Views on the News
Views on the News*
April 25, 2015
Among the casualties suffered by the American people over the past six plus years is the tragic loss of having a President that we can look up to with respect, admiration, and pride, notwithstanding existing ideological and partisan differences. Obama has exacerbated the differences between Americans by using race, income, class, religion, and patriotic fervor to further divide us; the result being that we the people are left, or seem to be, without a leader who is willing to be President to all Americans. From the earliest days of his term in office, Obama has traveled to foreign lands where he has routinely bashed American leaders and policies and even disputed the notion that America is a Christian nation. By his words and deeds, Obama at times seems more foe than friend. This President seems hostile to the Constitution, the rule of law, the US Congress, and to Americans born and raised here. It’s as if being American is something to be ashamed of, at least in the distorted vision of Barack Obama. I do not recall a time when a sitting President has been seriously suspected of being against the American people and for our enemies. Previous Presidents have always been faulted for faulty judgment and poor decision-making abilities. None, however, has been seen as fundamentally opposed to the values held dear by hundreds of millions of Americans. None have openly declared a burning desire to “fundamentally transform” our nation which, after all, has produced the greatest, most free, most prosperous, and most beloved, society in human history. Above all else, it is still possible to love America unconditionally, from sea to shining sea, despite her many faults and disappointments. The big question as we head into another critical Presidential election: Can the hurt and anger visited upon the American people during the latest Presidency be repaired?
(“Yearning for a President to Respect, Admire, and Be Proud Of!” by John Lillpop dated April 21, 2015 published by Canada Free Press at http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/71343 )
In a rational world, a woman like Hillary Rodham Clinton would have absolutely no chance of being nominated for, much less elected, President of the United States. She has achieved nothing, accomplished nothing; she is an extremely poor public speaker, full of annoying verbal and physical tics; she is legendarily dishonest; she is a hard-core Alinskyite; and in general a wretched human being. She has no natural political constituency, except the manufactured “women’s vote,” and no rationale for her candidacy except that it’s “time” for a woman President, just as it was “time” for a part-black African, part-Arab, half-white, paternally cultural Muslim to pass for a traditional African-American Christian and be elected president in 2008. Even after the comically disastrous and transparently phony launch of her new “campaign,” she’s considered the “inevitable” Democrat nominee for 2016 and, very likely, the next President of the United States. For the sake of democracy in America, she needs to be defeated and politically destroyed. Break Hillary and you have begun to break the power of the Mainstream Media, a fifth column masquerading as the Fourth Estate whose mission it has been for decades to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America. For the only reason an HRC candidacy is even plausible is the influence of the legacy media, which has simply declared, by fiat, her suitability and her inevitability. You may recall that the MSM did the same thing in the run-up to 2008, until their dreamboat, Obama, came along and gave the aging Baby Boomers, who had dreamed of exactly this moment since 1968, a reason to push the female candidate to the back of the bus in order to celebrate the only kind of “diversity” they advocate, which is racial. Despite its occasional displeasure when Barry fails to walk on water, the atheist, anti-American Left could not conceivably have supported anyone else during his eligibility. Now that he is constitutionally prohibited from running for president again, a Hillary candidacy is, at the moment, the next best thing to a third Obama term, despite the animosity between the two camps. The Hillary candidacy isn’t about appealing to voters, or changing hearts and minds, or offering the country a genuinely new way forward from the loathsomeness of Obama and Obamaism. Instead, it’s about perpetuating Obamaism, with a few tweaks here and there so to be able to pretend that Hillary represents enough of a break with the recent past that voters won’t have to vote for those grubby Republicans. The next Democrat candidate will come from the extreme left wing of a left-wing party, will automatically garner 47% of the votes, will have New York, Illinois and California in the Electoral College bag long before voting begins, and will need only a relative handful of votes in a few swing states to perpetuate the current administration’s baleful philosophy. The legacy media would probably prefer to see someone other than Hillary run; they understand her many and manifest weaknesses as a candidate and would rather not take the chance with her. Whomever they anoint will begin his or her day with the editorial pages of the New York Times, and then go about the ongoing business of dismantling the nation as founded, one brick at a time because they think they have all the time in the world, and given the lack of opposition, maybe they do.
