Displaying the most recent of 91325 posts written by

Ruth King

SHOOTING IN OFRA, SAMARIA

https://worldisraelnews.com/watch-pregnant-woman-critically-injured-in-shooting-attack-in-samaria

A pregnant woman was among six people injured after 9 p.m. in a shooting attack outside the commmunity of Ofra, north of Jerusalem. Her condition is critical. The others are in light to moderate condition.

“Shots were fired at Israeli civilians standing at a bus station from a passing Palestinian vehicle. IDF troops nearby responded by firing towards the vehicle, which fled. IDF troops are currently searching the area,” the IDF tweeted.

MARK STEYN ON MOVIES AND HANNUKAH

https://www.steynonline.com/9075/eight-crazy-nights

Happy Hanukkah to all our Jewish readers around the world. I thought it appropriate to look out a slab of Hanukkah Hollywood, but the pickings are thin, save for this 2002 offering from my sometime fellow Granite Stater Adam Sandler. Born in Brooklyn, Sandler grew up in New Hampshire and was discovered in an LA comedy club by Dennis Miller, who recommended him to “Saturday Night Live”. Eight Crazy Nights was a flop on its first release but has become something of a cult film, and is in its way a significant cultural artifact: a big-budget multiplex animated gross-out comedy about a Jewish holiday. Only in America!

It takes its title from a lyric in a comedy sketch Adam Sandler first did on American TV three decades ago. Surrounded by Christmas standards, he decided to create the first Hanukah song – or, if you prefer, Channukah, it being the first major American holiday without an agreed spelling (the Presidents Day/Presidents’ Day/President’s Day variables are a punctuation dispute). Anyway, Sandler’s song includes the attitudinal line that “instead of one day of presents we get eight crazy nights”. Other than that, all I recall from it is basically a laundry list of famous Jews not generally known as such:

David Lee Roth lights the menorah
So do James Caan, Kirk Douglas and the late Dinah Shore-ah…

There was nothing much else in the way of Hanukkah pop, although a couple of decades back, just before he bombed out in the Iowa caucuses, the Utah Senator and songwriting Mormon Orrin Hatch disclosed to me that he was writing a Chanukah number. I don’t know what became of that, but, in the absence of Orrin, Sandler’s song, by default, got an enormous amount of airtime from culturally sensitive radio stations, grateful for a Hannukah anthem the goyim could get a handle on. I think I first heard it on WQEW New York, in between Perry Como’s “Santa Claus Is Coming To Town” and Peggy Lee’s “Winter Wonderland”. Having become Mister Hanukah, Sandler then parlayed his hit into Hollywood’s first mainstream animated musical Chanukkah movie. I’ve no idea why they even bothered to release this picture in Belgium or Germany. No other culture but America could have produced this film: not because it’s a mainstream movie about a Jewish religious festival, but because its view of that festival, as just another pretext for an all-purpose secular holiday celebration anybody can be a part of, is so American. Indeed, Seth Kearsley directs, Rob Schneider narrates and A. Film and Yowza! Animation animate the picture consciously in the style of those perennial Rankin-Bass Christmas specials also built around songs: Santa Claus is Coming to Town, Frosty the Snowman and, of course, the now reviled Rudolph. The animation is affectionate and reassuringly familiar. Coming soon: ‘Twas The Night Before Ramadan.

The story opens in Dukesberry, New Hampshire, where a thirtysomething criminal alcoholic (which struck me as a comparative rarity back in 2002, but is now near universal in the state) steals a snowmobile, attempts to total the town ice sculptures, and is delivered by the district court into the care of a septuagenarian basketball coach. Aside from the fact that “Dukesberry” seems to be the most Jewish town in New Hampshire other than the once popular Jewish summer resort of Bethlehem (seriously), Mr Sandler’s first animated feature is, at least initially, in conventional heartwarming holiday mode.

The New Confessionalism: Anthony Daniels

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2018/11/new-confessionalism/

Hardly a week goes by without some famous person or other revealing one detail or other of his disreputable personal life, whereupon there is an outpouring of praise for his candour and an avalanche of similar confessions. We have given up fortitude and replaced it with psychobabble.

