Displaying the most recent of 90901 posts written by

Ruth King

Peter Beinart’s assault on the Abraham Accords By Ruthie Blum

https://www.jns.org/opinion/peter-beinarts-assault-on-the-abraham-accords/

 Peter Beinart’s latest attack on the Jewish state that he opposes as vehemently as he professes to have its best interest at heart is a work of remarkable sophistry.

In a lengthy op-ed on Monday in the radical-leftist quarterly Jewish Currents, the author of The Crisis of Zionism—recently hired by the equally ill-intentioned New York Times as a “contributing opinion writer”—bashes Israel by denigrating the Muslim-majority countries with which it is forging warm peace treaties.

That the Abraham Accords and Sudan agreement were brokered by U.S. President Donald Trump made them even more treif in the eyes of the kosher-keeping New York Jew, who boasts of attending an Orthodox synagogue and of feeling a “spiritual connection to Jewish people.”

The piece in question—“Israel’s Repressive Diplomacy”—delves into the Israel-United Arab Emirates and Israel-Bahrain deals signed at the White House on Sept. 15, and Sudan’s pledge on Friday to jump on the bandwagon. In it, Beinart attempts to refute the joint assertion by Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that these developments will promote “human dignity and freedom” in the Middle East.

He begins by going after the regime in Abu Dhabi, citing a report in the Middle East Monitor stating that “scores of Emiratis, Palestinians and Jordanians living in the UAE have already been imprisoned “for opposing Abu-Dhabi’s peace deal with Israel.”

One example he gives is that of Emirati poet Dhabiya Khamis, who recounted on social media that she was prevented from boarding a Cairo-bound flight from the Dubai International Airport “probably because of my announced opinion against Zionism and normalization.”

The Odd Couple: Joe Biden and Kamala Harris by Linda Goudsmit

http://goudsmit.pundicity.com/24688/the-odd-couple-joe-biden-and-kamala-harris

   http://goudsmit.pundicity.com  http://lindagoudsmit.com

We all know couples whose attraction to each other is confounding. We wonder, what do they see in each other? How do they find each other attractive? Often, marriage is a business arrangement. So it is in politics.

Presidents and vice-presidents are often selected by the constituency they bring to their party’s ticket. The 2020 election is no exception. The Biden/Harris ticket is an odd coupling. Biden is a corrupt, career politician, and dedicated globalist. His family financial dealings in Russia, Ukraine, and particularly communist China, make Joe Biden a national security risk and a threat to American interests worldwide.

Joe Biden is a 47-year swamp dweller whose diminished capacity is undeniable. Kamala Harris is a radical leftist Democrat who makes Bernie Sanders look like a conservative. So, what gives? Why did Biden choose Harris as a running mate?

The Biden/Harris ticket is a marriage of convenience—a political business arrangement.

The senior, corrupt, career Democrats in the party are being challenged by a radical leftist cohort of young American Marxists determined to destroy America from within, and replace our constitutional republic with socialism. WHAT?? Oh yes. The 2020 presidential election does not represent traditional Democrat/Republican differences of opinion between American patriots, whose vision for what is best for America is in conflict.

The 2020 election is a revolution without bullets! It is the consummation of the war on America, and the final battle between globalism and Americanism. Let me explain.

Senator Kamala Harris is the most extreme, radical leftist democrat in the U.S. Senate. Throughout her political career Harris has demonstrated her contempt for America and Americans. She is anti-America first, anti-constitutional governance, and a heartbeat away from the presidency. Consider what will happen if the Democrats manage to steal this election for Joe Biden—their corrupt, mentally deficient, globalist candidate. VP Kamala Harris will immediately replace Biden and become president.

Heads up, liberal Jews––Don’t be Jews with trembling knees Joan Swirsky *****

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/swirsky/201027

“Don’t threaten us with cutting off your aid. It will not work. I am not a Jew with trembling knees. I am a proud Jew with 3,700 years of civilized history. Nobody came to our aid when we were dying in the gas chambers and ovens. Nobody came to our aid when we were striving to create our country. We paid for it. We fought for it. We died for it. We will stand by our principles. We will defend them. And, when necessary, we will die for them again, with or without your aid.”

