Views on the News
Views on the News*
December 5, 2015
President Obama lives in a world of his own, in which he's widely beloved but misunderstood, a world in which everyone is racist except for those who support him, a world in which his foreign policy has been heroically successful and his domestic policy even more so. He lives in Fantasyland. In this Fantasyland, it's not enough for President Obama to define the world around him in self-serving fashion, he must define his enemies the same way. While visiting Paris for the Climate Change Summit that will usher in an era of global cooperation and environmental utopianism, Obama announced that he had finally found a way to defeat Islamic State. Nothing in ISIS' plans suggests that they care deeply about preventing a bunch of self-important bureaucrats from meeting in toney hotels to destroy the Western economy on behalf of scientific chimeras. ISIS probably adores the notion that the West will take itself down a couple economic pegs in order to redistribute the wealth. President Obama crafts his own enemies based on who he wishes they were. Obama is thoroughly uncomfortable with the idea that those who wish to fight him are members of radical Islam. He wishes the Islamic jihadists were right-wing American ideologues, so he simply treats them as such. Obama did the same thing with regard to the Iran nuclear deal. While handing Iran $150 billion in funding, opening their economy, and granting them a full nuclear weapons program in a decade, Obama claimed that the real enemies of peace were Republicans siding with Iranian hardliners. Never mind that those hardliners didn't exist, so Obama created them magically, and then made them Republicans. Barack Obama is a leftist hammer in search of a conservative nail. No matter who his enemies actually are, he'll characterize them as American conservatives for purposes of whacking them over the head. ISIS may have slaughtered Westerners in Paris thanks to radical Islam, but Obama will never acknowledge that: instead, he'll just claim that they're essentially Ted Cruz in keffiyehs. He has chosen his enemies, and they don't include ISIS. That means that if ISIS must be his enemy, he will simply wave his Fantasyland wand, and they will be transformed into the Republican enemies he so craves. Reality remains reality, no matter how much President Obama sprinkles fairy dust and claps his hands.
(“President Obama’s Imaginary World” by Ben Shapiro dated December 2, 2015 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2015/12/02/president-obamas-imaginary-world-n2087555 )
We are near the end of the seventh year of Barack Obama’s presidency, and by any measure the United States is a fractured nation. Its people are more divided politically than any time in recent memory, and too many are anxious, angry or just down. In a normal presidential transition year, voters would be excited at the mere prospect of new leadership, but instead, the American people are grasping for straw men. Donald Trump declared for the presidency and is milking the years of pent-up political and cultural contempt pouring into the streets. Nearly one-third of Barack Obama’s Democrat Party has migrated to aging Socialist Bernie Sanders. Black Americans, who expected better, live in urban neighborhoods with soaring murder rates, angry marchers and confused police who are utterly alienated from the people they are supposed to protect. Obama’s claimed legacy is he prevented an economic depression in 2009, but we’re still in a depression. Hope and change was the promise, but America and the world didn’t do what Barack Obama told them to do. The other half of the non-domestic legacy is supposed to be climate change, but he alone seemed to take seriously the notion that the climate windmills can be reset to less than 2 degrees Celsius above “preindustrial levels.” Meanwhile, the nation is either furious (the right) or depressed (the left) at eight wasted, wheel-spinning years whose main achievement is ObamaCare, a morass!
(“America at Obama’s End” by Daniel Henninger dated December 2, 2015 published by The Wall Street Journal at http://www.wsj.com/article_email/america-at-obamas-end-1449100772-lMyQjAxMTI1MDA0MzMwMjMxWj )
The late William Safire, writing in The New York Times in 1996, at the height of the Whitewater investigation, called Hillary Clinton a “congenital liar.” She is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends. To hear Hillary Clinton tell it, she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, the conqueror of Mount Everest - even though she was already 6 years old when he made his famous ascent. Shortly before her 1975 marriage to Bill Clinton, she decided in a fit of patriotic fervor and dedication to “public service” to stroll into a recruiter’s office in Arkansas and join the Marine Corps – even though given the tenor of the times, the Marines or any other service would have taken young Ms. Rodham in a heartbeat, especially given their need for lawyers. On a visit to war-torn Bosnia in 1996, she claimed she and her entourage landed under sniper fire and had to run “with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base” - although videos of her arrival show her waltzing serenely across the tarmac, waving to the crowd. She blamed the 2012 attack on American diplomatic and intelligence gathering installations in Benghazi on “a disgusting video” - when she knew almost from the first moment that it was a jihadist assault that took the lives of four Americans, including the ambassador to Libya. That would be the same Clintons (combined current net worth: $101 million) who were “dead broke” when they left the White House. The Clintons, like cockroaches and the Kardashians, would always be with us, forever playing the same shell game on the American people and laughing as we fall for it. There is absolutely no reason to accept anything that Hillary Clinton says at face value, since her credibility is so spotty!
