RUTHFULLY YOURS

He’s used the budget sequester to accomplish what looks to have been his political goal from the start.

News last month of the U.S. Army’s decision to cut 40,000 active-duty soldiers, shrinking to 450,000 by 2017, drew fusillades inside the Beltway. Sen. John McCain assailed “another dangerous consequence of budget-driven strategy.” Adam Smith, ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, fumed: “Sequestration and the Budget Control Act, which are responsible for slashing the defense budget, exist because the Republican Party held our economy hostage and threatened to default on our loans.”

These sound bites might bewilder Americans unfamiliar with the details of sequestration. Explanation is in order.

To start at the beginning: In 2011 Democrats controlled the White House and Senate, but Republicans promising fiscal restraint had swept the 2010 elections and controlled the House. That set up an inevitable confrontation, which culminated in the summer of 2011.

The embargo does not block the sale of books to Cuba, or isolate its economy from the world.

Getting to the left of Vermont senator and avowed socialist Bernie Sanders is no easy feat. But Hillary Clinton’s speech in Miami Friday was an excellent effort. What could be more reassuring to the extreme fringe of the Democratic Party (i.e., primary voters) than a candidate who uses the talking points of Fidel and Raúl Castro to explain Cuban isolation and misery?

The problem for the rest of the electorate is what the speech says about Mrs. Clinton’s foreign-policy judgment. Her remarks do not inspire confidence that she has a strategy for dealing with the intransigent Castro dictatorship.

The agency has failed to properly weigh the costs, even though the Supreme Court says it must.

On Monday President Obama is announcing the final version of his Clean Power Plan, the carbon-emission rules for power plants to secure his climate-change legacy. The plan is designed to hobble electricity generators much as the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2012 rule to reduce mercury and other emissions has harmed the coal industry.

Fortunately for consumers, on June 29 the Supreme Court slapped down the agency’s 2012 rule. In Michigan v. EPA, the court said the agency failed its legal obligation to compare the cost of its mercury standards with the benefits.

HEAR SPEECH: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/69400953
In a speech to the National Conservative Student Conference, United States Senator Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) harshly condemned President Obama’s proposed nuclear deal with the Iranian regime. Speaking to Breitbart News following the speech, Senator Cotton emphasized the importance of involving young Americans in foreign policy issues.

In an interview with Breitbart News, Senator Cotton stressed the need to communicate American principles to youth. “America was founded on principles that transcend time and space. It is our duty to lead on the global stage, and when we communicate our history to the youth, they will understand why we must lead,” the Senator said.

When pressed on what many perceive as a growing apathy among young people towards foreign events and national security, Senator Cotton replied that he was not particularly worried. “Our very best and brightest have always gone into the United States military. Those serving on the frontlines understand why we’re fighting, and they serve us well,” he said.

Senator Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, is a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Rep. Pompeo, a Republican from Kansas (District 4), is a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Mark Pompeo rates a -5 from the Arab American Association for his strong support of Israel. Tom Cotton is continually targeted by the Obamathons for his cogent criticism…..rsk

For those of us who are elected officials, few votes will be more consequential than whether to approve or disapprove the nuclear agreement President Obama has reached with Iran. Yet the president expects Congress to cast this vote without the administration’s fully disclosing the contents of the deal to the American people. This is unacceptable and plainly violates the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act—a law the president signed only weeks ago.

During a recent trip to Vienna to meet with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the organization charged with verifying Iran’s compliance, we learned that certain elements of this deal are—and will remain—secret. According to the IAEA, those involved with the negotiations, including the Obama administration, agreed to allow Iran to forge the secret side deals with the IAEA on two issues.

In a recent column in the Orange County Register, demographer Joel Kotkin wrote, “California is a great state in which to be rich,” but he added that affluence in California “co-exists alongside unconscionable poverty.” He pointed out that in the Golden State, the poverty rate for Latinos is 33.7 percent and for African Americans, 30 percent. Both those percentages are well above national averages.

Kotkin’s column, which carried the headline “Putting climate change ahead of constituents,” excoriates the energy policies being promoted by California’s liberal politicians, policies that he calls “environmental puritanism.” Kotkin (whom I am proud to call a friend) has it exactly right. California may be one of America’s most liberal states, but its energy policies are regressive, and the state’s headlong rush toward lower carbon-dioxide emissions and greater use of renewables will only make that regressivity worse.

On the surface lies and jokes may appear harmless. Many of the lies for Jews are so absurd it’s hard to imagine that anyone would believe them. But they do.Anti-Semitism and hatred for Jews are fanned by lies and jokes dating back centuries.

In the 14th.century a sickening lie ” Blood Libel” made the claim that Jews kill Christian children for their blood to make matzo (unleavened bread). To this day it is still circulated. Also in the 14th century Jews were blamed for poisoning wells across Europe causing the Black Plague.

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion , written in 1905 by agents of the Russian czar, claims to be minutes of secret Jewish meetings where they planned to rule the world. It is the most notorious anti-Semitic collection of lies widely distributed. Although discredited it is still circulated worldwide, notably in heavily populated Muslim countries.

— Kim R. Holmes is a former assistant secretary of state for international organizational affairs. His views are his alone and do not reflect the views of any organization.

Over the past couple of months, I’ve had the opportunity to discuss foreign-policy issues with Wisconsin governor Scott Walker. Beforehand, I didn’t know him personally and so didn’t know what to expect. Well, here is what I found: Walker has the potential to be a great foreign-policy president. Here’s why.

The first thing I learned is that Scott Walker is eager to talk about foreign policy. He relishes discussing the ins and outs of an issue and shows a curiosity that frankly I wish many of our senators had. He engages precisely at the level a president should, asking tough questions about the strategic importance of an issue, and his keenest interest is in finding how to improve America’s position in the world. There isn’t an apologize-for-America bone in his body.

Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe and his appointees to the Virginia State Board of Elections seem determined to ensure that felons and non-citizens can illegally register and vote in elections without getting caught.

In April 2015, Governor McAuliffe vetoed House Bill 1315, which would have required jury commissioners to retain information from individuals not qualified to serve as jurors for reasons that would also disqualify them from voting, such as

not being a citizen of the United States
no longer being a resident of the Commonwealth
being a resident of another county or city in the Commonwealth
having been convicted of a felony and having not provided evidence that their right to vote has been restored, or
having been adjudicated incapacitated.

The Obama administration is expected to announce today new restrictions on U.S. power plants that are, in the words of the New York Times, “the strongest action ever taken in the United States to combat climate change.” In reality, the new regulatory regime is no such thing, a fact that ought to inform the years-long political and legal fight that the president’s unilateral rulemaking inevitably will provoke.

The president will instruct U.S. power plants to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions by just under one-third (32 percent). How that is to be achieved and at what cost is . . . not Barack Obama’s problem. States will have until 2018 — comfortably remote from any presidential election — to submit their plans, and until 2030 to implement them.