ISRAEL Comments turned off

Israeli birth rate reaches all-time high as population tops 9 million by Zeev Klein

Posted By on September 27th, 2019

https://www.israelhayom.com/2019/09/27/israeli-birth-rate-reaches-all-time-high-as-population-tops-9-million/
Jewish population in Israel hits 6.74 million, or 74.2% of the country’s population. 43% of the population describes itself as secular, 10% as haredi, and the rest fall somewhere in between. Shanah tovah!

As the Jewish world prepares to usher in the year 5780, Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics published its annual population data for the country, which show that this past year, the population reached 9.092 million people and is expected to increase to 10 million by 2024.

According to demographic projections, when Israel celebrates its 100th anniversary in 2048, it will have a population of 15 million.

According to the CBS data, 43.2% of the population is secular, with 12.8% defined as “traditional,” 11.3% “religious,” and 10.1% ultra-Orthodox. Another 22.1% define themselves as “traditional but not very religious.”

Heading into the new year, Israel’s Jewish population numbers 6.74 million, or 74.2% of the total population. The Arab population numbers 1.91 million, or 21% of the population. Another 4.8%, or just over 440,000 Israelis, made aliyah under the Law of Return but are not listed as Jewish by the Interior Ministry’s Population Administration.

Since Rosh Hashanah 2018, Israel’s population grew by 184,000 (2.1%), a growth rate that has remained fairly stable in recent years. This past year also saw an all-time high birth rate for Israel, with 196,000 babies born. The average Israeli woman gives birth to 3.09 children.

MEDIA Comments turned off

Quid Pro Crap Are all NeverTrumpers too far gone? George S. Bardmesser

Posted By on September 27th, 2019

https://amgreatness.com/2019/09/26/quid-pro-crap/

The dust is still swirling around the Trump-Zelensky phone call and the released transcript, but I would like to direct my exasperation at the one NeverTrumper who should know better than to fall for it. The one NeverTrumper for whom I still had a few shreds of respect, and whom I would on occasion read and actually enjoy his writing. Perhaps the only such NeverTrumper out there. Yes, that’s right—I am talking about David French. The last of the Mohicans.

Most NeverTrumpers are pitiful. Max Boot long ago became a complete non-entity—and a reasonable case can be made that he never was an entity in the first place. Jennifer Rubin was more or less readable at one time, but became a miserable whiny hag after Trump’s election—I gave up on her in 2016, and haven’t read a thing she’s written in three years. Bill Kristol is a sad, pathetic wreck of an ex-conservative, eking out a living off the crumbs from a lefty billionaire’s table and peddling Democratic Party talking points on a website no one ever reads. George Will ceased to exist for me after he opined in 2018 that electing rabid socialists took priority over electing Republicans (such as they are, sadly).

But David French? I admit, occasionally he says some things worth saying. Occasionally. Sometimes they are even interesting.

So why is it so hard for him to look in the mirror in the morning, take a deep breath, and say to the reflection: “Dave, you handsome devil, you! I know you’ve been confused these last few years. I know that cheesy trick Kristol pulled four years ago, trying to get you to run for president, really messed with your head. Dave, since you’re me, I know how hard it can be to let go. But while Trump is no God’s gift to the planet, and while Trump might not always be right or politic or temperate, he has done more for conservative causes than all the Republican politicians put together in the last 30 years.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

Trump Urging Ukrainian Probe of Biden Breaks No Laws A Clinton-era U.S.-Ukraine treaty requires the two countries to provide mutual legal assistance. Matthew Vadum

Posted By on September 27th, 2019

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/09/trump-urging-ukrainian-probe-biden-breaks-no-laws-matthew-vadum/

A treaty from 2000 between the Ukraine and the United States requires the two countries to cooperate on law enforcement matters, a factor that may help to explain why President Donald Trump felt comfortable questioning the involvement of Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, in Ukrainian affairs, during a telephone conversation two months ago with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The American and Ukrainian governments, it turns out, are legally required by treaty to render mutual legal assistance in criminal matters.

The treaty, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998, provides in Article 1 that “[t]he Contracting States shall provide mutual assistance, in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty, in connection with the investigation, prosecution, and prevention of offenses, and in proceedings related to criminal matters.” As every schoolchild used to know before teachers’ unions, New Age thinking, and identity politics dumbed down the educational system, under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, properly ratified treaties are the supreme law of the land.

