<?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; Clinton</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/clinton/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 16:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Hillary at Georgetown: Tolerance, Empathy and Submission</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/howard-rotberg/hillary-at-georgetown-tolerance-empathy-and-submission/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=hillary-at-georgetown-tolerance-empathy-and-submission</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/howard-rotberg/hillary-at-georgetown-tolerance-empathy-and-submission/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2014 05:30:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Howard Rotberg]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[empathy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Georgetown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tolerance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=247690</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What it really means to "empathize" with one's enemies. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/aunnamed.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-247691" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/aunnamed.jpg" alt="aunnamed" width="332" height="212" /></a>In my book, <i>Tolerism: The Ideology Revealed (second revised edition, Mantua Books), </i>I quote the great philosopher of the post-World War 2 era, Karl Popper, who formulated the following dilemma about tolerance (which has become known as “the Popper Paradox”):</p>
<blockquote><p>If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. … We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.</p></blockquote>
<p>And so, I write that excessive tolerance of the intolerant illiberals has become a full-blown ideology which I call Tolerism.   Tolerism, in my view, elevates the virtue of tolerance over the fundamental Biblical value of Justice.</p>
<p>Tolerism also includes a type of cultural Stockholm Syndrome, where, as in the case of some hostages or abused women, some begin to identify with their captors or abusers.</p>
<p>It consists often of psychological denial, and it accepts United Nations Human Rights Councils led by Iran, Syria and other leading human rights abusers. Tolerism reflects a moral equivalency between terrorists and victims, and even a seeming masochism where we seek out painful retribution as a kind of catharsis for our supposed misdeeds.  Tolerist “compassion,” especially in the work of Karen Armstrong, assumes that there is equivalency in compassion between the “frequently unkind West” and Islam &#8212; which unfortunately in its present state is not at all compassionate to Coptic Christians, Yzedis, Jews, gays, women who seek freedoms, or even minority Muslim groups like the Ahmadis.</p>
<p>I believe that the ideology I call tolerism is expanding ever more rapidly beyond mere tolerance and unilateral compassion.   It is now becoming an excessive <i>empathy</i> where the quest to share some other group’s feelings is beginning to cause our liberals to accept the false facts and illiberal values of our enemies and in fact sometimes to convert or submit to Islam.  We are seeing some young people convert to Islam and go so far as to join the forces of ISIS.  We are even seeing young Western women convert to Islam and marry men whose attitudes toward women are almost barbaric. Submission indeed.</p>
<p>Ms. Clinton, of course, served as Secretary of State during the Obama administration’s new Middle Eastern doctrine of giving more “respect” to the Muslim world in word and deed.  As President Obama stated in Cairo during his first major overseas appearance:</p>
<blockquote><p>I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.</p></blockquote>
<p>Hillary herself has a close relationship with Huma Abedin, who is connected to the Muslim Brotherhood, as are her parents.  Ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and allowing its operatives into the Obama administration would be seen as treasonous if the country was not so immersed in Tolerism.</p>
<p>Clinton is not apologetic in the least over her relationship with Abedin. Now that Clinton feels that she should be President at a time when Islamist threats all over the world have only increased during the Obama years, she feels that her “feminine” skills give her the special qualification to right the ship she helped to tip over during her tenure as Secretary of State.</p>
<p>So, in her recent speech at Georgetown University, she contended that when women participate in peace processes, “often overlooked issues such as human rights, individual justice, national reconciliation, economic renewal are often brought to the forefront.”</p>
<p>Clinton’s talk (for which she apparently was paid $300,000) was at the launch of the Action Plan Academy, an organization which aims to explore how countries can craft strategies to help women rise into leadership roles on security issues and provide training and workshops.</p>
<p>“Today marks a very important next step,” Clinton told an audience of diplomats and other officials from all over the world, “shifting from saying the right things to doing the right things, putting into action the steps that are necessary not only to protect women and children but to find ways of utilizing women as makers and keepers of peace.”</p>
<p>Of the hundreds of peace treaties signed since the early 1990s, between or within nations, she said, fewer than 10 percent had any female negotiators and fewer than 3 percent had women as signatories.</p>
<p>“Is it any wonder that many of these agreements fail between a few years?” Clinton asked, implying, without any evidence at all, that women produce better peace agreements than men.   If I was paying part of the $300,000 I would really have expected a better discussion of past female leaders like Ms. Bhutto in Pakistan (who transferred nuclear technology to North Korea), Golda Meir in Israel,  and Margaret Thatcher in Britain,  and current leaders Angela Merkel in Germany and Cristina Kirchner in Argentina. America itself has seen women leaders in security matters – former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright and Condoleeza Rice (and Hillary Clinton), National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and first female Ambassador to the United Nations, Jeane Kirkpatrick.</p>
<p>Instead of discussing any of them, she raised the idea that two women were involved at a high level in brokering peace in the 40-year struggle between the government of the Philippines and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and other Islamic groups in the southern island of Bangsamoro (meaning Muslim land), which has killed hundreds of thousands and displaced more than a million..</p>
<p>Unfortunately, whether these two women were in fact instrumental or not, the issue of the Philippines submitting to Muslim rule over areas of its impoverished, yet potentially oil-rich, south, after 40 years of conflict and the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the displacement of over a million people, is factually quite complex.  Some argue that it was external pressure that helped this second peace initiative on the same territory for which the first peace treaty failed; and most recognize that this second one is very much up in the air as to its sustainability.</p>
<p>Under the proposal, Islamic Sharia law would apply to Muslims in the region, but the country&#8217;s justice system would (hopefully) continue to apply to non-Muslims. The Moro group has renounced the terrorist acts of extremist groups, but at least three smaller Muslim rebel groups oppose the autonomy deal and have vowed to continue fighting for a completely separate Muslim homeland.</p>
<p>And one wonders, once the Muslim groups are granted jurisdiction over limited areas of government, whether this is viewed by them as a first step to future demands for full Sharia law.   But Hillary is not interested in waiting to see how it turns out before attributing it to the presence of some women working on the negotiations.</p>
<p>This is a complex problem that Hillary obviously simplifies for partisan political purposes, i.e. the female vote in America.  Some commentators feel that the potential natural resource riches available to foreign business concerns is what eventually pushed the Philippine Government into the deal, rather than any great feminine talents as Hillary contends.  Moreover, some believe that the United States and other Western governments have backed the autonomy deal partly to prevent the insurgency from breeding extremists who could threaten their own countries.</p>
<p>But the topic of feminine talents for security and diplomacy and her preference to cite Muslims as examples rather than American female icons is not the main concern caused by Ms. Clinton’s remarks.   The really scandalous part of the speech is when she cited feminine skills as a component of something she called “Smart Power” as follows (emphasis added):</p>
<p>“This is what we call Smart Power, using every possible tool…leaving no one on the sidelines, <b>showing respect even for one’s enemies</b>, trying to understand, and insofar as is psychologically possible, <b>empathize with their perspective and point of view</b>, helping to define the problems [and] determine a solution, that is what we believe in the 21st century will change the prospect for peace,” she said.</p>
<p>What does it mean for a possible future President to seek to show “respect” for one’s enemies?</p>
<p>Respect, according to the Oxford Dictionary is defined as “a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.”</p>
<p>And here is where we begin to climb down into a terrible ethical hole.   Islamists, with their history of beheadings, other murders, torture, persecution of ethnic and religious minorities, and gays, and their forced genital mutilation of young girls, their abuse of women and their general disregard for individual human rights, do not deserve our “deep admiration” and do not show any great “qualities” or “achievements” &#8211; unless your idea of an achievement is grabbing vast areas of Iraq and Syria from under Obama’s nose, without his bothering to object until it was too late.</p>
<p>Let’s dig a little deeper also into the whole concept of “empathy” for one’s enemy.   The idea of empathizing with the enemy was first popularized by the film, <i>Fog of War, </i>about former Defense Secretary in the Johnson administration, Robert McNamara, who made it one of the eleven lessons he learned. The concept of empathy is also something that has received the study of humanist psychologists, who are well-meaning in their attempts to aid interpersonal relationships and help people understand and therefore overcome misunderstandings in difficult relationships.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Carl Rogers, an important American academic psychologist of the twentieth century promoted the concept of empathy, or being empathetic as a process leading one to perceive the internal frame of reference of another with accuracy and with the emotional components and meanings which pertain thereto as if one were the person, but without ever losing the &#8220;as if&#8221; condition. Thus it means to sense the hurt or the pleasure of another as he senses it and to perceive the causes thereof as he perceives them, but without ever losing the recognition that it is “as if I were hurt or pleased and so forth.  If this &#8220;as if&#8221; quality is lost, then the state is one of identification.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Rogers reasoned that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>An empathic way of being with another person means entering the private perceptual world of the other and becoming thoroughly at home in it. It involves being sensitive, moment by moment, to the changing felt meanings which flow in this other person, to the fear or rage or tenderness or confusion or whatever that he or she is experiencing. It means temporarily living in the other&#8217;s life, moving about in it delicately without making judgements;  &#8230;It means frequently checking with the person as to the accuracy of your sensings, and being guided by the responses you receive. You are a confident companion to the person in his or her inner world.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>To be with another in this way means that for the time being, you lay aside your own views and values in order to enter another&#8217;s world without prejudice. In some sense it means that you lay aside your self; this can only be done by persons who are secure enough in themselves that they know they will not get lost in what may turn out to be the strange or bizarre world of the other, and that they can comfortably return to their own world when they wish.</i></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">One can only conclude that real “political” empathy is for only the strongest, most intelligent intellectuals and politicians of our time, who are most secure in their liberal values and their constitutional limits and duties.  If the person is not so strong, this journey into what can be “a strange or bizarre world” may result in the person feeling more comfortable in <b>that</b> world or identifying with that world.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Feeling more comfortable in that world may result in something way more than tolerant empathy, and may result in conversion or submission.   This is not a job for postmodernists, but only for those with the clearest and most certain confidence in American values.  Without clear values, and a fixed sense of right and wrong, and good versus evil, postmodernist empathy will make it harder and harder for the empathizer to return to their own world, especially if his President has said that America is no more tolerant than Islam, that American standards of justice are no better than Islam’s and that countries that have banished all Jews and most Christians share the same view of dignity of all persons.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">And so, when the President stated that America and the Muslim world share mutual respect (i.e. admiration); and that they share the same principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings; then one wonders if empathy will more likely lead to submission.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">If Hillary Clinton calls for more respect and empathy for the enemy, she is a poor choice to lead a country as important as America is to the notion of individual freedoms and human rights based on Judeo-Christian values.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Since the election of Obama, we have a very large problem on our hands.   The moral and cultural relativism and postmodernism of our university campuses are now in the White House.  Can the historical America survive another four or eight years of tolerism and empathy before it, too, like some European countries, begins to submit to Islamist values, with acceptance of Sharia law as an alternative to its Constitution, Muslim religious teachings in public schools, and tolerance for “no-go” areas?    America failed its young by failing to properly vet Obama’s background and associations before electing him;   this time, before Americans place Hillary Clinton in the White House they had better study carefully the notions of tolerance, empathy and submission if America is to remain a great country.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.</b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/howard-rotberg/hillary-at-georgetown-tolerance-empathy-and-submission/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hillary Joins the Ferguson Lynch Mob</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/hillary-joins-the-ferguson-lynch-mob/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=hillary-joins-the-ferguson-lynch-mob</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/hillary-joins-the-ferguson-lynch-mob/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2014 04:53:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthew Vadum]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ferguson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=239841</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Stoking anger, hatred and fear to get into the White House.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/clinton1.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-239842" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/clinton1-450x300.jpg" alt="Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton participates in &quot;A Conversation with Hillary Rodham Clinton&quot; in Manhattan, New York" width="282" height="188" /></a>Breaking her calculated silence on the issue, Hillary Clinton said young Michael Brown was a victim of police brutality in Ferguson, Mo., the latest in a long line of helpless black victims mowed down by racist cops who are part of America&#8217;s corrupt criminal justice system.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s just more left-wing sloganeering, staples of which are knee-jerk cop hatred and making excuses for black criminals.</p>
<p>Clinton, wife of the man some used to call America&#8217;s &#8220;first black president,&#8221; has a long history of race-baiting and race-based pandering. She patronized black Americans in her insultingly awful mock African-American accent when <a href="http://www.creators.com/conservative/walter-williams/insulting-blacks.html">she gave</a> her infamous &#8220;I don&#8217;t feel no ways tired&#8221; speech.</p>
<p>The all-but-declared candidate for the 2016 Democratic nomination for president&#8217;s media-hyped public epiphany about Ferguson and Michael Brown <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/michael-brown-funeral-prelude-to-a-cop-lynching-1/">comes days after</a> 18-year-old Brown was laid to rest following a grotesque political rally led by the abominable racial arsonist Al Sharpton.</p>
<p>The former U.S. secretary of state embraces the politically correct lie that a helpless 6&#8217;4&#8243; 292-lbs. Brown was shot in cold blood, arms raised while attempting to surrender to white police officer Darren Wilson, instead of the less convenient truth that Brown was trying to crush the decorated cop&#8217;s skull with his bare hands and reaching for the man&#8217;s handgun. Left-wingers like Clinton also prefer to ignore that fact that minutes before he attacked Wilson, Brown was captured on video bullying a much smaller East Indian shopkeeper during a robbery, an act that some might consider a hate crime. And the public is still waiting for Brown&#8217;s not-yet-released postmortem toxicology report.</p>
<p>The myth that Brown was a gentle giant won&#8217;t die. The racial-grievance industry, egged on by President Obama and his fellow radicals, won&#8217;t let it go. They need rampant racial tension and cop-hatred to persist in order to motivate their political base if Democrats are to have any hope of maintaining control of the U.S. Senate after the November congressional elections.</p>
<p>Clinton, the Benghazi bungler whose studied nonfeasance on Sept. 11, 2012, got four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, killed by Muslim terrorists, told a San Francisco audience:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;This summer, the eyes of our country and indeed the world have been focused on one community in the middle of the American heartland, Ferguson, Missouri. Watching the recent funeral for Michael Brown, as a mother, as a human being, my heart just broke for his family, because losing a child is every parent&#8217;s greatest fear and an unimaginable loss.</p>
<p>But I also grieve for that community and for many like it across our country. Behind the dramatic, terrible pictures on television, are deep challenges that will be with them and with us long after the cameras move on. This is what happens when the bonds of trust and respect that hold any community together fray. Nobody wants to see our streets look like a war zone, not in America. We are better than that.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Although black violence is a persistent problem in America, Clinton, as always, has nothing to say about anything that might actually help black communities. They are always victims in the leftist narrative. She and her comrades have done everything in their power for the last half century since the War on Poverty was launched to weaken black families, yet they are always calling for more government programs and social engineering to cure the problems that they themselves have created.</p>
<p>Clinton spoke of the violence in Ferguson as if it had materialized in response to some kind of injustice, ignoring the role of what police called &#8220;outside agitators&#8221; played in driving the nightly street battles with police. She continued:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;We saw our country&#8217;s true character in the community leaders that came out to protest peacefully and worked to restrain violence. The young people who insisted on having their voices heard and in the many decent and respectful law enforcement officers who showed what quality law enforcement looks like. Men and women who serve and protect their communities with courage and professionalism, who inspire trust, rather than fear. We need more of that, because we can do better.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Apart from her perfunctory praise of law enforcement officials and denunciation of violence, Clinton&#8217;s wording implies that Ferguson police officer, Darren Wilson, who shot Brown in self-defense, is not one of the &#8220;many decent and respectful law enforcement officers.&#8221; According to Clinton&#8217;s reasoning, Wilson must be a racist villain who is part of the problem.</p>
<p>Then Clinton began to sound like Barack Obama and other believers in the kooky legal philosophy known as Critical Race Theory, pretending that violent crimes in this country are not disproportionately committed by blacks. She ignores the fact that in some communities blacks receive heightened scrutiny from police because they seem to fit the profile of wanted suspects. If black crime were not prevalent in a specific area, chances are blacks would not receive much attention from police. But logic is not something left-wingers are often blessed with. They prefer to explain social ills by blaming white people.</p>
<p>Clinton continued:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;We can&#8217;t ignore the inequities that persist in our justice system that undermine our most deeply held values of fairness and equality. Imagine what we would feel and what we would do if white drivers were three times as likely to be searched by police during a traffic stop as black drivers. Instead of the other way around; if white offenders received prison sentences 10 percent longer than black offenders for the same crimes; if a third of all white men, just look at this room and take one-third, went to prison during their lifetime. Imagine that. That is the reality in the lives of so many of our fellow Americans and so many of the communities in which they live.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Whether the specific statistics Clinton cites are valid is an arguable point, but what is not arguable is that violent black crime in America is far more prevalent that violent crime committed by whites. The statistics for young black males are particularly horrifying.</p>
<p>As liberal Democrat academic John McWhorter, a black American, <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/race-riot-romance-1/">wrote</a> last year:</p>
<blockquote><p>“[Y]oung black men do commit about 50% of the murders in the U.S. &#8230; Hardly uncommon are cases such as the two black guys who doused a white 13-year-old with gasoline and lit him on fire, saying “You get what you deserve, white boy’ (Kansas City, Mo.) or 20 black kids who beat up white Matthew Owens on his porch ‘for Trayvon’ (Mobile, Ala.) &#8230; [I]t’s just fake to pretend that the association of young black men with violence comes out of thin air. Young black men murder 14 times more than young white men. If the kinds of things I just mentioned were regularly done by whites, it’d be trumpeted as justification for being scared to death of them.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>But Hillary Clinton would never beat up a key political constituency. She&#8217;s too busy inflaming black voters, making them feel good about their dysfunctional communities, and reinforcing the worst pathologies of inner cities.</p>
<p>Of course Clinton is completely supportive of Eric Holder&#8217;s witch hunt in Ferguson, where Justice Department and FBI officials have been busy gathering evidence to use in what promises to be a high-profile trumped-up civil rights prosecution against Officer Wilson. Clinton said:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;I applaud President Obama for sending the attorney general to Ferguson and demanding a thorough and speedy investigation, to find out what happened, to see that justice is done, to help this community begin healing itself. We should all add our voices to those that have come together in recent days to work for peace, justice and reconciliation in Ferguson, and beyond, to stand against violence and for the values that we cherish. We can do better.</p>
<p>We can work to rebuild the bonds of trust from the ground up. It starts within families and communities. It was 51 years ago today that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr called us to live out true meaning of our creed, to make the dream real for all Americans. That mission is as fiercely urgent today as when he stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the hot August sun all those years ago.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Except that Clinton, a Saul Alinsky adherent just like Barack Obama, has no interest in rebuilding bonds of trust. Like Obama, she wants to tear down America in order to rebuild it and replace it with a socialist state. Talk of &#8220;equality&#8221; and &#8220;healing&#8221; are merely arrows in her rhetorical quiver.</p>
<p>Clinton&#8217;s attempt to stoke the flames of racial resentment came as up-and-coming independent investigative journalist Charles C. Johnson announced he <a href="http://gotnews.com/media-covers-reacts-got-news-lawsuit-michaelbrown-juvie-records/">has filed</a> a lawsuit after two law enforcement sources told him Michael Brown&#8217;s juvenile criminal record is under seal in a St. Louis court. Johnson also wonders why the so-called gentle giant <a href="http://gotnews.com/michaelbrown-choose-attend-st-louiss-violent-school-ferguson/">opted to attend</a> the most violent high school in the St. Louis area when he could have easily gone elsewhere.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, black leftists <a href="http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2014/08/28/we-need-to-get-ungovernable-dc-townhall-on-ferguson-gets-heated-n1884394">are plotting</a> further unrest to ensure the survival and flourishing of their narrative of cop-hatred.</p>
<p>At a Washington, D.C. branch of Busboys and Poets, owned by celebrated radical leftist Andy Shallal, an NAACP official and other neo-communist radicals like Hugo Chavez-loving actor Danny Glover vowed to escalate their activities.</p>
<p>The town hall-style meeting was titled, &#8220;Ferguson and Beyond – The Way Forward: A Town Hall Meeting on Police Killings of Black Men.&#8221;</p>
<p>Dr. Ron Daniels, former executive director of the Marxist public interest law firm, the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has been essential in the Left&#8217;s long-running drive to dismantle the Global War on Terror, seemed to sum up the feelings of participants.</p>
