introductory meetings paved the way for HoGeSa’s first mass gathering, the rally in downtown Cologne on October 26. The organizers of the event were expecting a turnout of around 1,500 hooligans, but more than three times that many people (4,900 by some counts) showed up.

According to some commentators, the mass mobilization was fuelled in part by a growing sense of frustration that the German government is not doing enough to curb the spread of Islam in the country. Others said that protesters were incited by the Salafists’ unceasingly provocative support for the jihadist group Islamic State.

The rally, which began in front of Cologne’s central train station, was initially peaceful, given that Salafists appeared to give the area a wide berth. But matters turned extremely violent after participants refused to obey police orders to clear the area after the event was over.

More than 1,300 police were called in, many using batons, pepper spray and water cannons against the protesters, who hurled rocks, bottles and firecrackers at them. Nearly 50 police officers were injured and 20 protesters were arrested.

The intensity of the violence shocked many Germans and commentators pondered over who these “new hooligans” are and whether this “unexpected phenomenon” portends serious trouble ahead.

One newspaper wrote: “The hooligans are more dangerous than ever. They have a new opponent. German security authorities are on high alert! A state security official has warned: ‘If hooligans actually meet Salafists next time, there will certainly be severe injuries or deaths.'”

HoGeSa representatives seemed to apologize for the violence in Cologne, saying that “not everything went according to plan” and that they had learned from their mistakes.

At the same time, HoGeSa leaders insist that the group is “apolitical” and not connected to any partisan organization, including Germany’s neo-Nazi movement. “We stand behind our cause,” one of the event organizers shouted into a megaphone. “We are not right-wing radicals,” he added.

But large numbers of neo-Nazis are said to have joined the rally, sparking fears that right-wing extremists are seeking to influence and possibly co-opt the hooligan scene, with the aim of leveraging HoGeSa’s mass mobilization potential to its own advantage.

The newspaper Die Zeit reported that senior leaders of the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party of Germany [NPD] participated in the Cologne rally and offered to help “professionalize” the HoGeSa movement. “The starving NPD, which has been in a political free fall for three years now, is apparently on the offensive and wants to join this new extremist trend,” the paper wrote.

A new report published by police in North-Rhine Westphalia estimates that there are a total of 13,600 hooligans in all of Germany, but that only 400 (or 3.3%) have ties to the neo-Nazi movement or other right-wing extremist groups.

The president of the German domestic intelligence agency BfV, Hans-Georg Maassen, said that hooligans have not been subject to state surveillance because, for the most part, they are “politically indifferent” and their personal values are limited to “drinking beer and fighting.”

Some commentators argue that mainstream media outlets are now using the fear of hooligan violence to completely shut down the debate about the rise of Islam in Germany. They are doing so by demonizing any German citizen with legitimate concerns about the spread of Sharia law and the establishment of a parallel Muslim society in the country as “neo-Nazi.”

In the words of one such commentator, the guardians of German multiculturalism are protecting the “beheaders of Christians and mutilators of women” by seeking to silence those who are politically incorrect enough to express outrage at such atrocities.

HoGeSa’s next major rally was set to be held in Berlin on November 15. The event — which was being organized under the motto, “Against Salafists, Islamization and Refugee Policy” — was to have been held at the Pariser Platz, a square in the center of Berlin that is situated within walking distance of the seat of the German government.

The rally organizers originally said they were expecting a turnout of 1,000 people, but after police predicted that more than 10,000 hooligans would show up, authorities in Berlin cancelled the event. Similar rallies planned for Frankfurt, Hamburg and Hannover have also been banned, although social media chatter indicates that the hooligans plan to proceed anyway.

In any event, HoGeSa appears to be striking fear into the hearts of the Salafists, who are now on the defensive, an accomplishment that has so far eluded German counter-terrorism officials.

Following the violence in Cologne, Pierre Vogel, a notorious convert to Islam who in recent years has emerged as a central figure in Germany’s Salafist scene, hired full-time bodyguardsto protect himself and his family.
The German media say Vogel, a former professional boxer who usually depicts himself as the embodiment of an invincible Islam, is now portraying himself as a helpless victim at the hands of football hooligans.

