<?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; agenda</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/agenda/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>The Left&#8217;s Use of Black People</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/walter-williams/the-lefts-use-of-black-people/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-lefts-use-of-black-people</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/walter-williams/the-lefts-use-of-black-people/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 05:35:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Walter Williams]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[African American]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill de Blasio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Black]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exploit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=248374</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How progressives keep African Americans in a perpetual state of grievance.  ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/de-blasio.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-248375" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/de-blasio-450x340.jpg" alt="de-blasio" width="336" height="254" /></a>Back in the day, when hunting was the major source of food, hunters often used stalking horses as a means of sneaking up on their quarry. They would walk on the opposite side of the horse until they were close enough to place a good shot on whatever they were hunting. A stalking horse not only concealed them but also, if their target was an armed man and they were discovered, would take the first shot. That&#8217;s what blacks are to liberals and progressives in their efforts to transform America — stalking horses.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s look at some of the ways white liberals use black people. One of the more obvious ways is for liberals to equate any kind of injustices suffered by homosexuals and women to the black struggle for civil rights. But it is just plain nonsense to suggest any kind of equivalency between the problems of homosexuals and women and the centuries of slavery followed by Jim Crow, lynching, systematic racial discrimination and the blood, sweat and tears of the black civil rights movement.</p>
<p>The largest and most powerful labor union in the country is the National Education Association, with well over 3 million members. Teachers benefit enormously from their education monopoly. It yields higher pay and lower accountability. It&#8217;s a different story for a large percentage of black people who receive fraudulent education. The NEA&#8217;s white liberals — aided by black teachers, politicians and so-called black leaders — cooperate to ensure that black parents who want their children to have a better education have few viable choices.</p>
<p>Whenever there has been a serious push for school choice, educational vouchers, tuition tax credits or even charter schools, the NEA has fought against it. One of the more callous examples of that disregard for black education was New York Mayor Bill de Blasio&#8217;s cutback on funding for charter schools where black youngsters were succeeding in getting a better education.</p>
<p>That was de Blasio&#8217;s way of paying back New York&#8217;s teachers union for the political support it gave him in his quest for the mayor&#8217;s office.</p>
<p>White liberals in the media and academia, along with many blacks, have been major supporters of the recent marches protesting police conduct. A man from Mars, knowing nothing about homicide facts, would conclude that the major problem black Americans have with murder and brutality results from the behavior of racist policemen. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, there are about 200 police arrest-related deaths of blacks each year (between 300 and 400 for whites). That number pales in comparison with the roughly 7,000 annual murders of blacks, 94 percent of which are committed by blacks. The number of blacks being murdered by other blacks is of little concern to liberals. Their agenda is to use arrest-related deaths of blacks to undermine established authority.</p>
<p>Liberals often have demeaning attitudes toward blacks. When Secretary of State John Kerry was a U.S. senator, in a statement about so many blacks being in prison, he said, &#8220;That&#8217;s unacceptable, but it&#8217;s not their fault.&#8221; Would Kerry also say that white prison inmates are also faultless? Johns Hopkins University sociologist Andrew Cherlin told us: &#8220;It has yet to be shown that the absence of a father was directly responsible for any of the supposed deficiencies of broken homes. &#8230; (The problem) is not the lack of male presence but the lack of male income.&#8221; The liberal vision is that fathers and husbands can be replaced by a welfare check.</p>
<p>Liberals desperately need blacks. If the Democratic Party lost just 30 percent of the black vote, it would mean the end of the liberal agenda. That means blacks must be kept in a perpetual state of grievance in order to keep them as a one-party people in a two-party system. When black Americans finally realize how much liberals have used them, I&#8217;m betting they will be the nation&#8217;s most conservative people. Who else has been harmed as much by liberalism&#8217;s vision and agenda?</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/walter-williams/the-lefts-use-of-black-people/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>48</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kimberley Strassel on the GOP Game Plan Going into 2016</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/kimberley-strassel-on-the-gop-game-plan-going-into-2016/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=kimberley-strassel-on-the-gop-game-plan-going-into-2016</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/kimberley-strassel-on-the-gop-game-plan-going-into-2016/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2014 05:51:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2016]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Midterm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Presidency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=247101</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wall Street Journal editor lays out the political battle ahead in Washington at Restoration Weekend.  ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong style="color: #232323;">Below are the video and transcript to Kimberley Strassel&#8217;s speech at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 20th Anniversary Restoration Weekend. The event took place Nov. 13th-16th at the Breakers Resort in Palm Beach, Florida. </strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/113680186" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p>A little bit more on me and my background.  I do sit on the editorial board of the <i>Wall Street Journal</i>.  We have a motto. We&#8217;ve had the motto, the same motto for decades, &#8220;Free Markets, Free People.&#8221;  It used to actually be &#8220;Free Markets, Free Men,&#8221; but then folks like me worked there, and we had to switch it up a little.  I&#8217;m the only member of the board who sits down in Washington and, from there, I write quite a few of the unsigned editorials that are the opinion of the editorial page.  Most of those focus on laying out our views on policy.  I separately also, under my own name once a week write a Potomac Watch column, and the idea of that is not to talk about policy but to try to explain politics which is, of course, infinitely harder, although infinitely more amusing.  It always reminds me of that famous Will Rogers line, &#8220;I don&#8217;t make jokes, I just watch the government and report the facts.&#8221;</p>
<p>So, we just had an election.  We are still waiting for a few last final results, Louisiana Senate race, some House seats, but the headline news is in and, of course, it is that the Republicans won and they won big.  This marks the first time in four years that one party has owned both houses of Congress, and the first time in the Obama presidency that he has faced a united Republican front.  In other words, after years of watching Harry Reid turn the Senate into an earthbound equivalent of the black hole, we are about to experience in Washington something very, very new, and I thought what I would do is just spend a few minutes talking about what I think we might expect.  What can we expect from President Obama in terms of his interaction with Republicans?  What can we expect from the GOP in terms of what they&#8217;re going to try to accomplish with domestic legislation and foreign policy and oversight?</p>
<p>Let me start with the President because I think that one&#8217;s pretty easy.  There are some, we can call them the world&#8217;s bipartisan optimists, who think that perhaps President Obama has been chastened by this loss.  They believe that he is like most Presidents, that he&#8217;ll be worried about his legacy, he hasn&#8217;t passed anything of consequence since 2010.  He&#8217;ll want to move up those approval ratings.  He&#8217;ll extend a hand to Republicans.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m a Conservative, and so I&#8217;m a born optimist, but I also try not to confuse optimism with insanity.  I think if we&#8217;ve learned anything about this presidency it&#8217;s that this President is fairly self-satisfied.  What you hear coming out of the White House is that he already believes he has written himself into the history books.  He did Obamacare.  He will take credit for restoring the economy.  He won the Nobel Peace Prize.  There is a view in the White House that what will in fact determine President Obama&#8217;s legacy is his party&#8217;s ability to keep the White House in 2016 and therefore protect programs like Obamacare.  And if that&#8217;s your guiding principle, then your impulse is going to be to spend the next two years trying to lay traps and create scenarios designed to make Republicans look bad, to make them look obstructionist and hostile to progress and therefore laying the groundwork for another Democratic President.  And I point out that he&#8217;s likely to get a lot of support for that strategy from Congress.  They are not chastened either.</p>
<p>One aspect of this recent midterm that has not been adequately noted is that most of the Democrats who lost their seats were the ones who at least claimed to represent the more moderate wing of the Democratic Party.  So the Democrats who were going to be returning to Washington in January are not only going to be greatly reduced in numbers, they&#8217;re going to be a far more liberal caucus than that party has probably seen in decades.</p>
<p>And we&#8217;re already seeing the President&#8217;s approach.  I&#8217;d like to point out to you for any of you who didn&#8217;t watch it or didn&#8217;t note this, the most telling line in the President&#8217;s press conference after his midterm thumping, &#8220;To all the Americans who voted, I hear you.  To the two-thirds of voters who chose not to participate in the process yesterday, I hear you too.&#8221;  This is a story Democrats are already telling themselves.  They didn&#8217;t lose this because it was a referendum on Obama.  They didn&#8217;t lose it because people disapprove of their policies or their candidates or want to change.  Oh, no.  They lost because not enough people voted.  In particular, not enough people on their side.  And so the approach going forward is to double down, to reenergize the liberal base with more aggressive policies.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s been the definition of Obama&#8217;s past week.  In the ten short days since this midterm, the President&#8217;s announced he&#8217;s going to unveil a series of unlawful immigration orders to get the Hispanic vote back onside.  He&#8217;s unilaterally cemented a new climate deal with China to get the Tom Steyers and the environmental base back onside.  He&#8217;s pressuring the Federal Communications Commissions on net neutrality to get all those Silicon Valley donors onboard.  And this in my view will be the definition of Obama&#8217;s behavior in his last two years in office.  This is going to be a White House that continues to break in every form and fashion and to new levels of the boundaries of Presidential power.  And the reason I think this is guaranteed is because I believe there is really only one lesson this President has learned in the last six years and that lesson is this.  He has discovered, to his delight, that when he does this stuff, there really isn&#8217;t anything anyone can do to stop him.</p>
<p>So, what about Republicans.  Republicans.  It is sometimes easy to look at the Republicans over the past few years and not be filled with huge amounts of rousing confidence that they&#8217;re going to successfully navigate the next couple of years.  But I think the glass-half-full side of all of this is that, in fact, the GOP has learned some very bruising lessons over the last couple of years, and they&#8217;ve learned them the hard way.  And so they come into this majority with those mistakes under their belt a little bit savvier perhaps than in recent years.  And their greatest insight, in my mind, and the one that their ability to remember I think is going to define their success, is that they can&#8217;t govern from Congress.  You can&#8217;t govern from Congress.  You can&#8217;t.  You can push, you can demand, you can block, you can exert influence.  They&#8217;re going to have a bigger megaphone than they did because they&#8217;ll now have both chambers.  But it&#8217;s the other guy who has the veto pen, and they know that this President is going to use that pen to draw lines around certain of his priorities and to protect them at all cost.  And so the trickiest thing the GOP is going to have to handle over the next two years is expectations management.  They cannot afford to go out and promise to repeal Obamacare because they can&#8217;t.  And they can&#8217;t reform Medicare.  And they can&#8217;t abolish the EPA.  That&#8217;s just not going to happen.</p>
<p>What they can do, and what they must do, is instead lay out on the national stage an optimistic, creative, pro-growth, problem-solving agenda by moving a steady stream of targeted, sometimes smaller legislation, to the President&#8217;s desk and daring him to say no to that.  Set peace battles in which the GOP highlights very specific positive changes and then forces congressional Democrats and President Obama to make choices.  And note this President has never had to do that before.  For six years he&#8217;s been protected by the Democratic Senate which spent its first two years only sending him his priorities, and the last four years shutting down the entire chamber to shield him from any controversial bills.  And by the way, most of the Senate has never had to take a difficult vote.  Do not underestimate the power of simply forcing the left to have to vote on some issues.</p>
<p>Look at Keystone.  I think this is a fabulous example.  It has been delayed for six years.  The House has passed legislation authorizing it nine times, and Harry Reid acted like the subject never existed, never had binding vote on it.  But now, Democrats came back and they realized that this was going to be one of the first things that Republicans took up when they took over the Senate.  They realized that 70 percent of Americans support the idea of the Keystone Pipeline.  They know that many of their members are going to get shellacked if they actually do vote no.  So rather than wait for Republicans to take credit for that, they&#8217;re moving it up, and they&#8217;re likely to have a vote on Tuesday.  And I will wager that there will be a number, a significant number, of Democrats who vote for this only because they are finally being made to.  So that&#8217;s an idea of the dynamic and how it changes.</p>
<p>Republicans are going to have a lot of avenues by which to make President Obama and Democrats have to make those choices.  In particular, because they have vowed to, and this is important not just for the country, I think, but for their success in Washington, they vowed to go back to regular order.  Something Washington has been missing a while.  We may finally have, for instance, an honest to goodness appropriations process.  Imagine that.  And that means the full use of the power of the purse which is the power that&#8217;s been largely obliterated by these many years of continuing resolutions and omnibus bills.  Those CRs have meant that if Republicans ever wanted to force a policy change via the federal purse, they had to hold the whole government hostage.  That&#8217;s what happened last fall with Obamacare and the government shut down, and it isn&#8217;t always good politics.</p>
<p>If you go back to the regular process, however, as both John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have promised to do, and it&#8217;s important that they be held to that, that&#8217;s a whole new ballgame.  You can put policy into individual funding bills.  You can pressure Democrats to join it.  You can send it to the President and then he has a choice.  He can agree to your policy, or he can be responsible for shutting down one piece of his own government.</p>
<p>Think about how much fun this could be with, say, an energy appropriations bill.  You put all this policy in there that the President and Democrats have for years, claims that they&#8217;re in favor of, more liquid natural gas terminals, offshore drilling, and you force them to vote on it, and you send it to the President and if he vetoes it, darn, he shut down his energy department, which would just be awful, right?  I mean he wouldn&#8217;t be able to send anymore subsidies to Solyndras.</p>
<p>If Republicans are going to lay out an agenda, that appropriations process is also going to be vital for another reason.  It&#8217;s going to be the main way to finally and again have a national debate on spending and priorities in government.  This is a debate the President has also been largely able to deep-six over the last few years because of the continuing resolution culture.  &#8220;Government Just Gets Funded,&#8221; it&#8217;s a little note on Page 36 of the newspapers.  Nobody talks about what was in it.  Republicans can once again talk about the sequester.  They can tie this into the foreign policy debate that we&#8217;re now having, the cuts President Obama has made to the military and what&#8217;s that meant for our national security, and even if they don&#8217;t send all their ideas to the President, they can tee-up via these process, budget process, their visions of healthcare reform and entitlement reform and give the country an idea of what would happen if there were a Republican President.</p>
<p>Some of these little set piece battles aside, there&#8217;s probably a few bigger and bolder things, if Republicans are very smart about it.  There is a push right now coming from the White House to work with Republicans on corporate tax reform.  Paul Ryan is taking over Ways and Means.  He&#8217;s very serious on this subject.  And the question is going to be whether Obama can be a trusted partner in a tax venture.  He never has been before.  We&#8217;ll see if he&#8217;s changed.</p>
<p>Immigration.  There is only one reason in my cynical little mind that the President is now threatening these immediate actions on immigration executive orders.  It isn&#8217;t to help the Hispanic community.  It isn&#8217;t to clarify the law.  It probably isn&#8217;t even likely because he believes that it&#8217;s great politics for him.  It is for one reason only. It is to goad Republicans into acting like lunatics.  And I know there is a very controversial question out there still, immigration, among the conservative ranks, but in my view Republicans would be very wise to act in a responsible way on some form of legislation and just clear this from their decks.</p>
<p>A little takeaway from the midterm that I didn&#8217;t think got a lot of attention, but it&#8217;s hugely relevant.  One of the reasons Republicans did better among Hispanics this midterm, and they did – a lot of senators, a lot of governors, a lot of house members.  Their numbers were higher with Hispanic voters.  I think it&#8217;s because immigration wasn&#8217;t really a topic.  The President didn&#8217;t want to talk about it because of what had gone on down at the border.  Republicans didn&#8217;t want to talk about it because it&#8217;s an uncomfortable subject.  And it just didn&#8217;t come up in a lot of races.  And as a result, the GOP had an opportunity to talk to Hispanic voters about other issues that matter deeply to the country, the economy, jobs, healthcare.  This ought to be the situation that Republicans are striving for.  Being able to talk to Hispanic voters about other issues that matter to them, and you can&#8217;t do that until immigration as a policy topic is neutralized.</p>
<p>So that&#8217;s legislative.  Beyond that, the next most important thing the GOP is going to have to do is tackle nominations.  It&#8217;s huge.  As many of you know, Mr. Reid at the end of last year blew up the Senate filibuster for Presidential nominations.  The consequences of that have been profound.  For years now Federal Appeals Courts have favored Conservative justices because of the legacies of Reagan and both Bushes.  Now for the first time in more than a decade, and a lot of people don&#8217;t know this, for the first time in more than a decade judges appointed by Democratic Presidents significantly outnumber judges appointed by Republicans.  Democratic appointees now hold the majority of seats of 9 of 13 appellate court circuits.  When Obama took office that number was one.</p>
<p>The most consequential of these as you may know is the DC Circuit which hears almost every important case out of Washington and now has seven Liberals and five Conservatives on it.  Four of those seven were picked by Obama, and most of them ran through just in this past year since the filibuster was blown up.  Obama has now not only appointed far more judges than President Bush had by this time in his tenure, those justices, because there has been no filibuster to provide a check on what kind of judges they are, they are far more Liberal than most justices that have been put on the court in decades.  And they&#8217;re going to serve lifelong terms.</p>
<p>Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has said he&#8217;s going to return the Senate to regular order and also restore the filibuster to 60 votes to confirm nominees.  I know there&#8217;s a big debate out there among Republicans on whether or not this is a good idea.  I think it is.  I know a lot of people think that Republicans should give Democrats a taste of their own medicine, but if you don&#8217;t go back up to 60 votes, here&#8217;s one of the problems.  There are a lot of Republican Senators right now in the Senate who are of the mind frame that you need to show deference to Presidential appointments and nominations.  And there are plenty more Republicans who are up for election in 2016 in very tough states, and they are not always going to be reliable when it comes to the nominations questions.  And I think it&#8217;s going to be very, very hard.  I don&#8217;t think, I&#8217;m sorry, I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s going to be very, very hard for Democrats to get 51 votes on most of these nominations, so if you don&#8217;t put it back up to 60, it becomes much harder to block things.  And I want everyone to think about that too in the context if there is a potential Supreme Court opening.</p>
<p>Finally, the other major priority for Republicans has to be oversight.  This is a Presidency that is a mountain of scandals: Fast and furious, Benghazi, the IRS, the Veterans Administration, the Pebble Mine veto.  And the only thing that all of these cases all have in common is that we don&#8217;t have answers to any of them.  We have very valiant people trying to get those answers.  I saw that Cleta Mitchell got your Annie Taylor award last night.  By the way, Cleta Mitchell took me to the bar last night, and if I don&#8217;t make it all the way through this speech, it&#8217;s her fault.</p>
