Monday, October 20, 2014

When All You Have Is the Race Card . . .

When All You Have Is the Race Card . . .: I just received a very earnest press release touting this piece over at Bill Moyers's website (the e-mail subject line: "Will GOP Racial Appeals on Ebola Translate into Votes?"). The article is written by Ian Haney López. Here's his bio:This is the fifth in a series of posts that Ian Haney López, the author of Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism and Wrecked the Middle Class, will be writing in the weeks leading up to the November election.This may come as a surprise, but a writer who is professionally invested in the idea that coded racial

Read More ...

FO’ SHO': Trusting Obama On Ebola, Or Anything Else, Is Insanity

FO’ SHO': Trusting Obama On Ebola, Or Anything Else, Is Insanity: obol1

Kurt crushes the Commander-In-Chief for his duplicitous blather, proving that BHO is full of BS and those who trust in him are nuttier than a squirrel turd.

By Kurt Schlichter, Townhall

Maybe the White House could organize a coherent response to the myriad problems exploding all over the place if this was an amorphous “community” instead of an actual country. We are seeing a real-life PowerPoint demonstration explaining exactly what happens when you turn the Executive Branch over to people who have never executed anything more complex than a sit-in at the local welfare office.

Since everything they touch turns to failure, their response is to lie. And everyone sees it. Everyone except Chet. Chet is my unicorn.

I’m a lawyer and get paid to watch equivocating weasels twist in the wind – in fact, one of the best parts of my job is doing the huffing and puffing. I have to give credit to the director of the Centers for Disease Control – rarely have I disbelieved someone so thoroughly so quickly. I don’t even believe his punctuation.

Instead of a rational, authoritative scientist calmly explaining what we do and don’t know, and exactly what commonsense steps his agency is taking to battle the Ebola outbreak, we get Dr. Kevin Bacon being flattened under a stampede of exposed medics running rampant across the country as he shrieks, “Remain Calm! All is well!”

Dude, all is not well. Everyone knows it. And that’s why people aren’t remaining calm.

When you tell us that you and your crack squad of pathogen professionals have got this, it would be infinitely better if you actually had this. Instead, after weeks of chaos, you finally announce that, “Yeah, we’ve decided that when Ebola pops up somewhere we’re going to send a big team in to make sure it’s contained.” Oh, you think?

I majored in communications, not communicable diseases, and I figured out that tactic weeks ago. Instead of studying, maybe you should have been drinking Coors Light and scamming hotties like me, because what you’re doing sure as hell isn’t containing the infection or reassuring the public.

Why hasn’t Barack Obama fired this guy? Well, that would be an admission of imperfection and that’s never going to happen. Instead of getting busy searching for a replacement, the White House is busy searching for a way to blame the GOP. Of course, in a nation dominated by failing unionized public schools, plenty of people will fall for the idea that the government is run by the party that has held one half of one branch of government for four of the last six years. Apparently evil genius John Boehner reigns over our nation from inside his extinct volcano lair.

Read more: Townhall
The post FO’ SHO': Trusting Obama On Ebola, Or Anything Else, Is Insanity appeared first on Clash Daily.

WSJ: ObamaCare ‘cost controls’ haven’t, don’t and won’t

WSJ: ObamaCare ‘cost controls’ haven’t, don’t and won’t: ObamaCare, officially known as the Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act, is a good example of how names politicians give to things often have little or nothing to do with the actual substance of the thing. You’d think from the name of the law - and from much of the Democrat rhetoric in support of the law - that it cuts costs and saves people money. Anyone who has seen what’s happened to health insurance premiums knows that’s not true. But if you still were holding out hope that ObamaCare would save money in some obscure corner of the world, please be advised: Even the government’s own controlled laboratories for cost-cutting under ObamaCare are not cutting costs:

November 4: the most important election in history

November 4: the most important election in history: The GOP has surged in the polls leading up to the November elections as people come to the shocking realization that Obama is deliberately risking the American population’s health by encouraging unfettered access to America by Ebola-infected West Africans. And while we are preoccupied with this horror show, he is intent on legalizing tens of millions of aliens to obtain a permanent Democrat majority nationwide. Obama’s goal is to destroy the middle class and steal future elections with a tidal wave of amnestied illegal immigrants.

Prevent Hamas Re-Arming Before Investing in Gaza

Prevent Hamas Re-Arming Before Investing in Gaza:

Satellite images of Gaza. Photo: Elder of Ziyon.
Will the reconstruction of Gaza also mean a serious effort to prevent the re-arming of Hamas? One without the other is folly.

And yet the international donor community seems to discount the imperative of seeking the prevention of Hamas re-arming before turning over piles of cash.

At the recent Cairo conference on rebuilding Gaza, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry pledged more than $200 million in additional U.S. aid to help the Palestinians. Conference attendees pledged a total of $5.4 billion in aid, with about half specifically set aside to rebuild Gaza.

The money comes with seemingly few strings attached. Not even the most basic concessions were secured from the Palestinian Authority, such as a demand that it stop Hamas rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel or even a commitment to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.

Hamas, which runs Gaza, is designated by the United States, the European Union, Israel and a few other nations as a terrorist organization. The Hamas charter still calls for Israel’s destruction. Are these the people to be entrusted with billions in rebuilding aid?

On a per capita comparison, Palestinians are near the top of the list in terms of receiving international aid. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. Since 2007, the Gaza Strip has been under the control of Hamas. The aid pledged in 2014 in Gaza looks suspiciously like previous aid efforts.

Nearly seven years ago in Paris, a broad international coalition pledged more than $7 billion to the Palestinian Authority. As with other aid commitments, too little made its way to ordinary Palestinians. Instead, funds were misdirected and misused.

When Israel withdrew from Gaza, it left behind a working infrastructure to help give the new leadership a leg up on establishing self-sufficiency. This included commercial greenhouses—which produced a variety of produce and employed many local Palestinians—that were quickly “repurposed.”  The materials were looted, some of which were used to build rocket launchers and terror tunnels.

A month ago, the European Union floated an idea for monitors to watch goods coming into Gaza, particularly materials like cement, which can be used for tunnels and other elements of a terrorist infrastructure. But in 2006, EU monitors assigned to supervise crossings fled at the first sign of trouble, not unlike the recent flight of U.N. peacekeepers from the Golan Heights, fleeing jihadist elements. Would new monitors fare any better? Without such oversight, it will be impossible to ensure aid is going to help the Palestinian people create an economically viable society and not the perpetuation of the terror-based hold that Hamas imposes on Gaza today.

It is reported that Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar noted after the conclusion of this summer’s violence that the terror group’s goal is to expand to the West Bank “the Gaza example of resistance.” These are the people the international community wants to provide money to rebuild Gaza?

The very act of committing such funds serves as another reminder of global myopia when it comes to Israel. The Jewish state is held to a singular standard on almost every issue affecting the conflict, while the rest of the world lives by other rules. Israel is routinely castigated for attempting to defend itself, however restrained and conscientious its approach, whereas no other country in a comparable predicament would ever have to endure such criticism. The Cairo conference is another example of the international community turning a blind eye to the regional threat posed by Hamas.

If Western leaders now wringing their hands over this situation don’t want to endlessly pledge funds to rebuild Gaza, they should be serious about preventing the re-arming of Hamas. Otherwise, the aid dollars won’t advance the peace process, and in fact, will set it back by ultimately allowing Hamas to acquire more rockets and weapons to fulfill its aim to destroy Israel.

The Cairo meeting on rebuilding Gaza also included not so subtle finger pointing at Israel.

The United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon himself told attendees: “Yet we must not lose sight of the root causes of the recent hostilities: a restrictive occupation that has lasted almost half a century, the continued denial of Palestinian rights and the lack of tangible progress in peace negotiations.”‎

There are some curious omissions in such a statement. Ban doesn’t focus on Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza or how Gaza has fared under its own chosen leadership. Ban gives no credit to Israel’s ongoing willingness to negotiate with the Palestinians. And he fails to condemn years-long Palestinian intransigence when it comes to bilateral negotiations.