Those words were spoken by Menachem Begin in June of 1982, directly to the Democrat senator from Delaware, Joe Biden, who had confronted the Israeli Prime Minister during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee testimony by threatening to cut off aid to Israel

That’s right, only 32 years after the establishment of the tiny Jewish state, which was surrounded by 22 war-mongering, Israel-loathing Arab states, and only 35 years after the Holocaust savagely murdered––tortured and gassed-to-death––six-million Jewish men, women, children, and infants, Senator Biden was once again terrorizing the Jews of the world with his menacing ultimatum.

Not a fluke, not a misstatement, not an error in judgement, but vintage Joe Biden, whose longtime antagonism and belligerence toward Israel has been exhaustively documented, most recently by Shmuel Klatzkin (Biden’s Hostility to Israel––read the whole article) and Janet Levy in AmericanThinker.com (Is a Vote for Joe Biden in the Interest of American Jews?).

EXAMPLES ABOUND

Levy reports a number of the Obama-Biden regime’s consistent anti-Israel policies:

When Second Comes First With two elderly candidates for the world’s biggest job, voters must consider their presumptive replacements. Joel Zinberg, M.D., J.D.

https://www.city-journal.org/vice-presidents-presumptive-replacements

Joel Zinberg, M.D., J.D., is an Associate Clinical Professor of Surgery at the Icahn Mount Sinai School of Medicine and was General Counsel and a Senior Economist at the Council of Economic Advisers from 2017 to 2019.
In 2008, many who had expressed support for the presidential candidacy of John McCain changed their minds with the announcement of the governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, as his running mate. They reasoned that McCain, 72, was too old, with a history of cancer, and that Palin was not up to assuming the presidency in the not unlikely event he became sick or died in office. Barack Obama’s campaign chided McCain for putting an obscure, former small-town mayor “a heartbeat away from the presidency.” Of course, McCain lived another ten years and would have completed two terms in office had he been elected and then re-elected.
What do we know about the current presidential candidates?
Joe Biden turns 78 next month. His fragile appearance is hard to ignore. He routinely puts “a lid” curtailing the day’s public appearances, well before noon. Throughout the campaign, his in-person appearances have been rare and brief. His medical history—including two brain aneurysms many years ago, high cholesterol, an irregular heartbeat, and multiple surgeries and physical therapy treatments—led his former physician to state nearly a year ago that “he’s not a healthy guy.”
Donald Trump is 74 and borderline obese. Based on an elevated coronary CT calcium score and a history of elevated cholesterol, he likely has some coronary artery disease, though this is common in men his age. He apparently has survived a coronavirus infection without sequelae and is back on the campaign trail.
Both men are significantly older and less fit than the previous three presidents, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and Bill Clinton. Bush, the oldest, was only 62 when he left office after two terms. There is a not-insignificant chance that either Trump or Biden could become incapacitated or die in the next four years.

Lesley Stahl Is Wrong And Trump Is Right: The Obama Administration Spied On The Trump Campaign By Margot Cleveland

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/26/lesley-stahl-is-wrong-and-trump-is-right-the-obama-administration-spied-on-the-trump-campaign/

‘60 Minutes’ and Lesley Stahl falsely reported it is ‘unverified’ that the Obama-Biden administration spied on Trump’s campaign in 2016.

Last week, President Trump’s team released 38 minutes of unedited video capturing his contentious sit-down with Lesley Stahl of “60 Minutes.” Sunday evening, CBS broadcast clips of the interview and amazingly let air proof of Trump’s charge that the media is fake news: “60 Minutes” and Stahl falsely reported that it is “unverified” that the Obama-Biden administration spied on Trump’s campaign in 2016.

Trump and not Stahl raised this scandal, as the unedited video showed, after he reversed roles with his interviewer and pushed her to say whether she thought it was okay for Hunter Biden to give “the big guy” a 10 percent cut of money raised by Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden’s son in China, and whether it was okay for China to give the Biden family one and a half billion dollars to manage and for Joe to then negotiate with China on behalf of Americans.

“60 Minutes” edited out those details of the Biden scandal, but let the television audience hear Trump say of it, “It’s the biggest scan…” before correcting himself, “the second biggest scandal. The biggest scandal was when they spied on my campaign.”