<p>&#8220;We need to get ungovernable,&#8221; Daniels said. &#8220;We&#8217;ve been too tame.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton, who is determined to carry on Barack Obama&#8217;s agenda of racial antagonism, wholeheartedly agrees.</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>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/hillary-joins-the-ferguson-lynch-mob/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>106</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Clinton Admits He Passed on Killing Bin Laden</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/mark-tapson/clinton-admits-he-passed-on-killing-bin-laden/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=clinton-admits-he-passed-on-killing-bin-laden</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/mark-tapson/clinton-admits-he-passed-on-killing-bin-laden/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2014 04:54:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Tapson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bin Laden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Kroger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=237764</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[…And the world changed forever.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/clinton.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-237766" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/clinton-450x337.jpg" alt="clinton" width="287" height="215" /></a>In a memorably explosive 2006 <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/2006/09/26/transcript-william-jefferson-clinton-on-fox-news-sunday/">interview</a> with Chris Wallace, former President Bill Clinton went off on a finger-wagging “tear,” as Wallace put it, when questioned about whether he had done enough during his terms in office to get Osama bin Laden. “I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since,” growled a furious Clinton. Now a recently-released audiotape confirms that Clinton did indeed have at least one clear opportunity to kill the world’s most wanted man in 1998 – and passed on it, allowing bin Laden to live to mastermind the 9/11 attacks.</p>
<p>Last week Australian Michael Kroger, the former head of the Liberal Party in the state of Victoria, unveiled on Australia’s Sky News <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bill-clinton-sept-10-2001-i-could-have-gotten-bin-laden">a never-before-released audio</a> of Clinton speaking to a group of businessmen in Melbourne on September 10, 2001, recorded a mere ten hours before the first plane hit the World Trade Center. In that recording, made with the former president’s knowledge according to Kroger, Clinton responded thusly in response to a question about international terrorism:</p>
<blockquote><p>And I’m just saying, you know, if I were Osama bin Laden — he’s a very smart guy, I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about him — and I nearly got him once. I nearly got him. And I could have killed him, but I would have to destroy a little town called Kandahar in Afghanistan and kill 300 innocent women and children, and then I would have been no better than him. And so I didn’t do it.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://dailysurge.com/2014/08/fmr-cia-head-bin-laden-unit-calls-clinton-liar-gets-shouting-match-dummy-geraldo/#eygewDMMb3HXeLSs.01">Questioned</a> by Fox News about the Clinton recording, Michael Scheuer, chief of the bin Laden unit from 1995 to 1999, replied that Clinton was a “disgrace” and a “monumental liar” for claiming that he didn’t kill bin Laden because of the collateral damage. He asserted that only Taliban and bin Laden and his crew would’ve died if Clinton had given the go-ahead for a missile strike on the region in December of 1998. But Clinton didn’t act, said Scheuer, because he’s a “coward morally” and because he’s “more concerned, like Obama, with what the world thinks about him.”</p>
<p>In the 2006 Wallace interview, Clinton referenced a wildly controversial ABC miniseries called <em>The Path to 9/11</em>*, which had aired a mere two weeks earlier and which Clinton angrily called part of a right-wing “disinformation” campaign against him. That docudrama, based in part on <em>The 9/11 Commission Report</em>, dramatized the historical thread connecting the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, Islamic attacks on American interests throughout the Clinton era, the failure to connect the dots under Bush, and the attacks of that September morning in 2001.</p>
<p>Prior to its premiere, a false accusation of “conservative bias” on the part of the filmmakers quickly spun into <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/discover-the-secret-right_b_29015.html">leftist hysteria</a> that the $30+ million miniseries was a “well-honed propaganda operation” on the part of a stealth cabal of conservatives. Clinton and his supporters, fearing the miniseries would tarnish his political legacy, claimed it was full of lies and pulled out all the stops to suppress it, including threats by the Senate Democratic leadership, led by Harry Reid, to pull ABC’s license if the miniseries aired. With a few very minor edits, the miniseries squeaked by and went on to high ratings; but it has not aired since and ABC-Disney refuses to release a DVD [check out John Ziegler’s riveting documentary <a href="http://www.blockingthepath.com/"><em>Blocking the Path to 9/11</em></a> for the whole outrageous story].</p>
<p>The miniseries featured one particular scene vetted, as every scene was, by a battery of ABC lawyers, in which a CIA team and its Afghan allies have bin Laden in its sights, call the White House for approval to make the hit, and are denied the green light. Clinton and his people attacked this scene as an outrageous fabrication.</p>
<p>But in May 2012, CBS’ <em>60 Minutes</em> broadcast <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7408420n">a startling segment</a> featuring former CIA officer Hank Crumpton, Deputy Director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center, who discussed with interviewer Lara Logan his participation in operations to capture and/or kill bin Laden well before 9/11. Crumpton complained about “the <em>lack </em>of response on the part of the administration” and described one incident in which his team sighted bin Laden. It sounds very similar to the dramatized scene from <em>Path to 9/11</em>:</p>
<blockquote><p>Crumpton: Our human sources took us to a village uh, far, not far from Kandahar –</p>
<p>Logan: And what did you see there?</p>
<p>Crumpton: We saw a security detail, a convoy, and we saw bin Laden exit the vehicle.</p>
<p>Logan: Clearly.</p>
<p>Crumpton: Clearly. And we had – the optics were spot on, beaming back to us, CIA headquarters. We immediately alerted the White House, and the Clinton administration’s response was, “Well, it will take several hours for the TLAMs, the cruise missiles launched from submarines, to reach that objective. So you need to tell us where bin Laden will be five or six hours from now.” The frustration was enormous.</p>
<p>Logan: So at that moment you wanted to kill him.</p>
<p>Crumpton: Yes.</p>
<p>Logan: But you couldn’t get permission.</p>
<p>Crumpton: Correct.</p></blockquote>
<p>Logan then narrates that Crumpton “couldn’t get permission to do <em>anything</em>, including allowing the CIA’s Afghan agents on the ground to attack bin Laden’s compound.”</p>
<p>Now the Clinton admission serves as further vindication for the <em>Path to 9/11</em>’s veracity; in fact, Scheuer also stated, as he has on numerous previous occasions, that the Clinton administration passed on as many as <em>ten</em> opportunities to nail bin Laden.</p>
<p>Imagine how different the world would be if President Clinton had pulled the trigger on bin Laden in 1998. There would have been no 9/11, says Michael Scheuer, and probably no Iraq war. “I worked hard to try to kill him,” Clinton insisted in the Wallace interview. “I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since.” But when he could have, he didn’t. Even if it truly was out of concern for Kandahari civilians, this question posed rhetorically by Scheuer cuts to the heart of the matter: “Who was he elected to protect, Kandaharis or Americans?”</p>
<p>* Full disclosure: <em>The Path to 9/11</em> was written and produced by my friend Cyrus Nowrasteh, whom I assisted on the project.</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/clinton-admits-he-passed-on-killing-bin-laden/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hamas’ Genocidal Technocrats</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/robert-spencer/hamas-genocidal-technocrats/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=hamas-genocidal-technocrats</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/robert-spencer/hamas-genocidal-technocrats/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2014 04:58:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Spencer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hamas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[palestinians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=234305</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hillary Clinton once again reveals the willful ignorance of the Washington establishment.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/hamas1.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-234307" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/hamas1-450x300.jpg" alt="Military Ceremony in Gaza" width="300" height="200" /></a>Hillary Clinton <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/06/16/Hillary-Hamas-Officials-Largely-Technocrats">said Monday</a> that she was in favor of Barack Obama’s support for the new Palestinian Authority unity government, even though it included the jihad terror group Hamas, because “the makeup of this joint enterprise are largely technocrats. They’re academics and they’re business people. They don’t represent sort of, what you might call hard-core Hamas leadership.”</p>
<p>Would Hillary Clinton then have us believe that the Hamas officials who are part of the unity government do not represent Hamas leadership, or Hamas itself? That would be like saying that Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi don’t represent the leadership of the Democratic Party, or that Obama, Reid and Pelosi cannot be held responsible for the actions and positions of the Party.</p>
<p>This is plainly ridiculous – and in this case, even worse than ridiculous, because Hamas leaders have quite recently reaffirmed their commitment to the total destruction of Israel. Anyone who thinks that is not the position of the Hamas officials in the Palestinian Authority government is suffering from a case of willful blindness that is spectacularly severe even in this blinkered age.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-official-denies-group-could-recognize-israel/">At the time of the reconciliation</a> between the two Palestinian groups, the Washington Post reported that Hamas would recognize Israel. Hamas spokesman Taher Nunu was livid: “What I was quoted as telling the American paper is wrong, and I unequivocally deny it. The issue of Hamas recognizing Israel is a complete nonstarter… aimed primarily at weakening the movement’s positions on Israel.” Nunu threatened legal action against the Post for its “false report.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/insideisrael/2014/May/Hamas-No-Future-without-Jihad/">A week after</a> reconciling with Fatah, Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal stated: “Our path is resistance and the rifle and our choice is jihad. There is no past or future without jihad and resistance. Jihad is our path.”</p>
<p>What that meant was vividly illustrated in early May, when <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/05/palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&amp;doc_id=11381">Palestinian Media Watch</a> reported that “the terrorist who murdered 15 in the Sbarro pizza shop suicide bombing in 2001 was given a military funeral by the PA after his body was transferred to the PA last week. On Aug. 9, 2001 suicide bomber Izz Al-Din Al-Masri detonated himself in a Sbarro pizza shop in Jerusalem, killing 15, 7 of them children. 5 members of one family were killed in the attack.”</p>
<p>Hamas’ Al-Aqsa TV News exulted: “Izz Al-Din Al-Masri ascended to Paradise in a Martyrdom-seeking operation (suicide terror attack) he carried out in the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem, where he gave the Zionists a taste of humiliation after killing 19 Zionists and wounding dozens.” And at the funeral, a Palestinian Authority official declared: “The popular gathering around the blood of Izz Al-Din Al-Masri is an honest and true expression of our people’s yearning for national unity (between Fatah and Hamas) and unity of action.”</p>
<p>That same week, according to the <a href="http://elderofziyon.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/hamas-releases-anti-hatikva-video.html#.U2o_t8eaEhR">Elder of Ziyon</a> blog, Hamas’ Al Qassam Brigades “released a video for Israel’s Independence Day, called ‘The End of the Hope,’” in which “Jews are forced onto ships to Germany by masked Hamas terrorists. Worshippers are chased out of the Kotel plaza which is destroyed and replaced with the ‘Mughrabi Quarter.’ Armed masked terrorists are seen on the roof of the Dome of the Rock to ensure that Jews can never visit there as they sing that there is no Temple in Jerusalem.”</p>
<p><a href="http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&amp;doc_id=11384">That same week</a>, the weekly Hamas children’s show <em>Tomorrow’s Pioneers</em> featured a young girl saying, that she wanted to become a police officer when she grew up, “So that I can shoot Jews.” The show’s child host then asked: “All the Jews? All of them?” When the girl responded in the affirmative, the host said, “Good.”</p>
<p>Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh <a href="http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/181470#.U5Wk0S-dDUo">said last Saturday</a>: “Hamas’s strategy has not changed and will not change.” The goal of that “strategy” was the total destruction of Israel: “Wherever [Hamas] presides, we will remain preachers and teachers and build the Palestinian nation to liberate all the land of Palestine. We emphasize now that we will not retreat from out plan to liberate our lands and ensure the right of return and the release of [terrorist] prisoners.”</p>
<p>But don’t worry: they’re <em>technocrats</em>!</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/robert-spencer/hamas-genocidal-technocrats/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>35</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama and Elizabeth Warren’s Big Lie About Student Debt</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/obama-and-elizabeth-warrens-big-lie-about-student-debt/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama-and-elizabeth-warrens-big-lie-about-student-debt</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/obama-and-elizabeth-warrens-big-lie-about-student-debt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:50:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[College]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elizabeth Ann Herring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Student Loans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=233771</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Student loans don’t need reforming. Colleges do.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="attachment_233774" style="width: 242px" class="wp-caption alignleft"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Elizabeth_Warren.jpg"><img class="wp-image-233774 size-medium" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Elizabeth_Warren-232x350.jpg" alt="Elizabeth_Warren" width="232" height="350" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">photo credit: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/qwrrty/8152000438/?">Tim Pierce</a></p></div>
<p>On Monday, two millionaires showed off their latest inequality talking points as Obama used Elizabeth Warren&#8217;s student loan bill to bash congressional Republicans.</p>
<p>&#8220;If you&#8217;re a big oil company, they&#8217;ll go to bat for you,&#8221; Obama sneered. &#8220;If you&#8217;re a student, good luck.&#8221;</p>
<p>Good luck indeed. Warren&#8217;s bill cynically piggybacks on a lower interest rate plan from last year that the House passed 392 to 31. The Republicans, who only care about oil companies, unlike Obama who doled out billions in Green Energy loans to the companies of his donors, voted for it almost en masse.</p>
<p>Unlike it, Warren&#8217;s bill isn&#8217;t really about student loans and isn&#8217;t meant to pass. Like her Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act, it&#8217;s political theater by a lifelong fraud who began her career as a fake Indian, was a fake Republican and is now a fake Socialist. It would be easier to find a garden spot on Mars than a single honest moment in the career of Elizabeth Ann Herring.</p>
<p>Warren&#8217;s bill is cynical manufactured outrage trying to link two unconnected things, supposed tax breaks for the rich to student loans, so that her equally corrupt colleagues can hold on to their fiefdom in the Senate by dragging out the overexploited youth vote for the midterm elections.</p>
<p>Elizabeth Warren, a tenured celebrity professor who jumped into politics, and Barack Obama, an untenured law school instructor, who made it big in politics, know exactly why student loan debt is so high and why their measures do nothing to address its real causes.</p>
<p>Harvard Law paid Warren $350,000 to teach a single course. When Scott Brown brought it up during a debate about student loans, she protested. &#8220;I want to talk about the issues. Senator Brown wants to launch attacks.&#8221;</p>
<p>But Warren&#8217;s outrageous compensation is the issue. Harvard pays the adjuncts who teach many of its undergraduate classes an average of $11,037. Elizabeth Warren, who likes comparing the salary of a company&#8217;s employees to its CEO’s, isn’t comparing the $429,981 that Harvard paid her before she ran for office to an adjunct’s salary. And unlike a CEO, all Warren did was show up for a little bit and then go back to her real business as a lawyer and government consultant.</p>
<p>The untenured Obama was making a more modest $69,287 for teaching three courses. He was politically connected, but had yet to become a celebrity. After leaving the White House, he can expect to easily pull down a small fortune for showing up to teach a brief seminar at any college.</p>
<p>The price of celebrity professors is paid for by student loans. The successful celebrity professors go on to a career in politics condemning Republicans for not caring enough about student loans.</p>
<p>But while it&#8217;s easy to blame Warren&#8217;s ridiculous salary for the student loan problem, we didn&#8217;t get to a trillion in student loan debt because of her or Clinton&#8217;s former Labor Secretary turned inequality campaigner Robert Reich who pulls in $235,791 a year from a public university at UC-Berkeley to teach a course on &#8220;Wealth and Poverty&#8221; making him one of the highest paid state employees.</p>
<p>The tenured celebrity professor who doesn&#8217;t teach and gets paid is the 1 percent and the adjunct that teaches, but is unlikely to ever get tenure or a decent paycheck, is the 99 percent. But just as national inequality did not happen because a few CEOs receive huge salaries, student loan debt didn&#8217;t spin out of control because of a few celebrity Socialist 1 percent professors.</p>
<p>The problem is always in the middle. In both the national economy and the campus, the biggest driver of inequality is bureaucracy.</p>
<p>The classic campus was top heavy with professors and light on administrators. The modern campus has more bureaucrats than professors. The average ratio is two administrators to one full-time faculty member. In the 1960s it used to be two faculty members to one administrator.</p>
<p>The rise of college administrators was driven by government regulations. The more colleges depended on the government to maintain their industry, the more they catered to government. The modern university isn&#8217;t run by donors, by student demand or even by its endless ranks of administrators. Like most government subsidized industries, it is run by the government.</p>
<p>Normal businesses have a profit motive for controlling the growth of their internal bureaucracy. The profit motive of universities lies in expanding their bureaucracy to better interact with their government masters. The very business of student loans increases the size of university administrations even while the cost of that administration increases the size of student loans.</p>
<p>In universities, as in their government templates, bureaucracy, regulation and spending feed off each other. Regulation results in more bureaucracy and more bureaucracy results in more regulation until the system can no longer fulfill its default function.</p>
<p>That state was already reached long ago in the most broken public school systems.</p>
<p>In Newark&#8217;s broken school system there is an administrator to every six students. The institutions of higher learning with their swollen administrator ratios are following that same model. The administrators of every indebted, overbureaucratized and overpriced college know that just as in the Newark school system, the bill will eventually be passed to taxpayers.</p>
<p>Like the allied financial institutions feeding off the debt they create, they are too big to fail.</p>
<p>Colleges keep spending money irresponsibly because they can always make it up by raising tuition rates. And they can always raise tuition rates because students have no choice but to pay. And when millions of students need something, the government will eventually supply it.</p>
<p>College degrees have become mandatory, even for jobs that lack any skill-based reasons for requiring them, turning colleges into very expensive high schools. Politicians and college presidents speak glowingly of the increased job prospects and salaries for college graduates. They neglect to mention that this is often not due to any academic magic, but to a job market in which employers save time and weed out the unemployable by hiring college graduates.</p>
<p>After educational “reforms” devalued many high school diplomas, colleges became expensive four year filters that save employers the trouble of going through resumes. College graduates earn higher salaries because their fortune in student loan debt tells employers that they can read, write and show up on time. And that their pile of debt will force them to work at a job they hate.</p>
<p>Increasing college enrollments devalue the exclusivity of a college degree. When the college diploma becomes as poor of a predictor of literacy and job skills as the high school diploma, it will also become worthless. The devaluation of college diplomas is already leading some employers to unnecessarily demand graduate degrees.</p>
<p>Colleges have been able to get away with wildly irresponsible spending and tuition increases because student loans continue to be subsidized in one form or another. The ping pong ball bounces between private lenders and the government with plenty of money to be made by those in the loop from the boom and bust cycle of privatizing and subsidizing loans, deregulating and regulating, while piously lecturing about inequality, &#8216;corporatization&#8217; and tax breaks for the rich.</p>
<p>Higher education is too big to fail and so is the student loan industry. As long as students are forced to attend college by the reform movements that destroyed public education standards, and are busy destroying the educational standards of higher education, their attendance will have to be subsidized. Americans will be forced to make bigger and bigger “investments” in the success of the next generation when they are really investing in corrupt and dysfunctional bureaucracies.</p>
<p>It’s a race that no one except the institutions peddling sheepskin, celebrity professors and courses on income inequality taught by millionaires can win.</p>
<p>Completing high school used to be a way that a poor boy could get a job. Now it&#8217;s college. Tomorrow it&#8217;s graduate school. This system doesn&#8217;t benefit him and it doesn&#8217;t create equality. Instead it rewards the likes of Elizabeth Warren or Robert Reich with generous salaries for occasionally coming in to speak about inequality and it rewards even more generously the bureaucrats who make the system impermeable to real reform and change.</p>
<p>The only way to reduce the trillion-dollar mountain of debt is by reforming higher education.</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>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/obama-and-elizabeth-warrens-big-lie-about-student-debt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>91</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Valerie Jarrett, the CEO of Obama Inc.</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/valerie-jarrett-the-ceo-of-obama-inc/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=valerie-jarrett-the-ceo-of-obama-inc</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/valerie-jarrett-the-ceo-of-obama-inc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2014 04:50:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chicago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Valerie Jarrett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=221293</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The woman behind the curtain.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/jarrett_ny_092210.jpg"><img class=" wp-image-221349 alignleft" alt="jarrett_ny_092210" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/jarrett_ny_092210-450x350.jpg" width="315" height="245" /></a>For eight years, the media envisioned Dick Cheney as the ‘evil genius’ behind the Bush White House, but few in the media have wanted to take a long look at the ‘evil genius’ behind the Obama White House.</p>
<p>The populist grass roots myth died shortly after Obama was elected and while plenty of books have been written about the internal workings of the Obama campaign and administration, unlike the books written about Bush, they rarely inform mainstream media news coverage. When these books and articles come from within the media, the authors are not attacked and their work isn’t discredited, it simply gets compartmentalized into the wonksphere and away from daily news coverage.</p>
<p>This compartmentalization is the reason why media coverage of Obama remains largely unchanged and very little attention is paid to the non-cabinet level personalities who actually make policy. Colin Powell’s dissatisfaction with his lack of influence under Bush was widely covered, while <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/clinton-insider-reveals-obamas-foreign-policy-blunders/">Hillary Clinton’s was not</a>. The Powell implosion led the media to exaggerate the role of Dick Cheney, but no one asks who really had the final say on foreign policy under Obama if Hillary Clinton didn’t.</p>
<p>The Obama White House is a radical departure from previous administrations. It’s a permanent campaign, not just for the obvious reason that it is constantly using the tactics of the campaign, fundraising, attacking and performing, but also because it operates like a campaign reducing the traditional forms of an administration to formalities.</p>
<p>Cabinet members <a href="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/11/locked-in-the-cabinet-99374.html#.Uydo9_lr7J8">have little influence</a>. Decisions are made by White House staffers, many from the Center for American Progress, who are the ones running the unaccountable permanent campaign.</p>
<p>There is no Obama administration. There is an Obama campaign. And that campaign is part of an organization built around a single figure; Obama Inc.</p>
<p>Obama Inc. has more in common with the type of organization built around a celebrity like Beyonce than a conventional political organization. It can handle everything from fundraising, branding to viral marketing, but like the inner circles of top celebrities, the most influential person in the organization is the one who can soothe, pamper and cater to the celebrity’s mercurial personality.</p>
