Displaying posts published in

July 2018

Let German Voters Try Again A new election with new ideas is needed to fix the Merkel crisis.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/let-german-voters-try-again-1530573865

The main lesson from the troubles in Angela Merkel’s German government is that administrations need to be about something other than survival. By our deadline Monday evening it appeared she had survived the latest challenge to her chancellorship. But she’ll limp through the remaining three years of her term if she can’t fill the ideas void at the center of her government.

Mrs. Merkel stared down a rebellion from the center-right Christian Social Union (CSU), the Bavarian sister party to Mrs. Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU). Horst Seehofer, Mrs. Merkel’s Interior Minister and CSU leader, had threatened to resign (or force Mrs. Merkel to fire him) if she didn’t emerge from last week’s European summit with a plan to stem the entry of asylum-seekers into Germany.

She did, and despite Monday’s theatrics Mrs. Merkel’s deal with Mr. Seehofer mostly builds on that EU pact. She promised the CSU stricter enforcement along the Germany-Austria border to bar asylum-seekers whose claims are being processed elsewhere in the EU from entering Germany, in line with the EU plan.

Maybe that will give Mr. Seehofer the political boost he wants from stirring up this feud. Bavaria, in Germany’s south, was traversed by a large share of the Middle Eastern migrants who entered after Mrs. Merkel’s open-door offer of refuge in 2015. The CSU now faces an electoral threat from the anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany (AfD), which could deprive Mr. Seehofer’s party of its absolute majority in the state parliament in local elections in October. But the CSU’s slipping poll numbers suggest Mr. Seehofer’s stunt may have backfired.

The New York Times Beclowns Itself With Fake News About Free Speech In an opinion article posing as a news story, The New York Times launches an illiberal and wrongheaded attack on free speech. At least we know where they stand.By David Marcus

http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/01/the-new-york-times-beclowns-itself-with-fake-news-about-free-speech/

There is nothing new about The New York Times running bizarre progressive agitprop. But thankfully these articles are more often relegated to the opinion pages. Not so today, as a headline purporting to be news, on page 1A above the fold, offered the absurd opinion that conservatives have “weaponized free speech.”

In the place of anything remotely resembling facts or serious empirical evidence, the article by Adam Liptak relies mainly on quotes from “experts” who think government needs to compel bad guys to shut up. William F. Buckley comes to mind while reading the mealy-mouthed assault on our greatest and first freedom, specifically his observation that “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” Indeed.
Yes, Speech Is A Weapon

The first and most obvious refutation of this laughably illiberal word salad of nonsense is that of course speech is and always has been a weapon. Has anyone at The New York Times ever heard the phrase “The pen is mightier than the sword”? Or is that the kind of old-timey expression concocted by racist, colonialist white guys to subjugate nice people?

Of course speech is a weapon: the most powerful one that exists. The British understood this when Thomas Paine changed the world with a pamphlet, launching the deadly violence of the American Revolution and ultimately the natural rights protections that the Times so casually tosses aside today.

Just like a gun, speech is a weapon that can be used for good or ill, and there is no basic understanding or a priori definition of which is which. For some, hunting is not only a leisure activity, but also a real source of food. For others, hunting is an inhumane and even evil practice. The gun is neutral in this debate, just as speech is neutral in the debate over who should have the freedom of it.

Merkel Melts Under Pressure To Tighten Europe’s Borders, Does 180 On Migrant Policy Merkel is working frantically to stave off rebellion in her government over her de facto open borders immigration policies. By Megan G. Oprea

http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/02/angela-merkel-melts-under-pressure-to-tighten-europes-borders/

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s governing coalition is hanging on by a thread. Last-ditch talks are underway between Merkel and interior minister Horst Seehofer of the Christian Social Union (CSU) over Germany’s migration policy. Seehofer wants migrants turned away at the border if they have sought asylum elsewhere in Europe, while Merkel wants an EU-wide deal. This standoff has caused Merkel to recant on her long-held beliefs and policies about migration.

How did this happen? Disagreements over migration policy between Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and junior coalition partner CSU almost prevented Merkel from forming a government last year. Then, last month, Seehofer proposed tighter restrictions of Germany’s borders, threatening to defy Merkel and enact the restrictions with or without Merkel’s approval, daring her to remove him from his post, which would have led to a breakdown of the coalition between their two parties.

