Displaying posts published in

2016

A Cruz vs. Rubio Fight Would Electrify Conservatives By Eliana Johnson

One subplot of the Republican presidential-nomination battle has been an increasingly vicious and personal contest between two first-term senators, both of Cuban descent and separated by just a few months in age.

Florida senator Marco Rubio (44) and Texas senator Ted Cruz (45) are both men of superhuman ambition who have put their personal advancement over virtually everything else, including, many would argue, loyalty, wealth, and family. Both were at least thinking about running for president from the time they arrived in the Senate. Their talent and their years-long focus on reaching the White House are reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s, and it’s entirely possible that the only thing standing between each and it, aside from another Clinton, is the other.

“You interview hundreds of candidates and a few stand out, and Rubio and Cruz stood out,” says Chris Chocola, the former president of the Club for Growth, the free-market group that endorsed both Rubio and Cruz in their Senate primaries. “They knew what they believed, they knew why they believed it, and they could articulate those beliefs.”

Their ascent to the top tier of the presidential field, where they have been trading barbs, is, for conservatives, a mark of astonishing success. Cruz is now viewed as the most conservative viable candidate, while Rubio is widely considered the most viable establishment choice (although he still has major competition from Chris Christie, among others). Yet this is a simplistic and somewhat misleading way to look at a prospective match-up between the two. Rubio was born of the tea-party movement and, during his Senate race, drove the liberal Charlie Crist out of the Republican party. That he is now considered a part of the Washington establishment says a lot about the transformation of the Republican party in the Obama era. “It’s a tremendous testament to what conservatives have been able to achieve,” says Mike Needham, the CEO of Heritage Action for America, a leading conservative-activist group.

The State of the State of the Union by Mark Steyn

Well, it’s that time of year again – the State of the Union! Here are my traditional thoughts on the occasion – after which we’ll deal with the peculiar circumstances of tonight’s festivities:

Strange how the monarchical urge persists even in a republic two-and-a-third centuries old. Many commentators have pointed out that the modern State of the Union is in fairly obvious mimicry of the Speech from the Throne that precedes a new legislative session in British Commonwealth countries and continental monarchies, but this is to miss the key difference. When the Queen or her viceroy reads a Throne Speech in Westminster, Ottawa, or Canberra, it’s usually the work of a government with a Parliamentary majority: In other words, the stuff she’s announcing is actually going to happen. That’s why, lest any enthusiasm for this or that legislative proposal be detected, the apolitical monarch overcompensates by reading everything in as flat and unexpressive a monotone as possible. Underneath the ancient rituals — the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod getting the door of the House of Commons slammed in his face three times — it’s actually a very workmanlike affair.

The State of the Union is the opposite. The president gives a performance, extremely animatedly, head swiveling from left-side prompter to right-side prompter, continually urging action now: “Let’s start right away. We can get this done. . . . We can fix this. . . . Now is the time to do it. Now is the time to get it done.” And at the end of the speech, nothing gets done, and nothing gets fixed, and, after a few days’ shadowboxing between admirers and detractors willing to pretend it’s some sort of serious legislative agenda, every single word of it is forgotten until the next one.

Helen Andrews Of Cowards, Patriots and Pasternak

Doctor Zhivago was transformed during the Cold War from a Siberian soap opera into a worldwide symbol of resistance to tyranny. How a competent but unexceptional novel came to achieve this status is a story far more interesting than the book itself
Helen Andrews

The Zhivago Affair: The Kremlin, the CIA, and the Battle over a Forbidden Book
by Peter Finn & Petra Couvée
Vintage, 2015, 368 pages, $22.99

Twilight of the Eastern Gods
by Ismail Kadare
Grove Press, 2014, 224 pages, $29.99

When Doctor Zhivago reached number one on the New York Times best-seller list in November, 1958, the book it displaced from the top spot was Lolita. Nabokov was not pleased. He did not think much of Boris Pasternak (left) as a novelist, and to make matters worse, he felt bound to keep his low opinion to himself for fear of seeming jealous. “Had not Zhivago and I been on the same ladder,” he griped in a private letter, “I would have been glad to demolish that trashy, melodramatic, false, and inept book, which neither landscaping nor politics can save from my wastepaper basket.”

Nabokov was right that Doctor Zhivago, as literature, is nothing to crow about—not that the author of Lolita was in a position to look down his nose at a book for owing its success to extra-literary considerations. Pasternak does not rank with Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. He nonetheless deserves to be classed with such perfectly creditable writers as, say, Margaret Mitchell. Indeed, Gone with the Wind may be the closest thing to an English-language equivalent of Doctor Zhivago: a sweeping romantic epic set against the backdrop of a civil war, with enough sympathy shown for the losing side to attract the ire of the politically correct. Both books transitioned very well to the big screen, and in neither case was that entirely a compliment to the literary quality of the source material.

