The Present American Revolution By Victor Davis Hanson

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/americas-constitution-destroyed-by-leftist-agenda/

Destroying the Constitution and seeking state-mandated equality of result

The revolution of 1776 sought to turn a colony of Great Britain into a new independent republic based on constitutionally protected freedom. It succeeded with the creation of the United States.

The failed revolution of 1861, by a slave-owning South declaring its independence from the Union, sought to bifurcate the country, More than 600,000 dead later, slavery was abolished, a Confederacy was in in ruins, and the South was forced back into the United States largely on the conditions and terms of the victorious North.

The 1960s saw efforts to create a new progressive nation by swarming democratic and republican institutions. The sheer force of a left-wing cultural revolution would supposedly transform a nation, in everything from jeans, long hair, and pot to rock music and sexual “liberation.” It was eventually diffused by popular weariness with the extremism and violence of the radical revolutionaries, and the establishment’s agreements to end the Vietnam War, give 18-year-olds the right to vote, phase out the draft, expand civil rights to include reparatory action, legalize abortion, radicalize the university, and vastly increase the administrative state to wage a war on poverty, a war on pollution, and a war on inequality.

Our present revolution is more multifaceted. It is a war on the very Constitution of the United States that has not yet brought the Left its Holy Grail: a state-mandated equality of result overseen by an omnipotent and omniscient elite. The problem for today’s leftists is that they are not fighting Bourbon France, a reactionary Europe of 1848, or Czarist Russia, but an affluent, culturally uninhibited, and wildly free United States, where never in the history of civilization has a people attained such affluence and leisure.

Poverty is not existential as it once was, given high technology and government redistribution. The grievance is not that America is destitute (indeed, obesity not famine is our national epidemic). The poorer do not lack access to material goods (everything from iPhones to high-priced sneakers is in the reach of about everyone).

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Joins Climate Change Protest Outside Pelosi’s Office By Debra Heine

https://pjmedia.com/trending/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-joins-climate-change-protest-outside-pelosis-office/

Newly elected New York Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez paid her first visit to the office of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Tuesday morning — as part of a protest demanding legislative action on climate change.

Ocasio-Cortez, who easily won the election in New York’s deep blue 14th district, praised the protesters for putting everything on the line to save the planet.

“I just want to let you all know how proud I am of each and every single one of you. For putting yourselves and your bodies and everything on the line to make sure we save our planet, our generation, and our future,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “We do not have a choice. We have to get to 100 percent renewable energy in 10 years. There is no other option. The IPCC let us know that.”

“Should Leader Pelosi become the next speaker of the House, we need to tell her that we’ve got her back on showing and pursuing the most progressive energy agenda that this country has ever seen,” Ocasio-Cortez also told the protesters.

Hate Crimes Rose 17 Percent Last Year, According to New FBI Stats By Bridget Johnson

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/hate-crimes-rose-17-percent-last-year-according-to-new-fbi-stats/

Increases reported in crimes based on religion, race and sexual orientation, with 37 percent more crimes targeting Jews reported in 2017 than the previous year.

WASHINGTON — The FBI reported in new statistics today, with more law enforcement agencies voluntarily contributing figures to the Bureau, that hate crimes rose 17 percent nationwide in 2017.

It’s the third annual increase in a row for hate crimes overall.

There were 7,106 single-bias incidents reported involving 8,493 victims, while 69 multiple-bias hate crime incidents involved 335 victims.

The FBI found that 59.6 percent of victims were targeted because of their race or ethnicity, 20.6 percent were targeted because of religion, 15.8 percent were victimized because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation, 1.9 percent were victimized because of a mental or physical disability, 1.6 percent were targeted because of gender identity, and 0.6 percent were victimized because of the offenders’ gender bias.

Hate crimes on the basis of race or ethnicity targeted blacks 48.6 percent of the time — a 16 percent increase from the previous year — while 17.1 percent were targeted for being white and 10.9 percent were targeted for being Hispanic.

The majority of crimes against the victim’s faith were anti-Semitic, constituting 58.1 percent of reported incidents; there were 37 percent more crimes targeting Jews reported in 2017 than the previous year. Muslims were targeted in 18.6 percent of religion-driven hate crimes, while Catholics were targeted in 4.3 percent and Protestants were targeted in 2.3 percent. Bias against Eastern Orthodox and Sikhs was cited in 1.5 percent of cases.

