POLITICS Comments turned off

Behind Hillary’s Iowa Scare The state’s Democrats are significantly more liberal than they were when she ran in 2008.By William A. Galston

Posted By on February 3rd, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s third-place finish in the 2008 Iowa caucuses upended her candidacy. By contrast, she scored a narrow victory Monday night. Beyond her having a much-improved campaign organization, what changed over those eight years, and what does it teach us about the current state of the Democratic Party?

Let’s begin with what didn’t change. Mrs. Clinton did better among women than men in both contests. She did 24 points better among Democrats than independents in 2008 against Barack Obama, and 30 points better among Democrats this year. She lost to Mr. Obama by 16 points among caucusgoers who regarded themselves as “very liberal”—and to Bernie Sanders by 19 points. She trailed Mr. Obama by 12 points among first-time caucus attendees, a group she lost to Sen. Sanders by 18 points.

And in both races she did much better among middle-aged and elderly voters. In 2008 she lost voters 17-29 years of age by 46 points, and those in the 30-44 bracket by 19 points. She ran even with Mr. Obama among voters 45 to 64 years old and trounced him by 27 points among voters 65 years and older. This time around she trailed Mr. Sanders among young adults by 70 points and by 21 points among voters 30-44. She did better among voters 45-64 than she did eight years ago, racking up a 23-point edge. And she garnered 69% of the elderly vote compared with just 26% for Mr. Sanders.

POLITICS Comments turned off

Rubio’s Rise Amid Trump’s Slump The Donald’s loss was more significant than Ted Cruz’s win as the GOP’s political world finally starts to make sense.By Jason L. Riley

Posted By on February 3rd, 2016

So, it turns out that you can’t call Iowa voters “stupid,” skip a debate in Des Moines because you don’t like the moderators and still expect to prevail in the state’s caucuses. Who knew?

Donald Trump’s loss Monday night, which is far more consequential than Ted Cruz’s victory, could mean a return to Republican normalcy in an election year that has been almost freakish. Mr. Trump’s poll numbers have soared above his rivals’ for months—the Real Clear Politics average puts him at nearly 36%, while none of the other GOP candidates is above 20%—yet he lost handily in the state where the first votes were cast.

Thanks to the voters of Iowa, conservatives awoke Tuesday morning to a political world that made sense again for the first time since Mr. Trump’s rise began last summer. They learned that bluster and incivility have not become political virtues. Well-attended rallies are no substitute for traditional campaigning. Sarah Palin is no GOP kingmaker. And religious conservatives—real ones in the mold of Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum—still win the Iowa caucuses. Hawkeye voters find Mr. Trump entertaining but not very presidential. Many Republicans haven’t made up their minds, and among those tasked with casting the first votes, Donald Trump ranked closer to the third-place candidate, Marco Rubio, than the winner.

BOOKS Comments turned off

Sergeant Schultz at your service! Deaf to your screams, blind to your suffering, and mute on policy! Edward Cline

Posted By on February 3rd, 2016

Sergeant Schultz Knows Everything

“I know nothing!”

That was Sergeant Hans Schultz’s favorite and well-known refrain in Hogan’s Heroes, which ran on CBS from 1965 to 1971. In the linked clip, he adds, “I was not here! I did not even get up this morning!”

Suppose you had a chance to chat with the real-life Sgt. Schultz’s in Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark. The “interfaith” dialogue would go something like this, after you’ve reported a crime committed by a Muslim.

Sgt. Schultz will claim that he knows everything, he was there, and that you should go back to sleep and pretend nothing ever happened. You were not raped by a Muslim or a gang of Muslims. You did not have your head kicked in by a gang of Muslims. You were not robbed by a Muslim. Or stabbed, or groped, or spit on by a Muslim on a train or on the street. Or even raped and then disfigured by a Muslim. Or by a “refugee,” or by an “immigrant.”