<p>Valerie Jarrett’s role as CEO of Obama Inc. confuses those who expect a more conventional arrangement. Jarrett is less Dick Cheney and more Colonel Parker or Helen Kushnick; a powerful enigmatic figure ruthlessly dedicated to her star whose power comes from his dependency.</p>
<p>Obama is the star of Obama Inc., the grinning figure who goes out on stage and cracks jokes while selling overpriced health insurance to the country. Valerie Jarrett is his manager, confidante and gatekeeper. Officially Jarrett is a senior adviser with a defined title and function, but Obama Inc. does few things officially and unofficially, Jarrett has the last word on everything.</p>
<p>Jarrett merges the personal and the political. Obama may chat with numerous advisers, but it’s Valerie who goes back to eat with Michelle and the family. A cabinet member is lucky to catch Obama’s attention once. Valerie Jarrett has it full time, day or night, leading to her nickname of “Night Stalker.”</p>
<p>If Obama skips security briefings, it’s because they, like so much of the formal infrastructure of government, are there just for show. The real briefing will come from or through Jarrett and it will be massaged into the talking points that communicate only what she wants them to.</p>
<p>The aggressive approach that Obama Inc. has come to be known for is all Valerie. Bill Clinton’s sharp edge was Hillary. It was Hillary who kept the grudges of Clintonworld burning while Bill tried to work with his rivals and enemies. In Obama Inc, Valerie Jarrett occupies Hillary’s role, urging greater ideological fealty to the left and uncompromising attacks on the right, while dominating Obama in a way that Hillary never dominated Bill.</p>
<p>Valerie Jarrett got away with too much during her time in Chicago politics to have learned caution. Where more conventional Democrats would slow down, Valerie Jarrett speeds up; a successful career of corruption and leftist politics has given her a sense of political and moral invulnerability. But that doesn’t mean that Jarrett lacks skill; like her boss, what she lacks is a sense of responsibility.</p>
<p>Obama is a political dilettante whose skills are entirely people skills. Valerie Jarrett’s people skills are negligible and concentrated on only one person, but unlike her boss, protégé and adopted son, she has the endurance and drive to pursue an issue indefinitely.</p>
<p>Barack Obama isn’t driven. Throughout his entire adult life there have been people there to open doors for him. It seemed natural for him to let Valerie Jarrett drive his political career and his administration to do the things that he lacks the attention span or the focus to do.</p>
<p>In exchange, his administration represents Jarrett’s ideological vision of a hard left turn for the country.</p>
<p>Valerie Jarrett doesn’t always get her way. She managed to talk Obama out of going after Osama three times, <a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/obamas_strange_dependence_on_valerie_jarrett.html">but eventually lost the argument</a>. But Jarrett has made her mark on the country and the world by winning more arguments than she loses by leveraging her unprecedented level of access to chip away at him with her personal knowledge of his weaknesses; what Michelle Obama described as his “soft spots”.</p>
<p>Valerie Jarrett’s strength is framing political arguments in personal terms. Through her that has also become Obama’s strength. For Obama, Jarrett and the rest of the left, the political is personal. And their bond is also political and personal.</p>
<p>Jarrett and Obama are both Third Culture activists with a background in the Muslim world and left-wing politics, who came up the ladder through their involvement with corrupt political non-profits and equally corrupt Chicago politics. Both have dipped their toes in the narrow interests of the urban black community while having political agendas that transcended theirs on a global scale. And both have deep wells of resentment.</p>
<p>Obama may be married to Michelle, but he is closer to Valerie. Jarrett protects him from his job by controlling access to him. As his gatekeeper, Jarrett controls everything from dinner invites to the czars who have more power than many cabinet members. And when each meeting ends, it’s Valerie Jarrett who privately provides the final summary and makes the concluding argument to Barack Obama.</p>
<p>By becoming the gatekeeper to the Oval Office, Valerie Jarrett has more control over domestic and foreign policy than anyone else making her the closest thing to the president. Obama may be the public face of Obama Inc., but when the cameras dim and the teleprompters are turned off, it’s Valerie Jarrett who calls the shots.</p>
<p>Obama may be reading a teleprompter on stage, but Valerie Jarrett is the woman behind the curtain.</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><b>Make sure to </b><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/dgreenfield/valerie-jarrett-the-ceo-of-obama-inc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>154</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>De-Imagining America</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/de-imagining-america/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=de-imagining-america</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/de-imagining-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2014 04:40:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthew Vadum]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Imagining America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marxism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syracuse University]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[universities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=221188</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Big foundations, universities and your tax dollars merge to support the Left's cultural warfare.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/337.png"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-221225" alt="337" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/337-350x350.png" width="245" height="245" /></a>A little-known consortium of radical groups, public-funded universities and the federal government is quietly seeking to transform the arts and other academic disciplines into vehicles of left-wing extremism and indoctrination. The initiative, called &#8220;Imagining America,&#8221; embraces the philosophy of Communist historian Howard Zinn, famous for manipulating historical fact to fit Marxist paradigms of human &#8220;progress&#8221; and to plant the seeds of radicalism in unsuspecting youth.</p>
<p>Imagining America is headquartered at taxpayer-funded Syracuse University in upstate New York and was virtually unknown until Glenn Beck <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/17/glenn-beck-horrified-by-americas-latest-propaganda-machine/">threw some light</a> on it in a broadcast. Beck described Imagining America and another group that calls itself “The U.S. Department of Arts and Culture” as an “effort to rewrite our history and catalyze a new culture for America.” This &#8220;department&#8221; isn&#8217;t actually part of the U.S. government but describes itself as “the nation’s newest people-powered department, founded on the truth that art and culture are our most powerful and under-tapped resources for social change.”</p>
<p>Active in both groups are “the people that will be teaching and influencing your children” through “art and music and film and history books,” Beck said.</p>
<p>America&#8217;s neo-communist radicals figured out a long time ago how to have their cake and eat it, too. U.S. taxpayers <a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/you_subsidize_leftist_anarchy.html">have been funding</a> subversive left-wing groups like the now-defunct Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and Saul Alinsky&#8217;s Industrial Areas Foundation since the Johnson administration. They advance their objectives, erode civil society, and send you the bill. Such is also the case with Imagining America, which occupies a cushy niche at the intersection of taxpayer-funded universities, government agencies and wealthy far-left non-profit organizations.</p>
<p>Imagining America grew out of executive action. President Bill Clinton <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=54960">created</a> the White House Millennium Council by Executive Order 13072 on Feb. 2, 1998. One of the council&#8217;s tasks was to &#8220;[p]roduce informational and resource materials to educate the American people concerning our Nation&#8217;s past and to inspire thought concerning the future[.]&#8221; The veritable cultural warfare council was headed by then-First Lady Hillary Clinton.</p>
<p>Imagining America <a href="http://imaginingamerica.org/about/collaborators/">was founded</a> at a 1999 White House Conference initiated by the White House Millennium Council, the University of Michigan, and the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. Conference participants became the basis for what was to become the group&#8217;s &#8220;consortium&#8221; of 100-plus colleges and universities. The group was initially hosted by the University of Michigan. Syracuse University took over in 2007 as IA&#8217;s temporary home, and will remain <a href="http://insidesu.syr.edu/2011/09/19/imagining-america/">host</a> through 2017.</p>
<p><b>Radical Objectives</b></p>
<p>Like many radical groups, Imagining America (its full name is Imagining America: Artists and Scholars in Public Life) couches its goals in soothing, innocuous-sounding prose.</p>
<p>&#8220;Imagining America,&#8221; according to its current <a href="http://imaginingamerica.org/about/our-mission/">mission statement</a>,</p>
<blockquote><p>advances knowledge and creativity through publicly engaged scholarship that draws on humanities, arts, and design. We catalyze change in campus practices, structures, and policies that enables publicly engaged artists and scholars to thrive and contribute to community action and revitalization.</p></blockquote>
<p>According to IA, <i>publicly engaged scholarship</i></p>
<blockquote><p>is defined by partnerships of university knowledge and resources with those of the public and private sectors to enrich scholarship, research, creative activity, and public knowledge; enhance curriculum, teaching and learning; prepare educated, engaged citizens; strengthen democratic values and civic responsibility; address and help solve critical social problems; and contribute to the public good.</p></blockquote>
<p><i>Publicly engaged scholarship</i>, also called simply <i>public scholarship</i>, means politicized scholarship. It is not about the free pursuit of knowledge for knowledge&#8217;s sake. In other words, going to college is not about the disinterested pursuit of knowledge and truth. It&#8217;s about righting the perceived wrongs of the past and changing society in furtherance of so-called social justice.</p>
<p>And in the hands of leftist crusaders, many of the above words in IA&#8217;s mission statement don&#8217;t mean what you might think they mean.</p>
<p>For example, when these people use the word <i>democracy</i> or <i>democratic</i>, they mock democracy as the idea is understood by most Americans. They believe in what the Left calls <i>economic democracy</i>, also known as socialism. They are excited at the prospect of reordering society with the help of capitalism-hating agitators. To them, <i>democracy</i> is Marxist mobocracy. And it’s only <i>true</i> democracy if they prevail. If they lose, it’s not democracy: the capitalists stole the election or took advantage of the people because they suffer from a mass “false consciousness.”</p>
<p>To cut through the billowy clouds of word smog generated by leftist academics, it is necessary to examine what the ideas embraced by Imagining America actually amount to in the plain English that these people use in public outreach.</p>
<p>Take the case of socialist theorist and community organizer <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2503">Harry Boyte</a>, who is director of the Center for <i>Democracy</i> and Citizenship at Augsburg College in Minneapolis (Augsburg is a member of IA&#8217;s consortium of colleges.)</p>
<p>In a <a href="http://youtu.be/tLyUWmMCPIE">video</a> intended for public consumption that promotes Imagining America&#8217;s <a href="http://imaginingamerica.org/convenings/national-conference/2014-national-conference/">national conference</a> this October in Atlanta, Boyte urged the fusion of higher education and left-wing activism:</p>
<blockquote><p>I want to lift up organizing as a supplement. It&#8217;s different than action. In fact, organizing is not mobilizing. It&#8217;s not people out in the streets in a protest mode. It&#8217;s the patient, slow development of relationships that build power &#8230; This is actually an extraordinary pioneering step for Imagining America to be bringing in organizing methods to which people in higher education, and connected to the world, can make our work more public.</p></blockquote>
<p>Academic Scott J. Peters, co-director of Imagining America, said his group is tasked with</p>
<blockquote><p>producing knowledge and theory and writings but the most substantial part of that work is actually building relationships, organizing opportunities for people to understand what they&#8217;re facing, to come together to share their values and experiences, and then to try to make the changes that will help advance their values and their ideals. That work is organizing work.</p></blockquote>
<p>&#8220;There&#8217;s a tension that organizers are always working and that&#8217;s the tension between the world as it is and the world as it ought to be,&#8221; said Peters, paraphrasing Saul Alinsky, author of <i>Rules for Radicals</i>, the <i>vade mecum</i> of the organizing world.</p>
<p>&#8220;Well, the &#8216;story of now&#8217; is a story that helps us see and feel that tension,&#8221; Peters said in a reference to what community organizing theorist Marshall Ganz of the Harvard Kennedy School of Government calls the <a href="http://billmoyers.com/groupthink/activism-what-works/a-story-of-self-a-story-of-us/">&#8220;public narrative&#8221;</a> framework. &#8220;We can see that the world as it is, &#8216;the story of now,&#8217; is not the same thing as the world we&#8217;d like it to be, so therefore we&#8217;re called to act.&#8221;</p>
<p>Peters <a href="http://www.syr.edu/news/articles/2012/imagining-america-08-12.html">is also part of</a> the leadership team for a dubious research project that received $5 million from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The project is called &#8220;Food Dignity: Action Research on Engaging Food Insecure Communities and Universities in Building Sustainable Community Food Systems.&#8221;</p>
<p>When you&#8217;re a Marxist, America is always in crisis. Kevin Bott, an associate director at IA, said the group &#8220;is at a particularly interesting and ripe moment to assert arts, humanities, and design thinking as a way to get the heart of the crisis that we all find ourselves in locally, nationally, and globally, politically, socially, economically.&#8221; Bott was also the Green Party&#8217;s unsuccessful candidate for mayor of Syracuse last year.</p>
<p>George J. Sanchez, vice dean for diversity at the University of Southern California, declared that IA examines &#8220;huge issues for the country and I think, again, we have to imagine a different America.&#8221;</p>
<p>Jesikah Maria Ross, a community organizer who is creative director at Praxis Projects, said IA &#8220;is really looking at, how do we bring together faculty, students from different disciplines with community organizations to kind of co-create something whether it&#8217;s an artistic production or engaged scholarship in a publication. How do we do something together for mutual benefit that moves community organizing and community change forwards?&#8221;</p>
<p>Fresh from the politically correct indoctrination camp, Ryan Metzler, a student in Occidental College&#8217;s Media Arts &amp; Culture Program, <a href="http://imaginingamerica.org/fg-item/ryan-metzler-occidental-college/">spews</a> the things that Imagining America wants to hear, complete with appropriately tortured postmodern diction, neo-Marxist buzzwords, and trendy academic gibberish.</p>
<p>In a testimonial on the IA website he writes:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;My work is informed by the belief that media makers have a responsibility to collaborate with and integrate marginalized communities into documentary films and other media projects in order to transform problematic representations &#8230; Media makers must take responsibility as a democratic community to break stereotypes by giving voices to men and women who lack the technological resources &#8230; We as a society cannot forget the history of media practices. As a society we cannot practice such an influential art without all groups having a voice.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>This is the language of relativism and multiculturalism, both of which are tools neo-Marxists use to weaken and transform America. The first obligation of media &#8220;makers,&#8221; as the student calls documentarians and journalists, is to push so-called social justice and allow disadvantaged groups a veto over his work, he claims. After years of PC brainwashing, truth is apparently not important to him.</p>
<p>Not surprisingly, Imagining America <a href="http://imaginingamerica.org/consortium/student-networks/resources/">requires</a> fellows in its Publicly Active Graduate Education (PAGE) program to read the Marxist journal, <i>Monthly Review</i>, and works by communists W.E.B. DuBois and Paulo Freire (author of <i>Pedagogy of the Oppressed</i>).</p>
<p>Among the course offerings for which Syracuse University faculty members have <a href="http://imaginingamerica.org/consortium/ia-at-su/curriculum-development/awardees/">received</a> IA grants are &#8220;Jazz and Human Rights as Cultural Democracy&#8221; and &#8220;Queering Syracuse.&#8221; A grant was also given for a course called &#8220;Masks, Movement, and Giant Puppets&#8221; that may as well be taught by anti-American radical Medea Benjamin of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6149">Code Pink</a>.</p>
<p><b>Legal Status</b></p>
<p>Figuring out the legal status and internal organizational structure of Imagining America is no easy task.</p>
<p>When the University of Delaware received a $2,000 &#8220;Critical Exchange Grant&#8221; from Imagining America, the school <a href="http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2007/feb/grant020807.html">described</a> IA as &#8220;a national nonprofit organization that encourages the incorporation of civic responsibility into art education at the university level.&#8221; But this researcher could find no evidence that Imagining America is a legally incorporated nonprofit entity. A public database search in Nexis revealed what appeared to be an old, probably lapsed business listing of some kind in its name in Michigan, but nothing else.</p>
<p>It is difficult to imagine running an enterprise as large and active as Imagining America appears to be without incorporating it somewhere. If Imagining America is merely an unincorporated project of Syracuse University there could be problems in terms of commingling of funds and it could generating major accounting headaches.</p>
<p>But that&#8217;s exactly what Imagining America is, according to Erin Martin Kane, Syracuse University&#8217;s associate vice president for public relations, who responded to some organizational questions by email. After rehashing IA&#8217;s creation story, she explained that IA &#8220;is an academic unit of SU that’s funded and supported by the more than 100 member institutions, including SU, other colleges and universities, and civic organizations. IA does not solicit, or accept donations from individuals.&#8221;</p>
<p>At press time, Kane had failed to respond to follow-up questions about how large IA&#8217;s annual budget was, how many employees it has, and if it produces annual or regular reports. That IA is an &#8220;academic unit&#8221; of SU, as Kane indicated, appears to be true. The SU comptroller&#8217;s office <a href="http://comptroller.syr.edu/comptroller/display.cfm?content_ID=%23%2BH%21%2F%0A">lists</a> Imagining America as department 20018 of the university.</p>
<p>Even so, Imagining America&#8217;s finances are very difficult to track, perhaps deliberately so. It charges taxpayer-funded educational institutions up to $5,000 annually in membership dues, which means that taxpayers fund IA indirectly. Grants to IA from foundations and membership dues from these tax-exempt universities and colleges that are part of the IA consortium should presumably appear in tax returns somewhere. But very little appears in the comprehensive FoundationSearch database which contains data extracted from the compulsory annual IRS filings of foundations and other nonprofit organizations.</p>
<p>The database shows only a handful of grants from foundations that benefited the group.</p>
<p>The Rockefeller Foundation has been onboard with IA since at least 2001. That year it gave $150,000 to the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation &#8220;to support &#8216;Imagining America&#8217; public scholarship grants program.&#8221; The next year it gave $25,000 to the University of Michigan &#8220;toward the costs of a conference of the Imagining America public scholarship program entitled &#8216;The Engaged University, the Engaged Community, &amp; the Daily Practice of Democracy.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>The New York Council for the Humanities, a taxpayer-funded nonprofit, gave Imagining America $18,000 in 2010. The Teagle Foundation <a href="http://www.teaglefoundation.org/Grantmaking/Grantees/default?rfp=218#sthash.pHquOORg.dpuf">gave</a> IA $150,000 in 2012.</p>
<p>And there the paper trail of grants specifically designated for Imagining America ends.</p>
<p>High-profile left-wing philanthropies have given money to the University of Michigan and Syracuse University that may have ended up supporting Imagining America projects.</p>
<p>Radical financier George Soros&#8217;s Open Society Foundations (formerly known as Open Society Institute) has given grants to the University of Michigan ($6,020 since 2000) and Syracuse University ($203,880 since 1999). The Soros-associated Tides Foundation has given grants to the University of Michigan ($35,000 since 2005).</p>
<p>Syracuse University has received funding from the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderprofile.asp?fndid=5311&amp;category=79">Nathan Cummings Foundation</a> ($185,000 since 2001), <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5210">Rockefeller Foundation</a> ($638,800 since 2000), and the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation ($392,600 since 2009).</p>
<p><b>Transforming America With Your Tax-dollars </b></p>
<p>&#8220;Politics is downstream from culture,&#8221; the late, great media entrepreneur Andrew Breitbart liked to say frequently when explaining how the deck has been stacked against conservatives for decades. At <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2011/08/22/Politics-Really-is-Downstream-from-Culture">Breitbart&#8217;s website</a>, screenwriter and producer Lawrence Meyers, elaborated.</p>
<blockquote><p>Culture influences politics, and in ways the Left has understood for a long time. The Right has sat idly by, as they did with higher education, and let an ideological movement take over one of the most important aspects of American society.</p></blockquote>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Imagining America is at the center of it all, accompanied by neo-communist activists and organizers, cheering our republic&#8217;s decline, and teaching Americans to despise their country.</span></p>
<p>The Obama administration is helping the group accomplish its mission.</p>
<p>In early 2012, IA proudly <a href="http://imaginingamerica.org/blog/2012/01/10/syracuse-university-joins-yearlong-initiative-to-promote-higher-education-as-agent-of-democracy/">announced</a> it was working with the White House Office of Public Engagement, the U.S. Department of Education, and various groups to publicly launch the American Commonwealth Partnership (ACP), &#8220;a yearlong initiative to promote higher education as an agent of <i>democracy</i> and a force for public good.&#8221; [emphasis added]</p>
<p>The director of ACP was socialist organizer Harry Boyte. IA&#8217;s Peters and his fellow co-director Timothy K. Eatman were also both members of ACP&#8217;s steering committee.</p>
<p>With taxpayer funding provided by the U.S. Department of Education, the National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement of the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU) laid bare the radicals&#8217; objectives in a 2012 report.</p>
<p>In &#8220;A Crucible Moment: College Learning &amp; Democracy&#8217;s Future,&#8221; AACU <a href="http://www.aacu.org/civic_learning/crucible/documents/crucible_508F.pdf">recommended</a> that &#8220;existing national civic networks &#8230; be tapped and expanded for leadership in mobilizing the next generation of investment in civic learning.&#8221; It singled out The Research University Civic Engagement Network (<a href="http://www.compact.org/initiatives/civic-engagement-at-research-universities">TRUCEN</a>), <a href="http://www.projectpericles.org">Project Pericles</a>, and Imagining America.</p>
<p>At page 42 the report states,</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;If indeed we seek a democratic society in which the public welfare matters as much as the individual’s welfare, and in which global welfare matters along with national welfare, then education must play its influential part to bring such a society into being.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>That&#8217;s the goal of Imagining America and the public scholarship movement in a nutshell. To transform America so that the collective trumps the individual, and the rest of the world trumps America.</p>
<p>As long as President Obama remains in office, your taxpayer dollars will continue to support these un-American goals.</p>