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook. Follow him on Twitter.

This article was published originally on GatestoneInstitute.org

Daily Digest for Thursday
November 13, 2014 Print

THE FOUNDATION
“Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of men will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice without constraint.” –Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 15, 1787

TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKS
Details of Obama’s Immigration Plan Leaked
As early as Nov. 21, Barack Obama will announce his 10-point plan on immigration, circumventing Congress and disregarding the Constitution. Fox News reports on a leaked draft of Obama’s executive action that does everything from giving Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers a raise, to granting differed action to 4.5 million illegal immigrants. It will also give a discount to the first 10,000 illegal immigrants who apply for naturalization. In response, some GOP lawmakers advocate a tough line against Obama’s plan. Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ) wants the GOP to work a provision into December’s appropriations bill where Congress leaves no money for Obama’s executive actions. But Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell wants a softer approach — more cooperation among politicians. Still, Obama could continue going Rambo on immigration by waiting until after Congress passes its appropriation bill Dec. 11, or by placing a few Republican carrots in the executive order. Republicans need to remember this is not just a policy debate: This is an argument over Rule of Law and the constitutionally separated powers in Washington. Both high ideals. More…

Comment | Share

Reid Has ‘No Desire’ to Create Obstruction
Outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid ran the chamber with an iron fist, but now that he’s headed for the minority, he wants everybody to get along. “I’ve always believed it wise to follow Will Roger’s admonition: ‘Don’t let yesterday use up too much of today,'” he said from the Senate floor. Therefore, he added, “I’m ready … to work with [Mitch McConnell] in good faith to make this institution function again for the American people.” He then had the temerity to blame Republicans for the dysfunction. “I saw firsthand how a strategy of obstruction was debilitating to our system,” he continued, blaming McConnell for creating gridlock. “I have no desire to engage in that manner.” That’s all he ever did as majority leader — blocking amendments, letting House bills stack up on his desk, etc. We don’t believe for a second he’s turned over a new leaf.

Comment | Share

Part-Time Workers Can’t Get Full-Time Jobs
About 32% of part-time workers wish for a full-time job, according to a survey conducted by CareerBuilder, but a lack of education and a crummy job market has landed those people in jobs bringing in little money on few hours. Of those wishing for full-time work, 39% say they have to stretch their salary and 31% say they are the only person bringing home the bacon in their family. The challenge to getting that 40-hour-a-week position? Only 31% said they weren’t looking, 51% said they didn’t have the necessary skills, and the top reason was the lack of full-time work since the recession (54%). Rosemary Haefner, vice president of human resources at CareerBuilder, said, “Though we’re seeing an uptick in full-time, permanent hiring, many workers are still having difficulty finding positions in their field of expertise.” Five years after the federal government declared the recession over, one-third of the part-time workforce wishes for something better, but the jobs are opening up at an excruciatingly slow pace. Just the latest dispatch from the sorry Obama recovery. More…

Comment | Share

Senate Vote Looming on Keystone
Earlier this year, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid squelched any effort to pass legislation regarding the Keystone XL pipeline. Now that Democrats got thumped in the election, however, the legislation is headed for a vote. Why? Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu needs help in her Louisiana runoff. Bloomberg reports, “The purpose of the vote would be symbolic: To highlight Landrieu’s support for the pipeline and her influence on energy issues in Washington — a centerpiece of her campaign. A vote in favor of the pipeline may benefit Landrieu in her Dec. 6 runoff election, in which she faces Republican Representative Bill Cassidy.” Landrieu’s being able to tout passage of the pipeline sure would be good on the stump in a state that stands to benefit from it. In fact, it may even be more helpful if Barack Obama vetoes it — he and his ecofascist constituents get what they want, while Landrieu can claim to have opposed Obama on something. It’s a win-win … for Democrats. Unfortunately, that usually means a loss for the country. More…