Dr Christina Blasey Ford, the woman who accused Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault when he was seventeen and she was fifteen years old, initially claimed that a fear of flying made it difficult for her to come to Washington to testify. It emerged, however, that she flew regularly to places as far apart as Tahiti and Delaware.

President Trump mocked her claim to suffer from fear of flying. I am not sure that it is the place of a president to mock a citizen of his country in this fashion, but I couldn’t help smiling nonetheless. “I’m no psychology professor,” he wrote, “but it does seem weird to me that someone could have a selective fear of flying. Can’t do it to testify but for vacation, well it’s not a problem at all.”

I was familiar with this selective type of fear from my medico-legal practice. People would claim to have been rendered agoraphobic by some negligent act or omission such that they could no longer leave the house and go to work, and therefore were entitled to large sums in compensation, but when I examined their medical records I would discover that they had been immunised against yellow fever for a holiday in Brazil. The man in the street might think that this discovery would have put paid to the claim. If you can leave your home to go to Brazil (64,000 murders last year), surely you can catch the Number 17 bus to go to the office twenty-five minutes away?

But the man in the street would be wrong. The apparent discrepancy would be explained away by a psychologist, and this is precisely what a psychologist did in the case of Dr Blasey Ford. He said that it was not uncommon for a fear of flying to wax and wane according to destination. In other words (though he did not pronounce them), it was the destination, not the flying, that created the anxiety. But oddly enough courts never seemed to draw this conclusion, perhaps because it would have threatened the lucrative livings provided by the tort system. That is why practically no claim was too outrageous to be entertained.

Rep. Jim Jordan: Comey Said 245 Times “Don’t Remember, Don’t Recall, Don’t Know”

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/12/09/rep_jim_jordan_comey_said_245_times_dont_remember_dont_recall_dont_know.html

Rep. Jim Jordan, Republican member of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees, blasts former FBI director James Comey for answering more than 200 questions at Friday’s closed-door hearing with, “I can’t recall.”

“245 times he said ‘don’t remember, don’t recall, don’t know.’ The biggest takeaway for me was the ‘don’t know’ part. Specifically, he didn’t know much about Christopher Steele, the guy who used his work product, the dossier, to get the warrant to spy on the Trump campaign,” Jordan explained. “Here’s the key player, the guy who wrote the document that was the basis for getting the warrant, and he didn’t know anything about it.”

There is No Such Thing as Free Lunch (Nor Free Healthcare) By Christopher Roach

https://amgreatness.com/2018/12/08/there-is-no-such

Americans are really beginning to sour on Obamacare, misleadingly titled the Affordable Care Act. Every year premiums go up, out of pocket costs go up, and care is only marginally better and in some cases worse, due to the influx of the sickest people into the healthcare system seeking generous, subsidized insurance.

Obamacare hasn’t delivered, even on its own terms. The most productive and enterprising Americans—small business owners and independent contractors—must foot monthly premiums of $1,000 or more in order to have the privilege of shelling out even more thousands in the event they get seriously ill.

In light of this debacle, some have resorted to magical thinking. Our favorite magician, young congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), tweeted the following in favor of “Medicare for All”:

While conservatives have generally rejected solutions like this, the impulse that drives the desire is understandable. Medical inflation is enormous and grossly disproportionate to improved outcomes. Medicare is a generous and expensive program, but one that mostly serves its clients well. The elderly, who often need substantial medical care, are generally able to partake with minimal personal expense.

Medicare costs incurred by patients are certainly a fraction of what self-employed, the young, and others pay for healthcare. And medicare remains more or less solvent because lots of healthy and younger people are paying into the pool. In other words, there are multiple payers for each recipient. The same is true of Tricare, the medical insurance plan for military service members and their dependents.

DAVID WEINBERGER REVIEWS THOMAS SOWELL’S “DISCRIMINATION AND DISPARITIES”

http://thefederalist.com/2018/12/07/thomas-sowell-explains-the-economics-of-discrimination/
Thomas Sowell Explains The Economics Of Discrimination
The revered economist’s latest book, ‘Discrimination and Disparities,’ takes a look at the high cost of misguided policies aimed at achieving social justice.