(“Hillary Clinton’s million little lies” by Michael Walsh dated November 28, 2015 published by New York Post at http://nypost.com/2015/11/28/hillary-clintons-million-little-lies/ )
Progressives aren't mentally normal, and neither is the GOP political establishment in Washington. Normal babies learn that if something hurts, you stop doing it, but when progressives see their policies fail, they blame the people involved and demand that the same ideas be tried again, and again, and again, in just the same way that the GOP reacts to one Obama double-cross after another by trying appeasement and appeals to reason or fairness on the next issue, and the next, and the next. Review any Obama policy and you'll find first that it has been tried at other times or in other countries, and second that the damage it does to the American ideal and the American nation is unambigiously predictable from the historical record. I thought Obama’s rule one says "don't do stupid stuff." If they aren’t stupid or insane the only alternative is their policies intended to achieve the destruction of American freedoms and American democracy. Consider, for example, some of their domestic achievements: they've crippled American health care; corrupted federal agencies, including the IRS, the EPA, and the DOJ into political service; stopped innovation in banking, manufacturing, power generation; and software through tax and regulatory policies whose effect is to help billionaire oligopolists push their smaller, more disruptive, competitors out of business; made Spanish the nation's second language; inflamed racial tensions; strained every police and social welfare agency to the breaking point; and just about doubled the national debt while raising nearly every tax affecting the middle classes and working poor -- with the result that national statistics agencies now straight-facedly report unemployment at the boom times rate of 5.5% while one third of the workforce is either unemployed or significantly underemployed, and a Craigslist ad for a full time toilet cleaner will generally draw 200+ responses on the first day. The picture doesn't get more positive if you look at foreign policy achievements: they've specialized in selling out America's friends and encouraging its enemies: while bludgeoning Republicans over race and women's rights issues at home, the Obama democrats have strengthened male ownership of women and children throughout the Muslim world; encouraged riot, civil strife, and the killing of dissidents from Egypt to Somalia; betrayed democracies in Israel, Pakistan, and Taiwan; financed the growth of Argentine hatred for England through loans for deep-sea drilling around the Falklands; forced Japan to rearm; and had multiple police and security agencies look the other way while an unknown, but possibly significant, number of Islamic fanatics dig themselves into the American social fabric in preparation for all out attacks on Americans once their champions in the White House leave office. If you despise ordinary people, however, and want, as I think the national socialists now in control of the Democrat Party do, to re-establish feudal government, the left's actions make perfect sense, but the GOP's response in getting along by going along does not. Voters understand rule one: if it doesn't work, stop doing it, and voting in establishment Republicans isn't working. They've done the right thing in electing Republican majorities to the House, to the Senate, into governor's mansions, and into the majority in most statehouses -- but the minute most of these people take the oath to defend the Constitution all the moral clarity that got them elected gets absorbed into a cloud of maybes and ifs and laters whose net effect is to make Neville Chamberlain look pretty good in retrospect. Rule one is all the explanation anyone needs for Donald Trump: he isn't actually a Republican at all, but he's caricaturing the leader people want to see: someone willing to say "you're fired!" to the Washington elites -- in both parties. The first credible candidate willing and able to make "you're fired!" the new way of life in Washington is going to take the nomination, and the presidency, in a walk.