All right, Sgt. Schultz would concede. All or one of those things happened to you. There’s no denying the facts, is there? But if you fought back, and used illegal means such as pepper spray to deter your assailant, then you must be punished. Your fighting back is evidence of bigotry, or racism, of being anti-Muslim or anti-Islam or anti-immigrant. Of your lack of patriotism! Those states of mind are illegal, as well, and must be corrected.

You must allow yourself to be raped, robbed, and spit on. It’s your duty to submit to the diktats of Islam. You must submit to Sharia. Horridly primitive system, yes. But, who are we to judge? You may not survive the experience, but it’s an issue of sacrifice. Of self-sacrifice for the greater good. For the nation. Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Germany, even Italy – all of our lily-white societies, have a duty to be invaded and assaulted by Muslims and others. We have a duty to relieve the suffering they endured in the countries from which they came. We have no right to assert that our morals and our society are superior to the cultures of the immigrants. We have no right to impose them on immigrants, even here. That is the height of cultural hubris and civilizational imperialism. Okay, so the perpetrator was Somalian. And he hates whites, even though Sweden was not a party to the downfall of Somalia. Or Ethiopia. I’m a little foggy on the history of that part of the world. So what?

POLITICS Comments turned off

Iowa Strengthens Republicans, Weakens Democrats Bad news for the Left and good news for the GOP. Daniel Greenfield

Posted By on February 2nd, 2016

Iowa taught two hard election lessons tonight. You can’t win without organization and you can’t win without enthusiasm.

Hillary Clinton came into Iowa with all the organization in the world, but none of the enthusiasm. It will take time to determine whether she managed to eke out a tiny victory against a senescent Socialist, but her shrill speech and deranged expression, eyes wild, draped in blood-red, were not those of a winner.

Bernie Sanders had poor organization, but plenty of enthusiasm. And that paid off. 43% of Iowa caucus goers identified as Socialists and 53% as politically correct. No matter how far to the left Hillary rushed, she couldn’t narrow that enthusiasm gap because she is fundamentally inauthentic.

Organization may have bought her a narrow win. Maybe. But it can’t buy her enthusiasm. And that will be a big problem for her in a general election.

On the Republican side of the dial, enthusiasm without organization also proved to be a disaster. Trump’s campaign had plenty of enthusiasm and was ahead in the polls, but it lacked the organization to capitalize on the enthusiasm and all the free publicity. Rubio had some organization and enthusiasm and came in third. Ted Cruz had the best combination of organization and enthusiasm and came in first.

BOOKS Comments turned off

U of Kentucky Offers ‘Taco Literacy’ Course Taco-identity politics! By Katherine Timpf

Posted By on February 2nd, 2016

The University of Kentucky is offering a course titled “Taco Literacy: Public Advocacy and Mexican Food in the U.S. South ” where students will examine the social and racial issues surrounding tacos.

Or, as the course’s website puts it, “how food literacies situate different spaces, identities, and forms of knowledge.”

“This class allows our students to explore the issues of immigration, inequality, workers, intercultural communication, and literacy through the prism of food,” the course’s professor, Steven Alvarez, told Vice.

This existence of such a course isn’t surprising; tacos are a very controversial subject these days — and plenty of people have gotten into trouble for handling the (apparently) sensitive issue in an (apparently) insensitive way.

A few examples:

In 2013, Northwestern University’s Hispanic/Latino Alliance wrote a letter warning students not to eat tacos on Cinco de Mayo because that could make some students feel “unsafe.”

In 2014, California State University – Fullerton’s chapter of Alpha Delta Pi sorority faced “serious sanctions” from the school for hosting a Taco Tuesday event where students wore sombreros because that’s “culturally insensitive attire.”

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Op-Ed: “Europe, learn from Israel!”: Exclusive interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali Bravery is too mild a term for Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Giulio Meotti, himself a fighter for truth, talks to her about reforming Islam.

