RUTHFULLY YOURS

Americans are shaken by government’s inability to function.

Ebola is causing such anxiety that even alarm over an outbreak of enterovirus D-68 — far more prevalent and linked to the deaths of at least four children — has been crowded out. Ditto news of the Islamic State’s rampage, a stock-price rollercoaster, and the impending midterm elections. Understandably, two concerns dominate the public discussion.

One is incompetence. Lulled into ever more dependence on government by the metastasis of regulation in what used to be the realm of private action, Americans are shaken by Washington’s inability to function. It is bungling elementary tasks. There is a sense of unraveling, a sense that officials are not merely out of their depth in addressing problems but incapable of spotting the problems in the first place — or, even worse, responsible for creating the very problems that then explode into crises.

Intimately related is the other concern: dishonesty. People expect politicians to spin and, at times, to out-and-out lie. I’ve been contending for a while now that our politics are no longer rational but tribal. Being right is secondary to being on the “right” side, as that side is perceived by the popular culture. That culture has largely tuned out the news and is swayed more by character assassination than by linear, fact-based argument. Official dishonesty is the natural result. When it is more important that “our side” wins than that the sensible thing be done, it is to be expected that the partisans, especially those in power, will say whatever they need to say to get through the news cycle. After all, fewer people than ever care about the news part of the news cycle; they care about the drama and their sympathies will be with their heroes — the fibs told to escape the latest jam are more admired for craftiness than condemned as breaches of trust.

Still, as we’ve previously observed, there is a breaking point. You can only abide politics as soap opera for so long because politics is actually about real life and real stakes. Reality cannot be scripted. Therefore, politics cannot forever be stage-managed as a “narrative” with “optics,” a daily show focused on how the lead character is affected by the latest crisis.

A century ago, a pioneering effort in global philanthropy whose legacy lives on.

PLEASE ALSO READ ABOUT HOOVER’S EFFORTS TO RESCUE EUROPEAN JEWS….

EX-PRESIDENTS AND THE JEWS: CARTER VS. HOOVER by Rafael Medoff

http://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2014/10/16/ex-presidents-and-the-jews-carter-vs-hoover-by-rafael-medoff

The world has grown accustomed to international organizations devoted to saving civilians in the midst of armed strife and social upheaval. Groups including Doctors Without Borders, World Vision and CARE are well-known and world-renowned. Almost forgotten is the American whose achievements a century ago set an example for these and many other philanthropic efforts: Herbert Hoover, the 31st president of the United States.

In August 1914 Hoover was living in London. He was a highly successful mining engineer with business interests on every continent except Antarctica—but he was also restless, confiding to a friend that he wished to “get in the big game” of public life. He had his opportunity when, just days before his 40th birthday, Great Britain declared war on imperial Germany. “If my judgment of the situation is right,” Hoover wrote to a friend, “we are on the verge of seven years of considerable privation.”

In the early weeks of World War I, Hoover and other leading Americans in London organized emergency relief assistance for more than 100,000 American travelers fleeing the continent of Europe for England and safe passage home. His efficient leadership impressed the U.S. ambassador to Great Britain, Walter Hines Page. Page, along with others, soon tapped him for a far greater mission of mercy.

Rep. Hensarling whom I had the pleasure to meet and hear last week at a private function is a bright, educated, principled conservative who is articulate and charming as well. Move over John Boehner…Hensarling is as good as it can get in Congress…..and he is running unopposed….with a great agenda for all Americans….rsk

Jeb Hensarling may be the most important Republican elected official you’ve never heard of. He will become even more important if his party wins control of the U.S. Senate in November’s elections, two weeks from this Tuesday. He’s also a leading candidate to eventually succeed John Boehner as House speaker.

So it’s a good moment to sit down with the Texan, who represents a district near Dallas and is now chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, to talk about the political possibilities and strategy. He believes the GOP is “poised for a good election” but not a great one. Good because President Obama is ineffectual and unpopular. Not great because Republicans haven’t talked enough about their plans to encourage job creation and rising incomes.

But if Republicans do win a majority, count Mr. Hensarling among those who think they will have to do more than stymie Mr. Obama for his final two years. They’ll have to produce legislation, he says, putting bills on the president’s desk that he will have to sign or veto. The political trick will be calculating what to pass that Mr. Obama might conceivably sign, and what to pass anyway to educate the country and prepare for the 2016 election.

Together with Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.), who is expected to become chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Hensarling will drive economic policy in the House. A cerebral veteran lawmaker who opposed the bank bailouts, he carries the respect of both tea party conservatives and establishment moderates within the GOP.