(“The GOP Reset Button: ‘You’re Fired’” by Paul Murphy dated December 2, 2015 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/the_gop_reset_button_youre_fired.html )
Clarence Thomas, in his 25th year on the Supreme Court, is urging the judicial branch to limit the legislative branch's practice of delegating its power to the executive branch. Thomas indicted the increasing incoherence of the court's separation of powers jurisprudence, a subject central to today's argument between constitutionalists and progressives. The former favor and the latter oppose holding Congress to its responsibilities and restricting executive discretion. "The Constitution," Thomas notes, "does not vest the federal government with an undifferentiated governmental power." It vests three distinguishable types of power in three different branches. The court has the "judicial duty" to enforce the Vesting Clauses as absolute and exclusive by policing the branches' boundaries. Particularly, it should prevent Congress from delegating to executive agencies the essentially legislative power of formulating "generally applicable rules of private conduct." Such delegation erases the distinction between "the making of law, and putting it into effect." Today, if Congress provides "a minimal degree of specificity" in instructions it gives the executive, the court abandons "all pretense of enforcing a qualitative distinction between legislative and executive power." As a result, the court has overseen and sanctioned the growth of an administrative system that concentrates the power to make laws and the power to enforce them in the hands of a vast and unaccountable administrative apparatus that finds no comfortable home in our constitutional structure. This state, so inimical to conservatism's aspiration for government limited by rival branches, depends on what conservatives reflexively praise. It depends on judicial deference to a majoritarian Congress, even when Congress delegates its legislative powers to unaccountable agencies. When, during the New Deal, the court became permissive about Congress delegating essentially legislative powers, there was "an implicit bargain: The court would permit Congress to delegate, and the administrative state to exercise, legislative, executive and judicial power, but it would review administrative exercises of such power to prevent lawlessness and abuse." However, three decades ago the court "reneged on the deal." It decided that if a statute's language is silent or ambiguous about a particular matter, the court would defer to the executive's interpretation because "judges are not experts in the field." Evidence that Congress may be rediscovering its institutional conscience was delivered by Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse: "The growth of the administrative state, the fourth branch of government, is hollowing out the Article I branch, the legislature, and many in Congress have been complicit in this." So much legislating now happens inside the executive branch because this kind of executive over-reach came about because of a great deal of symbiotic legislative under-reach.
(“Lone Defenders of the Separation of Powers” by George F. Will dated November 27, 2015 published by Investor’s Business Daily at http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-on-the-right/112715-782778-george-f-will-justice-thomas-and-senator-sasse-have-stepped-up-to-enforce-the-separation-of-powers.htm )
Actual injustice isn’t necessary, just a victim mentality and a longing to make history like those old people that protested that war and stuff. So long as there’s conflict, the cause can be manufactured. It’s not the millennials’ fault that they weren’t young back then, when riots raged against the legitimate struggles of racism and misogyny, a golden era of revolution mentioned fondly and often by their aging professors. They will concoct misguided movement after misguided movement in futile attempts to align themselves with that era where, “you know, Woodstock and stuff.” This new pseudo-Civil Rights mentality has been on breathtaking display at college campuses across the country following an initial spark at the University of Missouri. The Mizzou students’ gripe: an odd juxtaposition of Planned Parenthood funds being cut; two alleged racial slurs; and a swastika drawn in feces which, if true, speaks more to someone’s insanity than institutional racism. Despite the largely circumstantial nature of the students’ cause, some of the country’s most powerful political personalities, themselves starry-eyed admirers of that grooviest of decades, couldn’t resist making the illogical comparison between this half-baked crusade and one of the most important decades in American history. Hillary Clinton said “There was a lot of activism on campus, civil rights activism, antiwar activism, women’s rights activism, and I do appreciate the way young people are standing up and speaking out.” I’m sure the Queen of False Victimization does. President Obama said the protest “harkens back to a powerful tradition that helped to bring about great change in this country. The civil rights movement happened because there was civil disobedience, because people were willing to go to jail, because there were events like Bloody Sunday.” These petty fits bear no resemblance to the sacrifices that made them possible. Of course acts of racism are deplorable and have