Of the sexual orientation crimes, the FBI said 2.8 percent were targeted for being heterosexual while the rest were targets of anti-gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender bias.

Out of the offenses, 5,084 were classified as crimes against people. These included 44.9 percent intimidation cases, 34.3 percent for simple assault, and 19.5 percent for aggravated assault. The FBI also reported 23 rapes, 15 murders, and one offense of human trafficking classified as a hate crime. CONTINUE AT SITE

In Defense of Sir Roger by David P. Goldman

https://www.firstthings.com/

Soon after Sir Roger Scruton was appointed to advise the UK’s Ministry of Housing as chair of the new Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission, certain Labour MPs accused him of being an anti-Semite. But there is more than a modicum of chutzpah in this charge.

The Labour Party itself stands credibly accused of anti-Semitism. The distinguished former Chief Rabbi of Britain, Lord Jonathan Sacks, has denounced Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn as an “anti-Semite” who “has given support to racists, terrorists, and dealers of hate who want to kill Jews and remove Israel from the map.” Corbyn openly associates with terrorists who murder Jews. He has publicly described Hamas and Hezbollah as his “friends.” The Iranian regime paid him to appear on a government television channel. And in 2016 he was photographed laying a wreath at the graves of members of the Black September terrorist organization that conducted the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre. In the photograph, Corbyn stood next to the chief of the terrorist organization PFLP.

Corbyn’s Jew-hatred is a running sore in British politics and has caused deep divisions in his own party. Earlier this month London’s Metropolitan Police made public a criminal investigation into Labour Party anti-Semitism. It is reasonable to suppose that the putative discovery of a mote in Scruton’s eye serves to detract attention from the beam in Jeremy Corbyn’s.

A 2014 speech Scruton gave in Budapest is the sole exhibit for the Labour party’s prosecution. During this speech, Scruton noted in passing that some Jewish intellectuals took a dim view of nationalism after the hideous experience of World War II, and that some moved in the orbit of George Soros, the preeminent adversary of the new Hungarian nationalism as exemplified by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.

In response, an outpouring of support from the conservative camp has defended Scruton as “Britain’s greatest living philosopher,” “one of the great intellects of our age,” and “Britain’s most famous living philosopher.” I should like to add my voice to Sir Roger’s defense, first as a Jew, and second as a harsh critic of his work (see, for example, my First Things review of his recent book on Wagner). I have no prior reason to defend Scruton, but I am revolted by the Labour party’s spurious charges of anti-Semitism that trivialize a matter of urgent importance.

The distinguished British journalist Melanie Phillips, who has written frequently and fiercely on the matter of Jew-hatred, skewered the problem deftly:

Sir Roger said in a speech: “Many of the Budapest intelligentsia are Jewish, and form part of the extensive networks around the Soros Empire.” Cue claims of antisemitism. But here’s the whole passage from which those words have been taken:

“Many of the Budapest intelligentsia are Jewish, and form part of the extensive networks around the Soros Empire. People in these networks include many who are rightly suspicious of nationalism, regard nationalism as the major cause of the tragedy of Central Europe in the 20th century, and do not distinguish nationalism from the kind of national loyalty that I have defended in this talk. Moreover, as the world knows, indigenous antisemitism still plays a part in Hungarian society and politics, and presents an obstacle to the emergence of a shared national loyalty among ethnic Hungarians and Jews.”

Collectivism and the 8th Commandment by Linda Goudsmit

http://goudsmit.pundicity.com/21783/collectivism-and-the-8th-commandment

In the 18th century our Founding Fathers fought the War of Independence to escape the tyranny of the British monarchy. Our Founding Fathers envisioned a New World where citizens of the United States of America would be bound by the Constitution and live as free individuals in a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

The 10 Commandments were foundational to the Judeo-Christian tradition of the United States and to its ordered liberty. The Commandments provided the infrastructure and moral basis for the secular laws written to govern American society.

The separation of church and state was an acknowledgement that different religious doctrines existed within the Judeo-Christian tradition. The Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment was a defense against the tyranny of an official state religion.

What our Founding Fathers did not envision was the secular tyranny of collectivism – collectivism is a late 19th century political ideology.

“Thou Shalt Not Steal” is the 8th Commandment that strictly forbids stealing. So, let’s talk about stealing – the taking of another person’s property.

Stealing assumes a separation between self and other and is an acknowledgement of property rights. That is, one person cannot take another person’s property unless both parties acknowledge that each person has a separate existence and that property belonging to one is not the property of the other.