Even as the Cairo conference was under way, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas continued his call on the United Nations to circumvent the negotiation process entirely and enforce an imposed agreement on his terms only.

The donors at the Cairo conference have their priorities confused. Without a serious plan to prevent the re-arming of Hamas, the conference will stand as yet another example of throwing good money after bad.

Daniel S. Mariaschin is the executive vice president of B’nai B’rith International. As the organization’s top executive officer, Mariaschin directs and supervises B’nai B’rith programs, activities and staff around the world.

Original enclosures:

Ebola and the Tragedy of Political Correctness

Ebola and the Tragedy of Political Correctness:

It may be too soon to make any predictions about the course that ebola will take in the United States, but there are already a number of revelations about the current state of the government and its capture by the Progressive memeplex. A precursory analysis of the inaction being taken by the Obama regime and the defense of that inaction by Progressive propaganda outlets drill home the conclusion that there is a dangerous lack of will to take the simplest steps to protect the American people from a foreign threat. It is not that there is any inability; after all, when it came to making sure some white people wouldn’t talk about the plight of white people in Hungary, the State Department was able to act quickly and effectively to make sure such a dangerous threat to the social order would not occur. But a quarantine to protect the lives and health of American citizens which might inconvenience a few thousand Liberians and others in West Africa? Unconscionably racist.

The organs of Progressive righthink are already in overdrive to explain away the obvious incompetency of the Obama. The New York Times argues that Obama’s apparent inaction is a strategic means of preventing panic from disseminating among the sheeple:

For two turbulent weeks, White House officials have sought to balance those imperatives: insisting the dangers to the American public were being overstated in the news media, while also moving quickly to increase the president’s demonstration of action.

And when any action is ostensibly undertaken, it is to appoint a Washington veteran to coordinate the federal response. Klain’s experience with disease outbreak? Absolutely null. Yet the necessity of appointing a “political operative” is quite obvious; federal agencies are such a mess that it requires someone with a lot of clout to get these disparate groups to actually work together on a problem which demands immediate and extensive action.

In a transparent bid to protect the administration from criticism, ThinkProgress has elevated its sophistry, arguing that we shouldn’t take even basic steps to protect ourselves from ebola, since it will happen anyway. Experts are routinely corralled together to say ebola is an unstoppable force, so you may as well lie down and wait to die. Also, doing so would hurt those countries already affected, so it is our moral duty to sacrifice our own children.

This is what a government in the throes of a dangerously wrong ideology looks like. It is more important to allow the barbarians to wreak havoc, since anything else would be racist. Political correctness, which defends itself as the only way to prevent any genocidal tragedy from ever occurring, has created the perfect conditions for the development and spread of a disease with the potential to bring civilization to a grinding halt. Quite literally [skip to 12:50]. West Point, considered one of the worst slums in the world, where people literally shit on the street, is the creation of the UN. Ebola couldn’t ask for a better incubator to increase its spread.

This is without even considering the response of a post-ebola United States [assuming political and social integrity is maintained]. The communities most susceptible to high rates of infection are places with a high degree of contact with strangers and where poor hygiene is the rule rather than the exception. Cities, and especially ghettoes, in other words. Those who are prepared and can afford to get out when ebola strikes [do I need to tell you which groups of people these are?] will avoid the worst, but those people who are neither prepared nor can afford to leave afflicted areas will be disproportionately infected and killed by the disease. As we all know, disparate impact is always racist, so assuming a USG that survives ebola, we will undoubtedly hear how ebola proves the need of more extensive programs of affirmative action to help minorities. And while [predominantly white and Asian] flight takes place, these groups of people will most likely have to suffer being considered racist by New York Times writers writing from their second home in the country. No tragedy is too good to pass up for bashing the Cathedral’s enemies on the heads with, and it will make an excellent cover for the fact that the tragedy was hastened and exacerbated by incompetency forced upon us by political correctness.

The post Ebola and the Tragedy of Political Correctness appeared first on Social Matter.

The Blood on Obama’s Hands

The Blood on Obama’s Hands:

ebola obama

When conservatives consider the casualties of Obama’s national security policies, their attention is drawn quite naturally to Benghazi. In this shameful episode, the Obama Administration sacrificed an ambassador and three American heroes to protect a deceptive presidential campaign message in which Obama claimed that the war against al-Qaeda was over and won (“Osama bin Laden is dead, and al-Qaeda is on the run”). The facts are these: Ambassador Chris Stevens and three American heroes were sent into an al-Qaeda stomping ground that the British and other diplomatic consulates had already evacuated; they were denied the security they had requested; they were then left to die during a seven hour fire fight when their compound was attacked, and finally betrayed in death, when Obama and his representatives lied to the world about what had taken place and when he failed to bring their killers to justice as he had mendaciously promised he would.

Benghazi can be seen as the collateral damage caused by presidential lies – and worse – presidential denial that there is in fact a war that Islamists have declared on America. Instead Obama insists – in the official language he authorized and that is still in place – that America’s responses to acts of Islamic terror should be described as “overseas contingency operations.” If Islamic murders and beheadings take place in the homeland, Obama calls them “workplace violence.” Benghazi is also the most shameful presidential abandonment of Americans in the field in our history – a disgrace compounded when Obama justified his trade of five Taliban Generals for one American deserter by saying Americans don’t leave their countrymen on the battlefield, which is precisely what he did in Benghazi. All of which justifies the conservative focus on this terrible event.

But the casualties of Obama’s reign in Benghazi are dwarfed by the hundreds of thousands of deaths his policies have led to in Syria and Iraq, and the millions of Iraqis, Syrians and Lybians that those same policies have caused to flee their homes and become homeless in Turkey, Tunisia and other places of refuge. Obama’s legacy is defined by his ideological aversion to American power, his rule as the most anti-military president in our history, and his deeds as an “anti-war” activist, opposed to the “war on terror” because he believes that America’s (and Israel’s) policies are the cause of terrorism and the hatred that Islamic fanatics direct against our country.

Because of his ideological opposition to American power, Obama deliberately and openly surrendered America’s gains in Iraq, which had been won through the sacrifice of thousands of American lives and tens of thousands of American casualties. By deliberately handing over America’s massive military base in Iraq – a country that borders Syria, Afghanistan and Iran – Obama turned that country over to the terrorists and Iran, as his generals and intelligence chief and secretary of defense warned it would. Obama disregarded the warnings from his national security advisers – as no other American president would have – because he regarded America rather than the terrorists as the threat. In abandoning Iraq and deliberately losing the peace, he betrayed every American and every Iraqi who gave their lives to keep Iraq out of the hands of the terrorists and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Obama’s stubborn refusal to use America’s military might – ground forces backed by air power – when Assad crossed the “red line” Obama had drawn in Syria created a second power vacuum that the terrorists filled, thus leading to the emergence of ISIS or ISIL – the Islamic State in Syria and the Levant. Defenders of Obama will claim that the American public would not have supported a military intervention in Syria even if Obama had ordered one. But why is that? It is because for eleven years, beginning with their assault on “Bush’s war” in Iraq, the Democrats have sabotaged the war on terror, claiming that America’s use of power for anything but “humanitarian” purposes is illegitimate, dangerous and the root cause of the terrorist problem.