At 88 years old, Thomas Sowell continues to demonstrate why he’s one of the most formidable intellects of the age. In Discrimination and Disparities, released earlier this year, Sowell rebuts common misconceptions regarding socioeconomic differences among individuals, groups, and nations, and demonstrates that disparities are often explained by economics.

For instance, emotionally loaded phrases like “systemic racism” and “exploitation” are frequently used to explain differences between blacks and whites, rich and poor, and even individual nations. But a better understanding of economics refutes these notions.

Sowell begins by noting there are different types of discrimination. Discrimination I he defines as “an ability to discern differences in the qualities of people and things, and choosing accordingly”—in other words, “making fact-based distinctions.” Discrimination II he defines as “treating people negatively, based on arbitrary assumptions or aversions concerning individuals of a particular race or sex, for example”—in other words, what most people mean today when they talk of “discrimination.”

Ideally, Discrimination I—judging each person individually—would be universally practiced. Rarely, however, is the ideal “found among human beings in the real world, even among people who espouse that ideal.” He gives an example:

If you are walking at night down a lonely street, and see up ahead a shadowy figure in an alley, do you judge that person as an individual or do you cross the street and pass on the other side? The shadowy figure in the alley could turn out to be a kindly neighbor, out walking his dog. But, when making such decisions, a mistake on your part could be costly, up to and including costing you your life.

In short, cost is the relevant factor when determining a course of action. The cost of Discrimination I—judging the person as an individual—may be prohibitively high in some cases, as when you approach a shadowy figure in a dark alley. But that does not mean that choosing to cross the street to avoid that shadowy figure is automatically Discrimination II—arbitrarily expressing antipathy toward a group.

‘Your time is up, white people’: South African parliament targets next March for land expropriation By Rick Moran

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/12/your_time_is_up_white_people_south_african_parliament_targets_next_march_for_land_expropriation.html

The South African parliament approved a motion that would set up an ad-hoc committee to recommend procedures on how land expropriation without compensation would work. Earlier, the parliament had approved the constitutional changes that would give the government power to take land from white farmers without paying for it.

IOL:

The motion was adopted with 183 votes in favour and 77 against. There were no abstentions.

Opposition parties had objected vehemently, with the Freedom Front Plus’s Anton Alberts reiterating the party’s threat that land expropriation would lead to instability.

“When the blood flows it will be on your hands,” Alberts said in the direction of the ANC benches.

The Congress of the People’s Deirdre Carter urged voters to go to the polls to “stop the ANC, stop the EFF, the only way you can do it”.

Themba Godi, from the African People’s Convention, backed the ANC and Economic Freedom Fighters’ support for the motion and an amendment, saying those who opposed land reform were, in fact, supporting the oppression of African people.

“Land must be nationalised and socialised for the benefit of the people, especially the working class and women …. those who oppose want the perpetuation of wrongs of past.”

Tell me if you think this expropriation scheme is going to go peacefully:

Star:

But there were heated scenes in the House when politicians clashed over the plans.

According to local reports, Economic Freedom Fighters MP Hlengiwe Mkhaliphi argued land grabs must go ahead as she declared: “Your time is up, white people”.

This came as the IFP MP Mkhuleko Hlengwa said the plans undermine South Africa’s position as a democratic state.

According to the Daily Maverick, he said: “To achieve real and effective land reform is (possible) under the existing Constitution, not your (ANC) populist agenda.

“You should be ashamed of yourself.”

Greenies take a beating on fossil fuel divestment at Harvard By Monica Showalter

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/12/greenies_take_a_beating_on_fossil_fuel_divestment_at_harvard.html

Is the green fraud finally dead? Probably not, but when you’ve got Harvard students rejecting a free-and-easy-to-sign petition for university divestment from fossil fuels – in droves – you know someone’s wising up. Maybe this is the start of something.

Here’s what the Washington Examiner reported:

In response to recent doomsday predictions by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a number of Harvard students decided to take matters into their own hands by calling on the administration to completely divest all financial holdings in industries associated with fossil fuels. According to the petition, Harvard has an obligation to divest its funds due to its significant role in the “global economy.”

…and…

Despite their efforts, a measly 166 individuals have signed on to their Change.org petition, which accounts for roughly 0.36 percent of the school’s 40,818 students and faculty. According to journalists for Harvard’s student newspaper, the Crimson, administrators have “flatly rejected” the idea of immediate divestment.

