Displaying posts published in

February 2025

Understanding the Fight Over Birthright Citizenship By John Fonte

https://tomklingenstein.com/understanding-the-fight-over-birthright-citizenship/

President Donald Trump has triggered the beginning of a national debate on automatic birthright citizenship. On his first day back in office, the president signed an executive order ending the practice. Almost immediately a court temporarily blocked the executive order. At the same time, legislation was quickly introduced in Congress to end automatic birthright citizenship, essentially supporting the executive order. No doubt this dance will continue with appeals and counter-appeals in the courts and actions in the Congress. 

Let us step back and review the over 150-year history of birthright citizenship and its significance for the core American principle of “government by the consent of the governed.” 

The majority of the American political and legal establishment argues that the 14th Amendment is clear: Anyone born in the United States (with the exception of the children of foreign diplomats and enemy soldiers) is automatically an American citizen whether their parents are in the country legally or illegally.

The relevant clause of the 14th Amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Although there is no explicit exception for diplomats and enemy soldiers, these exceptions have long been understood to be covered by “jurisdiction.”

The Contours of the Debate

Don’t Be Fooled: The Palestinian Authority Did Not Halt Payments To Terrorists by Bassam Tawil

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21401/palestinian-authority-payments-to-terrorists

“Abbas claims to have ended the ‘Pay for Slay’ program – but it’s just a rebranding… Terrorists and their families will still receive payments, just through a ‘foundation’ under Abbas’s control instead of a ministry. The new foundation remains tied to the PA, making this a deceptive move, not real reform. The PA must truly end terror payments and incitement – not just change how they guise them.” — Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, X.com, February 12, 2025.

The Palestinian Authority has made it clear that it is making this change not because it believes it is wrong to fund terror, but because it needs US money. The Arabic version of the decree clearly states that the main goal is to “restore international aid programs that were suspended in the past years, which we need to implement development and economic recovery programs.”

While several international media outlets continue to argue that Abbas halted the payments to the terrorists, Monica al-Jaghoub, a senior official with the PA’s ruling Fatah faction (headed by Abbas), denied the claims.

The reality is that Abbas did not — and never will — stop the payments to terrorists and their families.

Did Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas halt payments to Palestinian terrorists and their families? Or is he just trying to fool the Americans to persuade them to resume financial aid to the PA?

On February 10, the American media outlet Axios reported:

“Abbas has issued a decree revoking the system of payments to families of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails or to families of Palestinians who were killed or wounded during attacks against Israelis.”

The payment program is known as “Pay for Slay.”

PA officials told Axios that they hope Abbas’s decision will improve relations with the Trump administration and with Congress and lead to the resumption of US financial aid to the PA.

Houellebecq’s Annihilation: an unlikely antidote to nihilism His final novel strikes a rare note of hope among his usual cynicism and despair. Neil McCarthy

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/02/16/houellebecqs-annihilation-an-unlikely-antidote-to-nihilism/

French master Michel Houellebecq has said that his latest novel, Annihilation, will be his last. If that does prove to be true, his departure will deprive us of a rare literary voice.

There is simply no one quite like Houellebecq. Through his novels he is able to explore the mood of the times, our spiritual malaise, in a way few other writers can. Take his last great succès de scandale – his 2015 novel, Submission. It dramatised the self-induced decline of the West and the rise of Islamism. And it did so by convincingly presenting the seemingly impossible – an Islamist political party assuming governmental power in France – as something entirely predictable and chillingly banal. He painted a picture of a political and cultural elite all too eager to collaborate with and ultimately submit to an Islamist regime.

Submission quickly acquired a tragic poignancy. On 7 January 2015, the exact day the novel was due to be published in France, two French-born Islamist gunmen massacred the staff of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo on the grounds it had insulted Islam. Houellebecq suspended all promotional activities and left Paris to lie low.

At the same time, in an echo of the themes of Submission, too few among the French political class were willing to stand up for free speech, a fundamental principle of Western liberal democracies. Instead, they criticised Charlie Hebdo for its mockery of Islam. French prime minister Manuel Valls denounced ‘hatred’ and ‘intolerance’ towards Islam and Muslims. Tellingly, he insisted that ‘France is not Michel Houellebecq’.

We’re now a decade on from the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Houellebecq’s Anéantir, originally published in January 2022, was finally translated into English and published as Annihilation in late 2024.

This delay in publishing the translation is striking. Houellebecq’s previous novel, Serotonin, was published in France in January 2019 and the English translation appeared just months later. Contractual difficulties reportedly played a role in the delay of Annihilation. But it’s hard not to suspect that the increasing provincialisation of the Anglosphere played a role, too. In the 1950s and 1960s, the films of François Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard, or the novels of Françoise Sagan and Marguerite Duras, were part of the culture here as well as in France. Today, the latest French novels or films barely register in the English-speaking world.

President Trump’s policy toward Israel – underlying assumptions Yoram Ettinger

bit.ly/3X0cuLm

 
1. President Trump is not an impartial leader. As expected, he is driven by US interests, determining that Israel’s capabilities and track record have been a unique force and dollar multiplier for the US, commercially and militarily, technologically and operationally.

2. President Trump views Islamic terrorism as a threat to Western democracies, including the US (“The Great American Satan”) – a mutual threat to both the US and Israel. He is aware of NATO’s vacillation (No Action Talk Only), and its unwillingness to flex any effective military and political muscle against Islamic terrorism. Also, all pro-US Arab regimes have the machetes of Iran’s Ayatollahs and the Muslim Brotherhood at their throats. Thus, Israel is the most potent, reliable and experienced ally in the US’ battle against Islamic terrorism. Trump views Israel as an essential ally in his attempt to end wars and terrorism, which requires the obliteration – not containment – of the epicenters of war and terrorism (e.g., Iran’s Ayatollahs, Hamas and Hezbollah).

