Displaying posts categorized under

BOOKS

The Flourishing Life of a Privileged Undocumented Immigrant Hating America while it hands you the American Dream. Jason D. Hill

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/11/flourishing-life-privileged-undocumented-immigrant-jason-d-hill/

Karla Cornejo Villavicencio was the first undocumented person to ever be a finalist for the National Book Award in 2020, according to the National Book Foundation. Her book The Undocumented Americans, published this year, is a runaway bestseller. It chronicles the lives of undocumented immigrants as well as Villavicencio’s own life in America. She was brought to the United States of America from Ecuador at age four or five by her parents—also undocumented immigrants.

Villavicencio was also, she believes, the first undocumented immigrant to graduate from Harvard University. She did so in 2011. During her senior year there she penned an anonymous essay for the Daily Beast titled: “I am an illegal immigrant at Harvard.” She was also an Emerson Collective Fellow. At just thirty-one years old, she has written for magazines (while being an undocumented immigrant) such as The Atlantic, Vogue, Glamour, The New Republic, The New York Times, and Elle. She has reviewed jazz albums for a New York monthly magazine. She is currently a Ph.D. candidate at in the American Studies Program at Yale University.

Very recently, Villavicencio was a DACA recipient and received a green card. She admits she owns and lives in a huge apartment.

But as far as she is concerned, America is not a nice place. It is a “fucking racist country.” Warning: The profanity and expletives in this book are employed with the ease with which traditional writers utilize commas and semicolons as grammatical tools to communicate effectively.

Her advice to kids who suffer is to go to Harvard and “‘Make hella money.’ Kill the salutatorian. Make it look like an accident, and in your valedictory address, remind your school that cops are pigs, and ICE are ZAZI’s.” She invokes them to believe that they are John at the foot of the cross of Jesus Christ, and perhaps, his lover.

Obama’s Simmering Resentment of Benjamin Netanyahu By Jim Geraghty

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/11/obamas-simmering-resentment-of-benjamin-netanyahu/?itm_campaign=headline-

In his new memoir, the 44th president continues to blame Netanyahu for his own failure to make peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors.

T he final chapter of Barack Obama’s third memoir, A Promised Land, begins with an extensive review of the former president’s often-testy relationship with his Israeli counterpart, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Claims that Obama was explicitly anti-Israel or anti-Semitic were always hyperbolic, but his assessment of his dealings with Netanyahu reveals the bristling disdain that fueled perceptions he was not a stalwart or reliable ally of the Jewish state.

Obama is a careful writer, and he would never risk something as incendiary as an argument that AIPAC controlled or exercised undue influence over U.S. politics, or that its members had “dual loyalty” toward both Israel and the United States. But in his description of the group and its sway, he doesn’t really keep a safe distance from those arguments, either:

Members of both parties worried about crossing the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful bipartisan lobbying organization dedicated to ensuring unwavering U.S. support for Israel. AIPAC’s clout could be brought to bear on virtually every congressional district in the country, and just about every politician in Washington — including me — counted AIPAC members among their key supporters and donors. In the past, the organization had accommodated a spectrum of views on Middle East peace, insisting mainly that those seeking its endorsement support a continuation of U.S. aid to Israel and oppose efforts to isolate or condemn Israel via the U.N. and other international bodies. But as Israeli politics had moved to the right, so had AIPAC’s policy positions. Its staff and leaders increasingly argued that there should be ‘no daylight’ between the U.S. and Israeli governments, even when Israel took actions that were contrary to U.S. policy. Those who criticized Israeli policy too loudly risked being tagged as ‘anti-Israel’ (and possibly anti-Semitic) and confronted with a well-funded opponent in the next election.

Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns: Part 1: Introduction and Death Counts and Estimates

Former New York Times reporter and prominent lockdown critic Alex Berenson provides a counterweight to media hysteria about coronavirus in this series of short booklets answering crucial questions about COVID.

Drawing on primary sources from all over the world – including state and national-level government data, Centers for Disease Control reports, and papers in prominent scientific journals – Unreported Truths offers clear, concise, and measured answers to some of the most important questions around the coronavirus:

How are COVID deaths counted?
How many Americans are likely to die in a worst-case scenario?
What is the evidence that lockdowns do or do not help reduce the spread of the illness?
Are masks an effective way to reduce the spread?
Why did the forecasts for coronavirus hospitalizations prove so wrong?
Are children at serious risk from coronavirus?
What has the mental health impact of lockdowns been?