Because it was “humanitarian” Obama felt justified in conducting an unauthorized, illegal intervention in Libya to overthrow an anti-al Qaeda dictator, saying it was to prevent an invisible threat to civilians there. The result? Al-Qaeda is now a dominant force in Libya, and 1.8 million Libyans – a third of the population – have fled to Tunisia. Another brutal Obama legacy. Yet, how firm is Obama’s commitment to humanitarian interventions? In Iraq he stood by while more than half a million Christians were either slaughtered or driven into exile by ISIS murderers on their mission to cleanse the earth of infidels. This was the oldest Christian community in the world, going back to the time of Christ, and Obama let it be systematically destroyed before bad press and pressure from his own party caused him to intervene to save Yazvidis and a Christian remnant trapped on a mountain top.

The Obama presidency has been an unmitigated disaster for Iraqis, Syrians, and Libyans. Now that ISIS is in control of territory the size of a state, has access to hundreds of millions of petrol dollars and advanced U.S. ordnance, not to mention chemical weapons that Saddam left behind, it is an impending disaster for the American homeland as well.

David Horowitz is the author of the recently published book Take No Prisoners: The Battle Plan For Defeating the Left (Regnery 2014)

The post The Blood on Obama’s Hands appeared first on RedState.

Original enclosures:

Health Board: wind turbines are a hazard to human health

Health Board: wind turbines are a hazard to human health: GLENMORE, WISCONSIN, USA: “This week the Brown County Health Board went on record declaring that wind turbines “are a human health hazard“.

People Across the World Prefer Free Markets

People Across the World Prefer Free Markets:

No, I am not making this up. According to the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, “a global median of 66% say most people are better off under capitalism, even if some people are rich and some are poor.”

Yes, buried in the study—after pages and pages of statistics on education, hard work, inequality, and belief in a brighter future, Pew suggests that a majority of people across the world favor the free market approach to defeating poverty.

It isn’t just a majority, either—it’s a majority of people in the poorest countries. The study found that “belief in the free market tends to be highest in developing countries (median of 71%).” Even more incredibly, “nearly two-thirds or more in all nine of the developing economies surveyed agree that most people benefit from capitalism, including 80% of Bangladeshis, 75% of Ghanaians and 74% of Kenyans.”

“A global median of 66% say most people are better off under capitalism.”Tweet This
On the other hand, those surveyed in developed countries are the least likely to support free markets—although the majority of them still do, at 63 percent. This result grabbed all sorts of headlines, as capitalism is more popular in China (76 percent) and Vietnam (95 percent) than in the United States (70 percent).

But these results confirm what classical liberals would expect—the poor have a great deal to gain from capitalism, and they know it. Indeed, while the rich can gain more money, the poor have a much higher standard of living under free markets, as subsistence farmers open their own businesses and begin to own their own futures.

Despite what you might hear on MSNBC, progressive programs and government spending do little to bring people out of poverty. After ten years of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, the Great Depression still gripped America. Thirty years after Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty began, programs have created more problems than they aimed to solve.

Command economies are older than the pyramids. Governments redistributing wealth did not start the engines of capitalism, which have powered inventions like the light bulb, the steam engine, the airplane, and the smart phone. Instead, they forced their subjects to slave away at epic projects—building majestic temples and tombs for themselves—to showcase their glory. They alone reaped the benefits of all this work, and lost out on the inventions to come.

These innovations, thought up and marketed by free people in free economies, improved the lives of individuals across society—both the rich and the poor. With time, even the poorest are able to gain access to valuable innovations. So long as their markets are open to foreign trade, poor nations do not even need to make their own tractors or computers—in an open market, they can trade for them.

People in Bangladesh and Ghana have learned this lesson, and they are eager to keep reaping the benefits of capitalism.

Indeed, the study found that those in emerging and less developed countries have a more positive outlook on the future. In emerging countries like South Africa, Vietnam, China, and Poland, a median of 50 percent say that “when children today grow up, they will be better off financially than their parents.” In developing countries, the median is 51 percent, but in advanced countries it falls to 28 percent—with only 30 percent of Americans owning this positive outlook.

Many countries whose citizens have a negative outlook on the free market also had a negative view of the future. In Greece and Spain, two countries with bloated debt and crippling welfare states, a majority oppose free markets (50 percent in Greece and 51 percent in Spain), and say their children will be worse off in the future(65 percent in Greece and 62 percent in Spain).

Most in the survey agreed that an unequal distribution of wealth is a serious problem, but most are willing to accept inequality if it is the inherent cost of freedom and greater prosperity for all.

Bill Gates may be tremendously wealthier than an industrial worker in Bangladesh. But due to the wealth created in a capitalistic system, that Bangladeshi worker has more opportunities than he would have in any other system. As the market expands, he may be able to own his own business, and to utilize technology even the greatest medieval king could have never dreamed of.

The post People Across the World Prefer Free Markets appeared first on Values & Capitalism.

More Govt Waste and Corruption

Spanish Firm Under Federal Investigation Wins $230 Million in DOE Subsidies:

A Spanish renewable energy company under investigation by at least two federal agencies unveiled a new biofuel production facility on Friday that will receive hundreds of millions of dollars in federal subsidies.

Former employees of the company have alleged that it routinely engages in violations of U.S. immigration, environmental, and workplace safety laws and uses taxpayer funds to hire foreign workers in violation of federal regulations.

The company, Abengoa, received a $132.4 million loan guarantee and a $97 million grant to build a new biofuel plant Hugoton, Kansas. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback attended its ribbon-cutting ceremony on Friday.


The company’s political connections are emblematic of an industry that remains reliant on taxpayer subsidies, according to William Yeatman, a senior fellow specializing in energy policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

“It could not be more clear that this company could not survive without access to government favors from political friends,” Yeatman said, citing its reliance on the Renewable Fuels Standard and continued financial support from DOE.

“Alas, the same can be said for the green energy industry as a whole, which would fast wither and die absent a steady diet of taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies,” Yeatman said.
Friday, October 17, 2014
William Yeatman

Michael Miller: Let’s Rethink Foreign Aid

Michael Miller: Let’s Rethink Foreign Aid:

Michael Matheson Miller

Michael Matheson Miller
Acton’s Michael Miller, director of the documentary Poverty.Inc, spoke with Bill Frezza at RealClearPolitics. Miller asks listeners to rethink the foreign aid model, which has not been successful in alleviating poverty in the developing world. Rather, Miller makes the case for supporting entrepreneurship and supporting the social and political framework that enable people to lift themselves out of poverty.

Read more on Michael Miller: Let’s Rethink Foreign Aid…

The post Michael Miller: Let’s Rethink Foreign Aid appeared first on Acton Institute PowerBlog.

Election 2014: America “completely out of control” and “women feel unsafe”

Election 2014: America “completely out of control” and “women feel unsafe”:

I’m combining two video reports.

First, Politico’s report that 64% feel things are spinning out of control:

(Click on Image for Survey)
More results on specific topics here.

This is how Morning Joe reacted (h/t Right Scoop):

Also, we reported yesterday on Obama creating a woman problem for Senate Democrats. This may be why.

Tina Brown notes that Obama makes women feel unsafe (h/t White House Dossier):

Original enclosures:

Tina Brown: Obama Makes Women Feel ‘Unsafe’

Tina Brown: Obama Makes Women Feel ‘Unsafe’:

President Obama’s polling numbers are down across all demographics, but especially among American women. Journalist Tina Brown said Obama’s declining numbers are due to his ego and making female voters feel “unsafe.”

“I think [women are] feeling unsafe,” Brown said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Monday. “They feel unsafe economically. They’re feeling unsafe with regard to ISIS. What they feel unsafe about is the government response to different crises.”

Brown said Obama’s smugness and willingness to place blame has also contributed to his declining support.

“I think they’re beginning to feel a bit that Obama’s like that guy in the corner office, you know, who’s too cool for school, calls a meeting, says this has to change, doesn’t put anything in place to make sure it does change, then it goes wrong and he’s blaming everybody,” she said.

Co-hosts said that many Democratic Senate candidates, including Kentucky candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes, will not even admit they voted for Obama.

If you feel things are spinning out of control you have to lay that at the feet of the people in charge...

