Displaying the most recent of 90433 posts written by

Ruth King

Right from Wrong: Iran’s panicky push for Palestinian jihad Iran “considers it its duty to support Palestinian groups and will help them in any way it can.” By RUTHIE BLUM

https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Right-from-Wrong-Irans-panicky-push-for-Palestinian-jihad-616765

Whenever Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei launches into a rant against the United States and Israel you know his regime is in a panic. His angry oration on Wednesday was no exception.

Nor was the timing of his diatribe coincidental. Not only did it take place as the mullahs and their puppets marked the 41st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution that ousted the Shah of Iran and ushered in the reign of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, but it came a day after US President Donald Trump delivered his third State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress.The contrast between the two speeches could not have been greater. While Trump’s was uplifting and cheerful – conveying an optimistic message to the American people about successfully striving for and achieving success – Khamenei’s was vitriolic and aimed at encouraging Palestinians to escalate their efforts to eradicate Israel.

“You saw that the US bullies and hooligans unveiled the so-called ‘Deal of the Century,’” he bellowed, referring to Trump’s announcement the previous week of his much-touted, long-awaited “Peace to Prosperity” plan. “They have wishfully chosen a big name for it so that it may be realized, but [it] is stupid, a sign of viciousness and has been detrimental to them since day one.”

Khamenei went on: “The American plot of the ‘Deal of the Century’ will die before Trump dies… [It] is foolish, because it will definitely not have any result. It is foolish to come and sit, spend money, invite, create uproar and unveil a plan that is doomed to failure.

Uproar Over Essays Turns MLK’s Dream Inside Out By  Heather Mac Donald 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/uproar-over-essays-turns-mlks-dream-inside-out-11581033256?mod=opinion_lead_pos5
The University of Montana judged contest submissions on content instead of the writers’ race. Big mistake.

The University of Montana asked students, staff and community members to participate in an essay contest on the legacy of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. When the school released the results last month, Montana students and race activists across the country accused university officials of racism and disrespect. That’s because all four winners were white. Turns out some would rather the school had honored King by judging entrants on the color of their skin rather than the content of their submissions.

The four contest winners started receiving threats, and the African-American studies program, which had sponsored the contest, removed their photos and essays from its website. A central fact—no black students had even submitted an essay—failed to defuse the racism charge.

Critics blasted “shameful” university officials for holding a contest at all. A lecturer on the college race circuit admonished the university for thinking that “there is a universality around writing an essay,” when in reality blacks express themselves “completely different.” One black student sniffed that participating would have been a “sellout/compromise.” “Having grown up in all white spaces,” he posted on Facebook, “I often avoided events such as this because I knew the purpose was a performative gesture from the administration.” How the student determines when events are not “performative gestures” was left unspecified.

The African-American studies program was denounced for not canceling the competition when the organizers realized the skin color of the six entrants. “I cannot understand how anyone would think remembering the legacy of MLK Jr. is achieved by giving four white girls a shout out,” wrote a critic. “Do not center Whiteness on the day we are supposed to remember MLK Jr.’s legacy.”

Schiff: Bolton Refused to Submit Affidavit Amid Trump Impeachment Trial By Jack Phillips

https://www.theepochtimes.com/schiff-bolton-refused-to-submit-affidavit-amid-trump-impeachment-trial_3229640.html

House impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on Wednesday said former national security adviser John Bolton wouldn’t submit a sworn affidavit amid the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump after the Senate voted to reject witnesses.

Schiff, speaking to MSNBC, said Democrats approached Bolton’s lawyers to see whether he’d be willing to provide a written statement in the trial that would describe “what he observed in terms of the president’s Ukraine misconduct, but he refused.”

During the trial last month, The New York Times published a report that contained allegations from a manuscript of Bolton’s upcoming book. In it, the former ambassador reportedly claims that Trump told him he was linking military aid to Ukraine and politically advantageous investigations, which Trump and other senior White House officials have repeatedly denied. The alleged conduct was at the center of the first article of impeachment against Trump, abuse of power.

As a result, House impeachment managers made references to the NY Times report and attempted to pressure the Senate into calling witnesses, but last Friday, that push ultimately failed when the Senate voted down a resolution—setting up the president’s acquittal on Wednesday. House managers complained the trial was unfair and rigged in favor of Trump after their witness push was rejected.

In early January, Bolton said in a statement on his website he would be willing to testify during the Senate’s impeachment trial if he was handed a subpoena. It came after House Democrats attempted to call him to testify in the impeachment inquiry before withdrawing their subpoena, saying that it would lead to a lengthy court battle that would slow down their impeachment process.

Marx Didn’t Distinguish Between Communism and Socialism; Why Should We? Diana West

https://www.theepochtimes.com/marx-didnt-distinguish-between-communism-and-socialism-why-should-we_3225448.html

When President Donald Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity that he believes the Democrats’ frontrunner, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), is a communist, the president clarified, “You could say socialist,” but then again, “I think of Bernie sort of as a socialist but far beyond a socialist.”

