Displaying posts published in

December 2012

Five-Point Action Plan for President Obama to Reduce Violence by the Mentally Ill (Criminally Insane…please!!!) By D. J. Jaffe

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/335767

President Obama said the federal government has to do something meaningful to prevent future shootings, like the recent massacre of 26 children and adults at a school in Newtown, Connecticut. Here is what the federal government can do to prevent violence related to mental illness:

1. Start demonstration projects of Assisted Outpatient Treatment (e.g. Kendra’s Law in New York, Laura’s Law in California) throughout the country. AOT allows courts to order individuals with mental illness to stay in treatment as a condition of living in the community. It is only applicable to the most seriously ill who have a history of violence, incarceration, or needless hospitalizations. AOT is proven to keep patients, the public, and police safer. The Department of Justice has certified AOT as an effective crime-prevention program. But mental-health departments are reluctant to implement AOT because it forces them to focus on the most seriously ill. Demonstration projects would help mental-health departments see the advantage of the program. (For why some people with serious mental illness refuse treatment, see this. See also how Assisted Outpatient Treatment laws (Kendra’s Law in NY and Laura’s Law in CA) keep patients, the pubic and police safer

2. Write exceptions into the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) so parents of mentally ill children can get access to medical records and receive information from their children’s doctors on what is wrong and what the children need. Right now, for reasons of “confidentiality,’ doctors won’t tell parents what is wrong with their kids or what treatment they need, even as they require parents to provide the care. As a result, when a child goes off treatment, the parents’ hands are tied. They have all the responsibility to see the person is cared for, but none of the information or authority to see it happens. We have to change the patient confidentiality laws so parents can help prevent tragedies rather than become a punching bag for the public when something horrific happens.

CAROLINE GLICK: CHUCK HAGEL FOR DEFENSE? BRING IT ON!!!

http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2012/12/chuck-hagel-for-defense-secret.php?utm_source=MadMimi&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Chuck+Hagel+for+Defense+Secretary+-+Bring+it+On%21&utm_campaign=20121217_m114705123_Chuck+Hagel+for+Defense+Secretary+-+Bring+it+On%21&utm_term=Continue+reading___
Many in the American Jewish community are aghast to discover that President Obama is planning to appoint former Senator Chuck Hagel to serve as Defense Secretary. If you want the skinny on how Hagel has come to be known as one of the few ferociously anti-Israel senators in the past generation, Carl from Jerusalem at Israel Matzav provides it.

Meantime, all I can say is I don’t understand how anyone can possibly be surprised. Shortly after word came out that Hagel is the frontrunner for the nomination, I read a quaint little blog post written by a conservative leaning commentator voicing her belief that Obama wouldn’t want to risk his relations with Israel’s supporters by appointing Hagel. But as Powerline pointed out today, this is the entire point of the nomination. Obama isn’t stupid. He picks fights he thinks he can win. He hasn’t always been right about those fights. He picked fights with Netanyahu thinking he could win, and he lost some of those.

But he is right to think he can win the Hagel fight. The Republican Senators aren’t going to get into a fight with Obama about his DOD appointee, especially given that it’s one of their fellow senators, even though many of them hate him. The Democrats are certainly not going to oppose him.

Obama wants to hurt Israel. He does not like Israel. He is appointing anti-Israel advisors and cabinet members not despite their anti-Israel positions, but because of them.

Some commentators said that Susan Rice would be bad because she was anti-Israel and they hoped that Obama would appoint someone pro-Israel. But John Kerry is no friend of Israel. And as far as I was concerned, we would have been better off with Rice on the job.

Unlike Kerry, Rice is politically inept. She walked into Sen. John McCain’s office with the intention of convincing Sens. McCain, Lindsey Graham and Oympia Snowe that she was competent to serve as Secretary of State despite the fact that she deliberately misled the public on what happened at the Sept. 11 jihadist attack on the US consulate in Benghazi.

But she failed. In commenting on the meeting, all three senators said they were more concerned after speaking with Rice than they were before they did. That is, they said she was a political incompetent. Can there be any doubt that Sen. Kerry will be able to play the politics of Capitol Hill far more effectively than Rice?

