RUTHFULLY YOURS

Could it be that The New York Times is fed up with Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama? The Times — probably the most dogmatically liberal newspaper in the nation — has twice recently reported on its former best friends in strongly critical terms.

First came the late April article detailing some of the principal allegations in Peter Schweizer’s book, “Clinton Cash,” which demonstrated the evident linkage between the flow of tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton foundation — and to Bill Clinton personally — and the key role the State Department played in approving the deals that resulted in Russia taking control of a substantial portion of U.S. uranium mining.

No matter where I turned on the Internet today, I encountered the Vanity Fair cover of Bruce Jenner pretending to be a woman. I got so sick of encountering that cover that I decided to write about it.

Note: The link to the Vanity Fair cover story has been removed by Vanity Fair; I was able to print the story just before the URL was scuttled; substituting for it will be New York Times and Washington Post stories (virtually identical in text) which highlight the Vanity Fair and Diane Sawyer interviews of Jenner, complete with the Vanity Fair videos. (I refuse to reproduce the Vanity Fair cover here.)

Transgenders, apparently, are the new privileged minority. Just as Muslims are. A Muslim baker or photographer refusing to serve gays or have them as customers — frankly, they don’t even need to have a reason — doesn’t make the news. Only Christians, Jews, or atheists refusing to validate homosexuality by accepting gays as “normal” clients make the news, and then they’re excoriated for hurting the feelings of gays (or Muslims). How dare they row against the stream of insanity?

Gays, lesbians, transgenders, and creatures great and small in between those parameters as a whole are the new protected group, patronized by the government and by the MSM, just as Muslims are, celebrated in especially the news media for their cultural or gender “diversity.” You can’t offend them without risking a lawsuit and the smears and sneers of their allies in government and in the mainstream media. (Even Merriam-Webster, the online dictionary, got into the act.)

Chief Justice Roberts in the minority opinion stated: “The court takes the perilous step – for the first time in our history – of allowing the president to defy an act of Congress in the field of foreign affairs,”
In landmark ruling backing president’s stance, legal body strikes down law permitting US citizens to cite Jewish state on passportWASHINGTON (AP) — The US Supreme Court struck down a disputed law Monday that would have allowed Americans born in Jerusalem to list their birthplace as Israel on their US passports in an important ruling that underscores the president’s authority in foreign affairs.

The court ruled 6-3 that Congress overstepped its bounds when it approved the law in 2002. It would have forced the State Department to alter its longstanding policy of not listing Israel as the birthplace for Jerusalem-born Americans.

ADL, AJC, Conference of Presidents express disappointment, concern over ruling barring Jerusalem-born US citizens from citing Jewish state on passport

WASHINGTON – A long list of major American Jewish organizations, many of which had filed amicus briefs supporting the inclusion of the word “Israel” on passports for US citizens born in Jerusalem, expressed dismay at Monday’s Supreme Court ruling that American citizens born in Jerusalem may only list their birthplace as Jerusalem, rather than as Jerusalem, Israel.

The ruling affirmed that the president held the power to grant formal recognition to a foreign nation and that Congress could not pass a law directing the State Department how to record the place of birth of a child born to American parents abroad. The original case was brought by the parents of now-13-year-old Menachem Zivotofsky, in an effort to have “Israel” appear on their Jerusalem-born son’s US passport.

In a mind-boggling gesture of official US Government dhimmitude, the US Embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia celebrated our sacred Independence Day holiday on June 4, so as to avoid any conflict with the month-long Ramadan celebration. If you think any Islamic countries – there are 57 of them (not counting ISIS) that count themselves officially Islamic – will move their DC embassy’s celebration of Ramadan to accommodate our Independence holiday, I have some bridges to sell you.

The Jakarta Post (hat tips: Pamela Geller and Jihad Watch) writes:

“US Embassy celebrates 4th of July earlier out of respect for Ramadhan,” by Dylan Amirio

The United States Embassy enjoyed its annual 4th of July celebration on Thursday, June 4, one month early, in order to respect the upcoming Ramadhan month, which will begin on June 17 and last for one month.

US Ambassador to Indonesia Robert O. Blake and US Ambassador to ASEAN Nina Hachigian presided over the festivities, which involved brass band renditions of the Star-Spangled Banner and the Indonesian national anthem, Indonesia Raya.

Blake explained that the theme of the event leaned toward “green” development, which supported the US’ focus on building and promoting a green economy and more environmentally sustainable development.

He also praised Indonesia’s performance as a fully functioning democracy, aiming for further collaboration between the two countries in the years to come.

“The US will continue to support Indonesia in the future through its democratic achievements. Democracy is an American value which we have championed since [the country’s birth in] 1776,” Blake told the crowd during the festivities at his residence near Taman Suropati, Central Jakarta, on Thursday.

