Displaying posts published in

November 2018

PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN ON THANKSGIVING DAY 1982

Two hundred years ago, the Congress of the United States issued a Thanksgiving Proclamation stating that it was “the indispensable duty of all nations” to offer both praise and supplication to God. Above all other nations of the world, America has been especially blessed and should give special thanks. We have bountiful harvests, abundant freedoms, and a strong, compassionate people.

I have always believed that this anointed land was set apart in an uncommon way, that a divine plan placed this great continent here between the oceans to be found by people from every corner of the Earth who had a special love of faith and freedom.

Glamour magazine turns itself into left-wing rag, finds itself out of the print business By Monica Showalter

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/11/glamour_magazine_turns_itself_into_leftwing_rag_finds_itself_out_of_the_print_business.html

Glamour magazine has decided to end its print version, heading to a web-only format, according to its parent company, Conde Nast.

In a story from Variety:

After nearly 80 years, the monthly print edition of Condé Nast’s Glamour women’s magazine is ending.

Glamour’s last regularly published print edition, the January 2019 issue, is scheduled to hit newsstands next week, the company announced Tuesday.

It’s another move by Condé Nast away from declining print businesses to pivot to a mostly digital future, a trend that has cut across the entire publishing biz. Glamour has a print circulation of about 2 million, but the brand reaches an audience of around 20 million online, according to the company.

Which is kind of the story of a lot of print media, with all its good and bad reasons. The magazine can’t be doing well, deny it as they try to suggest in their statement to Variety.

But the lack of wellness of the magazine is hardly confined to the tech revolution’s advances, or the preferences of the Millennials – have you taken a look at what Glamour is like these days?

It’s actually pretty hideous. I did with the last issue, viewing it in the doctor’s office, and boy did I put that one back on the stack instead of sneak it out in my purse. In the past, the magazine, formerly known as ‘Glamour of Hollywood’ was a great go-to place for stories about models, makeup, fashion, boyfriends and good girly stuff. One of my mother’s favorite photos of me at age 7 was of how I used to lap up her copy of Glamour magazine, seated like a kid with my feet on the couch reading it like a kid reads a storybook.

Today, it’s decided that Hollywood for Ugly People is better than actual glamour.

Seriously, it seems to be focused now on female politicians of the strictly Democratic stripe, the kind who wear pantsuits and congratulate themselves with awards. They’re the Democrat-left establishment. They’re the Planned Parenthood-approved sisterhood. The actresses the magazine focuses on are there solely based on their leftwing activism – Alyssa Milano and the #MeToo types, not people who’ve actually done something interesting in the acting trade. There was just one clothing spread and boy was it boring. In short, the magazine has degenerated into Democratic establishment politics, which is a stupid thing given that it advertises itself as about fashion and presumably, the cutting edge.

The Single Sentence That Would Rescue Theresa May’s Brexit Deal by Malcolm Lowe

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13327/brexit-northern-ireland-protoco

lArticle 20 of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland should be supplemented by a sentence of the form: “If not earlier, this Protocol shall cease to apply [x] years after the end of the transition period unless both the European Union and the United Kingdom agree to extent its application in whole or in part.” Here “[x]” should be a number (of years) that is sufficiently large to convict the EU of bad faith if it refuses to countenance such a sentence, but sufficiently small not to be absurd. We think that “three” would be a suitable number of years, but even “five” would establish the principle that the United Kingdom must have a guaranteed prospect of liberty.

Theresa May presented her Brexit deal to her cabinet on November 14, 2018 and to the House of Commons the next day. It consists of two documents, the “Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community” (585 pages) and the “Outline of the political declaration setting out the framework for the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland” (8 pages). The documents were released to the public only after the conclusion of that cabinet meeting.
The Problematic Protocol

The Members of Parliament hardly had time overnight to read the Draft Agreement in its entirety. Instead, they rushed to read the “Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland” because they knew that this had been the most controversial element in the negotiations between the United Kingdom and the European Union.

