RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://www.israpundit.com/archives/46173

In 1923, Jabotinsky contemplated how to achieve Zionist aims of a Jewish majority. He understood that to do so Jews had to be protected by an “iron wall” so to speak, maintained by the British, behind which Jews would be free to immigrate subject to absorptive capacity. He disabused his fellow Zionists of any possibility of reaching a voluntary agreement with the Arabs so long as they had any hope of preventing it. The reason being that “there has never been an indigenous inhabitant anywhere or at any time who has ever accepted the settlement of others in his country.” (Except I must note, Europe today.)

And he knew that the Arabs would not be bought off with offers of of material betterment. In fact he rejected “endless talks” to get an agreement, which no amount of concessions could achieve, and called such talks “a snare and a delusion”. Sound familiar. He wrote “We would destroy our cause if we proclaimed the necessity of an agreement.” His message to us today is end the peace process and colonize the land. Ted Belman

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2012/05/25/sharia-supremacists-take-first-and-third-place-in-egypts-presidential-elections/

Sharia Supremacists Take First and Third Place in Egypt’s Presidential Elections
Morsi, Morsi, Morsi (apologies to Cannonball Adderly [2])

Reports from the NY Times [3] and Reuters confirm [4] that the Muslim Brotherhood’s late entry “replacement” candidate, Mohammed Morsi, and a rival Muslim Brotherhood member candidate, Aboul Fotouh, garnered [4] first and third place, 25% and 20% of the vote tally, respectively, during the initial round of voting in the Egyptian Presidential elections. Second place went to another late entry in the contest, Ahmed Shafik, a former Air Force general who briefly served as Mr. Mubarak’s last prime minister, received 23% of the vote. Morsi and Shafik will face each other in a final run-off election on June 16th and 17th

http://www.turnerforny.com/

I MET BOB TURNER LAST NIGHT….AND HE IS WHAT WE NEED IN THE SENATE. REMEMBER EVEN A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WILL BE HAMSTRUNG IS THE SENATE IS STILL RUN BY THE DEMS…..RSK

Issues change. Principles do not. We often ask, where does so-and-so stand on the issues. The better question is what are his or her principles?

Here are Bob Turner’s.

* – The Constitution is our nation’s rulebook. We ought to follow it in all matters.
* – The best government is the least government.
* – We shouldn’t spend more than we bring in. There should be an Amendment to enforce that.
* – Tax increases hurt the economy. We should avoid raising taxes wherever possible.
* – Energy is our lifeblood. The Keystone pipeline, which Kirsten Gillibrand opposes, is a no-brainer.
* – Obamacare will destroy U.S. healthcare and bankrupt the nation. It should be repealed.
* – The safest country is the one with the best prepared military.
* – There is evil in the world. We need to stand firmly with our allies when they are threatened by it.
* – Human life is sacred.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/300971/cruz-reaches-runoff-katrina-trinko

In this Tuesday’s Texas Senate primary, Ted Cruz has one objective: Force a runoff.

A primary runoff would allow Cruz to directly square off with lieutenant governor David Dewhurst, who is currently leading in the polls. If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote, the top two contenders will face each other in a runoff on July 31.

“The best guess right now is there’s going to be a runoff, and the runoff is going to be between Ted Cruz and David Dewhurst,” says Mark P. Jones, a political-science professor at Rice University.

A veritable who’s who of conservative stars have endorsed Cruz, with his backers including Rick Santorum, Jim DeMint, and Rand Paul. FreedomWorks and the Club for Growth have both endorsed him, with the latter spending around $2 million to tout Cruz. National Review has endorsed him, as have talk-radio hosts Sean Hannity and Mark Levin.

Cruz campaign manager John Drogin describes the race as “ground zero in the battle between the tea-party conservatives and the establishment.” He compares it to Indiana, where conservative Richard Mourdock beat Dick Lugar in the recent Senate primary, and to Nebraska, “another situation where a conservative beat an establishment moderate,” when state legislator Deb Fischer defeated the state treasurer and state attorney general in a primary. Like Fischer, Cruz has been endorsed by Sarah Palin.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/301005/unleash-biden-rich-lowry An out-of-control veep makes the worst possible case for his president. Joe Biden is performing a public service, God love him. Out on the stump, he renders the case for President Barack Obama’s reelection in all its populist crudity. No dulcet tones. No faux sophistication. No charm. C’mon, man! There’s no time for that […]

Three Key ‘Fast and Furious’ Questions Still Unanswered

http://pjmedia.com/blog/three-key-fast-and-furious-questions-still-unanswered/?print=1

The congressional investigations into the gunwalking plot known as Operation Fast and Furious largely faded from the public eye over the past month, yet there is a growing conviction [1] among legislators of both parties that a grueling political battle is ahead.

