<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Dennis Prager</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/author/dennis-prager/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 07:56:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>You Can Kill, But Not Murder</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/you-can-kill-but-not-murder/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=you-can-kill-but-not-murder</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/you-can-kill-but-not-murder/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2014 05:00:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bible]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[commandments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[murder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pacifism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=246495</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why there's no biblical basis for pacifism. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Keith-Breeze-Ten-Commandments.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-246498" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Keith-Breeze-Ten-Commandments-421x350.jpg" alt="Keith Breeze Ten Commandments" width="303" height="252" /></a>That is the King James translation of the sixth commandment. It is a magnificent translation. But this one has led to much moral confusion.</p>
<p>Yesterday, PragerUniversity.com, which has had more than 20 million views this year, released 11 courses (each five-minutes long) — the Ten Commandments and an introduction.</p>
<p>The reason we made these video courses is that I believe that everything we need to make a good world and rid ourselves of evil is contained in the Ten Commandments.</p>
<p>For the next few weeks, my column will be selected transcripts of the courses, all of which I present.</p>
<p>Whatever your faith, or if you have no faith, I invite you to watch the videos at www.prageru.com — from the introduction through the tenth, or any of the Ten. They are cleverly animated with text and graphics.</p>
<p>Here is the text of commandment six — explaining why the King James translation is wrong:</p>
<p>You would think that of all the Ten Commandments the one that needs the least explaining is the sixth, because it seems so clear. It is the one that the King James Bible, the most widely used English translation of the Bible, translates as, &#8220;Thou shall not kill.&#8221;</p>
<p>Yet, the truth is the quite the opposite. This is probably the least well understood of the Ten Commandments. The reason is that the Hebrew original does not say, &#8220;Do not kill.&#8221; It says, &#8220;Do not murder.&#8221; Both Hebrew and English have two words for taking a life — one is &#8220;kill&#8221; (harag, in Hebrew) and the other is &#8220;murder&#8221; (ratzach in Hebrew).</p>
<p>The difference between the two is enormous. Kill means:</p>
<p>1) Taking any life — whether of a human being or an animal.</p>
<p>2) Taking a human life deliberately or by accident.</p>
<p>3) Taking a human life legally or illegally, morally or immorally.</p>
<p>On the other hand, murder can only mean one thing: The illegal or immoral taking of a human life. That&#8217;s why we say, &#8220;I killed a mosquito,&#8221; not, &#8220;I murdered a mosquito.&#8221; And that&#8217;s why we would say that &#8220;the worker was accidentally killed,&#8221; not that &#8220;the worker was accidentally murdered.&#8221;</p>
<p>So why did the King James translation of the Bible use the word &#8220;kill&#8221; rather than &#8220;murder&#8221;? Because 400 years ago, when the translation was made, &#8220;kill&#8221; was synonymous with &#8220;murder.&#8221; As a result, some people don&#8217;t realize that English has changed since 1610 and therefore think that the Ten Commandments prohibits all killing.</p>
<p>But, of course, it doesn&#8217;t. If the Ten Commandments forbade killing, we would all have to be vegetarians, as killing animals would be prohibited. And we would all have to be pacifists — since we could not kill even in self-defense.</p>
<p>However, you don&#8217;t have to know how the English language has evolved to understand that the Ten Commandments could not have prohibited all killing.</p>
<p>The very same part of the Bible that contains the Ten Commandments — the Five Books of Moses, the Torah as it is known by Jews — commands the death penalty for murder, allows killing in war, prescribes animal sacrifice and allows eating meat.</p>
<p>A correct understanding of the commandment against murder is crucial because, while virtually every modern translation correctly translates the commandment as &#8220;Do not murder,&#8221; many people cite the King James translation to justify two positions that have no biblical basis: opposition to capital punishment and pacifism.</p>
<p>Regarding capital punishment and the Bible, as I note in my Prager University course on capital punishment, the only law that appears in each one of the Five Books of Moses is that murderers be put to death. Opponents of the death penalty are free to hold the view that all murderers should be allowed to live. But they are not free to cite the Bible to support their view.</p>
<p>Yet, many do. And they always cite the Commandment, &#8220;Do not kill.&#8221; But that, as should now be abundantly clear, is not what the commandment says, and it is therefore an invalid argument.</p>
<p>As regards pacifism, the belief that it is always wrong to kill a human being, again, anyone is free to hold this position, as immoral as it may be. And what other word than &#8220;immoral&#8221; can one use to describe forbidding the killing of someone who is in the process of murdering innocent men, women and children, in, let&#8217;s say, a movie theater or a school?</p>
<p>But it is dishonest to cite the commandment against murder to justify pacifism.</p>
<p>There is moral killing — most obviously when done in self-defense against an aggressor — and there is immoral killing. And the word for that is &#8220;murder.&#8221;</p>
<p>The Ten Commandments are portrayed on two tablets. The five commandments on the second tablet all concern our treatment of fellow human beings.</p>
<p>The first one on that list is &#8220;Do not murder.&#8221; Why? Because murder is the worst act a person can commit. The other four commandments — prohibiting stealing, adultery, giving false testimony and coveting, are all serious offenses.</p>
<p>But murder leads the list because deliberately taking the life of an innocent person is the most terrible thing we can do. That is why it is so important to understand that the commandment prohibits murder, not all killing. When people liken killing in self-defense to murder — such as when they equate killing the terrorist who is murdering people with the murders that the terrorist is committing — all they are doing is reducing the evil that murder is. And when they use the Ten Commandments to justify that position, all they are doing is making the Ten Commandments, the moral foundation of Western Civilization, morally irrelevant.</p>
<p>The next time you hear someone cite, &#8220;Do not kill&#8221; when quoting the sixth commandment, gently but firmly explain that it actually says, &#8220;Do not murder.&#8221;</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/you-can-kill-but-not-murder/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>35</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What the Arab World Produces</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/what-the-arab-world-produces/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=what-the-arab-world-produces</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/what-the-arab-world-produces/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:10:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arab world]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hatred]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[produce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=242012</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And how the world suffers the consequences. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/islamonazis-in-syria-with-koran-and-fascist-salute-30.9.2013.png"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-242024" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/islamonazis-in-syria-with-koran-and-fascist-salute-30.9.2013-450x313.png" alt="islamonazis-in-syria-with-koran-and-fascist-salute-30.9.2013" width="308" height="214" /></a>At least since the early part of the 20th century, aside from oil, the Arab world has produced and exported two products.</p>
<p>It has produced essentially no technology, medicine or anything else in the world of science. It has almost no contributions to world literature, art or to intellectual development.</p>
<p>According to the most recent United Nations Arab Human Development Reports (2003-2005), written by Arab intellectuals, Greece, with a population of 11 million, annually translates five times more books from English than the entire Arab world, population 370 million. Nor is this a new development. The total number of books translated into Arabic during the last 1,000 years is less than Spain translates into Spanish in one year.</p>
<p>ArabianBusiness.com reports that about 100 million people in the Arab world are illiterate; and three quarters of them are between the ages of 15 and 45.</p>
<p>As for Arab women, the situation is even worse. Nearly half of the Arab world&#8217;s women are illiterate, and sexual attacks on women have actually increased since the Arab Spring, as have forced marriages and trafficking. And the exact number of women murdered by family members in &#8220;honor killings&#8221; is not knowable. It is only known to be large.</p>
<p>In Egypt, the largest Arab country, 91 percent of women and girls are subjected to female genital mutilation, according to UNICEF. Not to mention the number of women in the Arab world who must wear veils or even full-face and full-body coverings known as burkas. And, of course, Saudi Arabia is infamous for not allowing women to drive a car.</p>
<p>Another unhappy feature of the Arab world is the prevalence of lies. To this day, Egypt denies that it was the Egyptian pilot, Ahmed El-Habashi, who allegedly crashed an EgyptAir jet into the ocean deliberately. Vast numbers of Arabs believe that Jews knew of the 9-11 plot and avoided going to work at the World Trade Center that day.</p>
<p>So, then, is there anything at which the Arab world has excelled for the past two generations? Has there been a major Arab export?</p>
<p>As it happens, there are two.</p>
<p>Hatred and violence.</p>
<p>The Arab world has no peer when it comes to hatred &#8211; of the Western world generally, and especially of Israel. Israel-hatred and its twin, Jew-hatred, are the oxygen that the Arab world breathes.</p>
<p>Two of the most popular songs in Egypt over the past decade have been &#8220;I Hate Israel&#8221; and the ironically named &#8220;I Love Israel.&#8221;</p>
<p>Lyrics of the latter song include:</p>
<p>&#8220;May it [Israel] be destroyed. May it be wiped off the map. May a wall fall on it. May it disappear from the universe. God, please have it banished.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;May it dangle from the noose. May I get to see it burning, Amen. I will pour gasoline on it. I am an Egyptian man. I am not a coward.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;I Hate Israel&#8221; is so popular that it was the song which Egypt&#8217;s pop star Chaaboula sang at the largest music festival in the Arab world, Morocco&#8217;s Mawazine.</p>
<p>The festival, one of the biggest in the world, featured Alicia Keys, Justin Timberlake, Ricky Martin and Kool and the Gang.</p>
<p>Some of the lyrics:</p>
<p>&#8220;I hate Israel, and I would say so if I was asked to.</p>
<p>&#8220;Two faces of the same coin, America and Israel. They made the world a jungle and ignited the fuse.</p>
<p>&#8220;About that [Twin] Tower, oh people. Definitely! His friends [Israel] were the ones who brought it down.&#8221;</p>
<p>The other major Arab product and export has been violence.</p>
<p>It is difficult to overstate the amount of violence in the Arab world. Mass murder and cruelty have characterized the Arab world.</p>
<p>Regarding Iraq under Saddam Hussein, Dexter Filkins, the New York Times correspondent in Iraq from 2003-2006 wrote: &#8220;Here, in Hussein, was one of the world&#8217;s indisputably evil men: he murdered as many as a million of his people, many with poison gas. He tortured, maimed and imprisoned countless more. His unprovoked invasion of Iran is estimated to have left another million people dead.&#8221;</p>
<p>Syria, too, has been a country of mass murder, torture, and brutal totalitarian rule — under the rule of Hafez Assad (in power 1971-2000), and his son, Bashar, the current killer-dictator who, among other atrocities, used Sarin gas against his own people in 2013.</p>
<p>In the ongoing Syrian Civil War, according to the United Nations, between March 15, 2011 and April 30, 2014, 191,000 Syrians, about a third of them civilians, were killed. In addition, 2.5 million people have fled Syria to neighboring countries, and 6.5 million have fled their homes within Syria.</p>
<p>In Algeria in the 1990s, Islamist terrorists engaged in wholesale murder of their fellow Algerians. That war cost Algeria about 100,000 lives, mostly civilian.</p>
<p>In Sudan, the Arab government&#8217;s atrocities against the non-Arab population in the region of Darfur led to about 300,000 deaths and over a million refugees. In addition there was systematic rape of untold numbers of non-Arab women by Arab gangs known as the Janjaweed.</p>
<p>And then there was the terror unleashed by Palestinians against Israeli civilians in restaurants, at weddings, on buses, etc. The Palestinians are the modern fathers of terrorism directed solely at civilians.</p>
<p>There are two possible reactions to this description of the Arab world. One is that it is an example of anti-Arab &#8220;racism.&#8221; That would be the reaction in much of the Arab world, on the left and among most academics — despite the fact that the description is of a culture and that the Arabs are not a race. The other is that is that it is tragically accurate. That would be the reaction of some in the Arab world and anyone who cares about truth. One such individual is an Arab. In Politico Magazine two weeks ago. Hisham Melhem, Washington bureau chief of Al-Arabiya, the Dubai-based satellite channel, titled his article &#8220;The Barbarians Within Our Gates.&#8221; The subtitle is &#8220;Arab civilization has collapsed. It won&#8217;t recover in my lifetime.&#8221;</p>
<p>Islamic State, which is overwhelmingly Arab, is just the latest manifestation.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/what-the-arab-world-produces/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Not Islamic&#8217;?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/not-islamic/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=not-islamic</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/not-islamic/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2014 04:20:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ayaan hirsi ali]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamic state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saudi Arabia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=241806</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Arabia and Iran also not representative of Islam? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Screen-Shot-2014-09-25-at-2.56.44-PM.png"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-241807" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Screen-Shot-2014-09-25-at-2.56.44-PM-408x350.png" alt="Screen Shot 2014-09-25 at 2.56.44 PM" width="319" height="274" /></a>President Obama declared in his recent address to the nation that &#8220;ISIL is not Islamic.&#8221;</p>
<p>But how does he know? On what basis did the president of the United States declare the a group of Muslims that calls itself &#8220;Islamic State&#8221; &#8220;not Islamic&#8221;?</p>
<p>Has he studied Islam and Islamic history and concluded that ISIL, Boko Haram, al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Taliban, Jamaat-e-Islami, Lashkar-e-Taiba (the group that slaughtered 166 people in Mumbai, most especially guests at the Taj Hotel,and which tortured to death a rabbi and his wife), the various Palestinian terrorist groups (all of which have been Muslim, even though there are many Christian Palestinians), and the Muslim terror groups in Somalia, Yemen, Libya and elsewhere are also all &#8220;not Islamic&#8221;?</p>