He added that moving the 4th of July celebrations to June 4 was one done out of respect for the upcoming Ramadhan month, which will last from June 17 to July 17.

The event also showcased a number of American products and businesses, including the Zero FX Electric Motorcycles, which Blake explained were an environmentally friendly vehicle used by the California Highway Patrol.

It will ensure access to overseas markets for American companies and products

By almost every standard, America’s economic recovery following the 2008 recession has been disappointing. In fact, the Commerce Department just released revised estimates showing negative growth in the first quarter of this year. Under President Obama’s leadership, Washington has unleashed an avalanche of anti-growth regulations onto Main Street that impact virtually every sector of our economy. Combined with an anti-growth tax code, this economic agenda has stalled America’s post-recession economic growth and left hard-working taxpayers struggling as a result.

While it’s unlikely there will be any significant change in the status quo for the remaining two years of this administration, there remain a few areas where Republicans and Democrats can agree and can work together.

The late Saul Alinsky, the father of the community-organizing model that inspired both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, would be delighted. The man who championed moral relativism in tearing down the establishment (“In war, the end justifies almost any means”) is calling the tune of the Democratic party on voting issues.

Last March, President Obama rhapsodized about what would happen under mandatory voting: “If everybody voted, then it would completely change the political map in this country.” Obama once served as the lawyer for the disgraced and defunct voter-registration group ACORN, and he is still toeing its line.

Then last week, Hillary Clinton demanded that the federal government override state laws and automatically register everyone to vote and then offer at least 20 days of early voting, turning Election Day into an Election Month. Both would dramatically complicate the job of already-overburdened voter registrars and make it harder to catch potential fraud. In the case of New York v. United States (1992) and other cases, the Supreme Court has clearly ruled that it is beyond Congress’s power to do what Hillary wants.

This week, the journal Science, publishing a paper by US government scientists, reported [2] that there has been no global warming “pause” over the last 18 years, and the 2013 UN/IPCC report [3] claiming the presence of such an ongoing pause is wrong. But it’s more that Science journal is wrong.

This is going to get geeky, so bear with me a moment. According to the authors of the Science study, however, the UN/IPCC’s data was flawed. Using “corrected” measurements, they claim that temperatures rose at a rather significant rate of 0.106°C per decade between 1998 and 2014, more than twice the rate the IPCC reported the year before. The Science article, after all, “adjusted” the data for biases, and the IPCC didn’t.

“I hope that this study helps to put this false idea of a hiatus to rest,” sniffed [4] Stefan Rahmstorf, a professor of ocean physics at Germany’s Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, who was not involved in the study. “It didn’t have any merit in the first place.”

In his interview to Israeli TV [2] last Tuesday night, President Obama emphasized the theme of what he considers excessive Israeli fear. He referred to “balanc[ing] a politics of hope and a politics of fear,” said that “politics and…fears are driving the [Israeli] government’s response” to regional developments, and referred to “an Israeli politics that’s motivated only by fear….”

The upshot: if Israelis weren’t so full of fears, instilled by their government under four-times-elected Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, they would make peace with the Palestinians, help get a Palestinian state established in the West Bank and Gaza with a corridor between those two parts, and then have little or nothing to fear.

Obama’s words have been well picked apart by (among others) Times of Israel editor-in-chief David Horovitz—who is not a right-winger—in this riposte [3]. Horovitz refers, among other things, to the upcoming Iran deal, which basically lets Iran keep all its nuclear facilities and indeed evokes wall-to-wall fears in Israel; to Obama’s negotiators’ failure to get a good deal with Iran when it was truly reeling from the sanctions; to the “Arab Spring” and what would have happened if Israel had given the Golan Heights away to Syria back when it was constantly hectored to do so; and to Obama’s failure to take the Palestinian Authority to task publicly for one single iota of its ongoing annihilationist incitement against Israel.

Behind the rise of ISIS, the Libyan Civil War, the unrest in Egypt, Yemen and across the region may be a single classified document.That document is Presidential Study Directive 11.

You can download Presidential Study Directive 10 on “Preventing Mass Atrocities” from the White House website, but as of yet no one has been able to properly pry number 11 out of Obama Inc.

Presidential Study Directive 10, in which Obama asked for non-military options for stopping genocide, proved to be a miserable failure. The Atrocities Prevention Board’s only use was as a fig leaf for a policy that had caused the atrocities. And the cause of those atrocities is buried inside Directive 11.

With Obama’s typical use of technicalities to avoid transparency, Directive 11 was used to guide policy in the Middle East without being officially submitted. It is possible that it will never be submitted. And yet the Directive 11 group was described [2] as “just finishing its work” when the Arab Spring began.

That is certainly one way of looking at it.