The next minutes continued with what would be a comic routine of “did not,” “did too,” did not,” if the subject wasn’t truly the biggest scandal in American political history.

“They spied on my campaign,” Trump repeated.

“But there’s no evide…real evidence of that,” Leslie countered.

Trump Takes The Lead In Pennsylvania; +3 Per New Poll

https://amgreatness.com/2020/10/26/trump-takes-the-lead-in-pennsylvania-3-per-new-poll/

A poll conducted by InsiderAdvantage for the Center for American Greatness of 400 likely voters in Pennsylvania shows Donald Trump now leading in the state. The poll was conducted the evening of October 25 by both IVR and live cell phone interviews. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percent and is weighted for age, race, gender, and political affiliation. The results:

Donald Trump: 48.4%

Joe Biden: 45.5 %

Jo Jorgensen: 3 %

Undecided: 3 %

The same poll had Biden in the lead less than two weeks ago. Why? InsiderAdvantage’s Matt Towery explained why things have moved in Trump’s favor:

“These results indicate a stark shift in the contest. Our last survey of Pennsylvania showed Joe Biden leading Trump by three points. But that survey was before the last debate. Since the debate Trump has picked up support from younger voters, who based on our prior survey strongly oppose future lockdowns over Covid-19 spikes. Trump has also bolstered his lead among male voters by some twelve points. Biden continues to hold a seven point advantage over Trump among female voters. It would be nothing more than mere conjecture to attempt to correlate Biden’s statements on energy and fracking in the last debate contest with the shift towards Trump in this survey. However, Trump saw gains even among senior voters which have not been his strong suit this election cycle. That suggest that some issue or set of events has caused a late shift in the contest.”

Towery adds “Trump also continues to hold about 14% of the African American vote in this survey. In twenty years of polling, and as one who has polled Pennsylvania many times, I have never seen a Republican candidate consistently hold these type of numbers among black voters this close to an election. And this appears to be a developing trend in numerous states.”

Matt Towery accurately predicted a national victory for Donald Trump for major owned and operated Fox affiliates on air the evening before the 2016 presidential election. He has polled presidential races across the nation for twenty years. Specifically he has polled Pennsylvania for numerous news organizations, including the 2008 contest between Barack Obama and John McCain for Politico where his surveys showed an Obama victory. He retired from his nationally syndicated column (Creators) in 2016 and as CEO of InsiderAdvantage but returned to provide polling of the Trump-Biden contest this year.

Who’s Really To Blame For the Riots In American Cities? Pt. 2 With Michael Yon By Jeff Reynolds

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/jeff-reynolds/2020/10/26/whos-really-to-blame-for-the-riots-in-american-cities-pt-2-with-michael-yon-n1084277

Leaders in American cities have spent most of 2020 deflecting blame for the violent riots that have dominated them. Much of the finger-pointing has focused on Proud Boys, Patriot Prayer, and other right wing groups. These groups have formed over the past half decade as a response to the chaos caused in Portland, along with many other large American cities, by radical leftist groups like Black Lives Matter protests, riots led by antifa and By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), and other militant marxist groups utilizing black bloc tactics to disrupt American free society.

But what are these right wing groups? Are they fascists, white supremacists, and defenders of the systems of racism endemic to America’s core, as alleged by the Left? Are they the dreaded militias hell bent on domestic terrorism? How do they compare to antifa, BLM, or BAMN?

Michael Yon, a war correspondent who has covered insurrections all over the globe, came to Portland in September to gather intelligence on the civil unrest in the streets. This is part two of his conversation with PJ Media, in which he describes his investigation into the right wing groups that have sprung up to oppose antifa and BLM and their black bloc tactics to create chaos and destruction across the Pacific Northwest.

Part One: How Close Is the U.S. to Civil War? A War Correspondent Is in Portland to Find Out

“Groups like Proud Boys,” Yon said, “form in these vacuums when you feel like the government is not doing their job, and you fear for the lives of your family, yourself, you fear for your community being burned down. That’s when militias form everywhere. That’s what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it’s happened in America. Our whole country was formed on militias.”