<p>Has he concluded that the Muslim Brotherhood, which won Egypt&#8217;s most open election ever, is &#8220;not Islamic?&#8221;</p>
<p>And what about Saudi Arabia? Is that country &#8220;not Islamic,&#8221; too?</p>
<p>Oh, and what about Iran? Also &#8220;not Islamic&#8221;?</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t that a lot of Muslims, Muslim groups, and even nations — all of whom claim Islam as their religion — to dismiss as &#8220;not Islamic&#8221;?</p>
<p>To be fair, these baseless generalizations about what is and what is not Islamic started with his predecessor, President George W. Bush, who regularly announced that &#8220;Islam is a religion of peace.&#8221; And it is equally unlikely that his assertion came from a study of Islam and Islamic history.</p>
<p>The fact is that a study of Islamic history could not lead any fair-minded individual to conclude that all these Muslims and Islamic groups are &#8220;not Islamic.&#8221; Neither Islamic history, which, from its origins, offered vast numbers of people a choice between Islam and death, nor Islam as reflected in its greatest works, would lead one to draw that conclusion.</p>
<p>Killing &#8220;unbelievers&#8221; has been part of — of course not all of — Islam since its inception. Within 10 years of Muhammad&#8217;s death Muslims had conquered and violently converted whole peoples from Iran to Egypt and from Yemen to Syria. Muslims have offered conquered people death or conversion since that time.</p>
<p>The Hindu Kush, the vast, 500-mile long, 150-mile wide mountain range stretching from Afghanistan to Pakistan, was populated by Hindus until the Muslim invasions beginning around the year 1000. The Persian name Hindu Kush was proudly given by Muslims. It means &#8220;Hindu-killer.&#8221; At least 60 million Hindus were killed by Muslims during the thousand years of Muslim rule. Though virtually unknown, it may be the greatest mass murder in history next to Mao&#8217;s.</p>
<p>The groups named above are following some dictates of the Quran.</p>
<p>A few of many such examples:</p>
<p>&#8220;I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve.</p>
<p>Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them&#8221; (8:12).</p>
<p>&#8220;When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.&#8221; (9:5)</p>
<p>&#8220;Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth.&#8221; (9:29).</p>
<p>There is also a different admonition in the Quran: &#8220;In matters of faith there shall be no compulsion&#8221; (2:256).</p>
<p>So a Muslim can also cite the Quran if he wishes to allow non-Muslims to live in peace.</p>
<p>The problem is that Muslim theological tradition, affirmed by many scholars, holds that later revelation to Muhammad supersedes prior revelation (a doctrine known as &#8220;abrogation&#8221;). And the Quranic verses ordering Muslims to fight and slay non-believers came after those admonishing Muslims to live with non-believers in peace and without religious compulsion.</p>
<p>The problem is that Muslim history, in keeping with the doctrine of abrogation, has far more often practiced the violent admonitions.</p>
<p>The problem is that more than 600 years after Muhammad, Ibn Khaldun, the greatest Muslim writer who ever lived, explained why Islam is the superior religion in the most highly regarded Muslim work ever written, &#8220;Muqaddimah,&#8221; or &#8220;Introduction to History&#8221;:</p>
<p>&#8220;In the Muslim community, the holy war is religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.&#8221;</p>
<p>In other words, Ibn Khaldun boasts, whereas no other religion commands converting the world through force, Islam does. Was Ibn Khaldun also &#8220;not Islamic&#8221;? And so much for the president&#8217;s other claim that &#8220;no religion condones the killing of innocents.&#8221;</p>
<p>None of this justifies bigotry against Muslims. There are hundreds of millions of non-Islamist Muslims (an Islamist is a Muslim who seeks to impose Shariah on others), including many &#8220;cultural&#8221; or secular Muslims. And individual Muslims are risking their lives every day to provide the intelligence needed to forestall terror attacks in America and elsewhere.</p>
<p>It is only a call to clarity amidst the falsehoods coming from the president, the secretary of state, and especially the universities.</p>
<p>As the courageous Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-born woman who leads a worldwide effort on behalf of Muslim women and for reforming Islam, asked in a speech at Yale University this month: If Islam is a religion of peace, why is there a sword on the Saudi flag?</p>
<p>If the president feels he has to obfuscate for the sake of gaining Muslim allies, so be it. But the rest of us don&#8217;t have to make believe what he said is true.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p><em>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>Robert Spencer</strong> on this week&#8217;s Glazov Gang discussing<span id="productTitle" class="a-size-large"><strong> The Fog of Jihad-Denial</strong>:</span></em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/S8kxWhX0S50" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><a id="js_10" class="profileLink _5f0v" tabindex="0" href="https://www.facebook.com/annmariemurrell" data-hovercard="/ajax/hovercard/user.php?id=1258545911"></a></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/not-islamic/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>1,400 English Girls Raped by Multiculturalism</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/1400-english-girls-raped-by-multiculturalism-1/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=1400-english-girls-raped-by-multiculturalism-1</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/1400-english-girls-raped-by-multiculturalism-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 04:02:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rape gangs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=240680</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why the Left allowed 16 years of gang rapes of young U.K. girls.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/da.gif"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-240675" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/da.gif" alt="da" width="274" height="154" /></a>Last week, it was revealed that between 1997 and 2013, at least 1,400 girls — in just one relatively small English city (Rotherham, population 275,000) had been raped by gangs of men over the past decade.</p>
<p>As summarized in a British government inquiry:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten, and intimidated. There were examples of children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone. Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of male perpetrators.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Why was nothing done for 16 years?</p>
<p>Police incompetence was a factor, but not the primary reason.</p>
<p>The primary reason was political correctness. It turns out that the perpetrators were all, or nearly all, of &#8220;Pakistani heritage&#8221; and the girls were all, or nearly all, white.</p>
<p>This explanation is not that of conservatives alone. Virtually everyone, including media and politicians on the British left, acknowledge that this is the reason. What neither they nor the American left have acknowledged is that political correctness was created and is sustained by the left.</p>
<p>It is a testament to the lack of self-awareness on the left that it experiences no cognitive dissonance. The New York Times and other left-wing media have thoroughly reported this story and the fact that political correctness is to blame for the ongoing atrocities against these girls. Yet they are oblivious to the fact that they are the very ones who created the moral monsters known as political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity — the doctrines that forbid judging non-whites, Muslims and others by the same moral standards as whites and Christians.</p>
<p>These left-wing doctrines made 16 years of gang rapes of English girls possible.</p>
<p>In 2002, a Labor Party MP from nearby Keighley, Ann Cryer, complained to the police about &#8220;young Asian lads&#8221; raping girls in her constituency. In her words, she &#8220;was shunned by elements of her party.&#8221; And note, that as is demanded by the left in the U.K., she didn&#8217;t even mention that the rapists were Pakistani, lest Muslims be blamed for this evil. They were &#8220;Asian lads.&#8221;</p>
<p>And, for the record, her attempts to get local imams to intervene with the men failed; she was called a racist.</p>
<p>National Review editor Rich Lowry reports that,</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;In a BBC documentary, the author of a 2002 report to the Rotherham council on the scandal said her work was quashed. When she noted that the perpetrators were from the Pakistani community, a colleague told her &#8216;you must never refer to that again — you must never refer to Asian men.&#8217; She was sent to diversity training and, by her account, nearly fired.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>British Home Secretary Theresa May told Parliament that &#8220;institutionalized political correctness&#8221; was responsible for the lack of attention given to the mass rape.</p>
<p>In 2001, Jack Straw, then-MP from Brighton, and formerly U.K. home secretary, announced that &#8220;there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men &#8230; who target vulnerable young white girls.&#8221; Straw was dismissed by the left. For example, Keith Vaz, a Labour MP, told the BBC: &#8220;I disagree with Jack Straw &#8230; I don&#8217;t think you can stereotype an entire community.&#8221;</p>
<p>The immediate case that prompted Straw&#8217;s statement was the conviction of two Brits of Pakistani heritage on charges of rape. Multiculturalism and political correctness clearly infected the judge in that case. He &#8220;said he did not believe the crimes were &#8216;racially aggravated,&#8217; adding that the race of the victims and their abusers was &#8216;coincidental.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Coincidental.&#8221;</p>
<p>Lies are to political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity what water is to fish.</p>
<p>From the Guardian in 2001: &#8220;Retired detective chief superintendent Max McLean, who led a previous police investigation into sexual exploitation involving the grooming and trafficking of young girls in Leeds, <i> questioned whether it was a cultural problem&#8221; </i> (italics added).</p>
<p>Perhaps Detective Chief Superintendent is unaware of the following from his own country (as reported last week in the New York Times):</p>
<p>&#8220;The same [as in Rotherham] was true in recent prosecutions in Oxford, in southern England, and the northern towns of Oldham and Rochdale, where nine men of Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Afghan origin were given long prison sentences in 2012 for abusing up to 47 girls. Investigators in Scotland have reportedly uncovered a similar pattern of abuse.&#8221;</p>
<p>So why did the judge &#8220;question whether it was a cultural problem&#8221;?</p>
<p>Because morally judging cultures (except Christian, Israeli and American cultures) is forbidden by the left. Indeed not judging non-Western cultures is the very definition of &#8220;multiculturalism.&#8221;</p>
<p>And finally, from the same report: Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of Muslim organization the Ramadhan Foundation, &#8220;to suggest that this is somehow ingrained in the community is deeply offensive.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Offensive?&#8221; But what, Mr. Shafiq, if it&#8217;s true?</p>
<p>The answer is clear and important. For the multicultural left and the victim-status groups it defends — and for the millions of young people the Left has indoctrinated at schools and universities — whether something is true is not what matters. What matters is whether it can be deemed offensive by the left.</p>
<p>Some 1,400 girls were raped by gangs of men — &#8220;[While one girl was being raped] the rest of the men, all in their 20s, stood over her, cheering and jeering, and blinding her with the flash of their cameras&#8221; — thanks to leftism&#8217;s morality-denying doctrine of multiculturalism.</p>
<p>This is all but one more example of the most important moral rule since the beginning of the 20th century: Almost everything the left touches is either damaged or ruined.</p>
<p>In this case, it was the lives of 1,400 English girls.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p><em>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>The Glazov Gang&#8217;s </strong>special 2-part series with <strong>Gavin Boby</strong> of the <a href="http://lawandfreedomfoundation.org/">Law and Freedom Foundation</a> about Muslim rape gangs in the UK and how the Left facilitated their barbaric crimes against helpless young girls:</em></p>
<p><strong>Part I:</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Y27t01dx9Wg" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Part II:</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/NWKTTPyK1-o" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>. </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/1400-english-girls-raped-by-multiculturalism-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>85</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why America Is in Jeopardy</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/why-america-is-in-jeopardy/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-america-is-in-jeopardy</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/why-america-is-in-jeopardy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2014 04:00:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judaism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secular]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=236041</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Secularization and its consequences. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/pic_giant_121713_SM_No-Ones-Watching-Prison-Rape-in-America.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-236046" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/pic_giant_121713_SM_No-Ones-Watching-Prison-Rape-in-America-450x262.jpg" alt="pic_giant_121713_SM_No-Ones-Watching-Prison-Rape-in-America" width="258" height="150" /></a>On page 563 of his latest biography, &#8220;John Quincy Adams: American Visionary,&#8221; author Fred Kaplan (biographer of Abraham Lincoln, Charles Dickens, Mark Twain and Gore Vidal among others) cites this insight of the sixth president:</p>
<p>&#8220;Christianity had, all in all, he believed, been a civilizing force, &#8216;checking and controlling the anti-social passions of man.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>That insight is pretty much all an American needs to know in order to understand why the American Founders considered religion — specifically ethical monotheism rooted in the Hebrew Bible — indispensable to the American experiment, and why the America we have known since 1776 is in jeopardy.</p>
<p>It is easy to respect secular Americans who hold fast to the Constitution and to American values generally. And any one of us who believes in God can understand why some people, given all the unjust suffering in the world, just cannot believe that there is a Providential Being.</p>
<p>But one cannot respect the view that America can survive without the religious beliefs and values that shaped it. The argument that there are moral secularists and moral atheists is a non-sequitur. Of course there are moral Americans devoid of religion. So what? There were moral people who believed in Zeus. But an America governed by Roman religion would not be the America that has been the beacon of freedom and the greatest force for good in the world.</p>
<p>In order to understand why, one only need understand John Quincy Adams&#8217;s insight: How will we go about &#8220;checking and controlling the anti-social passions of man&#8221; without traditional American religious beliefs?</p>
<p>There are two possible responses:</p>
<p>One is that most Americans (or people generally, but we are talking about America here) do not have anti-social passions.</p>
<p>The other is that most Americans (again, like all other human beings) do have anti-social passions, but the vast majority of us can do a fine job checking and controlling them without religion as it has been practiced throughout American history.</p>