<p>The individual agencies that are the subject of these probes backed up by the Justice Department and aided by Democrats in Congress have spent the past three years engaging in a fulltime outright effort to stonewall every one of these probes.  Will a Republican Senate get us all the answers?  No.  But what this does do &#8212; and Cleta actually wrote an amazing piece in the <i>Wall Street Journal</i> this last week which everyone should pay attention to because it&#8217;s correct &#8212; this ought to be a moment for the Republicans to finally get more serious about oversight, to be far more aggressive to get the right people at the committees who are actually going to go to the wall to get some of the answers.  And that&#8217;s a big moment for Republicans too, because unravelling some of these scandals, I think, it&#8217;s going to be important for laying the groundwork for 2016 for them.</p>
<p>And they&#8217;ve got to do all this because it plays back to the opening point.  The GOP&#8217;s challenge in a nutshell is this.  They were voted in because people in this country desperately want change, but it&#8217;s also the case that they can&#8217;t run all of Washington just from Congress.  There are limits on what they can do, so they&#8217;ve got get through what smaller things they can while every day showing what things could be like, how things could be different.  And every day master the impulse to react to Obama, because his only goal is going to be to paint them as obstructionists who can&#8217;t govern, who are driven by internal fights, and they&#8217;ve got to prove that that isn&#8217;t true.</p>
<p>And they have to too because this next Presidential race is going to be very tough and nobody should think otherwise.  The Republicans on the upside have a very neat, new, young generationally different crew of potential nominees coming up, and that&#8217;s very good for the party.  But it&#8217;s also going to mean potentially a very long and ugly nomination fight.  And the Democrats aren&#8217;t going to have that problem because they&#8217;re going to have Hillary.  I mean everyone keeps asking is Hillary going to run?  Hillary is running.  She&#8217;s running right now.  She&#8217;s running, running, running.  You don&#8217;t go out and write a book and campaign for everyone across the country unless you&#8217;re saying I&#8217;m running.  Now she could change her mind in the next few months, but right now we are going to have some Republican versus Hillary Clinton.  And not only does some Republican have to get through a potentially ugly primary, but that some Republican then has to run in a general election in which increasingly the demographics of this country do favor a Democratic party.</p>
<p>And it isn&#8217;t just the Presidency on the line.  I&#8217;ve talked to some Democrats in the last few weeks since this election.  They&#8217;re not really overly fussed that they just lost the Senate.  Why?  Because they&#8217;re convinced this is going to be the shortest term loss ever.  The last three election cycles have all favored Republicans in the Senate.  Far more Democrats up for reelection than Republicans.  In 2016, that situation is totally reversed.  There will be 24 Republicans up for reelection.  Many in states that are absolutely brutal for Republicans to hold.  Places like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.  By comparison there will be ten Democrats up for reelection in 2016.</p>
<p>So, again, the ability for Republicans to prove that they can do something and to lay out, to lay out very clear, modest proposals, act on them, and then provide a vision could well shape the politics of this country for the next decade.  The policies the President&#8217;s passed, whether they&#8217;re allowed to stand, the shape of the courts, the final truth about these scandals, the biggest questions and whether they can ultimately be changed &#8212; entitlements, the tax code, tort reform, campaign finance, speech laws &#8211; this next two years are very important.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m just going to finish by telling you what I&#8217;m actually most excited about, and that&#8217;s actually the things I don&#8217;t yet know are going to come.  A major shift has actually been happening in Congress, one that tends to not get a lot of attention.  The media tends to be so obsessed with the split in the Republican Party, the Tea Party versus establishment and Libertarians versus Hawks.  The biggest change I&#8217;ve actually seen in Washington and particularly in the Senate in the decade I&#8217;ve been covering is in fact a generational one.  When I first started writing about the Senate, the average age of a Senator was about 180 years old.  And the real story of recent elections is how many of these older, distinguished politicians have retired or died in office and been replaced by a lot younger people with new ideas.  And that&#8217;s happened on both sides of the aisle, by the way.  It&#8217;s not just a Republican phenomena.  But given Harry Reid&#8217;s lockdown, hardly any of these guys have ever had a chance to make a mark.</p>
<p>And some of them are really impressive thinkers and policymakers.  I know you&#8217;ve heard from Ron Johnson last night.  Yeah.  Marco Rubio, Pat Toomey, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and they&#8217;re about to be joined by what I would term the best crop as a whole of Republican Senatorial candidates in goodness knows how long.  Tom Cotton in Arkansas, Ben Sasse in Nebraska, Dan Sullivan in Alaska &#8212; woo hoo, just got Alaska! &#8212; Joanie Ernst in Iowa, Steve Daines in Montana.  This is a really impressive crew, all of whom have real expertise in the areas that are actually going to matter profoundly in the debates in the next two years, things like energy, things like foreign policy.  And you&#8217;re going to see them join the many reformers you&#8217;ve also seen in the House.  And you can have real opportunity, I think, for some ideas and innovation of the kind that the Conservative moment has been lacking for some time and I think that&#8217;s going to be a really fun thing to watch.</p>
<p>So, on that more optimistic note, I&#8217;m going to let you all get back to your lunch.  Thank you so much for taking the time to listen to me, and if there are any questions I&#8217;m happy to take them.</p>
<p><strong>Audience Member: </strong>The Democrats have really poisoned the well.  Everybody who is an uninformed voter knows full well that every Conservative, every Republican is mean, selfish, dishonest, homophobic, bigoted, racist and any other bad thing you can think of.  So the question is, if people are really convinced of this, we have to change that impression first.  How the heck do we do it?</p>
<p><strong>Kimberley Strassel: </strong>Well, we have to show it, you know, and actually I think there were some remarkable examples of how people did that in this last election.  I think it&#8217;s why the Republicans won is because they did.  You know, the war on women thing, okay.  I mean, that has crushed Republicans the last few years.  It hit a wall this year and in part it was because of guys like Cory Gardner out in Colorado, who when they started running ads against him saying he was anti-women and, and would stop everything, he said, actually you know what, I&#8217;m in favor of over-the-counter contraception which actually would make it much easier for all of you women out there.  And by talking about policies that would actually help women in particular and by not being afraid to, he didn&#8217;t just say no, I&#8217;m not.  He actually gave examples of what it was that made him, his policies and his ideas work for women and, you know, I can&#8217;t remember what the final vote was but he kept the gap with Mark Udall very small in the women&#8217;s vote.  When Ken Buck ran in 2010 he lost women by 17 points.  And they did the same playbook on him in Colorado and I think Cory Gardner lost women by 3 or 4 in the end or something like that.  Tom Cotton won women by 10 points in part by talking about issues that mattered to women that went beyond uteruses.  You know, he talked about foreign policy.  You know, remember, there&#8217;s a lot of women out there that are national security moms.  They care about things like this.  So I think you have to address these head on.  You know, Ed Gillespie in Virginia, so close, but he spent most of his time, a lot of time on the campaign trail and I advised everyone to go look in Ed Gillespie&#8217;s campaign, he had all of his policies laid out.  He was a very informed candidate who went on an agenda and he spent a lot of time on the campaign trail talking about ways in which Republican policies will help the working poor.  You know, you have to address these things if you&#8217;re not going to be tarred as anti-women, anti-poor and everything else.</p>
<p><strong>Audience Member: </strong>Yeah, just so the Republicans don&#8217;t overreact and go ballistic and actually damage themselves, what is your recommendation for a strategy after Obama commits his lawless act next week?</p>
<p><strong>Kimberley Strassel:</strong> Well, look, I think the first thing Republicans have to do is actually just point out, A) how unlawful this is, okay, and that&#8217;s a theme that&#8217;s really grown out there among people and the public and I think it resonates.  I think they also have to point out that this was done for cynical reasons.  The President is not helping Hispanic voters.  What he will put out will not be durable, it does not address a lot of the problems the Hispanic community cares about.  There are all kinds of problems with doing this by executive order because you shouldn&#8217;t do it that way.  So they should point out that there are major problems and that he didn&#8217;t do this to actually help and it&#8217;s not good policy, and then I think they should put forward a series of bills that address different issues, starting with the border security bill, but going through some of the things.  And, you know, I think that Republicans have the ability, when I think of immigration, I know that this is very controversial but immigration can also be seen as a big jobs bill.  I mean, there&#8217;s a lot to this about high tech visas, guest worker programs, things like that, and I think it&#8217;s got to be a framing issue as well as anything.  But they do I think have to respond in some way.</p>
<p><strong>Audience Member: </strong>John Boehner has already rolled over on immigration and is going to give us amnesty and it makes those of us who worked hard to get Republicans elected wonder what the effort was about and why the Republicans in the House can&#8217;t seem to get a Republican as a leader.  Would you like to comment on that?</p>
<p><strong>Kimberley Strassel: </strong>Well, they just had elections.  Anyone could have challenged him and nobody did.  So I think one problem that has happened, and I would wager if you talked to members of Congress they would agree with this too, is that probably one of the failings of John Boehner and Mitch McConnell over the last few years is they haven&#8217;t actually talked to each other, and they haven&#8217;t necessarily talked to their conferences as much as they should and told them what they&#8217;re going to do and make an effort to get them onboard with it.  And you know when you&#8217;re not sending a message about what your plan is and working hard internally to get your guys onboard, you create a vacuum which allows everyone to kind of do whatever they want.  And, you know, I think that was some of the craziness you saw over the shutdown last year, it wasn&#8217;t the shutdown itself but the fact that the party didn&#8217;t seem to know where it was going, it was running in 15 different directions all at the same time.  So this isn&#8217;t directly addressing your question but I do think one of the things that I&#8217;m hearing from people is that there&#8217;s been a big push on Boehner and McConnell to be a lot more responsive to their caucuses, be a lot more informative about what they&#8217;re doing and to work with each other and have a unified strategy and we&#8217;ll see if that doesn&#8217;t help.  Thank you.</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/frontpagemag-com/kimberley-strassel-on-the-gop-game-plan-going-into-2016/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Belgium’s Death Spiral</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/stephenbrown/belgiums-death-spiral/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=belgiums-death-spiral</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/stephenbrown/belgiums-death-spiral/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2014 04:35:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephen Brown]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[belgium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[euthanasia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=241718</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Only months after giving children the right to ask to die, euthanasia claims yet another category of victims.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/eut.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-241720" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/eut.jpg" alt="eut" width="292" height="219" /></a>Europe’s descent to self-annihilation and a holocaust of its own making continues unabated as a court in Belgium this month granted a convicted rapist and murderer the right to die under Belgian euthanasia laws. This latest destructive blow to Western civilization’s Judeo-Christian moral order comes only months after Belgium’s King Philippe signed into law last March a bill allowing euthanasia for children of any age and dementia sufferers upon request.</p>
<p>With this highly disturbing piece of legislation becoming law, Belgian opponents of euthanasia questioned who would be next after children were granted the barbarism to request their own deaths. They did not have to wait long for an answer. This month, Frank van Den Bleeken, 50, who has been incarcerated for 30 years for the rape and murder of a 19-year-old student, received the right to be euthanized from a court after claiming “unbearable suffering.” Intolerable physical or psychological pain is accepted as a grounds for euthanasia in Belgium.</p>
<p>Van Den Bleeken is not the first Belgian convict to ask to be put to death. Fifteen others have made the same request. But van Den Bleeken is the first to receive legal permission, thus establishing a new euthanasia category.</p>
<p>“I am a human being, and regardless of what I’ve done, I remain a human being. So, yes give me euthanasia,” said van Den Bleeken in a recent television documentary.</p>
<p>The convicted murderer, who is currently serving his sentence in a prison’s psychiatric wing, first requested euthanasia three years ago. Inadequate help from the state for the problem that, van Den Bleeken says, caused him to commit his crime and the chance he will reoffend if released constitute other reasons for his having asked to die.</p>
<p>The Belgian commission responsible for euthanasia stated it would not examine van Den Bleeken’s request until “all therapeutic possibilities had been exhausted.” But a court of appeal blocked the commission’s attempt to transfer van Den Bleeken to an institution for specialized treatment, after which he successfully fought the justice ministry in court for the right to be euthanized.</p>
<p>“My client can be transferred to a hospital for 48 hours to say his goodbyes to his family and can then die in a dignified manner,” said van Den Bleeken’s lawyer. “I am not able to say when nor where this will happen.”</p>
<p>Opinion on this specific case, on granting van Den Bleeken the right to be euthanized, is, as expected, divided and emotional. Since it involves incarcerated criminals, some of whom have committed terrible crimes, this case does not garner the same sympathy and support that the children’s did when the euthanasia right was extended to them, Belgium becoming the first country in the world to do so.</p>
<p>Some of those in favor of granting van Den Bleeken’s death request, for example, believe society would benefit economically from his demise, as taxpayers would no longer have to support him in prison, and would like to see the euthanasia right extended to other prisoners for the same economic reasons. Others are of the opinion that van Den Bleeken deserves death for the horrendous crime he committed, but only wish it was the state demanding an end to his life rather than the murderer (Belgium does not have capital punishment).</p>
<p>Many of those opposing van Den Bleeken’s request also do not do so on the grounds that euthanasia is morally wrong. Some maintain murderers like him forfeited all their rights when they committed their crimes, including the right to be euthanized. And if they are suffering in prison, then that’s too bad, since their victims, and the victims’ families, are also still suffering. Besides, the student van Den Bleeken murdered didn’t get to choose whether she wanted to die, so why should he? The justice system, some opponents argue, also prescribes a punishment for the crime committed, and some view van Den Bleeken’s request to die as an attempt to escape his punishment, thus undermining the rule of law.</p>
<p>But these arguments appear to have overshadowed the bigger issue in the van Den Bleeken case in that the boundaries for euthanasia in Belgium have once again been expanded. And in this case, a scant three months after their last enlargement.</p>
<p>Originally, Belgium’s euthanasia law, passed in 2002, was meant for gravely ill adults suffering unbearable physical pain.  Now, as mentioned, it includes those experiencing “unbearable psychological suffering.” So relatively healthy people suffering mental stress or disorders are now being killed, among them a 44-year-old person who had undergone a failed sex change operation. So it is no wonder the number of euthanasia victims in Belgium has grown from 24 people in 2002 to 1,807 in 2013, an average of five per day and a 27 percent increase from 2012. All of which proves that early Belgian opponents of euthanasia were right when they claimed its parameters would constantly expand, becoming a slippery slope.</p>
<p>“Can one truly believe that there was really such a strong rise in incurable illnesses in Belgium?” asked the coordinator of a Belgian civil organization that wants stricter control of euthanasia. “When the criteria become more and more flexible, one clearly sees that there is a drift.”</p>
<p>The trailblazer in modern-day euthanasia is actually Belgium’s neighbor, Holland. Holland was the first European country to betray its Judeo-Christian heritage regarding the sanctity of life when it legalized euthanasia in 2001. Holland also has the dubious distinction of leading the way in killing babies, as the Dutch euthanasia policy was expanded in 2006 to babies born with severe birth defects. But while killing children under 12 is still technically illegal, as long as doctors follow a certain protocol, the Dutch justice system leaves them in peace.</p>
<p>It therefore should not surprise that Holland is another country where euthanasia appears out of control. In 2011, 3,695 people were reported medically killed, including 13 psychiatric patients, while 4,188 were euthanized in 2102, accounting for three percent of all Holland’s deaths that year. And like in Belgium, the number continues to rise, setting a new record every year.</p>
<p>“The Dutch experience shows that euthanasia becomes routine,” said one British anti-euthanasia activist.</p>
<p>One would have to go back to Nazi Germany to find a European country where euthanasia was so triumphant. In October, 1939, Adolph Hitler signed an authorization on his own personal stationary allowing German doctors to murder ill and physically and mentally handicapped children. This authorization launched the infamous Nazi euthanasia program, T-4 (for Tiergarten 4, the Berlin address of the program’s headquarters), in which several hundred thousand disabled minors and grownups, classified as ‘<em>leben lebensunwert</em>’ (life unworthy of life), were eventually killed simply because of the way they were born. Their murder was the beginning of the Nazi genocide and was to be followed by the Jewish Holocaust. More than seven decades later, modern-day Belgium and Holland are reviving the nightmare.</p>
<p>A new and frightening part of this nightmare is the mobile euthanasia units a Dutch pro-euthanasia organization created in 2012. In their eagerness to kill, these supporters of death on demand send a medical team, equipped with a lethal injection, to the homes of people who legally qualify for euthanasia but whose family doctors refuse to do it. These ‘death on wheels’ teams are called, appropriately, “<em>Levenseinde</em>” (Life End) units.</p>
<p>This is quite a reversal of the traditional doctor’s house call.</p>
<p>The reason for Belgium’s ever-expanding euthanasia legislation that now even includes children is that Western civilization is in the grips of a death cult, like the Nazi, Communist and Islamist ones. As Judeo-Christian values recede in Western European countries, the more such abominations associated with death worship, such as abortion, pedophilia, bestiality and euthanasia, will appear, as the continent reverts back to a pre-Christian paganism (which was also a Nazi goal). It is therefore no coincidence that Holland and Belgium, two of Western Europe’s most secularized and de-Christianized societies, have legalized euthanasia. They and Luxembourg are the only ones &#8212; so far.</p>
<p>Belgian euthanasia opponents, who are once again left asking ‘who’s next?’ after the van Den Bleeken legal decision, will, again, probably not have to wait long for a possible answer. The Belgian Intensive Care Society released a document requesting authorization to euthanize without a patient’s permission, “even in the absence of discomfort.” It claims non-requested euthanasia is already being regularly practiced.</p>
<p>“These patients are not sufficiently conscious to make an explicit request. It’s not about increasing the medication to prevent pain but so to precipitate death when the quality of life has become deficient,” wrote Jean-Louis Vincent, a former society head, in a Belgian newspaper.</p>
<p>Already, doctors have such control over life or death in Belgium that sometimes they do not even tell family members that a loved one has requested to be euthanized. The relatives of the deceased are told only after the fact. Now, if the Belgian Intensive Care Society gets its way, they won’t even have to inform their victims.</p>
<p>But such a frightening, downward trajectory is not unexpected when a country progressively gives up its traditional religious faith and allows Marxist socialism to heavily influence its society and culture. By abandoning its morality, losing its sense of eternity and living only in the here and now, oblivious of past and future generations, Belgium has created a moral and spiritual vacuum conducive to euthanasia’s growth. And its expansion is now occurring with such speed that it no longer resembles a slippery slope but rather a steep drop off a cliff into a beckoning abyss.</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/stephenbrown/belgiums-death-spiral/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Ferguson Lynch Mob and What It Doesn&#8217;t Know &#8212; on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-ferguson-lynch-mob-and-what-it-doesnt-know-on-the-glazov-gang/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-ferguson-lynch-mob-and-what-it-doesnt-know-on-the-glazov-gang</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-ferguson-lynch-mob-and-what-it-doesnt-know-on-the-glazov-gang/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2014 04:03:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Glazov Gang]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ferguson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lynch mob]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=239634</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Left's rush to judgment, division and hate -- without the facts. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/fire.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-239637" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/fire-450x300.jpg" alt="fire" width="332" height="221" /></a><strong>[<a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf">Subscribe</a> to <em>The Glazov Gang</em> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">LIKE</a> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.]</strong></a></p>