The Protocol recalls in its preamble that “the Withdrawal Agreement… does not aim at establishing a permanent future relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom” while noting that both parties recognize the need to maintain the “soft border” that exists between Northern Ireland, as an integral part of the United Kingdom, and the Irish Republic. Although it is hoped that that “permanent future relationship” will have been negotiated by the end of the “transition period” during which the United Kingdom completes its withdrawal from the EU, this may not happen. The aim of the Protocol, therefore, is to serve, if necessary, as a “backstop” arrangement to preserve the soft border even after the transition period while negotiations on the permanent future relationship are completed.

Statement on the Election of a New Interpol President by Garry Kasparov and Members of the Standing Committee of the Free Russia Forum

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13333/interpol-president-election-russia

It is well-established that Russia has abused Interpol as a tool to persecute abroad the political opponents of the ruling Russian regime who have been forced to emigrate.

Such an influential organization as Interpol cannot be led by a representative and functionary of an unfree nation that violates the rights and freedoms of its own citizens, violates its international obligations, annexes the territories of other states, and is currently the protagonist of several wars of aggression.

Would Interpol target these people on Russian request? It is difficult to imagine otherwise should a Russian official becomes the head of Interpol. The candidate for the post of the head of Interpol also raises questions. Alexander Prokopchuk is a major general of the Russian police, an organization known for its corruption and persecution of representatives of the Russian opposition.

On November 21, the election of a new President of Interpol will take place. The leading candidate for this post is the representative of the Russian Federation, Major General of the Russian Police Alexander Prokopchuk. The Standing Committee of the Free Russia Forum expresses its categorical protest against the election of this candidate to the post of head of Interpol. Such an influential organization as Interpol cannot be led by a representative and functionary of an unfree nation that violates the rights and freedoms of its own citizens, violates its international obligations, annexes the territories of other states, and is currently the protagonist of several wars of aggression.

It is well-established that Russia has abused Interpol as a tool to persecute abroad the political opponents of the ruling Russian regime who have been forced to emigrate. Critics and other targets of the Putin regime residing outside of Russia have repeatedly been victimized by Interpol mechanisms such as Red Notices and “diffusion” notices, as a result of which they were detained and put through lengthy legal procedures before they managed to convince Interpol of the political nature of their persecution — often requiring political intervention on their behalf.

Germany: Turkish-Muslim Appointed Second-In-Command of Domestic Intelligence by Soeren Kern

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13334/germany-domestic-intelligence

Sinan Selen, a 46-year-old Istanbul-born counter-terrorism expert, will be the first Muslim to fill a top leadership position within Germany’s intelligence community.

Throughout his government career, Selen has been resolute in confronting Islamic fundamentalists in Germany. He also led efforts at the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) to monitor the Turkish nationalist Milli Görüs, an influential Islamist movement strongly opposed to Muslim integration into European society.

The leadership changes at the BfV were spurred by a cellphone video that purportedly showed right-wing mobs attacking migrants over the murder of a German citizen in Chemnitz by two failed asylum seekers. According to the respected blog Tichys Einblick, the video actually documented migrants attacking Germans, not Germans “hunting” migrants.

Chancellor Angela Merkel has appointed a Turkish immigrant to fill the second-highest position in Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, BfV).

As the BfV’s new vice president, Sinan Selen, a 46-year-old Istanbul-born counter-terrorism expert, will be the first Muslim to fill a top leadership position within Germany’s intelligence community.

The appointment comes just weeks after Merkel fired BfV President Hans-Georg Maaßen for publicly defending the anti-mass-migration party Alternative for Germany (AfD) against attacks from Merkel and her junior coalition partner, the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD).

By choosing Selen, Merkel appears to be trying to achieve several objectives. First, she seems to be attempting to save her floundering government by placating the SPD, which has demanded that the domestic intelligence agency begin monitoring the AfD party, and which has called for more people with a “migration background” in leadership positions at federal agencies.

