Displaying the most recent of 90914 posts written by

Ruth King

Ruthie Blum‘Real Time’ Jewish America and Trump Washington is not Tehran, Cairo, Ankara or Moscow. America’s political system and society do not undergo chaotic upheaval with every changing of the guard.

“A society cannot be judged on the basis of its criminal, psychotic or evil members, but rather, on how it responds to them. The same goes for its anti-Semites. America—yes, Trump’s America—passes this test with flying colors. ”

In an interview with HBO’s “Real Time With Bill Maher” ahead of Tuesday’s midterm congressional elections, New York Times op-ed staff editor Bari Weiss blamed U.S. President Donald Trump for the Oct. 27 massacre of Jews at the Tree of Life*Or L’Simcha Synagogue in Pittsburgh. Weiss was not singing an original aria in the anti-Trump opera.

Indeed, since his inauguration in January 2017, the president has been accused by his detractors of directly inciting racism among his supporters and of indirectly creating a xenophobic atmosphere conducive to violence. The mass shooting at the synagogue provided these detractors with the perfect opportunity to reiterate what they had been saying for a few days when makeshift mail bombs were sent to various well-known Democratic figures: that although Trump himself did not plant the bombs or shoot the Jews in shul, he was actually the culprit.

Weiss, then, was in good company among liberals, which is why her statements to Maher were received with wild applause from the studio audience and from anti-Trump columnists everywhere. But what gave her interview particular weight was the fact that the 11 Jews murdered while praying on Shabbat belonged to the synagogue where she had become a bat mitzvah. Two heartfelt columns she wrote about the tragedy and her personal connection to it served as the impetus for the interview in the first place.

Yet she did not squander her stage time merely on mourning the dead and bemoaning anti-Semitism. On the contrary, she used the platform to make a political plea to Jewish voters “to elect people to Congress and everywhere else that are going to protect” the “way we live in this country,” which is “an aberration in history … a miracle.” In other words, elect Democrats.

Europeans React to US Elections by Soeren Kern

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13271/europeans-us-midterm-elections

“Many commentators around the world have looked at the US election results as a chicken looks at a knife: not knowing exactly what to do with it…. It is now proven that Donald Trump’s election was not an accident. The victory in the Senate, even if anticipated, shows for the first time in a great democracy that a populist can keep power after having begun to exercise it.” — Les Échos.

“…Trump is expected significantly to increase pressure on Europeans to invest the target of two percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on defense. Above all, Berlin will face pressure to spend billions and billions of euros, because the federal government is far from achieving this goal.” — Die Welt.

“Many in the country had hoped that the first full electoral verdict on the presidency of Donald Trump would deliver a decisive repudiation of Trumpism. The results do not bear this out.” — Irish Times.

The American midterm elections attracted intense interest in Europe, where much of the political and media establishment are hostile to U.S. President Donald J. Trump, and many had openly hoped that the vote on November 6 would weaken him and his legislative agenda.

Newspapers and magazines across Europe provided saturation coverage of the elections. The overwhelming majority of commentaries and editorials, while customarily vitriolic in tone, grudgingly acknowledged that the midterm results did not amount to the total repudiation of the Trump Administration and may even help the president’s chances for reelection in November 2020.

In terms of transatlantic relations, many observers raised fears that if the Democrats, who won control of the House of Representatives, succeed in thwarting Trump’s domestic initiatives, the president may place more focus on foreign policy and increase pressure on free-riding European allies to spend more for their own defense.

European Union Moves to Suppress Phrases Like ‘Manpower’ and ‘Mankind’ By Katherine Timpf

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/european-union-to-suppress-phrases-manpower-mankind/

People who care about women should focus their energy on the more serious issues of sexism.

The European Union has moved to do away with common words such as “mankind,” “manpower,” and “chairman” and replace them with words and phrases that are more gender-inclusive.

According to an article in the Daily Mail, staff have been instructed to minimize any references to “women or men” in a new rule book titled “Gender Neutral Language in the European Parliament.”

The new rules are meant for EU translators, whose job it is to translate documents among the different languages of the 28 member states.