The document states that each “Contracting State shall have a Central Authority to make and receive requests pursuant to this Treaty.” For the U.S., it is “the Attorney General or a person designated by the Attorney General.” For Ukraine, it is “the Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Prosecutor General.”

During the presidency of Bill Clinton, the U.S. Senate approved the treaty on Oct. 18, 2000, on a division vote. This means that senators rose from their seats to vote and how each of them voted was not recorded. It is, therefore, unclear, how then-Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware voted.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Taking Out Joe Biden The left can impeach Trump and destroy an insufficiently liberal front-runner. By Kimberley A. Strassel

Posted By on September 27th, 2019

The Trump years have been rough on Democrats’ sensibilities, and their thinking has become increasingly addled as a result. The party has worked tirelessly to create an issue worthy of impeaching the president—Russia collusion, obstruction of justice, Stormy Daniels, tax returns. This week Democrats jettisoned all that in favor of the only issue that implicates their own front-runner for the nomination. Genius.

The one person who has been as much in the news this week as Donald Trump is former Vice President Joe Biden. It’s a dubious accomplishment. The only way to discuss Mr. Trump’s nonsmoking-gun phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is to acknowledge the subject of the ruckus: Mr. Biden’s glaring conflicts of interest during his vice presidency vis-à-vis his son Hunter’s business interests. Since Democrats insist on making this all about Ukraine, get ready for daily new revelations about the young Mr. Biden’s questionable activities and “Quid Pro Joe’s” involvement.

This is why the former vice president’s promises that this scandal will fade are nonsense. True, the media is doing double-duty on his behalf. Its general line is that Mr. Biden’s conflicts are fine; asking about them is corrupt. We are seeing a lot of stories about how Democrats are determined not to let Republicans “Hillary” Mr. Biden—a historical rewrite that places the blame for Mrs. Clinton’s notorious ethical travails on her rivals. The “fact checkers” are out in force with soothing assurances that there’s no evidence any Biden broke the law.

FOREIGN POLICY Comments turned off

Proceed With Caution on a Defense Pact With Israel A treaty looks attractive to both Washington and Jerusalem, but potential pitfalls remain. By Douglas J. Feith

Posted By on September 27th, 2019

https://www.wsj.com/articles/proceed-with-caution-on-a-defense-pact-with-israel-11569538318

For all their longstanding defense ties, Israel and the U.S. have no mutual defense treaty. In the weeks before Israel’s Sept. 17 elections President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu both spoke favorably of negotiating one. Whether they were serious or simply wanted to bolster Mr. Netanyahu’s political support is unclear. In any case, a few observations are in order.

The U.S. is party to various kinds of defense treaties. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is the most far-reaching. The treaty states that “an armed attack against one [ally] . . . shall be considered an attack against them all.” Other bilateral U.S. defense treaties create lesser obligations—to consult about threats, to recognize that an attack on one would endanger peace and safety of the other, to meet common dangers in accordance with one’s own constitutional processes.

American and Israeli officials have long refrained from negotiating a mutual defense treaty because it was judged unnecessary and potentially harmful to both countries. Israelis worried mainly about their own freedom of action; they didn’t want to have to ask U.S. permission before taking steps to defend their state. U.S. officials didn’t want to have to grant or deny such permission—or to “own” Israeli military operations.

Sometimes U.S. officials have been pleased when Israel took tough and risky military actions—against Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981, against terrorist leaders or operatives during the Second Intifada, and against Syria’s nuclear reactor in 2007. The U.S. could disavow any responsibility but, if the actions succeeded, benefit nonetheless.

In a crisis, the help the U.S. would give Israel (or Israel would give the U.S.) wouldn’t likely increase as a result of a mutual defense treaty. Historically, such assistance has been provided out of national interest, not legal obligation.

CHARLOTTE'S NEWS WEB Comments turned off

Barack Obama, the real king of the quid pro quo Cheryl K. Chumley

Posted By on September 27th, 2019

www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/25/barack-obama-king-quid-pro-quo/

Democrats, socialists and others with animosity toward this White House say they’ve found the smoking gun in Donald Trump’s released telephone transcript with Ukraine’s president — the supposed quid pro quo nugget of gold — and that it won’t be long now before impeach, impeach, impeach moves from message to reality.

Clearly, they haven’t. But it’s funny how after eight years of Barack Obama quid pro quo-ing here, there and everywhere, it’s only now Democrats care. 