Comment | Share

School Refused Veterans Day Ceremony Over Firearms
The Eau Claire school district in Wisconsin did not hold its traditional Veterans Day ceremonies Tuesday because guns are scary. That’s right — the 21-gun salute that was a standard part of the program is no longer acceptable on school grounds. “We like to honor the veterans; we bring them in on a regular basis,” says Tim Libham, the executive director of administration with the district. “There are just some conditions that we have to adhere to and the shooting of guns, even with blanks, is something we don’t feel is appropriate given society, and the concerns that we have and that the community has, on school premises.” The ceremony was instead held at a local Burger King. School officials should be ashamed. They’re teaching kids that fear is more important than honor. More…

RIGHT ANALYSIS

The Phony Climate Deal With China
2014-11-13-7cae1639.jpg
Obama at the Star Trek convention
Barack Obama waves around five magic beans from his climate change talk with the Chinese while China walks away with the cow. On Tuesday, the White House announced it made an agreement with the Communist nation limiting carbon emissions. Obama’s in China this week, where the world’s two biggest energy producers hashed things out before UN delegates meet in Paris in December 2015 to write a new treaty regulating the world in response to supposedly man-made global warming.

Just like he has with so many other policies, Obama went it alone. Most everyone was surprised by the announcement that China and the U.S. had reached an agreement — a bad sign on an issue so large as climate change. But it’s a bum deal, and the Republican-led Congress must rescue Obama from himself.

During his first term, Obama set the goal of cutting the nation’s emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. This week’s announcement increases that goal of cutting emissions to 26-27% of 2005 levels by the year 2025. The White House said it was opening trade with China for “sustainable environmental goods and clean energy technologies.” The nations will be working to study responses to climate change together.

While Obama pledges to further cut emissions — strangling business and increasing the almighty power of the EPA — China pinky-promises (with fingers crossed) it will begin to decrease its emissions by 2030 and start to produce 20% of its energy from clean energy sources. Only years after the United States has met its goal will China think of following in those footsteps. Really? We’re supposed to believe this?

Last September, it was checkup time at the UN. Every country, from Ebola-stricken Liberia to large, industrialized nations, gathered in New York City to share specifics of what each had done to combat the scourge of global warming.

China slunk into that climate summit like the slacking student in a group project. It’s a “responsible major country,” said Zhang Gaoli, Vice Premier of the State Council of China, who added, “We will announce post-2020 actions on climate change as soon as we can.” The world’s biggest polluter, one of the giants when it comes to industry and energy production, had nothing.

In response to this week’s U.S.-China announcement, the UN released a statement: “Today, China and the United States have demonstrated the leadership that the world expects of them. This leadership demonstrated by the Governments of the world’s two largest economies will give the international community an unprecedented chance to succeed at reaching a meaningful, universal agreement in 2015.”

It took Obama — not the U.S. — a promise to further cut and cripple the U.S. economy for China to agree to the most basic of plans that would be agreeable to the ecofascists in the global community.

Senate Republican leaders hope to undermine Obama’s environmental policies. One of Congress’ most important tools is control of the purse strings. Republicans could defund Obama’s environmental policies, hamstring new EPA regulation by withholding funds and weaken Obama’s presence at the UN 2015 Paris meeting.

Indeed, the GOP believes it has a mandate from voters to stand in the gap against Obama and his economically damaging environmental policies. In a statement, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said, “The President said his policies were on the ballot, and the American people spoke up against them. It’s time for more listening, and less job-destroying red tape. Easing the burden already created by EPA regulations will continue to be a priority for me in the new Congress.”

But Obama has plenty of moves to hinder the Republicans’ pledge to work against his green policies. Obama still wields the veto pen and Republicans don’t have veto-proof majorities in either chamber. But neither can Obama enter into a binding international treaty. So he uses his phone to create working groups, research centers and initiatives with China — all little things compared to what Obama would truly like to accomplish.