“Gender-neutral or gender-inclusive language is more than a matter of political correctness,” the book states. “Language powerfully reflects and influences attitudes, behaviour and perceptions.”

“In order to treat all genders equally, efforts have been employed since the 1980s to propose a gender-neutral/gender-fair/non-sexist use of language, so that no gender is privileged, and prejudices against any gender are not perpetuated,” it continues. “’The use in many languages of the word ‘man’ in a wide range of idiomatic expressions which refer to both men and women, such as manpower, layman, man-made, statesmen, committee of wise men, should be discouraged.”

Public University Could Expel Students for Causing Others ‘Emotional Distress’ By Katherine Timpf

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/public-university-could-expel-students-for-causing-others-emotional-distress/

You read that right: The code of conduct at Mississippi’s Delta State University allows administrators to punish students simply for upsetting others.

Delta State University, a public university in Mississippi, has a policy that states that students can be expelled if they “inflict mental or emotional distress on others.”

Policy 27 of the school’s “student regulations” declares that “words, behavior, and/or actions which inflict mental or emotional distress on others and/or disrupt the educational environment at Delta State University” could “subject violators to appropriate disciplinary action, including suspension and expulsion.”

“Any student charged with or convicted of a violation of . . . University regulation, injurious to the health and welfare of the University community shall be subject to immediate administrative suspension, with or without prejudice, depending upon the nature and circumstances of the case by the President of the University or his delegate,” the policy states.

Zakiya Summers, a spokeswoman for the Mississippi American Civil Liberties Union, told The College Fix that the organization has concerns the policy might not be constitutional.

“In addition to Policy 27, Policies 4, 16, and 18 raise First Amendment concerns,” Summers told the Fix. “They are over-broad and vague and could restrict protected speech.”

As the Fix notes, the additional policies that Summers named ban “disorderly, lewd, indecent, or obscene conduct or language,” “inciting others to violate written University policies and regulations,” and participation in an “unauthorized demonstration.”

Now, I’m not a lawyer. Personally, I can’t say whether or not any of these policies violate the Constitution. What I can say, however, is that policy 27 definitely raises some practical concerns.

Linda Sanchez withdraws bid to become chair of House Democratic Caucus after husband indicted on theft of public funds By Thomas Lifson

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

Scandal has struck the leadership of the House Democrats as they prepare to take over that body. Representative Linda Sanchez, just re-elected to her ninth term in Congress representing a heavily Hispanic district in Orange County, California, was hoping to become the fourth-ranking Democrat in the House. But those plans have crashed and burned as her husband has been indicted for stealing public funds. Mike Lillis of The Hill reports:

The U.S. attorney’s office in Connecticut announced that a grand jury returned two indictments against five people for misusing taxpayer funds in connection with the Connecticut Municipal Electric Energy Corporation (CMEEC), an electric utilities co-op. One of those charged is James Sullivan, Sanchez’s husband.

Hours earlier, Sanchez, the vice chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, had withdrawn her bid to replace outgoing Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.) as chairman of the caucus next year. She cited “an unexpected family matter.

Later in the day she issued a clarifying statement.

”Earlier today I learned that my husband is facing charges in Connecticut,” she said. “After careful consideration of the time and energy being in leadership demands, I have decided that my focus now needs to be on my son, my family, and my constituents in California.”

The House Democrats are left with two other candidates for the chairmanship, both of them African-Americans: Rep. Barbara Lee of Berkeley and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, of Brooklyn and Queens. Lee inherited her seat in Congress from Rep. “Red Ron” Dellums, perhaps the farthest left member of Congress ever, for whom she worked as an aide for many years. Hakeem, formerly a corporate lawyer, won his seat representing Bedford-Stuyvesant and other heavily minority areas, after the retirement of veteran congressman Edolphus Towns. Hakeem raised large amounts of money from Wall Street and out-of-state donors, and beat out a rival who was regarded as anti-Semitic by much of the New York Democrat establishment.