He’ll need that credibility because he is aggressive in sketching out a 2015 legislative agenda for faster economic growth. The common theme he stresses with Journal editors is liberating people from bureaucracy, whether they are seeking a mortgage, buying health insurance, crossing America’s southern border to make an honest living in the U.S. or simply filling out their tax returns.

President Obama bowed to the growing Ebola political furor on Friday and named a so-called Ebola czar, though maybe the better label is apparatchik. His man isn’t a military general, despite the troops in West Africa, or even someone with so much as nominal expertise in disasters or infectious disease. He’s the political operative Ron Klain.

President Obama is selling the new position as an “Ebola Response Coordinator” to restore order and manage operations across government. This would seem to require some familiarity with epidemiology and federal assets like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Mr. Klain’s resume does not extend much beyond his stints as chief of staff to Vice Presidents Al Gore and Joe Biden , unless you count his job quarterbacking the Solyndra fiasco as no big deal.

If you’ve been exposed to fault-finding in Mr. Obama’s Ebola campaign and experienced symptoms such as chills, anxiety or skepticism—or you’re worried that you’ve communicated such criticism to others—do not fear. We know this epidemic can be stopped, and Mr. Klain’s field team will apply triage, contact tracing and meticulous political infection control practices.

Then again, anonymous White House aides are telling the press corps that Mr. Klain’s partisan skills as a fixer are a credential. This may be the best indication to date of how Mr. Obama regards the dangers of the Ebola crisis, with risks to his own approval ratings near the top. Maybe three-star commander Valerie Jarrett can next prosecute the air war against Islamic State, if she isn’t already.

Mr. Klain’s appointment is even less reassuring considering it is devised in part to counter the more unfortunate ideas circulating in other political precincts. Republicans and a few Democrats aren’t immune to political fever either, in particular on a travel ban for West Africa.

British MPs show the extent of their anti-Israel leanings.

The vote this week by the British Parliament to recognize a Palestinian state is being treated as a nonevent by diplomats in both Jerusalem and London. Though the margin of 274 to 12 was lopsided in favor of recognition, more than half the Parliament either abstained or didn’t show up. The nonbinding resolution will have no effect on Britain’s longstanding policy of recognizing a Palestinian state only in the context of an agreed two-state solution.

But symbolism can also be revealing. Some of the revelations came in comments by the MPs. Andrew Bridgen, a Tory, offered the view that the U.S. was “very susceptible to well-funded powerful lobbying groups and the power of the Jewish lobby in America.” David Ward, a Liberal Democrat, tweeted that he’d fire rockets at Israel if he were living in Gaza.
The mindset such statements betray speaks for itself. It is particularly disturbing after a summer that witnessed eruptions of anti-Semitic venom on Europe’s streets.

The Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act doesn’t do enough to fulfill the promise of its name.

On Aug. 7, President Obama signed into law a $16.3 billion bill to “overhaul” the Veterans Affairs health-care system. The Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act was lauded by the White House and Congress as a law that put vets back in the driver’s seat. But that’s just not so.

Supporters claim the new law allows veterans to see private doctors more quickly. Not true. Only in cases where the veteran has waited longer than the “wait time goals” of the VA can that veteran be seen by an outside doctor. What are the wait time goals? It’s hard to say. The law first defines them as 30 days. But one paragraph later the law allows the VA secretary to submit “actual” wait time goals to Congress. If the actual wait time is longer than 30 days, the actual wait time supplants the 30-day “wait time goal.” One wonders how Congress and the White House could high-five over that language.

Even if the vet manages to live through the wait time and see a private doctor, he can only stay with that doctor for 60 days before it’s back to the VA to start all over again. Why bother?

The law allows the VA to punish employees who intentionally manipulate VA wait times by faking medical appointment data. Apparently, the VA needed a special provision to punish employees for fraud and falsifying government records. One wonders why the U.S. Criminal Code wouldn’t do.

The law also creates a “Commission on Care” to examine the quality and accessibility of the VA health-care system. That sounds good. Trouble is, the commission isn’t in any hurry. The VA secretary has a full year just to appoint the members. Quick to enact, slow to act.

http://www.jerusalemonline.com/news/world-news/around-the-globe/isis-hostage-a-terrible-surprise-is-waiting-for-you-8815
ISIS Hostage: “A Terrible Surprise Is Waiting For You”
In a new video distributed by the terrorist organization, a British journalist warned of the consequences of an American attack. “Anyone who hoped for an orderly operation will be terribly surprised,” John Cantlie, a photojournalist captured in Syria in 2012, stated in the video. It is unclear whether the remarks were voluntary or forced.

Do you get the feeling the United States government is trying to get us all killed?

OK, not all of us. Some of us.