<p><span class="userContent">This week&#8217;s <em>Glazov Gang</em> was guest-hosted by Ann-Marie Murrell and joined by Monty Morton, Nonie Darwish and Karen Siegemund. </span></p>
<p>The guests gathered to discuss, <strong>The Ferguson Lynch Mob and What it Doesn&#8217;t Know</strong>, analyzing the the Left&#8217;s rush to judgment, division and hate &#8212; without the facts <strong>(starts at 15:00 mark)</strong>.</p>
<p>The guests also tackled <em>Ferguson, Foley and a Radical-in-Chief&#8217;s Double Standards</em>, focusing on how Obama and the media support a lynch mob while engaging in willful blindness to Islamic jihad.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/cMBQg9xHIP4" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>To watch previous <em>Glazov Gang</em> episodes, </strong><a href="http://jamieglazov.com/"><strong>Click Here</strong></a><strong>.</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> Jamie Glazov’s </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>Fan Page</strong></a><strong> on Facebook.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-ferguson-lynch-mob-and-what-it-doesnt-know-on-the-glazov-gang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What the Redskins Controversy Is Really About</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/mark-tapson/what-the-redskins-controversy-is-really-about/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=what-the-redskins-controversy-is-really-about</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/mark-tapson/what-the-redskins-controversy-is-really-about/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2014 04:48:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Tapson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[name]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Redskins Controversy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=234643</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The issue is always the revolution.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/nfl.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-234647" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/nfl.jpg" alt="nfl" width="275" height="183" /></a>Last week the controversy over the NFL Washington Redskins’ name, deemed offensive by the professionally aggrieved, reached a new peak when the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/redskins/2014/06/18/redskins-trademark-revoked-us-patent-office/10735053/">canceled</a> six federal trademark registrations owned by the team.</p>
<p>Nevada Senator Harry Reid, who had previously blustered impotently that he wouldn’t accept an invitation to attend a Redskins home game until the team changed its name (a threat which no doubt sent waves of panic through the Redskins organization), gloated that the ruling proved “the handwriting is on the wall.” “It’s only a matter of time,” he <a href="http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2014/06/18/harry-reid-says-writing-on-the-wall-for-redskins-name/">tweeted</a>, “until [Redskins owner] Daniel Snyder is forced to do the right thing and change the name.”</p>
<p><em>Forced to do the right thing</em>. And there you have the totalitarian pr0gressive mindset in a nutshell: if people don’t do the “right thing” – by which the left means, of course, conform to their social justice agenda – then they must be coerced by any means necessary.</p>
<p>The 2-1 decision by the Board does not mean that the team must stop using the name, but Robert Tracinski at The Federalist <a href="http://thefederalist.com/2014/06/19/why-the-redskins-trademark-ruling-should-terrify-you/">notes</a> that the cancellation sets a “terrifying” precedent: “This ruling happened precisely because the campaign against the Redskins has failed in the court of public opinion&#8230; So the left resorted to one of its favorite fallbacks. If the people can’t be persuaded, use the bureaucracy”:</p>
<blockquote><p>In this case, executive officials declared that a private company doesn’t deserve the protection of the law: if the ruling survives an appeal in the courts, the federal government will stop prosecuting violations of the team’s intellectual property rights, potentially costing it millions of dollars…</p>
<p>[B]ureaucrats in Washington are now empowered to make subjective decrees about what is offensive and what will be tolerated, based on pressure from a small clique of Washington insiders. Anyone who runs afoul of these decrees, anyone branded as regressive and politically incorrect, is declared outside the protection of the federal government.</p></blockquote>
<p>Oneida Indian Nation Representative Ray Halbritter and National Congress of American Indians executive director Jackie Pata, who call the Redskins name a “hateful slur,” hope that the patent ruling will “imperil the ability of the team’s billionaire owner to keep profiting off the denigration and dehumanization of Native Americans.”</p>
<p>This is a ridiculous claim, since Snyder is profiting not from dehumanizing Native Americans but from the American love of football. But what Halbritter and Pata are trying to do in their statement is smear Snyder as a “billionaire” which, in these times of anti-wealth bigotry, is as despised a label as “racist.” Among the Occupy movement left, it is code for “rapacious one-percenter who didn’t build that,” as <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/27/multimillionaire-elizabeth-warren-im-not-wealthy/">multi-millionaire</a> Elizabeth Warren might put it.</p>
<p>Barack Obama, who has a habit of injecting his personal opinion on topics that should be far beneath presidential concern, naturally spoke out in favor of jettisoning the team’s name, which offends “a sizable group of people,” he <a href="http://bigstory.ap.org/article/obama-open-name-change-washington-redskins">said</a>, who have “real legitimate concerns.”</p>
<p>Not <em>that</em> sizeable. Ten years ago a <a href="http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/downloads/political_communication/naes/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr.pdf">poll</a> of American Indians found that 90% of Indians polled in 48 states found the name inoffensive. In a January 2014 <a href="http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ap-gfk-poll-49-percent-are-pro-football-fans">poll</a>, a broad majority of adults (83%) responded that the Washington Redskins should not change their nickname. Among football fans, that majority was even higher: 87%.</p>
<p>The Redskins have been in existence since 1933 (although not always in Washington, D.C.). Ever since then probably no one has used the word “redskins” to refer to anything other than that team. Indeed, David Plotz at the radical Slate admitted that the word has a “relatively innocent” history, that Native Americans themselves used the word as a descriptor and not an insult. He also conceded that the team name was chosen to honor Native American bravery. Another writer at Slate <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2013/12/18/redskins_the_debate_over_the_washington_football_team_s_name_incorrectly.html">traced</a> the word’s history and found it largely benign.</p>
<p>“But time passes,” Plotz wrote. “Americans think differently about race and the language of race than we did 80 years ago.” And so Slate proudly <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/08/washington_redskins_nickname_why_slate_will_stop_referring_to_the_nfl_team.html">announced</a> that they simply would not use the word anymore (<em>Mother Jones</em> and <em>The New Republic</em> followed suit). “Changing the way we talk is not political correctness run amok,” wrote Plotz. True, changing the way we talk is not PC “run amok.” It is the very <em>intent</em> of political correctness to manipulate language and thought to conform to the progressive agenda.</p>
<p>Let’s be real. The rancorous debate over the Redskins name has nothing to do with assuaging the hurt feelings of Obama’s “sizeable group of people.” It is about the expansion of government control. Progressives like Harry Reid don’t truly care about Native American sensibilities any more than they care about health care for the uninsured. Both issues &#8211; <em>all</em> issues for progressives – are about acquiring and expanding power.</p>
<p>In short, the contemporary obsession with “being offended” is never truly about “being offended.” Claiming offense is a strategy of identity politics whereby a minority faction plays the victim card to further a broader agenda. “The issue is never the issue,” as Saul Alinsky used to state. “The issue is always the revolution.”</p>
<p>The <em>Daily Caller</em>, for example, <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/18/12-trademarks-declared-less-offensive-than-redskins/">listed</a> twelve trademarks that the United States Patent and Trademark Office apparently finds less worthy of addressing than “Redskins.” Those trademarks include, among others, such brands as Uppity Negro, Dago Swag, Kraut Krap, and Figgas Over Niggas. The hypocrisy is blatant and almost hilarious. But the Washington Redskins make a more useful and visible political target.</p>
<p>If President Obama and his cohorts are eagerly searching to punish organizations with offensive names, perhaps they could turn their selective attention to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.</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/mark-tapson/what-the-redskins-controversy-is-really-about/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>42</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Climate Change Fundamentalists</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/the-climate-change-fundamentalists-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-climate-change-fundamentalists-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/the-climate-change-fundamentalists-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2014 04:13:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Klein]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radical]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=225847</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In our new brave world, heretics must be punished.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/end-is-near.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-225849" alt="end-is-near" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/end-is-near.jpg" width="282" height="211" /></a>Climate change fundamentalists are predicting an apocalypse. Human depredation in the form of unbridled materialism is the cause. Any dissent from the fundamentalists’ doomsday prophesies if their radical prescriptions to save humanity and Mother Earth are not followed is regarded as heresy. </span></p>
<p>Charge the well-funded climate change “deniers” with committing “criminal negligence” for “their willful disregard for human life,&#8221; says Lawrence Torcello, a philosophy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology. After all, heretics must be punished.</p>
<p>Stop job-creating energy independence initiatives such as the Keystone XL pipeline, says the former director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, James Hansen, which he called the &#8220;fuse to the biggest carbon bomb on the planet.&#8221; Hansen was arrested during the course of a civil disobedience protest against the pipeline as he sat in front of a banner proclaiming, &#8220;Witness for Climate and Creation.&#8221; Who knew that a pipeline transporting oil to the United States, which would otherwise travel by rail or be shipped elsewhere such as to China, the world’s largest emitter of carbon gases, would upset God’s plan of creation?</p>
<p>Hansen co-authored with other like-minded scientists and economist Jeffrey Sachs, director of Columbia’s Earth Institute and adviser to the United Nations, a scare-mongering paper entitled “Assessing ‘Dangerous Climate Change’: Required Reduction of Carbon Emissions to Protect Young People, Future Generations and Nature.” The paper, published in December 2013, predicted “mass extinctions” of species and demanded “urgent change to our energy and carbon pathway to avoid dangerous consequences for young people and other life on Earth.” The authors moralized that human-caused climate change is on par with the evil of slavery. It represented inter-generational injustice, they said, for which they recommended there be legal remedies.</p>
<p>James Gustave Speth, formerly dean of the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality from 1979 to 1981, wrote an indignant letter to the New York Times on May 13, 2014 complaining that the “United States’ response to the climate crisis has been beyond pathetic. It is probably the greatest dereliction of civic responsibility in the history of the Republic.” What is Speth’s solution? Ideally, as he described in his book <i>Red Sky at Morning</i>, he would like to see “a world environment agency entrusted with setting international standards and enforcing them against laggard countries.”</p>
<p>Even some scientists who agree that human-induced greenhouse gas buildup is a real problem policymakers should address believe that the climate change fundamentalists are going too far. For example, Ken Caldeira, an atmospheric scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science&#8217;s Department of Global Ecology, discussing his reaction to the Hansen-Sachs paper, said he was  &#8220;concerned about the presentation of such a prescriptive and value-laden work&#8221; in a piece that wasn&#8217;t marked as an opinion. Caldeira has also said, regarding the Keystone pipeline, that “I don’t believe that whether the pipeline is built or not will have any detectable climate effect.”</p>
<p>Rather than providing balanced scientific data and reasoned analysis to persuade lay people of the potential adverse environmental consequences of human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases with recommendations for practical incremental approaches to dealing with these consequences, the climate change fundamentalists reject any notion of a gradualist approach. As Robert Skidelsky, a member of the British House of Lords and professor emeritus of political economy at Warwick University, explained: “Climate change is a fact. But apocalyptic thinking distorts the scientific debate and makes it harder to explain the causes and consequences of this fact, which in turn makes it harder to know how to deal with it.  The danger is that we become so infected with the apocalyptic virus that we end up creating a real catastrophe — the meltdown of our economies and lifestyles — in order to avoid an imaginary one.”</p>
<p>The doom merchants aim to shove radical economy-wrecking prescriptions down our throats by parading before us their version of the plagues &#8211; draught, intense rain storms, floods, fires, pestilence, very warm temperatures and very cold temperatures, all of which they attribute to human-caused climate change. The idea that some natural events may be random occurrences in a universe that far transcends human activity is foreign to the climate change fundamentalists who believe that Mother Earth itself is anthropomorphic.</p>
<p>One problem that the climate change fundamentalists have in persuading the rest of us the sky is falling is that they keep changing their explanations.  For example, the catchphrase “global warming” was rebranded as “climate change” when their computer models could not account for the fact that average atmospheric temperatures have risen little since 1998.</p>
<p>There are intellectually honest scientists in climatology who are willing to admit something is going on that the computer models may have missed.  “A few years ago you saw the hiatus, but it could be dismissed because it was well within the noise,” said Gabriel Vecchi, a climate scientist at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, New Jersey. “Now it’s something to explain.”</p>
<p>However, the climate change fundamentalists rationalize that looking at ten or fifteen year trend lines is a waste of time. “If you are interested in global climate change, your main focus ought to be on timescales of 50 to 100 years,” said Susan Solomon, a climate scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. Nevertheless, the fundamentalists want it both ways.  Now they tell us that every unusual day-to-day weather phenomenon is a result of human-caused climate change.</p>
<p>Another problem for the climate change fundamentalists is that many of their prior doomsday predictions have not come true. In 1972, for example, Arctic specialist Bernt Balchen was reported in the Christian Science Monitor as predicting that a general warming trend over the North Pole “may produce an ice-free Arctic Ocean by the year 2,000.”</p>
<p>Al Gore, one of the original climate change prophets of doom, predicted in 2008 that the entire North Polar Ice Cap would be completely ice free in five years.</p>
<p>While the Arctic Sea ice extent has declined, it has far from disappeared. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, “Arctic sea ice extent for April 2014 was 14.14 million square kilometers (5.46 million square miles). This is 610,000 square kilometers (236,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average extent, and 270,000 square kilometers (104,000 square miles) above the record April monthly low, which occurred in 2007.”</p>
<p>Here is another dire prediction that did not quite come to pass. Michael Oppenheimer, the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs in the Woodrow Wilson School and the Department of Geosciences at Princeton University, predicted in a book of his published in 1990: “[By] 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots … [By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.”</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.weather.com/sports-rec/weather-ventures/lightning-time-lapse-photo-platte-river-20140513">Platte River in Nebraska has not dried up</a>, and the continent-wide black blizzard and computer shut downs have not materialized.</p>
<p>Moreover, the hyperbolic rhetoric we hear from climate change fundamentalists does not correspond with what we observe around us ourselves, nor with some relevant empirical data.</p>
<p>For example, the Obama administration recently released its National Climate Assessment. It gave several examples of what it claimed to be the drastically worsening effects of human- caused climate change during the last fifty years, stating that “Americans are noticing changes all around them.” Two such examples we are purportedly seeing play out in extreme weather aberrations right now according to the Obama administration’s Assessment:  “Winters are generally shorter and warmer. Rain comes in heavier downpours…large increases in heavy precipitation have occurred in the Northeast, Midwest, and Great Plains where heavy downpours have frequently led to runoff that exceeded the capacity of storm drains and levees, and caused flooding events and accelerated erosion.”</p>
<p>People who shivered in Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri, during one of the ten coldest winters in those states since records were kept, would probably not agree with the Obama administration’s description of shorter, warmer winters. Indeed, large parts of the United States just experienced one of the longest and coldest winters in forty years. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported that overall, for the winter period from December 2013 through February 2014, the “contiguous U.S. experienced much drier and colder than average winter that ranked ninth driest and 34th coldest on record.”  Those records go back to 1895.</p>
<p>As for rainfall, we are certainly experiencing heavy downpours of rain. But this is not a phenomenon that has sprung up only in the last fifty years.</p>
<p>Anecdotally, the most destructive river flood in the history of the United States, which began with extremely heavy rains in the central basin of the Mississippi in the summer of 1926, was the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927. This occurred more than seventy-five years ago, well outside the most recent fifty year period in which human activity supposedly created the weather conditions of very heavy precipitation and floods cited by the Obama administration’s National Climate Assessment as evidence of accelerating human-caused climate change here and now.  If the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 is not considered far enough back in time to put the Obama administration’s Assessment findings in perspective, then consider the Johnstown Flood Of 1889. More than eight inches of rain fell in less than a one day period, resulting in a flood that took more than 2000 lives.</p>
<p>As for empirical data, the following is a chart prepared by NOAA which shows the percentage of the land area of the contiguous 48 states that experienced much greater than normal precipitation in any given year starting with 1895, which means it scored 2.0 or above on the annual Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI). The thicker orange line shows a nine-year weighted average that smoothes out some of the year-to-year fluctuations.</p>
<p>The biggest spike was in 1940. The years 1910 and 2000 were nearly equal in terms of the percentage of land area of the contiguous 48 states that experienced much greater than normal precipitation. There is no discernible accelerating upward trend line in the last fifty years.</p>
<div id="attachment_225848" style="width: 460px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/figure2.png"><img class="size-medium wp-image-225848 " alt="figure2" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/figure2-450x324.png" width="450" height="324" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Data source: NOAA, 2013</p></div>
<p>None of this is to deny that human activity worldwide contributes to climate change via the cumulative impact of human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. The questions to be debated are the extent and imminence of the problem, as well as the best measures to deal with the problem without wrecking our economy in the process. This is where the climate change fundamentalists become unglued. They do not want a policy debate. They want immediate action on their terms. Anyone questioning their dogma is blackballed.</p>
<p>For example, a paper written by an eminent climate change researcher Professor Lennart Bengtsson and four other scientists, which challenged the basis for predictions regarding the speed of global warming, was recently rejected for publication in a scientific journal because it was said to be “less than helpful.” Professor Bengtsson, an author of over 200 papers and former director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology which has contributed to United Nations reports on climate change, was harassed for daring to question the received dogma. He said: &#8220;I have been put under such an enormous group pressure in recent days from all over the world that has become virtually unbearable to me. If this is going to continue I will be unable to conduct my normal work and will even start to worry about my health and safety. It is a situation that reminds me about the time of McCarthy.”</p>