As the pundits trip over poli-sci-class definitions, my question is, what’s the difference?

As far as freedom-lovers go, safeguarding our liberties guaranteed by the Constitution, there is none. To be sure, communists and socialists argue and split hairs. They fight and break heads. But they also work together and destroy liberty because they all travel to the same soul-crushing destination of collectivism.

What anti-communists need to know is that communists and socialists—and “democratic socialists,” Fabians, progressives, Alinskyites (not to mention most Democrats and an awful lot of Republicans)—believe in the same centrally planned, varyingly totalitarian vision for America that our Founding Fathers would have had to declare independence from all over again.

To that point of ideological convergence, here are a couple of clarifying quotations from recognized experts—one, from the anti-communist camp; the other, from the communist camp.

‘Sesame Street’ To Feature Cross-Dressing Gay Entertainer For Impressionable Preschoolers

https://thefederalist.com/2020/02/06/sesame-street-to-feature-cross-dressing-gay-entertainer-for-impressionable-preschoolers/

Watching a cross-dressing gay man interact with their favorite TV characters is sure to affect impressionable young minds.

The popular TV program “Sesame Street” will soon feature Billy Porter, a cross-dressing homosexual entertainer. According to the Huffington Post. “Billy Porter dusted off his now-iconic velvet tuxedo dress for a forthcoming appearance on ‘Sesame Street.’”

Yes, that fun and often educational children’s TV series that taught you the letters of the alphabet decades ago is now preparing to teach your kids or grandkids that men dressing like women and having intimate relationships with other men is as normal as learning the alphabet —and how to form those alphabet letters into real words, like gay and transgender.

“Children are sponges. They soak up everything they are exposed to. For instance, if a child is exposed from birth to three different languages, he will become fluent in all three in what appears to be an effortless fashion,” says the American College of Pediatricians.

Young children learn through imitation. According to Parents magazine, “By 15 months, most toddlers have developed the motor and cognitive skills necessary to carry out the action to be imitated. Children this age are usually mobile and have some hand-eye coordination. What drives toddler imitation? In part, it’s the instant connection that mimicry creates between parent and child.”

Impeachment is over — or is it? Andrew McCarthy

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/481787-impeachment-is-over-or-is-it

If you think the Senate’s vote on Wednesday to acquit President Trump ends the impeachment saga, you haven’t been paying attention.

Congressional Democrats never believed they could actually remove Trump from power over anything as specious as the Ukraine kerfuffle. No more than they expected that the collusion caper — which was already known to be an investigative dry hole by the time of Bob Mueller’s May 2017 special counsel appointment — was a viable vehicle for ousting the president.

Impeachment has always been a partisan pretext. A third-order pretext, as I explained in “Ball of Collusion”: (1) The counterintelligence investigation launched by the Obama administration was a pretext to monitor Trump’s campaign while conducting a criminal investigation without the necessary criminal predicate; (2) the criminal investigation, formally launched on the ludicrous fiction that Trump’s constitutionally appropriate firing of FBI director James Comey could be an obstruction crime, was a pretext for packaging an impeachment inquiry for House Democrats (since the bureau didn’t have a crime but knew that impeachment does not require a crime); and (3) the impeachment drama has been a pretext for what all along has been the goal — to tumble out enough unsavory information over a long enough time that Trump is rendered unelectable by the time we get to the stretch-run of the 2020 campaign.

This is not to say, of course, that congressional Democrats would not remove the president if they could. The fact that House Democrats hauled out and formally voted two articles of impeachment, rather than contenting themselves with a long-running impeachment inquiry spiced up by the occasional, damning public hearing, shows that if they thought there was any shot at defenestrating Trump, even a remote one, they would take it.

Democrats Feel the Bern. For Insiders, It’s Heartburn Charles Lipson

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020//06/democrats_feel_the_bern_for_insiders_its_heartburn.html

A specter is haunting the Democratic Party—the specter of socialism.

For several years, this hard-left movement has been gaining support within the party, especially among younger voters. In a few deep blue districts, socialist/populist candidates like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the Squad have managed to defeat entrenched center-left incumbents. The movement is now powerful enough that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi chose to press forward with impeachment, which she never favored, to retain her leadership position. Bernie is pressing an equally radical agenda in the primaries. He finished in the top two in Iowa and is currently leading a weak field in next week’s New Hampshire primary.

Party leaders are appalled—and alarmed—by Sanders’ strength. They uniformly opposed him in 2016, and they are doing exactly the same this year. They favor Biden, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Bloomberg, or even Warren—anybody but Bernie.

When party insiders “feel the Bern,” it’s acid reflux. Democratic donors, lobbyists, think tanks, and elected officials are convinced their party is doomed this November if an avowed socialist heads the ticket. They’re right, but they don’t have an easy answer.