There would be no moral injunction against stealing and no Commandment or secular law against stealing without this fundamental acknowledgement.

The problem with collectivism, whether it is socialism or communism, is that it defies this most fundamental acknowledgement. Collectivism denies the property rights of an individual and, therefore, that individual’s existence as a separate entity.

Collectivism says that what is yours belongs to the state and the state is the entity that determines its distribution. Theoretically, without property rights there are no human rights because if what I produce is not mine and the fruits of my labors belong to the state, then I do not belong to myself. I am without human rights.

Collectivist ideology is antagonistic to the Judeo-Christian tradition because it denies the existence of the self. In collectivism the individual’s life belongs to the group.

This most fundamental and critical issue of property rights and its connection to human rights and the self is denied by the humanitarian hucksters selling socialism. When Obama tells business owners “You did not build that” he is denying their human rights and misappropriating them to the state. Obama is the prime time humanitarian huckster disingenuously selling socialism as the provider of social justice and income equality. He is the consummate con man deceitfully selling “resistance” as freedom fighting.

The 2020 Democratic National Circus: The Establishment Picks By Eric Lendrum

https://amgreatness.com/2018/11/13/the-2020-

As much as we’d all like to take a moment and enjoy the end of the 2018 midterms, the reality is that November 7 was not the last day of election season; it was the first day of the 2020 presidential campaign. Politics is an never-ending game.

And you’d better believe the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries are going to be a circus. The field of candidates who will run is shaping up to be nearly as large as that of the Republicans in 2016, which was the largest number of candidates in a presidential primary in American history. It’s not too early to begin thinking about who those candidates will be.

Indeed one candidate, who may be considered “serious,” already has officially declared his intention to run: U.S. Representative John Delaney of Maryland. Delaney is likely to go the way of Martin O’Malley in 2020 (notwithstanding the fact that Martin O’Malley himself may reappear in 2020 to run), and inevitably he will be joined by other “also-rans” with no viable shot.

Still, expect no shortage of major candidates fighting for the lead in each of the major ideological lanes of the Democratic field.

In the post-2016 world, it makes the most sense to view any future presidential primary through a lens of “insiders” versus “outsiders,” with perhaps a few other candidates somewhere in the middle of this spectrum between the establishment and the populists. First, there is the high-profile battle for the blessing of the party elites.

A Veep Sweep?
As numerous nationwide and statewide polls have already shown, the apparent frontrunner is former Vice President Joe Biden. Having previously run in 1988 and 2008, a third run in 2020 would be the latest in a long American tradition of vice presidents taking up the mantle of their party after the president they served under has been termed out of office.

Biden is hardly a sure-thing, however. His age (he’s three years older than President Trump) and his reputation for remarkably stupid gaffes may prove to be serious barriers. And, in the era of #MeToo, don’t be surprised if his creepy, touchy-feely approach with women becomes a campaign issue.

Return of the Taliban Five Another legacy item for the ex-Radical-in-Chief.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271930/return-taliban-five-lloyd-billingsley

In the run-up to the November election, five Taliban commanders freed from Guantanamo in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl rejoined the Taliban’s political office in Qatar. That development calls for a look at the back story.

“One big concern is that the U.S. will be releasing five Taliban commanders in exchange for Bergdahl,” the Washington Post explained in 2014. “So who are these men? And what might they do when released?” The Post weighed in on both counts.

Khirullah Said Wali Khairkhw helped to create the Taliban movement in 1994 and once served as its interior minister. According to his Guantanamo case file, he was known to have close ties to Osama Bin Laden of al Qaeda, prime mover of the 9/11 attacks.

Mullah Mohammad Fazl had served as a senior commander in the Taliban army during the 1990s, rising to chief of staff. He likely supervised the killing of thousands of Shiite Muslims near Kabul and was present during a prison riot that claimed CIA operative Johnny Spann. According to his file, if released Fazl would likely rejoin the Taliban and resume hostilities against the United States and coalition forces.

Mullah Norullah Noori was one of the Taliban’s provincial governors and rumored to be a player in the massacre of Shiites. According to his file, he is a significant figure who encourages acts of aggression.

Abdul Haz Wasiq, deputy intelligence chief for the Taliban, used his office to support al Qaeda. Wasiz also forged alliances between the Taliban and other Islamic militants.

