RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/percent-377975-america-vote.html

Republicans think they’re importing hardworking immigrants who want a shot at the American Dream; the Democrats think they’re importing clients for Big Government.

To an immigrant such as myself (not the undocumented kind, but documented up to the hilt, alas), one of the most striking features of Election Night analysis was the lightly worn racial obsession. On Fox News, Democrat Kirsten Powers argued that Republicans needed to deal with the reality that America is becoming what she called a “brown country.” Her fellow Democrat Bob Beckel observed on several occasions that if the share of the “white vote” was held down below 73 percent, Mitt Romney would lose. In the end, it was 72 percent, and he did. Beckel’s assertion – that if you knew the ethnic composition of the electorate you also knew the result – turned out to be correct.

This is what less-enlightened societies call tribalism: for example, in the 1980 election leading to Zimbabwe’s independence, Joshua Nkomo’s ZAPU-PF got the votes of the Ndebele people while Robert Mugabe’s ZANU-PF secured those of the Shona – and, as there were more Shona than Ndebele, Mugabe won. That same year America held an election, and Ronald Reagan won a landslide victory. Nobody talked about tribal vote shares back then, but had the percentage of what Beckel calls the “white vote” been the same in 2012 as it was in 1980 (88 percent), Mitt Romney would have won in an even bigger landslide than Reagan. The “white vote” will be even lower in 2016, and so, on the Beckel model, Republicans are set to lose all over again.

Hence the urge to get on the right side of America’s fastest-growing demographic. Only 27 percent of Hispanics voted for Romney. But all that could change if the GOP were to sign on to support some means of legalizing the presence of the 12-20 million fine upstanding members of the Undocumented-American community who are allegedly “social conservatives” and thus natural Republican voters. Once we pass amnesty, argues Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform, “future immigrants will be more open to the Republican Party because, unlike many immigrants who are already here, they won’t have been harmed or insulted by Republican politicians.”

So, if I follow correctly, instead of getting 27 percent of the 10 percent Hispanic vote, Republicans will get, oh, 38 percent of the 25 percent Hispanic vote, and sweep to victory.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/11/16/White-house-knew-Benghazi-terrorism
According to the Washington Guardian, it wasn’t just CIA Director David Petraeus who knew that the attacks on the American consulate in Benghazi were terrorism linked with al Qaeda. It was the White House. And they knew it well in advance of Ambassador Susan Rice’s appearances on national television to lie to the American public about a “spontaneous” demonstration based on a YouTube video spurring the assault.

The Guardian reports:

U.S. intelligence told President Barack Obama and senior administration officials within 72 hours of the Benghazi tragedy that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region, officials directly familiar with the information told the Washington Guardian on Friday ….

The details from the CIA and Pentagon assessments of the killing of Ambassador Chris Stephens were far more specific, more detailed and more current than the unclassified talking points that UN Ambassador Susan Rice and other officials used five days after the attack to suggest to Americans that an unruly mob angry over an anti-Islamic video was to blame, officials said.Most of the details affirming al-Qaida links were edited or excluded from the unclassified talking points used by Rice the following weekend, officials confirmed Friday.

NO URL
“The “Detroit Free Press” reports that Al-Husainy,, a Dearborn imam calls for restriction of free speech: “They should put a law not to insult a spiritual leader”
In a public declaration Shaykah Abdullah bin Bayyah, Imam of one of the largest mosques in the D.C. area, called upon “people of reason and understanding” to put a legal stop to statements that would offend Muslims and thereby threaten world peace.”

“To Hell With Free Speech” is what many Islamic leaders are shouting and preaching to their followers. Do not ignore their words, they are very serious. The question is, are you going to allow them to pick away at our precious freedom of speech. Lose that and what is next?

According to the “Weekly Standard” starting in 2009, the Obama administration had marked its first foray into the UN human rights establishment by backing calls for limits on freedom of expression.

At the invitation of Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, representatives of 26 governments and four international organizations, primarily of repressive dictatorships, met in Washington, D.C. in December 2011 to discuss the implementation of United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18 on “Combating Intolerance.”. Resolution 16/18 is a revised version of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s usual “Blasphemy against Islam” resolution ushered through with the support of our Administration.

The real aim of the “anti- blasphemy” resolution (16//18) is not to protect religion but to clamp down on freedom of expression. Accordingly, “defamation of religion,” by the definition of the 56-member OIC, could include criticism of Sharia law, questioning the Quran, a Muslim claiming you insulted Islam or security check profiling. A report by the New York–based Human Rights First listed more than 50 cases in 15 countries “where the enforcement of blasphemy laws have resulted in death sentences and long prison terms.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=292100 Despite the deadly display of hi-tech pyro-technics by the IDF, the depressing sense of déjà vu conveyed by the events unfolding in Gaza comprise a devastating indictment of Israel’s past and present political leadership. Watching the morning newscasts and the spectacle of Israelis scuttling to shelter from incoming projectiles, launched by implacable enemies, from […]

ttp://freebeacon.com/congress-backs-israel/ Members of Congress are standing with Israel as it wages a defensive war against Palestinian terrorists who in recent days have fired hundreds of rockets at citizens of the Jewish state. The bipartisan consensus among U.S. lawmakers is that Israel has the right to defend itself from terror attacks which have already killed three […]

http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2012/11/16/lincoln-a-review/

