RUTHFULLY YOURS

President Obama is fond of saying that he is responsible for one of the greatest jobs recoveries in history. Never mind the fact that less Americans are in the active workforce, as a percentage, than at any time in three decades. Never mind that his recover has been the weakest jobs recover of the century. He says the recovery is “real, steady, and happening.” He says America is experiencing the longest period of uninterrupted growth in US history.

Ok, so let’s assume that we’re creating massive numbers of new jobs.

Is Obama responsible for those jobs?

In a word, no.

It turns out that Obama’s recovery hasn’t been his recovery at all: it’s been those evil oil and gas companies. As Stephen Moore of the Heritage Foundation points out, “From 2008 to 2013, the oil and gas industry created more jobs on net than all other industries combined.”

While Western newspapers were debating whether or not to reprint the Mohammed cartoons, in Nigeria as many as 2,000 people were massacred by the Islamic State in Nigeria, also known as Boko Haram, in what is being called the deadliest attack by the Muslim group to date.

Survivors described the Islamic State setting up efficient killing teams and massacring everyone while shouting “Allahu Akbar”.

“For five kilometers (three miles), I kept stepping on dead bodies until I reached Malam Karanti village, which was also deserted and burnt,” one survivor said.

There’s a word for that. It’s genocide.

U.S. President Barack Obama, as is well known at this point, elected not to attend the ‎mass rally in Paris on Sunday, where the victims of several incidents of mass ‎murder by radical Islamic terrorists were honored, and the principle of free speech ‎‎(and a free press) was defended. The president also did not send Vice President ‎Joe Biden to the event, a symbolic role that would have suited Biden, while he waits ‎for Hillary Clinton to announce her candidacy for the Democratic Party nomination ‎for president in 2016, thereby ending his political career and ambitions. Secretary ‎of State John Kerry was in India, and chose to stay there. Attorney General Eric ‎Holder was already in Paris, but apparently had more important things to do there ‎than show his face in public. The excuse for his failure to show up at the rally had ‎to do with attending meetings in the city. It is pretty likely that those with whom he ‎was meeting were not sitting around a table conferring while the rally took place. ‎

Of course, this was not Ferguson, Missouri. There the White House sent three ‎people to Michael Brown’s funeral, and had a lot more to say about his death than ‎it did about the murder of 17 innocents which occurred in Paris. The U.S. ambassador to France, a political appointee, ‎who was awarded this elite post for her service as a big Obama campaign bundler, ‎was the sole official U.S. representative at the rally which several million people ‎attended, including over 40 foreign leaders. Some are calling this embarrassing ‎‎”no show” by the president and his top team, Obama’s Katrina moment, a reference to ‎President George W. Bush flying over New Orleans after the hurricane hit, while praising the ‎efforts of his Federal Emergency Management Agency director. ‎

Obscuring the threat of radical Islam won’t diminish it.

It is settled: The Paris terror attacks had almost nothing to do with Islam.

Consider that on the one hand, you have the chilling new tape of the Charlie Hebdo attackers declaring, “We have avenged the Prophet Mohammed,” and on the other, you have the tortured assurances of White House spokesman Josh Earnest. Which are you going to believe?

The Obama administration’s mind-bogglingly determined refusal to say that we are at war with “radical Islam,” together with the Left’s evasions about Islamic terrorism, means that there has been a haze of euphemism around what should be a galvanizing event in the West’s fight against terror.

The White House seems to think its denial of radical Islam will stop people from believing the obvious.

Could this argument be any dumber?

The Obama administration has forced America and much of the world into a debate no one wanted or needed. Namely, does Islamic terrorism have anything to do with Islam?

This debate is different than the much-coveted “national conversation on race” that politicians so often call for (usually as a way to duck having it), because that is a conversation at least some people want. The White House doesn’t want a conversation about Islam and terrorism.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest says, “We have chosen not to use that label [of radical Islam] because it doesn’t seem to accurately describe what happened.”

What happened was the slaughter last week at the satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The sound of the terrorists’ gunfire was punctuated by shouts of “Allahu akbar!” and “We have avenged the prophet Mohammed!”

Since no one questions the sincerity of these declarations, that alone should settle the issue of whether Islam had anything to do with the attack. And for normal people it would.

It was not elected to make Washington “work” but to keep Washington from working against Americans.

The Republican party’s conservative base has a major problem. In assessing the 2014 midterm elections, a tidal wave in which the base propelled the GOP to substantial majorities in both houses of Congress, conservatives are in full agreement with President Obama and completely at odds with Republican leadership.

The president boldly declared that, while he was not on the ballot, his policies were. He could not have been more right.

GOP leadership boldly declares that the election was a case of voters trusting Republicans with an opportunity to “prove we can govern” — to demonstrate that GOP lawmakers can work effectively with the president. They could not be more wrong.

In an attempt to make educational books more friendly to practicing
Jews and Muslims, Oxford University Press publishers are banning any
mention of pigs, bacon, or sausage in their youth books.

Schoolbooks will not be allowed to publish references to pork, for
fear of offending Muslims or Jews.

According to a speech made Monday on BBC Radio 4, a leading
educational publisher, Oxford University Press, is banning the
reference to pigs, sausages, or anything pork-related in their books.

The Guardian, supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, does for the reading public what Common Core books, also supported by the Gateses, do for American students – it provides a wealth of misinformation with an agenda. In its Global Development section, writer Liz Ford wrote of the role of girls and women under Islam, specifically Palestinians, and the violence to which they are subjected in their society.

Because her itemization was inaccurate and lacking references, I can provide some specifics about their driving force:

Koran 4:34 Allah has made men superior to women and, therefore, women must be obedient or be admonished and beaten.
M10-12 If the wife is rebellious, the man may warn her, follow with hitting, and beating but not breaking her bones or damaging her face. He may even imprison her in a room and withhold food and clothing.
M10:4 A man may forbid his wife to leave the home.
022:1 Women may never become judges (they are not equal)
L10:3 A woman’s value is half that of a man, because her “mind is deficient.” A woman should receive half the money of a man in an indemnity case, because women lack in intelligence and religion.
2:282 Her testimony is worth half the man’s.

A 12-year US Army Special Operations veteran who was severely wounded by an IED blast during his service in Afghanistan is now in Israel to help the IDF as part of a volunteer project, and to show support for the Jewish State, the Israeli 0404 News site reported Thursday. Brian Mast, who lost both legs and sustained other injuries in an attack in July 2010, arrived on Jan. 10 as a Sar-El program volunteer. The group’s itinerary includes logistics and maintenance work on bases, hikes and field trips around the country, and seminars on Israel and Jewish life. Mast is volunteering at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center near Tel Aviv as part of his two-week experience, according to the group.

Missing in more ways that one On Sunday, at the great Paris rally, the whole world was Charlie. By Tuesday, the veneer of solidarity was exposed as tissue thin. It began dissolving as soon as the real, remaining Charlie Hebdo put out its post-massacre issue featuring a Muhammad cover that, as The New York Times put it, “reignited the debate pitting free speech against religious sensitivities.”

Again? Already? Had not 4 million marchers and 44 foreign leaders just turned out on the streets of France to declare “No” to intimidation, and pledging solidarity, indeed identification with (“Je suis Charlie”), a satirical weekly specializing in the most outrageous and often tasteless portrayals of Muhammad?

And yet, within 48 hours, the new Charlie Hebdo issue featuring the image of Muhammad — albeit a sorrowful, indeed sympathetic Muhammad — sparked new protests, denunciations and threats of violence, which in turn evinced another round of doubt and self-flagellation in the West about the propriety and limits of free expression. Hopeless.