It’s only with Trump that Democrats seem to have gleaned a sense of conscientiously objecting to what they perceive as abusing one’s high office to obtain political or personal favors.

Where were they with Obama?

Green Biz, in March of 2011, ran this: “Barack Obama, Clean Tech and the Political Quid Pro Quo.”

The piece goes on to recount how the Center for Public Integrity published “a long, in-depth look at how some of the Obama campaign’s most prolific fundraisers have gotten loans, grants and special access to [his] administration,” to include a “deep look at how [Steve] Westly, former California state controller and venture capitalist … landed intimate access to the Obama administration.”

P.C.-CULTURE Comments turned off

U.S. gender ‘A Doll For Everyone’: Meet Mattel’s Gender-Neutral Doll ‘A Doll For Everyone’: Meet Mattel’s Gender-Neutral Doll By Eliana Dockterman

Posted By on September 26th, 2019

https://time.com/5684822/mattel-gender-neutral-doll/?utm_source=pocket-newta

A child opens a box. He starts jumping and screaming with joy—not an unusual sound in the halls of Mattel’s headquarters where researchers test new toys. But this particular toy is a doll, and it’s rare for parents to bring boys into these research groups to play with dolls. It’s rarer still for a boy to immediately attach himself to one the way Shi’a just did.

An 8-year-old who considers himself gender fluid and whose favorite color is black one week, pink the next, Shi’a sometimes plays with his younger sister’s dolls at home, but they’re “girly, princess stuff,” he says dismissively. This doll, with its prepubescent body and childish features, looks more like him, right down to the wave of bleached blond bangs. “The hair is just like mine,” Shi’a says, swinging his head in tandem with the doll’s. Then he turns to the playmate in the toy-testing room, a 7-year-old girl named Jhase, and asks, “Should I put on the girl hair?” Shi’a fits a long, blond wig on the doll’s head, and suddenly it is no longer an avatar for him but for his sister.

The doll can be a boy, a girl, neither or both, and Mattel, which calls this the world’s first gender-neutral doll, is hoping its launch on Sept. 25 redefines who gets to play with a toy traditionally deemed taboo for half the world’s kids. Carefully manicured features betray no obvious gender: the lips are not too full, the eyelashes not too long and fluttery, the jaw not too wide. There are no Barbie-like breasts or broad, Ken-like shoulders. Each doll in the Creatable World series looks like a slender 7-year-old with short hair, but each comes with a wig of long, lustrous locks and a wardrobe befitting any fashion-conscious kid: hoodies, sneakers, graphic T-shirts in soothing greens and yellows, along with tutus and camo pants.

POLITICS Comments turned off

Elizabeth Warren, Cherokee from Outer Space By Kyle Smith

Posted By on September 26th, 2019

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2019/10/14/elizabeth-warrens-strange-shifting-identities

/Conservative; liberal; white; Cherokee; Harvard prof; tribune of the people; possibly extraterrestrial

‘Fauxcahontas” and “Lie-awatha” are serviceable enough as one-word descriptors for Elizabeth Warren. But her decades-long phony insistence on Cherokee identity, which is to identity politics what stolen valor is to military service, is just part of her oleaginous, changeling habit of cycling through one persona after another. She’s Chief Spitting Bull, the lady with a J.D. in B.S.

Whether she’s claiming her white parents had to elope because of racism or, five years after the matter was litigated, falsely asserting that Michael Brown “was murdered” in Ferguson, Mo., or stating she was the “first nursing mother to take a bar exam in the state of New Jersey,” as though anyone kept tabs on such strange details (“Excuse me, madam, are you lactating at the moment? I’m making a record book”), Elizabeth Warren is always ready with a load of bull. Warren will say whatever is convenient for her ambitions of the moment. “I am not running for president of the United States,” Senator Warren said last March on Meet the Press. “I am running for the United States Senate in 2018 in Massachusetts.” The month after she was reelected she announced she was forming an exploratory committee to mull a presidential run.