<p>These are the views with which virtually every American who attends secular high school or university is explicitly and implicitly indoctrinated.</p>
<p>Both are wrong. And not just wrong, but foolish — and lethal to the American experiment.</p>
<p>To deny that human beings are filled with anti-social passions betrays a denial of reality and a lack of self-awareness.</p>
<p>One has to be taught nonsense for a great many formative years to believe it.</p>
<p>If we weren&#8217;t born with anti-social passions — narcissism, envy, lust, meanness, greed, hunger for power, just to name the more obvious — why the need for so many laws, whether religious or secular, that govern behavior?</p>
<p>The second objection is that even if we do have anti-social passions, we don&#8217;t need a God or religion in order to control them. Only moral primitives, the argument goes, need either a judging God or a religious set of rules. The Enlightened can do fine without them and need only to consult their faculty of reason and conscience to know how to behave.</p>
<p>Our prisons are filled with people whose consciences are quite at peace with their criminal behavior. As for reason, they used it well — to figure out how to get away with everything from murder to white-collar crime.</p>
<p>But our prisons are not filled with religious Jewish and Christian murderers. On the contrary, if all Americans attended church weekly, we would need far fewer prisons, and the ones we needed would have very few murderers in them.</p>
<p>Meanwhile the record of the godless and Christianity-less crowd is awful. I am not simply referring to the godless and secular Communist regimes of the 20th century that committed virtually every genocide of that century. I am referring to those Americans (and Europeans) who use reason to argue, among other foolish things: that good and evil are subjective societal or individual opinions; that gender is purely a social construct and therefore the male and female distinction is of no importance; that marriage isn&#8217;t important — it is just a piece of paper and it was invented by the religious to keep women down; that a human fetus, even when it has a beating heart, a formed human body, and a conscious brain, has less right to life than a cat; and that men, let alone fathers, aren&#8217;t necessary (see, for example, The Atlantic Are Fathers Necessary? and the New York Times Men, Who Needs Them?). And that is a short list.</p>
<p>For proof of the moral and intellectual consequences of the secularization of America, look at what has happened to the least religious institution in America, the university.</p>
<p>Is that the future we want for the whole country?</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/why-america-is-in-jeopardy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>148</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LA Mayor Exemplifies America&#8217;s Decline</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/la-mayor-exemplifies-americas-decline/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=la-mayor-exemplifies-americas-decline</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/la-mayor-exemplifies-americas-decline/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:19:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Beer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bud light]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eric Garcetti]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Los Angeles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mayor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stanley cup]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[swear]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=234811</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If nothing is holy, what can be profane?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/6852c48c12ce71fff70b3ac158468d4e7c737b53.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-234812" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/6852c48c12ce71fff70b3ac158468d4e7c737b53-450x348.jpg" alt="6852c48c12ce71fff70b3ac158468d4e7c737b53" width="287" height="222" /></a>Last week, during the official celebration of the Los Angeles Kings winning the Stanley Cup, the mayor of Los Angeles, Eric Garcetti, told a jammed Staples Center that &#8220;there are two long-standing rules for politicians . &#8230; They say never, ever be pictured with a drink in your hand and never swear. But this is a big f——-g day,&#8221; he said, holding up a bottle of Bud Light.</p>
<p>You read that right. In front of 18,000 people at Staples and hundreds of thousands of others watching on television — many of them, of course, children — the mayor of the second-largest city in America held up a beer bottle and used the F-word.</p>
<p>This was not a whisper overheard by reporters. This was not an accidental loss of self-control. This was a planned use of obscene language in a public forum.</p>
<p>The question is: Does it matter?</p>
<p>According to the Los Angeles Times report, to the vast majority of people who heard it, it didn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>&#8220;The audience roared. Players stood up to applaud.</p>
<p>&#8220;Outside Staples Center and L.A. Live, the remarks were a hit. Lake Forest resident Jeff Ottinger, who attended Monday&#8217;s rally, said &#8230; &#8216;I think a lot of times politicians are uppity and stuffy and for him to actually be a fan is cool.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;It makes me have much more respect for him,&#8221; said Jason Werntz, 45, of Burbank.</p>
<p>Not only was the mayor not apologetic, he repeated his comment on Facebook and Twitter.</p>
<p>&#8220;Soon afterward,&#8221; the Times reported, &#8220;Garcetti had similar, PG-rated messages on Facebook and his official Twitter feed. &#8216;There are a few rules in politics, one is never swear, but this is a BFD. @ericgarcetti welcomes the #StanleyCup to LA.&#8221;</p>
<p>There are those of us who believe that this is an example of a civilization in decline (or even in free fall). And there are those who think that this is either no &#8220;BFD&#8221; (as Garcetti and his admirers might say) or actually a good thing. Here are two typical comments on the Los Angeles Times website:</p>
<p>Bruuuce: &#8220;I love him even more!&#8221;</p>
<p>MarkRomero: &#8220;I thought the comment was very humorous!! I laughed out loud when I heard it. You no sense of humor haters will never get it. That&#8217;s exactly why you are the way you are — humorless and republican, most likely. Go KINGS!&#8221;</p>
<p>(He is right about &#8220;Republican&#8221; — which tells you a lot about both the Republican and Democratic Parties.)</p>
<p>Nor was support confined to anonymous commenters and thousands of fans.</p>
<p>Not one member of the Los Angeles City Council condemned the mayor. At least one, Councilman Mike Bonin, &#8220;said he agreed with the mayor&#8217;s vivid description of the day.&#8221;</p>
<p>Support for the mayor must have overwhelmed objection. As reported by the Times, &#8220;A day after using the F-word in televised remarks at an L.A. Kings victory party,&#8221; Garcetti told those who found it offensive to &#8220;lighten up.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8216;I think I was just being myself for a moment there,&#8217; Garcetti told reporters . &#8230;</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8216;Look, I think people should be kind of light about this,&#8217; Garcetti said. &#8216;It&#8217;s something that plenty of people have heard in their lives for sure.&#8217;</p>
<p>&#8220;KNBC-TV reporter Conan Nolan asked the mayor if his cussing contributed to the coarsening of society.</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8216;We micro-analyze everything,&#8217; he added. &#8216;We ought to let people be people. I was just being a person yesterday.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>So, who are those who think this reflects serious social decay?</p>
<p>They probably fall into two categories: those over, let&#8217;s say, 55 years of age and religious individuals of all ages.</p>
<p>Older Americans grew up in a religious America, and religions draw a strong distinction between the holy and the profane. That explains why even some non-religious older Americans will find this objectionable.</p>
<p>But the secular and left-wing tsunami of the last half century has all but extinguished the concept of the holy, and thereby extinguished the concept of the profane. If nothing is holy, nothing is profane.</p>
<p>Teachers tell us how common it has become for students to curse in class — including cursing teachers. Fifty years ago students were allowed to mention God in class prayer. But in 1962, Supreme Court justices considered it progressive to outlaw all school prayer. And school prayer was shortly thereafter replaced by school cursing.</p>
<p>To appreciate just how perverse our moral standards have become, imagine if Garcetti, instead of celebrating with a bottle of beer and the f-word, had lit up a cigar. He would have been excoriated by every liberal medium in the country. And many millions of Americans would have expressed horror at what a poor model he was for America&#8217;s children.</p>
<p>A society that is horrified by a mayor publically smoking a cigar, and either apathetic or enthusiastic about that mayor publically holding up a beer bottle and cursing, is in deep trouble.</p>
<p>One is tempted to dismiss Eric Garcetti as either a fool or a bad guy. Based on what he did, and his continuing defense of it, he may well be the former. But he is not the latter. Above all, he is a man of the left, a Democrat, and a product of a secularized culture.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/la-mayor-exemplifies-americas-decline/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>50</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Young College Grad Calls My Show</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/a-young-college-grad-calls-my-show/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-young-college-grad-calls-my-show</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/a-young-college-grad-calls-my-show/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2014 04:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[caller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[college student]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[good vs. evil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Young]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226433</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A look into the morally confused universe of the youth. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/1275923315_96962728_1-online-radio-host-required-multan-1275923315.jpg"><img class=" wp-image-226434 alignleft" alt="1275923315_96962728_1-online-radio-host-required-multan-1275923315" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/1275923315_96962728_1-online-radio-host-required-multan-1275923315.jpg" width="318" height="269" /></a>Last week, on my radio talk show, I received a call from Jeff, a 21-year-old in North Carolina. I have abridged it and edited it stylistically.</p>
<p>JEFF: I wanted to respond to your question about America being feared in the world. You brought up Syria. I think it&#8217;s a little naive, and maybe that&#8217;s not even the right word, to boil down such complex international issues into just good and bad. Like to say that America, for you, represents good. And to just boil down the Syria situation into good and bad is to underestimate the complexity of the situation. Because if the United States were to get involved there, you know, there might be consequences for us in that region that I think would be definitely more bad than good.</p>
<p>DP: Like what?</p>
<p>JEFF: If we were to depose Assad, there could be a power vacuum and that could create more problems than we intended.</p>
<p>DP: There are two separate questions here. One is: Should the United States be feared by bad regimes? The other is: What should the United States do? They&#8217;re not identical. So let&#8217;s deal with the first: Would you acknowledge that it would be good if countries like Putin&#8217;s Russia, Iran or North Korea &#8212; though I don&#8217;t compare Putin to North Korea &#8212; feared us? And do you think they do?</p>
<p>JEFF: I think that&#8217;s a really good question. If I had the answer to that I think I&#8217;d be secretary of state.</p>
<p>DP: It&#8217;s not that tough a question. What we should do is a tough question. But whether America should be feared by bad regimes is not a tough question.</p>
<p>Let me just throw in a tangential comment that I think is important: I presume you went to college.</p>
<p>JEFF: Oh, yeah.</p>
<p>DP: The reason I presume that you went to college is that you were taught &#8212; and this is no knock on you whatsoever since anyone who takes liberal arts courses, in political science in particular, is taught &#8212; what you just told me: You can&#8217;t divide between good and bad, because it&#8217;s too complex.</p>
<p>But that&#8217;s not accurate. There is a good and bad. Yes, sometimes there is bad and worse &#8212; in Syria today, for example. But between Syria and the United States the difference is between bad and good. Would you agree that it&#8217;s between bad and good between Syria and the United States?</p>
<p>JEFF: As an American, absolutely.</p>
<p>DP: Wait a minute. That&#8217;s a terrible answer. I don&#8217;t want you to answer me as an American. I want you to answer me as a moral human.</p>
<p>JEFF: I can only answer you as an American. I can&#8217;t answer you as anyone else.</p>
<p>DP: That&#8217;s not true. If I asked you how much two and two is, you wouldn&#8217;t answer me as an American.</p>
<p>JEFF: Here&#8217;s my only comment, I would just, you know, hesitate to boil down international issues of such complexity, with multiple variables, to, &#8220;It&#8217;s simply good or bad.&#8221; And that&#8217;s my only comment.</p>
<p>DP: Thank you for calling.</p>
<p>What Jeff said is what I was taught at college. It is heartbreaking to hear how effective left-wing college indoctrination continues to be, with its morally obfuscating concepts such as &#8220;too complex.&#8221;</p>
<p>The morally obvious fact is that the United States is overwhelmingly a force for good both in the world and within its borders, and Syria is overwhelmingly a force for evil both in the world and within its borders. Yet, colleges have taught for at least two generations that such judgments are illegitimate.</p>
<p>If you want to judge whether Sweden or Denmark is better, that&#8217;s complex. Or whether Iran or Syria is more evil. That, too, is complex. But between Denmark and Syria, there is no moral complexity.</p>
<p>The other revealing comment my caller made was that he could only say &#8220;as an American&#8221; that America was a better country than Syria.</p>
<p>This, too, reflects a fundamental left-wing doctrine taught at colleges &#8212; that there are no moral truths, and we can only subjectively observe the world as members of a group. There are, therefore, black truths, white truths, rich truths, poor truths, male truths, female truths. Accordingly, for example, since men do not get pregnant, they cannot morally judge abortion.</p>
<p>To Jeff&#8217;s credit, he listens to a radio show that so differs from what he was taught in college. There is therefore some hope that he will eventually realize how much nonsense he was taught at college. Dangerous nonsense.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/a-young-college-grad-calls-my-show/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why the Left Doesn&#8217;t Care about Bad Economic News</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/why-the-left-doesnt-care-about-bad-economic-news/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-the-left-doesnt-care-about-bad-economic-news</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/why-the-left-doesnt-care-about-bad-economic-news/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2014 04:15:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosperity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=225462</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Americans' financial losses are the Democratic Party's gain. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/unemployment-1.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-225463" alt="unemployment-1" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/unemployment-1.jpg" width="298" height="197" /></a>This perception is wrong. It is their goals that are irreconcilable. And until conservatives, independents and the Republican Party understand this, it will not be possible to defeat the left.</p>