It took a Seinfeld episode to clear the air and allow people to confess that “The English Patient” was basically a bore. Seinfeld is no longer live but truth demands that someone speak up and remark how overly long and somewhat dull Stephen Spielberg’s “Lincoln” is. Yes, it has the sainted Daniel Day Lewis, overly made up so that his natural genius for characterization is compromised by too much goop forming too many wrinkles and too much facial slack. It has the feisty Sally Field, playing Mary Todd Lincoln with the same brio she brought to Norma Rae and the same weltschmerz she brought to the matriarch in Brothers & Sisters. Even if the discrepancy in Abe and Mary’s height is historically accurate, it’s too distracting in scenes they play together, probably accounting for why she’s prostrate on the floor in one crucial scene and sitting next to him in a horse drawn carriage in another. Too much of the movie looks like painterly tableaux of various events instead of scenes where characters interact dramatically with each other. Spielberg pays attention to landscape, interiors, lighting and the inclusion of representatives of every class; he’s careful to have black people be well-spoken, well-dressed, literate and kind. Lincoln himself is played in a very understated, folksy manner with little range in the performance except for a marital fight with his wife and a final outburst with his inner circle as he pounds on the table, insisting on the importance of passing the 13th amendment. It’s hard to create a historical epic with the star acting in a very low register

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/15/why-land-for-peace-is-dead/ By Michael Rubin, Special to CNN Editor’s note: Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School. The views expressed are his own. On September 18, 1978, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin signed the so-called Camp David Accords, cementing […]

Dear E-Pals….Those who cheered the camp David Accord, and who supported the Oslo Accord and, in spite of all evidence, counseled Israel to leave Gaza should read this poem…..rsk

EMILY DICKINSON: I MANY TIMES THOUGHT PEACE HAD COME

I many times thought Peace had come
When Peace was far away—
As Wrecked Men—deem they sight the Land—
At Centre of the Sea—

And struggle slacker—but to prove
As hopelessly as I—
How many the fictitious Shores—
Before the Harbor be—
Emily Dickinson

http://times247.com/
Obama, along with Rice, is ‘easy target’
Commentary magazine
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Commentary
To the degree that Susan Rice is an “easy target,” it’s because the case against her and the administration is overwhelming. And the gallant Obama need not worry. The concerns about the negligence and misconduct of his administration go right to the top. Read more…

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz2COfrCbwq
Holder defends timing in FBI’s Petraeus probe
The Hill
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Blogs
Attorney General Eric Holder defended the FBI’s decision not to release information about former CIA Director David Petraeus’s extramarital affair sooner, saying the investigation turned up no threat to national security. Read more…

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz2COfDRK7L
.
GOP leaders back West’s call for recount
Dinan and Lengell
State and national Republican Party officials are getting behind Rep. Allen B. West’s call for a recount of all early votes in St. Lucie County, Fla., saying it would be “unconscionable” not to answer lingering questions about the results, which show the outspoken GOP lawmaker trailing Democratic challenger Patrick Murphy. Read more…

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz2COfMpAIM
Benghazi hearing turns to shouting, accusations
NBC News
Thursday, November 15, 2012
News
A House Foreign Affairs hearing on “Benghazi and Beyond” turned into a shouting and accusations forum. It began when Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher said, “This administration, including the president himself, has intentionally misinformed, read that LIED, to the American people.” Read more…

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz2COfdGVqI

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324556304578121410836696512.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

Columnist Douglas Murray writing online for the Spectator, Nov. 15:

The papers and media are full of the news that Israel has killed a Hamas leader in the Gaza. Why did this happen? Where did it come from? Is it not yet another example of the blood-thirsty Zionists doing their worst?

If you read most of the British media that may well be what you think. After all there has been barely any previous mention in the British papers of the massive escalation in rocket fire into Israel in the last month or the even swifter escalation this week. Certainly no British paper or broadcaster has come close to giving these attacks the front-page publicity they grant to Israel’s response today.

Nobody much bothered to report that in October alone, 116 rockets and 55 mortar shells were launched against Israel in 92 separate attacks. . . .

Since last Saturday, when Hamas terrorists fired an anti-tank missile into an army jeep [in] Israel, injuring four Israeli soldiers, more than 120 missiles have been fired at Israeli civilians by terrorists in Gaza. Israel has now responded to random targeting of civilians with the targeted killing of a terrorist.

Yet because of the way in which this is reported, many decent people will once again come away with the idea that it is the Israelis who have started this latest round of blood-letting. Whatever atrocity Hamas carries out next will be portrayed as a response, regrettable or otherwise, to Israeli provocation. Thus the British media ends up legitimising terrorism and demonising an ally which is behaving with more restraint than this country would in the face of such barbarism.