And what reason does anyone have to believe that Assad’s great defender will be any more supportive of Israel than Rice would have been? But with him in the driver’s seat now, instead of having a political incompetent whom no one can stand serving as the spokesman for Obama’s anti-Israel foreign policy, in Kerry we will have a competent, reasonably popular politician on the job.

It’s time for people to realize the game has changed. Obama won.

Obama won with 70 percent of the Jewish vote despite the fact that his record in his first term was more hostile to Israel than any president since Jimmy Carter. No one can expect him now, after his victory, to feel even slightly constrained in his desire to weaken the US relationship with Israel.

So far, he has made clear that he feels no constraints whatsoever. Take the Palestinians at the UN for example. Obama enabled the Palestinians to get their non-member state status at the UN by failing to threaten to cut off US funding to the UN in retaliation for such a vote.

Both Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush issued such threats during their tenures in office and so prevented the motion from coming to a vote. Given that the Palestinians have had an automatic majority in the General Assembly since at least 1975, the only reason their status was only upgraded in 2012 is because until then, either the PLO didn’t feel like raising the issue or the US threatened to cut off its financial support to the UN if such a motion passed. This year PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas said he wanted to have a vote and Obama responded by not issuing a threat to cut off UN funding. So the Palestinians got their vote and, as expected, it passed overwhelmingly.

Seeing the upgrade as a Palestinian move is a mistake. It was a joint Palestinian-American move.

And Obama made that move and no one balked. Indeed some New York Jews applauded it.

Let there be no doubt, Obama will get Hagel in at Defense. And Hagel will place Israel in his crosshairs.

The only way to foil Obama’s ill intentions towards Israel even slightly is to be better at politics than he is. And he’s awfully good.

Moreover, one of his strongest advantages is that Israel’s supporters seem to have never gotten the memo. So here it is: Obama wants to fundamentally transform the US relationship with Israel.

ROB COX: NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT……SEE NOTE PLEASE

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324407504578183312848676912.html?mod=opinion_newsreel

THIS IS A LOVELY TRIBUTE TO WONDERFUL NEWTOWN…..THERE IS ALSO A SECTION OF NEWTOWN CALLED “PALESTINE” AND THE NAME EVOLVED BECAUSE DOZNES OF JEWISH FAMILIES WERE RELOCATED TO NEWTOWN IN THE EARLY PART OF THE LAST CENTURY TO TAKE THEM AWAY FROM THE CROWDING AND POVERTY OF THE LOWER EAST SIDE IN NEW YORK CITY. BESIDES BEING A REMINDER OF THE JEWISH TIES TO “PALESTINE” LONG BEFORE THE INVENTION OF “PALARABS,” THE JEWS FOUND A BUCOLIC HAVEN. THEY TRIED THEIR HANDS AT FARMING BUT MOST WENT INTO RETAIL. ….RSK

The word “community” is overused. It is even the title of a television sitcom. But in the context of Newtown—the Connecticut town of 27,000 that I’ve known as home since 1969—it is authentic. Yet from within our midst came Adam Lanza, now a murderer of 20 innocent local children, six of their dedicated teachers, and his own mother.Today the world is focused on our heretofore-bucolic slice of America. As the international media’s satellite dishes sprout and their choppers descend to dissect the shooting and the shooter, Newtown is mostly presented as either an affluent suburb of New York or a picture-perfect New England hamlet with old-timey colonial houses, horse farms and a historic Main Street.Neither characterization does it justice. To live here is to know why, after two decades of global wandering, I returned eight years ago to raise my family.

ROBERT BRYCE : HARVARD NEEDS REMEDIAL ENERGY MATH ****

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324640104578161593492943144.html?mod=opinion_newsreel

Wind and solar power cannot possibly meet the world’s growing need for more electricity.

Investing in and using fossil fuels is so wrong it should be seen as the equivalent of support for apartheid. That is the message being promoted by 350.org, the organization headed by environmental activist Bill McKibben.

Over the past month or so, Mr. McKibben and a rotating cast of activists have held rallies in 21 U.S. cities encouraging students to campaign for ridding their university endowments of investments in coal, oil and natural gas. The effort is modeled on the 1980s effort to get universities to shed investments in companies that did business in apartheid-era South Africa. A few small schools, including Unity College in Maine and Hampshire College in Massachusetts, have responded to the pressure and agreed to rid their portfolios of fossil-fuel stocks.