“It’s hollow and not believable for China to claim it will shift 20 percent of its energy to non-fossil fuels by 2030, and a promise to peak its carbon emissions only allows the world’s largest economy to buy time,” Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) said. “China builds a coal-fired power plant every 10 days, is the largest importer of coal in the world, and has no known reserves of natural gas. This deal is a non-binding charade.”

Obama has his five magic beans, a pat on the back from the UN, a boiling political fight when he returns to Washington and a long road until the UN meeting in Paris. Going it alone has weakened Obama on the global stage. He can only go so far before the Constitution reins in his unlawful attempt to transform the country. But he’s still trying.

Pirouette Toward Asia
2014-11-13-2fb6f603.jpg
China is aggressively pushing asymmetric militarization — that is, targeted ramping up capabilities to probe vulnerable seams and gaps in U.S. capabilities — as well as conducting more pronounced maneuvering in the South China Sea. That means the Obama administration’s strategy of “pivoting toward Asia” is now in what can best be described as an endless “pirouette.” A better description would be a classic death-spiral.

The U.S. just reached agreement with Communist China on notification protocols for major military exercises, ostensibly diffusing alarm when one nation conducts such an exercise. Perhaps like conducting an otherwise-unannounced major naval exercise in the South China Sea. Another agreement reaffirms the now 50-year-old traditional rules for encounters at sea and in the air, because, apparently, these things aren’t patently evident to all civilized nations by now, having been codified into international law for half a century or so. Great job, Chosen One! We’ll show those naked aggressors who’s boss!

Meanwhile, as Russian President Vladimir Putin tries desperately to get the gang back together — a few invasions of sovereign states, a shoot-down of a plane carrying a few hundred innocent civilians — Team Hopeless is trying to return to its “pivot” script. Never mind that Putin just solidified Russian economic ties to China with another Siberia gas deal. Also overlook the fact Moscow has reclassified NATO as Russia’s official adversary (did we mention NATO is ostensibly led by the U.S.?). We should also not dwell on “blame” for that SA-11 shot that murdered 300 innocents, either, right? Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

The whole reason Barack Obama “pivoted” to “Asia” (read: China) in the first place was because of so much intense saber-rattling in the South China Sea. China’s bald regional hegemonic machinations meant the U.S. could no longer ignore the threats to its allies — Japan, Australia, New Zealand and a host of others within that vulnerable region.

Our “good friends” in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) recently developed their own version of the Marshall Plan to cope with all the unrest (which, by the way, they have generated): The so-called “Silk Road” is a $40 billion plan to buy off opposition to Chinese designs on regional hegemony. Effectively, it will force nations in the region to “chose a side” — the sides being, of course, the U.S. and China. As such an unwaveringly solid friend as the kowtow administration has demonstrated itself to be to these “lesser” states, any guesses which side most of them will choose?

Luckily, China has a long way to go to catch up with the U.S., despite the debut of its new J-31 stealth fighter — during Obama’s attendance at the Asian economic summit in Beijing, no less. Who could have predicted such timing for test flights? Of course, the “Chinese stealth fighter” is better known as the “F-35 Joint Strike Fighter,” an American jet, since the Chinese unabashedly stole top-secret technical data through cyber espionage against Lockheed Martin and its subcontractors. Testing their plane during Obama’s visit signals they know they have nothing to fear from him.

We should also point out the inconvenient truth of China’s deployment of two brigades of DF21D ballistic missiles — so-called “carrier killers,” and not without good reason. Supposedly, these missiles had been a long way off from reaching operational capability. Yet they are now part of what the emperor Chinese leader might call a “fully armed and operational battle station.”

Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall put a fine point on the whole issue of technology: “Our technological superiority is very much at risk. There are people designing systems specifically to defeat us in a very thoughtful and strategic way, and we’ve got to wake up, frankly.” Kendall went on to name several areas in which the U.S. remains critically vulnerable: China’s threat to the U.S. surface fleet as well as U.S. overseas bases; China’s challenge to U.S. air dominance; Chinese threats to U.S. space capabilities and access to space; and finally, China’s ability to mount cyber assaults on U.S. networks. The myth of U.S. technical superiority is quickly becoming just that: a myth.