What Truly Caused the Pogrom of 1938 By Gary Gindler

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/11/what_truly_caused_the_pogrom_of_1938.html

Everyone knows what happened 80 years ago, November 9-10, 1938 in Germany. The unprecedented pogrom of the Jews got the name Kristallnacht – “Night of Broken Glass.” Today, we are well aware of the approximate number of murdered Jews, destroyed businesses, and burned synagogues. The formal reason for the pogrom was the murder of the German diplomat Ernst vom Rath in Paris by the Jewish teenager Herschel Grynszpan on November 7.

Unfortunately, few people know about the true causes of the pogrom.

Who created the conditions under which a mass pogrom of Jews in the Third Reich could even take place?

After the murder of the German diplomat, the propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, announced that neither the German government nor the ruling National Socialist Workers Party (NSDAP, AKA Nazi) would organize any protests in this regard. Goebbels knew what was going to happen. The government of Nazi Germany, although not formally involved in the detailed organization of the Kristallnacht, for several years was doing everything possible to make such a pogrom.

Since taking power in 1933, the Nazis had tightened the existing gun control laws. All German citizens, including Jews, were required to register their weapons, and for every firearm purchase, they must obtain a special permit from the authorities. In September 1935, all Jews were stripped of German citizenship. All Jews, without exception, were declared “untrustworthy” and deprived of most civil rights. Then, starting in December 1935, the Jews of Germany lost the opportunity to buy firearms and ammunition, but the Nazis had not yet executed a widespread confiscation of the existing weapons and ammunition.

Finally, in March 1938, a new gun control law was passed in Germany. In this law, the only mention of Jews was in the part that declared a total ban on Jews from participating in the production and trade of firearms and ammunition. However, this law, on the one hand, lifted restrictions of the possession of firearms by members of all Nazi-connected organizations (such as the NSDAP, the SA, and the Hitler Youth) and on the other hand prohibited the possession of firearms by all “untrustworthy” and those persons “relieved of their civil rights.” By the law of 1935, not only Jews, but also all political opponents of the Nazi regime, as well as Gypsies and the homeless, were treated as “untrustworthy.”

A Green Ballot Trouncing Voters reject a carbon tax, energy mandates and drilling restrictions.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-green-ballot-trouncing-1541719310?cx_testId=16&cx_testVariant=cx&cx_artPos=2&cx_tag=collabctx&cx_navSource=newsReel#cxrecs_s

Tuesday’s election highlighted that more voters like Donald Trump’s policies than like him. Consider this week’s voter embrace of Mr. Trump’s pro-growth energy positions, via nationwide rejection of initiatives to raise energy costs.

Most notable was Washington State’s defeat of a carbon tax for the second time in two years. Climate activists designed the 2016 measure to be “revenue neutral” in hopes of masking the costs but still lost big. This time they aimed to win over progressives by promising to earmark carbon tax revenue for green subsidies and other spending.

The tax would have raised gas prices by 13 cents a gallon in 2020 and 59 cents a gallon by 2035—in a state that already has some of the highest gas prices in the country. While Seattle residents bought it, suburban and rural voters killed the measure 56%-44%.

Colorado voters rejected (57%-43%) a ballot measure that would have shut down most new oil and gas exploration. Proposition 112 would have banned such exploration within 2,500 feet of any structure deemed a “vulnerable area” by the state or local government—which would have meant most of the state.

A Common Sense Policy Roundtable analysis estimated a $218 billion hit to Colorado’s GDP from 2018-2030, and Democratic Governor John Hickenlooper warned that strangling an industry that accounts for 15% to 20% of the state economy could trigger a recession. Democratic Gov.-elect Jared Polis has supported drilling limits in the past, though even he opposed Prop 112. We’ll see if he and the all-Democratic state Legislature continue to heed voters.

Jeff Sessions’ Successor Firing Robert Mueller would be a political mistake.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-sessions-successor-1541635200

EXCERPT

Mr. Trump does have a point that Mr. Sessions’ recusal compromised his leadership of the department and made it harder to exert supervision over the FBI.

