Displaying posts published in

January 2020

MARILYN PENN: A REVIEW OF JO JO RABBIT

http://politicalmavens.com/

In order to succeed, satire and parody require a common understanding of what is being satirized. If the audience doesn’t have this, satire quickly degenerates into flat-tire. Sadly, 75 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, most Americans have little idea of the history of World War II and the extent of brutality that tortured and murdered six million Jews, one million of whom were children.

The elite private school Fieldston in Riverdale which has a significant population of Jewish students has had two episodes of anti-semiitism, the first featuring swastikas that appeared in hallways and classrooms in 2015. The school initially explained the swastika as an ancient symbol of peace without mentioning the word Holocaust, and only after objections from parents, did the school call an assembly to refer to the symbol in connection with the murder of six million Jews. In October 2019, a Muslim speaker from Columbia Law School spoke at Fieldston and compared the Israeli survivors of the Holocaust to Nazis, accusing them of similar violence against Palestinians It took a month before the school responded simply by reaffirming their firmly held values without specifying what these are or condemning the outrageous comparison.

The academic response to Israel Apartheid Week on campuses across the U.S. is another example of refusal to deal with the dangers of anti-semitism No other minority would be continually pilloried in this way on any American campus but objections to turning Jewish students into pariahs have been sporadic at best, and the accompanying BDS movement, directed solely at Israel, has been supported by many campus groups including faculty.

Now for JoJo Rabbit, a film about a ten year old boy infatuated with Hitler and thrilled to be a part of Hitler Youth. Hitler appears to the boy, remaining invisible to everyone else, and the two have lively exchanges about Nazis, Jews and the need to kill them whenever possible. Oddly enough in a movie that takes place during the war, there is no mention of ghettos, concentration camps or mass shootings into pits dug by the victims. The only Jew we see is a lovely young girl who is being hidden in the attic of JoJo’s house by his mother, a sympathetic Scarlett Johansson who pays for her kind empathy later in the film. Jews who were hiding during the war lived in sewers, underground cellars, sometimes on a closet shelf for prolonged periods of time None of this is revealed or mentioned in this movie. Ironically, the only military violence we see is that of the Russian and American liberators who destroy JoJo’s town with armor, machine guns and mass explosions. If asked to review this movie, it wouldn’t be strange if a student reported that WW II was about the mass destruction of Germany.

What would the reaction of Hollywood and the Left be to a movie about illegal immigrant children who were being kept in “cages” if only one was shown in a comfortable waiting room and the only violence was that of the long lines of raucous adult immigrants storming the border fences? Would this pass as an acceptable subject for satire and would the above theoretical description be considered appropriate?

JoJo Rabbit ends with a quote from a poem by Rainer Maria Rilke: “Let everything happen to you: beauty and terror. Just keep going. No feeling is final.”
The Squad and Black Lives Matter would never allow that quote to be affixed to their contemporary complaints. To our eternal shame, it has become acceptable when it comes to the indescribable horror of the Holocaust.

JoJo Rabbit has been nominated for six Academy Awards incuding Best Picture of the Year.

Ruthie Blum :Gantz’s stammering stance and Netanyahu’s mudslinging Kicking off a political campaign by pointing out the flaws of one’s opponent is par for the course, and nobody knows this better than Benny Gantz.

https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Gantzs-stammering-stance-and-Netanyahus-mudslinging-615191

Of all the mud slung at Prime Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu, this week’s phony scandal surrounding comments he made about his key rival in the upcoming Knesset elections deserves a prize for the slimiest.

The orchestrated outrage in question followed the launch of the Likud Party campaign on Tuesday evening in Jerusalem. During the flashy event – which resembled a rock concert replete with adoring fans – Netanyahu ridiculed Blue and White chairman Benny Gantz for being indecisive and ill-fit to lead the country.The way he did this was to show a video clip of Gantz fumfering in response to questions about policy, and then to imitate the Blue and White leader’s faltering.