The real lesson here is what is wrought when a nation chooses a position of weakness. Starting in 2009 with his World Apology Tour and continuing with numerous international failings and foreign-policy-related humiliations, Obama has abjectly demonstrated what happens when the U.S. abdicates its leadership role in the world and chooses instead to be the world’s buddy. Rogue nations, belligerent nations and nations ruled by an iron thumb are not content with being anyone’s buddy. They are content only with being conqueror.

OPINION IN BRIEF

American writer E. B. White (1899-1985): “Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half the time.”

Columnist Ann Coulter: “People who voted Republican took the attitude of ‘We’re giving you one more chance.’ They are not going to back off, and they can’t be tricked or lied to. They’re looking the GOP in the eye and saying: We’re not fooling around: Amnesty is dead, right? Republicans won by ignoring the establishment when it said, Don’t criticize amnesty! and ignoring the tea party when it said, Let’s run candidates like Christine O’Donnell! Don’t confuse who’s good at what here. The establishment has to drop amnesty and the tea party has got to drop — for now — demands for government shutdowns to repeal Obamacare. Without the presidency, Republicans’ sole objective for the next two years is to keep sending Obama bills that 80 percent of Americans will support. They can pass some great legislation — and they’ll also force Democrats into votes that won’t be easy to explain to their constituents. Republicans might start by dusting off that bill requiring Congress to live under Obamacare.”

Comment | Share

Historian Victor Davis Hanson: “Midterm voters apparently understood that ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ has devolved into something like comprehensive health care reform — a euphemism for Obama’s larger efforts at fundamentally transforming America. … It’s hard to find supporters of immigration reform who argue that the Kenyan, South Korean, Czech or Jamaican applicant for entry into the U.S. should be treated equally on the basis of skill sets, education or prior background — rather than as a future identity-politics voter. … If advocates of comprehensive immigration reform are going to win Americans over to their side, they are going to have to find a new approach to the debate that they have now lost. For now, the position remains the current one of ethnic-privileging one group over another. The selfish position is the current one of burdening the host society by accommodating the language of the guest. The surreal position is that of ingratitude of guests toward generous host country by demanding that its laws either be ignored or changed to fit their own particular agendas and preferences. On matters of immigration, open-borders advocates have become reactionaries. Last week’s midterm results proved it.”

 

You Won’t Believe What the NAACP Said About Tuesday’s Elections
Author: Rachel MullenPosted: November 7, 2014
The National Association for Colored People issued a statement following Tuesday’s elections. Rather than highlight the historic wins of black Republicans, the NAACP focused on voter suppression.

“This election was not about who won but the rather the citizens who lost the right to participate. This first election post the Shelby vs. Holder decision resulted in problems in every single state previously protected by the Voting Rights Act. For 49 years, these states were singled out because they had a history of discriminating against American voters. The Election Protection Hotline we manned with other concerned organizations fielded over 18,000 calls yesterday, many in those same states previously protected by the VRA. As we move forward—it is imperative that our newly elected Congress work with the NAACP and our partners to pass Voting Rights Act Amendment legislation that assures that all Americans have the franchise—our very democracy depends on it.”

Raffi Williams is the Deputy Press Secretary for the Republican National Committee. He took offense to the NAACP’s comments charging that they do not represent all blacks, just liberal blacks. In an interview on Fox News, Williams took the NAACP to task for it’s failure to acknowledge the accomplishments of black people of all ideologies.

“There is no one way to be black in America”

Williams took to Twitter to point out that the NAACP overlooked the historic wins of black conservatives. Tim Scott was the first black person to be elected to both the House and the Senate. Scott is also the first black Senator from the South since Reconstruction. Mia Love is the first black Republican woman elected to Congress. Will Hurd will be the first black Republican Congressman from Texas. All of these historic wins were completely ignored by the NAACP.