If you feel things are spinning out of control you have to lay that at the feet of the people in charge...: If you feel things are spinning out of control you have to lay that at the feet of the people in charge for last 7 years. Democrats #p2

Liberalism teaches you not to question anything.... especially if it comes from the gov't.

Liberalism teaches you not to question anything.... especially if it comes from the gov't.: Liberalism teaches you not to question anything.... especially if it comes from the gov't.

Ebola Vaccine…

Ebola Vaccine…:


The Race Card…

The Race Card…:


Multiculturalism Kills

Multiculturalism Kills: The logic of multiculturalism has dictated the White House response to the Ebola crisis. That logic, however, doesn’t fly with ordinary citizens.

We have arrived at a moment with our elite institutions where it is impossible to distinguish incompetence from willful misdirection.

We have arrived at a moment with our elite institutions where it is impossible to distinguish incompetence from willful misdirection.: Frieden was asked during a press conference if you could contract Ebola by sitting next to someone on a bus

— a question prompted by a statement from President Obama the week before, when he declared that you can’t get Ebola “through casual contact, like sitting next to someone on a bus.” Frieden answered: “I think there are two different parts of that equation. The first is, if you’re a member of the traveling public and are healthy, should you be worried that you might have gotten it by sitting next to someone? And the answer is no. Second, if you are sick and you may have Ebola, should you get on a bus? And the answer to that is also no. You might become ill, you might have a problem that exposes someone around you.”
Six Reasons to Panic | The Weekly Standard [Time for someone to give Frieden an ISIS haircut, pour encourger les autres. ]

Sunday, October 19, 2014

The Issue is Kerry’s Incompetence, Not Israeli Manners

The Issue is Kerry’s Incompetence, Not Israeli Manners:

On Friday, the U.S. State Department rejected criticisms from Israeli Economic Minister Naphtali Bennett that Secretary of State John Kerry had sought to blame the rise of ISIS on Israel. Spokesperson Marie Harf said Kerry’s remarks a day earlier were “taken out of context” for “political reasons” by Bennett and other Israelis who cried foul. That in turn set off criticisms of Bennett by his Cabinet colleague and rival, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who said the Jewish Home Party leader should keep his mouth shut about the United States. But while most observers seemed to focus on the Israeli political dimension of the controversy or the chances that the spat would worsen the already shaky relations between Israel and the U.S., what escaped notice was the fact that in claiming that the failure to broker peace between Israel and the Palestinians was helping ISIS, Kerry was actually contradicting President Obama.

On September 24, in his speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations, Obama said the following:

Leadership will also be necessary to address the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. As bleak as the landscape appears, America will never give up the pursuit of peace. The situation in Iraq, Syria and Libya should cure anyone of the illusion that this conflict is the main source of problems in the region; for far too long; it has been used in part as a way to distract people from problems at home. And the violence engulfing the region today has made too many Israelis ready to abandon the hard work of peace.
Leaving aside Obama’s willingness to blame Israel for not working for peace when, in fact, all they are reacting to is the consistent refusal of their supposed Palestinian peace partners to accept repeated offers of independence and peace, this statement represented genuine progress in the president’s thinking. Obama had in the past repeatedly embraced the notion that ending the Arab-Israeli conflict would solve all the problems in the region but the rise of ISIS had sobered him up a bit. The willingness of many Arab regimes to make common cause with Israel against both ISIS and radical Islamists such as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood illustrated the obvious fact that conflict within the Arab world is function of the division among Muslims, not discontent about Israel’s existence or the failure of peace negotiations.

This was a remarkable departure for a president who had spoken of Western and Israeli guilt for Muslim grievances in his address to the Muslim world in Cairo in June 2009 had finally woken up to the fact that no amount of apologizing or engagement will make radical Islam go away. But for some reason Kerry is still sticking to the old playbook in which Israelis can be scapegoated for the existence of bloody conflicts in which Jews play no part.

Kerry was, no doubt, playing to his audience of Muslims when he told a State Department ceremony honoring the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha, that resentment about the Arab-Israeli conflict was fueling recruitment for ISIS. Since Kerry has consistently and wrongly blamed Israel for the collapse of his peace initiative, it didn’t take much imagination or political to see that what he was doing was blaming the Jewish state for the fact that ISIS terrorists have overrun much of Syria and Iraq while beheading Westerners. But while the Arab leaders he cited may pay lip service to anti-Israel sentiment by referencing the alleged “humiliation and denial and lack of human dignity” suffered by the Palestinians, ISIS’s popularity is based on promoting hatred of all Westerners and non-Muslims not just Israelis. Which is to say that Bennett wasn’t off target or taking things out of context when he said, “When a British Muslim decapitates a British Christian, there will always be someone to blame the Jew.”

Yet while Obama called on Muslims to unite against ISIS and to recognize their responsibility to combat radical Islamists, Kerry is still using the same tired clichés about Israel and the Palestinians that even many Arabs are shelving and then looking to pick a fight with Israelis over their umbrage about his lack of perspective.

Israel’s government is probably better off not making much of an issue about Kerry’s latest vile assertion, but there should be no illusions about the attitudes his comments illustrated. If even after the outbreak of a war in Syria in which Muslims have slaughtered Muslims without a mention of Israelis, Kerry is capable of sticking to the notion that the grievances of Palestinians who have repeatedly refused to make peace is the reason for ISIS, then his intellectual bankruptcy could be more obvious.

The point here isn’t that Kerry is foolishly picking quarrels with Israel but that he has demonstrated his unfitness for office at a time when the United States is once again engaging in a conflict with a dangerous Islamist foe. President Obama has allowed Kerry to embark on a futile effort to revive the dead-in-the-water peace process thinking that there would be few consequences for another failure. But Kerry’s incapacity to focus on the ISIS threat presents a bigger problem for the president. If he is truly serious about building a coalition against ISIS, the president needs to stop letting his administration pick pointless fights with Israel. Kerry needs to be fired.

Britain set to crack down on the Muslim Brotherhood – “At heart a terrorist organization”

Better late than never I guess.  Some of us knew this quite a while ago but were ridiculed for "hateful" opinions.

Britain set to crack down on the Muslim Brotherhood – “At heart a terrorist organization”:

Downing Street is to order a crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood and a network of Islamist groups accused of fuelling extremism in Britain and across the Arab world.

David Cameron launched an inquiry into the Brotherhood earlier this year, prompted by concerns it was stoking an Islamist ideology that had encouraged British jihadists to fight in Syria and Iraq.

Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, who is an adviser to the review, is reported to have described it as “at heart a terrorist organisation”. The Brotherhood insists it is non-violent and seeks to impose Islamic rule only through democratic change. It has condemned Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil) and al-Qaeda.

A senior source close to the inquiry said its report – compiled but not yet published – had identified “an incredibly complex web” of up to 60 organisations in Britain, including charities, think tanks and even television channels, with links to the Muslim Brotherhood, which will all now come under scrutiny.

The inquiry, aided by the security services, has also investigated its network abroad. One expert said that the Brotherhood was now operating from three major bases – London, Istanbul and Doha, the capital of Qatar.

h/t Dr. J

Martin Luther King's niece: 'Moral bankruptcy' ruling Washington D.C. under Obama

Martin Luther King's niece: 'Moral bankruptcy' ruling Washington D.C. under Obama: (Breitbart) - There is a "moral bankruptcy" that's settled into leadership of America in the White House and throughout Washington, D.C., Dr. Alveda King--the niece of Martin Luther King, Jr.--said in an interview Friday morning....