<p>Take economic indicators. Most conservatives talk and act as if bad economic news disturbs the left as much as it disturbs them. It doesn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>Almost everywhere the left is in control — in California, for example — the economic news is awful. But this has no effect on the ruling Democrats, the Los Angeles Times editorial page, New York Times economics columnist Paul Krugman or others on the left.</p>
<p>There is one overriding philosophical reason and one political reason for this. But before I identify them, permit me to note some of the economic facts of life in California.</p>
<p>Unless otherwise noted, the following data have been culled by Chapman University Professor Joel Kotkin, and published in the Wall Street Journal, the Orange County Register and elsewhere. (For the record, Kotkin is a self-described &#8220;Truman Democrat&#8221; who voted for the Democrat governor Jerry Brown of California.)</p>
<p>—In the last 20 years, about 4 million more people have left California than came in from other states. Most of those leaving are young families.</p>
<p>—In the last 15 years, one-third of California&#8217;s industrial employment base has disappeared. That&#8217;s 600,000 jobs that have disappeared.</p>
<p>—California has the 48th-worst business tax climate. (The Tax Foundation)</p>
<p>—California&#8217;s electricity prices are 50 percent higher than the national average.</p>
<p>—Middle-class workers, those who earn more than $48,000, pay a top income tax rate of 9.3 percent. That&#8217;s higher than what millionaires pay in 47 other states.</p>
<p>—California&#8217;s unemployment rate is fourth highest in the nation.</p>
<p>—From 2010-13, California produced fewer than 8,000 jobs, while the country added 510,000.</p>
<p>California faces enormous underfunded public employee pension obligations. (Bloomberg)</p>
<p>—An estimated 25 billion barrels of oil are sitting untapped in the Monterey and Bakersfield shale deposits. California is therefore sending billions of dollars to Texas, Canada and elsewhere to buy natural gas and oil that it could have produced itself.</p>
<p>—Twitter, Adobe, eBay and Oracle, among other major California tech companies, have moved many operations to Salt Lake City.</p>
<p>—Hollywood is doing more and more of its filming in Louisiana, Canada and elsewhere to avoid California taxes.</p>
<p>—Toyota just announced that it is moving its U.S. headquarters from Los Angeles to Dallas. This will eliminate 3,000 or more generally high-wage jobs.</p>
<p>—Occidental Petroleum recently announced that it is moving its headquarters from Los Angeles to Houston.</p>
<p>—Until relatively recently, half of the country&#8217;s top 10 energy firms — ARCO, Getty Oil, Union Oil, Occidental and Chevron — were based in California. Today, only Chevron remains, and it is gradually relocating in Houston. (Reuters)</p>
<p>—Houston has added nine million square feet of new office space. Los Angeles has added one million.</p>
<p>—Tesla will likely locate its proposed $5 billion battery factory, which would employ upward of 6,500 people, in Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico or Texas. According to greentechmedia.com, California &#8220;didn&#8217;t make the short list because of the potential for regulatory and environmental delays.&#8221;</p>
<p>—California&#8217;s Monterey Shale offers a potential employment bonanza for workers needing access to entry-level jobs in the high-paying energy sector. But California&#8217;s green lobby is striving to deny them that opportunity. (John Husing, chief economist of the Inland Empire Economic Partnership, Los Angeles Daily News)</p>
<p>Now back to our riddle. Why do these state-crushing economic statistics — nearly every one of which is the result of left-wing policies — have no effect on California&#8217;s Democrats, the Los Angeles Times editorial page, New York Times economics columnist Paul Krugman or almost anyone else on the left?</p>
<p>The answer is that they don&#8217;t care. Yes, of course, as individuals with a heart, most people, right and left, care about people losing their jobs. But in terms of what matters to the left and the policies they pursue, they don&#8217;t care. The left and the political party it controls do not care if their policies force to companies to leave the state (or the country). They don&#8217;t care about the coming high inflation caused by Quantitative Easing (printing money) — Krugman calls it The Inflation Obsession — or the job-depressing effects of high taxes, or energy prices that hurt the middle class, or compelling businesses to leave.</p>
<p>They don&#8217;t care because the left is not interested in prosperity; the left is interested in inequality and in the environment. Furthermore, the worse the economic situation, the more voters are likely to vote Democrat. The worse the economic situation, the greater the number of people receiving government assistance; the greater the number of people receiving government assistance, the greater the number of people who will vote Democrat.</p>
<p>Therefore, both philosophically and politically, the left has no reason to be troubled by bad economic news. And it isn&#8217;t. It is troubled by inequality and carbon emissions.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/why-the-left-doesnt-care-about-bad-economic-news/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>From Greatness to Whiteness</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/from-greatness-to-whiteness/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=from-greatness-to-whiteness</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/from-greatness-to-whiteness/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2014 04:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[declaration of independence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Founding Fathers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[whiteness]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223956</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What American youths see when they reflect on the history of the U.S. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/founding-fathers7.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-223958" alt="founding-fathers7" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/founding-fathers7-450x294.jpg" width="360" height="235" /></a>When Americans over the age of, let us say, 45, look at any of the iconic paintings of America&#8217;s Founders &#8212; the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the signing of the Constitution, George Washington crossing the Delaware, any of the individual portraits the Founders &#8212; what do they see?</p>
<p>They see great men founding a great country.</p>
<p>If you ask recent graduates of almost any American university what they see when they look at these paintings, chances are that they see something entirely different.</p>
<p>They are apt to see rich, white males who are not great and who did not found a great country. And for many, it is worse than that. These men are not only not great; they are morally quite flawed in that they were slaveholders and/or founded a country that allowed slavery. Moreover, they were not only all racists; they were all sexists, who restricted the vote to males. And they were rich men who were primarily concerned with protecting their wealth, which is why they restricted the vote to landowners.</p>
<p>In the past, Americans overwhelmingly saw pictures of greatness. Increasingly only conservatives see pictures of greatness. More and more Americans &#8212; that includes the entire left and many universities attendees who were indoctrinated by left-wing professors &#8212; now see rich, white, self-interested males.</p>
<p>The left-wing trinity of race, gender and class has prevailed. The new dividing lines are no longer good and bad or excellent and mediocre, but white and non-white, male and female, and rich and poor. Instead of seeing great human beings in those paintings of the Founders, Americans have been taught to see rich, white, (meaning &#8212; by definition &#8212; selfish, bigoted, racist, sexist) males.</p>
<p>In colleges throughout America, students are taught to have disdain for the white race. I know this sounds incredible, or at least exaggerated. It is neither.</p>
<p>For example, from the day they enter college, many students are taught about white privilege &#8212; how innately advantaged white students (and all other whites are). Last week, the president of Western Washington University posed the question on the university&#8217;s website: &#8220;How do we make sure that in future years we are not as white as we are today?&#8221;</p>
<p>Imagine if the president of the University of California at Berkeley had posed the question, &#8220;How do we make sure that in future years we are not as Asian as we are today?&#8221;</p>
<p>Inner city young blacks who work hard in school are routinely chastised by other black youth for &#8220;acting white.&#8221;</p>
<p>Regarding white privilege, last year, three academics at the University of Rhode Island wrote in The Chronicle of Higher Education:</p>
<p>&#8220;The American Psychological Association&#8217;s educational goals for the psychology major include sociocultural and international awareness, with learning outcomes regarding mastery of concepts related to power and privilege. Other professional organizations, including the American Sociological Association, have developed similar learning goals for teaching in higher education. Instructors have been charged with teaching their white students to understand their own privileged positions in society relative to those of marginalized groups.&#8221;</p>
<p>The key point here is that the word &#8220;values&#8221; never appears. Instead of asking what values made America&#8217;s Founders great, the left asks what race, gender and class privileges enabled those men to found America. Instead of asking what values does the white majority (or, for that matter, on some campuses, the Asian majority) live by in order to succeed, and how can we help inculcate those values among more less successful people of all racial and ethnic groups, the left asks what privileges do whites have that enable them to get into colleges and graduate at a higher rate than blacks and Latinos.</p>
<p>The undermining of the very concept of values was starkly made clear last month at a national inter-college debate tournament.</p>
<p>As reported in the Atlantic last week:</p>
<p>&#8220;On March 24, 2014 at the Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA) Championships at Indiana University, two Towson University students, Ameena Ruffin and Korey Johnson, became the first African-American women to win a national college debate tournament, for which the resolution asked whether the U.S. president&#8217;s war powers should be restricted. Rather than address the resolution straight on, Ruffin and Johnson, along with other teams of African-Americans, attacked its premise. The more pressing issue, they argued, is how the U.S. government is at war with poor black communities.&#8221;</p>
<p>In the final round, Ruffin and Johnson squared off against Rashid Campbell and George Lee from the University of Oklahoma, two highly accomplished African-American debaters with distinctive dreadlocks and dashikis. Over four hours, the two teams engaged in a heated discussion of concepts like &#8216;nigga authenticity&#8217; and performed hip-hop and spoken-word poetry in the traditional timed format. At one point during Lee&#8217;s rebuttal, the clock ran out but he refused to yield the floor. &#8216;F&#8212; the time!&#8217; he yelled.</p>
<p>In a national intercollegiate debate contest, a black debating team won by transforming the topic of the debate, one that that had nothing to do with race, into a race question.</p>
<p>But to object to this, or to argue that a team might be disqualified for yelling &#8220;f&#8212; the time&#8221; when told it had gone over the time limit, or to ask what performing hip-hop has to do with the topic &#8220;whether the U.S. president&#8217;s war powers should be restricted&#8221; &#8212; is now deemed to act white.</p>
<p>This is another victory for the left. And another defeat for standards, for truth and for the values embodied by the men in the paintings of the Founders.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/from-greatness-to-whiteness/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>126</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What the Left Did Last Week</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/what-the-left-did-last-week/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=what-the-left-did-last-week</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/what-the-left-did-last-week/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2014 04:47:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ayaan hirsi ali]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brendan Eich]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Censorship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Krauthammer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Honor Diaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[totalitarianism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Left's ongoing transformation of America.  ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/censorship-10-5-25.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-223580" alt="censorship-10-5-25" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/censorship-10-5-25.jpg" width="280" height="187" /></a>In his column last week, Charles Krauthammer crossed a line. He declared the American left totalitarian. He is correct. Totalitarianism is written into the left&#8217;s DNA.</p>
<p>Krauthammer wrote about a left-wing petition &#8220;bearing more than 110,000 signatures delivered to the [Washington] Post demanding a ban on any article questioning global warming.&#8221;</p>
<p>He concluded:</p>
<p>&#8220;I was gratified by the show of intolerance because it perfectly illustrated my argument that the left is entering a new phase of ideological agitation — no longer trying to win the debate but stopping debate altogether, banishing from public discourse any and all opposition. The proper word for that attitude is totalitarian.&#8221;</p>
<p>America is engaged in a civil war — thank God, a non-violent one, but a civil war nonetheless. It is as divided as it was during the Civil War in the 19th century. The issue then was slavery — a huge moral divide, of course. But today, the country is divided by opposite views about much more than one major issue. The left and right are divided by their views of morality, politics, society, religion, the individual and the very nature of America.</p>
<p>The left seeks to, as candidate Barack Obama promised five days before his first election, &#8220;fundamentally transform the United States of America.&#8221;</p>
<p>That is what the left is doing. There is almost no area of American life in which the left&#8217;s influence is not transformative, and ultimately destructive.</p>
<p>Beginning with this column I will periodically, perhaps regularly, devote this space to that transformation and destruction. My reason for doing so is that most Americans, including more than a few Republicans and more than a few Democrats, simply do not know what the left is doing to their country.</p>
<p>So, here is some of what the left has done in the last week or two.</p>
<p>—The left-wing directors of Mozilla, the parent company of the browser Firefox, compelled their CEO, Brendan Eich, to resign after he refused to recant his support for maintaining the man-woman definition of marriage. Even though his gay employees acknowledged how fairly he treated them individually and as couples, the mere fact that he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman rendered him unacceptable as an employee of Mozilla/Firefox. (For more details, see my column of last week, &#8220;Uninstall Firefox.&#8221;)</p>
<p>The Wall Street Journal condemned Mozilla. The New York Times has not taken a position.</p>
<p>—Brandeis University rescinded its invitation to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, perhaps the world&#8217;s foremost activist on behalf of women in the Islamic world.</p>
<p>Hirsi Ali, an African woman born into a Muslim family and raised Muslim, who now teaches at Harvard, was scheduled to receive an honorary degree at the forthcoming Brandeis graduation ceremony. Brandeis rescinded its invitation after protests led by a Muslim student and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an Islamist organization, erupted over Hirsi Ali&#8217;s criticism of the way women are treated in many parts of the Muslim world.</p>
