Two VA Administrators Responsible for Fake Wait List Going Back to Work By Rick Moran

Two Veterans Affairs managers from the Phoenix VA facility who faked wait lists for treatment that led to the deaths of dozens of veterans are going back to work after being suspended — with pay — for nearly two years.

Agency investigations into their wrongdoing proved to be “inconclusive,” says the VA.

Washington Free Beacon:

Two top administrators at the Department of Veterans’ Affairs health system in Phoenix, Arizona, who were suspended following revelations of fake waitlists and delayed patient care will return to agency jobs Monday.

The Arizona Republic reported:

Lance Robinson, associate director of the Phoenix VA Health Care System, will be assigned as a planner at the VA’s southwest regional office in Gilbert, known as VISN 18, according to spokeswoman Jean Schaefer. Brad Curry, the system’s chief of Health Administration Services, will serve as a data analyst. The two men have been focal points in a controversy over the VA’s perceived failure to hold leaders accountable for mismanagement and misconduct that caused a breakdown in care for veterans in Arizona and nationwide.

Robinson and Curry were placed on paid leave and given termination notices in May 2014. During their suspensions, they have been given hundreds of thousands of dollars in pay and benefits.

Trump Gives ‘Amazing’ NoKo ‘Maniac’ Kim Jong Un ‘Credit’ for Strong Leadership By Rick Moran

“There is absolutely nothing to admire in Kim or Putin. They are the enemies of civilized behavior and should be held in utter contempt. That Trump doesn’t place their actions in a moral context should be worrying to anyone who cares about U.S. leadership.”

First, candidate Trump carried on a long-distance bromance with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, calling him “a strong leader” and saying it was a “great honor” to have Putin compliment him.

Now Trump has expressed admiration for an even loonier goon: North Korea’s boy tyrant Kim Jong Un. Speaking at a rally in Ottumwa, IA, Trump veritably gushed about the leadership qualities of Kim.

The Hill:

“If you look at North Korea, this guy, he’s like a maniac, OK?” Trump said at a rally in Ottumwa, Iowa, on Saturday.

“And you’ve got to give him credit: How many young guys — he was like 26 or 25 when his father died — take over these tough generals and all of a sudden, you know, it’s pretty amazing when you think of it. How does he do that?” he added.

Reflections on Wise and Suicidal Immigration By Victor Davis Hanson

Legal immigration has historically been classically liberal and a great boon for the United States.

Immigrants often bring in energy and fresh ideas.

In the past, newcomers from around the world were eager for a second start in the United States. They nearly all worked hard, reminding American-born citizens that that they can never rest on their laurels.

Immigrants honed American competition and helped to keep the nation productive.

Immigrants were typically hyper-patriotic. They reminded complacent Americans how lucky they were to be born in the U.S.

No one knew better how uninviting were the alternatives abroad than did those who had been forced to live under fascism, communism, totalitarianism, tribalism, or endemic poverty and corruption. Most immigrants believed that they always had been Americans in spirit, just unfortunately born in the wrong country.

Immigrants characteristically had rejected their native cultures and were eager to adopt a new American identity. So they were not foolish enough to question what had made America attractive to them in the first place: constitutional government, the rule of law, personal freedom, free-market capitalism, and an independent judiciary and press.

Instead, immigrants often enriched that immutable Western core with diverse contributions of food, music, literature, and art.

Through integration and intermarriage immigrants quickly became part of the American dream. The path from Italian to Italian-American to American usually was completed in two generations.

What then were the ingredients of past successful American immigration policy?

POLL INDICATES WEAKNESS IN HILLARY’S NUMBERS

40-something Hillary Clinton should Worry DemocratsBy Silvio Canto, Jr.
The latest FOX poll is bad news for Mrs Clinton:

She loses to Senator Rubio (50-41%),
Senator Cruz is up 7 (50-43%),
she ties Bush (44-44%),
Trump leads (47-44%),
and Christie leads (47-44%).

Dr. Carson is the only candidate that she defeats, according to this poll.

It takes more than one poll to persuade me one way or another. However, there is a trend in the polls that should scare Democrats: Hillary is 40-something time after time.