<p>And if Hillary Clinton, who got the American narrative rewriting effort underway in 1999 when she headed the White House Millennium Council, succeeds Obama in the Oval Office, she&#8217;ll do whatever she can to finish the job she started.</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><b>Make sure to </b><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/matthew-vadum/de-imagining-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>59</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fight the Next War, Not the Last One</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/bruce-thornton/fight-the-next-war-not-the-last-one/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=fight-the-next-war-not-the-last-one</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/bruce-thornton/fight-the-next-war-not-the-last-one/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2014 05:55:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruce Thornton]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[address]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state of the union]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=217287</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why dwell on Obama when the Hillary campaign is mounting its assault? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/pict.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-217292" alt="pict" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/pict-450x337.jpg" width="270" height="202" /></a>Tuesday night President Obama will deliver another campaign speech, this one marketed as the State of the Union address. As such, we can expect to hear, through the usual white noise of “I,” “me,” and “my,” vacuous bromides like “moving America forward,” and empty promises “to grow the economy, strengthen the middle class, and empower all who hope to join it,” as White House flack Dan Pfeiffer said. So after token references to economic growth, we can expect to be served heaping helpings of “income inequality” and “economic mobility,” the redistributionist chum for his hungry progressive base.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Is anybody surprised at once again experiencing the mendacity of hope? Is there anything we don’t know about the incompetence, arrogance, and political thuggery of this administration? Obama and the Democrats represent the toxic stew of old-style Progressive government by technocratic elites, Sixties grievance politics, stealth pacifism, guilt over America’s sins, class warfare, redistribution of wealth to buy votes, crony socialism for the progressive 1% to secure campaign-contribution kickbacks, and pork for public employee unions to garner votes as well as bucks. The wages of this faux populist elitism are a sluggish recovery, anemic economic growth, a real </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" title="" href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm" target="_blank">unemployment rate</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> of 13%, a 3% decline over the last decade in the workforce </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" title="" href="http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000" target="_blank">participation rate</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">, the monstrosity of Obamacare, the failure to exploit this country’s petroleum and natural gas riches, the looming bankruptcy of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and the explosion of debt and deficits to finance the whole disaster. In other words, precisely the policies guaranteed to stop economic growth and to weaken the middle class.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">As for foreign policy, it would be surprising to hear a whole lot about that on Tuesday night. Five years of Obama have seen American prestige and influence damaged across the globe. Enemies and rivals have been appeased and strengthened, friends and allies scorned and compromised. Russia and China are rushing to fill the vacuum left by American retreat. The Middle East in particular is one spark away from explosion. American lives and dollars have been squandered by Obama’s abandonment of Iraq and Afghanistan. Reliable if thuggish allies in countries like Libya and Egypt have been surrendered to jihadists or civil war. Our stalwart friend Israel has been bullied and endangered. Al Qaeda and its affiliates are rampaging across the region. And Iran––our enemy for 35 years, the most vicious and lethal state sponsor of terrorism, the murderer of thousands of Americans––currently is being not just appeased into becoming a nuclear power, but bribed with sanctions relief to do so. Given the brazen shamelessness of Obama, I fully expect him to ignore all those disasters on his watch, and in full Neville “peace in our time” Chamberlain mode, tout as a “breakthrough” his agreement with Iran that does nothing to stop the mullahs from acquiring the bomb.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Equally predictable will be the reaction to the speech. The Congressional Democrat shills and touts will pop up on the carefully crafted applause lines, while Joe Biden grins maniacally. The courtiers in the media will declare Obama’s reading of the words of others to be the greatest oratory since Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, and carefully parse the banalities, clichés, tired jargon, preposterous claims, and outright lies for more signs of their messiah’s rhetorical, political, and intellectual brilliance. The far-left of the base, who differ from other Democrats only in their honesty about their statist intentions, will whine that Obama didn’t promise to raise taxes on the “1%” even more, dismantle the NSA, shut down Guantanamo, shutter every coal-fired electricity plant, go on a Keynesian spending binge, destroy our drones, and slash defense spending to the bone, as they cast longing gazes on Cherokee princess Elizabeth Warren.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">But we know all that. For five years we conservatives have been like Cassandra, wandering desperately around Troy accurately predicting its destruction and being dismissed as insane. Or in our case, as racist, heartless, greedy, and downright evil. No amount of empirical evidence debunking the claims of income inequality and the lack of mobility, or explaining the adverse effects of raising the minimum wage, or detailing the ongoing collapse of Obamacare, or adding up the fiscal failures of stimulus spending, or exposing the sweetheart deals to “green energy” hustlers, or documenting Obama’s serial lies, has made much of a difference. His celebrity besotted, vulgar-rich 1% lifestyle on the taxpayer’s dime, his abuse of executive power to make or unmake laws for political advantage, his demonization of his political enemies and rivals even as he simpers piously about “civility,” his attempt to kill the Fox News messenger, his siccing of government agencies like the IRS and Department of Justice on conservatives, all have been amply publicized. And despite all that, his job </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" title="" href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html" target="_blank">approval numbers</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> average 43%, up over 3 points since December 2, when they should be at least 10 points lower, and heading south.</span></p>
<p>Forget the speech. Forget yet once again cataloguing Obama’s crimes and misdemeanors. When we’re not preaching to the choir, we come off like the Ancient Mariner, a gray-beard loon grabbing voters’ sleeves to make them hear yet again the tale of the political albatross hanging around the country’s neck. We need to seize the opportunity created by the dissatisfaction with Obamacare, which has penetrated the fog of self-interest, ignorance, and indifference that helped reelect Obama. The strong likelihood that Obamacare will continue to hit more and more people in the wallet means that there will be a larger, more receptive audience come November’s midterm elections.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">But Republicans have to be ready for that opportunity, with savvy, competent candidates and spokesmen who can explain the issues and link voter angst to the specific policies that created them, and who have workable alternatives to offer. They have to break the usual Republican circular firing squad, whether in Congress or the primaries, and concentrate their fire on the political enemy. They have to cleverly mock those who would whine about the metaphor in the previous sentence, and abandon the “preemptive cringe,” as Margaret Thatcher called it, they sometimes indulge when the other side squeals about “racism,” “war on women,” “polarization,” “incivility,” and “extremists.” Instead, they should model their responses on Ronald Reagan’s brilliant </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" title="" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi9y5-Vo61w" target="_blank">riposte</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Jimmy Carter in the 1980 debate, “There you go again,” using the same tone of mild amusement at a sulky child’s tantrum.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">And Republicans have to start dismantling the carefully crafted persona of Hillary Clinton––or “Planet Hillary,” as The New York Times Magazine absurdly put it in a worshipful profile––who currently is riding out Obama’s political storm in the safe haven of accolades, awards, Time magazine puff pieces, and $200,000 speeches from companies investing in the future. Republicans can’t let voters forget every gaffe, corrupt deal, and scandal from 1992 until today, or stop reminding them that she has no achievements other than buying her mediocre political career with the coin of humiliation at the hands of her philandering husband. Voters have to be reminded of her politicized opposition to the 2007 successful surge of troops in Iraq, and her public accusation that General Petraeus was lying about the evidence of that success. Most important, all Americans must never let anyone forget that on her watch 4 Americans died in Benghazi, while all she had to say was “What difference does it make!” after lying to a grieving father that an obscure moviemaker was to blame.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Whatever damage Obama can do in the next 3 years, 8 years of Hilary Clinton will make it worse. Every dysfunction inflicted on the country by 100 years of the progressive assault on limited government, self-reliance, and self-government will continue to worsen, while the debt clock ticks ever closer to the midnight of bankruptcy. Conservatives need to fight the next war, not refight the last one.</span></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/bruce-thornton/fight-the-next-war-not-the-last-one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Liberalism’s War on Women</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/liberalisms-war-on-women/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=liberalisms-war-on-women</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/liberalisms-war-on-women/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Oct 2013 04:38:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Filner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=207722</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Filner and the Democratic Party escape justice once again.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/filner.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-207727" alt="filner" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/filner-450x337.jpg" width="315" height="236" /></a>As Bob Filner, San Diego’s former progressive mayor, pleads guilty to charges stemming from his attacks on women, his essay, “Why I am Pro-Choice” <a href="http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pacific-southwest/why-am-pro-choice-us-congressman-bob-filner-23077.htm">still decorates the website</a> of Planned Parenthood.</p>
<p>A year ago<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZB3657np1k">, Filner had appeared</a> at a Planned Parenthood rally while running for mayor of California’s second largest city to accuse his opponent of being part of the war on women.</p>
<p>The Planned Parenthood Action Fund had sent out a letter asserting that “for twenty years, Bob Filner has defended women.” At the rally, attendees were told that he had spent “the last twenty years protecting our rights and the rights of women everywhere.”</p>
<p>But while Filner was protecting women, no one was protecting women from Filner.  The California Democratic Party maintained its red wall of silence around the son of a Communist, a Freedom Rider and member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus because he was one of their own.</p>
<p>Even Filner’s disgrace hasn’t changed that. Filner pleaded guilty to three counts and will not serve any time in prison. Instead he’ll spend three months at home, receive some counseling and three years on probation. He won’t go into California’s 100,000 strong sex offender database.</p>
<p>Meanwhile in Lakeland, California, a 75-year-old man was sentenced to six months in jail for groping a court reporter. If he had been the progressive mayor of San Diego, he might have also gotten the Filner Justice Special and be spending his time at home with his feet up on the couch.</p>
<p>In the Democratic Party, as with American Express, membership has its privileges. The same liberal political establishment that protected Filner throughout his career is still covering for him.</p>
<p>At the Planned Parenthood rally, Filner had said, “The war on women can be done at any level. My opponent won’t even fill out the Planned Parenthood questionnaire.” The crowd booed and then cheered when he told them about winning twenty-five elections with the backing of Planned Parenthood.</p>
<p>Filner’s opponent, a gay Republican who was for abortion, gay marriage and legalizing pot, had enrolled in the war on women by failing to fill out a questionnaire while Filner, who had molested everyone from grandmothers to sexual abuse victims, was an official protector of women because he had checked the right box on an abortion organization’s questionnaire.</p>
<p>The war on women can be done on any level, but it so often seems to happen on the level of those most vocal about using “War on Women” rhetoric and painting themselves as the protectors of their victims.</p>
<p>House Democrats voted against the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act which would have cracked down on sex selection abortions that mostly target baby girls. Filner, then still a Congressman, had cast one of the 168 votes against the bill. Those voting to allow the continuing murder of baby girls to go unsanctioned were, like Filner, mostly Democrats.</p>
<p>Filner had a 100 score from NARAL, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, for, among other things, voting the right way on that bill. NARAL had come out against the bill because it would limit “some women’s access”.</p>
<p>The fundamental right of women had become the murder of other women. And Bob Filner had been supported and protected in his abuse of women in defense of the fundamental right to murder women.</p>
<p>The contraction of women’s rights into the sphere of abortion led to “Destroy the village to save the village” scenarios where the only way to protect women is to kill women and where the protector of women role could fall to a grotesque smirking creature who made Bill Clinton look like a monk.</p>
<p>The liberal protectors of women, like Filner, Clinton and Ted Kennedy, often seem like the exact opposite. But as long as they support abortion—all is forgiven, forgotten and drowned in the deepest waters off Martha’s Vineyard.</p>
<p>Despite the occasional mumbled mentions of economic equality, the liberal idea of social improvement for women now consists of little more than the right to kill. The only real right of women under liberalism is the right to kill their own children.</p>
<p>There was a net loss of 354,000 female jobs during Obama’s term and the income of single mothers fell 7 percent.  Obama, who opposed the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, has not done anything meaningful for women economically. Like Bob Filner, his credentials in the War on Women depend on his support for the same organization whose questionnaire Bob Filner filled out and his opponent didn’t.</p>
<p>What does the War on Women really look like?</p>
<p>In Sweden, there are 20 abortions for every 1000 women and 25 abortions for every 100 pregnancies. Sweden also has the second highest rate of sexual assaults after South Africa.</p>
<p>From 2003 to 2008, Sweden’s sexual assault rate doubled to 53 rapes per 100,000 people. The numbers are now so bad that some forecasts indicate that 1 in 4 Swedish women will be raped in their lifetimes.</p>
<p>Police statistics show that as much of 77% of rapes were carried out by foreign born rapists. As much as 5 percent of Sweden is now Muslim. Around the same time that Sweden’s rape statistics were doubling, so was its Muslim population.</p>
<p>In Stockholm, six Muslim teenagers who raped a 15-year-old Swedish girl were given 100 hours of community service. One of the rapists described himself as a “proud Muslim” and was no doubt aware of the rather forgiving attitude of his religion toward the rape of non-Muslim women and girls.</p>
<p>But this real war on women can’t be discussed because of its leftist perpetrators who fill a country with rapists and then offer their victims easy access to abortion.</p>
<p>In 2008, rapes in San Diego had increased 34 percent. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of Latinos in San Diego had increased by 21%. Filner had been the chief beneficiary of that demographic shift which allowed him to become the first Democratic mayor of San Diego in a generation.</p>
<p>Filner had co-sponsored an amnesty bill back in 2007. He had opposed building a border fence and at an interfaith ceremony, had called amnesty a “holy cause”. And illegal alien activists returned the favor. Enrique Morones of Border Angels took the lead in defending Filner even long after the facts were in.</p>
<p>&#8220;Environmentalists, educators, women&#8217;s rights, gays, civil rights, labor, human rights, unions, neighborhoods, immigration and many more &#8212; we stand united,&#8221; Morones had said at a pro-Filner rally.</p>
<p>The entire pyramid of liberal identity politics was trotted out in defense of a serial predator. Meanwhile rape cases in California had increased by 7 percent.</p>
<p>Bob Filner wasn’t just guilty of a one man war on women. Like so many liberal politicians, he had championed policies that led to sexual assaults on a much larger scale.</p>
<p>The left won the war on women in Sweden. It is winning the war on women in California.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p><em>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>Jamie Glazov&#8217;s</strong> video interview with <strong></strong> <strong>Daniel Greenfield</strong> on &#8220;Obama&#8217;s Shutdown Strategy,&#8221; the administration&#8217;s Brotherhood Romance, the Huma Abedin-Anthony Weiner saga, the Unholy Alliance and much, much more:</em></p>
<p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/hpyoCFF-iL8" height="315" width="420" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.   </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/liberalisms-war-on-women/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>66</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Clinton Muslim Brotherhood Operative Arrested in Egypt</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/clinton-muslim-brotherhood-operative-arrested-in-egypt/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=clinton-muslim-brotherhood-operative-arrested-in-egypt</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/clinton-muslim-brotherhood-operative-arrested-in-egypt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2013 08:38:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthew Vadum]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arrested]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brotherhood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[egypt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gehad el-Haddad]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=204750</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gehad el-Haddad taken into custody for inciting violence.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Gehad-el-Haddad.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-204753" alt="Gehad el-Haddad" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Gehad-el-Haddad-450x270.jpg" width="315" height="189" /></a>A fugitive Muslim Brotherhood leader and Clinton operative has been arrested by Egyptian authorities in an ongoing roundup of seditious Islamist militants.</p>
<p>The arrest of Gehad el-Haddad for inciting violence is a sobering reminder not just of how close Hillary Clinton&#8217;s network is to the brutal Muslim Brotherhood, the Left&#8217;s favorite Islamofascist cell, but also of the extent to which Islamist enemies of the United States have infiltrated the American political establishment.</p>
<p>And it is yet another <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/michele-bachmann-attacked-and-vindicated/">vindication</a></span> for Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) who has been viciously attacked by left-wingers and leaders of her own party for having the courage to sound the alarm about radical Islam&#8217;s penetration of the U.S. government.</p>
<p>A mere month after Haddad quit his Clinton Foundation job for full-time employment with the Brotherhood a year ago, now-deposed Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi received an invitation to deliver a major address at the Clinton Global Initiative, a high-profile project of the foundation. Morsi calls Jews “bloodsuckers” and “the descendants of apes and pigs.&#8221;</p>
<p>“It was only a matter of time before Gehad el-Haddad was arrested,” said Eric Trager who was characterized by the Washington Free Beacon as an Egypt expert.</p>
<blockquote><p>“Many of the other Muslim Brotherhood spokesmen have been apprehended, and in addition to decapitating the organization, the military-backed government has been specifically targeting the Brotherhood’s media wing, including by shutting down its TV stations at the time of Morsi’s ouster on July 3.”</p></blockquote>
<p>“It has also gone after those connected to Morsi’s presidential office, and Gehad’s father is Morsi adviser and Muslim Brotherhood Guidance Office member Essam el-Haddad,” said Trager, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.</p>
<p>As the <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://freebeacon.com/muslim-brotherhood-official-former-clinton-foundation-employee-arrested/">Washington Free Beacon</a></span> reports, Gehad el-Haddad&#8217;s tenure at the Clinton Foundation &#8220;overlapped with his official work for the Muslim Brotherhood, which began in Cairo in February 2011 when he assumed control of the Renaissance Project, a Brotherhood-backed economic recovery program.&#8221;</p>
<p>Although the Renaissance Project has been described as a long-term economic recovery program, Egyptian media say it is actually a program designed to implement the radical Islamization of Egyptian society.</p>
<p>“Renaissance is far more than the electoral program of President Mohamed Morsi or the Brotherhood’s political wing, the Freedom and Justice Party,” the <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/renaissance-man-gehad-el-haddad-works-islamist-project-s-pragmatist">Egypt Independent</a></span> reported last year. “It is a 25-year project to reform state, business and civil society, rooted in the Brotherhood’s Islamic values but conditioned by the experiences of the project’s founders in the modern economy.”</p>
<p>&#8220;You can’t come up with concrete solutions unless you have a compass to tell you what’s right or wrong,&#8221; Haddad told the Egypt Independent. &#8220;For us, that compass is Islam. We believe its mission is to change people’s lives.”</p>
<p>It is unclear if Clinton Foundation donors are aware that their donations have been used to train Islamic terrorists determined to snuff out individual rights and civil society.</p>
<p>Those who support the Global War on Terror should bear in mind that Haddad&#8217;s experience at the Clinton Foundation gave him the know-how to help build the terror apparatus, police state, and other oppressive institutions that would be required to turn Egypt into a totalitarian theocracy, which is the Brotherhood&#8217;s goal.</p>
<p>The Clinton Foundation&#8217;s Climate Initiative, which he worked on in Egypt, &#8220;taught Haddad about managing [a nongovernmental organization] and the role that civil society takes between the state and private sector, lessons he is applying to the Renaissance Project,” according to the Egypt Independent.</p>
<p>Haddad &#8220;officially became a senior adviser for foreign affairs in Morsi’s Freedom and Justice Party in May 2011, when he was still claiming to be employed by the Clinton Foundation,&#8221; the news website reports.</p>
<p>In Egyptian media, Haddad was a frequent apologist for the Brotherhood&#8217;s violent crackdowns on civil liberties in the Arab republic. He put his spin doctoring skills to use last December to downplay Brotherhood supporters&#8217; attacks on women and children.</p>
<p>When pro-democracy protests swept Egypt on June 30, Hadded called the demonstrators violent thugs. “The anti-Morsi camp are providing a political endorsement to the violence,” he told the Washington Free Beacon at that time. “Some have resorted to violence because they didn’t do well at the ballot box.”</p>
<p>Evidence abounds of the Clinton political network&#8217;s close ties to totalitarian Islam.</p>
<p>While Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, Huma Abedin was her Deputy Chief of Staff. The wife of disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), Abedin <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/354351/huma-unmentionables-andrew-c-mccarthy">worked</a></span> from 1996 to 2003 at the <i>Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs</i> (JMMA), a journal of Islamic supremacism founded by al-Qaeda financier, Abdullah Omar Naseef. At the same time Abedin also worked for Hillary Clinton in different capacities.</p>
<p>Naseef hired Abedin&#8217;s father, the late Dr. Zyed Abedin, to oversee the <i>JMMA</i> in Saudi Arabia. As Andrew McCarthy notes:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;[t]he journal was operated under the management of the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, a virulently anti-Semitic and sharia-supremacist organization. When Dr. Abedin died, editorial control of the journal passed to his wife, Dr. Saleha Mahmood Abedin — Huma’s mother.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Abedin&#8217;s mother <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/hillary-tied-to-new-muslim-brotherhood-president/#19I3ZGt5Jyv6Ihox.99">was also active</a></span> in the women’s division of the Muslim Brotherhood.</p>
<p>During Hillary Clinton&#8217;s tenure in the objectively pro-terrorist Obama administration, the entry ban applying to Islamic scholar, stealth jihadist, terrorism funder, and grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Tariq Ramadan, was <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://pjmedia.com/blog/tariq-ramadan-a-viper-in-our-midst-thanks-to-hillary-clinton/">lifted</a></span>.</p>
<p>Radical imam Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, claimed to have ties to the Clinton administration. &#8220;I had dinner with [then-] Secretary of State [Madeleine] Albright &#8212; after the list&#8221; of unindicted co-conspirators was released. Albright refused to comment. Wahhaj is also involved the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which is the Muslim Brotherhood&#8217;s front group in the U.S.</p>
<p>Abdurahman Alamoudi <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1311">helped</a></span> President Clinton and the American Civil Liberties Union develop a presidential document called “Religious Expression in Public School,” which established a legal justification upon the ACLU could use to sue public schools to force them to remove Nativity scenes and curtail Christmas celebrations. Alamoudi is a former director of CAIR and founder of CAIR ally, American Muslim Council.</p>
<p>Haddad, a top Brotherhood communications official and adviser to Morsi when he was Egypt&#8217;s president, was &#8220;city director,&#8221; a senior communications position, at Clinton&#8217;s charity, the former William J. Clinton Foundation, from August 2007 to August 2012. As of 2008, the Wahhabist kingdom of Saudi Arabia was one of the largest <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/18/saudi-arabia-biggest-donors-clinton-foundation/">donors</a></span> to the Clinton Foundation.</p>
<p>Incidentally, it needs to be noted that the Bill Clinton-founded philanthropy may yet regret a name change earlier this year. After Hillary Clinton left her Foggy Bottom perch behind, the foundation <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.clintonfoundation.org/main/about.html">was renamed</a></span> the Bill, Hillary &amp; Chelsea Clinton Foundation so she could share in its glory, past and future.</p>
<p>Frank Gaffney has written <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/frank-gaffney/the-muslim-brotherhood-in-the-obama-administration/">a full-length pamphlet</a></span> for the David Horowitz Freedom Center about the Muslim Brotherhood&#8217;s connections to Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration. After the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 11 last year, David Horowitz previewed the pamphlet, writing:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;If anyone needed evidence that Hillary Clinton is in the pocket of the Muslim Brotherhood, the events of the last few days should be more than sufficient.  On the anniversary of 9/11, on what should be a day of shame for the Muslim world, the US Embassy in Cairo issued a statement condemning critics of Islamofascism in language appropriate to the office of propaganda for the Muslim Brotherhood. Islamofascists launched violent attacks on Americans, repeating the outrages in miniature of the World Trade Center attacks 11 years ago. In the face of these outrages the posture of the U.S. government is one that would make Neville Chamberlain blush.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>It&#8217;s unlikely that Hillary Clinton will blush. After all, she&#8217;s shameless.</p>