One of the slogans used in 350.org’s divestment campaign is “Do the math.” OK. Let’s.
Set aside the financial arguments for—or against—investing in companies that produce hydrocarbons. Further, let’s not judge the claims made by Mr. McKibben and his allies that a concentration of 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere is “the safe limit for humanity.”

Let’s do the math by considering what will happen if we humans—in the words of the campaign—attempt to “go fossil free” and rely solely on “clean energy.” To make the computation simpler still, let’s ignore oil altogether, even though that energy source represents about 33% of all global energy use and is indispensable for transportation.

DANIEL GREENFIELD: THE ROAD TO DAMASCUS

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ Forget the Grand Prix or the Daytona 500, the real race right now is the race to Damascus. The racers include Syrian rebels in pickup trucks with mounted machine guns and homemade tanks, toting weapons and equipment supplied and paid for by Qatar and Turkey, and more covertly by the British and French intelligence […]

HILLARY IN HIDING? ABOUT THAT FAINTING (OR WAS IT FEINTING?) BY DARYN JONESCU

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/hillary_in_hiding.html For once, I am inclined to believe Hillary Clinton. The U.S. Secretary of State, suffering from a sick stomach, has reportedly fainted and bumped her head. As a result, her spokespeople have already announced that she will be unable to testify at the Benghazi hearings, although she was not due to appear until December […]

PAMELA GELLER: U.S. AMBASSADOR TELLS REPUBLIC OF GEORGIA TO VOTE FOR A PALARAB STATE!!!!

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/us_ambassador_tells_georgia_to_vote_for_a_palestinian_state.html

From the former Soviet Republic of Georgia comes news of an extraordinary betrayal by the Obama Administration. As Obama continues to abandon freedom in his support of Muslim Brotherhood and Sharia revolutions and regimes in Egypt and elsewhere, he has taken behind-the-scenes steps to further the international isolation of Israel, the only democracy in that Middle East.

Just before the November 29 United Nations vote granting non-member state observer status, the U.S. ambassador to Georgia, Richard Norland, an Obama appointee, met with Georgian Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili. During their conversation, Norland recommended that the Prime Minister that Georgia should vote in favor of a Palestinian state.

This happened despite the U.S.’s official opposition, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the vote “unfortunate and counterproductive … plac[ing] further obstacles in the path of peace.” Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said on the day of the vote: “None of the vital interests of peace appear in the resolution that will be put forward before the General Assembly today and that is why Israel cannot accept it.” He was right. But in Georgia, the U.S. was betraying a steadfast and true ally.

This information comes from Gabriel M. Mirilashvili, a prominent businessman and corporation owner in Georgia, who is Vice-President of the Euro-Asian Jewish Congress and head of the World Congress of Georgian Jews. Mirilashvili says that he heard this from Ivanishvili himself, and that there exists an official record of the conversation between Norland and Ivanishvili. When Mirilashvili urged Ivanishvili to oppose the Palestinian statehood resolution, Ivanishvili responded that the American ambassador had told him to support it.

It is also interesting to note that a few days before this meeting, George Soros came to Georgia and also met with Prime Minister Ivanishvili, and they agreed to collaborate on various initiatives. President Obama’s close ties to Soros goes back to the 2007 and the run up to the 2008 presidential election.

Meanwhile, another source said that Georgia is harboring Chechen jihadists — killers who have Georgian passports. When some of these jihadis were arrested in Turkey, the Turkish press published the fact that they were traveling on Georgian passports. What’s more, their leader, Umar Sugaipov, who is not currently in Georgia, is a former deputy head of security for the late President of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, Aslan Maskhadov.

This is the kind of government that the Obama Administration is whispering with to work against Israel. That the U.S. Ambassador to Georgia would advise that nation’s Prime Minister to support a Palestinian state is shocking, but not surprising. This is what the U.S. under Obama has been covertly but effectively pursuing on the world stage for four years now. While Obama is courting influential Jews in America and Americans who support the tiny Jewish state, he is betraying Israel, our only reliable ally in the Middle East.