If We’re Doing a Mask Mandate, Do It Right! Because “science.” By Julie Kelly

https://amgreatness.com/2020/10/26/if-were-doing-a-mask-mandate-do-it-right/

As predicted, this week is filled with fear and recriminations about COVID-19 as Election Day nears. The Biden campaign—cognizant of the fact that the Left has turned the president’s handling of coronavirus into his biggest political weakness—along with the unhinged news media, is exploiting every case and death in a ghoulish attempt to defeat Donald Trump on November 3.

The alleged “party of science” is condemning the president for failing to “control” the novel coronavirus, which is the most unsciency thing ever because it’s impossible to control a virus without the widespread use of immunizations over a long period of time and even that isn’t a guarantee. Only a few deadly viruses in history, perhaps unbeknownst to the Democratic Party’s credentialed class, have been completely eradicated.

The annual flu vaccine can combat just a handful of influenza strains. The Centers for Disease Control admits that “Flu viruses are constantly changing so it’s not unusual for new flu viruses to appear each year.” Despite Herculean efforts to “control” influenza, a vaccine is only about 40 to 60 percent effective. Millions of Americans still contract the illness and tens of thousands, including children, die each year. This year’s vaccine targets a form of the Hong Kong flu first identified in 1968, the year I was born.

But somehow, Donald Trump was supposed to contain, control, or completely stop a novel (that means new) coronavirus within a matter of months. Joe Biden warns that if he’s elected, he will initiate all sorts of virus-killing measures, most of which already have been implemented by the Trump Administration. “I’m going to shut down the virus not the country,” Biden, who it must be noted is not an epidemiologist, promised at last week’s debate.

English Departments in the Ideological Thrall of Identity Politics When the curricula become all about “social justice.”Richard L. Cravatts

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/english-departments-ideological-thrall-identity-richard-l-cravatts/

In July, the English Department of the University of Chicago posted an odd statement on its website. In response to the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and the supposed “thousands of others named and unnamed who have been subject to police violence,” the department announced that, “For the 2020-2021 graduate admissions cycle, the University of Chicago English Department is accepting only applicants interested in working in and with Black Studies.” What is the motivation for the targeting of that particular area of study now? The statement, in the tortured language academia is so adept at generating, explains that English as a discipline “has a long history of providing aesthetic rationalizations for colonization, exploitation, extraction and anti-Blackness,” and is “responsible for developing hierarchies of cultural production that have contributed directly to social and systemic determinations of whose lives matter and why.”

Apparently, the Chicago faculty believe that it is part of the mission of the English Department to mobilize its intellectual resources to address social problems and that the work of “undoing persistent, recalcitrant anti-Blackness in our discipline and in our institutions must be the collective responsibility of all faculty, here and elsewhere,” as the statement pretentiously proclaims.

While some observers lauded the department’s decision to focus graduate study on Black Studies, critics, including University of Chicago’s own president, Robert Zimmer, were quick to question a department committing itself to a political movement and activism supporting it. “[S]ome members of the University community have expressed concern that the exclusive disciplinary commitment effectively represents a political test for admission,” Zimmer wrote, in responding to the controversy, and “[t]he idea or even implication that there would be a political criterion applied to admission to our doctoral program would be incompatible with the fundamental principles of our University.”

Rep. Omar: Biden Will Turn Left After Election Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2020/10/rep-omar-biden-will-turn-left-after-election-daniel-greenfield/

Nice of her to point this out to anyone deluded enough to think otherwise.

Rep. Ilhan Omar told “Axios on HBO” that given the way progressives have shaped Joe Biden’s policy platform, she and other members of “The Squad” expect a liberal turn from him if he’s elected.

Illiberal is the correct term.

“I know that when the policy platform was being put into place, a lot of our feedback was incorporated throughout his platform,” Omar said.

“We will have a cohort of progressives that are very clear about their objectives for wanting the implementation of Medicare for All and a Green New Deal and raising the minimum wage and not allowing for fracking,” Omar said.

“There has been a level of responsiveness … to the policies that we are advocating for that we know will have not just a future in his administration, but a future in the upcoming administrations after his,” she added.

So expect that ban on private health insurance and on any energy that doesn’t come from expensive Chinese solar panels. Along with millions of lost jobs.

And if Biden succeeds, then the socialist caucus will be influencing future Democrat administrations too.