RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324205404578147360260072602.html?mod=opinion_newsreel

This is the most violated saying in American public life:

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Martin Luther King Jr.’s acclaimed call in 1963 for a colorblind society has been displaced, at least in our politics, by an obsession with racial categories. That is the meaning of racialization.

It may be over four decades since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, but whenever America votes today, the exit polls can’t move fast enough to divide voters by the color of their skin. Mere moments after the 2012 exit polls were released, a conventional wisdom congealed across the media that the Republican Party was “too white.”

Let us posit that this subject wouldn’t have been raised if the bottom hadn’t fallen out of the GOP’s share of the Hispanic vote. When George W. Bush attracted 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, there was no cry that the Republican Party was “too white.” The GOP’s problem with Hispanics today is a tangle of issues involving the law, labor and assimilation that is hardly reducible to the accusation that the party is too white.

In virtually every instance, the idea that the Republican Party is “too white” is dropped with almost no discussion of what exactly that means. The phrase is being pinned like a scarlet “W” on anyone who didn’t vote for the Democrats’ nominee. It’s a you-know-what-we-mean denunciation. Its only meaning is racial.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324469304578145881558310020.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

The would-be secretary of state’s record on Iran, Israel, human rights and more.

Several Republican senators continue to oppose the possible nomination of Susan Rice, currently the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to be secretary of state in President Obama’s second term. Their opposition stems largely from Ms. Rice’s repeated insistence, five days after terrorists murdered four Americans at a U.S. facility in Libya, that the slaughter stemmed from spontaneous Muslim rage over an amateur video. Sen. John McCain at one point called Ms. Rice “unfit” for the job.

To assess fitness, one might look at those who served previously as secretary of state. More than one has said or done foolish things, or served without notable distinction.

In 1929, Henry Stimson dismantled the nation’s only cryptographic facility, located in the State Department, with the airy observation that gentlemen don’t read one another’s mail. (He sobered up by World War II, when as secretary of war he oversaw a robust code-breaking effort.) More recently, Clinton administration Secretary of State Warren Christopher diminished the office by making several futile pilgrimages to Syria, where he once waited on his airplane for over half an hour in Damascus before being told that Syrian dictator Hafez Assad was too busy to see him. Assad calculated correctly that the slap would be cost-free.

By this modest standard, some might find that Susan Rice is fit. But moral fitness is also relevant, and it is in that category that the Benghazi episode is relevant.

The president has said that Ms. Rice should not be criticized because she “had nothing to do with Benghazi” and so couldn’t have known better when she gave her false account. According to Mr. Obama (and to her), she simply repeated talking points provided by an amorphous and anonymous “intelligence community.”

But Ms. Rice did know at least a couple of things. She knew that she had nothing to do with Benghazi. She knew that after the attack the president insisted that U.S. leaders not “shoot first and aim later” but rather “make sure that the statements that you make are backed up by the facts.” She knew that the video story line was questionable, as Sen. Dianne Feinstein (chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence) and administration officials had already suggested publicly that the attack was al Qaeda-related. And she knew that the president had a political interest in asserting that al Qaeda wasn’t successfully attacking senior American officials but was instead “on the run,” as he maintained on the campaign trail.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/11/28/seven-egyptian-christians-sentenced-to-death-for-anti-islam-film/ An Egyptian court convicted in absentia Wednesday seven Egyptian Coptic Christians and a Florida-based American pastor, sentencing them to death on charges linked to an anti-Islam film that had sparked riots in parts of the Muslim world. The case was seen as largely symbolic because the defendants, most of whom live in the United […]

Israel’s Friends in Gaza Hamas was quick to declare victory in the latest conflict with Israel. A closer look at the price it paid in terms of personnel and equipment shows that its bravado was false. But the fact that Israel was able to destroy so many installations, weapons teams, smuggling tunnels, and high-ranking personnel, […]

http://pjmedia.com/blog/washington-post-goes-full-bigot/?print=1 Hello. My name is Bob, and I’m a racist. I know this because the editorial board of the Washington Post said so. While I’m too young to have used water cannons on civil rights protesters, and couldn’t tell you where the local Klan meets (or if there even is one), I have this troubling […]

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/militant_socialism_in_america.html

Despite his “colossal economic failures” and a national debt “above $16 trillion” Barack Obama was given a second term. It is not because the conservative message was wrong; it is because Obama is a master of marketing his message. Seductive and false advertising as well as outright bribery marked this man’s first term and will certainly be the hallmark of his second.

He mesmerized a misinformed or ill-informed public, convincing them that his promises would result in a piece of the pie for them. Thus, currently, “…more than half the population — 50 percent plus one — is dependent upon government benefits. For the past four years, the Obama administration has created a Franco-German welfare state whose sole purpose is to forge a majority political coalition wedded to the Democratic Party.” The explosion of food stamps, the bailouts — all translated into an ‘I got mine, not gonna’ worry about anybody else’ mentality that has ruptured this country into two camps. There are those who pay and there are those who expect the payment without any effort on their part. As David Limbaugh has written in Crimes Against Liberty, “in his monomania for socialism, Obama will brook no challenge” (388).