Obama’s foreign policy has been instrumental in the rise of jihadist and Islamic supremacist regimes across the Middle East and North Africa. And it is not difficult to see what the second Obama presidential term will bring. President Obama is consistent in his foreign policy. Four years into his presidency, the world is radically transformed, and soon will be unrecognizable.

WHAT TO DO ABOUT A DISOBEDIENT (MUSLIM) WIFE: LAINA FARHAT HOLZMAN

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/what-can-a-husband-do-about-a-disobedient-wife A month ago, an Iraqi woman was found on a roadside, beaten to death. A sign was pinned on her: “Go back to your country, you terrorist.” There was immediate hand-wringing from good-hearted people, led by the Islamic American legal propagandists (CAIR), pointing to one more hate crime against American Muslims. Because there have […]

EDWARD CLINE: THE FINANCES OF HYPOCRISY….MUSTREAD****

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/the-finances-of-hypocrisy

Bill Gates is liquidating his billions to “do good” – “dedicated to improving lives here and around the world” – and also to avoid an annual tax bill that could match the GNP of Luxembourg or perhaps Switzerland. His foundation website boasts the egalitarian motto: “All Lives Have Equal Value.”

Do they? Doubtless, Bill Gates believes they do. But is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation merely a super-sized tax dodge? All tax dodges are altruist in nature. And hypocritical. Our tax code enforces altruism by granting deductions for charity and exempting nonprofit enterprises. It encourages dishonesty and – what is worse than tax evasion – moral evasion, and ultimately moral corruption.

Much has been written by critics since the beginning of 2009 and President Barack Obama’s reign about the hypocrisy of members of his allies in the Left/Liberal Establishment. Particular focus has been on wealthy politicians and the champions of left/liberal causes, such as movie stars and professional talking heads, who advocate financial discipline and lower expectations for Americans but who don’t themselves wish to practice what they preach.

This barrage of accusations has largely fallen on deaf ears. Virtually the only thing that will guarantee the permanent potting and retirement of a liberal is a sex scandal, à la former North Carolina Senator John Edwards or former New York governor Eliot Spitzer. A charge of criminal behavior and gross malfeasance of public funds and just plain blatant corruption sometimes works, but not always. New York congressman Charles Rangel is a case in point. He was “censured” by the House in 2010 but still maintains his corrupt ways and lifestyle, and grins at you from his House web page with the amiability of a card shark.

Hurling a charge of hypocrisy at a liberal hypocrite is about as effective as throwing a spitball at the back of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie sporting a flak jacket. It is a fruitless, impotent act because the target is by nature inured against charges of verisimilitude, dissimulation, venality, and double standards. Morality, honesty, integrity, and legally gained wealth – these virtues, the hypocrite avers, are for others, not for him. He is of the elite and must have some freedom of action and viable options and financial security and comfort so he has the leisure time to concoct his utopian fiscal and social plans for everyone else, and then propose them with the religious fervor of a ragged desert anchorite.

Charges of hypocrisy have never made hypocrites blush in embarrassment. When such charges are made public, a hypocrite’s first concern is his public image, not the falseness and fraudulence of his private and public character. Such charges only move his ilk to erect even higher opaque barriers to exposure and to dig deeper labyrinths of secrecy.

As a rule, liberals and advocates of confiscatory taxation seek to conserve and protect their nest eggs from the very tax and fiscal policies they propose for everyone else. They can afford the tax lawyers and CPA firms which most middle income individuals can only dream of employing. Liberals such as John Kerry and any random Kennedy patronize the services of law firms and CPA firms with a dozen names between them to fix their books. All others must patronize a strip mall’s Jackson Hewitt or H&R Block.

Disgruntled Protestants Issue Irenic Jerusalem Declaration by Malcolm Lowe ****

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3502/protestant-consultation-israel-middle-east The next Presiding Bishop of the ELCA would do well to forget the obsession with pro-Palestinian activism and pay more attention to the real wishes of the faithful. Ditto for the other churches whose members have signed the Declaration. Protestants from three continents met in Jerusalem during November 5-8, 1912, to initiate a Protestant […]