<p>But then again, what difference does it make?</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/2013/matthew-vadum/clinton-muslim-brotherhood-operative-arrested-in-egypt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Resetting U.S. Foreign Policy</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/caroline-glick/resetting-u-s-foreign-policy-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=resetting-u-s-foreign-policy-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/caroline-glick/resetting-u-s-foreign-policy-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2013 04:31:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Caroline Glick]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benghazi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reset]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=201707</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How Obama made America not just irrelevant -- but dangerous. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/169338855.jpg.CROP_.rectangle3-large.jpg"><img class=" wp-image-201710 alignleft" alt="169338855.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/169338855.jpg.CROP_.rectangle3-large-450x332.jpg" width="315" height="232" /></a>Originally published in the <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Column-One-Resetting-US-foreign-policy-323985">Jerusalem Post</a>. </em></p>
<p>Aside from the carnage in Benghazi, the most enduring image from Hillary Clinton’s tenure as US secretary of state was the fake remote control she brought with her to Moscow in 2009 with the word “Reset” in misspelled Russian embossed on it.</p>
<p>Clinton’s gimmick was meant to show that under President Barack Obama, American foreign policy would be fundamentally transformed. Since Obama and Clinton blamed much of the world’s troubles on the misdeeds of their country, under their stewardship of US foreign policy, the US would reset everything.</p>
<p>Around the globe, all bets were off.</p>
<p>Five years later we realize that Clinton’s embarrassing gesture was not a gimmick, but a dead serious pledge. Throughout the world, the Obama administration has radically altered America’s policies.</p>
<p>And disaster has followed. Never since America’s establishment has the US appeared so untrustworthy, destructive, irrelevant and impotent.</p>
<p>Consider Syria. Wednesday was the one-year anniversary of Obama’s pledge that the US would seek the overthrow of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime if Assad used chemical weapons against his opponents.</p>
<p>On Wednesday, Assad’s forces used chemical weapons against civilians around Damascus. According to opposition forces, well over a thousand people were murdered.</p>
<p>Out of habit, the eyes of the world turned to Washington. But Obama has no policy to offer. Obama’s America can do nothing.</p>
<p>America’s powerlessness in Syria is largely Obama’s fault. At the outset of the Syrian civil war two-and-a-half years ago, Obama outsourced the development of Syria’s opposition forces to Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Erdogan. He had other options. A consortium of Syrian Kurds, moderate Sunnis, Christians and others came to Washington and begged for US assistance. But they were ignored.</p>
<p>Obama’s decision to outsource the US’s Syria policy owed to his twin goals of demonstrating that the US would no longer try to dictate international outcomes, and of allying the US with Islamic fundamentalists.</p>
<p>Both of these goals are transformative.</p>
<p>In the first instance, Obama believes that anti-Americanism stems from America’s actions. By accepting the mantel of global leadership, Obama believes the US insulted other nations. To mitigate their anger, the US should abdicate leadership.</p>
<p>As for courting Islamic fundamentalists, from his earliest days in office Obama insisted that since radical Islam is the most popular movement in the Islamic world, radical Islam is good. Radical Muslims are America’s friends.</p>
<p>Obama embraced Erdogan, an Islamic fascist who has won elections, as his closest ally and most trusted adviser in the Muslim world.</p>
<p>And so, with the full support of the US government, Erdogan stacked Syria’s opposition forces with radical Muslims like himself. Within months the Muslim Brotherhood comprised the majority in Syria’s US-sponsored opposition.</p>
<p>The Muslim Brotherhood has no problem collaborating with al-Qaida, because the latter was formed by Muslim Brothers.</p>
<p>It shares the Brotherhood’s basic ideology.</p>
<p>Since al-Qaida has the most experienced fighters, its rise to leadership and domination of the Syrian opposition was a natural progression.</p>
<p>In other words, Obama’s decision to have Turkey form the Syrian opposition led inevitably to the current situation in which the Iranian- and Russian-backed Syrian regime is fighting an opposition dominated by al-Qaida.</p>
<p>At this point, short of an Iraq-style US invasion of Syria and toppling of the regime, almost any move the US takes to overthrow the government will strengthen al-Qaida. So after a reported 1,300 people were killed by chemical weapons launched by the regime on Wednesday, the US has no constructive options for improving the situation.</p>
<p>A distressing aspect of Obama’s embrace of Erdogan is that Erdogan has not tried to hide the fact that he seeks dictatorial powers and rejects the most basic norms of liberal democracy and civil rights.</p>
<p>Under the façade of democracy, Erdogan has transformed Turkey into one of the most repressive countries in the world. Leading businessmen, generals, journalists, parliamentarians and regular citizens have been systematically rounded up and accused of treason for their “crime” of opposing Turkey’s transformation into an Islamic state. Young protesters demanding civil rights and an end to governmental corruption are beaten and arrested by police, and demonized by Erdogan. Following the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt last month, Erdogan has openly admitted that he and his party are part and parcel of the Muslim Brotherhood.</p>
<p>Obama’s approach to world affairs was doubtlessly shaped during his long sojourn in America’s elite universities.</p>
<p>Using the same elitist sensibilities that cause him to blame American “arrogance” for the world’s troubles, and embrace radical Islam as a positive force, Obama has applied conflict resolution techniques developed by professors in ivory towers to real world conflicts that cannot be resolved peacefully.</p>
<p>Obama believed he could use the US’s close relationships with Israel and Turkey to bring about a rapprochement between the former allies. But he was wrong. The Turkish-Israeli alliance ended because Erdogan is a virulent Jew-hater who seeks Israel’s destruction, not because of a misunderstanding.</p>
<p>Obama forced Israel to apologize for defending itself against Turkish aggression, believing that Erdogan would then reinstate full diplomatic relations with the Jewish state. Instead, Erdogan continued his assault on Israel, most recently accusing it of organizing the military coup in Egypt and the anti- Erdogan street protests in Turkey.</p>
<p>As for Egypt, as with Syria, Obama’s foreign policy vision for the US has left Washington with no options for improving the situation on the ground or for securing its own strategic interests. To advance his goal of empowering the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama pushed the Egyptian military to overthrow the regime of US ally Hosni Mubarak and so paved the way for elections that brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power.</p>
<p>Today he opposes the military coup that ousted the Muslim Brotherhood government.</p>
<p>The US claims that it opposes the coup because the military has trampled democracy and human rights. But it is all but silent in the face of the Muslim Brotherhood’s own trampling of the human rights of Egypt’s Christian minority.</p>
<p>Obama ignores the fact that Mohamed Morsi governed as a tyrant far worse than Mubarak.</p>
<p>Ignoring the fact that neither side can share power with the other, the US insists the Brotherhood and the military negotiate an agreement to do just that. And so both sides hate and distrust the US.</p>
<p>Wresting an Israeli apology to Turkey was Obama’s only accomplishment during his trip to Israel in March. Secretary of State John Kerry’s one accomplishment since entering office was to restart negotiations between Israel and the PLO. Just as the consequence of Israel’s apology to Turkey was an escalation of Turkey’s anti- Israel and anti-Semitic rhetoric, so the consequence of Kerry’s “accomplishment” will be the escalation of Palestinian terrorism and political warfare against Israel.</p>
<p>As Jonathan Tobin noted Wednesday in Commentary, to secure Palestinian agreement to reinstate negotiations, not only did Kerry force Israel to agree to release more than a thousand Palestinian terrorists from prison. He put the US on record supporting the Palestinians’ territorial demands. In so doing, Kerry locked the US into a position of blaming Israel once the talks fail. When the Palestinians escalate their political and terrorist campaign against Israel, they will use Kerry’s pledges as a means of justifying their actions.</p>
<p>The current round of talks will fail of course because like the Turks, the Syrians and the Egyptians, the Palestinians are not interested in resolving their conflict.</p>
<p>They are interested in winning it. They do not want a state. They want to supplant Israel.</p>
<p>Clinton’s Reset button was played up as a gimmick. But it was a solemn oath. And it was fulfilled. And as a result, the world is a much more violent and dangerous place. The US and its allies are more threatened. The US’s enemies from Moscow to Tehran to Venezuela are emboldened.</p>
<p>The time has come to develop the basis for a future US policy that would represent a reset of Obama’s catastrophic actions and attitudes. Given the damage US power and prestige has already suffered, and given that Obama is unlikely to change course in his remaining three years in power, it is clear that reverting to George W. Bush’s foreign policy of sometimes fighting a war on nebulous “terrorists” and sometimes appeasing them will not be sufficient to repair the damage.</p>
<p>The US must not exchange strategic insanity with strategic inconsistency.</p>
<p>Instead, a careful, limited policy based on no-risk and low-risk moves that send clear messages and secure clear interests is in order.</p>
<p>The most obvious no-risk move would be to embrace Israel as America’s most vital and only trustworthy ally in the region. By fully supporting Israel not only would the US strengthen its own position by strengthening the position of the only state in the Middle East that shares its enemies, its interests and its values.</p>
<p>Washington would send a strong signal to states throughout the region and the world that the US can again be trusted.</p>
<p>This support would also secure clear US strategic interests by providing Israel with the political backing it requires to eliminate Iran’s nuclear program. Moreover, it would bring coherence to the US’s counter-terror strategy by ending US support for Palestinian statehood. Instead, the US would support the institution of the rule of law and liberal norms of government in Palestinian society by supporting the application of Israel’s liberal legal code over Judea and Samaria.</p>
<p>Another no-risk move is to support former Soviet satellite states that are now members of NATO. Here, too, the US would be taking an action that is clear and involves no risk. Russia would have few options for opposing such a move. And the US could go a long way toward rebuilding its tattered reputation.</p>
<p>Low risk moves include supporting minorities that do not have a history of violent anti-Americanism and are, in general, opposed to Islamic fascism.</p>
<p>Such groups include the Kurds. In Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Iran, the Kurds represent a national group that has proven its ability to self-govern and to oppose tyranny. With certain, easily identified exceptions, the stronger the Kurds are, the weaker anti-American forces become.</p>
<p>Then there are the Christians. The plight of the Christians in the Islamic world is one of the most depressing chapters in the recent history of the region. In country after country, previously large and relatively peaceful, if discriminated against, Christian minorities are being slaughtered and forced to flee.</p>
<p>The US has done next to nothing to defend them.</p>
<p>Strong, forthright statements of support for Christian communities and condemnations of persecution, including rape, forced conversions, massacre, extortion and destruction of church and private Christian-owned property from Egypt to Indonesia to Pakistan to the Palestinian Authority would make a difference in the lives of millions of people.</p>
<p>It would also go some way toward rehabilitating the US’s reputation as a champion of human rights, after Obama’s embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood.</p>
<p>Under Obama, America has made itself worse than irrelevant. In country after country, it has become dangerous to be a US ally. The world as a whole is a much more dangerous place as a consequence.</p>
<p>Nothing short of a fundamental transformation of US foreign policy will suffice to begin to repair the damage.</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/caroline-glick/resetting-u-s-foreign-policy-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The GOP National Security Debate of 2016 Begins</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/ryan-mauro/the-gop-national-security-debate-of-2016-begins/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-gop-national-security-debate-of-2016-begins</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/ryan-mauro/the-gop-national-security-debate-of-2016-begins/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:26:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ryan Mauro]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2016]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Christie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Hampshire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rand Paul]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator McCain]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=198411</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The significance of Chris Christie's clash with Rand Paul.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/paul.christie.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-198414" alt="paul.christie" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/paul.christie.jpg" width="280" height="169" /></a>The contest for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016 will include a great debate about the party’s direction on foreign policy and national security, while the DNC candidates are on the same page. N.J. Governor Chris Christie just clashed with Kentucky Senator Rand Paul after saying that he and his libertarian trend are “dangerous.”</p>
<p>As I <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/ryan-mauro/eye-on-2016/">noted on July 16</a>, the emphasis on national polls is misplaced. The important ones are in Iowa and New Hampshire and Paul leads in both, making him the frontrunner. Now, he <i>also</i> leads nationally with 16% according to a <a href="http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_725.pdf">PPP poll.</a> With his strengthening position Paul should have been expecting criticism from his rivals, and Christie has stepped up to throw the hardest punch.</p>
<p>Christie is framing himself as tougher on national security than Paul, saying that Paul’s “strain of libertarianism…is a very dangerous thought.” The specific area of disagreement is the National Security Agency’s controversial intelligence-gathering programs. Paul’s office replied by referring to him as “(Crist)ie,” using the disagreement to reinforce criticism that Christie is too moderate.</p>
<p>The disagreement helps Paul in the primaries, but helps Christie’s general election prospects. About <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2013/07/26/few-see-adequate-limits-on-nsa-surveillance-program/">50% of Americans</a> support the NSA programs and 44% disapprove. However, among Republicans, 50% are against them and 44% support them.</p>
<p>Senator Paul is also <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/06/23/rep_peter_king_rand_pauls_support_of_snowden_is_absolutely_disgraceful.html">under attack</a> from New York Rep. Peter King for his support for NSA leaker Edward Snowden. Paul may also be criticized for <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2013/07/11/rand-paul-introduces-legislation-to-end">introducing legislation cutting off aid to Egypt</a> in reaction to the overthrow of Egyptian President Morsi. He has always opposed aid to Egypt, but the timing will be seen by Egyptians as proof that the U.S. is on the side of the Muslim Brotherhood.</p>
<p>King <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/peter-king-says-hillary-clinton-destroy-rand-paul-122922836--abc-news-politics.html">says</a> that Hillary Clinton would “destroy” Paul and Texas Senator Ted Cruz because of their “isolationist” positions. Christie, the most electable candidate at this point, has a slew of <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/">polls</a> he can use to drive this point home.</p>
<p>Nationally, Clinton is ahead of Paul by 8%, but is only 1% ahead of Christie. Paul ties Biden, but Christie leads him by 6% (another poll has him with a 11% lead). In Ohio, Christie ties Clinton and defeats Biden by a whopping 18%. Paul loses to Clinton by 3% and his margin over Biden is only half of Christie’s. In Virginia, Christie is 5% behind Clinton, while Paul has a 14% gap to fill. Biden defeats Paul by 7%, but loses to Christie by 8%.</p>
<p>By attacking Paul, Christie has opened the door for his rivals to scrutinize his own national security record. The <a href="http://www.clarionproject.org"><i>Clarion Project</i></a> has repeatedly documented his associations with Islamists. Last November, it was revealed that Christie had <a href="http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/four-islamists-gov-christies-muslim-outreach-committee">four Islamists on his Muslim outreach committee</a>, including the Hamas-linked Imam Qatanani, whom Christie defends against the Department of Homeland Security. Christie&#8217;s <a href="http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/gov-christie-appoints-islamist-friendly-ag-be-new-senator">Senate appointment is friendly with these Islamists</a>, something that only <a href="http://www.clarionproject.org/news/christies-senate-appointment-and-his-islamist-friends">Canadian TV covered.</a> Christie attacks his critics on this issue as <a href="http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/christie-reponds-critics-about-his-ties-radical-islamists">bigots.&#8221;</a></p>
<p>The second tier of GOP candidates is Christie, Rep. Paul Ryan and former Governor Jeb Bush, each with 13%. Cruz also fits into this category with 12% and Senator Marco Rubio has 10%. As my <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/ryan-mauro/eye-on-2016/">last analysis showed</a>, Rubio’s fall is a big development in the race. He is now in 5<sup>th </sup>place in Iowa, 4<sup>th</sup> place in New Hampshire and 6<sup>th</sup> nationally.</p>
<p>Rubio will try to regain some of his support by criticizing Paul on national security and foreign policy, but, like Christie, he has holes in his own record. He stood with Senator McCain when he blasted the members of Congress that <a href="http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/huma-abedin-associate-editor-islamist-journal">pointed out the Islamist associations of Huma Abedin</a>, the wife of New York City mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner, who <a href="http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/other-anthony-weiner-scandal">recently received a donation from an Al-Jazeera lobbyist.</a></p>
<p>Rubio went beyond McCain’s scope of criticism, and dismissed the congressmen’s concerns about the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood altogether. The Abedin angle was only one part of the letters on the topic. Rubio <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/07/19/rubio_condemns_bachmann/">said</a>, “I can tell you that I don’t share the feelings that are in that letter.”</p>
<p>The offensive against both Paul and Christie (and possibly Rubio) on national security is going to come from the third tier candidates: Former Senator Rick Santorum, who registers 4% nationally, Rep. King and former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton. Two other possible candidates are Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker; Governor Bobby Jindal, who ties Santorum at 4%; and Governor Susana Martinez, who is at 2%, but she isn’t showing interest in running.</p>
<p>The Democratic lineup remains stable, with Clinton dominating and Biden taking her place if she chooses not to run. Senator Elizabeth Warren is in a distant third. Governor Deval Patrick, who has courted Islamists, but <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/ryan-mauro/mass-governor-replaces-islamist-imam-at-interfaith-service/">replaced an Islamist imam at an interfaith service</a> following the Boston bombings, has ruled out a presidential run. Senator Amy Klobuchar is now <a href="http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2013/07/17/amy-klobuchar-to-speak-in-iowa-in-august/article">putting her name out there</a> with a trip to Iowa.</p>
<p>Of course, the race is in its very earliest stages and a lot will change, with Rubio’s dramatic decline serving as an example. However, this debate isn’t just about 2016. Unlike the Democrats, there is a visible fracturing of the party into two camps on national security and foreign affairs issues. The Republican Party is headed towards a fork in the road and only one path can be taken.</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/2013/ryan-mauro/the-gop-national-security-debate-of-2016-begins/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Al Qaeda in Iraq Still Threatens America</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/al-qaeda-in-iraq-still-threatens-america/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=al-qaeda-in-iraq-still-threatens-america</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/al-qaeda-in-iraq-still-threatens-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Jun 2013 04:37:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chemical weapons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WMD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=191891</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A foiled nerve gas plot shows the terrorist group is more dangerous than ever. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Iraq-AQ-chemical-agents.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-191898" alt="Soldiers wearing gas masks hold bottles containing chemical materials during a news conference at the Defence Ministry in Baghdad" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Iraq-AQ-chemical-agents-450x281.jpg" width="270" height="169" /></a>A week ago, Obama declared that Al Qaeda was on a path to defeat. Not only is that not true of Al Qaeda as a whole; it’s not even true of Al Qaeda in Iraq.</p>
<p>During his multiple withdrawals from Iraq, Obama claimed that the mission had been successfully concluded and that the war there never had anything to do with Al Qaeda. Unfortunately Al Qaeda in Iraq begged to differ.</p>
<p>This May<a href="http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2013/06/01/More-than-1-000-people-killed-in-May-Iraq-violence-U-N-says.html">, over a thousand Iraqis</a> have been killed, nearly equaling the death toll from the worst days of the Iraq War. Car bombings in Baghdad no longer make the evening news, but they are commonplace and despite the withdrawal, Americans haven’t been immune from the violence.</p>
<p>Among the Benghazi attackers <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/24/world/benghazi-al-qaeda-in-iraq">were about a dozen members of Al Qaeda in Iraq</a>. The four Americans who died in the attack could be considered four additional Al Qaeda in Iraq kills.</p>
<p>But Al Qaeda in Iraq’s real mission lay in Syria. The Al-Nusra Front has dominated the Sunni side of the Syrian Civil War. Robert Ford, the United States ambassador to Syria, <a href="http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/12/12/ford_al_nusra_front_is_just_another_name_for_al_qaeda_in_iraq">has said that the Al-Nusra Front</a> is just Al Qaeda in Iraq operating under another name.</p>
<p>While Obama has been taking an extended victory lap, his unfinished business in Baghdad is on the way to accomplishing in Syria what it failed to accomplish in Iraq; take over an entire country. The Al-Nusra Front started life as a Syrian arm of Al Qaeda in Iraq which fed foreign fighters into the Iraq War and made the fighting so bloody. It has now become Al Qaeda in Iraq’s biggest success story.</p>
<p>In April, the head of Al Qaeda in Iraq announced the creation of an Islamic state encompassing Iraq and Syria. The Al-Nusra Front responded by pledging allegiance to Al Qaeda while avoiding acknowledging that they are not a Syrian independence movement, but a transnational Salafist front operating in Syria.</p>
<p>All this might seem academic. After years of trying to police Iraq, most Americans could be forgiven for not giving a damn who is blowing up who in Syria or Iraq. Unfortunately as we found out in Benghazi, what happens in Iraq, doesn’t stay in Iraq. It doesn’t stay in Benghazi either.</p>
<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/al-qaeda-in-iraq-caught-plotting-nerve-gas-attack-in-the-united-states/">Iraqi authorities have arrested five members</a> of Al Qaeda in Iraq and seized a production facility for manufacturing Sarin nerve gas along with remote controlled planes that they planned to use as drones to deploy their chemical weapons.  Their immediate targets were Shiite Muslims, but the Iraqi defense ministry <a href="http://news.sky.com/story/1098214/iraq-smashes-al-qaeda-poison-gas-cell">stated that there were plans to smuggle the weapons</a> to the United States and Europe.</p>
<p>Meanwhile Turkey arrested members of an Al-Nusra Front cell with their own stockpiles of Sarin nerve gas. Syria claims to have done the same thing.</p>
<p>While there are good reasons to be skeptical of any claims from the Syrian government, Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry, <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/">had stated earlier that evidence</a> pointed to the use of Sarin nerve gas by the Sunni rebels.</p>
<p>The seizure of multiple WMDs from Al Qaeda in Iraq’s operations across three countries shows just how big the problem has become.</p>
<p>In his recent national defense speech, Obama repeated the familiar theme that Bush had diverted focus from the fight against Al Qaeda by going into Iraq and that he had restored the proper focus by moving back to Afghanistan.</p>
<p>In fact, Al Qaeda was far stronger in Iraq than in Afghanistan when he took office and remained so during his failed attempts at defeating and then appeasing the Taliban. While Obama threw away lives fighting the Taliban, Al Qaeda in Iraq was laying plans for capturing an entire country and its WMD stockpiles.</p>
<p>There is a certain irony to Al Qaeda in Iraq threatening the United States with Sarin, classified officially as a weapon of mass destruction, long after the Democrats had discredited the Iraq War with taunts of “Where are the WMDs?”</p>