ANALYSIS: Ebola Czar Ron Klain was Appointed to Cover Up New Cases of Deadly Virus, Not Protect Americans

ANALYSIS: Ebola Czar Ron Klain was Appointed to Cover Up New Cases of Deadly Virus, Not Protect Americans: Did you know that President Obama already has an "Ebola Czar"? Dr. Nicole Lurie is the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Nicole Lurie, a Scandal-Plagued Bureaucrat

Lurie has been mysteriously absent from discussions of the Ebola outbreak. The media seems rather incurious about her even though she's served in her very high-ranking position for five years. She is one of only eight direct reports to the HHS Secretary.

But Lurie has a sordid background: she was implicated in a major scandal three years ago, reportedly directing a $433 million grant to a major Obama donor "and away from a company that was developing a treatment now being used on Ebola patients."

So Lurie has been carefully written out of the media's stories on the government's response to Ebola. She's an embarrassment; one of thousands of incompetent, political hacks who have burrowed into the federal bureaucracy, seemingly more intent on thievery than on their actual jobs.

That explains why Lurie has been "unavailable for comment".

So who is the new "Ebola Czar", Ron Klain?

He's a far left Democrat political operative, who has served as a chief of staff for both the dumbest Vice President ever (Joe Biden, who previously served as the dumbest senator in American history) and the infamous global warming grifter and Al Jazeera supporter, Al Gore.

As Mark Levin pointed out on Friday, Klain has a "shady past" and was involved with Gore's lawless efforts to steal the 2000 presidential election.

And, like so many Clinton cronies, Klain is said to have profited from protecting Fannie Mae from proper oversight, one of the primary factors behind the 2008 housing meltdown.

What does Klain know about Ebola, or any infectious disease, for that matter?

What qualifies him to lead this critical effort?

It turns out: absolutely nothing.

My contention is that Klain is there to to cover up new cases of Ebola, to threaten hospitals and other medical facilities with financial retribution, and to otherwise attempt to salvage Democrats' midterm hopes by excising the word Ebola from the nation's headlines.

There is no other rational reason for Klain to serve in this capacity.

As Dan McLaughlin notes, putting Klain in charge of the government's Ebola response is somewhat akin to George W. Bush naming Karl Rove the head of Katrina recovery in 2006.

As with every decision this administration makes, politics trumps protecting the American people.

Hat tip: BadBlue News.

A Plague on Both Houses: Insane Ebola Policy Exposes American Suicide Culture

A Plague on Both Houses: Insane Ebola Policy Exposes American Suicide Culture: Has America passed the point of no return, where dying cultures arrive when their internal logic and external conversations descends into illiteracy, and then madness? Perhaps. For example, how is it possible that persons fresh from the site of outbreak of one of the world’s worst viruses, simply walk off airplanes into American cities? Or, consider the dangerous, utterly indefensible policy of allowing the border to stay open, and illegal entries to cross, allowed to stay, even when criminal convictions for violent crimes are proved.

In the fight against hate speech, subversive propaganda and the diffusion of false and misleading ideas, Federal Government to place monitors in Newsrooms across the country [Darleen Click]

In the fight against hate speech, subversive propaganda and the diffusion of false and misleading ideas, Federal Government to place monitors in Newsrooms across the country [Darleen Click]:

I’m sure the New York Times, LA Times, CBS, NBC, ABC, et al, will welcome such Truthy overlords …

Oh, wait, that would be against the First Amendment, right? Nevermind. Let’s just have the Feds monitor private citizens instead, m’kay?

If you take to Twitter to express your views on a hot-button issue, does the government have an interest in deciding whether you are spreading “misinformation’’? If you tweet your support for a candidate in the November elections, should taxpayer money be used to monitor your speech and evaluate your “partisanship’’?

My guess is that most Americans would answer those questions with a resounding no. But the federal government seems to disagree. The National Science Foundation , a federal agency whose mission is to “promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity and welfare; and to secure the national defense,” is funding a project to collect and analyze your Twitter data.

The project is being developed by researchers at Indiana University, and its purported aim is to detect what they deem “social pollution” and to study what they call “social epidemics,” including how memes — ideas that spread throughout pop culture — propagate. What types of social pollution are they targeting? “Political smears,” so-called “astroturfing” and other forms of “misinformation.”

Named “Truthy,” after a term coined by TV host Stephen Colbert, the project claims to use a “sophisticated combination of text and data mining, social network analysis, and complex network models” to distinguish between memes that arise in an “organic manner” and those that are manipulated into being.

But there’s much more to the story. Focusing in particular on political speech, Truthy keeps track of which Twitter accounts are using hashtags such as #teaparty and #dems. It estimates users’ “partisanship.” It invites feedback on whether specific Twitter users, such as the Drudge Report, are “truthy” or “spamming.” And it evaluates whether accounts are expressing “positive” or “negative” sentiments toward other users or memes.

The Truthy team says this research could be used to “mitigate the diffusion of false and misleading ideas, detect hate speech and subversive propaganda, and assist in the preservation of open debate.” [...]

Some possible hints as to Truthy’s real motives emerge in a 2012 paper by the project’s leaders, in which they wrote ominously of a “highly-active, densely-interconnected constituency of right-leaning users using [Twitter] to further their political views.”
Let me repeat … this is being done by the National Science Foundation.

And scientists wonder why the rubes are questioning their alleged dedication to non-partisanship on a host of issues?

Yeah, right.

h/t Glenn Reynolds

The Evidence on Universal Preschool | Cato Institute

Any program that could cost state and federal taxpayers $50 billion per year warrants a closer look at the evidence on its effectiveness.

The Evidence on Universal Preschool | Cato Institute: "These evaluations do not paint a generally positive picture. The most methodologically rigorous evaluations find that the academic benefits of preschool programs are quite modest, and these gains fade after children enter elementary school."

'via Blog this'

School Choice Works Wonders in Ohio

School Choice Works Wonders in Ohio:

In Ohio, school choice combined with intense, holistic investment in students—including work-study programs—is producing incredible results in an impoverished population. Cristo Rey Columbus High School, like the 28 others in the Catholic Cristo Rey network, serves only low-income students; 83 percent of its currently enrolled students qualify for the school lunch program. Its class of 2014 had a graduation rate of 100 percent, and over the past few years, 90 percent of graduates have enrolled in college. They go on to graduate from college at rates twice as high as those normally achieved by students of the same socio-economic background. How does Cristo Ray do it? The Atlantic reports:

Cristo Rey found a creative way to fund most of the tuition. First, in Columbus, $5000 per student per year is potentially available from Ohio’s school-choice voucher program; if a student’s home school is designated as a “failing school,” that money can “follow the student” to a school of choice. Right now, 59 percent of Cristo Rey Columbus students are voucher eligible, a number the school expects will rise once the troubled Columbus City School system completes its audit and more schools will likely be classified as “failing.” [...]

Now enters the second piece of the business model, the hallmark Cristo Rey Professional Work Study Program. Each student works five days per month (one day a week, and two days every fourth week) at a paid position in one of Columbus’s partner companies or institutions. Student earnings, about $6500 per year, are applied directly toward tuition. Unmet differences come from donations, fundraising, grants, etc.
The school complements these financial strategies with partnerships with local service providers: a hospital in the area provides the kids with preventive care each Friday, while a cluster of other services like financial planning classes for parents as well as students help impart skills the whole family will need to succeed and have a chance at some kind of mobility. Meanwhile, the students gain valuable work experience in apprenticeships or internships that can help them get jobs after graduation. It’s an inspiring model—and much of it made possible by school choice. Read the whole thing to get a sense of what successful education reform on the high-school level could look like.

The Peace Gangsters

The Peace Gangsters:

Alon Liel. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
A prominent leftist policy activist went on Israeli radio to gloat right after Britain’s House of Commons symbolically recognized a Palestinian Arab state.

“We have been working hard in Europe,” declared Dr. Alon Liel, a close protégé of Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin, who built Israel’s NON-peace with the PLO.

Neither Liel, Peres or Beilin will admit error. They prefer to have foreign governments and organizations try forcing their idea of “peace” down Israel’s throat.