Based on what’s seen at the petition itself, it’s been up at least seven days, and only managed to get 100 signatures in the first seven, and 91 now. Can you say ‘pathetic’?

Maybe that’s because Harvard students read the news as kids and learned all about how fraudy and corruption-prone ‘green’ energy is, as evidenced by Solyndra. Green energy is fraud energy, simple enough to understand. Or maybe the brighter ones know for a fact that ‘green’ energy relies on coal-fired plants to create all those electrical power-charging stations, could it be that? Maybe the kids are just sick of this divest-everything blather, which has been going on since the 1980s. Or maybe the kids are noticing what happens when greens rule the roost in cities like Paris.

Israel’s “gatekeepers” vs. democracy Caroline Glick

https://carolineglick.com/israels-gatekeepers-vs-democracy/

Israel has no written constitution – but all the same, it is steeped in a deep and dangerous constitutional crisis. In the balance hangs nothing less than the country’s ability to remain a democracy, where the people elect their leaders and the elected leaders govern the country.

Presently, a powerful group of unelected, self-appointed “gatekeepers” is challenging the foundations of Israel’s democratic order. These self-empowered “gatekeepers” seek to end Israeli democracy by acting as a wedge between the people and their elected leaders and preventing those leaders from using the power vested in them by voters.

The present crisis was revealed starkly on Tuesday in an otherwise unimportant and deeply boring hearing on Israel’s dairy industry at the Knesset’s Economic Affairs Committee.

But to understand what happened, it is important to go back to November 5. That day, Deputy attorney-general Dina Zilber was asked to represent the position of the government regarding a controversial bill that would block state funding to artists and productions that campaign against Israel. Rather than present the government’s position, Zilber brutally attacked the bill. In an outburst entirely bereft of legal argumentation, Zilber effectively said that Israel was losing its soul.

This statement was in keeping with Zilber’s long record of abusing her power as the deputy attorney-general to advance her far-Left political agenda on everything from undermining the development of Israeli communities beyond the armistice lines to requiring religious groups to either permit men and women to participate in their events or be denied access to public facilities.

Belgium’s Government in Crisis Over UN Migration Pact By Rick Moran

https://pjmedia.com/trending/belgiums-government-in-crisis-over-un-migration-pact/

The government of Belgium Prime Minister Charles Michel was rocked by the withdrawal of a major coalition partner over Michel’s intent to sign the UN migration pact.

The pact was negotiated by 180 countries and is due to be signed on Monday. But at least six EU countries will refuse to sign the accord, which was given the green light last summer.

What happened in the interim is a classic case of political leaders getting out too far in front of the people. While the nations signed off on the pact, many have been having second thoughts as the rise of nationalist parties has put a damper on the signing ceremony.

In Belgium, Michel faced a revolt by the nationalist N-VA, the largest party in parliament. When Michel refused to accede to their demand he not sign the treaty, N-VA cabinet ministers quit. Michel says he will continue governing with a minority, but his power will be severely curtailed.

Reuters:

Michel had secured a large parliamentary majority last week in favour of maintaining Belgium’s support of the United Nations text, which since it was agreed by all U.N. states bar the United States in July has run into criticism from European politicians who say it could increase immigration to Europe.

The N-VA faces electoral losses in its Dutch-speaking region to the harder-right, anti-immigration Vlaams Belang. Its leader Bart De Wever, the mayor of Belgium’s second city Antwerp, had issued Michel an ultimatum that it would quit the government if he signed the non-binding U.N. declaration.

A crisis cabinet meeting on Saturday night was cut short when two N-VA ministers, Interior Minister Jan Jambon and Migration Minister Theo Francken, walked out.

Michel said he would replace N-VA ministers with lower-ranked state secretaries and maintain a minority coalition involving his French-speaking liberal MR and two Flemish parties, the centre-right CD&V and Open VLD.

At least six EU states — mostly in formerly Communist eastern Europe — have already shunned the accord to regulate the treatment of migrants worldwide, a sign of how the bloc has turned increasingly restrictive on accepting refugees and migrants alike since a 2015 spike in arrivals.

Why all this trouble over a non-binding, toothless pact?