<p>Chemical weapons are notoriously tricky and it’s likely that Al Qaeda in Iraq still has some work to do before it can successfully deploy a WMD. In the nineties, a Japanese doomsday cult’s Sarin nerve gas attacks only killed twenty people and sickened thousands. But 0.5 milligrams of Sarin is a lethal dose for an adult and the Al-Nusra Front cells had kilograms of it.</p>
<p>Syria as a whole may have a thousand tons of Sarin. The Tokyo doomsday cult planned to kill millions with its 70 tons. And as Syrian bases and facilities fall into the hands of the Al-Nusra Front, it will no longer have to rely on crude attempts to manufacture weapons that it can just pick up wholesale.</p>
<p>In his speech at the National Defense University, Obama declared that the war must end. And no doubt it will. One way or another. Nothing lasts forever. But his implication that America can end the war by becoming more passive is wrong.</p>
<p>The war did not begin because the United States was too active, but because it was too passive and took refuge in the cult of root causes instead of dealing directly and immediately with threats. September 11 was shocking, but it was also inevitable. It is equally inevitable that a terrorist attack will one day occur that will be bigger and more devastating than it.</p>
<p>Washington, D.C. often lives in its own bubble. Having forgotten about Iraq once it stopped being a political football, Democratic politicians imagine that Iraq and its Al Qaeda legions have forgotten about them. The Sarin raids in Iraq, Turkey and Syria are a reminder that Al Qaeda in Iraq may now be a bigger threat than it ever was before.</p>
<p>The Clinton Administration chose not to take down Bin Laden when it had the chance, instead taking refuge in outreach and “smart” targeted strikes that were the predecessors of today’s drone warfare. It believed that showing Muslims that we would engage in humanitarian intervention to empower their national aims in Yugoslavia would count for more than hunting down Osama bin Laden. It was wrong.</p>
<p>September 11 was the outcome of its neglect. Now the Obama Administration is allowing history to repeat itself with more humanitarian interventions and smart strikes that overlook the real threat growing on the horizon.</p>
<p>The Sarin raids should be a wake up call. But this is not an administration that takes 3 AM calls.</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/dgreenfield/al-qaeda-in-iraq-still-threatens-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>45</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Great Race Card Getaway</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-great-race-card-getaway/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-great-race-card-getaway</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-great-race-card-getaway/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 May 2013 04:27:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Morehouse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uganda]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=190963</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Racing away from scandals with a race card.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/morehouse.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-190967" alt="morehouse" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/morehouse-450x252.jpg" width="315" height="176" /></a>In his second term, as scandals were exploding all around him, President William Jefferson Clinton boarded Air Force One along with a few close personal friends, like BET CEO and richest black man in America Robert Johnson, and a bunch of other businessmen and politicians, along with the ubiquitous Jesse Jackson, for a jaunt to Africa.</p>
<p>The trip cost a mere $42.8 million, which would have been enough to feed a sizable chunk of Africa, and featured an entourage that would have shamed Alexander the Great or Jay-Z. It took 1,300 people to make Clinton’s Great African Getaway possible including 205 personnel from the Office of the President, 60 from the State Department, 9 from the Department of Transportation and 1 from the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Somehow Fish and Wildlife stayed at home.</p>
<p>The Department of Defense flew 98 airlift missions and 110 refueling missions. It might have been simpler to just invade and get it over with.</p>
<p>Despite the mass mobilization, Clinton wasn’t going to Africa so much as he was getting away from Washington, D.C. where every television news show was full of women accusing him of a One Man War on Women.</p>
<p>Two months earlier, Bill Clinton had wagged his finger at America and Hillary Clinton had blamed a vast right-wing conspiracy for her husband’s inability to keep his pants on.  Now as Lewinsky’s lawyers were discussing immunity agreements, President Clinton invoked executive privilege, in more ways than one, and flew off to Africa.</p>
<p>It was the first black president’s first trip to Africa where he hoped to use the horrors of slavery to put his peccadilloes in perspective. Sure, the victim of the vast right-wing conspiracy might have actually had sexual relations with that woman and tried to force himself on countless other women, but who can attach any importance to that when contemplating the thousands chained up and dragged away to a life of slavery?</p>
<p>In Uganda, Clinton made history by apologizing for the slave trade. Uganda, however, was in East Africa and no slaves had gone to America from there. It was a case of, “I did not engage in slave trade with that part of the continent.”</p>
<p>None of the 1,300 people involved in the Great Apology Safari had bothered to research where the slaves came from because it didn’t matter. Bill Clinton was using Africa as a morality prop, the way that liberals so often use black people as props in their morality plays. In the little picture, he might be immoral for cheating on his wife, but in the big picture he was morally superior because he apologized for slavery.</p>
<p>Now as congressional Republicans were trying to figure out which scandal to investigate first, Barack Obama headed off to Morehouse, a historically black college, to offer some condescending words of wisdom, telling graduates, “It betrays a poverty of ambition if all you think about is what goods you can buy instead of what good you can do.” Far be it from the Morehouse Men to follow his example.</p>
<p>Obama cheerfully declared that he was an “Honorary Morehouse Man”; an honor that the Harvard and Columbia alum, who would never have been caught dead at Morehouse, prizes nearly as dearly as Clinton prized the lives of all the East Africans who were never enslaved.</p>
<p>“We know that too many young men in our community continue to make bad choices,” Obama told Morehouse grads, even as Congress was busy investigating the bad choices that he had made with the IRS and Benghazi. “Growing up, I made a few myself. And I have to confess, sometimes I wrote off my own failings as just another example of the world trying to keep a black man down.”</p>
<p>Fortunately that is a lapse that Obama has grown out of. It’s probably been an entire week since one of his surrogates compared the Republican Party to the KKK and declared that any investigation of his crimes and misdemeanors is another lynching.</p>
<p>But aside from the usual ObamaCare pitch, the race card was what the appearance was largely about. In 2012, Obama went to Barnard College, an elite women’s liberal arts school affiliated with his Columbia alma mater where the tuition it is double what it is at Morehouse, in keeping with his theme of a War on Women. (A war that history records Bill Clinton successfully winning when he dodged impeachment.)</p>
<p>In 2013, Obama needed to suddenly remind everyone that the world was trying to keep a half-black man down after twice selecting him for the highest office in the world. At Morehouse, Obama praised grads for their critical race theory awareness in being able to recognize “the burdens you carry with you, but to resist the temptation to use them as excuses.”</p>
<p>Obama, who has never carried a burden heavier than a golf club bag, has exploited their burdens as his excuse for everything. He got elected by exploiting the guilt and anger over a history of slavery that he had as much to do with as the Ugandans did. And he stayed in office by flipping open his wallet and flashing his race card every time he was pulled over because the taillight of national defense was out and the muffler of the economy was dragging a hail of sparks along the road.</p>
<p>Instead of going to Africa, where he actually has some relevant history, Obama went to Morehouse, where he has none.</p>
<p>Obama’s roots aren’t African-American. They have as little to do with the country’s tangled past as Uganda does. The son of a diplomat and the grandson of the Vice President of the Bank of Hawaii, he lived a privileged life that had little in common with the “brothers who have been left behind” mentioned in his speech.</p>
<p>“The brothers who have been left behind – who haven’t had the same opportunities we have – they need to hear from us. We’ve got to be in the barbershops with them, at church with them, spending time and energy and presence helping pull them up, exposing them to new opportunities, and supporting their dreams,” Obama told them.</p>
<p>Meanwhile under Obama, the unemployment rate for the “brothers” stands at 14 percent. For teen brothers, it’s 43 percent. Brothers with college degrees, like those coming out of Morehouse, have double the unemployment rate of white college graduates.</p>
<p>Bob Johnson, who went on the Great African Lewinsky Escape safari with Bill Clinton, said, “This country would never tolerate white unemployment at 14 and 15 percent. No one would ever stay in office at 14 or 15 percent unemployment in this nation.”</p>
<p>But Johnson is wrong. If unemployment ever hits 15 percent or it it’s revealed that the IRS will allot kidney transplants based on the contents of your prayers and four embassies are destroyed in a single day, Obama will just head back to Morehouse to impress white liberal supporters with another one of his inspirational speeches about not using race as an excuse.</p>
<p>And if that doesn’t work, he can always try Uganda.</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/2013/dgreenfield/the-great-race-card-getaway/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>59</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Amnesty Bill&#8217;s Latest Sham &#8220;Trigger&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/volpe/the-amnesty-bills-latest-sham-trigger/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-amnesty-bills-latest-sham-trigger</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/volpe/the-amnesty-bills-latest-sham-trigger/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:20:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Volpe]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amnesty bill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exit system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exit tracking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[visas]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=187453</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why the Gang of 8's claims of "tough" border enforcement are a fraud. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Border-Fence.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-187507" alt="U.S. Border Patrol Monitors Vast Border With Mexico" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Border-Fence.jpg" width="277" height="156" /></a><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">The &#8220;exit system,&#8221; one of the so-called triggers in the Gang of 8 immigration bill, while sounding tough, appears to be largely a sham, according to an analysis by Front</span></b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">p</span><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">age Magazine. Some of the flaws include: that all enforcement mechanisms won’t be required for the first five years, that it is essentially the reauthorization of a system that’s already had funding authorized five times without any action, that biometric identification will not be required, and that the system does not require any identification in road exits.</span></b></p>
<p>To explain: One of the mandates in the new immigration bill is a mandate to develop an &#8220;exit tracking system.&#8221; This is an important system because it’s estimated that about 40% of the illegal aliens in the USA came here legally, but overstayed their visas. An exit system would not only track all non-citizens that have left the country, but theoretically, alert authorities when someone has stayed longer than they were supposed to.</p>
<p>During the Clinton administration, in 1996, such a system was first mandated and money was appropriated. Since that time, the system was mandated and appropriated for five more times. That system remains largely ineffective even though the Obama administration has spent tens of trillions of dollars and had six prior mandates to develop one. There’s no special language in this bill that should lead anyone to believe that now things will suddenly be different.</p>
<p>Furthermore, none of the exit tracking enforcement mechanisms will be required to be in place for five years. Meanwhile, all those individuals that are now in the US illegally will be provided with provisional legal status immediately.</p>
<p>Another problem with the bill is that it only mandates for exit tracking system at air and sea ports, even though a plurality of all individuals that exit the country do it by road. Finally, the system doesn’t mandate a biometric system, but rather by using an individual’s name done in a data entry manner.</p>
<p>It should be noted that one reason that Tamerlan Tsarnaev didn’t raise more red flags was because his name was misspelled in exactly such a data entry system on more than one occasion.</p>
<p>Last week, Frontpage Magazine reported <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/volpe/criminal-illegal-aliens-to-receive-amnesty/">that illegal aliens with as many as two separate misdemeanor convictions would still become legal provisionally</a> under this bill. This exit system is now the second example in which a close examination of the language in the bill has shown that the supposedly &#8220;tough&#8221; border enforcement triggers have instead appeared to be a sham.</p>
<p>The current bill is 844 pages and the so-called markup process has already begun. The markup process is when any other senator can add an amendment to the bill and that amendment will be voted on. It is during the markup process that bills are intended to be made better and examined in more detail.</p>
<p>While the markup process has already begun, it is not expected to be finished for several more weeks. That’s because the Senate is scheduled to take one of many breaks next week, and so the process will be stalled until after they return.</p>
<p>There should still be at least two weeks of debate during the markup process. It is during this time that senators can most be encouraged to do their part to make parts of the bill better, including by demanding that a bill not be brought to the floor unless it contains real border security enforcement.</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/volpe/the-amnesty-bills-latest-sham-trigger/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Oliver Stone&#8217;s Bush Derangement Syndrome</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/oliver-stones-bush-derangement/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=oliver-stones-bush-derangement</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/oliver-stones-bush-derangement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2013 04:40:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthew Vadum]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[9/11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George H.W.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George W]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oliver Stone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=176535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The neo-Communist filmmaker presents yet another perversion of history.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/oliver-stones-bush-derangement/image4712295/" rel="attachment wp-att-176545"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-176545" title="image4712295" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/image4712295.jpg" alt="" width="297" height="260" /></a><em>Editor’s note: The following is the ninth installment of a series of articles Frontpage is running in response to Oliver Stone’s neo-Communist documentary series, “The Untold History of the United States.” Frontpage will be reviewing each episode of the Stone series, exposing the leftist hateful lies about America and setting the record straight. Below is a review of Part 9 of the series.</em></p>
<p><em></em>George W. Bush schemed and plotted to become virtually an American emperor long before becoming president in 2001, according to neo-Communist movie-maker Oliver Stone.</p>
<p>Working with various shady so-called neoconservatives, Bush clawed his way into the Oval Office so he could impose his will on the world. The 43rd president used every unethical means at his disposal to achieve his unsavory objectives, Stone&#8217;s audience is told in the ninth episode of his multi-part hateful assault on modern American history, <em>Untold History of the United States</em>.</p>
<p>Moreover, as Stone sees it, the U.S. cheated to win the Cold War. George H.W. Bush cheated by using unfair campaign tactics against Michael Dukakis. George W. Bush and the Supreme Court cheated Al Gore out of the presidency. Bill Clinton, literally a serial sexual cheater, cheated Americans out of a &#8220;peace dividend.&#8221;</p>
<p>The episode is chock full of the kind of sweeping statements, outright lies, sleazy tabloid-worthy innuendos, and sloppy research we&#8217;ve come to expect from the pretentious movie director who has always shown a callous disdain for the facts.</p>
<p>Just about the only thing that is accurate in the episode is its name, &#8220;Bush and Clinton: Peace Squandered &#8212; the New World Order,&#8221; which correctly describes the episode&#8217;s theme. Like his popular conspiracy film, <em>JFK</em>, the episode is largely fiction.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s examine the story-lines of the episode in order.</p>
<p><strong>Gorbymania</strong></p>
<p>Contrary to pro-American propaganda, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush didn&#8217;t contribute to ending the Cold War, according to Stone.</p>
<p>Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev, a Communist who was fighting to preserve Soviet Communism, gets all the credit. Gushing, Stone declares that around the time the Berlin Wall fell, &#8220;the world was a hopeful, even joyous place. Protracted and bloody wars were ending in Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia, Nicaragua, and between Iran and Iraq.&#8221;</p>
<p>In this magical time of rainbows and unicorns, Gorbachev took it upon himself to ask the member states of the United Nations &#8220;for joint action to eliminate the threat to the world&#8217;s environment.&#8221; At the end of 1988, Gorbachev demanded that weapons be banned in outer space and that Third World exploitation be ended. &#8220;He called for a UN-brokered ceasefire in Afghanistan and offered a joint effort to put an end to an era of wars, the terror of hunger and poverty and the tactic of political terrorism,&#8221; Stone boasts.</p>
<p>Echoing the <em>New York Times</em>, which hailed Gorbachev as a visionary world leader, Stone ecstatically praises the Communist&#8217;s proposals as &#8220;breathtaking, risky, bold, naive, heroic.&#8221;</p>
<p>George H.W. Bush, on the other hand, was a vicious, dimwitted blue-blood. Like the media before him, the director distorts the 41st president&#8217;s much ridiculed reference to the &#8220;vision thing.&#8221; He maintains it meant the president &#8220;distrusted individualistic thinking.&#8221;</p>
<p>This is nonsense, of course. Bush was ridiculing the idea that a presidential candidate had to have a distinct vision, as conservatives had argued in his day. Bush thought he could win by convincing the public he was a competent manager, without laying out a comprehensive platform. The fact that he was elected suggests he was on to something.</p>
<p>Stone accuses Bush of race-baiting during the 1988 campaign. &#8220;Like Nixon, Bush appealed to voters&#8217; racism and fears of crime.&#8221; He &#8220;openly played the race card with a campaign ad&#8221; about the furloughed black murderer Willie Horton, who went on a crime spree after being released in Massachusetts under then-governor Michael Dukakis.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s difficult to believe the ad that painted Dukakis as soft on crime was racist. The Willie Horton issue was first raised earlier in the election cycle by then-Sen. Al Gore (D-Tenn.) in his run for the Democratic nomination against Dukakis.</p>
<p>Ensconced in the Oval Office, Bush and his advisers didn&#8217;t fight fair against the dear Soviet leader, Stone complains.</p>
<p>&#8220;They all agreed reaching out to Gorbachev would weaken Western resolve where Gorbachev was calling for eliminating tactical nuclear weapons in Europe, a move, an offer most Europeans applauded,&#8221; Stone says. &#8220;The United States countered that the Soviet Union should remove 325,000 troops in exchange for a U.S. cut of 30,000.&#8221;</p>
<p>Most Americans would consider Bush&#8217;s offer an example of driving a hard bargain against the nation&#8217;s sworn enemy, but Stone regards it as some kind of betrayal.</p>
<p>The U.S. should have entered into a grand alliance with the Soviet Union, according to the Kremlin-adoring director. &#8220;The laurels of victory and a true peace would be squandered &#8230; in Bush&#8217;s lack of foresight and vision in acquiring a true ally in the Soviet Union.&#8221;</p>
<p>Stone implies that because Bush refused to give Gorbachev political cover to help him deal with hardliners at home, the Soviet strongman was placed under house arrest in mid-1991 by Communist officials.</p>
<p>Bush&#8217;s refusal to appease Gorbachev, who was struggling to reform the USSR while maintaining a socialist system, led to the Soviet leader&#8217;s downfall. &#8220;Condemned and rejected, on Christmas Day 1991 Gorbachev, one of the most visionary and transformative leaders of the twentieth century resigned in a form of disgrace,&#8221; Stone says somberly.</p>
<p>As U.S. president, Bill Clinton was an improvement in certain ways over Bush 41, Stone emphasizes. The neo-Communist film-maker recycles the popular <a href="http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/craigsteiner/2011/08/22/the_clinton_surplus_myth/page/full/">left-wing lie</a> that when his presidency came to a close, Clinton &#8220;left behind a temporarily prosperous country with a huge surplus.&#8221;</p>
<p>But Clinton was a warmonger just like his predecessor, the director claims. Although the United States faced &#8220;no clear threat from hostile nations,&#8221; the Clinton administration was &#8220;even more tough-minded on defense than their Republican adversaries.&#8221; Tough-guy Clinton, of course, repeatedly failed to give the order to shoot when Osama bin Laden was in U.S. cross-hairs.</p>
<p>Clinton squandered the much vaunted &#8220;peace dividend&#8221; that America supposedly had coming because it no longer had to spend great sums to defend itself from the world&#8217;s other superpower:</p>
<blockquote><p>In January 2000 his administration added <em>$115 million</em> to the Pentagon&#8217;s projected five-year defense plan. It continued spending profusely on missile defense. Clinton also refused to sign the Ottawa land mines treaty and oversaw a significant increase in U.S. arms sales to almost 60 percent of the world&#8217;s market by 1997.</p></blockquote>
<p>According to Stone&#8217;s fuzzy math, a mere $115 million increase in missile defense spending constitutes a spending spree. The Department of Defense&#8217;s actual budget in fiscal 2000 was more than a quarter <em>trillion</em> dollars.</p>
<p><strong>The Bushes Stole the Election</strong></p>
<p>Stone rehashes the tired old smear that the Bush family stole the 2000 presidential election by somehow rigging the vote in all-important Florida. Regurgitating what has become an article of faith on the Left, Stone declares the election &#8220;the most scandalous in U.S. history.&#8221;</p>
<p>To support his claim of Republican corruption, Stone literally invents facts. After correctly stating that Democrat Al Gore beat George W. Bush in the national popular vote by 540,000 votes, he insinuates that racial discrimination prevented Gore from winning Florida.</p>
<p>According to Stone, Gore lost Florida &#8220;when more than 10 percent of African-Americans were disqualified by an antiquated state voting system overseen by a Florida governor, Jeb Bush, George&#8217;s younger brother, and Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, Bush&#8217;s state campaign manager.&#8221;</p>
<p>Stone doesn&#8217;t say how he knows more than one tenth of black voters were removed from Florida voter rolls, a conspiracy theory that emerged from the fever swamps of the Left during the recount. Could these disqualified African-Americans have been ineligible felons? We don&#8217;t know because the film-maker doesn&#8217;t bother to explain.</p>
<p>It is fanciful for Stone to assert that Florida&#8217;s voting system was run by Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris. As anyone who lived through the 36-day recount saga in 2000 knows, the governor and secretary of state don&#8217;t exert much control over polling places. Those are administered at the local level by turf-conscious, stubborn county officials.</p>
<p>Stone&#8217;s conspiracy-theorizing is even more explicit in the companion book, co-written with <a href="http://www.american.edu/cas/faculty/kuznick.cfm">Peter Kuznick</a>, a real-life associate professor of history at American University. (Given that Kuznick is contributing to a book that ought to be subtitled <em>Anti-Americanism For Dummies</em>, he can&#8217;t be overly concerned about being taken seriously.)</p>
<p>Poor Vice President Al Gore was doomed from the outset, according to the book:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;The deck was stacked against Gore &#8230; Partial recounts cut Bush&#8217;s lead below 600 votes. Fearing that the full state recount would sink him, Bush deployed family consigliere James Baker, his father&#8217;s campaign manager and secretary of state, to use every available court challenge to block the recount.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Long a believer that the U.S. invaded Iraq for oil, Stone breaks out a violin and plays his corporate conspiracy/war for oil <em>leitmotif</em>. Some campaign staffers flew down to Florida for the recount on corporate jets lent to the campaign by Bush&#8217;s &#8220;friend&#8221; Ken Lay of Enron infamy and Dick &#8220;Cheney&#8217;s friends at Halliburton.&#8221; Stone doesn&#8217;t mention the thousands of Democratic lawyers who rushed down to Florida in November 2000 to advocate for Gore.</p>
<p>Gore &#8220;demanded&#8221; a &#8220;full state recount&#8221; and the Bush campaign fought that demand, Stone writes. (Kindle version of book, Location 10971 of 22715)</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a bald-faced lie.</p>
<p>Gore&#8217;s strategy was to harvest extra votes in Democratic strongholds alone. He sought manual recounts in the four heavily Democratic counties of Volusia, Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade. Florida&#8217;s state supreme court futilely ordered a statewide recount on its own, acting so late in the game that it probably couldn&#8217;t have been done properly without missing federal deadlines.</p>