And note the false, strained way she did get in the presidential race, in that infamous video. She starts recording. Then — hello, soon-to-be-conquered Earth people, I understand you like brewed malt beverages on this planet — she immediately takes a break to get a beer. Her programmers in the Nebula 235X star system have told her that ordinary Earthfolk are intimidated by proper grammar, so she phrases this entirely natural and spontaneous decision like this: “Hold on a sec, I’m gonna get me, uh, a beer.” Then she follows up with this classic: “Hey! My husband Bruce is now in here!” Her husband was in her house? Where does she normally keep him, in the shed with the lawnmower? Warren isn’t just phony, she’s creepy and alien and able to change form to play on your nightmares: She’s It of the Charles. Occasionally she lets the mask slip, as when, in Greenwich Village, she positioned herself as the candidate opposed to half the population. “We’re not here today because of famous arches or famous men,” she said. “In fact, we’re not here because of men at all.” Huh? Warren must be the first candidate in history to think that winning the working class means deriding the sex that does most of the grunt labor in this country. Should she make it to the general election, and advisers somberly inform her that she is losing the men’s vote by 97 points and that all of her male supporters wear Capris and live in Brooklyn, I wonder what her Dukakis-in-a-tank response will be. My guess is it’ll involve a misbegotten attempt to imbibe tequila during a show at Bada Bing’s, where she somehow mispronounces the word “bro.” Someone will ask who her favorite member of the New England Patriots is and she’ll say something like “Eli Kaepernick.” 

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Double Standards on Ukraine By Andrew C. McCarthy

Posted By on September 26th, 2019

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/double-standards-on-ukraine/

Democrats in Congress and the media pretend to swoon over conduct they accepted when Obama did it.

House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff’s opening statement at today’s hearing, a grilling of National Intelligence Director Joseph Maguire, was remarkable. To begin with, he recited a parody of the conversation between President Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky that was so absurd, it would not have made it into a Grade-C mob movie. A telling decision by Schiff, a capable former prosecutor: If you have an extortionate conversation, you quote it. If you need to imagine it into something it isn’t, that means it is not an extortionate conversation.

Also telling: Chairman Schiff came flying out of the starting block describing how overwhelmingly dependent Ukraine is on the United States and its president. Of course, this fact must be forced to the fore because it is not obvious from the Trump–Zelensky conversation — again, Schiff does not have evidence that Trump extorted Zelensky for the purpose of aiding Trump’s 2020 campaign.

But more to the point, the relationship of dependency intensified in 2015 due to the flight to Moscow of Ukraine’s president, Viktor Yanukovych. At that point, a new Ukrainian government more to the Obama administration’s liking, under President Petro Poroshenko, came to power. It was desperate for American help, financially and security-wise, which is why Vice President Biden was in a position to pressure it into firing the prosecutor who was conducting a corruption investigation of Burisma, the energy company that had appointed Hunter Biden to its board and was lavishly compensating him.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

Why the Impeachment Frenzy May Only Strengthen Trump By Victor Davis Hanson

Posted By on September 26th, 2019

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/why-impeachment-frenzy-may-strengthen-trump/https:

Contrary to suggestions by some, most Trump supporters are not automatons or blind supporters. What bothers them, and should bother others, about the latest Ukraine hysterias is the familiar monotony of this latest scripted psychodrama.

The whistleblower admits to hearsay (“I was not a direct witness to most of the events described”). His term-paper report is laden with anonymously sourced rumors, e.g., “According to multiple White House officials I spoke with,” “I was told by White House officials,” “Based on my understanding,” “I learned from multiple officials,” “I do not know whether similar measures were taken,” “I do not know whether those officials spoke with or met with . . . ”

Between references to Internet news accounts and “I heard from” and “I learned from” and “I do not know” anonymous officials, there is nothing here to launch an impeachment of any president.

In the complaint are all the now-familiar tell-tale signs of pseudo-exactness, in the form of Mueller-report-like footnotes and page references to liberal media outlets such as Bloomberg, ABC, and the New York Times. There is the accustomed Steele-dossier scare bullet points. We see again Comey-memo-like disputes over classification status with capital letters UNCLASSIFIED stamped as headers and footers and TOP SECRET lined out.

Scary references abound to the supposed laws that the legal-eagle whistleblower believes were violated. In sum, there is all the usual evidence of an administrative-state bureaucrat, likely to be some third-tier Brennan or Clapper-like intelligence operative, who is canvassing disgruntled White House staffers, writing a report that imitates intelligence-department formats, combing the Internet, in “dream-team” and “all-star” footnote fashion, for scare quotes and anti-Trump stories, and then likely having it dressed up in legalese by an activist lawyer. Take all that away, and one is left with “I heard.”