Rent-Seeking Run Amok By Colin A. Carter Henry I. Miller

https://amgreatness.com/2018/11/21/rent-s

President Trump announced last month that his administration will take actions to allow the year-round sale of fuel containing 15 percent ethanol, which is currently banned during summer months. The rent-seeking justification for this expansion of a flawed policy revved up immediately, in the form of a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Iowa U.S. Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst. They lauded the decision, as well as the existing federal mandate to blend ethanol with transportation fuels, citing the contributions to the nation’s job growth, GDP, and tax revenues.

The same arguments could be made for a federal law mandating that all the alcohol in hard liquor and mouthwash be derived from corn. Would that be sound public policy?

Politics aside, any defense of U.S. ethanol policy must embrace a series of fallacies which include:

ethanol produced from corn makes the U.S. less dependent on fossil fuels,
ethanol lowers the price of gasoline,
an increase in the percentage of ethanol blended into gasoline boosts the overall supply of gasoline, and
ethanol is environmentally friendly and lowers global carbon dioxide emissions.

Although none of these claims is true, the ethanol lobby continues to promote them, and many politicians—particularly in the major corn-producing states—seem intoxicated by them.

Politicians like to say that ethanol is environmentally friendly, but these claims are misleading. Although corn is a renewable resource, it has a far lower yield relative to the energy used to produce it than ethanol from sugar cane. Moreover, ethanol yields about 33 percent less energy per gallon than gasoline, so mileage drops off significantly. Fuel costs for Americans are often artificially inflated due to the low energy content of ethanol (in spite of a possible octane boost) and the high costs faced by fuel companies trying to comply with ill-conceived fuel regulations. In a 2014 study, the Congressional Budget Office found that raising the mandated use of corn ethanol raises motor fuel prices.

Even Astronauts Fear the Left By Dennis Prager

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/scott-kellys-winston-churchill-comment/

Advocating magnanimity in politics, Scott Kelly holds up Churchill as a model and provokes a firestorm of indignation.

There are many reasons I pity today’s younger generation of Americans.

Among them are:

• The unconscionable debt we are leaving them.

• The obliteration of male and female as separate and distinct categories — and the sexual confusion that is left in its wake.

• The emasculation of men and the de-feminization of women.

• The undermining of the value of marriage.

• The lack of God and religion in their lives — and the consequent search for meaning in the wrong places.

• The receiving of indoctrination, rather than education, in most schools from elementary through graduate.

• The inability to celebrate being American.

Tragically and ironically, each one of these was brought on by the very group many young people identify with: the Left.

You can add to the list the Left’s tearing down of heroes.

Asia Bibi and the Plight of Pakistani Christians An inconvenient narrative for Western media elites. Jack Kerwick

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271992/asia-bibi-and-plight-pakistani-christians-jack-kerwick

Media talking heads and self-appointed monitors of “hate” have been waxing hysterical over what they claim is a rising tide of “hate crimes” nationwide, a phenomenon, they want for us to believe, provoked by the rhetoric of President Donald J. Trump.

This claim, of course, is nonsense. Yet there’s another point that I wish to make here.

While the Western world has been deluged with media coverage regarding the legions of Muslims that fled to Europe from the oppression that they allegedly suffered in their own homelands, as well as with stories (many of which have been revealed as hoaxes) of Christians victimizing religious minorities in the streets of America, media elites never make a sound concerning the oppression that Christians around the world really suffer at the hands of the non-Christian majorities with which they co-exist.

Take Asia Bibi as just one example of this endemic phenomenon. This young woman’s experience is illustrative of that endured by numerous Christians throughout Bibi’s home country of Pakistan and throughout the Islamic world. Hers is worth drawing attention to, however, for more people are increasingly becoming familiar with Bibi’s name.

Bibi is a Pakistani woman, a mother of five children, and a member of Pakistan’s Christian minority. In 2009, she was arrested. The following year, Bibi was found guilty of the blasphemy charges that had been brought against her and she was sentenced to…death.