This is sad testimony to the state of Israel’s so-called “peace movement,” which is so unpopular inside Israel that it spends most of its energies outside Israel trying to lobby inside Britain, the European Union, Scandinavia and especially with the U.S. government.

Israel’s Left is more popular in Britain—where the Establishment hates Israel—than inside Israel, where Israelis love Israel and realize that Great Britain is no longer great.

The Israeli Left has taken its show on the road to a once-Great Britain that had to fight to hold on to Scotland. British leaders and security forces seem hapless to stop beheadings of Britons on the streets of London or in Iraq and Syria. Britain’s prime minister cannot get his own party to fight the Islamist scourge abroad or at home.

British politicians preen and flirt with a growing Muslim audience that is not at all moderate or peace-loving. That has become the audience of the Israeli Left.

British authorities seem hapless in trying to control radicalized Muslims who publicly threaten Jews or non-religious Muslims or who sexually abuse great numbers of girls in some British localities. Some of these same phenomena—on the street and in government—are taking place in France, Belgium and other countries.

Israel’s Left also likes Scandinavian countries whose leaders love to hate Israel or pass resolutions limiting the religious freedom of local Jews (eg: kosher food and circumcision), and whose central cities are controlled by Islamic workers who are growing as an extremist force in political and cultural life.

Dr. Liel also cheered Sweden’s announcement that it would recognize a PLO-led state “governed” by Mahmoud Abbas, a worthless figure-head with zero legitimacy, whose term ran out five years ago.

Abbas tells some forums he wants peace but when he talks in Arabic, he has a different message.

“Let our rifles, all our rifles, be aimed at the Occupation,” he declared in a big Fatah Day speech in 2005. “Occupation” (Al-Ikhtilal in Arabic) actually was code for Israel. Abbas knows he is weak and he has always wanted to link up with Hamas.

When the Left preaches to Israelis about talking to Abbas or Hamas, it  is like trying to recite poetry from an overdue library book—all of whose pages are missing.

In Europe, where they cannot see the writing on their own walls, they like the Israeli Left’s message. Europeans would rather not face their own problem with Islam, the rampant Jew hatred in academia and on the streets.

Some European leaders want Israel to be equally clueless. Most Israelis have a clue, and the opinion polls and elections results show it.

The sad truth about Israeli Leftists is that they refuse to see the sad truth—that  Mahmoud Abbas is not merely a shadow of a leader but more like the ghost of a castrato in the choir who never could sing and never will.

The Leftists call him “Abu Mazen”—an affectionate nickname that recalls how an earlier generation of wishful thinkers referred to Josef Stalin as “Uncle Joe.” But an affectionate name does not change a harsh reality.

Abbas is worse than Yasser Arafat. Abbas will not talk to Israel without getting a consent note from the Arab League. Several Israeli prime ministers have offered him and the PLO everything. They gave Gaza, but he could not hold it. They offered 95-98 percent of the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem, but that is somehow not enough.

It is part of the reality problem of the Israeli Left and its forlorn leaders that they cannot even admit that Abbas does not want peace with Israel. He only wants a piece of Israel, and then another piece and then another piece.

Most Israelis realize the Israeli Left does not realize Abbas cannot blow his nose in Ramallah without  Israeli protection, let alone go to the bathroom unescorted in Gaza.

Shakespeare once said that a rose by any name would still smell sweet, but PLO plans and policies are no rose, only manure. Israel’s Left still wants to sell fertilizer as flowers. Nobody is buying its merchandise or its message.

That is why the Israeli Right has a built-in advantage in elections in Israel, and that is why the Israeli Left takes the anti-democratic route of trying to impose its will through foreign governments, NGO’s, the UN, etc.

Part of the Israeli Left would rather go to the World Court in the Hague than face the court of opinion in Israel. This is not democratic or ethical, but it is not be the first time that the Israeli Left has chosen this route.

For years, Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin reported that they had reached all kinds of deals with PLO officials like Yasser Abd-Rabbo or Mahmoud Abbas, but it was not true. Beilin even violated Israeli law in the 1980’s to talk with the PLO when it was illegal.

Beilin has never apologized for law-breaking or being wrong about PLO intentions—a strategic error that cost hundreds of lives in Israel. That is why Beilin went from a position of power in the Israeli Labor Party to being unable to get elected even in the Left-wing fringe party Meretz.

Peres had a similar journey and also stretched the law. Peres used the ceremonial post of president to try enact his failed peace ideas. It got him many interviews, but the last time he was elected to anything functional was alongside Yitzhak Rabin in 1992.

The last time Peres ran for a functional job, he was beaten in the Labor Primary for the job of head of the Israeli Labor Party by union organizer Amir Peretz. Peres defected from Labor in the middle of the election cycle to join Ariel Sharon’s Kadima Party.

Democratic norms and legal niceties are only good for the Israeli Left when they can be used for its agenda.

Peace—even a phony peace—trumps democracy, sovereignty and the rule of law.

“You have to do what you can,” said Dr. Liel in his radio interview when asked why he and his friends did not work harder in Israel, instead of taking the non-democratic route.

The response to Liel is simple: if you want to make Israeli policy, make it in Israel.

Original enclosures:

To End Shortages, Make Water More Expensive

What a novel idea.  Allow price and the market to determine supply and demand.

To End Shortages, Make Water More Expensive:

Many U.S. states are experiencing water shortages, but California is going dry so quickly that the state’s water authority declared it a crime to waste water. Eduardo Porter argues in the New York Times that the water scarcity crisis stems from dysfunctional pricing.Water is far too cheap, according to Porter, because subsidies and other obstacles distort its value. More:

Consumers have little incentive to conserve. Despite California’s distress, about half of the homes in the capital, Sacramento, still don’t have water meters, paying a flat fee no matter how much water they consume.

Some utilities do worse: charging decreasing rates the more water is consumed. Utilities, of course, have little incentive to discourage consumption: The more they did that the more their revenues would decline. [...]

Farmers pay if the government brings the water to the farm, say via an aqueduct from the Colorado River. But the fees are minimal….And the government has often subsidized farmers via things like interest-free loans to cover upfront investments….

This kind of arrangement helps explain why about half the 60 million acres of irrigated land in the United States use flood irrigation, just flooding the fields with water, which is about as wasteful a method as there is.
At Marginal Revolution, Alex Tabarrok notes that subsidized water also props up hugely inefficient projects to farm crops in water-poor areas when they could be grown more efficiently elsewhere. The areas in American life where we see some of the worst cases of waste and overconsumption—health care, education, and, apparently, water use—all share the same trait: third parties bear costs in a way that prevents real markets from forming. The results have been bad to disastrous, depending on the product in question. Read both the original Porter piece and the Marginal Revolution commentary—each offers useful suggestions for solving this problem in water supply.

How Qatar funds extremists across the Middle East

How Qatar funds extremists across the Middle East:

Qatar is the richest country in the world per capita – and has made significant investments into various iconic London landmarks.

Its sovereign wealth fund owns Knightsbridge department store Harrods and its property arm has invested substantially in the development of Chelsea Barracks. It also owns the Shard – currently the tallest building in the EU.

However, it has also played a significant role in funding groups across the Middle East who are extremely hostile to the West.

Israel’s Lieberman: Abbas is Anti-Semite Trying to Ignite Holy War

Israel’s Lieberman: Abbas is Anti-Semite Trying to Ignite Holy War:

Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Lieberman.

Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Lieberman. Photo: Israeli government. – Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Saturday that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is responsible for the recent unrest in eastern Jerusalem.

Lieberman’s comments came after Abbas suggested on Friday that Jews should be banned from the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

In a speech quoted by the official Palestinian news agency WAFA, Abbas said Jewish “settlers” should be prevented from entering the site “by any means.”