<p>In the documentary, the director glibly attributes Bush&#8217;s eventual win to a corrupt high court in Washington:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Behooving the shenanigans of a banana republic, the U.S. Supreme Court, without precedent, surprisingly intervened in the Florida election process and voted 5 to 4 to stop a recount, thus handing Bush the election. The majority of these justices had been appointed in administrations in which Bush&#8217;s father was either president or vice president. If it had happened in another country it would have been denounced as a coup by the United States.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>In fact, the high court voted 5 to 4 in <em>Bush v. Gore</em> to halt the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court after it had already decided in a lopsided 7 to 2 vote that the vote-counting processes in place were so fundamentally unfair that they violated the Constitution&#8217;s Equal Protection Clause. On that equal-treatment issue liberal justices Stephen Breyer and David Souter concurred with the majority.</p>
<p>Of course it is true, as Stone notes, that the high court was dominated by justices appointed when George W. Bush&#8217;s father was president or vice president. But that by itself proves nothing. After the elder Bush served 12 years in the Executive Branch, it isn&#8217;t surprising that courts would abound with his appointees or the appointees of the two-term president he served under.</p>
<p>Years later, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia <a href="http://www.callawyer.com/clstory.cfm?pubdt=NaN&amp;eid=913358&amp;evid=1">denied suggestions</a> that the high court had injected itself into the 2000 election. &#8220;Nobody on the court liked to wade into that controversy,&#8221; Scalia said. &#8220;But there was certainly no way that we could turn down the petition for certiorari. What are you going to say? The case isn&#8217;t important enough?&#8221;</p>
<p>In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court merely produced the same election result that would have been reached had it not interrupted the Florida recount. And after much drama, the system devised by the Framers of the Constitution worked.</p>
<p>Eventually even the mainstream media &#8211;gasp!&#8211; agreed that Bush was the legitimate victor.</p>
<p>A year after the election, an exhaustive investigation by a large consortium of mainstream media outlets concluded that &#8220;George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.&#8221; (<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html?pagewanted=all">New York Times</a>, Nov. 12, 2001)</p>
<p>Stone ignores the inconvenient fact that had the U.S. Supreme Court not acted, other political institutions were prepared to step in. (He also overlooks the hordes of left-wing activists who pressured electors pledged to Bush to become &#8220;faithless&#8221; electors by voting against him in the Electoral College.)</p>
<p>To prevent Gore from stealing the election in Florida, the Republican-controlled state legislature had been ready to approve Bush&#8217;s slate of presidential electors over Gore&#8217;s, handing the election to Bush. Similarly, if the election had been thrown to the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives, Bush would also have been elected.</p>
<p>But Stone, like the entire Left, can simply never accept that Gore, whom he describes as &#8220;a forward-looking, experienced man who repeatedly warned of a world ecological disaster looming in a changing climate that needed controlling,&#8221; could ever lose to a supposed rube from tumble weed-covered Texas.</p>
<p>Stone fantasizes that Gore was compassionate and as such might have been a truly great president. It is &#8220;compassion for the other that in the end has distinguished our greatest leaders, be it Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt, or on other fronts, people such as Martin Luther King.&#8221;</p>
<p>The America-hater suggests that if Clinton&#8217;s veep hadn&#8217;t supposedly been so unfairly roughed up by a mocking media, the community of nations might have come together in a giant group hug after 9/11:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Had Al Gore been in office, instead of being derided by the media as a know-it-all who annoyed them might he not have emotionally connected to a world that had hardened in its hatred of U.S. policies? Might he not have acted in humbler fashion and pursued the terrorists with the traditional structures of diplomacy, intelligence services, and firm police action? Would not the same results have been achieved without making new enemies that could be perceived as martyrs to a young generation of emerging radicals?&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>We&#8217;ll never know for sure.</p>
<p><strong>Bush the Younger, the Mad Tyrant</strong></p>
<p>Stone characterizes George W. Bush, forever an illegitimate president in his eyes, as a decadent tyrant. After taking office and &#8220;befitting a Roman emperor,&#8221; the 43rd president was &#8220;surrounded by an entourage of true believers.&#8221;</p>
<p>Although President George H.W. Bush and President Clinton worked at diplomacy and coalition-building in the international area, the younger, twisted Bush had psychological issues with his father that guided his actions in the Oval Office, Stone claims. &#8220;In his sense of defiance towards his father, [Bush 43] came to resemble more a degenerate heir to an admired Roman emperor.&#8221;</p>
<p>As invented facts spring forth from his fertile imagination, Stone pontificates that, &#8220;In Bush&#8217;s mind both his father and the sexually undisciplined Bill Clinton were weak. Ronald Reagan was his idea of strength and a higher father.&#8221;</p>
<p>The cheap shots at Bush continue. Unable to take in the scope of history without the lens of cinema, the director relies on a box office blockbuster to advance his lunatic theories. It was ironic, he says, that in early 2001, Ridley Scott&#8217;s <em>Gladiator</em> was named best film of 2000. The movie, which enjoyed &#8220;worldwide success celebrated Rome&#8217;s harsh militarism depicting a perverted leadership that spelled the fall of the Roman Empire,&#8221; really seemed to be telling the story of the ongoing collapse of increasingly militaristic, imperialistic America, Stone infers.</p>
<p>We are then shown a dramatic clip from <em>Gladiator</em>, in which the conflicted son Commodus, having just learned he will not become emperor, murders his father Marcus Aurelius to seize his throne. &#8220;I would butcher the whole world if you would only love me!&#8221; a distraught Commodus cries out as he squeezes the life out of the elderly emperor.</p>
<p>Having metaphorically killed his father, or something, Bush 43 soon turned into a monster the likes of which the American body politic had never seen before &#8212; in Stone&#8217;s morbid fantasy world. Aligned with devious &#8220;neoconservatives,&#8221; Bush set about doing pro-American things that the conservative movement had long supported.</p>
<p>Under Bush, the litany of supposed horrors committed included asserting U.S. sovereignty by withdrawing from the International Criminal Court Treaty, rejecting the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, repudiating the worse-than-useless Kyoto Protocol on Global Warming, disavowing the so-called Middle East peace process, and suspending negotiations with Stalinist North Korea on its long-range missile program.</p>
<p>Even worse, Bush dared to make an effort to provide American energy security, Stone pouts. &#8220;His administration was marinated in oil, [Vice President Dick] Cheney putting together a highly secretive energy task force that laid out plans to control the world&#8217;s supply.&#8221;</p>
<p>Stone inadvertently reveals that he must not have watched television news for a decade, making the ridiculous claim that &#8220;in general the media asked few questions about these abrupt reversals in policy.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>9/11 As An Opportunity</strong></p>
<p>Stone blames Bush for failing to prevent the Islamofascist terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The threats made by Osama bin Laden were known by authorities but Stone claims the president &#8220;could not focus his attention as he spent more time away from Washington than any recent president at his sequestered Crawford, Texas ranch chopping wood.&#8221;</p>
<p>In his rush to condemn Bush, Stone skips over the fact that because of the long delay in resolving the election, well into 2001 many top security posts in the administration went unfilled. The fact is also left out that the Democrat-erected &#8220;<a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=182">Gorelick wall</a>&#8221; prevented intelligence agencies from piecing together data gathered about the impending attacks.</p>
<p>Following the deadly attacks in which roughly 3,000 Americans were killed, Bush fanned the flames of public hysteria, Stone alleges.</p>
<p>After 9/11 in America:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;an enormous Pandora&#8217;s box of dark energy and pent-up fear of chaos reminiscent of the late nineteenth-century French Revolution all came together in self-righteousness that would spawn a crusade against not only bin Laden and his followers but all evil in the world itself.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>This makes no sense. Although in his rhetoric Bush identified a three-country &#8220;Axis of Evil&#8221; and attacked Iraq, one of those nations, the Global War on Terror he initiated never actually aimed at eradicating all evil in the world. This campaign was narrowly directed at state sponsors of terrorism.</p>
<p>Besides, Stone&#8217;s historical analogy is a head-scratcher. There was no French Revolution near the end of the nineteenth century. Civilized people the world over-stared in disbelief at the actual French Revolution, an ugly, blood-drenched eruption of sociopolitical tumult that raged at the very end of the <em>eighteenth century</em> (i.e. 1789 to 1799) and whose reverberations continue echoing in the present day.</p>
<p>Strangely, Stone is referring to the Paris Commune of 1871, which only a few have called the Fourth French Revolution. We know Stone is pointing to the events of 1871 because during the relevant part of his narration he displays <a href="http://www.parisenimages.fr/fr/popup-photo.html?photo=1543-1">a period print</a> of Communards fighting at the barricades.</p>
<p>The problem is that the Occupy Wall Street-like uprising of anarchists and communists lasted only two months and didn&#8217;t spread beyond the French capital. Although it inspired generations of Marxists, the Paris Commune is more of an interesting historical footnote than a real revolution.</p>
<p>In any event, as a neo-Communist, Stone would have to applaud the Paris Commune. As V.I. Lenin <a href="http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch03.htm">noted</a>, Karl Marx himself applauded the uprising at the time, expressing hope that at some point revolutionaries would &#8220;smash&#8221; France&#8217;s &#8220;bureaucratic-military machine.&#8221;</p>
<p>Because this error-prone, America-hating director can&#8217;t be bothered to explain his argument properly, it&#8217;s not clear what he is getting at. Perhaps the significance of the reference was lost on Stone&#8217;s cutting room floor.</p>
<p>Stone insists that in the aftermath of 9/11, when nations acted with empathy towards the U.S., Bush squandered an opportunity to reach out to the rest of the world.</p>
<p>But Stone can&#8217;t even get country names right. &#8220;Vladimir Putin of the <em>USSR</em> was one of the first to offer help,&#8221; Stone says. Putin&#8217;s offer came in 2001, when he was president of Russia, a decade after the Soviet Union disbanded.</p>
<p>Putin, by the way, was the right kind of strongman to rescue Russia, says the director. Putin &#8220;brought Russia back from the brink by reinstating a strong tyrannical centralizing power in the old Russian style.&#8221; Of course in reality Russia is still on the brink, its population plummeting amidst a perpetually stagnant economy, but Stone never lets facts get in the way of dictator-worship.</p>
<p>Bush 43 had planned his drive for world domination long before becoming president, according to Stone:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;As he embarked on one of the country&#8217;s most ambitious periods of nation-building, George Bush actually did more in his eight years in office than any other president to bury the World War Two myth of American power moderated by fairness. In hindsight it was his capacity to conceal his reactionary intentions that years later still confronts and shocks many Americans from the pre-2001 era.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>There you have it. The ups and downs of American life for the past 12 years may be directly traced to a sinister plot hatched in smoke-filled back rooms in Kennebunkport and Austin.</p>
<p>So says Hollywood&#8217;s most prolific neo-Communist conspiracy theorist.</p>
<p><strong>Related articles on Stone’s series:</strong></p>
<p>1. <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-thornton/oliver-stones-left-wing-agitprop/">Bruce Thornton’s introduction</a> to this Frontpage series.</p>
<p>2. <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/david-horowitz/neo-communism-out-of-the-closet/">David Horowitz’s analysis</a> of the meaning behind the warm reception of Stone’s Kremlin propaganda.</p>
<p>3. <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/matthew-vadum/oliver-stones-untrue-history-stalin-the-great-hero-of-wwii/">Matthew Vadum’s review</a> of Stone’s first episode.</p>
<p>4. Daniel Flynn’s review of “<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/daniel-flynn/through-oliver-stones-looking-glass/">Roosevelt, Truman and Wallace</a>,” the second episode.</p>
<p>5. Daniel Greenfield’s <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/the-atom-bomb-and-the-truth-bomb/">review of “The Bomb,”</a> the third episode.</p>
<p>6. Bruce Thornton’s review of “<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/bruce-thornton/oliver-stones-cold-war-melodrama/">The Cold War: 1945-1950</a>,” the 4th episode.</p>
<p>7. Matthew Vadum’s review of “<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/oliver-stones-distortion-of-the-eisenhower-era/">The 50s: Eisenhower, The Bomb &amp; The Third World</a>,” the 5th episode.</p>
<p>8. Larry Schweikart’s review of “<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/larry-schweikart/the-cuban-missile-crisis-world-saved-by-the-soviets-says-oliver-stone/">The Cuban Missile Crisis,</a>” the 6th episode.</p>
<p>9. Larry Schweikart’s review of “<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/larry-schweikart/a-history-lesson-for-oliver-stone-on-vietnam/">Johnson, Nixon &amp; Vietnam: Reversal of Fortune</a>,” the 7th episode.</p>
<p>10. Daniel Greenfield&#8217;s review of “<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-death-of-oliver-stones-good-soviet-union/">Reagan, Gorbachev &amp; the Third World: Revival of Fortune</a>,” the 8th episode.</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/matthew-vadum/oliver-stones-bush-derangement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Things Only a Democrat Could Get Away With</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/things-only-a-democrat-could-get-away-with/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=things-only-a-democrat-could-get-away-with</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/things-only-a-democrat-could-get-away-with/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 04:58:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benghazi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jimmy Carter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=176134</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Shamelessness is the only virtue left in the Democratic Party.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/things-only-a-democrat-could-get-away-with/benghazi-2/" rel="attachment wp-att-176178"><img class="wp-image-176178 alignleft" title="Benghazi" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Benghazi-450x254.jpg" alt="" width="315" height="178" /></a>On Friday, Hillary Rodham Clinton left the Harry S. Truman Building of the State Department after doing a grand media tour of every media outlet with a camera and a microphone. Meanwhile in Benghazi, where it was twenty degrees warmer, foreign organizations were fleeing the city while the killers who stayed behind still walked the streets.</p>
<p>In her joint appearance with Obama on 60 Minutes, Clinton claimed that her critics were not living in an &#8220;evidence-based world&#8221;. This is the same world of which she wrote in her goodbye letter to her State Department colleagues; “I am proud of what we have accomplished together.” Those accomplishments are hard to find among the debris of three failed wars, two failed containment policies in Iran and North Korea, and more attacks on American diplomatic facilities than ever before.</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton presided over the first murder of an American ambassador in thirty years. It was the closest thing to a notable moment in her time as Secretary of State, which concluded, in true Clinton style, with a cover-up, Senate hearings and more finger-wagging.</p>
<p>And yet, despite all that, the media threw her a farewell party in preparation for the 2016 election.  Four Americans died in Benghazi and in four years, Hillary Rodham Clinton expects to take the White House.</p>
<p>There is a certain symmetry to that. A year of political exile for every man she left unguarded and unsupported while lavishing millions on mosque renovations, embassy paintings and assorted trinkets. A year for every man whose blood was spilled on the warm streets of Benghazi. Four dead men and four years in which to prepare to do the same thing all over again as President of the United States.</p>
<p>It’s a big job and HRC finally has the experience for it.</p>
<p>The Benghazi attackers came out of Al Qaeda in Iraq; an organization that is showing more staying power than General Motors, and like the maker of the Aztek, it’s spending a lot of time and energy expanding internationally.</p>
<p>When Obama turned his back on Iraq, discarding the sacrifices of the Surge, like he did the lives of the four men murdered in Benghazi, the terror didn’t stop. Al Qaeda bombs have kept going off as Iraq melted down into a conflict between its Iranian-backed Shiite government, the Kurds and Sunni Islamists. And Al Qaeda found new wars. Like a persistent suitor, it followed BHO and HRC to Benghazi.</p>
<p>Obama’s surrender in Iraq paved the way for the regional resurgence of Al Qaeda. It put a spring in the step of every enemy from Iran to the Muslim Brotherhood to the grimmer sort of Salafis. It convinced them that they could take on the United States and win.</p>
<p>Like Hillary, Obama has never been held accountable for any of it. And Hillary’s very lack of accountability, her immunity from accountability makes her eminently qualified for the top spot in a Democratic Party where it’s more important to know how to shrug off accountability than it is to get things right.</p>
<p>Bill Clinton ushered in the post-accountability era, where evidence no longer mattered and the law was something that you could ignore if you felt like it. It is the thing that Obama, Clinton 2 and Biden all have in common. They are the poster-children of the post-accountability era where the synergy of media and party is so complete that it no longer matters what you do; only which side you’re on.</p>
<p>Jimmy Carter, the man under whose administration the last American ambassador was murdered, was also the last Democratic president to be held accountable for anything. His successors just smirk, wipe the blood off and do the rounds of fawning media interviewers.</p>
<p>Looking back on the last two decades, it almost seems as if the Clinton era never ended. Not only are both Clintons on television all the time, but so is Al Gore, still playing the guru in a suit, the deep thinker with a hand out to foreign governments. In the Clinton era, it was Communist China. Today it’s Islamist Qatar. At the time Gore said that he had done nothing wrong because there was no controlling legal authority. There still isn’t. Not where Democrats are concerned.</p>
<p>Al Gore, whose palm always itches for money from the enemies of the United States, nearly made it to the White House, where his influence peddling would have taken place on a whole other scale. Clinton, who did make it, deported a little boy to a Communist country at gunpoint and murdered more children at Waco, in the world’s bloodiest training exercise.</p>
<p>But again no one was held responsible. It’s a long way from Benghazi to Waco, but the Clintons retain their talent for walking over corpses to reach their ambition. And their critics, who notice the bodies, are accused of harboring personal vendettas and of not living in an “evidence-based world.”</p>
<p>The Democratic Party in the last two decades has absorbed Bill Clinton’s ability to avoid accountability. The ranks of its congressmen are full of liars, felons and lunatics. It is a party so devoid of accountability that the likes of Sheila Jackson Lee can sit on the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics without being able to tell apart the Moon and Mars, while Hank Johnson can warn that Guam may tip over if too many Marines land on it.</p>
<p>The Party of Jefferson has made the long sad trip to a party that views Massachusetts scandal machines like Ted Kennedy and Barney Frank as elder statesmen, instead of criminals who were never locked up, on account of their political influence. And it is full of these elder statesmen, men like Joe Biden, whose only gift is an inability to shut up and a media unwilling to condemn even the worst of their shenanigans.</p>
<p>The only remaining virtue in the Democratic Party is shamelessness. Those Democrats who have no shame prosper, those who do turn themselves in and serve their time.</p>
<p>After having trashed the housing market, the likes of Barack Obama and Andrew Cuomo step forward as reformers. After having murdered a woman, Ted Kennedy retired as a champion of women’s rights. After murdering children, Bill Clinton is touring in support of gun control to save the lives of children. And four years from now, Hillary Clinton will be touting her experience in Benghazi as a reason that she should be elected to the White House where she will be able to do it all over again.</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/2013/dgreenfield/things-only-a-democrat-could-get-away-with/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>60</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Monica Crowley at Restoration Weekend</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/monica-crowley-at-restoration-weekend/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=monica-crowley-at-restoration-weekend</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/monica-crowley-at-restoration-weekend/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2012 04:45:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monica Crowley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Restoration Weekend]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=166729</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A rallying cry for happy warriors everywhere. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Editor’s note: Below is the video and transcript of the speech given by Monica Crowley at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 2012 Restoration Weekend. The event took place on Nov. 15th-18th at the Breakers Hotel in Palm Beach, Florida.</em></p>
<p><iframe src="http://blip.tv/play/AYOJ1i8C.html?p=1" width="550" height="443" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://a.blip.tv/api.swf#AYOJ1i8C" style="display:none"></embed></p>
<p>Monica Crowley:  (Applause)  Thank you.  Oh, thank you so much.  With that introduction Deborah already has me in tears.  I&#8217;ve already lost my composure and I haven&#8217;t even started yet.</p>
<p>This is the second time that Deborah has introduced me.  The first time was at a very wonderful lunch, very gracious lunch, that David threw for me back in June or early July when my book first came out.  And, Deborah, thank you so much for your very kind words.  These introductions keep getting better and better every time she gives them, so I think I&#8217;m going to have to, like, put her on my payroll or something and just bring her with me everywhere I go.</p>
<p>By the way, I&#8217;m very happy that when she introduced me and she was talking about my experiences working with President Nixon that she actually put the timeframe on my employment with President Nixon when she said I worked with him during the last years of his life, from 1990 until his death in &#8217;94.  Because sometimes people don&#8217;t hear that part of it and they think I was in the Nixon White House and I have to correct them and say, &#8220;Oh, no, no.  I was a mere embryo when he was elected President.&#8221;</p>
<p>In fact, I was giving a speech one time a couple of years ago.  And I noticed a woman in the front row and she was looking at me after I&#8217;d been introduced as having worked for President Nixon.  She was looking at me and she was sort of squinting.  And at the end of my talk she came up to me and she said, &#8220;Monica, I just love you.  I&#8217;m a big fan.&#8221;  I said, &#8220;Thank you so much.&#8221;  And she said, &#8220;Listen, can I ask you a question?&#8221;  And I said, &#8220;Sure, anything.&#8221;  So she leans into my ear and she whispered, &#8220;Girl, who is your plastic surgeon?&#8221; (Laughter)  True story.  I said, &#8220;No, no.  You misunderstand.&#8221;</p>
<p>Before we get started &#8212; and we have so much to talk about, because we are fighting for the life of the country.  And that is not an overstatement or an exaggeration.  We are fighting for the life of America.  Before we get started, I want to recognize a couple of people, first and foremost, David Horowitz.  (Applause)  David Horowitz and the Freedom Center, you are true patriots.  You are on the front lines of our college campuses and every other part of America every day, tirelessly fighting for this country.  This gracious event that you host us all every year, God bless you.  Thank you so much.</p>
<p>Elizabeth Ruiz, are you in the room?  This event would not come off without Elizabeth Ruiz (applause) or E, as I call her.  She&#8217;s such a good friend and she puts this all together.  Thank you so much.</p>
<p>Frank Gaffney, my good friend.  Frank Gaffney? (Applause)  Andrew McCarthy.  (Applause) Andrew McCarthy, where are you?  Be recognized, Andy McCar-…is he still in bed?  (Laughter)  Where is he? Andrew McCarthy, there you are!</p>
<p>Caroline Glick, who does incredible work.   I know she brought her two young children with her, so she might not be in the room today.  Want to recognize them.  Oh, Caroline, yea!  (Applause) All right.  You made it!</p>
<p>Everybody in this room is an American patriot.  We are all fighting for this country.  We are now relying on a dwindling group of conservatives on Capitol Hill and I want to single out three who are in the room today.  The true American hero, Allen West. (Applause) Is he here yet?  Is Allen West here yet?  Okay, he might not be here yet, but he needs to win this race.  He&#8217;s going to be speaking later this morning.  We need him.  Okay?  We need him.</p>
<p>The dynamite Louie Gohmert, where is he?  (Applause)  And the fearless Michele Bachmann.  (Applause)  God bless you.</p>
<p>And I know these are tough times for Conservatives, especially on Capitol Hill, given the Republican establishment, given our leadership on Capitol Hill.  Everybody is running scared.  These three American patriots are fearless.  They don&#8217;t care what their own leadership thinks of them.  They certainly don&#8217;t care what the other side of the aisle thinks of them.  And they do not care what the New York Times editorial board thinks of them.  They are out there with the truth and they&#8217;re fighting for America and they&#8217;re fighting for justice and they&#8217;re fighting for us every day.  So God bless you.  (Applause)</p>