This sent Merkel on a frantic diplomatic tour of Europe in an effort to get EU members to agree on a new policy that would radically reduce the number of migrants and refugees who would be able to come to Europe, in the hopes of assuaging Seehofer and the CSU. Merkel has caved, reversing her previous position of absolute open borders and moving to toughen the entire continent’s migrant policy.

Stanford U. Teaches ‘Male Privilege’ With Its ‘Men and Masculinities Project’ By Toni Airaksinen

https://pjmedia.com/trending/stanford-u-teaches-male-privilege-with-its-men-and-masculinities-project/

Stanford University is pushing the myth that male identity is a “social privilege,” despite numerous studies indicating that men disproportionately suffer from unique issues that circumvent their economic, educational, and social pursuits.

The claim was made by the school’s Men and Masculinities Project. The project aims to convene male students with counselors to help them develop “healthy and inclusive male identities,” almost as if male students oppress women by their very existence.

“We acknowledge that male identity is a social privilege, and the aim for this project is to provide the education and support needed to better the actions of the male community rather than marginalize others,” explains Stanford officials.

Instead of aiming to help men regain parity with women in academia — men nationwide are less likely to attend college, and less likely to graduate in four years than women — the school instead aims to help men “redefine masculinity.”

College men should be “active agents of positive and sustainable change on campus and in the community, striving to understand male privilege, redefine masculinity, [and] dismantle systemic structures of power and oppression,” the program states.

Of course, men do enjoy certain privileges in society. They don’t have to worry about sexual harassment and stalking to the same extent as women, and they are far less likely to find themselves victims of sex trafficking.

But privilege isn’t a black and white issue. To acknowledge the plight of women — especially regarding sexual abuse — shouldn’t preclude a discussion of the issues that men face. Yet that is precisely what the Stanford University program does.

The issues that men face start young. Men are significantly more likely to face issues in K-12, and are significantly less likely to graduate from high school, a disparity that is even more pronounced in minority and working-class communities.

Men also are less likely to attend college, disproportionately less likely to graduate, less likely than single women to become homeowners by age 30, far more likely to be in dangerous fields of work, and significantly more likely to be homeless. Men are also far more likely to remain homeless — nonprofits and state services prioritize women and their children. CONTINUE AT SITE

WaPo’s Jennifer Rubin Calls for Mobs to Harass Sarah Huckabee Sanders for the Rest of Her Life By Paula Bolyard

https://pjmedia.com/trending/wapos-jennifer-rubin-calls-for-mobs-to-harass-sarah-huckabee-sanders-for-the-rest-of-her-life/

Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin went on the attack against Sarah Huckabee Sanders on MSNBC’s AM Joy on Sunday, calling on left-wing minions to harass the embattled White House press secretary for the rest of her life. She also warned two female Republican senators not to vote for any potential Supreme Court nominees who might endanger her beloved right to abort unborn children.

Rubin, the left’s favorite conservative (they call her a conservative, I don’t), claims that Sanders is inciting violence by criticizing the press. (You know, like every press secretary in the history of press secretaries.) Rubin warned that “lives are on the line” and called for a million protesters to harass and intimidate Sanders. “I don’t think what’s most effective is throwing Sarah Huckabee Sanders out of a restaurant. I wouldn’t serve her either, frankly, but what’s most successful is getting a million people on the street to protest,” she said. (Tell us more about who you would and wouldn’t serve in a restaurant, Jen. You’ve said that bakers who refuse to make cakes for gay weddings are “grandstanding on bigotry and making a virtue out of the vice of prejudice.” I guess that doesn’t apply to your virtue signaling.)

“Sarah Huckabee has no right to live a life of no fuss, no muss, after lying to the press — after inciting against the press,” a vituperative Rubin said. “These people should be made uncomfortable, and I think that’s a life sentence frankly. [Emphasis added]

But Rubin wasn’t finished with yet, warning Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) not to vote for a Trump Supreme Court nominee who might erode abortion rights, an issue that appears to be near and dear to Rubin’s heart.

“Let’s get a million people to go to Maine or a million people to go to Alaska and start putting pressure on those senators,” said Rubin. “So it’s perfectly civil to do that — no one is telling them to be violent protesters, but we’re not going to let these people go through life unscathed,” she said.

“The message to those two women by Democrats, by pro-choice women in those two states, by the entire states of Maine and Alaska has to be simple,” she said. “You vote for this, Ms. Collins, Miss Murkowski, this is on you. We won’t accept these nonsense excuses.”