(“The Sham Candidacy of Hillary Clinton – and What it Means for the Republic” by Michael Walsh dated April 18, 2015 published by PJ Media at http://pjmedia.com/michaelwalsh/2015/04/18/the-sham-candidacy-of-hillary-clinton-and-what-it-means-for-the-republic/ )
Building hysterias based on falsehoods is a primary modus operandi on the left. The "Black Lives Matter" campaign is based on as big a lie as the "campus rape culture" lie; the Rolling Stone magazine gang rape at the University of Virginia fraternity lie; the gang rape by the Duke University lacrosse team lie; the "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" Ferguson lie; and all the other lies that animate leftist hysterias. First a lie or exaggeration is manufactured; then it is repeated over and over by the mainstream media and myriad left-wing groups; academics hold conferences and write thoughtful-sounding op-ed pieces about the fake issue; meanwhile activists on its behalf demonstrate, taking over public buildings and highways, sometimes violently. The latest left-wing hysteria is "Black Lives Matter," based on the lie that black lives don't matter because white police kill blacks wantonly. The problem with the mantra and the hysteria is not that no blacks are ever killed unjustifiably by police, but that it is so rare as to constitute a libel. In 2013, of America's 6,261 black homicide victims, more than 6,000 of them, 97%, were killed by people other than police. About three percent of black homicide victims were killed by police, and of that 3%, nearly everyone was armed and dangerous, so to label that an epidemic of police racism is a libel. In addition, more than 9 in 10 blacks murdered were murdered by another black person. The left is not only engaging in demagoguery and creating hysteria when it claims that "Blacks Lives Matter" in reference to police killings of blacks. Black lives don't really interest the left. If they did, the left would focus on all the black murderers taking black lives. The left's overriding interest lies elsewhere: in defaming America, with its "legacy of slavery," "institutional racism" and "white privilege," and in depicting white police as racists because to understand the left one must first understand that it hates conservatives more than it loves almost anything.
(“Black Murderers Matter” by Dennis Prager dated April 21, 2015 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2015/04/21/black-murderers-matter-n1987985 )
Environmentalism is a faith without joy, a religion lacking hope of redemption. Every April 22, the group of Americans most determined to show their superiority can be found worshipping dirt. Environmentalists have replaced joy with scorn, scorn for followers of other faiths, and most of all scorn for the heathen who dare question the holy trinity of global warming, overpopulation, and eventual starvation. Back in the 1960s, environmentalists declared with great authority that pesticides would wipe out birdlife, remember Silent Spring? My backyard birds, not to mention the far away whales and forests, were on their way out, thanks to man's greed and corporate transgressions against divine Gaia. While I feared for the birds, self-righteous professors preached that unless we changed our sinful ways there would be hell to pay. Governments would need to consider extreme methods, including forced sterilization, for humanity to survive. Meanwhile, in the real world, all of these predictions proved to be false. The percentage of the population in developing nations living in extreme poverty shrank from 50% to 21% from 1981 to 2010. Ever-greater agricultural productivity resulted from the spread of free markets preferring to put their faith in government-led policies. Luckily, most other predictions of environmental devastation have also failed to materialize. Globally, deforestation has slowed. Blue whales no longer face imminent extinction. Challenges remain, particularly climate change, but with a little free market innovation, we can beat those challenges, just like other false doom and gloom environmentalist predictions of the past. Environmentalists come off to normal thinking people as the boys who cried wolf, rather than the men who saved the wolves.
(“Why Republicans don’t believe in global warming” by Robert Maranto dated April 22, 2015 published by Washington Examiner at http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/why-republicans-dont-believe-in-global-warming/article/2562972 )
American Presidents have a lot more free rein in foreign affairs compared to the domestic side, and here Obama has done his worst, and as a result, we are now viewed with suspicion by our allies, and we’re laughed at by our enemies. Obama shows no compassion at all, especially to Muslims, who have died by the tens and hundreds of thousands in Syria, Libya, Egypt and now Yemen, following actions by this President. Al Qaida is stronger than ever, and ISIS receives direct support from Obama’s “friends” in Turkey and Qatar. Still Obama’s most dangerous move has been to kick over the nuclear balance in the Middle East. I’ve never met a liberal who understood how the balance of nuclear power kept the Cold War cold for six decades. Before Obama, the United States also kept things under control in close coordination with our allies. From Truman to Bush we had allies who understood and supported us to protect themselves. Today they are frantically arming up, because we have destroyed their trust. Obama has made the world more dangerous. We are no longer the good cop in the Middle East. Iran’s proxies now control nearly all of Lebanon, much of Iraq and Syria, and most recently Yemen. The mullahs have systematically driven a strategic pincer around Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. Yemen has closed the trap. Liberals never seem to understand two basic points about nukes: 1) Rational powers never use nukes aggressively, for fear of being destroyed by a nuclear opponent; but 2) Irrational powers are completely different because they sound delighted to use nuclear weapons even at mortal risk to themselves. Obama is now openly letting the mullahs threaten genocide against Israel and the Sunni Arabs. Iran is Shi’ite, and the Sunni Arabs are apostates who deserve death. Israel is also subject to Armageddon. Obama has therefore significantly increased the risk of nuclear war. Obama has promised that Iran can now act like “a regional power,” and the United States won’t intervene. Iran doesn’t want to be a regional power, because Islam is a world-conquering faith, and they want it all. As bad as Obama is domestically, in foreign policy he is downright dangerous because that’s what happens when the Left falls in love with a radical leftist with lifelong anger problems.
(“Who authorized Obama to kick over the nuclear balance?” by James Lewis dated April 20, 2015 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/04/who_authorized_obama_to_kick_over_the_nuclear_balance.html )
* There is so much published each week that unless you search for it, you will miss important breaking news. I try to package the best of this information into my “Views on the News” each Saturday morning. Updates have been made this week to the following sections:
· Homeland Security at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/dp/homelandsecurity.php
· Terrorism at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/fp/terrorism.php