Which is why the 1952 piece by Elia Kazan titled “Where I Stand” needs to see the light of day again. Kazan wrote it following his appearance before the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HCUA) in 1952. It is particularly instructive as we now enter the new world of Obama socialism.

Kazan notes that

Communist activities confront the people of this country with an unprecedented and exceptionally tough problem. That is, how to protect ourselves from a dangerous and alien conspiracy and still keep the free, open, healthy way of life that gives us self-respect.

The facts I have are 16 years out of date, but they supply a small piece of background to the graver picture of communism today.

I was taken in by the Hard Times version of the communists’ recruiting technique. They claimed to have a cure for depressions…. I joined the Party late in the summer of 1934. I got out a year and a half later.

I have no spy stories to tell because I saw no spies. Nor did I understand, at that time, any opposition between American and Russian national interest. It was not even clear to me in 1936 that the American Communist Party was abjectly taking its order from the Kremlin.

What I learned was the minimum that anyone must learn who puts his head into the noose of Party ‘discipline.’ The Communists automatically violated the daily practices of democracy to which I was accustomed. They attempted to control thought and suppress personal opinion. They tried to dictate personal conduct. They habitually distorted and disregarded and violated the truth. All this was crudely opposite to their claims of ‘democracy’ and the ‘scientific approach.’

To be a member of the Communist Party is to have a taste of the police state. It is a diluted taste, but it is bitter and unforgettable.

Why did I not tell this story sooner? I was …held back by a piece of specious reasoning …which goes like this. ‘You may hate the Communists, but you must not attack them or expose them, because if you do you are attacking the right to hold unpopular opinions and you are joining the people who attack civil liberties.’

I have thought soberly about this. It is, simply, a lie. Secrecy serves the Communists. At the other pole, it serves to silence…voices… [who] have allowed themselves to become associated with or silenced by the Communists.

It also left me with the passionate conviction that we must never let the Communists get away with the pretense that they stand for the very things which they kill in their own countries.

I am talking about free speech, a free press, the rights of property… and above all, individual rights. I value peace, too, when it is not bought at the price of fundamental decencies.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/334337/immigrant-welfare-new-colossus-jillian-kay-melchior

Here’s a perplexing pair of statistics: Compared with native-born Americans, immigrants are more likely to start a business — and they’re also more likely to depend on welfare.

These dissonant data are even more irksome considering the state of the U.S. economy. Government social-aid programs consume an ever-growing portion of the federal budget, surpassing a trillion dollars even before Medicare and Social Security are factored in. And entrepreneurial activity is slowing. Census Bureau statistics show that start-ups accounted for 12 percent of American businesses in 1980 but less than 8 percent today. And earlier this fall, the Hudson Institute found that under the Obama administration, we’ve averaged 7.8 start-up jobs per 1,000 people. During the Bush years, it was 10.8, and during Clinton’s years in office, it was 11.2.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/multicultural-miasma We’re devolving into tribalism. Americans vote for members of their tribe, or for those their tribal chiefs tell them to vote. Ninety-tree percent of blacks voted for Barack Obama. In Philadelphia, fifty-nine wards voted 100% for Obama. There wasn’t a single vote for Romney or anybody else. The Hispanic-American organization called “La Raza,” (translated, […]

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/the-us-is-blocking-energy-wealth-and-jobs What if I told you that the government was blocking America’s prosperity in the form of enormous untapped energy reserves that represent wealth and jobs that would once again put America on the path to fiscal security and growth? Recently, Matt Vespa, on CNS.com reported that the International Energy Agency released a report that […]

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/norways-cops-apologize-for-sending-jews-to-death-camps-in-wwii

Tis a tad late dear Vikings….you should apologize for present day anti-Semitism and coddling of your anti-Semitic Moslem population and their Sharia demands….rsk

More than 67 years after World War II ended, Norway’s national police service officially apologized on Monday for the involvement of Norwegian cops in the deportation of more than 500 Jewish Norwegians during the Second World War.

Monday, Sept. 26, 2012, marked the 70th anniversary of the tragic and shameful episode in which 532 Jewish residents were arrested and “deported” to the infamous Nazi death camp at Auschwitz. Norway’s police herded their fellow citizens on board the German ship SS Donau to transport them to arguably the most notorious concentration camp in history.

Speaking to the Norwegian-language newspaper Dagsavisen, Norwegian police chief Odd Reidar Humlegaard said that he wished to apologize on behalf of the Norwegian Police Service and those who were involved with the deportation operation, in which more than 300 Norwegian policemen assisted the Nazis in rousting innocent Jews who were citizens of Norway.

Earlier this year, Norway’s Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg promulgated a formal apology for the deportation of the Jews to Auschwitz on behalf of the Norwegian government.

Norway’s police collaboration with the Nazi occupiers in the dark early morning 70 years ago was seen by many Norwegians as a “national shame.”