I almost don’t know how else to interpret the headlines, whether it’s the 167,000 convicted criminal aliens who, despite deportation orders, remain “currently at large,” or it’s the U.S. consulates in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea that are still issuing travel visas to citizens from these Ebola-stricken nations at a rate of 100 per day.

The White House refusal to exercise elementary precautions to prevent an Ebola outbreak in the United States has become another notorious hallmark of the Obama years. I refer to the administration’s failure to prohibit travel from the Ebola-stricken region into our formerly Ebola-free nation for the duration of the horrific epidemic. This wouldn’t have guaranteed the virus would never surface here – not with that porous border of ours – but it would have prevented the initial Dallas outbreak. It would have prevented subsequent Texas cases, continuing havoc, mounting costs and a national panic that is largely a response to a White House demonstrably more committed to the principles of globalism than to the health and welfare of American citizens.

Even now, the Obama administration continues to permit 150 travelers from Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea to land every day, their unimpeded ease of movement our government’s top priority. The rest of us take our chances. So far, our chances are exceedingly good. To date, we are looking at “only” two infected nurses. From the globalist perspective, this mean Obama’s policies are working. The golf course beckons.

What kind of leader thinks like this? One who doesn’t care about Americans as Americans. To Barack Obama, as to all globalists (most of both the Democratic and Republican parties), We, the People, are just interchangeable denizens of the world, subject to the diktats of transnational elites.

To keep this utopia moving, the administration has installed temperature monitors at airports. These monitors are expected to check 94 percent of West Africans entering the USA – and never mind that stealth 6 percent (the Obama administration doesn’t). But what’s to stop someone from passing undetected by popping a few Advils before deplaning? Presto – no fever for an airport monitor to pick up, but plenty of deadly germs to spread around the country.

While Americans began to panic this week about the spread of Ebola in the United States, and Israelis mourned the tragic loss of young hikers killed in a snowstorm in Nepal, something with far more lethal consequences was taking place in Europe that barely elicited a yawn.

Representatives of Iran and the P5+1 countries (Russia, China, France, Britain, the U.S. and Germany) met in Vienna to hold yet another round of talks on the Islamic republic’s nuclear program. Key players in these negotiations were Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

Though this was the eighth such gathering since the beginning of the year aimed at “ironing out” differences between the sides, it was highly significant.

In November, an interim arrangement was reached, according to which a final deal on curbing Iran’s nuclear capacity would be achieved during the six-month period between January and July.

Because Iran had no intention of curtailing its nuclear capabilities, but was keen on receiving the ease on sanctions it was rewarded for continuing to engage in bogus negotiations, none of the summits produced results. They did, however, enable the mullah-led regime in Tehran to keep the centrifuges spinning.

When the only progress made by the summer deadline was in uranium enrichment, the parties agreed to an extension of talks until November 24. What this really meant was that Iran was given an additional four months in which to proceed on its course of regional hegemony and world domination. It also provided President Hassan Rouhani with the further justification he needed to persuade Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that his stance as a “moderate” was paying off.

With a mere few weeks to go until the new deadline, neither side says it has an interest in prolonging negotiations past November. Rouhani gave a televised address ahead of this week’s talks to tell the Iranian people that reaching a deal by the end of next month would be possible.

Kerry was less committal. “Step by step,” he told reporters on Wednesday, before entering into six hours of talks, described by another State Department official as “about whether Iran is willing to take verifiable actions to show that their program is for peaceful purposes.”

These are the people the MPs declared have a “right” to a state.

In a spectacular display of ignorance, moral illiteracy and malice, Britain’s House of Commons this week unwittingly resurrected the specter of its own historical perfidy towards the Jewish people.

By 274 votes to 12, MPs voted to “recognize the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel.”

Most MPs didn’t turn up for the vote at all. In the Middle East, it will make no difference on the ground. The prime minister, David Cameron, who abstained, says it won’t alter British government policy “to recognize a Palestinian state at the moment of our choosing,” whatever that means. So does it matter? Yes. Mahmoud Abbas is using unilateral recognition of “Palestine” as a weapon of war to isolate and choke Israel to death.

The Commons vote may encourage other countries to follow suit. It also threatens to deepen the Middle East conflict.

To head off a damaging split in the Labor Party, the motion was amended to support Palestine recognition “as a contribution to securing a negotiated two-state solution.”

But a state of Palestine cannot precede a two-state solution. It has to be negotiated into existence, not least because of the evidence that its real purpose is as a beachhead to destroy Israel.

Unilaterally declaring a Palestine state tears up the Oslo treaty committing both sides to such a negotiation, thus destroying the peace process by its own lights.

Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly said (in Arabic) that the Palestinians will never accept the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. His Palestinian Authority glorifies those who murder Israelis, and teaches Palestinian children to hate and kill Jews.