Posted By on February 2nd, 2016

When Theo van Gogh was murdered by an Islamist on a street in Amsterdam, Ayaan Hirsi Ali could not even attend the funeral because she would have put the lives of others at risk. So the Dutch intelligence agreed to take her to the morgue. The next day, bodyguards accompanied her from her home and gave her three hours to pack and leave. From there she went to the air base at Valkenburg, near The Hague, where she would be embark on a plane. The portholes were closed, they told her not to approach them nor go near the door. The plane was full of soldiers. Hirsi Ali was leaving a country at war. They landed at a military base in Maine, in the United States. This is how the love affair between America and the first refugee from Western Europe since the Holocaust began. A story that continues to this very day.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is still a shadow. But her voice at the telephone is clear, tough, cool. It is that of a young Somali woman who has undergone genital mutilation, who has lived in Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Kenya, before being betrothed to a Canadian cousin she had never seen before. Hirsi Ali escaped from Germany to the Netherlands.

She worked as an interpreter in the Islamic Dutch ghettos, she graduated, became a Liberal MP, helped Van Gogh to make the film “Submission” and then disappeared. Now she talks with me about Europe from her think tank, the American Enterprise Institute. Hirsi Ali recently released her third book on Islam, “Heretic”, an optimistic book on the reform of Islam.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

The Case Against Imposing Middle Class Values Robert Weissberg

Posted By on February 2nd, 2016

A strange debate over policing is currently occurring in many large cities. On one side are defenders of “broken windows” policing—cracking down on “little things” like public urination, aggressive panhandling, graffiti, sleeping in doorways and multiple similar offenses which will ultimately reduce more serious offenses. Specifically, a would-be armed robber feels free to commit his crime when he sees a neighborhood rife with vandalism, garbage on the street etc. Moreover, arresting those who don’t pay their bus or subway fares or otherwise commit minor crimes helps apprehend miscreants wanted for more serious offenses.

Nevertheless, crime reduction successes aside, there is growing pressure to roll back broken windows, especially in poor black and Hispanic neighborhoods. In some instances the call is for less aggressive policing—cops should just ignore sleeping drunks in doorways and reduce “stop and frisk.” In New York City, however, the anti-broken windows sentiment focuses on the laws themselves. The police currently ignore those possessing 25 grams or less of marijuana. And further reductions are in the works as the City Council debates downgrading several “quality of life” laws, notably public urination, excessive noise and littering, into civil, not criminal offenses and with reduced penalties.

One argument against aggressive enforcement is that it over-burdens the courts while multiplying potentially troubling resident/police encounters. But more pressing is that “nuisance” law enforcement disproportionally penalizes blacks and Hispanics. After all, few rich whites deal pot in public parks or jump subway turnstiles. In a sense, enforcing broken windows policing is part of a larger effort to equalize an allegedly racially unfair judicial system, for example, reducing the stiff penalties for crack cocaine (favored by African Americans) versus lighter punishment for the powdered cocaine used by whites.

Why would anybody prefer a disorderly environment that breeds more serious criminal behavior? Who wants to stroll through a park filled with small-time drug dealers, snoozing drunks and confrontational beggars?

Let me suggest an awkward, almost unspeakable answer to this question: “quality of life” standards differ across American society and an insufferable public nuisance for some is tolerable for others. Arguing about broken windows is part of our ongoing culture war debate. In particular, critics of broken windows insist that the policy, as currently applied, rests on white middle-class values and they are correct. One only has to observe life in cities populated by large numbers of underclass African Americans, e.g., Detroit, Newark, and East St. Louis among others. Here there is no clamor for broken windows policing and it almost seems that resident want to live in an environment filled with low-level crime, graffiti, open drug dealing and all the rest targeted by broken windows policing. Conversely, enforcing broken windows is irrelevant in upscale largely white communities like Scarsdale NY.

BOOKS Comments turned off

College Program: Follow These Five Steps Before Kissing Someone or It’s Sexual Assault By Katherine Timpf

Posted By on February 2nd, 2016

The University of Southern California hosted a “Consent Carnival” where it taught students that there’s a five-step process they must follow before kissing someone in order for it to not be considered sexual assault

In fact, the checklist also states that following these steps just once is not enough. No, you have to follow them every time you kiss someone, even if you’ve kissed them before.