Bibi had been charged by her co-workers with having made offensive remarks about Muhammad and the Quran. They had ordered her to fetch them some water. She did. But after Bibi drank from it, they refused to do so and mocked her for having “defiled” the drink. Bibi’s co-workers ordered her to convert to Islam. It was then that Bibi had responded that it is they, her harassers, who should convert, for while Jesus saved humanity from its sins, what had Muhammad ever done for humanity, Bibi asked.

A Short History of American Immigration Coming to the U.S. always took courage and tolerance for risk, traits that are still part of the country’s DNA. By John Steele Gordon

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-short-history-of-american-immigration-1542758403

“Modern opposition to immigration is for the most part not to immigration per se, nor to particular ethnic groups, as it was in the past, but to the perception that illegal immigration has undermined the rule of law. America’s prosperity, freedom and entrepreneurial spirit will always be a magnet for the ambitious and talented. It will remain one of the country’s greatest strengths. But that doesn’t mean the U.S. shouldn’t decide who gets to come in.”

If Americans are famous for our get-up-and-go, it is because we all have ancestors who got up and came. Whether sailing into the Chesapeake Bay in the early 17th century, waiting in line at Ellis Island in the early 20th, or crossing the South Texas border in the early 21st, immigrants to the U.S. have had to bid farewell to the familiar and enter a strange land with strange customs and, often, a strange language. That took—and still takes—courage and tolerance for risk, traits that are very much part of the American gene pool.

Sometimes the risk was to one’s life. About 25% of immigrants to Virginia in the 1620s died within a year. In the late 19th century, about 1 in 7 didn’t survive the trans-Atlantic voyage. Crossing the border illegally remains dangerous.

The first wave of immigration to the U.S. came between 1620, when the Mayflower arrived in Plymouth, Mass., and 1642, when the English Civil War began. About 25,000 Puritans, seeking to worship God in their own way, traveled to New England during those decades. The war brought the Puritan migration to a close, but other religious and ethnic groups, such as the Quakers and Huguenots, took up the slack in the late 17th century.

The Dutch came to New Amsterdam in the early 1600s to trade fur, tolerating all religions. New York has been America’s most commercially minded and religiously pluralistic city ever since.

The next wave of migration began in the mid-18th century, when Scots-Irish from Ulster began to immigrate in numbers. Many arrived in Philadelphia and made their way westward and then down the Appalachians, populating the Southern upcountry. Their descendants have formed the backbone of a number of populist movements, from Andrew Jackson to Donald Trump.

Reviving Due Process on Campus DeVos restores the right to cross-examination. Democrats are outraged.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/reviving-due-process-on-campus-1542758809

For those awaiting a restoration of rational discourse in American politics, well, you’ll have to keep waiting. No other conclusion is possible after seeing the reaction to Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’s long-awaited regulatory proposals last week on handling accusations of sexual abuse on campus.

From California Democrat Maxine Waters: “Betsy DeVos, you won’t get away with what you are doing. We are organizing to put an end to your destruction of civil rights protections for students.”

Former Vice President Joe Biden said on Facebook that the proposal “would return us to the days when schools swept rape and assault under the rug and survivors were shamed into silence.”

The centerpiece of the proposed regulations is—hold your fire—restoring the right of cross-examination, one of the oldest and most hallowed elements of due process.

The Obama Department of Education, responding to legitimate concerns about sexual abuse on campus, issued guidelines that went overboard, casting away many basic protections for the accused. The result has subjected victims and the accused to a system of campus justice often controlled by amateurs and political activists.

For more than four decades the Department of Education has set Title IX policy by issuing “guidance,” which circumvents the normal rule-making process. The Obama-era sexual abuse guidance was essentially an administrative diktat. The public had no chance to comment, and universities, which understood federal funding was at risk, opted to dilute standard legal protections for accused students.