Yet during the Cold War Doctor Zhivago was transformed from a Siberian soap opera into a worldwide symbol of resistance to tyranny. The story of how this occurred is the subject of The Zhivago Affair: The Kremlin, the CIA, and the Battle over a Forbidden Book by Peter Finn and Petra Couvée.

pasternak PW coverThe book’s road to international fame began in 1956, when the Khrushchev thaw led Pasternak to hope that his newly completed first novel might find a Soviet publisher, despite its criticisms of Bolshevik excesses. His friend Kornei Chukovsky, who had more experience with the Moscow literary bureaucracy, was less naive. He knew that Doctor Zhivago would be suppressed, thaw or no thaw. But he also knew that Khrushchev would be wary of handing the West an easy propaganda victory. According to the gossip Chukovsky had gathered by September, “the current plan is as follows: to stem all nasty rumours (both here and abroad) by putting the novel out in three thousand copies—thereby making it inaccessible to the masses—and at the same time proclaiming that we are placing no obstacle in Pasternak’s path”.

Obama’s Gun Speech: Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due By Roger Kimball

I do not often watch Barack Obama’s speeches. No one at my daughter’s school is allowed to bring a peanut butter sandwich for lunch because some of the students have an aggravated allergy to nuts. So do I, just not to peanuts. So when my son asked if we could watch Obama’s recent, tearful speech about “gun violence in America,” it was with some reluctance, in addition to an assist from Mr. J. Daniels, over ice, that I agreed. But I am glad I did. It was a remarkable performance and it reminded me why Obama was elected in the first place. I find his rote face-this-way, then turn-and-face-that-way technique irritating, but boy is he good with a teleprompter (and, no, “boy” is not a racial slur). Obama is an attractive guy. He looks serious. He seems earnest, yes, but above all pragmatic. [Swivel.] He speaks slowly and in short sentences. [Swivel.] He is articulate. He is concerned. The atmosphere he creates, folks [Swivel], is one of simple reason battling dark forces. We’re against violence. We proposed reasonable solutions. Republicans in Congress made progress impossible.

Students of Quintilian should watch Obama. As a rhetor, he really is good. He even, as Mark Steyn noted admiringly, got off a little joke with perfect timing: The twin brother of Mark Gifford, the husband of Obama’s “dear friend and colleague” Gabby Gifford, is an astronaut and was in space when Mark came to see Obama. Obama asked Mark how often he spoke to his brother.

And he says, well, I usually talk to him every day, but the call was coming in right before the meeting so I think I may have not answered his call — (laughter) — which made me feel kind of bad. (Laughter.) That’s a long-distance call. (Laughter.)

ISIS Burns Its Own Jihadis Alive After Losing Ramadi to the Iraqi Army By Michael van der Galien

In what’s just more proof that ISIS is by far the most diabolical terrorist organization in the world, Fox News reports that its leaders burned their own jihadists alive because they fled when the Iraqi city of Mosul was attacked by the Iraqi army.

ISIS fighters who fled to the terror group’s Iraqi stronghold of Mosul after being defeated in Ramadi were burned alive in the town square, sources told FoxNews.com, in an unmistakable message to fighters who may soon be defending the northern city from government forces.

Several residents of Mosul recounted the grisly story for stateside relatives, describing the deadly reception black clad jihadists got when they made it to Mosul, some 250 miles north of the city retaken by Iraqi forces operating with cover from U.S. air power.

A former resident of Mosul who now lives in the U.S. says that his family back home told him what happened:

They were grouped together and made to stand in a circle, and set on fire to die.

Hillary Who? Progressive Grassroots Movement ‘MoveOn’ Endorses Sanders By Michael van der Galien

Take this as yet another sign that Hillary Clinton’s campaign is in deeper trouble than anyone thought possible:

MoveOn is endorsing Bernie Sanders for president after the liberal challenger to Hillary Clinton won 78 percent of votes cast by its membership.

Ilya Sheyman, MoveOn Political Action’s executive director, lauded Sanders for his run-away win and promised to help turn out voters in the early states of Iowa and New Hampshire, where the group has 43,000 members and 30,000 members respectively.

Sheyman explained:

This is a massive vote in favor of Bernie Sanders, showing that grassroots progressives across the country are excited and inspired by his message and track record of standing up to big money and corporate interests to reclaim our democracy for the American people.

That’s bad news for Hillary Clinton, but what makes this even worse is that MoveOn will actively and energetically campaign for Sanders. Sheyman:

Mandatory USC Class Requires Detailed Sexual History from Students By Stephen Kruiser

This is really happening.

A mandatory online course at the University of Southern California (USC) asks students to disclose the number of sexual encounters they have had over the past three months and teaches students to ask for consent by saying “how far would you be comfortable going?” and “would you like to try this with me?”