The exhibit, called “Kissing Booth,” offered students Hershey’s kisses glued on to little white pieces of paper with the words “what exactly does it mean to . . . ‘consent’ to a kiss?” and the following five steps:

Affirmative: We’re really excited to share this kiss with you and we’re letting you know!

Coherent: We’re present and able to recognize exactly what’s happening when we give this kiss to you.

Willing: We made the decision to give you this kiss ourselves, without pressure or manipulation from you or anybody else.

Ongoing: Should you come back for another kiss, check in to see if we’d still like to give you one.

Mutual: Sure, we offered you a kiss, but that doesn’t mean you have to accept it. Coming over to our table doesn’t forfeit your right to say no.

So, in other words: If you are kissing someone, but stop for a half a millisecond to breathe, you have to step back and say “can I kiss you again?” before continuing.

How reasonable and normal and romantic!

POLITICS Comments turned off

Donald Trump’s Business Career Has Been One of Bullying Ordinary Citizens By Mark Antonio Wright

Posted By on February 2nd, 2016

Donald Trump’s pitch to American voters can be summed up as “I’ve been wheeling and dealing all my life. In pursuit of personal advancement, I have made ‘great deals’ to build my company and my net worth. Elect me president of the United States and I will place those talents and services at your disposal.”

To many, it’s a compelling argument. Rather than another weak-kneed politician, America would have a CEO president — a titan of industry who could run a tight ship; a Gordon Gekko out to make America strong and rich again.

But how many Americans are aware of the grimy details of Trump’s famously #winning record?

And how many know that Donald J. Trump’s vaunted “business” career is marked less by innovative, hard-charging business acumen, and more by good old-fashioned bullying? As one might expect, Trump claims to represent the interests of the blue-collar citizenry of this country. But his business record reveals a man with a penchant for persecuting the little man — or even the little old lady:

Trump Asks the Government to Take Out an Atlantic City Widow

If there was ever an example of a caddish play, it was Trump’s persecution of five-foot-three-inch-tall Atlantic City widow, Vera Coking.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION, POLITICS Comments turned off

Ex-Spies Say That Clinton’s Illegal Server Triggered Widespread Devastation By Deroy Murdock

Posted By on February 2nd, 2016

Three veterans of American intelligence are horrified by the havoc that they believe former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton caused through her epic abuse of state secrets in the E-Mailgate scandal.

“If there really were SAP [special-access programs] material on her server, consider the implications,” a former U.S. intelligence officer tells me. He refers to the “several dozen” messages marked TOP SECRET/SAP that I. Charles McCullough III, inspector general for the intelligence community, reports were on the private server at Clinton’s home in Chappaqua, N.Y., 267 miles north of the State Department. Special-access programs are America’s most clandestine activities. Their revelation could damage national security severely and possibly get people killed.

In the anonymous words of this one-time American intelligence professional, here is some of the devastation likely caused by Clinton’s exposure of SAP secrets:

Intel officers responsible for those programs must be alerted.
Once alerted that SAP was mishandled and on a system that has been attacked, it is only prudent to end those programs.
What does ending those programs mean? Depending on the SAP involved, it could mean redoing war plans, terminating ongoing covert actions, rethinking how the exposed covert actions must be done and executing on that new plan, or, if it reveals a source, removing that source from his environment.
That has a significant impact. Presume, if you will, that it was a source. If that source were providing intel of such value that it rose to the SecState, now we’ve lost that source.
Intel officers care about their sources, and for two reasons. One, we’re human beings. We don’t want those assisting us and our country to be hurt, even though we recognize the danger in which they are placing themselves. Two, the business model doesn’t work very well if sources think they’ll be outed. The US intel community already has so much trouble in that regard due to Edward Snowden and Bradley [now Chelsea] Manning. This just compounds it. Think about the next meeting between a prospective source and a CIA case officer trying to recruit that source to risk his/her life for the United States: “Are you sure a high-level official won’t out me?”