Those determined to uncover the truth behind Fast and Furious are being opposed by Democratic congressmen and Obama administration officials such as Deputy Attorney General James Cole. Cole has objected to the House Oversight Committee’s investigation and the actions of Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa. His recent combative letter to Issa received sympathetic coverage at progressive site TPMMuckraker [2]:

Rep. Darrell Issa’s drive to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt is “unwarranted,” “unprecedented” and “ill-advised,” a top Justice Department official said in a letter to the California Republican, who is chair of the House Oversight Committee, on Tuesday.

Deputy Attorney General James Cole also wrote that the committee’s “core questions” on the flawed gun trafficking operation known as Fast and Furious “have been answered.”

Cole suggested that the lack of documents showing high-level discussions about the tactics used in Fast and Furious show the problem grew out of offices in Arizona and that top Obama administration were not aware that ATF agents were telling gun shop dealers to sell large quantities of weapons to individuals they suspected were “straw purchasers” for Mexican drug cartels.

“Far from reflecting a ‘cover-up,’ as some have claimed, the lack of documents makes clear that these tactics had their origin in the field in Arizona and not among Department leaders in Washington,” Cole wrote.

Cole’s assertions would be laughable, were it not for the hundreds of bodies linked to Fast and Furious weapons and their almost certain role in a recent spike in violence in northern Mexico that has resulted in bodies turning up by the dozens [3].

The deputy attorney general — who is also suspected of having a role in the plot — is correct when he claims the congressional investigation is “unprecedented.” Never in American history has an administration stood accused of facilitating the smuggling of thousands of weapons in an attempt to generate murders as propaganda for undermining the constitutional rights of Americans.

Multiple [4] Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) [5] agents [6] have testified under oath that the explicit intent of the operation was to have guns purchased by straw purchasers be smuggled over the border and recovered at Mexican crime scenes. The entire plot hinged upon Mexican citizens being killed with walked guns. As one supervisor said to an agent [7] complaining about the deaths that would occur: “If you’re going to make an omelette, you’ve got to break some eggs.”

Cole did not try to refute these facts: he simply lied in stating that “core questions” about Fast and Furious “have been answered.” More than 18 months after Border Patrol agent Brian Terry was gunned down by a cartel “rip team” led by an FBI informant, the Department of Justice has refused to answer the three most basic questions [8] about the gun-walking plot:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/stealth_islamic_propaganda_shown_to_six_million_american_students.html

On May 16 and 17 of 2012, Channel One Network, a national distributor of educational videos and newscasts viewed daily by over 8,000 middle and high schools, aired a two-part video series, titled “Young and Muslim in America” and “Islam in America.”

In “Young and Muslim in America: How being a part of Islam changed ten years ago, Part 1,” students watch as Muhtasham Sifaat, 18, kneels on a prayer rug inside an empty classroom. His voiceover explains how he moved around a lot when he was younger, but Islam has given him stability. What is not revealed is that Mr. Sifaat is a political activist serving as a chapter president of the Muslim Students Association (MSA), one of the most radical Muslim Brotherhood front groups in America.

The MSA pledge states: “Allah is my lord. Islam is my life. The Koran is my guide. The Sunna is my practice. Jihad is my spirit. Righteousness is my character. Paradise is my goal. I enjoin what is right. I forbid what is wrong. I will fight against oppression. And I will die to establish Islam.”

Kyle Smith, 22, gives an overview of the five pillars of Islam before the narrator explains:

Kyle, who’s president of his university’s Muslim Students Association, grew up in a Roman Catholic family, but converted to Islam three years ago after searching for meaning in his life (italics mine)…two of his friends led him to the religion.

Doesn’t searching for meaning in life describe almost every American adolescent? Presenting an idealized, whitewashed image of Islam and its followers, and showing how converting to Islam helps those who are lost and confused, this programming is nothing short of a disguised recruitment video pushing a religion in a public school setting.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/under-obama-30-worst-months-of-employment-in-the-past-25-years?f=must_reads

http://www.weeklystandard.com/print/blogs/under-obama-30-worst-months-employment-past-25-years_645771.html

The federal government’s Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes monthly tallies for the employment-population ratio. That stat shows something rather straightforward: Among those who are living in America and are free to pursue employment, what percentage are employed? (The bureau excludes those who are under 16 years old, are active-duty military, or are — in the bureau’s own words — “inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities, homes for the aged),” from its tallies.)