“This is our Noble Sanctuary. … They have no right to enter and desecrate it,” Abbas said.

On Saturday, Abbas raised his level of vitriol, referring to Jews who visit the Temple Mount as a “herd of cattle.”

Later on Saturday, Lieberman said that Abbas had again revealed his true face as a “Holocaust denier who speaks about a Palestinian state free of Jews.” The foreign minister added that Abbas was and remains an anti-Semite.

“Behind the suit and the pleasantries aimed at the international community, he is raising the level of incitement against Israel and the Jews and is calling for a religious war,” Lieberman said, according to Israel Hayom.

Original enclosures:

Abbas' goal is certainly not peaceful coexistence.

Abbas' goal is certainly not peaceful coexistence.: Abbas calls on activists to prevent Jewish ‘settlers’ from entering Temple Mount

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called on Palestinians on Friday to prevent Jewish “settlers” from entering the Temple Mount.

Addressing Fatah activists from east Jerusalem in Ramallah, Abbas also called on Palestinians to be present at the Temple Mount at all times to confront the “fierce onslaught on Al-Aksa Mosque, Jerusalem and the Holy Sepulchre Church.”

He said Fatah should spearhead the effort to stop “settlers” from entering the Temple Mount.

Abbas was referring to continued visits by Jewish groups and individuals to the Temple Mount, particularly over the past month. The visits have sparked protests in east Jerusalem, where Palestinians have been clashing with police forces over the past few months.

Abbas said it was not enough for Palestinians to say that “settlers” have come to the Temple Mount.

“We should all remain present at the Noble Sanctuary [Temple Mount],” he added.

“We must prevent them from entering the Noble Sanctuary in any way. This is our Al-Aksa and our church. They have no right to enter and desecrate them. We must confront them and defend our holy sites.”

Abbas said Palestinians must be united to defend Jerusalem.

“Jerusalem has a special flavor and taste not only in our hearts, but also in the hearts of all Arabs and Muslims and Christians,” he said. “Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the Palestinian state and without it there will be no state.”

Abbas said he was determined to go to the UN Security Council to seek a resolution calling on Israel to withdraw to the pre-1967 lines.

Culture Trumps Politics

Culture Trumps Politics: Though his new collection of essays, "The Undocumented Mark Steyn: Don't Say You Weren't Warned" (Regnery), recounts many of the biggest political events of recent history, bestselling author Steyn says that's not the real battleground. While everyone is focused on the 2014 midterms, the question about where our country is headed is being decided in our entertainment and our schools. Here, in an excerpt from the book, he explains how culture is king...

Protectionism’s Essence

Protectionism’s Essence: (Don Boudreaux)

Here’s a letter to a college student in New Jersey:

Dear Mr. Sloan

Thanks for writing.

You ask if my support of free trade is “too simplistic.”  Aren’t there “conditional situations and details” that I overlook when I oppose protectionist arguments?  Fair questions.  My answer, though, is that while I agree that reality is unavoidably more complex than are any human accounts of it, the unconditional case against protectionism is as sound as is, say, the unconditional case against armed robbery.

Suppose your next-door neighbor grows tomatoes and offers to sell some to you.  You reject his offer and instead buy tomatoes from a seller who lives further down the street.  Your next-door neighbor’s prices might be higher than are those charged by the more-distant seller or the quality of his tomatoes not quite to your liking.  Whatever the reasons, you don’t buy tomatoes from your neighbor.

Now suppose that your neighbor responds by pointing a gun at your head to demand that you hand over to him a dollar for every pound of tomatoes that you buy from the seller down the street.  Would you think that your neighbor’s actions are justified?  Of course not.

But what if your neighbor tells you, as he stares at you down the barrel of his gun, that he really needs the extra income that he’ll get if you buy his tomatoes?  Or what if your neighbor insists that the seller down the street is selling tomatoes at prices that are unfairly low?  (“His uncle subsidizes his tomato growing!”)  Or suppose your neighbor asserts that he’s a more reliable supplier of tomatoes for the neighborhood than is the seller down the street?  Would any of these “situations and details” justify your neighbor threatening violence against you if you don’t pay to him a penalty whenever you buy tomatoes from someone else?  Of course not - and this conclusion wouldn’t change if your neighbor outsourced to a criminal gang the task of collecting from you the fines your neighbor demands for your patronizing another seller.

Protectionism of the sort practiced by sovereign governments is similarly unconditionally unjustified, for it differs in no relevant ways from the armed robbery described above.


Donald J. Boudreaux

Professor of Economics


Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center

George Mason University

Fairfax, VA  22030

More Liberal Lies Exposed: CDC Increased Payroll by 38% Since 2007, Increased # of Employees by Nearly 2,000 | The Gateway Pundit

More Liberal Lies Exposed: CDC Increased Payroll by 38% Since 2007, Increased # of Employees by Nearly 2,000 | The Gateway Pundit: "In the wake of this latest disaster Democrats decided to blame the Sequester for cutting funds to the CDC. This was despite the fact that the Republican Congress gave more money to the CDC than Obama requested.

Now there is even more proof that Democrats are blatantly lying about funding to the CDC. Open the Books discovered that the CDC increased its payroll by 37% since 2007. The CDC also added nearly two thousand new employees since 2007.


'via Blog this'

Why Is the Ebola Czar Reporting to Nation’s Highest Counterterrorism Official?

Why Is the Ebola Czar Reporting to Nation’s Highest Counterterrorism Official?:

Roger L. Simon » Ebola? It’s the VIDEO!

How could it be otherwise? Who else but Susan Rice should the new Ebola czar be reporting to? After all, as we all know, there would not be such a disease were it not for that noxious video.
Actually, I’m a bit more worried about the other security adviser the Czar is reporting to:  Lisa Monaco, the  Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

Would it be hysterical of me to spend a moment or two wondering why the Ebola Czar is reporting to the nation’s highest counterterrorism official?

What are they worried about here?

What Nancy Pelosi Is Trying to Do to the Military Proves She Must Be Fired

What Nancy Pelosi Is Trying to Do to the Military Proves She Must Be Fired: Conservatives generally don’t need any more evidence to convince them that Nancy Pelosi should be fired as house minority leader. The California representative who has been variously described as “mind-numbingly stupid” and “unhinged” is likely to hear more such comments as word of her latest plans for the U.S. military become known. Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill

Houston’s mayor is a villain, not a hero

Houston’s mayor is a villain, not a hero: This week the country learned that in the politically red state of Texas is the liberal, blue city of Houston, which is led by Mayor Annise Parker, an avowed lesbian.

Pope Harming The Church

Pope Harming The Church: Pope Francis is doing great harm to the church. Those words in public interview from Cardinal Raymond Burke. Cardinal Raymond Burke is the prefect of the Apostolic signatory of or at least he was he has also confirmed for the first time in public the rumor that he has been ousted by Pope Francis


Kansas Senate race is a national election

I don't much like the Beltway GOP, but we must control the Senate.  We have got to stop the Liberal insanity even if the GOP is not the perfect solution.  We need to stop the Liberal judicial appointments.

Kansas Senate race is a national election:

Pat_Roberts_official_photoFormer Democrat House Speaker Tip O’Neill’s political wisdom that “All politics is local” has been a staple in political thinking for many years.
But the truth of the matter is that, regarding elections for national office, politics is really, today, a national business.

And this is what voters in Kansas should be thinking about in the current close Senate race between Republican incumbent Pat Roberts and Independent challenger Greg Orman.

Roberts has not been shy making the point that regaining the Senate by Republicans is crucial and this is what Kansas voters should be thinking about in this election. And he is right.

Let’s consider how the role of the federal government in American lives has changed since Tip O’Neill was first elected to the House of Representatives in 1953.

In 1953 about 15 percent of the federal budget consisted of direct payments to individuals and almost 70 percent of the federal budget consisted of spending on national defense.