Making fun of the fact that Gantz’s entire platform is based on an “anybody but Bibi” mantra, Netanyahu said, “It used to be ‘either us or them.’ Today, it’s ‘either us or eh, eh, eh.’ Now the question is, ‘What would they be doing? What would they be doing if they were [heading] the government?”

Nothing unusual there. Kicking off a political campaign by pointing out the flaws of one’s opponent is par for the course. Nobody knows this better than Gantz, whose fledgling political career has consisted solely of attacks on Netanyahu.

How A Bumbling Fool Marches From Triumph To Triumph Francis Menton

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-1-20-how-a-bumbling-fool-marches-from-triumph-to-triumph

I’m old enough to remember the press coverage of Ronald Reagan as President. It was not as uniformly and aggressively hostile as the current coverage of President Trump, but close. The gist was that this guy was a bumbling fool who didn’t understand anything about either foreign or domestic policy. He had gone to a nothing college that no one had ever heard of. All the smart people knew that the right foreign policy was to reach accommodations with the Soviet Union, but instead he put us at risk of World War III by calling it an “Evil Empire” and vowing to out-compete it. The smart people also knew that the right domestic policy was massively increasing government spending, but instead he fought to restrain the government’s domestic footprint.

The Soviet Union collapsed, and the economy soared.

I thought that Reagan was quite intelligent; but another possibility is that you don’t need to be all that intelligent to do a good job as President. All you need to do is to replace the progressive program of utopian fantasies and wishful thinking with a small dose of reality and common sense.

BRUCE KESLER: A PERSONAL RECOLLECTION OF JIM LEHRER

http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/34531-A-personal-addition-to-Jim-Lehrers-standards-for-journalists.html

Back in the late ’60’s until the ’80’s I told friends that if they wanted to be really, although relatively quickly, informed about most sides of a complex issue, then they should be regular watchers of the Lehrer News Hour on PBS. Unfortunately, his successors there have not kept to that high standard, devolving into just another partisan gab.

I had personal correspondence with Jim Lehrer back in the days when I wrote many times a day for posts and publications. One such sticks in my mind. I’d just visited the traveling Vietnam memorial wall, and commented that it brought up so many feelings and memories that I had nothing to say, I was dumbstruck. Until that time, I hadn’t known that Lehrer served as a Marine officer.  He wrote back to me that he had the same reactions and feelings as I.

In the linked obit, Jim Lehrer’s standards of journalism are listed. I would add one more: if you’ve nothing really worth saying, don’t say it.

Jim Lehrer’s old school journalism is exactly how we should still be doing it today The Texas great was a true newspaperman

https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/2020/01/23/jim-lehrers-old-school-jo

By Dallas Morning News Editorial

When he signed off from his long and excellent broadcasting career, Jim Lehrer was still the same sort of journalist that he started as. He was, as he put it, a newspaperman.

The term is dated now, but Lehrer described in a common term then something important about the kind of journalism he did. It was a journalism that was sober and serious, more attached to reason than emotion, and in relentless pursuit of the facts.

His journalism was rooted in the way he did his job early in his career on the city desk of the Dallas Times-Herald and The Dallas Morning News, before he sat in front of a camera at KERA and launched himself in broadcast.

The camera’s lights never changed the man or the way he did his work, and the nation was better for it.

In his years alongside Robin MacNeil and alone, Lehrer, who died today at 85, presented the news fairly, fully and with genuine balance, standing as an example of how the work should be done of both presenting and consuming information about our world.

And it stands in such stark contrast to the nonstop nonsense of bias, noise and garbage that presents itself as television news today. That is entertainment created to hold eyeballs and sell ads. And that wasn’t Jim Lehrer’s journalism.

Lehrer was of the old school. In public broadcasting he perhaps did not have the same pressures that commercial television might have applied. But given his personal character and his strong sense of the ethics of journalism, we doubt any commercial calling would have fit him at all.

Every journalist practicing the craft today should listen to his words about how to do the job and do it well. Because that is exactly what he did.

Here is what he said.