For his part, Mohammed Nabi Omari was a member of a joint al Qaeda-Taliban cell, and one of the most significant Taliban leaders detained at Guantanamo. All five Taliban bosses were high risk and posed considerable threat to the United States and its allies. Even so, POTUS 44 pushed for their release, which came as a surprise to Senate Intelligence Committee boss Dianne Feinstein, a left-leaning San Francisco Democrat.

Presidential Proclamation Addresses Massive Illegal ‘Migrant’ Caravan A dire national security threat.Michael Cutler

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271910/presidential-proclamation-addresses-massive-michael-cutler

The United States is about to be inundated with thousands of foreign nationals heading up through Latin America to the U.S./Mexico border. The media, nearly unanimously, have described them all as “migrants” purportedly fleeing poverty and violence in their home countries in Central America. The President, however, has stated that among them are criminals and individuals from other than Latin America.

President Trump is determined to discourage as many of these individuals from entering the United States illegally as a matter of national security.

As I have noted in previous articles about this “Caravan of Migrants,” talk show hosts and others have blatantly accused the President of being a liar who does not care about poor migrants. Of course, they are blithely ignoring that the President has access to intelligence that is not made available to anyone else.

They have also failed to make any effort to do a bit of research, to determine if perhaps there is evidence that is available in the public domain that would support Trump’s assertions.

My article “Trump Connects The Dots On Dangers Of Illegal Immigration” contains compelling evidence about the potential for Iranian involvement in large-scale human trafficking and hence the potential that they and other adversaries of the United States would be eager to inundate the United States with huge numbers of aliens that would overwhelm the already beleaguered immigration system.

A Melancholy Centennial, by S. Trifkovic

https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/a-melancholy-centennial-/
After four years and three months of unprecedented carnage, the Great War—the most catastrophic event in all of history—ended one hundred years ago, on November 11, 1918. That war destroyed an effervescent civilization, unmatched in its fruits and vigor. A decent and on the whole well-ordered world was wrecked for ever, thrown into the abyss in which we live now.

“The summer was more wonderful than ever and promised to become even more so, and we all looked out on the world without any cares,” Stefan Zweig wrote long after it was all over. “That last day in Baden I remember walking over the vine-clad hills with a friend and an old vine-grower saying to us: ‘We haven’t had a summer like this for a long time. If this weather continues this year’s wine is going to be beyond compare. People will always remember the summer of 1914.’”

We will always remember that summer indeed, and not for the exquisite Spätburgunder. The final verses of Philip Larkin’s MCMXIV summed it up:

Never such innocence,
Never before or since,
As changed itself to past
Without a word—the men
Leaving the gardens tidy,
The thousands of marriages
Lasting a little while longer:
Never such innocence again.

On the centennial of the Armistice, it is not uncommon to hear, from poorly educated members of the postpodern commentariat, the assertion that the Guns of August were the result of unintended blunders in various courts, foreign offices, and chancelleries. In what passes for the academe these days, one notable example is Christopher Clark’s The Sleepwakers, an audaciously revisionist whitewash of the Central Powers published in 2014. Clark rehashes the old claim that the decision-makers were swept into a maelstrom by malevolent forces beyond their control. The European balance was supposedly so volatile that two shots fired by a young Serb in Sarajevo could fatally disrupt it, with a revanchist France and an ever-malevolent Russia goading the hapless Kaiser and his officials into a trap.

MOST HAMAS ROCKET ATTACKS EVER IN A SINGLE DAY TOM GROSS

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/001807.html

Yesterday at least 20 Israelis were injured in the largest ever number of rocket attacks in a single day by the Hamas terror organization. And yet there has been very little reporting of this in the international media, and even where there has been coverage it has often been inaccurate. (Serious reporting will only start when Israel finally starts to defend itself, in order to then portray Hamas as the victims.)

Over 400 rockets have been fired into Israel in the last 24 hours. Houses, buses and shops have been hit all over southern Israel. One man was killed by a rocket that partially destroyed an apartment building. An Israeli 19-year-old is in critical condition. Other Israeli children were injured as rockets slammed into homes. An elderly woman was also seriously injured. One dog in Israel died of injuries from a Hamas rocket. Prime Minister Netanyahu is being criticized in Israel for his weak response.

Israeli casualties have not been far higher, thanks to the technologically amazing Iron Dome system shooting down many incoming rockets and people sheltering in underground bomb shelters. Schools in southern Israel are closed today as children are being told to stay in bomb shelters.