<p>The Wall Street Journal condemned Brandeis. The New York Times has not taken a position.</p>
<p>—The University of Michigan canceled a showing of the documentary &#8220;Honor Diaries.&#8221; The film features nine women who are either Muslim or come from a Muslim country. They speak about honor killings, female genital mutilation, forced marriages at young ages, and the denial of education to women in Muslim communities. They praise moderate Muslims. But the University of Michigan cancelled the film lest a non-moderate Muslim organization, CAIR again, label the university &#8220;Islamophobic.&#8221;</p>
<p>—Six weeks ago, a University of Wisconsin student released a video he had made of a guest lecturer in the freshman general education course &#8220;Education 130: Individual and Society.&#8221; The lecturer, the political and organizing director for Service Employees International Union Local 150, delivered a diatribe, with obscenities, against conservatives, whites and Republicans. Last week. When confronted with the evidence that classrooms at their university were being politicized, the faculty of the University of Wisconsin reacted with indignation — at the student who made the video. And then the faculty passed a resolution demanding that the university ban recording any of its classes.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s hard to blame the faculty. Given the intellectual shallowness and the left-wing politics that pervade so many liberal arts classes, the University of Wisconsin faculty has every reason to fear allowing the public to know what professors say in class.</p>
<p>—Today is the cutoff date for public reactions to the California Supreme Court&#8217;s ethics advisory committee&#8217;s proposal to forbid California judges from affiliating with the Boy Scouts, which the left deems anti-gay. Given the Left&#8217;s animosity to traditional value-based institutions, it is not surprising that it loathes the Boy Scouts. What is remarkable — actually, frightening — is how easy it has been for the left to make it <i>illegal </i>for a judge to be a leader in the Boy Scouts. This is the now case in 22 states. It will soon be the case in California as well.</p>
<p>This was just one week — and only selected examples — in the left&#8217;s ongoing transformation of America.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/what-the-left-did-last-week/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>128</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Uninstall Firefox</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/uninstall-firefox/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=uninstall-firefox</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/uninstall-firefox/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:25:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boycott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brendan Eich]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mozilla]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same sex marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Conservative outrage is meaningless unless we act. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/screen_shot_2014-04-08_at_8.40.54_am.png"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-223124" alt="screen_shot_2014-04-08_at_8.40.54_am" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/screen_shot_2014-04-08_at_8.40.54_am-439x350.png" width="307" height="245" /></a>In 31 years of broadcasting, and 40 years of writing, I have never advocated a boycott of a product.</p>
<p>Quite the opposite, in fact.</p>
<p>During the 2012 presidential campaign, when the left attempted to destroy Chick-Fil-A for its owner&#8217;s views on same-sex marriage, I suggested on my radio show that the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, stand in front of a Chick-Fil-A restaurant while enjoying some Ben and Jerry&#8217;s ice cream. In that way, I argued, he could show one of the great moral differences between the right and the left. Though Ben and Jerry are leftists, we conservatives do not believe that company owners&#8217; views should matter to consumers. We believe that products should speak for themselves. If the ice cream is good, despite whatever repugnance we might feel regarding the views of the makers of that ice cream, we will still purchase it.</p>
<p>The left does not see things that way. The left is out to crush individuals and companies with whom it differs. This is especially so today on the issue of same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most dramatic example of this took place last week. The governing board of the widely used browser, Firefox, forced the company&#8217;s CEO, Brendan Eich, to resign. The Firefox board had learned that in 2008, Eich donated $1,000 to the Proposition 8 campaign in California. Proposition 8 amended the California Constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. In classic Communist fashion, gay rights organizations demanded that Eich publicly recant. When Eich did not, gay rights and other leftist organizations called for a boycott of Firefox. Firefox immediately forced Eich out.</p>
<p>All these years, the left, after coining the term &#8220;McCarthyism&#8221; in order to disparage the right, had fooled most people into believing that it is the right that suppresses liberty. The truth, of course, has been the opposite. Worldwide, with the exception of Nazi Germany (which was a uniquely race-based totalitarianism, neither left nor right — while it rejected Marxist class-based struggle, it supported socialism (&#8220;Nazism&#8221; was short for National Socialism), every genocidal totalitarian regime of the 20th century was leftist. And domestically, too, the left has much less interest in liberty than in forcing people to act in accord with its values. A totalitarian streak is part of the left&#8217;s DNA. How you think matters and what you do away outside of work matters: More than 20 states prohibit judges from being leaders in the Boy Scouts — because the left deems the Boy Scouts homophobic.</p>
<p>During the McCarthy era, the left (and not only the left) screamed when people were falsely charged with supporting Stalin and Communism, one of the greatest evils in human history.</p>
<p>But the left also screamed when people who really did aid and abet Stalin were dismissed from their jobs. In other words, for those on the left who celebrate Eich&#8217;s ouster, it was evil to deprive a man who supported Stalin of a job, but it is right to fire a man who supports the man-woman definition of marriage. Such is the left&#8217;s moral compass.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">It is important to further note that gay employees at Firefox acknowledge that Eich never discriminated against gays, whether in employment, benefits or any other way. But that doesn&#8217;t matter to the left because a totalitarian streak is part of the left&#8217;s DNA.</span></p>
<p>As Princeton Professor of Jurisprudence Robert George warned on my radio show, today the left fires employees for opposition to same-sex marriage. Tomorrow it will fire employees who are pro-life (&#8220;anti-woman&#8221;). And next it will be employees who support Israel (an &#8220;apartheid state&#8221;).</p>
<p>The reason to boycott Firefox is not that it is run by leftists. Nor is the reason to support the man-woman definition of marriage. It is solely in order to preserve liberty in the land of liberty. If Firefox doesn&#8217;t recant and rehire Eich as CEO, McCarthyism will have returned far more pervasively and perniciously than in its first incarnation. The message the gay left (such as the Orwellian-named Human Rights Campaign) and the left in general wish to send is that Americans who are in positions of power at any company should be forced to resign if they hold a position that the left strongly opposes.</p>
<p>And right now that position is opposition to same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>Think about that. In the United States of America today, the belief that marriage should remain defined as the union of a man and woman is portrayed as so vile by the left that anyone who holds it is unfit for employment.</p>
<p>A handful of those on the gay (and straight) left have spoken out against the forced resignation of Eich. If their words are to mean anything, they must join in the call to boycott Firefox. Otherwise, their protestations are meaningless, made solely to preserve their moral credibility.</p>
<p>The battle over Firefox is the most important battle in America at this particular moment. If you use Firefox, uninstall it. Instead use Internet Explorer, Chrome, Opera, Safari, or try Pale Moon for Windows, which is based on the Firefox engine and will import all of your bookmarks. For mobile devices, you can try Puffin.</p>
<p>America can have liberty or it can have Firefox. Right now, it cannot have both.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/uninstall-firefox/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>37</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bryan Stow and a Justice System that Is Criminal</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/bryan-stow-and-a-justice-system-that-is-criminal/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=bryan-stow-and-a-justice-system-that-is-criminal</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/bryan-stow-and-a-justice-system-that-is-criminal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2014 05:15:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bryan Stow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dodgers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[giants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verdict]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219658</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The inhumanity of light sentences for monsters. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Bryan_Stow_5.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-219661" alt="Bryan_Stow_5" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Bryan_Stow_5-450x328.jpg" width="270" height="197" /></a>On March 31, 2011, the opening day of baseball at Dodger Stadium, four San Francisco Giants fans, all paramedics, were there to cheer on their team.</p>
<p>As they left the stadium, in the parking lot, one of them, Bryan Stow, was attacked by a Dodger fan, who hit him so suddenly and with such force that Stow hit his head on the ground without being able to break his fall, which fractured his skull. But the attack didn&#8217;t end there. Once on the ground, Stow was repeatedly kicked in the head and ribs.</p>
<p>As reported by CBS Los Angeles, &#8220;Stow&#8217;s friend said he saw the assailant — whom he described as a Hispanic man between 20 and 30 years old — repeatedly kick Stow in the head with &#8216;full wind-up&#8217; kicks after knocking him to the pavement with a &#8216;haymaker punch&#8217; to the left side of his head.&#8221;</p>
<p>A witness to the beating, Joann Cerda, stood over Bryan Stow as he lay motionless, and said she saw &#8220;Blood gushing from his ears,&#8221; and didn&#8217;t think Stow was still alive.</p>
<p>The result was severe brain damage.</p>
<p>He was left unable to walk, lost motor skills in his arms and hands, and is incapable of carrying on a normal conversation, controlling his bodily functions or caring for himself. He will require long-term care and 24-hour assistance for the rest of his life. He has a confused short-term memory, which makes work impossible. The care he will need for the remainder of his life is projected to cost 34 million dollars.</p>
<p>At the time of the attack, Bryan Stow was a 42-year-old father of two young children, an 11-year-old boy and an 8-year-old girl.</p>
<p>His aging parents&#8217; lives have been transformed into that of full-time caregivers for their adult son. His children have half a father, his friends have essentially lost their friend, and his sisters have been devastated. At the home he shares with his parents, Stow must wear an adult diaper, cannot shower without help, can barely close his left hand, and because of his memory problems, has to be reminded why a plastic shunt protrudes from the base of his skull.</p>
<p>His medical care has already exceeded five million dollars and is estimated to end up costing an additional 34 million dollards over the course of his life, according to his family&#8217;s attorney, Tom Girardi.</p>
<p>Get the idea?</p>
<p>Now what punishment do you think Marvin Norwood, 33, and Louie Sanchez, 31, the two sadists who did this, deserve?</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll tell you what I think they deserve.</p>
<p>Sanchez, the primary assailant, deserves to be punched so hard in the head that he falls to the ground and his head smashes into concrete, and then violently kicked in the head three more times in the hope that he spends the rest of his life in diapers.</p>
<p>Of course, we don&#8217;t do such things.</p>
<p>Instead we sentence such human debris to prison.</p>
<p>So, then, how much prison time do Norwood and Sanchez deserve? Given the life sentence they imposed on Bryan Stow and his family, I cannot see an argument for anything less than, let us say, 40 years to life.</p>
<p>What they got was not close.</p>
<p>Norwood has been sentenced to four years in prison and Sanchez eight years. (Norwood&#8217;s time has already been served, but he is being held on a separate federal warrant on a weapons violation charge.)</p>
<p>As for restitution, that will be determined at a hearing scheduled for six months from now. Of two things, however, I am certain:</p>
<p>One is that they will have to pay virtually nothing approaching the needs of Bryan Stow. Yes, I know, they don&#8217;t have anything near millions of dollars. But they should be forced to pay some significant percentage of whatever they money they ever acquire to Bryan Stow. The notion that people who permanently hurt other people &#8220;pay their debt to society&#8221; just because society has paid to house them in prison is not only absurd; it is meaningless. Norwood and Sanchez owe &#8220;society&#8221; very little. They owe Bryan Stow a fortune, and being imprisoned does absolutely nothing to meet that obligation.</p>
<p>The other thing of which I am certain is that Norwood and Sanchez will be harmed financially far less than tens of millions of divorced men who hurt no one, yet suffered financial devastation in the nation&#8217;s family law courts.</p>
<p>Sanchez, the puncher and head-kicker, smirked during the heart-rending victim impact statements and the judge&#8217;s castigation of the defendants&#8217; actions and unrepentant attitudes. That this man, who destroyed and damaged so many lives, will be out of prison in about four years mocks the notion of an American criminal justice system. The only valid part of that phrase is that our justice is very often criminal.</p>
<p>Louie Sanchez is why I so fervently hope there is a hell.</p>
<p>Until he goes there, however, we can help Bryan Stow and his family through support4bryanstow.com.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/bryan-stow-and-a-justice-system-that-is-criminal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Right Fights Evil &#8212;- The Left Fights the &#8216;Redskins&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/the-right-fights-evil-the-left-fights-the-redskins/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-right-fights-evil-the-left-fights-the-redskins</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/the-right-fights-evil-the-left-fights-the-redskins/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2014 05:20:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[North Korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Redskins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=217493</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What the U.N. focused on last week while it was ignoring the atrocities of North Korean and Iran.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/1383873869000-AP-Redskins-Protest.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-217496" alt="1383873869000-AP-Redskins-Protest" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/1383873869000-AP-Redskins-Protest-450x337.jpg" width="315" height="236" /></a>A news item this past week made this point with glaring clarity. It reported a meeting that the United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights had on Friday.</p>