Read more: http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/you-wont-believe-what-the-naacp-said-about-tuesdays-elections/#ixzz3IgZ4y9bg

Democrat War On Women Ends With A Whimper
By Adriana Cohen, Boston Herald November 6, 2014 11:55 am                                                                                                                                                                  The war on women is officially over. The midterm election delivered that message loud and clear.

The progressives’ birth-control darling Sandra Fluke, who kickstarted the phony propaganda scheme back in 2012, was sent packing Tuesday. She ran for state Senate in California’s 26th District and lost dramatically — by 21 points — despite being very well-funded. Proof even lots of money can’t fool the people.

In Texas, Wendy Davis, who made a name for herself last year during an infamous 11-hour-long attempt to filibuster a highly controversial Texas abortion bill, lost her bid for governor. And Mark Udall, a rubber stamp for Obama, who ran his hotly contested Colorado Senate race on “women’s issues,” was trounced by Republican Cory Gardner.

Republicans actually advanced women and gave them positions of power and influence.

Republican Mia Love was elected Utah’s first black congresswoman. In Iowa, the GOP’s Joni Ernst is now the state’s first female senator. The same is so for West Virginia’s Sen.-elect Shelley Moore Capito. And the youngest congresswoman in history, 30-year-old Elise Stefanik of New York, was also victorious.

With the mass wave of Republican electorate victories giving the GOP control of both the Senate and the House as well as winning several key gubernatorial seats — in Blue States no less — Democrats would be smart to scrap the bogus war on women ploy once and for all. Americans are simply not falling for it.

In fact, millions of American women across the country elected Republicans to represent them. If there was a real war on women, clearly this massive demographic would’ve voted differently.

What smart American women know is that the most important thing our government can do for us is to protect our safety and freedom. We need leaders in Washington who will support a strong military, possess an effective foreign policy and elect those who will strengthen homeland security.

Right now.

On the economic front, what Republican women understand is that the path to financial independence and the American Dream are two things: a good education and a good job.

Bottom line: There’s hope for America, because midterm results indicate women across this nation are starting to get it.

The GOP might take the White House in 2016 after all.

Adriana Cohen is also a host on “Trending Now” on Boston Herald Radio weekdays from 1 to 3 p.m. Follow her on Twitter @AdrianaCohen16.

Parents to take ‘torture’ of Michael Brown to UN

By St. Louis Post-Dispatch (MO) November 5, 2014 11:55 am

Human rights violationsThe parents of Michael Brown are going to a United Nations meeting in Switzerland to speak against civil rights violations, racial profiling and police violence in the United States, according to a St. Louis University assistant law professor who is helping organize the trip.

Lesley McSpadden and Michael Brown Sr. will speak before the 53rd Session of the United Nations Committee Against Torture in Geneva on Nov. 12 and 13, said the professor, Justin Hansford, who has been active in Ferguson protests. He said Brown’s parents are taking their grievances to a world stage because they feel they have not gotten justice from state, local and federal governments in the death of their son, who was fatally shot by Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9.

Hansford said Brown’s parents are being sponsored by the U.S. Human Rights Network, a nonprofit network of human rights groups. Hansford and others have set up a website to collect donations to send protesters to the conference, he said. Plans for the trip are spelled out on the website fergusontogeneva.org.

McSpadden and Brown could not immediately be reached for comment. Their lawyer, Anthony D. Gray, said they planned to leave Nov. 10.

Hansford said he helped the Brown family get an audience by submitting a paper earlier this fall. He said he hopes the committee helps encourage authorities to take a less militarized approach in their response to future unrest. “The world community will look at it through a human rights lens this time,” he said.

The Committee against Torture, made up of 10 human rights experts from around the world, monitors an agreement by certain nations not to engage in torture or other inhumane treatment.

 

IS GOD A DIVINE BEING? NOPE, SAYS POPE

By Lee Duigon
November 6, 2014
NewsWithViews.com

In his continuing quest to win the favor of liberals and pagans around this fallen world, Pope Francis I last week said, “God is not a divine being.”