Whether you have been skeptical of the media’s panicked reporting all along or are just starting to wonder why the predictions of doom from March and April have not come to pass, Unreported Truths will provide you with the factual, accurate, and impeccably sourced information you need.

Please note: Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns will be published in multiple sections. Part 1 includes an introduction, an examination of the way COVID deaths are counted, and a forecast for a potential worst-case scenario of coronavirus deaths in the United States.

A Book for Our Times: Peter Wood’s 1620 Skewers 1619 Project By Stanley Kurtz

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/a-book-for-our-times-peter-woods-1620-skewers-1619-project/

I can think of no book more deserving of a review in The New York Times—or less likely to receive one—than Peter Wood’s just-published 1620: A Critical Response to the 1619 Project. More than a powerful refutation, Wood’s 1620 is a withering appraisal and deadpan skewering of the 1619 Project as a cultural phenomenon. That ill-starred journalistic project is the purest and most perfect example of woke. The cultural revolution of 2020 will always rightly be associated with the 1619 Project of The New York Times. Not for nothing did project creator Nikole Hannah-Jones cheerfully embrace the term “1619 riots.”

Many young Americans believe that slavery was a novelty in world history—an exclusively American innovation. That misapprehension is abetted by the 1619 Project. Wood thus begins with a quick tour of New World slavery prior to 1619. Among the indigenous peoples of the Americas, captive enemies were kept for their labor, for the sport of torture, and in a few cases for what Wood calls “almost industrial level” human sacrifice, not to mention cannibalism.

Long before 1619, the Spanish and Portuguese used slavery to extract forced labor from native peoples. Eventually, they abolished the enslavement of native Americans in favor of something closer to serf-like dependence. Certainly, the Spanish and Portuguese imported slaves from Africa (where slavery was also common), sometimes putting them in charge of indigenous slaves. Those African overseers often discharged their task with brutality. When a party of Spanish conquistadors out to subdue what is now Florida were shipwrecked, they themselves were enslaved by the indigenes. Most died in short order. Slavery was a world-wide human norm.

In New Memoir, Obama Accuses Netanyahu of Engaging in ‘Orchestrated’ Push Against His Administration

https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/11/13/in-new-memoir-obama-accuses-netanyahu

In his own words, former US President Barack Obama regarded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “smart, canny, tough…gifted communicator” who engaged in an “orchestrated” push against his administration.

The disclosure is contained in Obama’s presidential memoir, “A Promised Land,” which will be published on Tuesday.

In excerpts of the book released in advance, Obama wrote that Netanyahu’s “vision of himself as the chief defender of the Jewish people against calamity allowed him to justify almost anything that would keep him in power.”

On the subject of AIPAC, the US pro-Israel lobbying group, Obama claimed that its positions moved rightward in accordance with a political shift in Israel, “even when Israel took actions that were contrary to US policy.”

He lamented that politicians who “criticized Israel policy too loudly risked being tagged as ‘anti-Israel’ (and possibly antisemitic) and [were] confronted with a well-funded opponent in the next election.”

Obama said that he was the subject of a “whisper campaign” that sought to portray him as “insufficiently supportive — or even hostile toward — Israel” during the 2008 presidential race.

“On Election Day, I’d end up getting more than 70 percent of the Jewish vote, but as far as many AIPAC board members were concerned, I remained suspect, a man of divided loyalties; someone whose support for Israel, as one of [campaign manager David Axelrod’s] friends colorfully put it, wasn’t ‘felt in his kishkes’ — ‘guts,’ in Yiddish,” Obama wrote.

Obama Defames ‘Millions of Americans’ as Racists in New Memoir By Jack Cashill

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/11/obama_defames_millions_of_americans_as_racists_in_new_memoir.html

Barack Obama owes the people of America an apology.

“For millions of Americans spooked by a Black man in the White House,” writes Barack Obama in his new memoir, A Promised Land, “Donald Trump promised an elixir for their racial anxiety.”

Rather than speak for the millions of Americans whom Barack Obama casually defamed, I am going to speak for the 130,000 or so residents of Chautauqua County, New York, a semi-rural “rust belt” county tucked away in the far southwest corner of western New York.