no place in modern America. They should be taken seriously and dealt with properly. As should acts of extortion, and the behavior of the students at the University of Missouri places them firmly on the same moral low ground as their purported persecutors. The obvious moral chasm between the situation at Mizzou and the Sixties is that racism a half-century ago was institutional, not anecdotal. Risking life and limb for the rights guaranteed you by the courts is a far cry from two isolated racial slurs on a campus of 35,000. The right to an education is the right to be challenged. To be uncomfortable. It is neither a right to be coddled nor to disrupt the education of others. What a tragic decline, from the vicious assaults on the Freedom Riders to temper tantrums over Halloween costumes; from simply demanding the rights guaranteed under the Constitution to demanding those rights be revoked because an individual finds them offensive; from actual justice to whiny, woe-is-me entitlement unworthy of a spoiled child, let alone the select few fortunate enough to attend one of the country’s most prestigious universities. The chaos at Missouri and Yale spread like wildfire to campuses across the country, an inferno of iffy victimization raging from Amherst to Southern California. Today’s Civil Rights wannabes have a choice: they can either honor the sacrifices of their predecessors by earning their educations or defile their legacies by fighting false battles. Sadly, it seems, they have chosen the latter. Therein lies the greatest irony: the very leftist academics whose Sixties-centric worldviews have enabled these episodes of acting out are now the ones whose livelihoods are most threatened. Of course, this monster isn’t confined simply to race, or college campuses. False activism these days knows no bounds. Hence the failed campaign in Houston conducted under the guise of gay rights to allow men in women’s restrooms. Nevermind that the quest for gay rights was never about ignoring basic biology, or that a Washington Post analysis found that 95% of police shootings are clearly justified, we want to be hippies! Today’s social justice warriors are no closer to being legitimate activists than I am to becoming the imaginary gladiator I pretended to be as a bored child in my bedroom.
(“Sorry People, The Sixties Are Over” by Greg Jones dated November 30, 2015 published by The Daily Caller at http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/30/sorry-people-the-sixties-are-over/ )
Your complaining and moaning about how you are being treated and your demand that your foreign languages, foreign dress, and anti-American native cultural traits be accommodated imply that you are not satisfied with being here, so, you might try the option of returning to the place of your origin. Over the past several decades the progressive Left and the elite "ruling class" in this country have worked fervently to encourage you to intimidate native-born citizens into thinking that we owe you something. Perhaps we could change our Christian heritage to appease whatever faith you brought with you. We could possibly accept your denigration of the English language of the forefathers who founded this nation. Or we could end our opposition to your apparel and behavior that telegraph your refusal to assimilate into our culture, even to the point of hampering law enforcement's ability to identify some of you in the process of doing their duty. This is our home, native-born Americans whose ancestors shaped this nation. If you are dissatisfied, you can leave. Nobody who isn't incarcerated is held against his will in today's America. America was magnanimous enough to allow you in, but do not confuse that magnanimity with idiocy or suicidal tendencies. Yes, for many decades American citizens cowered under the Left's evil schemes to eviscerate our Christian faith; our Western-influenced culture (owing to Europeans' having founded the nation); our Constitution, which ensures us rights that you no doubt didn't have in your own country; our reliance on the Supreme God of the universe who granted those rights; and our success at melding peoples from many places into a unit, as "Americans" without hyphenated distinctions. Contrary to what you likely encountered in your country of origin, patriotic American citizens are currently working through our system of government to put an end to your ungratefulness. We are, after all, a lawful people. We are not, however, fools and our patience is not unlimited. Those of you who immigrated or whose family members immigrated within, say, the past 40 years and determined that you would not assimilate into America's culture are probably accustomed to having it your way – being pandered to. You've grown adept at infiltrating certain cities and intimidating native-born citizens; flaunting your inability to or your decision not to speak the language of this nation, English; terrorizing children of native-born citizens in the leftist, corrupted school systems; and other despicable actions, all with the aid of America-despising officials and the powerful elites (of all ideologies) who deem patriotism beneath them, but be forewarned; the jig is up. Native-born Americans and immigrants who came to this country to become Americans will see to it that the job is done, because we existed in relative cultural peace before you came and will do so when you are gone.