<p>Before revealing the subject of that meeting, let&#8217;s review for a moment what is happening in the world regarding human rights.</p>
<p>North Korea continues to be an affront to the human species. That North Korea, whether or not it had nuclear weapons, is not a central concern is an indictment of humanity.</p>
<p>That the West, with the noble exception of Canada under Stephen Harper, is appeasing the dictators of Iran, is an indictment of the West.</p>
<p>Add to this list the U.N.&#8217;s and the world&#8217;s ignoring of the Chinese government&#8217;s continuing suppression of all dissent and its decades-long violent eradication of Tibet&#8217;s unique and ancient culture.</p>
<p>Then add the slaughter of millions in Congo over the last decade, the 100,000-plus killed in Syria just last year, most of them civilians killed by their own government, and the blowing up, burning alive, and throat-cutting of untold numbers of innocent people by violent Islamists on a daily basis.</p>
<p>In other words, if what bothers you most is evil — the deliberate infliction of cruelty on people by people — North Korea, Congo, China, Syria and radical Islam will bother you more than anything else on the world scene.</p>
<p>So, then, what was the subject of the meeting convened Friday by the United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights?</p>
<p>The alleged racism of the name of the National Football League&#8217;s Washington team, the Redskins.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s right. All these horrific evils are happening as you read this, and the second-ranking official in charge of human rights at the United Nations had a meeting about the name Washington Redskins.</p>
<p>The U.N. is not alone in paying undue attention to the Redskins&#8217; name.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">This left-wing obsession with a non-evil exemplifies the left&#8217;s moral universe. That universe is preoccupied with lesser evils while nearly always ignoring the greatest evils. </span>The left in the United States is nearly obsessed with it. President Barack Obama has spoken out against it. The Washington Post editorial board has demanded that the team drop the name. In the herd-like way that governs media, innumerable columnists and sports writers have written passionate columns against the name, and increasing numbers of sports writers have vowed to never again write or speak the name.</p>
<p>Preoccupation with real evil is the greatest difference between right and left. The right was preoccupied with fighting Communism while the left (not liberals such as JFK, but the left) was preoccupied with fighting anti-Communists.</p>
<p>The right today is preoccupied with fighting Islamism; the left is preoccupied with fighting &#8220;Islamophobia.&#8221;</p>
<p>One way of putting it is that the right is preoccupied with fighting evil and the left is preoccupied with fighting those who fight evil.</p>
<p>The right is preoccupied with defending Israel against those who wish to annihilate it. The left is preoccupied with Israeli apartments on the West Bank.</p>
<p>This difference was made manifest last week in the address given by the one world leader to exemplify the right&#8217;s preoccupation with evil, Canada&#8217;s prime minister, Stephen Harper. Talking about all the condemnations of Israel, Harper said:</p>
<p>&#8220;Think about the twisted logic and outright malice behind that: a state, based on freedom, democracy and the rule of law, that was founded so Jews can flourish as Jews, and seek shelter from the shadow of the worst racist experiment in history, that is condemned, and that condemnation is masked in the language of anti-racism. It is nothing short of sickening.&#8221;</p>
<p>Only a conservative leader would have the moral courage to say that. Because while the right fights evil, the left fights the Redskins.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dennis-prager/the-right-fights-evil-the-left-fights-the-redskins/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Most Jews Wish You a Merry Christmas</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/most-jews-wish-you-a-merry-christmas/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=most-jews-wish-you-a-merry-christmas</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/most-jews-wish-you-a-merry-christmas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2013 05:10:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christmas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Holiday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judaism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Merry Christmas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=213847</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why my Orthodox, pro-American family always celebrated the holiday.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/MNOL_HV_Ornaments_MerryChristmasPlaque-700x466.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-213848" alt="MNOL_HV_Ornaments_MerryChristmasPlaque-700x466" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/MNOL_HV_Ornaments_MerryChristmasPlaque-700x466-450x325.jpg" width="252" height="182" /></a>As a Jew, and a religious one at that, I want to wish my fellow Americans a Merry Christmas.</p>
<p>Not &#8220;Happy Holidays.&#8221; Merry Christmas.</p>
<p>I write, &#8220;my fellow Americans&#8221; because, as reported by the Pew Research poll released just last Wednesday, nine in 10 Americans say they celebrate Christmas.</p>
<p>Apparently, many Americans have forgotten that Christmas is not only a Christian holy day, but also an American national holiday. Just as we wish one another a &#8220;Happy Thanksgiving&#8221; or a &#8220;Happy Fourth,&#8221; so, too, we should wish fellow Americans a &#8220;Merry Christmas.&#8221;</p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t matter with which religion or ethnic group you identify; Christmas in America is as American as the proverbial apple pie. That is why some of the most famous and beloved Christmas songs were written by guess who? Jews.</p>
<p>&#8220;White Christmas&#8221; was written by Irving Berlin (birth name: Israel Isidore Baline).</p>
<p>&#8220;Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer&#8221; — Johnny Marks.</p>
<p>&#8220;Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Let It Snow!&#8221; — composed by Jule Styne, lyrics by Sammy Cahn.</p>
<p>&#8220;Silver Bells&#8221; — by Jay Livingston (Jacob Harold Levison) and Ray Evans (Raymond Bernard Evans).</p>
<p>&#8220;The Christmas Song (Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire)&#8221; — Mel Torme and Robert Wells (Robert Levinson), both Jews.</p>
<p>&#8220;Sleigh Ride&#8221; — lyrics by Mitchell Parish (Michael Hyman Pashelinsky).</p>
<p>There are many others as well.</p>
<p>The notion that non-Christians are excluded is absurd.</p>
<p>Americans who feel &#8220;excluded&#8221; are not excluded. They have decided to feel excluded. Which is, of course, entirely their right to do; no one forces anyone to celebrate any American holiday. But attempts to remove Christmas from the public sphere are destructive to our society. It would be as if Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses attempted to remove public celebrations and references to the Fourth of July because they don&#8217;t celebrate national holidays.</p>
<p>Why are these attempts destructive? Because the entire society — Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists as well as Christians — all benefit from the goodness and joy that the Christmas season engenders.</p>
<p>It never occurred to my Orthodox Jewish family not to enjoy this season. It was a tradition in our home to watch the Christmas Mass from the Vatican every Christmas Eve (unless it was a Friday evening, and therefore the Sabbath, when no television watching was allowed). Had you visited our home, you would have seen my mother — and my father, my brother and I all wearing our kippot (Jewish skullcaps) — watching Catholics celebrate Christmas.</p>
<p>Nor did it ever occur to my brother, Dr. Kenneth Prager, an Orthodox Jew, not to sing Christmas songs when he was a member of the Columbia University Glee Club. He happily sang not only secular Christmas songs, but religious Christ-centered Christmas songs as well.</p>
<p>So when and why did this pernicious nonsense of non-Christians being &#8220;excluded&#8221; by public celebration of Christmas develop?</p>
<p>It is nothing more than another destructive product of the 1960s and &#8217;70s when the left came to dominate much of the culture.</p>
<p>One way in which the left has done this has been through &#8220;multiculturalism,&#8221; the left&#8217;s way of dividing Americans by religion, ethnicity, race, and national origins.</p>
<p>The other way has been through its aim of secularizing America — which means, first and foremost, the removal of as many Christian references as possible.</p>
<p>The left regularly mocks the notion that there is a war against Christmas, a description that left-wing writers almost place within quotation marks, as if it is a manufactured falsehood.</p>
<p>The most obvious and ubiquitous example of this war is the substitution of &#8220;Happy Holidays&#8221; for &#8220;Merry Christmas&#8221; almost throughout the culture. Employees in most retail operations are told not to say &#8220;Merry Christmas.&#8221; As a result, in much of America today, wishing a stranger &#8220;Merry Christmas&#8221; is almost an act of courage.</p>
<p>And, of course, many, if not most, public schools have banned Christmas trees and the singing of any Christmas song that hints of Christianity. Last week, for example, the school choir at a Long Island school, the Ralph J. Osgood Intermediate School, sang &#8220;Silent Night&#8221; with the lyrics changed. &#8220;Holy infant,&#8221; &#8220;Christ the savior&#8221; and &#8220;Round yon virgin, mother and child&#8221; were all deleted.</p>
<p>Let me end where I began: speaking as a Jew.</p>
<p>Overwhelmingly, the Jews who are active in the removal of Christmas from society — such as Mikey Weinstein, the anti-Christian activist (with a soft spot for Islamists) who led the campaign to remove the manger scene from Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina — are not religious Jews. They are animated by one or both of two factors: One is leftism, which serves as a substitute religion for Judaism (and among many non-Jews for Christianity). The other is a psychological need to see Christianity suppressed; many people who have little or no religious identity resent those who do.</p>
<p>According to Fox News, Weinstein&#8217;s Military Religious Freedom Foundation &#8220;said they were alerted by an undisclosed number of Airmen who said they were emotionally troubled by the sight of [the nativity scene].&#8221; That sentence should be reworded. Those who claim to be emotionally troubled by the sight of a nativity scene are not emotionally troubled by the sight of a nativity scene. They are emotionally troubled.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/most-jews-wish-you-a-merry-christmas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>105</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Midas Touch and the Leftist Touch</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/the-midas-touch-and-the-leftist-touch/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-midas-touch-and-the-leftist-touch</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/the-midas-touch-and-the-leftist-touch/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Nov 2013 04:25:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[destroy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gold]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Midas]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=211034</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The inherent similarity they both share. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/King_Midas.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-211040" alt="King_Midas" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/King_Midas.jpg" width="209" height="178" /></a>The Midas touch is named for the mythological Greek King Midas who is said to have been able to turn everything he touched into gold.</p>
<p>The left has the opposite ability: to turn virtually everything it touches into rubble. Sometimes it happens quickly; sometimes it takes generations. But it is inevitable.</p>
<p>Almost the only time this is not true is when the left takes a position that is shared by non-leftists. But whatever the left transforms in its direction is damaged, and often destroyed.</p>
<p>Name the institution or the value transformed by the left and that institution or value is ruined.</p>
<p>Here is a partial list:</p>
<p>—Education</p>
<p>Since the left came to dominate universities, schools of education and, increasingly, high schools, each has becomes inferior to what it was prior to left-wing influence.</p>
<p>Universities have become to the left what seminaries are to religions — a place to indoctrinate students. Truth is derided as a false construct and is no longer the goal of most university professors (outside of math and the natural sciences). Schools of education teach left-wing doctrines and brand-new notions of teaching that are almost always inferior to what existed earlier.</p>
<p>—Art and Music</p>
<p>The left-wing influence on art and music has been almost entirely destructive. Notions of greatness in art have been deconstructed, if not ridiculed. There is no pursuit of excellence or of spiritual or moral elevation, and no aim to inspire. Indeed, the opposite is more often the rule. The ugly, the deliberately offensive, the moronic and the scatological are celebrated: The 24-foot sculpture of a dog lifting its leg and peeing in front of the Orange County Museum of Art; Piss Christ, the crucifix in the artist&#8217;s urine shown at galleries around America; and exhibits composed of menstrual blood are but a few examples.</p>
<p>—Environmental Laws</p>
<p>While all rational people want to protect the environment, environmentalism has become a destructive leftist religion. Millions of Africans have died of malaria because of the environmentalist-induced bans on DDT. Environmentalist opposition to modifying rice to include Vitamin A led to the deaths of about 8 million Third World children. In 2012 alone, wind turbines have created killing fields for birds and bats. The American prairies are being destroyed by the environmentalists&#8217; push for ethanol.</p>
<p>—The Culture</p>
<p>The cultural left has created and celebrated an unbelievable coarsening of the culture, especially injurious to the young. Examples of Hollywood&#8217;s degradation of culture in film and on television are too numerous to mention. We will suffice with mentioning only MTV, one of the most damaging cultural forces in the lives of American young people; and the sex-drenched universities from an f-saw exhibition to the ubiquitous &#8220;sex week.&#8221;</p>
<p>—The Military</p>
<p>For decades, the left has sought to weaken the American military, the most potent force for peace and liberty on planet earth — by, among other things, obtaining huge cuts in military spending (not only through sequestration) and social engineering experiments such as placing women in combat units.</p>
<p>—California</p>
<p>Thanks to the left&#8217;s total dominance of California political life, the left, in the words of the most respected observer of California life, Chapman University&#8217;s Joel Kotkin, &#8220;has turned the California Dream into a nightmare.&#8221;</p>
<p>—Black America</p>
<p>Left-wing policies have done incalculable to damage to black America. Left-wing mayors of nearly every major American city have supervised the economic ruin of many of those cities. Decades of rhetoric reinforcing black victimhood have served only to stymie black progress and increase anger. And left-wing welfare policies have been the primary contributor to the 70 percent rate for children born out-of-wedlock and the concomitant decline of black fatherhood.</p>
<p>—The Economy</p>
<p>The left-engineered welfare state with its monumental national debts is crushing the economies of virtually every European country that has adopted them, and it will do the same to the American economy. Even the proudest achievements of the left — Medicare and Medicaid — will soon be unsustainable, as will Social security if the retirement age is not raised by at least a few years.</p>
<p>—Men and Women</p>