<p>Through their excommunication of serious-minded scientists who dare to raise questions and their increasingly strident and dogmatic proclamations, the climate change fundamentalists are turning into Cassandras whose prophesies are being tuned out by the public. Sadly, they drown out more reasonable voices who can contribute positively to the public’s understanding of the multiple dimensions of climate change and sensible solutions.</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/joseph-klein/the-climate-change-fundamentalists-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>102</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why the Left Will Never Abandon &#8216;Global Warming’</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/jack-kerwick/why-the-left-will-never-abandon-global-warming/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-the-left-will-never-abandon-global-warming</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/jack-kerwick/why-the-left-will-never-abandon-global-warming/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2014 04:40:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jack Kerwick]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intergovernmental panel on climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=224033</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A look at the mother of all issues for the lovers of Big Government.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/ClimateChange.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-224037" alt="ClimateChange" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/ClimateChange-450x318.jpg" width="315" height="223" /></a>It won’t surprise readers of this column to learn that the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCG) insists that unless “global warming” is addressed, the planet promises to suffer all manner of evil.   Courtesy of “coastal flooding” and “storm surges,” “urban populations” especially are susceptible to “the risk of death, injury, and disrupted livelihoods [.]”</p>
<p>To a <i>far </i>greater extent than any other issue, that of Global Warming reveals what makes the leftist mind tick.</p>
<p>That the leftist aches from the very marrow of his being for the consolidation of power and authority in a central government is a no-brainer.  While there are <i>ways</i> in which governments <i>use</i> their power to which he objects, the leftist has never known a limit on <i>the amount</i> of power at a government’s disposal with which he could rest comfortably.</p>
<p>So, the leftist has always wanted Big Government.  And this insatiable lust for unlimited government is inseparable from his disdain for the nation-state and its concomitant “nationalism”: national boundaries impose a <i>limit </i>on the extent to which government can expand.  The logic of Big Government has a life all of its own, pointing beyond the nations in which it takes root toward the rest of the planet.  It is self-perpetuating, much like a disease that can’t desist from moving from host to host until it dies.</p>
<p>There is no issue short of a conflict with an extraterrestrial race that better serves the global aspirations of Big Government than that of Global Warming.</p>
<p>The conservative philosopher Michael Oakeshott contrasts two fundamentally different models of a modern (“nation”) state.  On the one hand, modern states have been looked upon as “civil associations,” associations of human beings doing their own thing and bound together by nothing more or less than the law.  The latter, in turn, doesn’t tell associates <i>what </i>they must do, but only <i>how </i>they must do, or refrain from doing, whatever it is that they <i>choose </i>to do.  Since laws are not policies designed to bring to fruition some grand master plan or vision for the nation, government, from this perspective, is not visionary or activist.</p>
<p>Rather, government serves the function of an umpire or a referee: it exists solely to ensure that the rules (laws) of the association are observed by all of its members.</p>
<p>Modern states have also been thought of as “<i>enterprise</i> associations.”  The government of an enterprise association is visionary, activist.  It <i>leads</i> by <i>policy; </i>it doesn’t <i>rule </i>by <i>law.  </i>The members of an enterprise association are not related to one another as one law-abider to another, but as “joint-enterprisers,” comrades-in-arms, fellow-travelers.</p>
<p>“Global Warming” is made for the idea of the state-as-enterprise association.</p>
<p>Even <i>war</i>, the stuff of which collectivist dreams are made, isn’t quite as amenable to the lover of Big Government as is Global Warming.  War insures the centralization of power and the transformation of government into an agent of activism.  However, from the perspective of the leftist, the zealot of Big Government, war—because it always pits one actor <i>against</i> another—exacerbates “nationalism” and, thus, actually <i>limits </i>the growth of government.</p>
<p>Global Warming is another proposition altogether.  The term “Global Warming,” far from being descriptive, is chock-full of imagery of death and destruction of epic proportions.  The term is what logicians since Aristotle have referred to as an “appeal to force,” a rhetorical device designed to at once circumvent rational argumentation and <i>coerce</i> people into bending to the will of its apologists.  It is the secular equivalent of Hell or Armageddon in both the images that it calls to mind as well as the uses (i.e. the instillation of fear and the consolidation of power) to which it is put.  Like Hell or Armageddon, there is no one that is safe from its clutches—unless they turn to, not Almighty <i>God, </i>but Almighty <i>Government. </i></p>
<p>And since Global Warming is, well, global, it provides the golden opportunity for the governments of the world to either join forces or synthesize with one another.</p>
<p>In the process, national sovereignty and individual liberty will be relegated to the dustbin of history.</p>
<p>Global Warming is the gift that keeps on giving to the leftist.  This is why he will never give it up.</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 href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/jack-kerwick/why-the-left-will-never-abandon-global-warming/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>87</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Black Book of the American Left</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/theodore-dalrymple/the-black-book-of-the-american-left/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-black-book-of-the-american-left</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/theodore-dalrymple/the-black-book-of-the-american-left/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2013 05:55:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Theodore Dalrymple]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Black Book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Collection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Horowitz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Progressives]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=213422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[David Horowitz's new collection unveils the heart of progressive darkness. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/tbb.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-213426" alt="tbb" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/tbb.jpg" width="300" height="454" /></a><strong>To order David Horowitz&#8217;s &#8220;<em>The Black Book of the American Left, Volume I: My Life And Times,&#8221; </em><a href="https://secure.donationreport.com/productlist.html?key=DBERMFBVMXYH">click here</a>.</strong></p>
<p>Ever since Stéphane Courtois published his <em>The Black Book of Communism</em>, there has been a deluge of black books, particularly in France, where the latest is that of Vichy. David Horowitz’s <em>Black Book</em> is that of the American left, which he charges – with a great deal of cumulative evidence – of equivocation towards, support for and outright complicity with the Soviet Union. Ignorance of the horrors of Soviet rule was not an excuse, because the horrors were known and documented from the very first, and for decades the left preferred to ignore the facts than abandon its fantasies. And although the American left was not responsible for much violence in America itself, there was hardly any revolutionary violence that to which it did not provide aid and comfort, repeating its original <em>sin ad nuaseam</em>. In the process it rewrote its own history as assiduously and dishonestly as Stalin wrote his.</p>
<p>It is against the attempt by intellectuals to disconnect the ideas that their words express and the deeds that those ideas have inspired, condoned or encouraged, that David Horowitz has written for a quarter of a century. He has focused his powerful guns on the American left for two reasons, the first personal and the second sociological, though in fact in his case the two reasons are inextricably linked. First he himself was a member of the left for much of his youth and early adulthood, and second leftist ideas of various stripes were and remain predominant in academia and among the intelligentsia.</p>
<p>He was a red diaper baby, that is to say the child of ‘orthodox’ communist parents, but by the time he came to young adulthood the Soviet Union was no longer plausibly the hope of the world. However, Horowitz did not at that stage want to throw the baby out with the diapers, and therefore helped to found the New Left. Unfortunately, the internal logic of its socialist beliefs led it to support or make excuses for totalitarian regimes such as Castro’s, just as the previous generation of orthodox communists had done. It also indulged in what would have been comic operetta revolutionism had it not been for the extreme criminal nastiness of the acts which it excused, condoned, concealed or perpetrated.</p>
<p>Horowitz’s essays collected here, written over twenty-five years, are dedicated to demonstrating that this leftism was not an ‘infantile disorder,’ to quote Lenin, or a mild and mostly harmless childhood illness like mumps, but more usually like a chronic condition with lingering after-effects and flare-ups. Those who suffered it only very rarely got over it fully, the late Christopher Hitchens being a good example of one who did not. He, Hitchens, could never bring himself to admit that he had for all his life admired and extolled a man who was at least as bad as Stalin, namely Trotsky; and his failure to renounce his choice of maître à penser became in time not just a youthful peccadillo of a clever adolescent who wanted to shock the adults but a symptom of a deep character flaw, a fundamental indifference to important truth. With the exception of Hitchens, for whom he has a soft spot and to whom in my opinion he is over-indulgent, Horowitz does not want any of the leftists to get away with it by rewriting not only history but their own biographies.</p>
<p>There is inevitably some repetition in collection. There are also things with which one might disagree: it is far too categorical, for example, to state that up to 100,000,000 people have died of malaria as a result of the ban on the use of DDT. I think the author greatly underestimates the strength of possible conservative objection, both on grounds of moral justification and practical effects, to the second Gulf War (though he admits that not all those who objected to it were motivated by American self-hating animus). He does not identify the real source of dangerous Islamism in most of the west, namely Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which play double games if ever such double games were played, and which are not mentioned by him.</p>
<p>He is very good on the guerrilla movements in Latin America, which far from being the spontaneous and justified expression of a downtrodden peasantry, as was the received wisdom among western intellectuals at the time of those movements’ apogee, were the products of rapidly expanding numbers of university students led by leftist intellectuals. The Guatemalan guerrilla group, ORPA, for example, was led by the son of the then sole Guatemalan Nobel Prize Winner, the novelist Miguel Ángel Asturias. The worst of them all, Peru’s Sendero Luminoso, was led by a university professor of philosophy, Abimael Guzmán, who very nearly became Peru’s Pol Pot. Just as American leftist intellectuals ceased to be interested in Indochina the moment American troops left, so the fate of Central America ceased to interest them once there was no possibility that utopian leftist regimes would be established in them. Their interest in far-flung places was only as a screen upon which they could project their own psychodrama.</p>
<p>It is on the psychological reasons for eschatological leftism that Horowitz is best. Eschatological leftists, rather than genuine liberals, or for that matter eschatological nationalists or religious fanatics, are not interested in righting this or that individual wrong, reforming this or that defective institution; they aim at resetting the terms and limits of human existence itself. They are like doctors who, instead of wanting to cure illness, want to abolish death. They dream of an existence in which there are no frustrations, no contradictory desires, no conflicting interests. For them anything less than root and branch change is but a sticking plaster over a gaping wound, and anyone who enjoys the present moment is deficient in compassion for those who are not in a position to do so. The only permissible enjoyment is in fighting the good fight.</p>
<p>Why? What is the gaping wound that they want to heal? It is the transitoriness of human life to which, in the absence of religious belief, they cannot reconcile themselves, the life that Macbeth says is full of sound and fury that signifies nothing. They seek in political action that transcendence that would assure them that their lives in fact have significance; and since the problem is a metaphysical one that will never be solved, victory over eschatological political belief, of whatsoever kind, is never final or even very lasting. Indeed, as things get materially better chiliasm grows stronger, for people have greater leisure to dwell upon their dissatisfactions.</p>
<p>Horowitz’s reflections on this problem, both obvious and revelatory, are for me the best thing in these volumes, and express very succinctly why conservatism, at least of the kind that I favour, is an attitude to life rather than a doctrine:</p>
<blockquote><p>It became clear to me that the world was not going to be changed into anything very different… from what it had been. On this earth there would be no kingdom of freedom where swords would be turned into plowshares and lions would lie down with lambs. It should have been obvious when I began. Many things change but people do not. Otherwise how could Shakespeare, or writers more ancient, capture in their creations a reality that we recognize, and that still moves us today?</p></blockquote>
<p>He continues:</p>
<blockquote><p>These revelations had a humbling effect. They took my attention away from noble fantasies that had enveloped me and forced me to focus on my ordinary existence; to see how common it was; how un-heroic, ordinary and unredeemed. The revelations that shattered my faith allowed me, for the first time, to look at my mortality… I was going to die like everyone else, and be forgotten.</p></blockquote>
<p>Horowitz then realized that his political fantasies were a way of ‘averting [my] eyes from this ordinary fact.’ And ‘who would want to hear the voice of a future that was only calling them to oblivion?’</p>
<p>The leftism that Horowitz wants to combat, then, is religious, but without a god and without beauty. His short essay, A Political Romance, reminds me of the words of Joseph Conrad:</p>
<blockquote><p>I felt in my heart that the further one ventures the better one understands how everything in our life is common, short and empty; that it is in ‘seeking’ the unknown in our sensations that we discover how mediocre are our attempts and how soon defeated!</p></blockquote>
<p>*</p>
<p><em>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>David Horowitz</strong> discussing <a href="https://secure.donationreport.com/productlist.html?key=DBERMFBVMXYH">The Black Book of the American Left</a> in <strong>The Glazov Gang&#8217;s</strong> two-part video series below:</em><br />
<b></b></p>
<p><strong>Part I:</strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/QL9WUvnJ_Cs" height="315" width="460" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Part II:</strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/eeN2K6romr8" height="315" width="460" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>To sign up for </strong><em><b>The Glazov Gang</b></em><strong>: </strong><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><b>Click here</b></a><strong>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/theodore-dalrymple/the-black-book-of-the-american-left/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What If Islamists Took Control of the White House?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/howard-rotberg/what-if-islamists-took-control-of-the-white-house/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=what-if-islamists-took-control-of-the-white-house</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/howard-rotberg/what-if-islamists-took-control-of-the-white-house/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2013 05:10:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Howard Rotberg]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[take over]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=211561</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What agenda would an Islamist U.S. president pursue?  ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/wh.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-211564" alt="wh" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/wh.jpg" width="275" height="183" /></a>Dear me, I worry so much about the future of our freedoms in the West, as so many begin to “submit” to the values and demands of radical Islam, or what is called “Islamism.”</p>
<p>The other day, I began to worry what would happen if the Islamists took over the American government and placed one of their own in the White House.</p>
<p>I started to think about the agenda that an Islamist president would fulfill.   Here are some of my thoughts:</p>
<p>[1] He would make it clear that the American Constitution and the history of American freedoms were no more exemplary than the history of Islam.   He would argue that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition.   Instead, he would say, they overlap and share common principles.  He would be clear in his moral equivalence between America and the totalitarian Islamic regimes.   He might go so far as to say the “common principles” were justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.   And if he got away with comparing the American justice system and the tolerance of most Americans with the totalitarian justice systems of the Islamic states and with comparing American tolerance to the intolerance of peoples who riot and kill if they think political cartoons are offensive, then he would go further:  He would assure everyone that it is <i>Islam</i> that has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibility of religious tolerance and racial equality.   If the American people were too stupid to know about the persecution of Christians and Jews in Muslim countries (including the often-ignored fact of nearly a million Jews being expelled from Arab countries in the ‘40s and ‘50s), then that would just make his task all the easier.</p>
<p>[2] He would as quickly as possible give out important awards, like the Medal of Freedom, to those complicit with the goals of radical Islam, who head NGOs and United Nations bodies that support the notion that the Israelis are the new Nazis and the Palestinians are the new Jews.   And he would announce such awards on a date of symbolic significance to the Jews – Tisha B’Av, the historic day of mourning for the loss of the Jewish temples and the occurrence of other national tragedies, so that the Jews knew that he was putting them in their place, for the sooner they got the message, the better.</p>
<p>[3] He would make a quick symbolic snub to Eastern Europe so as to emphasize that the quid pro quo for Russian support of Islamists (outside the former U.S.S.R only, of course) would be the removal of defensive missiles from Poland.   He would drive home the point by not informing the Poles very much ahead of the announcement and would make the announcement on September 17, 2009, which everyone in Central Europe knew was the 60th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland, followed by the annexation of eastern Poland to the USSR.   This would be another important symbolic act to show how in the future the world would be divided between radical Islam, Russia and China.</p>
<p>[4] To further the goals of Radical Islam, the U.S. must be dramatically weakened from the inside, including its once strong and proud economy.  He would have to create unheard of budget deficits.  He would make a budget that spends more than any other in history, creates the largest deficits in history and imposes the largest tax increases in history.  He would spend over a trillion dollars more each year than he took in, and would project a cumulative deficit within ten years of $14.29 trillion – more than the country’s GNP.  That way, the U.S. would end up being owned by China and other foreign lenders and the American people would be so preoccupied with their economic woes, and his governments lies about the terms of a socialized medical system, there would be little regard paid to the increasing rate of Islamification of its culture and freedoms.</p>
<p>[5] Any captured terrorists would be given civilian trials, with the same constitutional rights as American citizens, rather than giving them military trials like enemy soldiers receive.   This would show that Islamic terrorists are really the same as American citizens and would make it difficult to secure convictions.  It would also make it difficult to keep anti-terrorist measures secret, because they would be subject to pre-trial discovery of civilian trials.</p>
<p>[6] He would change many of the terms that are meant to suggest American values are superior to Islamic values.  He would downplay any sense that America is at war with radical Islam.  In fact, he would avoid using the term &#8220;Global War on Terror&#8221; [GWOT] and instead use &#8220;Overseas Contingency Operation.”</p>
<p>[7] He would refer to any terrorists that kill dozens of Americans on American soil not as “terrorists” or “murderers” or “agents of Islamism” but as mere “extremists” – making such killers no more evil than, say, right-wing Republicans.   He would not do anything to stop Islamists infiltrating the American military.</p>
<p>[8] He would assure Americans that acts of terrorism that obviously should be caught by American authorities, were in fact business as usual, and if he was on vacation during such incidents, he would not bother to return to work. That would show that not only were the terrorists winning but that was entirely normal.</p>
<p>[9] He would appoint an Iranian-born political associate without any special military, security or nuclear knowledge to be put in charge of secret negotiations with Iran and then pretend to make a deal with Iran to stop its nuclear weapon program (which nuclear weapons Iran has been promising since 1996 would be used against Israel, and even a few days before the deal was made, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, who really rules Iran, said that the Jews of Israel “cannot be called humans, they are like animals, some of them” and that Israel was “the rabid dog of the region&#8221;). He would, in an act of appeasement that was Chamberlain-like, make an agreement that allowed Iran to keep all its centrifuges and proceed to make its nukes, with the sanctions that have finally begun to bite being eased in return for nothing at all.    He would allow the Parchin site and other secret military installation to be out of sight of the inspectors, allow for the possibility of “dirty bombs” using nuclear material probably through its terrorist arm, Hezbollah, allow it to keep up its production of centrifuges, and boost its stock of 3.5 percent enriched uranium, thereby accumulating enough material to enhance its capacity for producing enough weapons-grade uranium to break through to a nuclear bomb rapidly enough to defy detection by the IAEA or Western intelligence until it is too late.</p>
<p>[10] He would make it clear that Israel would be on its own (at least up until an Iranian first strike nuclear attack killed an estimated 200,000 Israelis) and he would delay the delivery of “bunker busting” bombs promised to be sold to Israel.  He would also delay delivery of helicopters and other military hardware so as to pressure Israel to do nothing in the face of a threatened nuclear war.</p>