He made this astonishing remark during an informal speech defending something called “theistic evolution.” That’s a doctrine much favored by squishy Christians who want to be accepted by the world. Oh, sure, says the pope: God is still the Creator. But He doesn’t actually “make” things. He just sort of starts the ball rolling, and then sits back and watches. Although how He can do even that, without being a divine being, the pope did not explain.

Before dropping this clanger, Francis got his wings clipped by the assembled bishops recently when he exhorted them to ease up on homosexuality, shacking up, and divorce. The bishops weren’t buying it.

Does this man understand he’s the pope, and not the governor of California?

Some of you will say, “Well, what do you expect? The pope is Catholic, and Catholics aren’t Christians.”

But what has Francis said that countless flatline Protestant church men have not already said? If you want Tibetan Buddhist prayer chants, goddess worship, labyrinth walks, openly “gay” clergy performing same-sex parodies of marriage, or Sufi dervishes spinning around the floor like tops, you can find it at a nearby Episcopalian, Evangelical Lutheran, United Methodist, or Presbyterian Church USA facility. Don’t think for a moment that Catholics have a lock on pseudo-Christianity.

As a Protestant affiliated with no particular denomination, when an unbeliever taxes me with howlers spoken by Rick Warren or Joel Osteen, I can always shrug my shoulders and say, “It’s got nothin’ to do with me.” But Catholics have a single, supposedly authoritative spokesman, and it’s hard for them to distance themselves from anything he says. They’re stuck with it.

So we soon saw a lot of “what he really meant was…” pieces on the Internet, by Catholic writers trying to sanitize the pope’s remark.

“God is not a divine being.” Think it over. If God is not a divine being, who is? If Pope Francis is not just Joe Biden in clerical robes, what could he have meant? One of my liberal friends says he only meant that God is “not some old man with a white beard, like Zeus.” Well, okay—but is there any Christian, anywhere, who doesn’t already know that? “God is a spirit,” Our Lord Jesus Christ told the Samaritan woman at the well, “and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24). Michelangelo painted God as an old man with a white beard on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel; but we don’t presume God posed for him.

Not having been granted an interview with the pope, I can only speculate on what’s going on inside his head. Is he suggesting that there really is no such thing as a divine being, as we mortals have always understood the term?

Not long ago, Francis said that atheists, heathen, and what-have-you can go to Heaven, whether or not they accept Jesus Christ as their Savior, as long as they do nice things. So we must then ask just how many good works will earn you salvation. What if you miscounted, and you realize, with your dying breath, that you’re one or two works short?

Pope Francis seems to have joined with assorted flatline Protestant churchmen in the exciting pastime of making up Christianity as they go along. Maybe they can come up with a generic Christianity Lite that the secular world can tolerate—a Christianity without a divine being, without immutable moral laws, without a need for faith, accepting and even embracing the secular values of socialism, self-esteem, and sexual liberation. Maybe they can come up with a Christianity that’ll even be approved of by the lesbian mayor of Houston.

it won’t be Christianity at all, in the Biblical sense of the word—only a collection of flabby platitudes and flabby believers who bow to Baal whenever there’s a conflict. But at least no one will get down on those believers for rejecting Evolution and doubting Global Warming.

There’s already too much of this among the churches. The world hated Christ, and He warned His disciples that it would hate them, too, for His sake (John 17:14). Would we rather have the truth, or the good opinion of Christ’s enemies? We cannot surrender to the world, except at the price of our souls.

And if God is not a divine being, how can He give us eternal life?

© 2014 Lee Duigon – All Rights Reserved

Lee Duigon, a contributing editor with the Chalcedon Foundation, is a former newspaper reporter and editor, small businessman, teacher, and horror novelist. He has been married to his wife, Patricia, for 34 years. See his new fantasy/adventure novels, Bell Mountain and The Cellar Beneath the Cellar, available on http://www.amazon.com

Website: LeeDuigon.com

E-Mail: leeduigon@verizon.net

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 202 other followers