Mr. Sessions’ temporary successor will be the AG’s chief of staff, Matthew Whitaker, who presumably will hold the job until a successor is nominated. It is important that the White House get this one right.

The Attorney General shouldn’t fire Mr. Mueller, as the President essentially said himself at his Wednesday news conference. Mr. Trump needs an individual of stature and judgment who will have the trust of the department’s lawyers, who is capable of independence, but who also understands that the Justice Department is part of the executive branch and not a law unto itself.

We are former attorneys general. We salute Jeff Sessions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/jeff-sessions-can-look-back-on-a-job-well-done/2018/11/07/527e5830-e2cf-11e8-8f5f-a55347f48762_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.893959254b9d

By William P. Barr ,
Edwin Meese III and
Michael B. Mukasey

William P. Barr was attorney general from 1991 to 1993. Edwin Meese III was attorney general from 1985 to 1988. Michael B. Mukasey was U.S. attorney general from 2007 to 2009.

Serving as U.S. attorney general is the honor and the challenge of a lifetime.

We are three former attorneys general who served in Republican administrations — from different backgrounds, with different perspectives and who took different actions while in office.

But we share the view that Jeff Sessions, who resigned at President Trump’s request on Wednesday, has been an outstanding attorney general.

Each of us has known Sessions over many years. All of us thought his record — as a U.S. attorney for 12 years, as a state attorney general, as a respected U.S. senator for 20 years — made him a nominee of unexcelled experience. As important, his deep commitment to the Justice Department and its mission made him a nominee of unexcelled temperament.

By any measure, he has fulfilled the promise of those qualifications.

Sessions took office after the previous administration’s policies had undermined police morale, with the spreading “Ferguson effect” causing officers to shy away from proactive policing out of fear of prosecution. Steep declines in the rate of violent crime from 1992 to 2014 were reversed in the last administration’s final two years, with violent crime generally up 7 percent, assault 10 percent, rape nearly 11 percent and murder 21 percent. Opioid abuse skyrocketed. Many people were concerned that the hard-won progress of earlier years would be lost.

Sessions made sure that didn’t happen. He reinstituted the charging practices that had been used against drug dealers before 2008. He leveraged the power of big data to locate those who were stealing taxpayer dollars and flooding the streets with opioids and other painkillers.

Casting Out a Man of Honor and Achievement By firing Attorney General Jeff Sessions, President Trump puts his own agenda at risk. Heather Mac Donald

https://www.city-journal.org/

President Donald Trump has finally sacked Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The only upside to this development is that it ends the grotesque public humiliation of a man of honor and courage. Trump persuaded himself that Sessions was fungible, in order to justify scapegoating him for the special counsel investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and the Trump presidential campaign. Trump was wrong about Sessions’s disposability, and wrong to blame him for the appointment of a special counsel, which was triggered by Trump’s own impetuous firing of FBI director James Comey. Now that same willfulness threatens the Trump agenda and, possibly, the integrity of the justice system itself.

Trump won the presidency by promising to restore the rule of immigration law after decades of bipartisan neglect. Sessions, serving as a senator from Alabama in 2016, was uniquely positioned to do so. No politician had devoted as much time to documenting the corrosive effects of low-skilled mass immigration on the country’s working class. Sessions was a nationalist long before Trump came on the scene. He knew the myriad tactics through which the nation’s career bureaucrats and immigration advocates had abetted mass illegal entry, and set out to block them. As attorney general, he used every lawful tool available to his office to fight the sanctuary-city movement, whereby local jurisdictions openly defy the federal government’s efforts to protect the public from illegal-alien criminals. Scofflaw cities and states across the country responded with a spate of lawsuits against Sessions; left-wing judges slapped the Justice Department with questionable nationwide injunctions to protect the sanctuary jurisdictions. Sessions sued right back. Sheriffs, the closest to the ground when it comes to public sentiment about law enforcement, understood what was at stake. “Jeff Sessions has probably been the most effective attorney general in the eyes of law enforcement in our nation’s history,” National Sheriffs’ Association executive director Jonathan Thompson told the Huffington Post in August 2018.