<p>[11] He would have his secretary of state warn Israel that unless it gave into demands from a terrorist entity that teaches its children hatred and violence, Israel would end up with a Third Intifada, which presumably would be Israel’s fault.</p>
<p>[12] He would make Israel the object of his demands, and demand nothing from Arab countries or the Palestinians.  He would try to stop all Israeli settlement even within established cities, if they were on “disputed” lands.    He would thus create a situation where the Palestinians had no interest in compromise, since all demands were only made on the Israelis.</p>
<p>[13] He would befriend radical Islamist professors and Americans with records of terrorist violence against American institutions, so young Americans would know who he deemed worthy of the respect inherent in friendship, and they would understand the way of the future.</p>
<p>[14] He would make it clear that the only “radical” part of Islam is Al Qaeda, and therefore there is no threat to America from any other Muslims, who after all, as pointed out in point one above, are tolerant and followers of justice just like all Americans.</p>
<p>[15] He would court the Muslim Brotherhood, support it in Egypt and elsewhere, and allow its operatives to participate at the highest levels of American government.</p>
<p>Oh, dear.  I think we have a problem.</p>
<p><i>Howard Rotberg is a Canadian writer.  His latest book is TOLERism:  The Ideology Revealed.   He is also President of publisher Mantua Books  (www.mantuabooks.com).</i></p>
<p>*</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>Josh Brewster&#8217;s</strong> video interview with <strong>Jamie Glazov</strong> about why the Obama administration reaches its hand out in solidarity to America&#8217;s adversaries:</p>
<p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/SNJg6w6CB0o" height="315" width="560" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="/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/howard-rotberg/what-if-islamists-took-control-of-the-white-house/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>77</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Radicalism of Michelle Obama</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-blumer/the-radicalism-of-michelle-obama/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-radicalism-of-michelle-obama</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-blumer/the-radicalism-of-michelle-obama/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2013 04:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Blumer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michelle Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racist]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=201375</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A controversial history exposed. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Michelle-Obama.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-201423" alt="Michelle Obama" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Michelle-Obama.jpg" width="280" height="210" /></a></p>
<p><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">Like Bill Clinton&#8217;s female counterpart Hillary, Michelle Obama is arguably more radical in her outlook than her husband. Leon Puissegur <a href="http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/08/the-radical-racist-background-of-michelle-obama-were-not-talking-about-barack/#ixzz2cQeK03NI">at Freedom Outpost </a>is in the midst of compiling what can be gleaned from Mrs. Obama&#8217;s light historical footprint, and what he has compiled from her younger days is illuminating.</span></b></p>
<p>More recently, Mrs. Obama&#8217;s February 2008 reaction to her husband&#8217;s breakout performance in the Democratic primaries may have been the most direct window into her soul we will ever see.</p>
<p>Her husband Barack&#8217;s presidential candidacy had turned an important corner earlier that month. He outperformed rival Hillary Clinton in a slew of contests on February 5 and 12, establishing a significant lead in Democratic Convention delegates and a clear perception of unstoppable momentum. To Mrs. Clinton&#8217;s chagrin, the &#8220;first black president&#8221; was in the process of completely trumping the &#8220;first woman president.&#8221;</p>
<p>So what emotions should one have expected from Michelle, a seasoned political spouse, once it was evident that her husband had just become the favorite to win the Democratic Party&#8217;s presidential nomination? Positivity, excitement, and optimism, of course.</p>
<p>But that&#8217;s not what we saw.</p>
<p>Instead, she acted as if some — but far from all — of the weight of over a quarter century of misery had been lifted from her shoulders &#8212; not once, <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/02/michelle-obam-1-2/">but twice </a>in the same day:</p>
<blockquote><p>Speaking in Milwaukee, Wisconsin today, would-be First Lady Michelle Obama said, &#8220;for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.&#8221;</p>
<p>Then in Madison, she said, &#8220;For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Michelle Obama has been an adult since her eighteenth birthday on <a href="http://www.biography.com/people/michelle-obama-307592?page=1">January 17, 1982</a>.</p>
<p>The second statement, moving from &#8220;I&#8217;m proud&#8221; to &#8220;I&#8217;m really proud,&#8221; looks like a reluctant and impotent attempt, especially <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGjR81pFJI4">when seen on video</a>, to water down the first.</p>
<p>Despite her Madison protestation, Mrs. Obama&#8217;s newfound pride was almost definitely short-lived and, to the extent that it ever existed, completely about her husband&#8217;s success. It was not at all about &#8220;hope,&#8221; or what it might have said about America&#8217;s willingness to consider a presidential candidate regardless of his or her color.</p>
<p>An early March 2008 <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/03/10/080310fa_fact_collins?currentPage=all">New Yorker magazine article</a>, &#8220;The Other Obama: Michelle Obama and the politics of candor,&#8221; exposed the self-adopted strident tone of Mrs. Obama&#8217;s stump speeches:</p>
<blockquote><p>Obama begins with a broad assessment of life in America in 2008, and life is not good: we’re a divided country, we’re a country that is “just downright mean,” we are “guided by fear,” we’re a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. “We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day,” she said, as heads bobbed in the pews. “Folks are just jammed up, and it’s gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I’m young. Forty-four!”</p>
<p>&#8230; “The life that I’m talking about that most people are living has gotten progressively worse since I was a little girl. . . . So if you want to pretend like there was some point over the last couple of decades when your lives were easy, I want to meet you!”</p></blockquote>
<p>Collins importantly noted that Mrs. Obama composed the speech herself, delivering it &#8220;without notes&#8221; — and, it would appear, without a teleprompter.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s very little chance that Mrs. Obama&#8217;s pride lasted. One does not suddenly get past such a repeated display of open contempt for America and the everyday people who live in it and permanently find pride simply because your husband is on a political hot streak.</p>
<p>Michelle Obama&#8217;s long-term and still-existing shortage of pride originates in a deep-seated belief that America remains, in the words of leading black socialist <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornel_West">Cornel West</a>, &#8220;a &#8216;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornel_West#Views_on_race_in_the_United_States">racist patriarchal</a>&#8216; nation where white supremacy continues to define everyday life.&#8221;</p>
<p>In 1984, while an undergraduate student at Princeton, then-Michelle Robinson <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/10/30/a-detailed-look-at-obamas-radical-college-past-and-were-not-talking-about-barack/">promoted and attended </a>&#8220;a &#8216;Black Solidarity&#8217; event for guest lecturer Manning Marable, who at the time was, according to West, probably &#8216;the best known black Marxist in the country.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>Her <a href="http://obamaprincetonthesis.wordpress.com/">1985 thesis </a>buys into the harmful belief of 1960s black radicals Stokely Carmichael and Charles Hamilton that &#8220;Before a group can enter the open society, it must close ranks.&#8221; The problem is that once groupthink dominates, philosophical separation from the rest of society almost never goes away.</p>
<p>Michelle was married to Barack Obama in 1992 at the Rev. Jeremiah Wright&#8217;s Trinity United Church of Christ. Wright is best known for saying less than a decade later that America, based on its history of &#8220;terrorism,&#8221; <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=208t80uceSg">deserved what happened to it </a>in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. He <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzuOOshpddM">invoked Malcolm X </a>as he said that &#8220;America&#8217;s chickens are coming home to roost.&#8221;</p>
<p>Less visible but even more crucial is Wright&#8217;s belief in the &#8220;American/European Rhetorical Ethic,&#8221; which states the following:</p>
<blockquote><p>Rhetorical ethic is the hypocritical exercise of white supremacy used to service the same. It sets laws that are only to be adhered to by others. But if those laws or structures get in the way of white supremacist actions of power, they will not apply. Such is the history and current state of this American government.</p></blockquote>
<p>In broader terms, the ethic sees the law as an artificial construct only to be applied to the powerless and which can safely be ignored by the powerful. Now that they&#8217;re in power, it&#8217;s interesting how operating above the law — &#8220;the hypocritical exercise of leftist supremacy,&#8221; if you will — seems to be the guiding philosophy of Barack Obama&#8217;s presidential administration.</p>
<p>When the spoken and written statements of Wright and other TUCC clerics threatened to derail Obama&#8217;s 2008 general election campaign, the Obamas chose to resign. Even though the resignation letter&#8217;s text was written in first person singular, its lead signature, conveniently <a href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/05/31/breaking-obama-quits-trinity-united-church-of-christ/">released on a Saturday evening</a>, was Michelle&#8217;s. The resignation letter made sure not to reject Wright&#8217;s &#8220;theology,&#8221; which when broken down was essentially <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/03/20/31079/obamas-church-pushes-controversial.html#.UhOtbGT3IhY">Black Liberation Theology </a>tinged with bitter, delusional attacks on &#8220;<a href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/04/11/quote-of-the-day-among-rev-jeremiah-wrights-ten-essential-facts-about-the-united-states/">white supremacy</a>.&#8221;</p>
<p>Though she has largely restrained herself since her husband assumed the presidency, there&#8217;s little evidence to support the notion that Michelle Obama&#8217;s core beliefs have changed. Unless we see otherwise, the default assumption should be: Once a far leftist, always a far leftist.</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/tom-blumer/the-radicalism-of-michelle-obama/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>95</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CAIR Leader Runs for New York City Council</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-j-rusin/cair-leader-runs-for-new-york-city-council-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=cair-leader-runs-for-new-york-city-council-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-j-rusin/cair-leader-runs-for-new-york-city-council-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 04:25:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David J. Rusin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CAIR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Zead Ramadan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=175906</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Zead Ramadan eyes a bigger platform from which to promote his Islamist agenda.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/david-j-rusin/cair-leader-runs-for-new-york-city-council-2/zaed-ramadan-2/" rel="attachment wp-att-175908"><img class="wp-image-175908 alignleft" title="Zaed-Ramadan" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Zaed-Ramadan.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="209" /></a>Zead Ramadan, <a href="http://www.cair-ny.org/page/staff_and_board.html">board president</a> of the <a href="http://www.cair-ny.org/">New York chapter</a> of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (<a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6176">CAIR</a>), is eyeing a <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/uptown/ramadan-underway-wash-hts-article-1.1248316">bigger platform</a> from which to promote his Islamist agenda: a seat on the New York City Council. If he prevails, the city that endured 9/11 will count among its lawmakers a senior official in an organization linked to the financing of terrorists and intent on frustrating law enforcement efforts to foil the next jihad plot.</p>
<p>A Democrat and <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/mancb12/html/about/members.shtml">member</a> of <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/mancb12/html/home/home.shtml">Community Board 12</a>, one of 59 local <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/cau/html/cb/about.shtml">representative bodies</a> serving neighborhoods across New York, Ramadan has formally <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/uptown/ramadan-underway-wash-hts-article-1.1248316">announced his candidacy</a> to succeed the term-limited <a href="http://council.nyc.gov/d7/html/members/home.shtml">Robert Jackson</a> in northern Manhattan’s <a href="http://council.nyc.gov/d7/html/members/map.shtml">District 7</a>. He has gotten off to a quick start in <a href="http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2013/01/25/city-council-race-mark-levine-and-zead-ramadan-leaders-amount-campaign-funding">fundraising</a> and an even quicker start in playing the victim card, no doubt hoping to preempt criticism of his association with CAIR. “Ready 2 get attacked 4 my faith but I am not first or last,” Ramadan <a href="https://twitter.com/Zead4NYC/status/290533827758141440">tweeted</a> on January 13.</p>
<div id="adWrapper1"></div>
<p>The opening salvo was a January 2 <a href="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2013/01/7052857/zead-ramadan-president-cair-ny-braces-city-council-run">article</a> by Azi Paybarah, published at <a href="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/">CapitalNewYork.com</a>. Relaying Ramadan’s description of himself as a “lightning rod,” the piece explains that he “has been a frequent target of local anti-Muslim commentators, and several times during the interview Ramadan predicted opponents of CAIR would turn their attention to his campaign,” because “CAIR has been a frequent target of Republicans and conservatives, who accuse it of being tolerant of terrorism, or worse.” Paybarah’s <a href="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2013/01/7112291/were-going-obama-style-bill-lynch-council-candidate-zead-ramadan">follow-up report</a> states that “CAIR, a civil-rights group, says it exists in part as an antidote to radicalism, and condemns terrorism and religious violence.” A more thorough journalist would have mentioned that “CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists,” in the <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/542.pdf#page=58">words</a> of <a id="_GPLITA_1" title="Click to Continue &gt; by Text-Enhance" href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/david-j-rusin/cair-leader-runs-for-new-york-city-council/#">federal</a> prosecutors; that CAIR was listed as an <a href="http://www.nysun.com/national/islamic-groups-named-in-hamas-funding-case/55778/">unindicted co-conspirator</a> in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation (<a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6181">HLF</a>), whose leaders were <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2008/nov/25/nation/na-muslim-charity25">convicted</a> of funneling money to Hamas; that a federal judge, citing “ample evidence” of CAIR’s ties to HLF and Hamas, <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/1425.pdf#page=15">upheld the designation</a>; and that the FBI <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/985/fbi-cuts-off-cair-over-hamas-questions">ended outreach activities</a> with CAIR as a result. Of course, these inconvenient facts might have ruined the witch-hunt narrative.</p>
<p>Paybarah <a href="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2013/01/7052857/zead-ramadan-president-cair-ny-braces-city-council-run">emphasizes</a> the Arab-Israeli conflict and the “politics in staunchly pro-Israel New York,” assuring readers that Ramadan “said he wanted to avoid using his Council campaign to refocus the dialogue in New York on Middle East foreign affairs” and would not prioritize such issues if elected. “I can’t affect the Middle East problem,” Ramadan told him. “I’m not condemning anything, OK? You want me to condemn one side or the other in a one thousand, two thousand-year dispute, what are you, insane?”</p>
<p>This is not the only time that Ramadan has passed on an opportunity to denounce Hamas. “Sir, do you consider Hamas a terrorist organization?” asked an Investigative Project on Terrorism (<a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/">IPT</a>) reporter at a <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/3405/excerpt-from-committee-to-stop-fbi-repression">press conference</a> in 2011. After trying to change the subject to anti-jihad activist Pamela Geller, Ramadan offered nothing but bromides: “Islam, myself, and I think all people of conscience are opposed to all terrorism in all of its forms against all the people of the world. Anyone who is innocent that is killed, it’s not the way of the Islamic people or people of conscience or people who stand for liberty and justice. Thank you very much.” His evasiveness is consistent with CAIR’s long history of <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/969/cairs-silence-on-hamas">refusing to censure Hamas</a> by name. Further illuminating his sympathies, an IPT <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/3406/the-new-york-times-collaborates-with-hamas-front">article</a> reveals that “Ramadan <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/3401/excerpt-from-the-siege-continues-the-struggle">contributed $1,000</a> to <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/322.pdf">Viva Palestina</a>, an organization led by noted anti-Semite George Galloway, that supports Hamas financially and politically, in 2010.”</p>
<p>Though reticent to rebuke Hamas, Ramadan has no shortage of harsh words about life in the U.S. and sometimes disseminates them on Iranian-controlled Press TV, just as <a href="http://www.islamist-watch.org/blog/2011/07/cair-regularly-slams-america-on-iranian-tv">other CAIR figures</a> have done. Ramadan employed the following <a href="http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/05/14/241178/attacks-us-muslims-rise-election/">hyperbolic analogy</a> to peddle the Muslims-under-assault meme on the channel last year: “In Nazi Germany, they targeted the minority, the Jewish minority, and unfortunately it went from only philosophy to rhetoric to action. And that’s not where we want to go in America. I don’t think we’ll ever get there, but I don’t think we should allow the road to continue to be built towards that direction, because the comments that are being made against Muslims are very eerily echoing the comments that were made against Jews by Nazis.” During an earlier <a href="http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/168553.html">Press TV appearance</a>, he painted Congressman Peter King’s hearings on Muslim radicalization as “an attempt to demonize the Islamic faith” and downplayed the danger of Islamic terrorism, suggesting that Jews are as great a terrorist threat as Muslims. He <a href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/09/09/today-cair-spokesman-equates-ground-zero-mosque-protest-japanese-i">sparred with King</a> on NBC in 2010, likening resistance to the proposed Islamic center near Ground Zero to the internment of the Japanese, segregation, and slavery.</p>
<p>Ramadan has toed the <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2011/ryan-mauro/cair-vs-the-nypd-counter-terrorism-program/">CAIR party line</a> on the New York Police Department’s <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/anti-terror-program-new-york-safe-nypd-article-1.945717">surveillance program</a> to identify potentially violent radicals, <a href="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2013/01/7052857/zead-ramadan-president-cair-ny-braces-city-council-run">calling it</a> “f—ked up” for “basically equating Muslim with terrorism, which is outrageous.” He previously <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/nyregion/in-police-training-a-dark-film-on-us-muslims.html?pagewanted=all">chided the department</a> for its use of <em><a href="http://www.thethirdjihad.com/">The Third Jihad</a></em>, a documentary that exposes Islamism in America and is narrated by reformist Muslim <a href="http://aifdemocracy.org/about/staff/founder-president/">Zuhdi Jasser</a>. According to a 2011 CAIR <a href="http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?ArticleID=26733">news release</a>, “Ramadan compared <em>The Third Jihad</em> to past propaganda such as the Nazi-era film <em>Triumph of the Will</em> or <em>Birth of a Nation</em>, which vilified African-Americans.” As CAIR was <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/muslims-call-new-religious-freedom-appointee-a-puppet-for-islam-foes/2012/03/27/gIQAdH6meS_story.html">protesting</a> <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/3513/jasser-appointment-riles-islamists">Jasser’s</a> <a href="http://freebeacon.com/smearing-zuhdi-jasser/">appointment</a> to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom last spring, Ramadan penned a <a href="http://www.islamist-watch.org/documents/12239.jpg">Facebook post</a> smearing him as an “extremist” and asking, “Are David Duke and Pamela Geller on this panel too?”</p>
<p>Ramadan and CAIR-NY also participate in the <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/3496/islamists-rehash-canards-in-bashing-law">Islamist pushback</a> against vital FBI sting operations to nab budding terrorists. The aforementioned <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/3405/excerpt-from-committee-to-stop-fbi-repression">press conference</a> at which Ramadan ducked the Hamas query was arranged by the <a href="http://www.stopfbi.net/">Committee to Stop FBI Repression</a>. Additionally, CAIR-NY <a href="http://www.cair-ny.org/event/terros_factory_inside_the_fbi.html">co-hosted an event</a> with the author of <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Terror-Factory-Manufactured-Terrorism/dp/1935439618">The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War on Terrorism</a></em> at Columbia Law School on January 31. Attorney General Eric Holder <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/10/AR2010121007733.html">criticized</a> such rhetoric before a Muslim audience in 2010: “Those who characterize the FBI’s activities in this case as ‘entrapment’ simply do not have their facts straight — or do not have a full understanding of the law.”</p>