People often ask me if there are guidelines in our practice of what I like to call MacNeil Lehrer journalism. Well, yes, there are, and here they are. Do nothing I cannot defend. Cover, write and present every story with the care I would want if the story were about me. Assume there is at least one other side or version to every story. Assume the viewer is as smart and caring and as good a person as I am. Assume the same about all people on whom I report. Assume personal lives are a private matter until a legitimate turn in the story absolutely mandates otherwise. Carefully separate opinion and analysis from straight news stories and clearly label everything. Do not use anonymous sources or blind quotes except on rare and monumental occasions. No one should ever be allowed to attack another anonymously. And, finally, I am not in the entertainment business.

Rest in peace, Jim Lehrer. You were a great newspaperman.

Nadler’s Folly By Matthew Continetti

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/trump-impeachment-trial-jerry-nadler-audience-left-wing-democrats/

Impeachment’s target audience isn’t moderate Republicans. It’s left-wing Democrats.

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said they had committed treason: “So far, I’m sad to say, I see a lot of senators voting for a cover-up. Voting to deny witnesses and obviously a treacherous vote. A vote against honest consideration of the evidence against the president. A vote against an honest trial. A vote against the United States.”

Easy, tiger. All Republicans did was follow the precedent of the Clinton trial. They also admitted the House evidence into the record. The vote on witnesses will arrive next week. Hysterical accusations of national betrayal won’t win the Democrats any converts. When Trump counsel Pat Cipollone said Nadler should feel embarrassed after insulting 53 U.S. senators, Chief Justice Roberts intervened to “admonish the House managers and the president’s counsel in equal terms to remember that they are addressing the world’s greatest deliberative body.” Roberts played it safe. He rebuked both sides. Nadler, though, was the reason he intervened.

Roberts had company. Nadler’s comments also bothered Lisa Murkowski, who said his accusation was “offensive.” Susan Collins put out a similar statement. Murkowski went further, saying she was puzzled the House didn’t go to court to force testimony from administration officials. “The House made the decision that they didn’t want to slow things down by having to go through the courts,” she said. “And yet now they’re basically saying you guys gotta go through the courts. We didn’t, but we need you to.” Why, it’s almost as if the Democrats are out for political gain rather than justice.

Sweden and its Welfare State in Crisis by Nima Gholam Ali Pour

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15414/sweden-welfare-crisis

Within a generation, Sweden’s third largest city, Malmö, will have a population in which the majority of people are of foreign background. How will integrating immigrants take place then, and which group will be integrated into which?

At the same time, many children born in Sweden learn Swedish so poorly that they cannot really speak it, because there is not enough Swedish spoken in some preschools and grade schools. This change is unfolding at a rapid pace.

It is not just Swedish society that will look radically different within a decade. The Swedish welfare state, which has been the hallmark of the Swedish state around the world, is also changing or possibly even being phased out.

The Swedish welfare state has often been praised by the left in the United States. After the migration crisis of 2015, however, when Sweden was flooded by Syrian refugee claimants, Sweden is now facing a welfare crisis that threatens the entire Swedish welfare state model.

Sweden had 9.7 million inhabitants in 2015, before it received 162,000 asylum seekers. 70% of those asylum seekers came from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq. 70% of those asylum seekers were also men. The migration crisis created an unsustainable financial and social situation that caused the Swedish political establishment to rethink its stance on asylum migration, which, until then, had been extremely liberal.

Asylum migration has continued, nevertheless. Between 2016 and 2018, more than 70,000 additional migrants have applied for asylum in Sweden, and more than 105,000 asylum migrants have been granted asylum.

WHO WERE THE BLACK PANTHERS? LLOYD BILLINGLEY

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/01/just-another-gangster-lloyd-billingsley/
Just Another Gangster Black Panther “Field Marshal” Don Cox explains it all for you.

EXCERPT:

“The Missouri-born Cox had been a member of the National Rifle Association and Bobby Seale appointed him “Field Marshal,” meaning,  “whenever you see something that needs to be done, do it.” Cox mentions shooting a cop whose crime was to be white. He was not the first nor the last law enforcement officer to be the victim of Panther violence.