The insiders’ dilemma is simple to state but tricky to solve. They think Bernie’s nomination would be an electoral disaster, but they must prevent it without alienating his supporters. They need them to win in November.

Three Glorious Days of Democrat Agony Kurt Schlichter *****

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2020/02/06/three-glorious-days-of-democrat-agony-n2560771?

So, February 3, 4, and 5, 2020 were pretty much the most miserable three days in the history of the Democratic Party. I’m not laughing, really I’m not! You know how sometimes you have a bad day when nothing goes right? Well, these super-achievers managed to triple that streak. They are achievers in the same sense Hoover Snort Biden is an achiever.

Let’s start with Monday, February 3rd and the Iowa Caucuses. In their defense, it wasn’t like they had four years to get prepared to handle…counting. Oh wait, they did have four years to handle…counting. Okay, well, then in their defense they went to unionized failing government schools, so counting is hard. But not for the Republicans, who managed to count their votes just fine.

As of when you read this, they might still not have actual numbers. Audie Murphy Buttigieg, Crusty Commie Curmudgeon and Chief Sitting Bolshevik may well all still be claiming victory, while Gropey J’s handlers are likely still complaining about the process and Not Senile Joe himself is chasing an uppity squirrel around a Nashua park.

One thing for sure – Mr. Electible is done for. He started off Monday arguing with liberal Savannah Guthrie on NBC about how his stripperphilic brat got his Ukrainian gig by being really “bright.” He ended up serenaded by sad trombones as he was hustled out of Des Moines to head east to try and salvage the S.S. Lusitania that is his latest presidential campaign. 

The Dems are not only dealing with this massive show of incompetence – “Okay, counting a few thousand ballots is beyond our abilities, but taking over the entire health care system will totally go smoothly” – but also coming to the realization that none of their three remaining candidates has any appeal outside a faculty lounge, gulag, or in the case of Warren, a second-tier casino. 

In the wings, perched on a couple telephone books, is Mike Bloomberg, waiting to try to buy his way in as the sensible sorta-center candidate. Seems like a good plan. When the Bernie bros are once again denied their victory by the blatant cheating of the Democrat establishment, they’ll flock to the bite-sized billionaire. He’ll totally get the nomination, or in his case, the gnome-ination.

Quick, what is the name of a person in your life who would vote for the Verne Troyer of American politics? And that shrug you just gave demonstrates that you should go short on President Bloomberg.

Democrats Have a ‘Go Big or Go Home’ Problem by David Davenport

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/democrats-have-a-go-big-or-go-home-problem

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/democrats-have-a-go-big-or-go-home-problem

The fact that Democrats could not even deliver timely results of their own Iowa caucuses underscores their larger problem. They have become the party of big, structural changes led by government in a time when people lack confidence and trust in big government.

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren likes to talk about the need for “big, structural change” to our domestic policies. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is right with her, denouncing “half measures” and arguing, as he did in a recent commercial, “America is best when we strive to do big things.” 

Nearly all of the Democratic candidates have jumped on the “go big or go home” bandwagon, with calls for “Medicare for all,” free college, a revolutionary and expensive Green New Deal, and huge tax increases on the wealthy. Apparently, Democrats have concluded that if policy proposals are not blockbuster, then they are merely lackluster. Their pitch is not President John F. Kennedy’s “we can do better” call for improvement, but rather President Franklin Roosevelt’s plea for a revolutionary New Deal.

The problem is that the public increasingly distrusts big government. A Pew Research Center study published last year showed that only 17% of people trust the government to do what is right, while 75% believe that trust in the federal government is shrinking. Examining trust in various leadership groups, government officials came in dead last, behind scientists and educators, but even trailing journalists and business leaders.

Meanwhile: Americans’ optimism about personal finances surges to all-time high in new Gallup poll

https://hotair.com/archives/allahpundit/2020/02/05/meanwhile-americans-optimism-personal-finances-surges-time-high-new-gallup-poll/

A friendly reminder amid all the impeachment hubbub today that Trump’s probably getting reelected and the political shiny object du jour will have little or nothing to do with his odds.

Neither the Reagan era nor the Clinton era, both famous boom times for America, produced quite as much financial optimism as the Trump era has. Remember that other poll that Gallup released yesterday showing Trump’s job approval at a personal best 49 percent? Now we know what’s driving that number. With economic enthusiasm like this, if Trump were a little less … Trump-y his job approval might be north of 55 percent. He’d be a near-lock for a second term.

But there’s more. Gallup also asked a question with lots of resonance for the 2020 election: Are you better off financially then you were a year ago?

Nearly six in 10 Americans (59%) now say they are better off financially than they were a year ago, up from 50% last year…

The current 59% of Americans who say they are better off financially than they were a year ago is essentially tied for the all-time high of 58% in January 1999. That was recorded during the dot-com boom, with conditions similar to the current state of the economy — a stock market rocketing to then-record highs and unemployment at multidecade lows — though GDP growth was higher at that time.