<p>Finally, Ramadan has overseen one of CAIR’s more radical branches. A CAIR-NY <a href="https://www.facebook.com/CAIRNewYork/posts/182673128505041">Facebook entry</a> from February 2012 “urges everyone to come out and support Dr. Aafia Siddiqui by attending her appeal for an unjust 86 yr jail sentence”; Siddiqui, a suspected al-Qaeda facilitator, was <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/pakistani-scientist-lady-al-qaeda-sentenced-86-years-prison-kill-u-s-soldiers-article-1.442926">found guilty</a> of trying to murder U.S. personnel in Afghanistan. Ramadan’s CAIR-NY <a href="http://www.cair-ny.org/page/staff_and_board.html">colleague</a> Cyrus McGoldrick infamously <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/joe-kaufman/cair-leader-mimics-hamas-in-calling-for-israels-destruction/">tweeted pro-Hamas messages</a>, <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/08/cyrus-mcgoldrick-of-hamas-linked-cair-calls-for-vandalism-of-afdi-pro-israel-ads.html">advocated</a> the <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/09/cyrus-mcgoldrick-of-hamas-linked-cair-applauds-mona-eltahawys-fascist-vandalism.html">destruction</a> of anti-jihad ads, and promised that “<a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/10/hamas-linked-cairs-cyrus-mcgoldrick-warns-snitches-theyll-blast-them.html">we’ll blast</a>” police informants, whom he branded as “<a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/12/hamas-linked-cair-thug-cyrus-mcgoldrick-again-threatens-snitches.html">snitches</a>”; he recently <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/joe-kaufman/cair-leader-calling-for-israels-destruction-leaves-organization/">left the group</a>, perhaps due to bad publicity. Furthermore, CAIR-NY <a href="http://www.cair-ny.org/page/staff_and_board.html">board member</a> Lamis Deek has <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/3489/cair-official-sees-nypd-cia-israeli-conspiracy">warned Muslims</a> of an “NYPD-CIA-Israeli alliance” out to get them and, upon the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/world/middleeast/mohamed-morsi-of-muslim-brotherhood-declared-as-egypts-president.html">election</a> of Islamist Mohamed Morsi as president of Egypt, <a href="https://twitter.com/Lamis_Deek/statuses/216762773084971008">praised</a> the supposed liberation from America’s “proxy-imperialist (colonialist) wrath.”</p>
<p>Notable on its own, Ramadan’s campaign also highlights the trend of American Muslims with Islamist track records seeking elected office. For instance, <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/711.pdf">Esam Omeish</a>, a former president of the Muslim American Society (<a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6263">MAS</a>), <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/542.pdf#page=58">described</a> by federal prosecutors as “the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America,” <a href="http://www.islamist-watch.org/1684/pro-muslim-brotherhood-candidate-eyes-public">pursued a seat</a> in the Virginia House of Delegates four years ago, but he <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/1294/omeish-campaign-crashes-in-va-primary">finished third</a> in the Democratic primary. Minnesota’s <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2158">Keith Ellison</a> has been more successful. A Democratic congressman since 2007, he regularly <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/1533/rep-keith-ellison-the-islamists-man-on-capitol">collaborates with CAIR</a> and similar groups; <a href="http://newsbusters.org/node/14103">saw parallels</a> between 9/11 and Hitler’s Reichstag fire; <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/1448/jasser-challenges-congressman-on-reforms-value">savaged Jasser</a> on Capitol Hill in 2009, effectively calling him an Uncle Tom who “give[s] people license for bigotry”; and <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/08/group-funded-rep-ellisons-pilgrimage-mecca-called-extremism/">enjoyed a pilgrimage to Mecca</a> funded by MAS. Despite this, Ellison <a href="http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Minnesota%27s_5th_congressional_district_elections,_2012">defeated his challenger</a> by nearly 50 points in 2012.</p>
<div id="adWrapper2"></div>
<p>Though Islamists who enter the halls of power through the back door have drawn most of the headlines of late — particularly the many unelected <a href="http://www.radicalislam.org/analysis/muslim-brotherhoods-long-tenacles-reach-american-gov">Muslims with alarming histories</a> currently populating the Obama administration — one must not forget to keep an eye on the front door as well. Will Zead Ramadan be the next to walk in, securing a New York City Council seat that would provide a vehicle for shaping key issues, from police counterterrorism programs to religious accommodations in public institutions, and bestow unearned legitimacy on CAIR itself?</p>
<p>The decision will rest with the voters of District 7. They deserve to be given the facts about Ramadan and CAIR — to offset the steady diet of <a href="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2013/01/7052857/zead-ramadan-president-cair-ny-braces-city-council-run">puff</a> <a href="http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2013/01/28/candidate-zead-ramadan-would-be-city-councils-first-arab-american">pieces</a> and sob stories — before making it.</p>
<p><em><a href="http://davidjrusin.blogspot.com/">David J. Rusin</a> is a research fellow at <a href="http://www.islamist-watch.org/">Islamist Watch</a>, a project of the <a href="http://www.meforum.org/">Middle East Forum</a>.</em></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <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">Click here</a>.<br />
</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-j-rusin/cair-leader-runs-for-new-york-city-council-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Man or a Woman: What’s the Diff?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/a-man-or-a-woman-whats-the-diff/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-man-or-a-woman-whats-the-diff</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/a-man-or-a-woman-whats-the-diff/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 04:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Solway]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transgender]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=166181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Social engineering with a vengeance.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/a-man-or-a-woman-whats-the-diff/sol-5/" rel="attachment wp-att-166272"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-166272" title="sol" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/sol-450x230.jpg" alt="" width="270" height="138" /></a>The pansexual Left is daily making deeper inroads into the very heart and soul—and loins—of Western culture, intent, it seems, on sexualizing our children as if they were already mature and capable adults. Along with militant hatred of traditional customs, prurience masking as liberal complaisance has become one more ideological force eating away at the established and time-tested norms and usages that have characterized Western civilization and that have provided for its (now-threatened) durability. Traditional and even biological partitions have grown porous and some have fallen altogether, a phenomenon increasingly symbolized by the prefix “trans.”</p>
<p>One thinks of the European movement to dissolve nation states and replace them with a “transnational” entity, and now of the social and educational recognition of a new category of human beings, known as “transgenders” or the “transgendered.” Cultural and natural distinctions are in process of being wiped out and supplanted by a fetish for collective and undifferentiated existence—which is to say, we are toiling in an untenable paradox. We are all <em>equally</em> different, we all possess the <em>same rights</em> to be what we want to be and to expect the world to acknowledge us as such, in defiance of both social and empirical reality.</p>
<p>This is especially the case for something as biologically given as gender identity. Alluding to Tom Wolfe’s notion of the “Victorian gentlemen” in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Right-Stuff-Tom-Wolfe/dp/0312427565/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1353160188&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=tom+wolfe+the+right+stuff">The Right Stuff</a>, Michael Walsh <a href="http://pjmedia.com/michaelwalsh/author/michaelwalsh/">comments</a> on the unfortunate breaking down of “institutional barriers between men and women… barriers erected not out of sexist animus or irrational prejudice, but in recognition of…biological reality.” Perhaps the most salient instance of the rejection of reality which typifies our pseudo-enlightened epoch involves precisely this issue. Just recently, the Toronto District School Board furnished a prismatic microcosm of the depths of imbecility to which we have plunged, an illustration in little of the larger <em>zeitgeis</em>t.</p>
<p>The fiasco began when the TDSB, for the presumed benefit of its students, provided links to a website that, among other suggestions for sexual experimentation, “<a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/10/04/zhe-hir-toronto-school-board-guidelines-on-gender-identity-allow-for-non-masculinefeminine-pronouns/">explained how to use vegetables in sexual play</a>.” A carrot a day keeps the doctor away. A week later it issued a set of guidelines noting that all students can use their washroom of choice, since gender identity is supposedly unrelated to “<a href="http://www.torontosun.com/2012/10/03/transgendered-kids-can-use-whichever-school-washroom-they-wish-tdsb">the student’s sex assigned at birth.</a>” According to the poster it distributed, “Masculine and feminine are labels, not definitions”: gender is not assigned at birth but freely chosen. Evergreen State College in the U.S. is clearly in agreement with this pixilated assessment, <a href="http://godfatherpolitics.com/8012/transgender-man-allowed-to-use-same-locker-room-as-young-girls/">allowing</a> a 45 year-old male student who claims transgender status, despite the fact that he is biologically a man, to use the female changing room facilities. Responding to parents’ complaints, the College Administration argues that it “cannot discriminate on the basis of gender identity,” a devious way of begging the question.</p>
<p>The redefinition of gender identity is a godsend for pedophiles and sexual perverts of all stripes. No matter. Students are encouraged to decide for themselves which gender they feel they belong to and are to be perceived as members in good standing of the transgender community, immune to criticism and heroically rebellious against both common sense and the genetic code.</p>
<p>Although transgender students represent an insignificant minority of the school population, their sense of grievance and exclusion, Administration believes, should determine intramural policy for all students, and teachers as well, despite the havoc bound to be unleashed. The travesty doesn’t stop there. As the National Post <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/10/04/zhe-hir-toronto-school-board-guidelines-on-gender-identity-allow-for-non-masculinefeminine-pronouns/">reports</a>, “Gender identity is currently not a protected status under the Canadian Human Rights Act, but Bill C-279, under debate in the House of Commons, would change that.” Indeed, no less an authority than Joe Biden <a href="http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=13419&amp;MediaType=1&amp;Category=26">regards</a> transgender discrimination as “the civil rights issue of our time.” And as we are all aware, when Joe Biden speaks, the age listens with rapt attention.</p>
<p>The larger issue, of course, involves the rejection of the heterosexual norm, including its associations with the traditional family unit, the rearing of children within the family, the proper function of the state, the importance of traditional morality and the assertion of anarchic but also state-sanctioned and regulated non-reproductive sexuality in its place. These elements form part of the Left’s defining project, which is nothing less than culture-change. It is essentially an attack on what it regards as the hetero-patriarchal nature of Western civilization, and the directives coming down from the Toronto District School Board enjoy exemplary status in this respect.</p>
<p>Like many school boards across the nation, it attempts to regulate everything from the traditional usages of the culture to the sexual identity of its students. The TDSB swims with the sewage, not only in the washrooms, but, for example, in renaming Hallowe’en as “Black and Orange Day” in order not to offend wiccans or immigrants for whom the custom of trick or treating is foreign or potentially unsettling in some way. But the TDSB is merely a symptom of the age in which, as I have written elsewhere, “the individual is no longer understood as a nexus of thought, energy, moral conviction and spiritual autonomy, with a biological identity furnished by Nature, but as a malleable lump of helpless suffering and justified desire to be pitied and served.” Our schools in particular have succeeded in turning us into creatures of ideological fashion rather than autonomous agents capable of self-reflection and resistant to social and political manipulation. Forget about math, science, literature or history; it’s all about social activism now. The signs of cultural decadence are everywhere around us, and the educational system has become one of the principal engines of moral and intellectual decay.</p>
<p>This is social engineering with a vengeance. Our schools, like our cultural institutions in general, believe they are breaking down barriers, but what they are really doing is erasing differences—that is, <em>unequal differences</em>, the differences that make us who we are, not who we imagine ourselves as being, and that allow for the preservation of our integrity, in both senses of the word. And in proceeding to gut the culture they despise and to render it sterile, they have even robbed us of our gender.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <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">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/a-man-or-a-woman-whats-the-diff/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muslim-American Interfaith Group Calls for Blasphemy Laws</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/ryan-mauro/muslim-american-interfaith-group-calls-for-blasphemy-laws/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=muslim-american-interfaith-group-calls-for-blasphemy-laws</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/ryan-mauro/muslim-american-interfaith-group-calls-for-blasphemy-laws/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2012 04:35:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ryan Mauro]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blasphemy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim-American Interfaith Group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The United Muslim Christian Forum]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=147140</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The United Muslim Christian Forum’s anti-Semitic, Islamist agenda.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/slide.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-147142" title="slide" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/slide.jpg" alt="" width="365" height="184" /></a>The United Muslim Christian Forum, a friendly-sounding “interfaith” group issued a press release on September 18 demanding the prosecution of the makers of the low-quality <em>Innocence of Muslims</em> film that appeared on YouTube. The Islamist agenda of the group is in written form but if the past is any indication, that won’t stop elected officials and Christian leaders from embracing it in order to prove their tolerance.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.umcforum.org">United Muslim Christian Forum</a> (UMCF) is an entity of the Muslims of the Americas, whose members follow a cleric in Pakistan named Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani that refers to Osama Bin Laden as a “Saudi activist.” The group says it has 22 “villages” across the country, such as “Islamberg” in Hanock, N.Y. and <a href="http://www.radicalislam.org/analysis/holy-islamville-paramilitary-training-americas-backyard">&#8220;Islamville&#8221;</a> in York County, S.C.</p>
<p>Gilani also leads Jamaat ul-Fuqra, a group that the State Department said in 1998 is an “Islamic sect that seeks to purify Islam through violence.” In 2009, I obtained a <a href="http://youtu.be/ebg6AFylios">video</a> of Muslim women receiving guerilla warfare training, complete in military fatigue, at “Islamberg.” This should raise questions about the purpose of Islamberg’s <a href="http://www.islamicpostonline.com/article/24th_annual_ladies_summer_camp_comes_close">24th Annual Ladies Summer Camp</a> in July 2011.</p>
<p>The UMCF <a href="http://www.sbwire.com/press-releases/american-muslims-revile-anti-islamic-film-clear-attack-on-muslim-christian-unity-165742.htm">press release</a> claims that the film is part of a conspiracy involving “media terrorism” to cause war between Muslims and Christians and its content should not be protected as free speech. It quotes an unidentified citizen as saying it is “barbarous treason.”</p>
<p>“Therefore we demand immediate action by the appropriate government agencies to stop this film and bring its perpetrators to justice for this malicious hate speech,” it says.</p>
<p>Anti-Semitism is at the core of UMCF’s drive to forge a Muslim-Christian coalition. Its website <a href="http://www.umcforum.org/latest/un-rally.jspx">states</a> that the 9/11 attacks were “Stage One of getting the Western World, on behalf of the Jews, to go to war with the Arab world.” Gilani <a href="http://www.adl.org/extremism/moa/default.asp">says</a> “Jews are an example of human Satans” and that he’s never encountered an honest Jew.</p>
<p>A number of officials and Christian leaders have embraced the UMCF even though this extremism can be easily found with a simple Google search or review of the group’s website. A photo of Binghamton Mayor Matthew T. Ryan standing with the UMCF sign is on the home page of the website to this day.</p>
<p>The most recent <a href="http://www.umcforum.org/calendar/winthrop-university-byrnes-auditorium/">event</a> held by the UMCF was on April 21 at Winthrop University in Rock Hill, S.C. The two Christian speakers were Reverend Sam McGregor of Allison Creek Church and a missionary named Ryan Peters. The UMCF’s main speaker was Khalifa Hussein Adams and the <a href="http://www.islamicpostonline.com/article/united_muslim_christian_forum_delivers_inspiring_policy_statement_7th_annual_interfaith_prog">text of his speech</a> is online.</p>
<p>“[Jesus] is a role model for the Sufis, as opposed to the Jews who deprived him of the honor of being born to a Blessed virgin mother. They also conspired to take his life. He was called the son of an illegitimate birth while his mother was termed a woman of ill repute. Perhaps you are well aware of the fact that the Jews brought false allegations of sedition and rebellion against Jesus son of Mary to their Roman masters. Because of this, they say he was crucified,” Adams said.</p>
<p>Adams claims that UMCF’s goal isn’t to convert Christians to Islam, but the text of his speech tells a different story. He says that anyone who believes that Jesus was crucified “must also believe that these Roman and priests were more powerful than God…[and] be prepared to disbelieve in Almighty God, His power and Jesus son of Mary.”</p>
<p>He also made the unbelievable statement that “no Muslim, which you may refer to as an orthodox Muslim, has ever been charged with any act of terrorism within or outside of the United States of America.” He condemned the Muslim Brotherhood and said all terrorist acts are done at the hands of Wahhabists and Shiites who aren’t real Muslims. He said that the members of Muslims of the Americas are the only ones that truly follow Islam.</p>
<p>I heard a similar theme when I <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2011/ryan-mauro/confronting-muslims-of-the-americas/">attended</a> a UMCF event on April 16, 2011 in Owego, N.Y. One of the speakers was the city’s mayor at that time, Edward Arrington, who is also the chairman of the Deacon Board at the First Baptist Church of Owego. Father Timothy Taugher of Blessed Sacrament Church in Johnson City and Professor Diane O’Heron of Brome Community College, a UMCF board member, also spoke.</p>
<p>The keynote speaker was Muhammad Ali Qadiri, the “mayor” of the Muslims of the Americas site in Red House, V.A. He <a href="http://www.islamicpostonline.com/article/united_muslim_christian_forum_celebrates_milad_un_nabi_2011">preached</a> that the U.S. may be destroyed by Allah over Pastor Terry Jones’ burning of the Quran. When I confronted him about his group’s anti-Semitism, he said, “We are trying not to get into the bashing business anymore” but they stand by their statements. His reaction to Gilani’s anti-Semitism was, “it is what it is.” His answer to a question about gunfire being heard at his group’s “villages” was, “What is wrong with shooting your gun in the United States of America?”</p>
<p>The UMCF also held a <a href="http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/militant-muslims-of-america-pulling-out-all-stops-for-ny-parade/">parade</a> in Binghamton to honor Jesus Christ. According to a local news report, 700 Muslims and Christians attended, with Muslims of the Americas members traveling from as far away as Canada and the Caribbean. An advertisement for the event told attendees not to wear “military-style clothing.”</p>
<p>Advocacy for blasphemy laws and anti-Semitism isn’t what a genuine “interfaith” group is about. The UMCF was created for the sole purpose of making over the image of Muslims of the Americas. The press release and speech at Winthrop University show that the goal is unchanged: To promote the anti-Semitic Islamist ideology of Muslims of the Americas and Sheikh Gilani.</p>
<p><em>This article was sponsored by the <a href="http://www.theird.org">Institute on Religion and Democracy.</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/ryan-mauro/muslim-american-interfaith-group-calls-for-blasphemy-laws/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>69</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>David Suzuki: the Climate Industry’s Old Man of the Mountain</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/david-suzuki-the-climate-industry%e2%80%99s-old-man-of-the-mountain/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=david-suzuki-the-climate-industry%25e2%2580%2599s-old-man-of-the-mountain</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/david-suzuki-the-climate-industry%e2%80%99s-old-man-of-the-mountain/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 04:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Solway]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Suzuki]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=130840</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bad math, wrong predictions and indoctrinating the multitudes.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/davidsuzuki.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-130853" title="davidsuzuki" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/davidsuzuki.jpg" alt="" width="315" height="221" /></a>Predictive failure does not deter an ideological zealot, who feels sure that a disaster must arrive someday to confirm his forecast and justify his program for salvation. It matters little if his timetable is off by 10, 20 or 1000 years since, under the aspect of eternity, a cataclysm is bound to happen <em>in seculae seculorum</em>. The mathematics can always be redone in the light of a grisly but accommodating future to which only he has privileged access. It is he who stands before the burning bush of the world and hears the voice of the Lord. For this eccentric mentality, being wrong over and over is a sure sign that he will be right once. The end-of-the-world fanatic merely keeps revising his calculations, relying on a new revelation to perfect his reckoning and reinforce his delusion. But what he has really accomplished is to turn rational thought into spurious divination. This is as true of those who gaze into the crystal ball of Nature as of those who claim insight into the mysterious workings of the Lord.</p>