Hillary Clinton is between 42-45% in the average of polls. This is scary for such a well-known candidate.

Democrats Press Obama Administration Over Iran Lawmakers want sanctions to move forward after the nation’s ballistic-missile testingBy Kristina Peterson

WASHINGTON—Congressional Democrats are intensifying pressure on the Obama administration to hold Iran accountable for its testing of ballistic missiles.

Both supporters and opponents of the multinational nuclear accord with Iran say that to maintain U.S. credibility in enforcing the deal, the White House must move forward with sanctions on Iran after two missile tests in the fall.

The administration in late December told lawmakers it planned to impose new financial penalties on nearly a dozen companies and individuals for their alleged role in developing Iran’s ballistic missile program. It then reversed course, saying it needed more time for diplomatic work with the Iranian government, but it hasn’t given a timeline for when they would be imposed.

The delay has put some Democrats, particularly those who represent large Jewish constituencies and donors, in an uncomfortable position. Many such lawmakers agonized this summer over whether to support the nuclear deal, which was opposed by Israel, saying their backing was contingent on strict oversight of Iran’s behavior.

“They ought to impose sanctions because we have to show we take this seriously,” Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y.), who backed the nuclear deal, said in a recent interview. “Iran is very destabilizing, very aggressive and very badly behaved and we have to do what we can to stop that.”

“We will issue those sanctions and those designations at the appropriate time. There’s no question about it,” Denis McDonough, the president’s chief of staff, said on Fox News Sunday.
The House is expected to vote Wednesday on GOP legislation ensuring that as the administration eases sanctions on Iran under the nuclear deal, it doesn’t lift sanctions against individuals involved in the country’s ballistic missiles program or terrorism. Many Democrats said they were reviewing the legislation.

Mr. Obama also faced resistance from his own party in November when nearly four dozen House Democrats defied his veto threat to support legislation to halt the resettlement of Syrian refugees after the Islamic State attacks in Paris. That biil hasn’t been passed by the Senate.

The debate over the nuclear deal reached with Iran in July is likely to intensify as it is formally implemented and sanctions against Tehran are lifted. “I’m hopeful that Democrats, even those who voted to support the president’s deal, will recognize we’re in a bad place” under the agreement, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.) said.

The Federal Failure to Counter Jihad By J.R. Dunn

With the incidents of the past two months, ranging from San Bernardino to Merced to Rochester, we now know that we are essentially unprotected from terrorist attacks.

What San Bernardino amounted to is that government fumbled the ball and then refused to pick it up. Every single error made on the federal level concerning terror since the first inauguration of Barack Obama came to a head, from encouraging Muslim immigration to enabling terrorists to enter the country to crippling security investigations in the name of PC.

The federal government has unilaterally broken a basic element of the social contract — that the citizen will give up private use of violence and support the government in exchange for protection.

That protection is no longer forthcoming. Both the military and police have given up any pretense of attempting to control Islamic terrorism. Homeland Defense was founded to create a new basis for a public employee’s union. It fulfills that role admirably. It does nothing else. (Consider the Lutchman case in Rochester, N.Y. in which Emanuel Lutchman, a near-lunatic, was infatuated by ISIS websites but transparently unable to act upon them without help. He obtained this from government agents, who not only encouraged him, but in fact purchased the items he was going to use in the attack. That he was groomed as a trophy bust is difficult to deny.)

Peter Smith: The Pope’s More Spiritual Economics

Right or wrong in its economic specifics, the Pontiff’s Laudato Si encyclical draws attention to the wide material gap between rich and poor and to the insuperable problem of bridging it. The Pope surely has a point, even if his nostrums are not wholly of this world.
We fight for and against not men and things as they are, but for and against caricatures we make of them.

—Joseph Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis, 1954

Reading can be a pleasure and sometimes, as we all know, a chore. I confess as a Christian—albeit not of the Roman Catholic persuasion—to having not read a papal encyclical before the latest, issued on May 24. On my rough count, Laudato Si’ (On care for our common home) ran to a daunting 40,000 words or so. The flesh is weak. I was deterred. However, my interest was piqued by media commentary on the Pope’s condemnatory views, or so they were portrayed, on the role of free market forces in guiding economic affairs. It turned out to be a rewarding read.