<p>Thanks to left-wing attitudes inculcated in women from high school on, more and more women consider marriage and family second in importance to career success. This will lead, as it already has, to unhappiness among vast numbers of women who eventually realize that career isn&#8217;t nearly as meaningful to them as it is to most men. Meanwhile, the anti-boy policies in elementary schools and high schools — books assigned that appeal far more to girls, the end of games at recess that boys enjoy and need — have directly led to boys falling more and more behind girls in academic and professional achievement.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, left-wing denigration of marriage (except same-sex marriage) has led to the lowest rates of marriage in Western history, and the left-wing-induced secularization of society has massively contributed to historically low birth rates in America and Europe.</p>
<p>—God and Religion</p>
<p>For over half a century, the left has made war on Judeo-Christian religions in the popular culture and through legislation, beginning with the Supreme Court&#8217;s 1962 decision banning this voluntary and non-denominational prayer in New York State schools: &#8220;Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country.&#8221; The consequences of this enforced secularization of American life in terms of human happiness and ethical behavior are — and will increasingly be — disastrous.</p>
<p>It turns out that there is little difference between the Midas touch and the leftist touch. Both end up destroying everything.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/the-midas-touch-and-the-leftist-touch/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If You Want a Conservative Child</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/if-you-want-a-conservative-child/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=if-you-want-a-conservative-child</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/if-you-want-a-conservative-child/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Nov 2013 04:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Children]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[teach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Values]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=210953</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How to make sure the right values endure into adulthood.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Children-reading-001.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-210954" alt="Children-reading-001" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Children-reading-001.jpg" width="251" height="218" /></a>In my last column, I proposed some explanations for why many conservative parents have left-wing children.</p>
<p>In a nutshell, American parents who hold traditional American values — such as belief in small government as the basis of liberty, in a God-based moral code, that American military strength is the greatest contributor to world peace and stability, or in American exceptionalism, not to mention in the man-woman definition of marriage or in the worth of a human fetus — are at war with almost every influence on their children&#8217;s lives. This includes, most importantly, the media and the schools.</p>
<p>Here, then are some suggestions for raising a child with American, i.e., conservative, values.</p>
<p>First, parents who are not left-wing need to understand that if they do not articulate their values on a regular basis, there is a good chance that after one year, let alone four, at college, their child will adopt left-wing views and values. Do not think for a moment that values are automatically transmitted. One hundred years ago they may have been — because the outside world overwhelmingly reaffirmed parents&#8217; traditional values — but no longer.</p>
<p>You have to explain to your children — repeatedly — what America and you stand for. (That, if I may note, is why I wrote &#8220;Still the Best Hope&#8221; and why I started PragerUnversity.com.)</p>
<p>Second, they need to know what they will be taught at college — and now in many high schools — and how to respond. When they are told from day one at college that America and its white citizens are inherently racist, they need to know how to counter this libel with these truths: America is the least racist society in the world; more black Africans have immigrated here of their own volition than were came here forcibly to be slaves; and &#8220;racist&#8221; is merely one of many epithets — such as sexist, intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, and bigoted — that the left uses instead of arguments.</p>
<p>Third, when possible, it is best that your child not go to college immediately after high school. One reason colleges are able to indoctrinate students is that students enter college young and unworldly. It is very rare that adult students are convinced to abandon their values and become left-wing. Why? Because they have lived life and are much less naive.</p>
<p>For example, someone with life experience is far more likely than a kid just out of high school to understand that the best formula for avoiding poverty is to take personal responsibility — get a job, get married and then have children — not government help.</p>
<p>Teenagers who spend a year before going to college working — in a restaurant, for a moving company, at an office — will mature far more than they would after a year at college. And maturity is an inoculation against leftism.</p>
<p>If your home is Jewish, Catholic, Protestant or Mormon, another option for the year after high school is to have your child devote a year to studying religion in some formal setting. The more your child knows, lives and adheres to the principles of any of these religions, the less likely he or she will convert to Leftism, which has been the most dynamic religion of the last hundred years. For example, it is a fundamental belief of each of these Judeo-Christian religions that the root of evil is within the evildoer. But it is a fundamental belief of leftism that people murder, steal and rape overwhelmingly because of outside influences such as poverty and racism. The moment your child understands that people who commit evil are responsible— not poverty or racism — they cannot be a leftist.</p>
<p>Fourth, don&#8217;t be preoccupied with instilling high self-esteem in your child. It is the left that believes that self-esteem is a child&#8217;s right, something that parents and society owe children. Conservatives believe that everyone, including children, must earn self-esteem. Indeed, the belief in earning — rather than in being given — is conservative.</p>
<p>Fifth, teach character. The left has essentially defined a good person as one who holds progressive social positions — on race, the environment, taxes, health care, etc. That is why the left, including the feminist left, could so adore Bill Clinton who regularly used his positions of power to take advantage of women: He held progressive positions.</p>
<p>If your child recycles or walks five kilometers on behalf of breast cancer, that is lovely. But if your child refuses to cheat on tests or befriends an unpopular kid at school, that is character. And teaching that definition of character is more often done in a conservative (usually a religiously conservative) context.</p>
<p>It is not all that hard to produce a son or daughter able to withstand left-wing indoctrination. You just have to understand that it doesn&#8217;t happen automatically.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/if-you-want-a-conservative-child/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The New York Times: America Sucks</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/the-new-york-times-america-sucks/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-new-york-times-america-sucks</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/the-new-york-times-america-sucks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2013 04:02:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genocide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Japan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nazi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rwanda]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=207571</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rwanda, Nazi Germany, America: what's the difference? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/ny-times-building.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-207572" alt="ny-times-building" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/ny-times-building-450x299.jpg" width="270" height="179" /></a>This past Saturday, the New York Times published an article, &#8220;Behind Flurry of Killing, Potency of Hate,&#8221; on the roots of monstrous evil. The article largely concerned a former paramilitary member of the Irish Republican Army, and as such was informative.</p>
<p>But when it ventured into a larger discussion of evil, the moral confusion and contempt for America that characterize leftism were on display.</p>
<p>The article contains a breathtaking paragraph that exemplifies both qualities. After noting that atrocities against groups of people are often the result of the dehumanization of the victimized group, the writer gives four such examples:</p>
<p>&#8220;The Hutus in Rwanda called the Tutsis cockroaches, the Nazis depicted the Jews as rats. Japanese invaders referred to their Chinese victims during the Nanjing massacre as &#8216;chancorro,&#8217; or &#8216;subhuman.&#8217; American soldiers fought barbarian &#8216;Huns&#8217; in World War I and godless &#8216;gooks&#8217; in Vietnam.&#8221;</p>
<p>This paragraph is noteworthy for its use of false moral equivalence to justify its anti-Americanism.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s begin with the moral equivalence — equating how the Hutus viewed and treated the Tutsis, how the Nazis viewed and treated the Jews, and how the Japanese viewed and treated the Chinese with the Americans&#8217; views and treatment of the Germans in World War I and Vietnamese during the Vietnam War.</p>
<p>In 1994, over the course of about 100 days, Hutus slaughtered between half a million and a million Tutsis. This was not a war between armies, but against a civilian population marked for extinction.</p>
<p>The Nazis murdered about six million Jews, all of whom were civilians. Indeed more than a million were children. The Nazis had targeted the Jews for extinction.</p>
<p>The Japanese likewise slaughtered Chinese civilians en masse and regarded the Chinese as so subhuman as to be worthy of being systematically experimented upon in ghoulish medical experiments that paralleled those of the Nazis.</p>
<p>What do any of those examples have to do with Americans fighting in World War I or in Vietnam?</p>
<p>Nothing.</p>
<p>Absolutely nothing about these other three examples applied to America in World War I or in Vietnam.</p>
<p>Nicknames — even derogatory ones — for enemies have probably been used in every war by every nation&#8217;s soldiers. That is not at all the same as a serious view of another racial or national group as unworthy of life, as subhuman.</p>
<p>Unlike any of the other examples, Americans did not have a term that — by definition — meant that Germans or Vietnamese were not members of the human race, as are &#8220;cockroaches,&#8221; &#8220;rats&#8221; and &#8220;subhumans.&#8221;</p>
<p>Unlike any of the other examples, the killing by Americans in World War I and Vietnam was confined to war. No war, no killing. The Nazi and Hutu examples had nothing to do with waging war. The Tutsis and Jews were targeted for annihilation, period. And the Japanese committing of hundreds of thousands rapes, tortures, and medical experiments on Chinese civilians — such as cutting them open without anesthetic or freezing people&#8217;s limbs and then cutting them off, also without an anesthetic — had nothing to do with war aims.</p>
<p>Moreover, what does &#8220;godless&#8221; have to do with subhuman categories? Again, nothing. Why, then, was it included in this article — &#8220;godless &#8216;gooks&#8217;&#8221;? Because the Times writer wanted to render the term &#8220;godless&#8221; as offensive as the term &#8220;subhuman.&#8221; Being largely godless itself, and aiming for a godless West, the left detested the right&#8217;s calling Communism &#8220;godless&#8221; — even though Communists were vocal and proud of their godlessness.</p>
<p>Lumping America&#8217;s actions in those two wars with the other three examples is typical of the left&#8217;s defamation of America and of its facile use of false moral equivalence.</p>
<p>But that is how a generation of Americans who have attended college — including most likely the Times author herself — have been taught to think. And that is what is taught to your child today at the left&#8217;s seminaries, our universities:</p>
<p>Nazis, Hutu murderers, Japanese rapists, Americans at war: All pretty much the same.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/the-new-york-times-america-sucks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why the Left Hates the Old</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/why-the-left-hates-the-old/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-the-left-hates-the-old</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/why-the-left-hates-the-old/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Oct 2013 04:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Matthews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dead]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HATE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Men]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Old]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rachel Maddow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=206625</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The defining ethos of the progressive mind. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/rachel-maddow-msnbc.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-206627" alt="rachel-maddow-msnbc" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/rachel-maddow-msnbc-450x343.jpg" width="315" height="240" /></a>The latest left-wing tactic to discredit conservative views is to dismiss the age and race of conservatives. &#8220;Old white males&#8221; and &#8220;old white people&#8221; are the left&#8217;s latest favored negative epithets for those holding conservative views.</p>
<p>Chris Matthews of MSNBC, Thomas Friedman and Paul Krugman of the New York Times, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (&#8220;angry old white men&#8221;) are among the many on the left who have used this epithet.</p>
<p>Last week, on her nightly MSNBC show, Rachel Maddow showed a picture of an ad for Washington, D.C. talk radio station WRC that featured the station&#8217;s talk show hosts. You will notice, she said, that they are all &#8220;old white Republican males.&#8221; It was brought to my attention because I am one of those talk show hosts (and, it should be noted, nearly all of my colleagues and I are younger than her colleague, Chris Matthews, an old white Democratic male.)</p>
<p>What is going on here?</p>
<p>The answer is: quite a bit. The left&#8217;s dismissal of old people is much more than another left-wing ad hominem attack. Therefore, to understand it is to understand much of what animates leftism.</p>
<p>As a rule, the left rejects the old.</p>
<p>The left&#8217;s attack on teaching the works of &#8220;Dead White European Males&#8221; was one such example. It infuriated the left that Shakespeare was studied so much more than, let us say, living Guatemalan playwrights. As a result, one can now obtain a college degree in English — let alone every other liberal arts department — without having taken a course in Shakespeare.</p>
<p>So, too, in art and music, the new is almost always favored over the old. New composers and artists — no matter how untalented — are studied as much as or more than the great masters of old. And the old standards of excellence are neglected in favor of the latest avant-garde experimentation.</p>
<p>Rejection of the old is a reason the left has contempt for the Bible. To progressives, the idea of having 2,000 and 3,000-year-old texts guide a person&#8217;s behavior today is ludicrous.</p>
<p>Low regard for the old is also a major factor in the left&#8217;s dismissal of the Founders and of the original intent of the Constitution. Talk about &#8220;old white males,&#8221; the Founders are white males who are now over 200-years-old.</p>
<p>What could they possibly have known or understood that a progressive living today does not know more about or understand better?</p>