<p>Enter David Suzuki, Canada’s leading climate guru, who predicted some 20 years ago that we had only 10 years remaining before environmental collapse. In the meantime what has collapsed is Dr. Suzuki’s objective credibility—though his prophetic authority persists among the naïve and impressionable. Abetting the strategy of endlessly renewable computation is the complementary trick of selective disinformation. A good example of this technique is provided by the controversy over the discovery of a “mutant” fish near Lake Athabasca which, as University of Calgary economist Frank Atkins wrote, was jumped all over by “the David Suzuki crowd” (<em>NP Posted</em>, March 12, 2009). Of course, the presumed “find” was immediately blazoned in the media and among environmental groups as indisputable evidence of oil sands pollution. Unfortunately for the proponents of this factoid, the “mutation” was nothing of the sort but a natural development that follows on decomposition (<em>Fort McMurray Today</em>, the only news source to report on the scientific reassessment of the canard).</p>
<p>Similarly, one recalls Suzuki’s comrade-in-arms Al Gore who, in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Balance-Ecology-Human-Spirit/dp/B0017U74TW/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1335441311&amp;sr=1-1"><em>Earth in the Balance</em></a>, blames the Antarctic ozone hole for causing blindness in animal populations: “hunters now report finding blind rabbits; fishermen catch blind salmon.” Reality check: not only has the Antarctic ozone hole begun to close (<em>NASA Science</em>, December 12, 2000; <em>Nature</em>, May 16, 2011), but Chilean scientists investigating the phenomenon had already accounted for the blight as owing to an epidemic of pink eye disease (<em>NewScientist</em>, August 21, 1993).</p>
<p>So it goes: bad math, wrong predictions, the application of a Bozo filter to disagreeable facts, and profitable indoctrination. There can be little doubt that, like aspiring carbon billionaire Gore, David Suzuki is a master in the lucrative field of environmental exploitation. Ezra Levant of Sun News Network has uncovered evidence that Suzuki is allegedly stuffing his coffers with money from multi-national organizations that finance his campaigns against Canada’s oil sands production (<em>The Source</em>, February 7, 2012). Suzuki received a million dollar gift from Canada’s Power Corp, which operates in totalitarian China, one of the world’s leading carbon emitters. This may explain why Suzuki, lecturing by video feed to two hundred Canadian schools, has praised China as a nation “committed to developing a green economy.” Indeed, Suzuki, as Levant has shown, grosses $10 million per annum for his mega-Corporation, apparently only a fraction of which is spent on hands-on environmental concerns.</p>
<p>In an informative talk at the National Archives in Ottawa on March 19, 2012, independent researcher Vivian Krause confirmed the details of Suzuki’s windfall from the U.S. based Moore, Hewlett and Packard foundations. Writing in the <em>Financial Post</em> for April 21, 2012, Krause goes on to state that Suzuki’s American funding was for many years “underreported or not reported at all.” This is rather telling, especially when one considers that since 2009, the Canada Revenue Agency “requires nonprofits to report the total amount of funding that they receive from foreign sources.” For 2009 and 2010, the Suzuki Foundation reports “accounted for 5% or 6% of total revenue.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/david-suzuki-the-climate-industry%e2%80%99s-old-man-of-the-mountain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is The Climate Consensus Beginning to Change?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/is-the-climate-consensus-beginning-to-change/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=is-the-climate-consensus-beginning-to-change</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/is-the-climate-consensus-beginning-to-change/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 04:33:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Solway]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[green lie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leftist]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=128909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Countering a big green lie.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Global-Climate-Change3.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-128913" title="Global-Climate-Change3" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Global-Climate-Change3.jpg" alt="" width="412" height="386" /></a>The current scientific consensus on Global Warming and Climate Change (or Global Weirding or Global Climactic Disruption, etc.) may be slowly shifting away from the catastrophism of the United Nations IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report. True, the shift has been tentative. Carbon-driven global warming was an easy sell, but it will be a hard buyback—too many professional reputations are on the line. Nonetheless, the evidence is piling up to suggest that the human contribution to (earlier) global warming is far less than originally assumed and that a meteorological calamity is highly unlikely. Two-thirds of the scientists attending the 33<sup>rd</sup> International Geological Congress in Norway in August 2008 were “hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN’s IPCC report” (<em>U.S. Senate Committee &amp; Public Works </em>online, December 10, 2008).</p>
<p>More recently, a coalition of 49 former NASA scientists and seven Apollo astronauts has accused the bureaucracy of both NASA and the Goddard Institute of Space Studies, with which it is affiliated, of diddling with the facts. They write: “We believe that [their] claims that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.” (<em>Watts Up With That</em>, April 10, 2012).</p>
<p>Further, the Interim Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) of August 29, 2011 showed unambiguously that the UN suppressed or ignored much of the countervailing data that challenged its official position. This is hardly surprising since the IPCC, which certified and entrenched the so-called “scientific consensus,” is essentially a political body with an agenda of its own. Mark Hendrickson of the Center for Vision and Values at Grove City College points out that the IPCC “does not speak as one voice,” since some of the “leading scientists on the panel contradict its official position.” Others have resigned in protest against its policymakers’ summaries, which are “produced by a committee of 51 government appointees, many of whom are not scientists.” It turns out that those “who compose the summaries are given considerable latitude to modify the scientific reports,” and Hendrickson quotes a U.S. State Department official who informed an IPCC co-chair that “it is essential… chapter authors be prevailed upon to modify their text in an appropriate manner” (<em>Doc’s Talk</em>, May 25, 2009).</p>
<p>Hendrickson cites warmist crusader and suspect guru Al Gore’s ally, former Under-Secretary of State Tim Wirth, who has gone on record justifying the kind of scientific fraud perpetrated by the IPCC. “Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,” he said, “we will be doing the right thing.” Further data casting serious doubt on this railroaded consensus may be found at <em>Inhofe EPW Press Blog</em>, <em>Daily Tech</em> online, and the journal <em>Energy and Environment</em>, whose findings are based on a survey of the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science database covering almost 9000 scientific publications.</p>
<p>But the fix is still in and soldered tight by all sorts of disreputable means. In her new book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Delinquent-Teenager-Mistaken-Worlds-Climate/dp/1466453486/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1334323839&amp;sr=1-1"><em>The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Scientist</em></a>, Donna Laframboise shows that “IPCC has been recruiting 20-something graduate students” as lead authors, many of whom had not even earned their degrees and some of whom were majoring in non-climate disciplines. More than a third of the 2007 IPCC report (or Climate Bible) consisted of so-called “grey references,” that is, unaccredited studies. The IPCC has also chosen “to muddy the water by aligning [itself] with lobbyists” and relies heavily on non-peer reviewed material, including newspaper items, press releases, magazine articles, unpublished graduate theses and Green activist sources.</p>
<p>And then there is the taradiddle, emanating from a University of Illinois 2009 survey, that 97.4% of scientists agree that mankind is responsible for global warming. This is easily debunked when one considers its selection methodology. As Rich Trzupek explains (<em>FrontPage Magazine</em>, August 30, 2011), citing Lawrence Solomon’s crushing putdown (<em>FullComment</em>, December 30,  2010), the Illinois researchers decided that of the 10,257 respondents, the 10,180 who demurred from the so-called consensus “weren’t qualified to comment on the issue because they were merely solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists, astronomers and the like. Of the remaining 77 scientists whose votes were counted, 75 agreed with the proposition that mankind was causing catastrophic changes in the climate. And, since 75 is 97.4% of 77, ‘overwhelming consensus’ was demonstrated once again.” <em>The real percentage of concurring scientists in the survey is less than .008%</em>. That these 75 were, as Solomon writes, “scientists of unknown qualifications” adds yet another layer to the boondoggle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/david-solway/is-the-climate-consensus-beginning-to-change/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>43</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Left&#8217;s Tea Party?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/jacob-laksin/the-lefts-tea-party/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-lefts-tea-party</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/jacob-laksin/the-lefts-tea-party/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 04:54:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal income taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fiscal conservatism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income earners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[percent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tea]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=107569</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why the Occupy Wall Street campaign is destined to fail.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Wall-Street-protest-200921.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-107574" title="Wall-Street-protest-20092" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Wall-Street-protest-200921.gif" alt="" width="375" height="246" /></a></p>
<p>Move over Tea Party, there’s a new populist movement in town. Such has been the hype that has greeted the nascent “Occupy Wall Street” campaign, whose youthful partisans most recently made headlines when, for no obvious reason, some 700 of them were arrested this past weekend for blocking the Brooklyn Bridge.</p>
<p>So, what is the cause for which these protestors are willing to defy the NYPD and inbound traffic? That depends on who you ask. According to sympathetic media accounts, Occupy Wall Street represents an emerging strain of left-wing economic populism, one that will become a counterweight to the fiscal conservatism of the Tea Party cadres. Media accolades apart, though, Occupy Wall Street is unlikely to replicate the Tea Party’s success.</p>
<p>One problem is the campaign&#8217;s agenda. In short, it doesn’t really have one. Click through the Occupy Wall Street website and you find grandiose invocations of &#8220;using the Arab Spring to achieve our ends,&#8221; but little edification about what precisely those ends are. Participants in the campaign have been no more helpful on this point. As one protestor at this weekend&#8217;s rally instructed another, “It doesn’t matter what you’re protesting. Just protest.”</p>
<p>Occupy Wall Street&#8217;s existential unclarity is in stark contrast to the Tea Party&#8217;s raison d&#8217;être. While it took time for the Tea Party to become an organized political force, from the very beginning it set itself against a clear problem and culprit: the ballooning federal debt and the irresponsible political class that had made it possible. Occupy Wall Street’s driving narrative is much more dubious. The campaign declares that it &#8220;will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%.&#8221; Exactly who makes up the 1% is not explained. Presumably, though, it&#8217;s the top one percent of income earners, who also happen to pay 38 percent of all federal income taxes. Whatever one makes of that fact, it&#8217;s hard to muster outrage about the &#8220;greed&#8221; of the country&#8217;s most-taxed bracket.</p>
<p>But perhaps the &#8220;1%&#8221; is intended to be a metaphor for Wall Street and the financial industry. If their signs are any guide, the Occupy Wall Street protestors seem to think that Wall Street&#8217;s elite have committed some crime in “stealing” the billion-dollar taxpayer-funded bailouts. Whatever one&#8217;s view about the wisdom of these bailouts, though, it&#8217;s absurd to claim that they were in any way stolen by Wall Street. If anyone is to blame for misallocating taxpayer money, it’s the Bush administration that passed the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the Obama administration that extended, and the Congress that approved it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/jacob-laksin/the-lefts-tea-party/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>33</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Not to Defend Yourself as a Jew at Yale</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/david-horowitz/how-not-to-defend-yourself-as-a-jew-at-yale/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=how-not-to-defend-yourself-as-a-jew-at-yale</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/david-horowitz/how-not-to-defend-yourself-as-a-jew-at-yale/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 04:50:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Horowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apartheid state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[daily]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dorm room doors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Notices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[passover services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SJP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yale daily news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yale sophomore]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=91666</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Even sugarcoating your enemy’s venom is an insufficient gesture of submission.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Picture-3.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-91682" title="Picture-3" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Picture-3.jpg" alt="" width="375" height="278" /></a></p>
<p>At Yale the other week, Students for Justice in Palestine, one of the most aggressive and vicious supporters of Palestinian terrorism, conducted a stunt to dramatize their anti-Israel agenda. Members of the SJP put “Eviction Notices” under the dorm room doors of Yale students, which warned them that their rooms were going to be “demolished in three days” for no reason. According to a report of the action in the <em>Yale Daily News</em>, the Eviction Notices were designed “to raise awareness about the plight of Palestinians whose homes are being demolished by the Israeli government.” In a sane world such a claim would have zero credibility. Why would any government, let alone one as humane and democratic as the government of Israel, go around randomly demolishing people’s homes? What agenda would be served by that?</p>
<p>In fact the homes that Israel has demolished belong to terrorists who blow up Pizza parlors and buses and Passover services, hoping to kill as many innocent Jews as possible. It is all part of a 60-year unrelenting war Arabs and Muslims have waged against the existence of a non-Arab, non-Muslim state in the Middle East. This is a fact overlooked not only by terrorist support groups like Students for Justice in Palestine but by the editors of the <em>Yale Daily News</em>. Naturally, Yale students ignorant of this 60-year history and bombarded by Palestinian lies spread by left-wing faculty and student organizations to the effect that Israel is “occupying” a mythical entity called “Palestine,” Palestinians are oppressed by Israelis (rather than the Palestinian Authority and Hamas), Israel is an “apartheid state” and so forth – are unable to distinguish reality from fiction.</p>
<p>“I was really confused at first,” a Yale sophomore named Helen McCreary told the <em>Yale Daily News</em>, “but I think I understand why [Students for Justice in Palestine] did it. None of us have had our house randomly destroyed by the government.”</p>
<p>The SJP Eviction Notices explained to the credulous that they “were not meant to be an attack on Israel or Israelis, but rather on the actions of the Israeli state.” But as everyone knows, Israel is a democracy and its government reflects the sentiments and will of its people – including a million Muslim Arabs who are Israeli citizens with more rights than the citizens of Gaza or the West Bank under Palestinian rule. In short, this a distinction without a difference: the attack on Israel is an attack on Israelis and Jews. By the same token, 100% of the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza vote for terrorist organizations – either Fatah or Hamas. But if one were to draw the conclusion that Palestinians as a people support terrorism – that opinion would be banned from the pages of the <em>Yale Daily News</em> and every other college newspaper as giving “offense”  to an ethnic group &#8212; although there is no ethnic group “Palestinian.”</p>
<p>And how did Yale’s Jewish organizations respond to this malicious attack from a Hamas-supporting, Israel-hating campus group? According to the <em>Daily News </em>reporter, “a member of the Yale Hillel board and the co-president of Yale Friends of Israel criticized the fliers for being ‘counterproductive’ and disrespectful,” and also “hyperbolic” – as though the Israelis were only demolishing the doors on Palestinian houses for sport and not their entire dwellings.</p>
<p>The rationale for responding in such generalities which did not come close to identifying the outrage that had been committed was that Hillel did not want to even think of upsetting the Students for Justice in Palestine who, in fact, would like to see Israel destroyed and the Jews pushed into the sea. Too harsh? That is precisely what the SJP slogan, chanted on campuses across the country, promises: “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” One glance at a map of the Middle East will show that the eastern border of Israel is the Jordan River and the western border is the Mediterranean sea. In other words, “Free Palestine from the river to the sea” means for the campus Nazis who chant it: the obliteration of Israel. As it happens, this is the explicit and formal goal of their favorite Palestinian party, Hamas, which has enshrined it in its charter: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam obliterates it.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/david-horowitz/how-not-to-defend-yourself-as-a-jew-at-yale/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The True Face of J Street</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/moshe-phillips/the-true-face-of-j-street-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-true-face-of-j-street-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/moshe-phillips/the-true-face-of-j-street-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:03:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Moshe Phillips]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[afsi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[american leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[americans for a safe israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arthur Waskow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Atlantic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capitol Hill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[community]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[former members of congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gaza]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[I. L. Kenen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[israel and the middle east]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[J Street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jeffrey goldberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeremy Ben-Ami]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jta news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[myths and facts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[October]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[page]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philadelphia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philadelphia chapter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rabbi Brian Walt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rabbi Everett Gendler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rabbi Gerald Serotta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shalom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Masters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tzedek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Walt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[website]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=53729</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is it really "pro-Israel" to call out for talks with Hamas?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/heschelgreen.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-53732" title="heschelgreen" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/heschelgreen.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="329" /></a></p>
<p>J Street, the controversial pressure group, explains on the &#8220;About Us&#8221; page on its official website that &#8220;J Street is the political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement.” Since its inception in 2008, J Street has undergone growth that must be considered no less than remarkable.</p>
<p>In large part, the success of J Street has occurred without any serious investigations into how this group grew so incredibly fast and just where it came from.</p>
<p>Jeffrey  Goldberg, writing for <em>The Atlantic </em>on October 27, 2009, stated “J Street grew organically, and continues to grow organically.” Goldberg’s essay was published during J Street’s first conference. The conference was held near Capitol Hill and 1,500 delegates attended. An October 29m, JTA news service report stated “activists had meetings in 210 of the 535 lawmakers&#8217; offices on the Hill, including about 100 meetings with the lawmakers themselves…”</p>
<p>Organic? How could such a new group create such a powerful infrastructure and nurture such impressive contacts so quickly? There should be no doubt that J Street came from somewhere. The question is from where?</p>
<p>The  statement on the &#8220;<a href="http://www.jstreet.org/about/about-us">About Us</a>&#8221; page goes on to state:</p>