I know the county well.  I spend a good chunk of each year there and set my first published novel, 2006: A Chautauqua Rising, therein.  (Word to would-be writers: do not use names in book titles that no one can pronounce: sha-TAWK-wa).

In 2008, Mr. Obama, you won Chautauqua County.  In that the county is only 2 percent black, it was the white people of Chautauqua who elected you.  In that many residents have not seen a black American since the Buffalo Bills moved their training camp, “racial anxiety” is preposterously low on the list of local motivators.  You appeared just as black in 2008 as you did in 2012, and you scared no one.

High on the list of real anxieties was the economy.  The once prosperous county had been hemorrhaging jobs and people since 1970.  In 2008, with the economy collapsing, you promised “hope and change.”  People ignored the details and put their trust in you.

In October 2012, after four years of left-leaning economic amateurism, the national unemployment rate stood at 7.9 percent, the worst “recovery” in our history.  It was higher still in Chautauqua County.

Months before the election, with Congress unable to pass a law giving relief to the so-called “DREAMers” — young people brought to this country illegally by their parents — you unilaterally decided to give as many as a million people relief from deportation proceedings, as well as the right to apply for work authorization.

Israelis’ Worries Center on Biden’s Plans to Negotiate with Iran By P. David Hornik

https://pjmedia.com/columns/p-david-hornik/2020/11/13/israelis-worries-center-on-bidens-plans-to-negotiate-with-iran-n1141462

There’s no question about who Israel’s majority Jewish population was rooting for on November 3. A poll by the Israel Democracy Institute found 70 percent of Jewish Israelis supporting Trump, 13 percent preferring Biden, and 17 percent who didn’t know. Strikingly, with respondents defining themselves as right-wing, centrist, or left-wing, half of the left-wingers came out in favor of Trump.

Israelis, in other words, are well aware of the remarkable record Trump racked up in four years as history’s most pro-Israel president, which included: moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem; recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights; defunding the Palestinian Authority until it behaves decently and constructively; coming up with a realistic peace plan in which Israel retains indispensable parts of the West Bank; brokering peace deals with three Arab states; and — not least — treating Israel as the U.S. treats its other allies instead of constantly berating it publicly.

Most probably, though, those days are gone, and speculations now center on what to expect from a Biden presidency — particularly regarding the Palestinians and Iran. On the Palestinian track, Biden is likely, unfortunately, to throw out Trump’s peace plan and return to the “Clinton parameters” or worse, in which Israel gives up virtually all of the West Bank and turns Jerusalem into a divided, warring city. Even so, with domestic issues on his plate like COVID-19 and an economy striving to recover from the pandemic, many believe Biden won’t replicate Barack Obama’s obsession with the stubborn, self-pitying Palestinians — who have proved unamenable to peacemakers since the late 1930s.

The Deep State From Inside Out Rich Higgins’ new memoir reveals just how murky is the swamp. Jack Cashill

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/deep-state-inside-out-jack-cashill/

“The Trump administration is suffering under withering information campaigns designed to first undermine, then delegitimize and ultimately remove the President,” so wrote National Security Council staffer Rich Higgins in a May 2017 memo that ultimately landed on President Trump’s desk. Although the NeverTrumpers in the NSC did not succeed in removing Trump, they did remove Higgins.

The Higgins memo reportedly distressed National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, who had replaced Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn in the position. McMaster ordered a probe that some described as “McCarthy-type” to identify the author. That search led to Higgins, a Flynn loyalist who had worked on the Trump campaign.

After his authorship was established, Higgins had to choose between resignation and termination, the latter coming with the potential loss of his security clearance. Higgins resigned and was promptly escorted out of the building.

An everyday guy from Boston, Higgins had started his career as an army bomb technician with a hands-on specialty in IEDs, worked his way up to become an anti-terrorism expert, and ended his stint in the Deep State as a national security expert in the Trump administration.

Here is one unnerving fact: Trump received only 4 percent of the vote in the District of Columbia. As Higgins tells the tale in his new eye-opening memoir, The Memo: 20 Years Inside the Deep State Fighting for America First, the staffers at the National Security Council were no more disposed to support the president’s agenda than were the District voters writ large.

Higgins tells his tale well. I downed the book in two quick gulps. It was that good, that readable, that prescient, and that essential. As closely as I follow events, before reading this book I had no real sense of just how deep and murky the swamp is.