3. President Trump aspires to minimize US military presence in the Middle East. However, he does not ignore the critical role played by the Middle East as the main epicenter of global anti-US Islamic terrorism and drug trafficking, and the site of 48% of global oil reserves. Also, the Middle East is a junction of critical trade routes between Asia and West Europe, stretching between the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Persian Gulf and between Europe, Asia and Africa. President Trump considers Israel as the only effective ally to fill in the vacuum created by a US military withdrawal, serving as a US strategic beachhead, while not requiring US military personnel, only US military hardware – the largest US aircraft carrier with no Americans on board.

Trump Calls Education Department a ‘Con Job,’ Wants It Closed ‘Immediately’ “If we’re ranked No. 40, that means something’s really wrong.” by Robert Spencer

https://www.frontpagemag.com/trump-calls-education-department-a-con-job-wants-it-closed-immediately/

Could the Department of Education (DOE), a massive boondoggle that has done nothing but oversee a decline in the quality of American education and the substitution of wokeism for readin’, writin’, and ‘rithmetic, really go away? If Donald Trump wins yet another victory, it will.

Fox News reported Wednesday that reporters asked Trump how soon he wanted the department closed. “Oh, I’d like it to be closed immediately,” the president replied. “Look at the Department of Education. It’s a big con job. They ranked the top countries in the world. We’re ranked No. 40, but we’re ranked No. 1 in one department: cost per pupil. So, we spend more per pupil than any other country in the world, but we’re ranked No. 40.” Trump also “said the last time he looked at where the U.S. ranked in education, it was 38th, but then he looked two days ago, and the country had fallen to No. 40.”

Trump also noted that China’s educational system appears to be in fine condition: “As big as it is, it’s ranked in the top five, and that’s our… primary competitor. So, if we’re ranked No. 40, that means something’s really wrong.”

Yes. And it has been wrong for a very long time. Jimmy Carter established the Department of Education, and one of Ronald Reagan’s campaign promises was that he would close it, as it was an unnecessary centralization and bureaucratization of an educational system that had been getting along fine without a Cabinet-level federal agency. When Reagan took office, he appointed Terrel Bell to be his secretary of education, with the explicit task of dismantling the department. In this case, however, the swamp beat the Gipper, and the Education department stayed open.

Is There a Democrat Blueprint to Regain Power? Democrats seem stuck in a cycle of rage and resistance, recycling failed anti-Trump tactics while losing ground with voters and donors alike. By Victor Davis Hanson

https://amgreatness.com/2025/02/17/is-there-a-democrat-blueprint-to-regain-power/

“The voters’ problem with the new Democratic Party is not just that they are old and unhinged, but that they are so wearily and predictably boring.”

What is the long-term Democratic Party’s strategy to return to power?

Americans may ask that only because so far, the Democrat agenda seems to entail polarizing and alienating as many voters as possible.

They gleefully double down on their 2024 defeat. And they seem almost to grow ecstatic at ensuring that Donald Trump and his record poll at unprecedented highs.

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) rants on national TV that Trump is a d—k and promises to go to “war” against him.

Democratic representatives chant “f—k Trump” on national television.

Senator “Spartacus” Booker (D-NJ) almost daily shouts to high heaven and barks out promises of massive resistance, proving he is far crazier than his allegedly crazy Trump.

During the recent cabinet confirmations, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Tim Kaine lost their minds in impotent rage at the nominees and played the fools—furious at a few timid Democrat suggestions to tone it down.

Democrats bark that Elon Musk is even more Satanic than Trump.

They swarm and try to break into the Department of Education. They shut down the LA freeways. And in the case of illegal aliens, they wave the flag of the nation they fled from, while burning the flag of the nation in which they demand to remain.

Trump Gets Broad Backing On Illegal Immigration Crackdown: I&I/TIPP Poll Terry Jones

https://issuesinsights.com/2025/02/17/trump-gets-broad-backing-on-illegal-immigration-crackdown-ii-tipp-poll/

President Donald Trump’s actions since reclaiming the Oval Office to secure America’s borders, remove criminals and keep other illegal immigrants out are proving to be highly popular among American voters, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows. Even a significant share of Democrats support Trump’s policies.

If you’re looking for a reason why Trump won so handily against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris, illegal immigration looms large. The online national I&I/TIPP Poll, taken from Jan. 29-31, asked 1,478 adults around the country four questions about Trump’s immigration policies and the actions he has taken so far. The poll has a margin of error of +/-2.6 percentage points.

The first question: “Do you support or oppose Trump’s promise of large-scale deportations of illegal migrants?” By a roughly 3-to-2 majority, voters back this idea. The actual numbers: 57% say they support it either “strongly” (35%) or “somewhat” (22%), while just 35% oppose it “strongly” (22%) or “somewhat” (13%). Another 8% aren’t sure.

How does that split with regard to political affiliation? Republicans (85% support, 11% oppose) and independents (54% support, 37% oppose) both gave strong backing.

What about the Democrats? A solid majority oppose it, at 59%, but 31% (nearly one in three) support it. And that support likely comes from two pillars of the Democratic Party: black voters (43% support, 45% oppose) and Hispanic voters (46% support, 44% oppose).