<p>What, then, is at the core of the left&#8217;s contempt for the old, and its celebration of the new and of change?</p>
<p>There are two primary answers.</p>
<p>One is the yearning for utopia. Since Marx, the left has sought utopia in this world. And that means constantly transforming every aspect of society. As then-Senator Barack Obama said prior to the 2008 election: &#8220;We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.&#8221;</p>
<p>By definition, those who seek to transform consider the old essentially worthless.</p>
<p>The other answer is self-esteem. The left began the self-esteem movement in large measure because of its own high self-esteem. Those on the left are certain that they are smarter, kinder, more moral and more compassionate than — in every way superior to — their opponents.</p>
<p>That is a major reason for the left&#8217;s problem with the old: If the old is great, then they and their new ideas are probably not that great.</p>
<p>Just about everyone who is not on the cultural left knows that all the great masters were incomparably superior to Jackson Pollock and other 20th-centuries artists who produced meaningless and talentless art. And because there are so few artists at any time who measure up to the old standards (standards that are synonymous with standards of excellence), the old standards have simply been abandoned.</p>
<p>This applies equally to morality. The left doesn&#8217;t want to be bound or answerable to a higher moral authority. Rather, one&#8217;s heart and reason are the best moral guides. Here, too, the old codes, especially as embodied in traditional religion, must be overthrown.</p>
<p>Prior to the ascendance of the left, it was assumed that the old had more wisdom than the young. Indeed, even every leftist I have asked, &#8220;Are you wiser today than 20 years ago?&#8221; has answered in the affirmative.</p>
<p>Nevertheless the left has transformed &#8220;old&#8221; — a title that commanded respect in every civilization prior to the pre-1960s West — into a pejorative.</p>
<p>As a result we live in the age of new music, new art, new families, new morality, new education, and now new marriage. If you think all these are good, then &#8220;old white males,&#8221; like almost everything else old, do indeed constitute a threat. If you think the left&#8217;s belief in &#8220;new&#8221; and &#8220;change&#8221; hurts society, &#8220;old&#8221; sounds good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/why-the-left-hates-the-old/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>86</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Response to Richard Dawkins</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/a-response-to-richard-dawkins/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-response-to-richard-dawkins</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/a-response-to-richard-dawkins/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2013 04:12:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atheist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[good and evil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard Dawkins]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=205866</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The truth about morality that the famed atheist will not admit. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/richard_dawkins_2.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-205867" alt="Description=Richard Dawkins Photograph: Jeremy Young 05-12-2006" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/richard_dawkins_2-444x350.jpg" width="311" height="245" /></a>This past Friday CNN conducted an interview with Richard Dawkins, the British biologist most widely known for his polemics against religion and on behalf of atheism.</p>
<p>Asked &#8220;whether an absence of religion would leave us without a moral compass,&#8221; Dawkins responded: &#8220;The very idea that we get a moral compass from religion is horrible.&#8221;</p>
<p>This is the crux of the issue for Dawkins and other anti-religion activists — that not only do we not need religion or God for morality, but we would have a considerably more moral world without them.</p>
<p>This argument is so wrong — both rationally and empirically &#8211; that its appeal can only be explained by a) a desire to believe it and b) an ignorance of history.</p>
<p>First, the rational argument.</p>
<p>If there is no God, the labels &#8220;good&#8221; and &#8220;evil&#8221; are merely opinions. They are substitutes for &#8220;I like it&#8221; and &#8220;I don&#8217;t like it.&#8221; They are not objective realities.</p>
<p>Every atheist philosopher I have debated has acknowledged this. For example, at Oxford University I debated Professor Jonathan Glover, the British philosopher and ethicist, who said: &#8220;Dennis started by saying that I hadn&#8217;t denied his central contention that if there isn&#8217;t a God, there is only subjective morality. And that&#8217;s absolutely true.&#8221;</p>
<p>And the eminent Princeton philosopher Richard Rorty admitted that for secular liberals such as himself, &#8220;there is no answer to the question, &#8216;Why not be cruel?&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>Atheists like Dawkins who refuse to acknowledge that without God there are only opinions about good and evil are not being intellectually honest.</p>
<p>None of this means that only believers in God can be good or that atheists cannot be good. There are bad believers and there are good atheists. But this fact is irrelevant to whether good and evil are real.</p>
<p>To put this as clearly as possible: If there is no God who says, &#8220;Do not murder,&#8221; murder is not wrong. Many people or societies may agree that it is wrong. But so what? Morality does not derive from the opinion of the masses. If it did, then apartheid was right; murdering Jews in Nazi Germany was right; the history of slavery throughout the world was right; and clitoridectomies and honor killings are right in various Muslims societies.</p>
<p>So, then, without God, why is murder wrong?</p>
<p>Is it, as Dawkins argues, because reason says so?</p>
<p>My reason says murder is wrong, just as Dawkins&#8217;s reason does. But, again, so what? The pre-Christian Germanic tribes of Europe regarded the Church&#8217;s teaching that murder was wrong as preposterous. They reasoned that killing innocent people was acceptable and normal because the strong should do whatever they wanted.</p>
<p>In addition, reason alone without God is pretty weak in leading to moral behavior.</p>
<p>When self-interest and reason collide, reason usually loses. That&#8217;s why we have the word &#8220;rationalize&#8221; — to use reason to argue for what is wrong.</p>
<p>What would reason argue to a non-Jew asked by Jews to hide them when the penalty for hiding a Jew was death? It would argue not to hide those Jews.</p>
<p>In that regard, let&#8217;s go to the empirical argument.</p>
<p>Years ago, I interviewed Pearl and Sam Oliner, two professors of sociology at California State University at Humboldt and the authors of one of the most highly-regarded works on altruism, The Altruistic Personality. The book was the product of the Oliners&#8217; lifetime of study of non-Jewish rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust.</p>
<p>The Oliners, it should be noted, are secular, not religious, Jews; they had no religious agenda.</p>
<p>I asked Samuel Oliner, &#8220;Knowing all you now know about who rescued Jews during the Holocaust, if you had to return as a Jew to Poland and you could knock on the door of only one person in the hope that they would rescue you, would you knock on the door of a Polish lawyer, a Polish doctor, a Polish artist or a Polish priest?&#8221;</p>
<p>Without hesitation, he said, &#8220;a Polish priest.&#8221; And his wife immediately added, &#8220;I would prefer a Polish nun.&#8221;</p>
<p>That alone should be enough to negate the pernicious nonsense that God is not only unnecessary for a moral world, but is detrimental to one.</p>
<p>But if that isn&#8217;t enough, how about the record of the godless 20th century, the cruelest, bloodiest, most murderous century on record? Every genocide of the last century — except for the Turkish mass murder of the Armenians and the Pakistani mass murder of Hindus in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was committed by a secular anti-Jewish and anti-Christian regime. And as the two exceptions were Muslim, they are not relevant to my argument. I am arguing for the God and Bible of Judeo-Christian religions.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most powerful proof of the moral decay that follows the death of God is the Western university and its secular intellectuals. Their moral record has been loathsome. Nowhere were Stalin and Mao as venerated as they were at the most anti-religious and secular institutions in Western society, the universities. Nowhere in the West today is anti-Americanism and Israel-hatred as widespread as it is at universities. And Princeton University awarded its first tenured professorship in bioethics to Peter Singer, an atheist who has argued, among other things, that that &#8220;the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog or a chimpanzee&#8221; and that bestiality is not immoral.</p>
<p>Dawkins and his supporters have a right to their atheism. They do not have a right to intellectual dishonesty about atheism.</p>
<p>I have debated the best known atheists, including the late Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Lawrence Krauss (&#8220;A Universe from Nothing&#8221;) and Daniel Dennett. Only Richard Dawkins has refused to come on my radio show.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/a-response-to-richard-dawkins/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>190</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muslims Need to Confront Muslim Evil</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/muslims-need-to-confront-muslim-evil/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=muslims-need-to-confront-muslim-evil</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/muslims-need-to-confront-muslim-evil/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2013 04:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kenya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NAIROBI]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=205335</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why are there more protests over Muhammad cartoons than over the Nairobi atrocity? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/MW-BI908_Kenya__20130922102653_MG.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-205336" alt="MW-BI908_Kenya__20130922102653_MG" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/MW-BI908_Kenya__20130922102653_MG-450x332.jpg" width="270" height="199" /></a>With this weekend&#8217;s massacre by Muslim terrorists at a mall in Nairobi, Kenya, and Muslim terrorists killing about 80 Christians at a Christian church in Pakistan, most people wonder what, if anything in addition to a continuing war on terror, can be done to minimize the scourge of Islamic terror.</p>
<p>The answer lies with Muslims themselves. Specifically, it means that Muslim religious leaders around the world must announce that any Muslim who deliberately targets non-combatants for death goes to hell.</p>
<p>I arrive at this answer based on something that I have long believed about Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust.</p>
<p>I readily acknowledge that the situations are not the same. The Jews of Europe were not annihilated by Catholics in the name of Catholicism; whereas the Christians, Muslims and Jews who are massacred by Islamic terrorists are murdered by Muslims in the name of Islam.</p>
<p>I also readily acknowledge that many of the attacks on Pope Pius XII for his alleged inaction and even collaboration with the Nazis during the Holocaust are animated by individuals who hate Western religion generally or hate the Catholic Church specifically. Pius XII was not &#8220;Hitler&#8217;s Pope,&#8221; as one best-selling book on Pius XII is titled.</p>
<p>Moreover, Pius XII lived in Italy during World War II, in a fascist dictatorship that began as Hitler&#8217;s ally and ended up being the target of Nazi atrocities. This was not the case with President Franklin D. Roosevelt, for example, who lived in the safety of a free country six-thousand miles away from Germany, did nothing to save the Jews of Europe, and even sent a boatload of Jewish refugees from Hitler back to Europe. Yet the critics of Pius are silent about Roosevelt.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, Pius could have done more to at least slow down the Holocaust. And I say this recognizing that Italy&#8217;s Catholic clergy saved many Jews, and that Pius, to his credit, had to be aware of this. What he could have and should have done was to announce that any Catholic — and any Christian for that matter — who in any way helps in the murder of innocent Jews is committing a mortal sin and will not attain salvation. In other words, he or she will go to hell.</p>
<p>This would have had no impact on the many Germans and other Europeans who had no belief in God or religion; but it would have had an impact on many who did.</p>
<p>I believe the same thing regarding Muslim terror. Muslim leaders — specifically, every imam in the world who is not a supporter of terror, the leaders of the most important Sunni institutions, such as the Al-Azhar Mosque and University in Cairo, and religious leaders in Saudi Arabia and the in Gulf states — must announce that any Muslim who participates in any deliberate attack on civilians goes to hell.</p>
<p>This must be announced as clearly and as repeatedly as, for example, Muslim condemnations of Israel.</p>
<p>Just as the promise of immediate entrance into paradise animates many Muslim terrorists, the promise of immediate hell would dissuade many Muslims from committing acts of terrorism.</p>
<p>Just as the promise of 72 virgins animates many Muslim terrorists, the promise of hell would dissuade many Muslims from terrorism.</p>
<p>Whenever non-Muslims ask Muslim organizations about Muslim terrorism, these organizations trot out the various anti-terrorism statements they have issued. But these are largely useless because: a) they are usually issued by Western Muslim organizations; b) even when they are issued by Middle Eastern Muslims, they almost always include condemnation of &#8220;state terrorism,&#8221; which is Muslim-speak for condemnation of any use of force by Israel; and c) these statements usually also condemn non-Muslim terror, as if Christian or Jewish or Buddhist terrorism is as great a threat to humanity as is Muslim terrorism.</p>
<p>Therefore the statements that need to be made by every Muslim teacher, school, mosque and organization that does not support Muslim terror must be unequivocal. They need to state that any Muslim who targets <i>any</i>civilian for death — whether that civilian is Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Hindu or of no religion — goes to hell.</p>
<p>In addition, there need to be large Muslim demonstrations against Muslim terrorism. I understand that Muslim clerics who would organize such demonstrations in the Muslim world might be risking their lives. But what about Muslims in America and Europe?</p>
<p>There have been huge Muslim demonstrations against cartoons depicting Muhammad and any other perceived &#8220;insult&#8221; against Islam. But I am unaware of a single demonstration of Muslims against Muslim terror directed at non-Muslims.</p>
<p>And if morality doesn&#8217;t persuade Muslim leaders to issue such a statement and organize such demonstrations, perhaps self-interest will. To just about everyone in the world outside of academia and the media, Islam is not looking good. Muslim leaders should be aware that with Muslims burning Christian churches and Christian bodies in Pakistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Egypt and elsewhere, and the regular massacring of innocents by Muslim terror groups, the protestations by Muslim spokesmen that &#8220;Islam is religion of peace&#8221; are beginning to wear thin. For a religion that seeks converts, this is not a positive development.</p>
<p>On the other hand, perhaps not that many Muslim religious leaders do believe that Muslim terrorists are going to hell.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dennis-prager/muslims-need-to-confront-muslim-evil/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>50</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1477/1682 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 06:22:39 by W3 Total Cache -->