(“Immigrants, you may leave” by Sylvia Thompson dated October 28, 2015 published by Renew America at http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/sthompson/151028 )
Consumers are enjoying low gas prices, low home heating and electricity prices, and low costs for the shipment of goods to homes and stores. Obama and the representatives of 150 other countries at the Paris climate conference, COP21, are working overtime to raise these prices. A global agreement on carbon restriction will carry a big price for consumers. If Obama succeeds in getting a binding agreement, or one that his successors would find it difficult to disavow, consumers will no longer enjoy natural gas at less than $2.00 per mBtu. Doubling this price, the cost of new carbon taxes and regulation of fracking, would in effect double home heating and other utility bills tied to natural gas. Think of that as the Paris conferees' Christmas gift to snowy America, which has shown no evidence of warming for 15 years. It's not just natural gas. Cheap oil, the result of fracking, is now providing record low gasoline prices, adjusted for inflation. Most Americans don't want to go back to $4.00 gas, but if the Paris conferees have their way, it could be $10 – the goal Obama set during his 2008 campaign. Beyond oil and natural gas, there's coal, for which new demand has been killed off already in the U.S. but which is still expanding globally. Cheap coal is fueling the economies of China, India, and dozens of other developing nations. In these countries, coal makes it possible for the poor to enjoy the benefits of electricity. As a result, children are educated, patients receive modern medical care, and businesses thrive where only primitive agricultural methods once existed. The extraordinary thing about COP21 is the sheer audacity of global leaders who presume to legislate rules governing a vital global industry without the input of their people. In what is now a familiar pattern, President Obama plans to return from Paris with a sweeping agreement, one that would slash carbon "pollution" by 32% from 2005 levels by 2030, without so much as a by-your-leave from Congress. As with ObamaCare, immigration, and the Iran nuclear agreement, he seems oblivious to the wishes of the American people. Not since Woodrow Wilson's failed campaign to impose the League of Nations on America has a President been so contemptuous of the will of the people. Among major leaders, the only sensible one seemed to be Premier Xi of China, who simply remarked that it was "very important for China and the United States to be firmly committed to the right direction of building a new model of major country relations." At least there is one major power that believes that the world has not been doomed by an increase of one degree Celsius over the past half-century. For the leaders of many developing nations, the motivation seems to have more to do with cold, hard cash. Already Obama and other Western leaders have pledged $100 billion in wealth transfers per year, but this seems not to be enough. The leaders of developing countries in Africa and Asia are holding out for more, and Obama seems willing to comply. As has been the case with similar aid programs in the past, most of this huge sum will get swallowed up in bureaucratic costs, waste, and outright corruption. No wonder a roster of third-world heavies, including Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe and Swaziland's King Mswati III, has descended on Paris demanding climate reparations. American taxpayers don't support sending $100 billion to third-world dictatorships any more than they support new taxes and regulation on carbon at home. If the climate summit imposes a sweeping tax on carbon, the poor will find themselves making hard choices between paying the rent (and buying food, medicine, and clothing) and going cold. Obama said he was fighting for the poor, but his climate fanaticism shows that he is actually their worst enemy. The public needs to speak for itself as well. America is still a democracy, for the moment anyway, and in a democracy, one man, even a president, does not decide for the people. Given the chance, Americans will vote against new carbon taxes and regulation.
(“COP21: Carbon Regulation without Representation” by Jeffrey Folks dated December 3, 2015 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/cop21_carbon_regulation_without_representation.html )
Barack Obama is blowing past all signs of caution on the left lanes of the road of American politics. He no longer cares what Americans think of his leadership. His “my way or the highway” handling of the Syrian refugee crisis, which could endanger the homeland, seals it. President Obama brushed off the legitimate concerns of more than 30 governors, including some within his own party, that in light of the terrorist attack in Paris, welcoming additional migrants from the Islamic State’s burgeoning caliphate poses a danger to American citizens. The President forgets that governors of both major parties speak not simply for themselves, but for their constituents. It’s the regular folk on Main Street who must absorb the impact of terror when it erupts in their midst, as it did in Paris. As commander in chief, Obama has an obligation to protect 320 million Americans. Contrary to the President’s assertion, the majority of the refugees is not composed of “widows and orphans,” but healthy and well-fed young men. At least two of the Paris murderers were reported to have arrived in France among Syrian immigrants, and a female suspect died during a police raid several days later. Careful screening of arriving immigrants can minimize risk, but screening is only as good as the background records law enforcement can access. Taking security steps to guard Americans from danger does not demonstrate a lack of compassion for the downtrodden, it’s simply common sense. Military-aged men who cannot be cleared should be held out until they can be, or sent home. A national leader willing to endanger his people is a sad story of incompetence in high places.
(“When danger is deliberate” dated November 26, 2015 published by Washington Times at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/26/editorial-obamas-syrian-resettlement-plan-threaten/ )
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