Over the past quarter of a century (a total of 300 months), dating back to May 1987 and the Reagan administration, here are the 30 worst months (that is, the bottom 10 percent) for the employment-population ratio, along with the president who happened to be in office at that particular time (scroll down to the see the list):

1. (tie) July 2011, 58.2 percent, President Barack Obama
1. (tie) June 2011, 58.2 percent, Obama
1. (tie) November 2010, 58.2 percent, Obama
1. (tie) December 2009, 58.2 percent, Obama
5. (tie) August 2011, 58.3 percent, Obama
5. (tie) December 2010, 58.3 percent, Obama
5. (tie) October 2010, 58.3 percent, Obama
8. (tie) April 2012, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) October 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) September 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) May 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) April 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) February 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) January 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2012, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) January 2012, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) December 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) November 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) September 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) August 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) July 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) June 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) February 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) January 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) November 2009, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) October 2009, 58.5 percent, Obama
29. February 2012, 58.6 percent, Obama
30. (tie) May 2010, 58.7 percent, Obama
30. (tie) April 2010, 58.7 percent, Obama
30. (tie) September 2009, 58.7 percent, Obama

Interestingly, the 30 (or 32, including ties) worst months for employment in the past 25 years have all come after the most recent recession ended, in June 2009. In other words, they’ve all come during the Obama “recovery.”

What’s more, under every other president during the past 25 years (spanning from the later stages of the Reagan presidency through the entire George W. Bush presidency), the employment-population ratio was always over 60 percent — every single month, for 260 consecutive months. In vivid contrast, with the exception of the month in which he took office (January 2009) and his first full month in office (February 2009), the employment-population ratio under Obama has always been under 60 percent — every single month, for 38 consecutive months. (For 32 consecutive months — from September 2009 to the present day — it’s been under 59 percent.)

In fact, the worst non-Obama month in the past 25 years was December 2008, when the employment-population ratio was 61.0 percent under George W. Bush. Comparatively, Obama’s best month to date (not counting January 2009, when he entered midstream) was his first, February 2009, when the employment-population ratio was 60.3 percent. In other words, over the past 25 years, the worst month under any other president has beaten the best month under Obama.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/coexisting-with-sharia?f=must_reads http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/300883/coexisting-sharia-karen-lugo   You have probably seen the “coexist” bumper sticker. It implies that we should all just try harder to get along. Wherever we turn, it seems, we are assured that efforts to embrace differences will result only in harmony, although the bargain often entails that we abandon our core cultural principles and our […]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/300512/breaking-house-windsor-one-five-tribes-mark-steyn

My weekend column mentions en passant Teepee Party candidate Elizabeth Warren’s contributions to the cookbook Pow Wow Chow, a “compilation of recipes passed down through the Five Tribes families”:

The recipes from “Elizabeth Warren — Cherokee” include a crab dish with tomato mayonnaise. Mrs. Warren’s fictional Cherokee ancestors in Oklahoma were renowned for their ability to spear the fast-moving Oklahoma crab. It’s in the state song: “Ooooooklahoma! Where the crabs come sweepin’ down the plain . . . ” But then the white man came and now the Oklahoma crab is extinct, and at the Cherokee clambakes they have to make do with Mrs. Warren’s traditional Five Tribes recipe for Cherokee Lime Pie.

Shortly after my column was filed yesterday afternoon, our Noah Glyn reported that Mrs Warren’s crab dish passed down from her Cherokee ancestors actually came from an upscale Manhattan eatery on 55th Street across from the St Regis:

Two of the possibly plagiarized recipes, said in the Pow Wow Chow cookbook to have been passed down through generations of Oklahoma Native American members of the Cherokee tribe, are described in a New York Times News Service story as originating at Le Pavilion, a fabulously expensive French restaurant in Manhattan. The dishes were said to be particular favorites of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor and Cole Porter.

The Pundette wonders: “Were they Cherokee, too?“

No. But, as Broadway’s first Native American composer, Cole Porter wrote about his Indian blood in his famous song, “I’ve Got Sioux Under My Skin”.

Actually, that last line quoted above briefly made me wonder if writing about American liberalism isn’t a threat to one’s sanity. Some societies are racist, some societies work hard to be non-racist, but only in America does the nation’s most prestigious law school hire a 100 per cent white female as its first “woman of color” on the basis that she once mailed in the Duke of Windsor’s favorite crab dish to a tribal cookbook.

Before he ascended to the throne, the Duke inspired a hit song of reflected celebrity: “I Danced With A Man Who Danced With A Girl Who Danced With The Prince Of Wales”. That seems to be how Harvard Law’s identity-group quota-filling works. I’m confident Elizabeth Warren will eventually be able to prove she danced with a man who danced with a girl who danced with someone who once changed planes at a municipal airport accidentally built on a Cherokee burial ground.