“Great Society,” by Amity Schlaes Reviewed by Sydney Williams

https://swtotd.blogspot.com/

The book reviewed, Great Society by Amity Schlaes, is a timely history of what happens when hopes and expectations exceed capabilities. It is especially timely now when Socialism and the “Green New Deal” are being pushed on the American people by a progressive left that has become distanced from the average American.

By the time John Kennedy became President, The Depression was a distant memory and World War II had been over for over fifteen years. Americans were prospering. Theys felt good about themselves. They were admired by friends and feared by enemies. But, as happens once prosperity becomes common, people don’t seem to care or understand the role capitalism plays in eliminating poverty and making lives comfortable and happy. They don’t understand that nothing moves in straight lines – GDP growth, stock market performance, human emotions, or views of liberty. In the 1960s, the compounded rate for the Dow Jones Industrial Averages (DJIA) was 4.9% – all in the first half of the decade – and in the ensuing decade, the DJIA lost eight percent. What happened in the ‘60s, and its effect on subsequent decades, is the subject of this well-researched history of the period from the summer of 1960 to the summer of 1972. 

On January 20, 1961, a 43-year-old John F. Kennedy became the youngest U.S. President since Theodore Roosevelt. In his inaugural he focused on the Country’s strength and the meaning of freedom: “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty.” Americans were confident. In May of that same year, Kennedy announced a goal of putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade. Yet the Cold War persisted, poverty had not been vanquished and civil rights were not equally shared. Convinced of a need to stop the spread of Communism got us entangled in Vietnam. Concern for those living in penury led to the War on Poverty. Disquiet about equality and fairness were behind the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. A decade that began on a high note, exemplified in Kennedy’s inaugural, ended with Nixon taking the nation off the gold standard on August 15, 1971. The years between witnessed a growth in national debt, a declining Dollar, student riots, and the assassination of a President, a civil rights leader and a U.S. Senator and Presidential candidate.

‘Crosswinds’ Review: Middle East Balancing Act An exploration of the Saudi temper that has both the interpretative heft of scholarship and the anecdotal brilliance of literary travelogue. By Martin Peretz

https://www.wsj.com/articles/crosswinds-review-middle-east-balancing-act-11603149873?mod=opinion_reviews_pos1

Search for recent news articles about Saudi Arabia and the first name certain to appear is that of Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi journalist and inside player of Saudi power politics who was exiled from the kingdom, became an outspoken critic of the House of Saud, and in October 2018 met his gruesome end in an ambush inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul—an attack about which Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman denies any foreknowledge. The Khashoggi incident was met by world-wide revulsion; it’s been a blow to Saudi Arabia’s reputation that, in comparison to those of the kingdom’s neighbors, is warranted but not deserved. Every day, for example, more evidence surfaces of the top-down human-rights abuses in Iran and the unending human wreckage caused by the Syrian genocide. Still, Khashoggi’s fate has become a more potent symbol than either of these, emblematic of an increasingly hardline, conservative regime that the American foreign-policy establishment, and much of the American public, dislikes and distrusts.

Actions don’t exist outside of contexts. Insisting on a less myopic look at Saudi Arabia doesn’t mean excusing Khashoggi’s murder, but it does mean contextualizing it, bringing to it an analytical commitment to complexity too often attenuated in our times. This is the indirect achievement of “Crosswinds,” a posthumous book by Fouad Ajami that makes sense of the Saudi kingdom on its own terms—terms dense and tense with possibilities.

The Lebanon-born Ajami, who died in 2014 at age 68, was director of Middle East Studies at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and America’s most prominent pragmatic idealist about the possibilities of liberalization in the Middle East. “Crosswinds,” completed in 2010 and drawing on 30 years of anecdote and analysis, attempts to gauge those possibilities in Saudi Arabia, not as an apologia for the kingdom but as a corrective to facile critiques.

In this work, more penetrating than argumentative and more deepening than sweeping, Ajami shows that behind its deliberately opaque exterior, modern Saudi Arabia has been defined by the calibration of tensions between competing forces: deep conservatism and yearnings for modernity; the ferocity of radicalism and the dependability of oil revenues; pressures from America to move left and from Iran to move right. The role of the monarchy in negotiating these crosswinds implicitly repudiates the brutal despotic repressions of regional neighbors like Iran and Syria: the Saudis may be authoritarians but they are also pragmatists.