In an email obtained by Campus Reform, students were told they must complete the Title IX training in order to register for courses in the spring.

“This course is mandatory, and you must complete it by February 9, 2016. If you do not complete the training by this date you will receive a registration hold until the training is complete,” the email stated.

Well, scratch that off the list of places I would like my daughter to go to school (kidding, it’s in downtown L.A., I never wanted her to go there).

Worry not, incoming students, the old creepers who created the curriculum assure us it’s like totally groovy and stuff:

Despite some students being uncomfortable with the content of the course, the campus-wide email assured students they would “enjoy the assignment.”

“We believe you’ll enjoy the assignment, and that this training is in line with our shared belief that Trojans care for Trojans. It is an innovative, engaging, and informative online course, created with students for students,” the email stated.

State of the World: Open Season on America By Claudia Rosett

Seven years into the presidency that promised America a 21st century golden age, born of the Audacity of Hope and Change, audacity is not going America’s way. Just before the State of the Union address, Jan. 12, 2016, news breaks that Iran has seized and detained 10 American Navy sailors (though we are told they will be promptly returned).

This follows last week’s in-our-face announcement by North Korea that it had just tested a hydrogen bomb (though maybe it was merely an atomic bomb) — its third nuclear test on President Obama’s watch. That followed Iran’s brazen, sanctions-violating test launches in recent months of ballistic missiles, despite the “exclusively peaceful” refrain of the Iran nuclear deal so fervently sought and perversely praised by the Obama administration.

Add to this scene the December terrorist massacre in San Bernardino, in which an ISIS-inspired couple, an American-born jihadi and his Islamist immigrant bride, murdered 14 people and wounded 22 at an office Christmas party.

Here’s the real State of the Union, which is inextricably linked to the increasingly alarming state of the world: It is open season on America.

Sweden’s Walking Diplomatic Disaster by Ingrid Carlqvist

“It is a shame for Sweden to have a Foreign Minister who creates a diplomatic crisis as soon as she opens her mouth, and who so one-sidedly allies herself with anti-democratic forces against Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East.” — Political analyst Mathias Sundin, in Aftonbladet.

“Wallström portrays [Palestinian President Mahmoud] Abbas as a pacifist who has denounced terrorism…. He has not condemned a single one of the murders of 20 Israelis during the last few months. On the contrary … Abbas said in September, regarding the violence against Israelis, that ‘We bless every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem’, and we know that every Palestinian assassin apprehended by Israel is rewarded by the Palestinian Authority. So how can Wallström claim that he denounces terrorism, when he is actually rewarding it with money from the Swedish taxpayers? … Is Wallström aware of the praising of terrorism? Is Wallström aware of the rewards paid to terrorists? Yes or no?” — Kent Ekeroth, Sweden Democrats Party.

It seems that pretty much everything is going wrong for Sweden’s Foreign Minister these days.

Margot Wallström, of the Social Democratic Party, ascended with much fanfare to the post of Foreign Minister in the fall of 2014. She had introduced a completely new concept: a feminist foreign policy. In the Statement of Foreign Policy of 2015, she asserted that “A feminist foreign policy is now being formulated, the purpose of which is to combat discrimination against women, improve conditions for women and contribute to peace and development.”

Another Miracle from Israel? Prostate Cancer Cure in 20 Minutes By Karin McQuillan

One in six American men will develop prostate cancer. It is the most common cancer after skin cancer, and the second biggest cancer killer for men. Two Israeli scientists at the Weizmann Institute in Israel promise an almost miraculous cure, now in clinical trials at New York’s Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. It is the culmination of 20 years of basic research by plant scientist Avigdor Scherz and cancer researcher Yoram Saloman.

Professor Scherz took a naturally occurring form of chlorophyll from aquatic bacteria:

…chemically modified by Prof. Scherz’s lab at Weizmann to fit the team’s pharmaceutical needs. Once the photosensitized drug is injected, it meets up with the second crucial element in this therapy—light—at the targeted tumor site… from highly focused fiber-optic lasers that have been inserted near the tumor. As the chlorophyll absorbs the light, it can then interact with the third component in the process—oxygen—to produce oxygen radicals. This interaction initiates a fast cascade of pathophysiological events that cause instantaneous closing of the blood vessels leading to the tumor, followed by oxygen and nutrient deprivation at the tumor site, as well as other active processes that kill tumor cells. In 24 to 48 hours, the tumor undergoes complete necrosis.

The treatment, called vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy or VTP is a one-time 20 to 30-minute procedure. There have been no side effects in urination or sexual function.

The Israeli team foresees applications for breast, ovary, lung and pancreas tumors. The latter has no effective treatment to date and has been a tragic death sentence.