<blockquote><p>“J Street was founded to change the dynamics of American politics and policy on Israel and the Middle East. We believe the security and future of Israel as the democratic home of the Jewish people depend on rapidly achieving a two-state solution and regional comprehensive peace. Our mission is to promote meaningful American leadership to achieve peace and security in the Middle East and to broaden the debate on these issues nationally and in the Jewish community.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>On J Street  website’s “Myths and Facts about J Street” page, J Street declares:</p>
<blockquote><p>“J Street&#8217;s Advisory Council consists of over 170 prominent Americans &#8211; including three Former Members of Congress, 28 Rabbis, a number of former Jewish community leaders and professionals, and many others.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Researchers with the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For A Safe Israel/AFSI initiated a study of the rabbis connected to J Street in order to understand just what the backgrounds of “former Jewish community leaders” involved in J Street are. What light can be shed on J Street’s agenda by examining its structure and organization?</p>
<p>Being Philadelphia based, AFSI researchers had prior familiarity with many of these players. A large number of J Street rabbis have played senior leadership roles in the Pennsylvania based Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and the locally headquartered network of Jewish Renewal organizations. A cadre of these individuals were also leaders of the now defunct Philadelphia chapter of New Jewish Agenda, which was specifically noted for its radical stance &#8212; even in that radical group.</p>
<p>The results  of the AFSI research into these rabbis is startling.</p>
<p>A JTA report from October 25, 2009 stated that “The left-wing lobby J Street is absorbing Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom&#8217;s chapters and rabbinic wing.”</p>
<p>The national president of Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom at the time of the merger was Steve Masters. Masters is a Philadelphia attorney and a former leader of the Philadelphia Chapter of the New Jewish Agenda. Jeremy Ben-Ami, the executive director of J Street, was introduced by Masters at a local kick-off event in Philadelphia on February 4, 2010.</p>
<p>Many of Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom’s rabbis were among the founders and key activists of New Jewish Agenda including Rabbi Gerald Serotta, Arthur Waskow, Rabbi Everett Gendler and others. Serotta, Waskow and Gendler are also all involved in a group called Jewish Fast For Gaza – but more on that later. Waskow attended the February 4, 2010 event also.</p>
<p>It is well worth noting that many of these rabbis were first involved in an organization called Breira (meaning alternative) that was universally opposed by almost all sectors of the American Jewish community. I. L. Kenen the founder of AIPAC claimed that Breira &#8220;undermined U.S. support for Israel.&#8221;</p>
<p>The majority of Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom/J Street rabbis hold radical views that go far past anything that even Breira advocated in its hay day.</p>
<p>Half of the  rabbis on J Street’s Advisory Council were members of Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom’s  Rabbinic Cabinet &#8211; before the merge.</p>
<p>There is a very significant overlap between the rabbis from Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom and the Jewish Fast for Gaza group. Fast for Gaza made its first public announcement in July 2009. Rabbi Brian Walt was listed as the contact for the group’s initial press release. Walt is a member of Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom’s Rabbinic Cabinet.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.fastforgaza.net/statement">Fast  for Gaza group purpose</a> is &#8220;To call upon Israel, the US, and the international community to engage in negotiations without pre-conditions with all relevant Palestinian parties &#8211; including Hamas &#8211; in order to end the blockade…&#8221;</p>
<p>Here are  the facts:</p>
<p>More than half of the seventy-eight rabbis listed on the Fast for Gaza website are also members of Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom’s Rabbinic Cabinet. Put another way, about 12.5 % of all of Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom’s Rabbinic Cabinet are involved with the Fast for Gaza and call for talks with Hamas.</p>
<p>For example, Rabbi Arthur Green is listed by J Street as an Advisory Council member. Green is a former dean of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College (RRC) and was a prominent member of Breira. Another Advisory Council member is the former president of RRC, Rabbi David A. Teutsch. Rabbi Mordechai Liebling, a former director of the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, is on Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom’s Rabbinic Cabinet and is a “Rabbinical Supporter of the Fast for Gaza”. Teutsch too attended J Street’s February 4, 2010 event.</p>
<p>Breira. New Jewish Agenda. Brit Tzedek v&#8217;Shalom. Reconstructionist Rabbinical College. Is J Street really just old wine in a new bottle? Has this wine turned to vinegar? Where are the likes of I. L. Kenen among today’s American Jewish leaders to stand up to J Street? An article on the website of the <em>Forward</em> newspaper (December 9, 2009) states that Israel&#8217;s Ambassador Michael Oren recently publicly labeled J Street as &#8220;a unique problem in that it not only opposes one policy of one Israeli government, it opposes all policies of all Israeli governments. It&#8217;s significantly out of the mainstream&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>Ambassador Oren should have been applauded for his statement. And loudly. After all, shouldn’t it be apparent to even the casual observer that forces within the highest echelons of the Obama Administration and/or the Democratic Party are assisting J Street, or perhaps even pulling its strings?</p>
<p><em>Moshe Phillips is a member of the Executive Committee of the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans for a Safe Israel/AFSI. The chapter&#8217;s website is at: <a href="http://mail.google.com/mail/www.phillyafsi.com" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">phillyafsi.com</span></a> and Moshe&#8217;s blog can be found at <a href="http://phillyafsi.blogtownhall.com/" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">phillyafsi.blogtownhall.com</span></a>.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/moshe-phillips/the-true-face-of-j-street-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Manmade Global Warming: How a Lie Died</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/walter-williams/manmade-global-warming-how-a-lie-died/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=manmade-global-warming-how-a-lie-died</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/walter-williams/manmade-global-warming-how-a-lie-died/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 05:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Walter Williams]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[A.D]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Academic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[academic institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amazonian forests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[carbon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[carbon dioxide emissions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Carol Browner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate research data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climatic research unit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consensus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conservation of nature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[curricula]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[director]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dr. Tom Borelli]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[east anglia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environmental activist groups]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[himalayan glaciers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intergovernmental panel on climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interview]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ipcc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ipcc report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manmade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marsh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[name]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nobel Peace Prize]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paper co]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[period]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[planet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Professor Jones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Professor Phil Jones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tropical savannas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.






Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[university of east anglia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[world wildlife fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[world wildlife fund wwf]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=51851</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why does the spending of billions of dollars to fight a fraud continue?
 ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/global-warming21.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-51862" title="global-warming2" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/global-warming21.jpg" alt="" width="480" height="384" /></a></p>
<p>Private industry and governments around the world have spent trillions of dollars in the name of saving our planet from manmade global warming. Academic institutions, think tanks and schools have altered their curricula and agenda to accommodate what was seen as the global warming &#8220;consensus.&#8221;</p>
<p>Mounting evidence suggests that claims of manmade global warming might turn out to be the greatest hoax in mankind&#8217;s history. Immune and hostile to the evidence, President Barack Obama&#8217;s administration and most of the U.S. Congress sides with Climate Czar Carol Browner, who says, &#8220;I&#8217;m sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real.&#8221;</p>
<p>The scientists whom Browner references are associated with the U.N.&#8217;s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Let&#8217;s look some of what they told us. The 2007 IPCC report, which won them a Nobel Peace Prize, said that the probability of Himalayan glaciers &#8220;disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high&#8221; as a result of manmade global warming. Recently, IPCC was forced to retract their glacier disappearance claim, which was made on the basis of a non-scientific magazine article. When critics initially questioned the prediction, Rajendra Pachauri, IPCC&#8217;s chairman, dismissed them as &#8220;voodoo scientists.&#8221;</p>
<p>The IPCC also had to retract its claim that up to 40 percent of the Amazonian forests were at risk from global warming and would likely be replaced by &#8220;tropical savannas&#8221; if temperatures continued to rise. The IPCC claim was based on a paper co-authored by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), two environmental activist groups.</p>
<p>England&#8217;s now-disgraced University of East Anglia&#8217;s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) has been a leader in climate research data. Their data, collected and analyzed by them, have been used for years to bolster IPCC efforts to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions. Climatologists, including CRU&#8217;s disgraced former director Professor Phil Jones, have been accused of manipulating data and criminally withholding scientific information to prevent its disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.</p>
<p>Professor Jones, considered to be the high priest of the manmade global warming movement, has been in the spotlight since he was forced to step down as CRU&#8217;s director after the leaking of e-mails that skeptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.</p>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="15" align="right">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>In a recent interview with the BBC, he admitted that he did not believe that &#8220;the debate on climate change is over&#8221; and that he didn&#8217;t &#8220;believe the vast majority of climate scientists think this.&#8221;</p>
<p>Long denied by the warmers, Professor Jones admitted that the Medieval Warm Period (800 A.D. to 1300 A.D.) might well had been as warm as the Current Warm Period (1975-present), or warmer, and that if it was, &#8220;then obviously the late-20th century warmth would not be unprecedented.&#8221; That suggests global warming may not be a manmade phenomenon. In any case, Professor Jones said that for the past 15 years, there has been no &#8220;statistically significant&#8221; global warming.</p>
<p>During the BBC interview, Professor Jones dodged several questions: why he had asked a colleague to delete e-mails relating to the IPCC&#8217;s Fourth Assessment Report and ask others to do likewise; whether some of his handling of data had crossed the line of acceptable scientific practice; and what about his letter saying that he had used a &#8220;trick&#8221; to &#8220;hide the decline&#8221; in tree-ring temperature data?</p>
<p>Given all the false claims and evidence pointing to scientific fraud, I don&#8217;t think it wise to continue spending billions of dollars and enacting economically crippling regulations in the name of fighting global warming. At the minimum, we should stop the Environmental Protection Agency from going on with their plans to regulate carbon emissions. Companies should resign from the United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP), a lobbying group of businesses and radical environmentalists. Dr. Tom Borelli, who is director of the National Center for Public Policy Research&#8217;s Free Enterprise Project, says that BP, Caterpillar, Conoco Phillips, Marsh, Inc. and Xerox have the common sense to so already.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/walter-williams/manmade-global-warming-how-a-lie-died/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>46</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Lies of Duke</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jenn-q-public/the-lies-of-duke/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-lies-of-duke</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jenn-q-public/the-lies-of-duke/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 05:00:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jenn Q. Public]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alcohol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Black]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Black Panther Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child abuse charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crystal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crystal mangum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[duke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[duke athletes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[duke university lacrosse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gang]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gang rape]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[injustice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jesse Jackson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lacrosse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lacrosse players]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lacrosse team]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[male privilege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Malik Zulu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mike Nifong]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[misdemeanor charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[murder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new black panther]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new black panther party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Panther]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privilege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[professor baker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[professor houston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Provost Peter Lange]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[racial inequity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[racial violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rape]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rev. Jesse Jackson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[systemic injustice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TIME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[university provost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[washington post columnist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white privilege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[woman]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=51156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Arrest of Duke rape accuser Crystal Mangum exposes the Left’s race-baiting immorality play.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/crystal.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-51159" title="crystal" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/crystal.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="355" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Visit <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/">Newsreal</a></strong></p>
<p>“She was black, they were white, and race and sex were in the air.”  That’s how a <em>Washington Post</em> columnist described <a title="Lynne Duke on the Duke University case" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052302022.html">the atmosphere</a> that led to the brutal gang rape of Crystal Mangum by a group of <a title="Duke University" href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6656">Duke University</a> lacrosse players in 2006.  You remember, right? That was the violent, racially motivated hate crime that <em>never happened</em>.</p>
<p>Mangum is in the news again, but this time she won’t find an army of race-obsessed charlatans, Marxist demagogues, and pandering politicians speeding to her defense.  The Left only rolls out that treatment for struggling black single mothers when their harrowing tales bolster an ideological agenda.  Pulling off the “virtuous victim of white privilege” shtick won’t be easy when Mangum faces charges of <a title="Crystal Mangum charged with first degree attempted murder, child abuse, and arson" href="http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/7068705/">child abuse, arson, and attempted murder</a>.</p>
<p>Guilty or innocent, the stripper who cried wolf is on her own this time.  She was only worthy of the support of <a title="Jesse Jackson" href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=687">Jesse Jackson</a>, <a title="NOW" href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6186">NOW</a>, the <a title="The New Black Panther Party" href="http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=14294">New Black Panther Party</a>, and the Duke University “<a title="Duke University gang of 88" href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/List%20of%20Gang%20of%2088%20Duke%20Professors3.html">gang of 88</a>” as long as she was able to help weave a compelling narrative of misogyny, class warfare, racial inequity, and systemic injustice.</p>
<p>Two weeks after Crystal Mangum falsely accused the Duke athletes of rape, English Professor Houston Baker publicly condemned the University’s “moral response to abhorrent sexual assault, verbal racial violence, and drunken white male privilege loosed amongst us.”  In <a title="Houston Baker's letter to the Duke University Provost" href="http://news.duke.edu/mmedia/features/lacrosse_incident/lange_baker.html">a letter to University Provost Peter Lange</a>, he wrote:</p>
<blockquote><p>The lacrosse team – 15 of whom have faced misdemeanor charges for drunken misbehavior in the past three years – may well feel they can claim innocence and sport their disgraced jerseys on campus, safe under the cover of silent whiteness. But where is the black woman who their violence and raucous witness injured for life? Will she ever sleep well again?</p></blockquote>
<p>If Professor Baker and his Duke colleagues cared so much about Crystal Mangum getting a good night’s sleep, what did they do to prevent her from landing in prison on attempted murder and child abuse charges?  If her race and socioeconomic status were enough to merit destroying the lives of a “<a title="Baker called the Duke players a scummy bunch of white males" href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D07E2D9103FF936A25757C0A9619C8B63&amp;sec=&amp;spon=&amp;pagewanted=2">scummy bunch of white males</a>,” why did they abandon this underprivileged black woman without getting her the help she so obviously needed?</p>
<p>Mangum was a <a title="Crystal Mangum was deeply troubled" href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,265374,00.html">deeply troubled woman</a> long before she falsely accused the Duke University athletes of rape. Her history of mental illness and unsubstantiated rape and violence claims began in her teenage years, and alcohol abuse has been part of the picture as well.</p>
<p>But that didn’t matter to the <a title="the Duke University gang of 88" href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/List%20of%20Gang%20of%2088%20Duke%20Professors3.html">Duke faculty members</a> who seized upon her false rape account to stir up racial animosity and resentment of “<a title="white, male, athletic privilege" href="http://news.duke.edu/mmedia/features/lacrosse_incident/lange_baker.html">white, male, athletic privilege</a>.”  She made a convenient weapon in the race, class, and gender warfare waged by academics and abetted by the media and the reprehensible former district attorney, Mike Nifong.</p>
<p><a title="New Black Panthers leader Malik Zulu Shabazz" href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2044">Malik Zulu Shabazz</a>, national chairman of the New Black Panther Party <a href="http://news14.com/charlotte-news-104-content/top_stories/?ArID=83946">proclaimed</a>, “to us she is a righteous and divine woman by nature.” 88 Duke faculty members jumped to her defense (and all but convicted the athletes) in a <a title="Duke 88 ad" href="http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/mmedia/pdf/socialdisasterad.pdf">full-page ad</a> that described a poisonous environment of racial hatred.  And of course, the Rev. Jesse Jackson showed up to highlight the plight of a black single mother terrorized by a culture of rampant racism and sexism.</p>
<p>Mangum’s affirmative action qualifications became less valuable when evidence clearing the lacrosse players forced her to turn in her righteous victimhood card.  To the Left, she was a cause, not a human being. When she couldn’t maintain the hoax, she wasn’t any less black or any less female. But she was no longer a <em>politically useful</em> black single mother, and thus, no longer of value to the race hustlers and class warmongers who rushed to her aid.</p>
<p>Once Crystal Mangum outlived her usefulness as the personification of social injustice in their heavy handed race baiting immorality play, the Left moved on without apology.  And Mangum returned to her troubled life as just another ex-poster child for the leftist agenda, a mentally unstable, alcohol soaked liar who was chewed up and spit out by people in a position to help stop her from ruining more lives, including those of her three young children.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jenn-q-public/the-lies-of-duke/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1739/1973 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 03:37:46 by W3 Total Cache -->