A first thing to say is that when Pope Francis is on his “home turf”, discussing spiritual matters, he is inspirational. I had to put his words down at times because they were so powerful and moving. On the other hand, his wide-ranging comments on the environment, to which the encyclical was primarily directed, were unremittingly one-sided. The way he begins sets his unchanging compass: “This sister [Mother Earth] cries out to us because of the harm we have inflicted on her by our irresponsible use and abuse of the goods which God has endowed her.”

Instructively, as you read on, it becomes increasingly clear that the Pope’s perspective on the environment stems from, and is caught up with, his perspective on economics and capitalism. But stop here. Economics and capitalism take us down the road apiece from where the Pope starts. I think it is safe to say that the Pope starts with God. As you might expect, a number of conservative writers and broadcasters, in passing comment on the encyclical, started further down the road. And this, I believe, and as I will later explain, has led them into being more sharply critical of its economic content than is justified.

At one point John Maynard Keynes broke off debate with some of his contemporaries after the publication of The General Theory in 1936 because he did not believe that they were engaging his arguments with an open mind. Those who write with good will, hoping to persuade, are entitled to an open-minded reception. The Pope is no exception.

Germany Just Can’t Get It Right by Douglas Murray

How can you explain why Germany, which in the 20th century had such a gigantic anti-Semitism problem, would import so many people from those areas of the world which now have the same gigantic anti-Semitism problem?

The police water cannons were not in evidence on New Year’s Eve to break up the migrant gangs committing violent crimes against women. Instead they were used to break up a lawful demonstration of people opposed to such violent attacks on women.

The late Robert Conquest once laid out a set of three political rules, the last of which read, “The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.” This rule comes in handy when trying to understand the otherwise clearly insane and suicidal policies of Chancellor Merkel’s government in Germany. These policies only make sense if the German government has in fact been taken over by a cabal of people intent not on holding Germany together but on pulling it entirely apart. Consider the evidence.

Blame Terror on Everyone but Terrorists! by Burak Bekdil

Muslims had the habit of slaughtering “infidel” Muslims for centuries when there was not a country called Syria or any “Islamophobia.”

The main lack of logic seems to be that innocent people are attacked repeatedly by Muslims, so they become suspicious of Muslims; this suspicion is then called Islamophobia — but it does not come out of thin air.

President Erdogan is explicitly saying that even non-terrorist Muslims have the potential to become terrorists if they happen to feel offended. So easily?

Pro-Sunni supremacists, such as the Turkish president and his top cleric, do not understand that cartoons do not kill people. But some of their friends do kill people.

There is hardly anything surprising in the way Turkey’s Islamist leaders and their officials in the clergy diagnose jihadist terror: Blame it on everyone except the terrorists. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the inventor of the theory that “there is no Islamic terror,” recently warned that “rising racism and enmity against Islam in Europe[an] and other countries” will cause great tragedies — like the Paris attacks.

Keystone No, Kenya Pipeline Yes The U.S. says it wants to help finance an oil pipeline in Africa.

TransCanada took Uncle Sam to court last week to reclaim some of the damage done by the Obama Administration’s multiyear, drawn-out rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline. It may not come up in the litigation, but someone should point out that the same Obama Administration that rejected Keystone seems to have no problem supporting a new oil pipeline project in Africa.

That was the story last week out of Kenya, where U.S. Ambassador Robert Godec told Kenya’s energy minister that Washington would help Nairobi raise $18 billion to finance its PowerAfrika project. The pipeline would stretch from Kenya’s Rift Valley to Lamu on the coast. “Kenya needs $18 billion worth of financing,” Mr. Godec said, according to a dispatch in Oilprice.com, “so one of the questions we are discussing is how we can work together with the private sector and governments to raise that sum, to find ways to make certain that this financing becomes available.”

Has Mr. Godec checked with Secretary of State John Kerry, or, perhaps more important, anti-oil Democratic financier Tom Steyer? Kenya and Northeast Africa could certainly use the investment and jobs that would come from the oil project. Then again, so could the United States. What’s with the double standard on pipelines?