“It has to be all-out on the ground in those states,” she continued, “those women have to be put under a glaring light so that they finally have to make a choice that goes against their party — unless they were phony pro-choice women all along, which is distinctly possible.”

The coming Democratic crackup By Peter Skurkiss

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/07/the_coming_democratic_crackup.html
Despite media-inflated stories of the popularity of Bernie Sanders and his fellow travelers, the radicalized Democratic Party is heading for a major crackup.

The signs are there for anyone with eyes to see. Despite media-inflated stories of the popularity of Bernie Sanders and his fellow travelers, the radicalized Democratic Party is heading for a major crackup.

The trend started with the rise of the Tea Party (2009), followed by the Democratic loss of the House (2010) and the Senate (2014) and then Donald Trump’s stunning election in 2016. At each stage of this progression, left-wingers have dialed up their hysteria, their lies, their hate, and even their violence. Now it is reaching a fever pitch.

But it has been to no avail. Indeed, all the rage has been, if anything, counterproductive. Could be that this November will be a climax, forcing, among other things, George Soros to go to his grave a defeated and frustrated old man?

The media paints a picture of the left being full of fight and determination to continue Barack Hussein Obama’s transformation of America into a European-type socialistic paradise with a multicultural emphasis. This may be true for the hardcore activists, but they are relatively few in number. So what might be the dominant mood of the run-of-the-mill Democratic voter? It is one of depression and a feeling of hopelessness. They’ve seen their side throw absolutely everything at the conservative resurgence and President Trump in particular and watched as one event after another went against them. Even the media, with their fake news stories and skewed polls, can’t snap liberals out of their funk. The party’s only option seems to be doubling down on the losing hand it has been playing.

Some examples: the liberal media’s drumbeat message is that Trump and his supporters are racists, yet the president’s approval rating with minorities continues to grow. Every Democrat in Congress voted against the Trump tax cuts, predicting they would tank the economy, yet GNP growth is exploding to levels that President Obama repeatedly stated were impossible. Black unemployment is at a record low, and the overall economy is at near full employment. The Trump tax cuts have put more money in people’s pockets and confidence in America is rising.

TIME TO LEAVE? THE QUESTION THE JEWS OF BRITAIN AND EUROPE MUST PONDER BY MELANIE PHILLIPS

http://www.melaniephillips.com/time-leave-question-jews-britain-europe/
These are alarming times for Jews in Britain and Europe.

The British Labour Party is convulsed over the realization that it is riddled with antisemitism. Jeremy Corbyn, its leader and a friend to Hamas, has been exposed as belonging to Facebook groups hosting claims that the Jews were behind ISIS and 9/11, that the Rothschilds controlled the world’s finances, and other such paranoid theories. The backwash from the exposure of these groups revealed a tsunami of anti-Jewish insults, smears, and libels by Labour supporters. Corbyn’s responses, often truculent and insulting to the Jewish community, have only deepened the crisis.

Last year, according to the Community Security Trust, saw the highest number of antisemitic incidents in Britain since the CST started recording such data in 1984. In the past, surges in these incidents had occurred in response to the reporting of Israeli military action. That’s disturbing enough. But what was more disturbing here was that this record surge had occurred in the absence of any such Israeli activity.

Worse is happening in mainland Europe. In Paris, an 85-year-old survivor of the Shoah, Mireille Knoll, was stabbed to death and her body burned by a young Muslim. Last year, a man shouting “Allahu akbar” beat up Jewish schoolteacher Sarah Halimi and threw her to her death out of her Paris apartment window. In January, a teenage girl in the Paris suburb of Sarcelles wearing the uniform of her Jewish school was slashed in the face with a knife. Later that month, an eight-year-old boy was beaten in the same area because he was wearing a kippah. In February, two Jewish men in Paris were attacked with a hacksaw amid a volley of Jew-hating abuse.

In Amsterdam, a kosher restaurant long targeted for attack had its windows smashed in March by a man holding a Palestinian flag and shouting “Allahu akbar.” Holland’s chief rabbi says that, on the street, curses or taunts of “dirty Jew” are now quite normal. At the beginning of Chanukah last year, two Syrians and a Palestinian firebombed a synagogue in Gothenburg, Sweden. A few days later, a Jewish cemetery in Malmö was attacked. In Germany, the Israeli flag has been burned and Jewish pupils bullied by Arab schoolmates. And so on and on.