Cox mentions Martin Luther King, but fails to note that Panthers mocked him as “de Lawd” and an uncle Tom. Angela Davis pops up a few times, with no mention of her Lenin Peace Prize or candidacy for vice president with the Communist Party in 1980 and 1984.

Stokely Carmichael, “Honorary Prime Minister” of the Black Panther Party condemned all whites and working coalitions with them, “which was utterly contrary to the direction Eldridge [Cleaver] had been taking the party.” As Cox explains, the Panthers were in a bitter fight with “bald headed” Ron Karenga’s US organization and its “pork-chop cultural nationalism.”  In January 1969 on the UCLA campus, Karenga’s group gunned down Panthers Bunchy Carter and John Huggins. At the funeral, Cox recalls, “niggers with bald heads were looking to shoot at anything in a black leather jacket, and niggers in black leather jackets were looking to shoot at anything with a bald head.”

The left has excused the criminal mayhem committed by Panthers like Cox as the result of the FBI’s COINTELPRO, but as Cox explains nothing could be further from the truth. Blaming COINTELPRO, he writes, “is a very convenient way of avoiding analysis.” It was not a “repression by law enforcement agencies that destroyed the Black Panther Party.”

The Untalented Mr. Schiff and His Unwatchable Vanity Adam Mill

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/22/the-untalented-mr-schiff-and-his-unwatchable-vanity/

Senators will silently endure Schiff’s prancing and twirling in his new special make-up that suppresses those rosy apple cheeks.

After a lifetime of being insulated from criticism, the Lemony Snicket character Carmelita Spats acts with unshakable confidence in her talent as a performing artist. Vicious and cruel, she subjects her victims to a twirling dance that ends with her signature sign off, “And my name is Carmelita!” Fans of A Series of Unfortunate Events—or anyone who recognizes the archetype of the “stage” child—might feel a twinge of déjà vu as Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) demands the rigging of the Senate trial with rules that allowed his hippity-hoppity kangaroo proceeding in the House to reach its predetermined result—the impeachment of President Trump.

Ugh! “Do we have to watch this?” everyone seems to be asking. 

Like a family held hostage by an untalented stage child’s living room performance, there’s no escaping Adam “Carmelita” Schiff’s vanity. The House managers will get to perform their show to a captive and paralyzed Senate audience. It must be agony to watch untalented congressmen deliver nauseating speeches about supposed commands of our Constitution. 

Schiff brayed that Trump’s actions were, “the trifecta of constitutional misconduct justifying our impeachment.” 

To what section of the Constitution does he refer? The part he made up, of course. 

Trump’s Beltway Critics Failed in Afghanistan Julie Kelly

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/23/trumps-beltway-critics-failed-in-afghanistan/

Turns out, the same class of experts that claims the president is the biggest threat to global security in 70 years has been the legitimate threat.

As I wrote earlier this week, Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden has plenty of explaining to do and not just about his son’s sweet gig with a corrupt Ukrainian energy company.

Biden, in the wake of an explosive exposé by the Washington Post, needs to account for his nearly two-decade involvement in the disastrous war in Afghanistan.

Few politicians in Washington have more fingerprints on the war’s failed planning and execution than Joe Biden: As the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for 10 years, then vice president for eight, Biden supported the 2001 invasion; co-authored the 2002 bill to authorize reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan (at a cost of least $130 billion in U.S. tax dollars and climbing) and went along with Barack Obama’s surge of U.S. troops, which began a decade ago this month.

Despite his possessing almost the reverse of a Midas Touch when it comes to foreign affairs—Afghanistan is just one of Biden’s many and storied mishaps—Biden is earning endorsements from the Beltway’s national security crowd, Democrats and Republicans alike. Coincidentally, many of Biden’s supporters populate the same disgruntled diplomatic corps that has opposed Donald Trump since he announced his candidacy and now are attempting to oust him from the White House: The House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry was animated by the self-righteous musings of career State Department bureaucrats who think they, not the president, should set foreign policy.