Today it is the opposite. Seventy percent of expenditures of the federal government consist of transfer payments made directly to individuals and spending on national defense is barely 20 percent of the federal budget.

Where are all these transfer payments going?

According to John Merline of Investors Business Daily, 38.6 percent goes to pay health bills – through Medicare, Medicaid, or Obamacare, another third is in Social Security payments, 21 percent goes to poverty programs, and 5 percent to veterans.

When Tip O’Neill was first elected in 1953, non-defense expenditures of the federal government amounted to 10.4 percent of our GDP. Today it is 17.6 percent.

So politics cannot be local anymore. America is a different country today than Tip O’Neill’s America. The federal government places a major role – dwarfing that of local government – in the lives of every American citizen.

Furthermore, our political class in Washington – particularly the liberal ones that have controlled our government for the last 6 years – have advanced their control of our personal lives in a surreptitious way. Instead of raising taxes to cover the costs of all new expenditures, they just borrow the money.

Massive increases of American debt finances growth of government with citizens sitting on the sidelines, hearing about what they are getting and not what it is really costing them.

The latest report that federal debt has ballooned to $18 trillion boggles the mind.

That is over $57,000 debt on every US man, woman, and child.

Beyond the overriding economic control that the federal government now has over citizens, federal courts now dictate our social norms.

It is the federal judiciary that defines a woman’s ability to destroy life in the womb. And it is now the federal judiciary that defines what marriage is.

Kansas has always been a red state. The last time Kansans sent a Democrat to the Senate was in 1932. Since then, every Senator from Kansas has been a Republican, except for two populists.

The national agenda – runaway debt, runaway spending, loss of American leadership in the world, collapse of values and the American family at home – permeates every election in every state.

Greg Orman rejects Pat Roberts’ claim that he is a liberal Democrat in hiding. It’s pretty hard to not agree with Roberts when Orman ran for office as a Democrat in 2008, has given major contributions to Democrat candidates, is unapologetic in his pro-abortion stance, and has just been endorsed by the AFL-CIO.

Certainly conservatives have good reason to be disillusioned with the Republican Party over recent years. But at least there is hope that the Republican Party can get back on track.

There is no such hope for Democrats. They stand for everything that is sinking our country.

Pat Roberts is right. We cannot let Kansas turn purple or blue. We need to keep it red and we need to get conservatives back in control in Washington.
The post Kansas Senate race is a national election appeared first on American Clarion.

Killing Confidence in Our Government

Killing Confidence in Our Government:

By Alan Caruba

What has been the over-riding theme of life in America since Barack Obama became President in 2008?

It has been the continued loss of confidence Americans have regarding various elements of the federal government. From the Centers for Disease Control, the Veterans Administration, the Secret Service, to the Department of Justice and the Internal Revenue Service, these and other agencies have been tainted in ways that have turned his two terms into a litany of scandals and failures.

Obama is a President for whom politics is the sole reason against which every decision is made.

The latest example was the naming of an Ebola Czar. “Sources confirm to Fox News that President Obama plans to name Ron Klain, a longtime political hand with no apparent medical or health background.” In the past, Klain has served as chief of staff to Al Gore and Joe Biden. Does this make you feel any better about the Ebola threat?

I think that most Americans—not the “low information” ignorant ones—are experiencing a generalized depression about the nation these days. It’s a sense of weariness because our paychecks don’t stretch enough in the supermarket where the cost of food, particularly meat and fish, is soaring.

We wonder about the quality of education our children or grandchildren are receiving. It’s poor when compared to other nations and it undermines a belief in America's exceptionalism.

In growing numbers younger Americans are choosing not to marry because of the costs involved and because we live in a society that no longer frowns on a couple living together; nearly half of marriages end in divorce. And then there’s same-sex marriage, a concept that was unthinkable not that long ago and for centuries in all societies.

We’re now six years into the Great Recession thanks to a White House that thought that, if the government spent $834 billion on top of the national debt, it would somehow “stimulate” the economy but government spending did not relieve Americans during the Great Depression, generate new jobs or achieve anything else that this tried-and-failed liberal theory was said to do. Who was in charge of Obama’s “stimulus” program? Ron Klain, the new Ebola Czar.

Cutting taxes, slowing and reducing regulations, and generally getting out of the way to allow people to start or expand their businesses works, but the White House went the other direction.

As an October 16 Wall Street Journal editorial noted, “Millions of American families haven’t had a raise in after-inflation incomes in years, but in Washington times are flush…the U.S. federal government rolled up record revenues of $3.013 trillion.” Individual income tax receipts rose by 5.9%, along with payroll taxes and corporate income taxes—very nearly the highest in the world—increased 16% to $321 billion. 

Only the naïve or ignorant believe that the government knows how to spend our money better than we do, but liberals—Democrats—do. Their answer to every problem government encounters is more money, but not to repair and expand the infrastructure, roads and bridges, on which the nation depends and not for a military that is currently at low pre-World War Two levels of personnel and old equipment of every description.

Our current Secretary of State, John Kerry, is going around echoing the President, telling people that mankind is doomed because “climate change” is coming and will destroy all life unless billions or trillions are spent in ways that will avoid it. Only no one can avoid climate change because that’s what climate does; it changes with well-known and predictable cycles tied to the Sun’s cycles.

Our military’s mission is now being redirected to addressing “climate change” at a time when, having been withdrawn from Iraq, a new, larger and far more dangerous entity, the Islamic State, has emerged, stretching into Syria as well.

The President recently gave an interview to France’s Canel+ TV Channel and said that the American people need to be better educated about Islam, claiming that the U.S. should be regarded as a Muslim country because of the number of Muslims living here. The truth is that the U.S. has one of the smallest percentages of Muslims of any Western nation, about 1.5% of the population. Americans know everything they need to about Islam. They recently watched two of their countrymen beheaded by the Islamic State.

The President appears to prefer unapologetic liars as his advisors. Consider Susan Rice who came to fame by lying on five Sunday television shows that the Benghazi attack in 2012 was the result of a video no one had seen and more recently said that Turkey had agreed to permit the U.S. to undertake military flights to attack ISIS only to have Turkey deny that within hours. She is Obama’s national security advisor and that is cause enough for concern, but guess to whom the new Ebola Czar, Ron Klain, will be reporting? Susan Rice.

While Obama has been in office the population has been growing by virtue of the millions of illegal aliens that have been entering. This year there was a dramatic virtual invasion of children and others from Guatemala and San Salvador at the invitation of the President. They were quickly dispersed throughout the U.S. and just as quickly schools around the nation began to report outbreaks of the diseases they brought. At the same time, deportations have declined this year.

The President has sent more than 4,000 of our military to Africa’s Ebola hot zone and he did so rapidly as what will be described as a humanitarian gesture, but he has never seen any necessity to dispatch our military to our southern border to stem illegal entry. Indeed, his administration has taken Arizona to court when it passed legislation to address the problem. In the meantime, we are left to wonder what will happen if our soldiers become ill with Ebola?

Indeed, his signature legislation, ObamaCare, is destroying our healthcare system and is a testament to the lies he repeatedly told before the Democrats in Congress passed it in 2009. No Republican voted for it. After the midterm elections, hundreds of thousands will learn that their employers will no longer provide them with healthcare insurance.

Americans are left to wonder how the nation can survive a President who has steadily engaged in programs that have harmed America’s economy—he is the first to have had our national credit rating reduced.

In the process he has ignored the limits imposed on his office by the Constitution. The courts have repeatedly rebuked this.

On November 4th voters will have an opportunity to go to the polls and vote out as many of his supporters, incumbent Democrats and candidates for Congress, as possible. 

Our confidence in our government must be restored with new leadership.

© Alan Caruba, 2014
Alan Caruba blogs daily at An author, business and science writer, he is the founder of The National Anxiety Center.