<p>All right.  Let&#8217;s get this party started.  And by &#8220;party,&#8221; I mean, not just this room, although we are a party.  And I don&#8217;t mean the Republican Party, although God knows that needs a hell of a lot of help and a hell of a lot of work.  I mean the Conservative movement.  And we&#8217;ve got to get this party started, because I don&#8217;t know about you, but I&#8217;m sick and tired of being at a wake.</p>
<p>We have had a hell of a couple of weeks here.  We have had a hurricane of epic proportions.  We have had a sex scandal involving the person I would guess would be the least likely to have been caught having sex under a desk.  We have now the real housewives of Tampa straight across our television sets.  And last Tuesday night we had a national suicide.  And that is not overstating the case.</p>
<p>The title of my book, <em>What the Bleep Just Happened?</em> &#8212; now more than ever we need to ask that question, &#8220;What the bleep just happened?&#8221;  There are many parts to this answer and I want to break it down because we need to be armed with the truth because we&#8217;re facing at least, at least, another four years of this.  So we need to be reminded of what we are up against and what we are fighting against and what we are fighting for.</p>
<p>The short answer is that what the bleep just happened is that this country was taken over by the Star Wars Cantina. (Laughter) You know what I&#8217;m talking about, right?  This country is now being run by the Star Wars Cantina.  Every far left group, every radical, every Communist, every filthy Occupy Wall Street hippie, every abortion-on-demand sicko, every anti-American revolutionary who wants to take America down a notch or two or ten, every bearded anarchist &#8212; sorry, David (laughter).  He&#8217;s no longer an anarchist, but he&#8217;s still bearded.  Every aspect of America is now controlled by the Star Wars Cantina.</p>
<p>Alien forms, and I do mean alien forms because their philosophies, these people are fundamentally anti-American.  And we cannot be afraid to say it.  They are anti-…oh, are you calling the President anti-American?  I&#8217;m calling his philosophy anti-American, because it is.  (Applause)  And they now control every aspect of America.  They control the White House.  They control the State Department.  They control the Justice Department.  They control every aspect of the Executive Branch, of course.  They control the US Senate.  They control the media, which is now completely corrupt, with a few pockets of exception.  They control academia.  They control entertainment.  They control every part of the culture.</p>
<p>So when we now say we are outnumbered, we are.  We are.  Because over many decades the conservative movement was interested in just a couple of things &#8212; fiscal responsibility, the Constitution, you know, the really important stuff.  And while we were interested in the really important stuff, in trying to project and defend the Constitution, and those great foundational principles that have always made America great, the left was burrowing in through every aspect of our society and our culture, grabbing control of the college campuses, grabbing control of entertainment.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s how you really weave their way in.  This is what the Communists did from the very beginning.  1950s Communist infiltration &#8212; what do you &#8212; everybody was focused on Alger Hiss.  Right, very important.  What they were doing under the radar was even more important, burrowing in to every aspect of our culture to bring us down from within.</p>
<p>And now what we have is that these people are no longer in the shadows.  These people are front &#8212; right in front of us.  They are leading us.  They are the President of the United States.  They are the Secretary of State.  They are running every major media organization, again, with a couple of exceptions.</p>
<p>And what are they doing with all of this power?  They are fundamentally transforming the nation.  Not my words, Barack Obama&#8217;s words &#8212; &#8220;the fundamental transformation of the nation.&#8221;  What Obama did that was so brilliant four years ago was when he started talking about fundamental transformation &#8212; and he used a couple of other phrases, too, all meaning the same thing.  He&#8217;d talk about remaking America.  He talked about achieving a, quote, more perfect union.</p>
<p>What he did was throw those phrases out and then stand back and allow the American people to supply their own meanings to what we thought he meant by that.  And so the American people, who don&#8217;t pay close enough attention to the reality, supplied their own meanings, thought, &#8220;Oh, we&#8217;ll finally get rid of George W. Bush,&#8221; or, &#8220;The economy is falling apart, so we&#8217;ll get somebody new who&#8217;s going to fix it.&#8221; Or the historical moment of the first black president.  People supplied their own meaning to fundamental transformation.</p>
<p>What we have to recognize is don&#8217;t pay attention to what you think he meant.  Pay attention to what he meant by fundamental transformation.  And now we have four years of evidence as to what he meant by that fundamental transformation.  And it is wholly anti-American.</p>
<p>For decades, the far left progressives have been at this &#8212; Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, straight up through 2008.  And they have made enormous progress in establishing huge redistributive pillars in this country &#8212; Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.  But it wasn&#8217;t until 1968, and I write about this in my book, where the far left extremists took over the Democratic Party.  It&#8217;s a very important distinction that everybody in this room needs to be aware of so we can spread it far and wide. What you see with Barack Obama and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and so many others &#8212; this is not your father&#8217;s or grandfather&#8217;s Democratic Party.</p>
<p>Barack Obama is not Harry Truman, who dropped the A-bomb on Japan to stop World War II.  Barack Obama is not John F. Kennedy, who lowered marginal tax rates to get economic growth and job creation.  Barack Obama and the far left, they are a completely different ball of wax.  Fundamentally anti-American to fundamentally transform America away from what has always made America great.  That&#8217;s the point.</p>
<p>And let&#8217;s not lose sight of that.  You know what&#8217;s driving me crazy?  I&#8217;ll go on TV &#8212; the Happy Warrior theme, and that&#8217;s my brand and that&#8217;s the brand that I&#8217;m trying to get out to the Conservatives, to be a Happy Warrior and it&#8217;s so necessary, now more than ever.  But on election night and the day after I was not a Happy Warrior.  I was a very unhappy warrior.</p>
<p>In fact, Tuesday night, when the election results started coming in, I thought, &#8220;None of this makes any sense.&#8221;  And I&#8217;m sure you had this &#8212; I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;re still experiencing this because it&#8217;s completely surreal.  But not a single election result that came in made any sense whatsoever.  From the reelection of Barack Obama, which was really weird, I mean, weird for all of us, but think about just on another level.  At Fox News, and I was there until about 6:00 that night, they were prepared for 4:00 or 5:00 in the morning.  They were getting prepared for days of recounts and legal challenges and so close and how are we going to do &#8212; 11:15, 11:30?  Okay, well the presidency, okay, we can call that now.  Barack Obama has been reelected.  Nothing to see here.  Move along.</p>
<p>What?  What the bleep just happened?  So from the reelection of Barack Obama all the way down to what Allen West is facing now here in Florida to Alan Grayson, who is the biggest far left kook you can ever imagine, and mentally unstable, by the way, getting his seat back, to not winning North Carolina, not winning the state of Florida.  To California &#8212; California voters voting to raise taxes on themselves and voting to water down their three strikes and you&#8217;re out law.  None of it made any sense.</p>
<p>And what I thought on Tuesday night before I went to bed, crying for my country, was that there was something bigger than voting going on here.  And we have to go about this &#8212; I mean, we will talk about what we need to do on the ground.  And we will talk about the grass roots and how we are now going to really struggle to get our country back.  Because, you know what?  The battle just got a heck of a lot tougher and that hill just got a heck of lot steeper.  That doesn&#8217;t mean we don&#8217;t fight.  We do.  But the battle in front of us now just got a lot worse, and a lot tougher.</p>
<p>But we now need to fight it on a whole series of levels, not just grass roots, not just politically in the Congress, but on a spiritual level, because, &#8220;There&#8217;s something bigger than Phil,&#8221; going on here, to quote Mel Brooks.  There&#8217;s something bigger than Phil happening here in the country.  And we all have to be attuned to it.</p>
<p>1968, the Democratic Party gets hijacked by the far left.  They always had the elements in it and, again, they had Teddy Roosevelt, they had Woodrow Wilson leading the charge.  So they did have power in the past.  But in 1968 they take full control of one of the two major political parties in America.  And after 1968 they start nominating far left extremists after far left extremists for the presidency.</p>
<p>So we get George McGovern.  We get Walter Mondale.  We get Michael Dukakis.  We get Al Gore.  We get John Kerry.  All kooks.  And none of them could get elected president because America has always been a center-right country.  Now, I&#8217;m exempting Jimmy Carter from this because Watergate was an aberration and that was a separate situation.  But from 1968 the only time the Democratic Party did not nominate a kook, they won the presidency not once, but twice, and that was Bill Clinton.</p>
<p>Now, Clinton was kooky in other ways. (Laughter)  And his wife is definitely a far left kook.  But Bill Clinton was a pragmatist.  Bill Clinton wanted to survive.  And Bill Clinton wanted to thrive, not just for himself, although that&#8217;s primarily what drives Bill Clinton.  He&#8217;s a classic narcissist. So of course he wanted to thrive and succeed.  But he also wanted America to thrive and succeed, which is why he worked with a Republican Congress.  He had to, but he did it, which is why he cut the capital gains tax rate, to get economic growth and job creation going.  Which is why, when the Republicans came calling he agreed to cut spending and he went down that road.  Okay?  Bill Clinton is a classic old school Southern pragmatic Democrat.</p>
<p>Barack Obama is a far-left extremist, of the kind that took over his party in 1968.  And from &#8217;68 on, again, none of these far-left extremists could get elected.  It wasn&#8217;t until they found their perfect marriage of man and mission in Barack Obama that they were able to grab the brass ring of the presidency, huge majorities in the Congress, and do what they had been dying to do for decades, which is complete that fundamental transformation of the nation.</p>
<p>Remember, they have been putting up these redistributive pillars throughout history &#8212; Social Security, Medicare, and so on.  The one thing that was missing?  Healthcare, in a broad way that would include every American.  You look at the history of socialist nations, one of the very first things the socialists do, as soon as they seize power is seize control of the healthcare system.  Why?  Because if the government controls your healthcare, the government controls you.  The government is in your eyeball, and your ear canal, and places where the sun don&#8217;t shine.  (Laughter)  The government controls you.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s why he spent the first year and a half doing this.  The American people were screaming for jobs and economic growth when he came in in January of 2009.  What does he do?  Classic leftist move; it&#8217;s all illusion.  It&#8217;s all Alinsky packets.  It&#8217;s all to keep people distracted.</p>
<p>So he sends Nancy Pelosi off to run wild in the Congress to come up with some stimulus bill that stimulated nothing but Democratic constituencies.  And then he signs it.  He didn&#8217;t even care what&#8217;s in it.  He signs it.  My work here on the economy is done.  And he turns immediately to healthcare, again, to control you, the crown jewel of the socialist state, healthcare.  That&#8217;s why they did it.  Not a big mystery.  None of this is a mystery when it comes to Obama and the far left, none of it.</p>
<p>And now we are in a situation where we have a much tougher battle ahead of us.  I came across this quote from Ronald Reagan.  You know, the choice that we had last Tuesday night was the choice between being enslaved by government or being the country that the founders envisioned, free.  And we chose badly &#8212; well, not us, but the moronic other half of the country chose badly.  And now we are all going to be stuck with this.</p>
<p>Ronald Reagan once said, quote, &#8220;Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn&#8217;t pass it to our children in the bloodstream.  It must be fought for, protected, and handed on to them for them to do the same.  Or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children&#8217;s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.&#8221;</p>
<p>Has that day arrived?  Are we here now?  Are we now looking in the rearview mirror at what once made America free and great?  I am a firm believer in dealing in reality.  It&#8217;s all nice to say, &#8220;Okay, you know, we&#8217;re still a central-right country.&#8221;  I&#8217;m not so sure we are.  I am not entirely convinced that we are.</p>
<p>The progressives have worked on this grand project for decades, as I said.  Barack Obama and the far left Alinsky-ites and Chicago thugs he brought in with him have moved us to that tipping point that they so &#8212; that they have strived for for so many decades.  What I mean by tipping point is, more people dependent on government than not.  Altering the balance between the private sector and the government sector.  It used to be in the America the balance was like this &#8212; private, government or public sector.  Now it&#8217;s like this.</p>
<p>Barack Obama and the far left, when they came in in 2009, they realized they had a short opportunity to accelerate this country to the tipping point.  And they weren&#8217;t about to blow it and they wasted no time.  First thing Obama does, he comes in and they realized that in order to take down the American free market system they have to take down the four key pillars of the US economy.  So they went after the industrial base with the cars.  They went after the financial sector with the banks.  They went after the healthcare sector with Obamacare.  And they went after the energy sector.</p>
<p>If you want to take down American capitalism, you take down those four pillars holding up American capitalism, you have completed the destruction of American capitalism.  And if you succeed in destroying American capitalism or so weakening it that it can&#8217;t function, then you destroy global capitalism because we&#8217;re it.  We&#8217;re it.  And that is the point.</p>
<p>David has been working on this, on these themes for years.  Glenn Beck has done such great work in educating the American public about how this is all interrelated.  Occupy Wall Street didn&#8217;t just spring from the earth organically, out of thin air.  This was all part of the global socialist movement.  You see it happening here, Western Europe, Israel.  It&#8217;s happening everywhere.  It&#8217;s all part of this grand project.</p>
<p>And, again, if you take down American capitalism or so gravely weaken it, you take down global capitalism.  And, again, that&#8217;s the objective.</p>
<p>So Obama goes in.  He attacks the four main pillars of the US economy.  And no opposition, except from the Tea Party, thank God.  The American media is so corrupt nobody raises an eyebrow that all of this is happening.  If you had said to a person on the street five years ago, six years ago, ten years ago, the United States will have socialized medicine, they would have laughed in your face.  And yet here we are.</p>
<p>In my book, every page has some piece of leftist madness, progressive insanity, anti-American &#8212; an anti-American assault on this country.  Because every day that Obama has been President he has inflicted one or many of those on us.  And yet, no resistance except from heroes and heroines like Louie Gohmert and Allen West and Michele Bachmann.  The media just giggles like they did during that press conference this week.  &#8220;Oh, Mr. President, you&#8217;re so…&#8221;  The question is, &#8220;Are you awesome or super awesome?&#8221;  (Laughter) &#8220;Well, Candy, let me answer that as objectively as I can.  I really think I&#8217;m super awesome.&#8221; (Laughter) No resistance.</p>
<p>Take one more step back.  There are two big things happening here.  Far left comes in and, yes, the specific things they do are attack the four main pillars of the US economy.  But remember what the ultimate objective is.  You grow government as fast and as widely as possible.  And the objective of that is to make as many people dependent on government as possible.</p>
<p>And between those two things you have an endless feedback loop, because if you&#8217;re growing government while perpetuating a crappy economy, by the way &#8212; I would just point something out.  Us normal Americans look at this economic situation and see a total disaster, a catastrophe &#8212; high unemployment, anemic economic growth, unprecedented spending, record breaking deficits and debt, socialized medicine that&#8217;s going to break the bank, record numbers of people in poverty, 50 million as of this week, 48  million people on food stamps, another record.  We normal Americans look at this and see a disaster.  Obama and the far left look at this and see a wild success, a wild success.</p>
<p>Think about it this way:  Any normal President would be looking at 8%, 10% when Obama had it at 10.2 in October of &#8217;09.  Any normal President would look at that unemployment rate and be flipping his lid.  Obama never broke a sweat.  He&#8217;s still not breaking a sweat.  The unemployment rate going back up.  And we all know how BLS fudges those numbers.  Now, by the way, they can tell us the truth, which is now why the number&#8217;s over 400,000 new claims each week.</p>
<p>Obama never breaks a sweat.  Why?  Because this is all by design.  He needs to perpetuate the crappy economy.  He needs people out of work.  He needs the chaos to sow the dependency.  You get an endless feedback loop.  The more people dependent on government the more justification you have for growing government and giving government more and more power and control over every American&#8217;s life.  And, remember, the ultimate objective of both of those things is to create a permanent Democrat voting majority.</p>
<p>Have we gotten there yet?  Well, Tuesday night looked like it.  Tuesday night looked like it.  Like I said, I am a firm believer in dealing with reality here. And in reality we have to confront the fact that Obama came close, if not has achieved, getting us to that tipping point.  And once we&#8217;re there, the country is gone, gone.</p>
<p>The dependency part is just part of this equation.  The far left &#8212; and all you have to do now is look at what&#8217;s unfolding in this Benghazi investigation.  The far left is not just interested in redistributing wealth here at home, although that&#8217;s their main mission.  If they were just limited to doing that, it would be horrifying and tough enough to throw into reverse.  But that&#8217;s not what they&#8217;re limited to.  Barack Obama and the far left seek to redistribute everything that has made America great, everything.</p>
<p>So, yes, our wealth here at home, of course.  But our economic power, so weakening us that we are no longer globally competitive.  In fact, in the four years that Barack Obama has been President, the United States of America has gone from being number 1 in global competitiveness to number 7 &#8212; again, all by design.  You wonder why he&#8217;s not flipping out about this?  This is the grand project, our economic power, our military power.</p>
<p>Frank Gaffney can speak to this, about the gutting of the defense budget something like $2 trillion over 10 year &#8212; which was probably a low ball.  I mean, you know that Barack Obama wants to rip apart the Defense budget.  Defense is the only thing, by the way, he&#8217;s willing to cut.</p>
<p>And what the Republicans need to be arguing, which, it&#8217;s such a common sense thing which every American can get, is all of these other issues &#8212; birth control, war on women, abortion &#8212; all of it, none of it matters if we are all dead.  Defense is number one.  And that&#8217;s the only thing he&#8217;s been willing to cut.  (Applause)</p>
<p>Our military power, our economic power, our wealth here at home, our cultural appeal, elevating everybody else in the world so that they&#8217;re equal with the United States.  Oh, hell, no.  No.  I like being number one.  We&#8217;re all proud of being number one and we should all be fighting to stay number one.  (Applause)  There is no virtue, there is no virtue in saying, &#8220;Oh, we&#8217;re Americans and everybody is the same and we&#8217;re all on this great spaceship Earth together and we&#8217;re all equal.&#8221;  No, we are not equal.  Generations before us fought and died for this flag and for the right for me to stand here and speak my mind and the right of all of you to have your own opinions.  And we&#8217;re just going to give that up and say, &#8220;Oh, yes, well Zimbabwe is equal to us&#8221;?  Oh, hell, no.  Hell, no.</p>
<p>Because the ultimate thing that they are trying to redistribute &#8212; when I talk about wealth and &#8212; oh, by the way our borders, they&#8217;re trying to redistribute our borders.  Eleven million new poor voters for them to get us not just across the tipping point but so far past it that you&#8217;ll never get a Republican President again.  You&#8217;ll never get a Ronald Reagan, or you&#8217;ll never even get a George W. Bush.  Forget it, it&#8217;s over.</p>
<p>And the Republicans, the dummies in Congress, present company excluded, of course, &#8220;Oh, we need to &#8212; &#8221;  Let me tell you something.  I heard Ann talking last night about illegal immigration.  When you go back and look at the history of this &#8212; and Rush Limbaugh&#8217;s been talking about this too, thank God.  1986, Ronald Reagan, huge amnesty, amnesty for millions of, particularly, Latinos who had come into the country illegally.  You know what kind of support the Republican Party got out of that?  Zero.  In fact, it went down.</p>
<p>This is not a racial divide.  This is not about appealing or even pandering to Latino voters by doing amnesty or open borders or whatever the heck is being bandied about now to try to get Latinos to pay attention.  This is a dependency problem.  This is a government dependency problem.  It doesn&#8217;t matter what race.  And don&#8217;t think for one second that Barack Obama and the far left don&#8217;t know that.  We have to tackle the roots of government dependency.</p>
<p>The other day, when people jumped all over Mitt Romney in that conference call for &#8212; when he was talking about his loss and, yes, of course he made mistakes.  Every presidential campaign makes mistakes.  Barack Obama made mistakes aplenty.  Remember, &#8220;Vote for me for revenge.&#8221;  Mitt Romney is not the problem here.  The problem is government dependency and getting us to that tipping point, which they have &#8212; looks like they&#8217;ve succeeded in doing.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s some wiggle room for us here &#8212; and I want to get to this in a second &#8212; because it was so very close.  So we still have a little bit of breathing room, but not much.  Not much.</p>
<p>When Mitt Romney said, &#8220;Well, the other side essentially won because of all of the gifts&#8221; &#8212; he used the word &#8220;gifts&#8221; &#8212; all the gifts that Barack Obama and the far left are giving to minorities, to minorities, to black voters and Hispanic voters and women, he was absolutely right.</p>
<p>Now, he got criticized because he said it out loud.  But you know, what, guys?  We have to deal in reality.  I&#8217;m sick and tired of the political correctness and, oh, he shouldn&#8217;t have used the word &#8220;gifts&#8221; and he shouldn&#8217;t have said &#8220;47%.&#8221;  (Applause) Deal in reality.  The other side is Santa Claus.  The other side is giving away all of these gifts.  It&#8217;s called government dependency.  It&#8217;s called social welfare programs.  It&#8217;s all about bringing them in, and once you lock in that dependency you lock them in for life.  And once you lock them in for life on dependency you lock in their vote.  And then you get that majority.  Period.  End of story.</p>
<p>P.S., Mitt Romney was right and Bobby Jindal, who I love and respect so much &#8212; but for him to say, &#8220;No, we can&#8217;t be dividing people.  You know, the Conservative movement, we can&#8217;t be dividing people.&#8221;  It&#8217;s not us doing the dividing.  The other side has been slicing and dicing the American electorate for decades.  Woman &#8212; it&#8217;s all identity politics to them &#8212; women, Latinos, black voters.  And they have succeeded.  They&#8217;ve had a lot of success doing it.  It&#8217;s not us doing the dividing.  But since they have succeeded in slicing and dicing the electorate, now we have to figure out a way to manage that, because now we are navigating a brand new America, with a brand new electorate because the left has had so much success.  And we have to figure out a way to do it.</p>
<p>We have nothing to lose here.  Michele Bachmann was right last night.  We have nothing to lose.  Our backs are against the wall here.  And the founding fathers and every generation that has come before us, they&#8217;re counting on us.  I don&#8217;t know about you; maybe this makes me weird, but I hear the voices of the founders.  Maybe I&#8217;m hearing things.  Maybe I&#8217;m going insane before my time, I don&#8217;t know.  But I hear them.  I hear Thomas Jefferson, I hear George Washington.  I hear them.  I hear the voices of the Greatest Generation, who I&#8217;ve loved and respect so much, who fought for this country in World War II, every military veteran.  I hear them in my head, saying, &#8220;Fight for this.  Fight for it, as tough as it&#8217;s going to be.&#8221;</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve got the grand projects of government dependency and the tipping point on the one hand.  You&#8217;ve got the redistributing everything that has always made America great going on on the other hand.  And so the question is &#8212; what do we do?  And I think we go for broke.  I think we go for broke, because we have nothing to lose.</p>
<p>President Nixon, one time when we were talking about the Vietnam War and his prosecution of it, he told a story one time.  He was deliberating about doing the Christmas Day bombing of Cambodia because the Soviets, and to some extent the Chinese, but mostly the Soviets, they were bringing supply lines into the Communists in North Korea.  And President Nixon &#8212; I&#8217;m sorry &#8212; North Vietnam.  So President Nixon has to make a decision about whether or not to bomb those supply lines, which meant bringing the war into a third country, actually Cambodia and Laos.  And so he has to make a decision.  And you know what he told me?  He said, &#8220;Took about five minutes to make the decision to bomb.&#8221;  And I said, &#8220;Well, why was that, Mr. President?&#8221;  And he said, &#8220;Well,&#8221; he said, &#8220;I realized that I was going to be criticized if I sent one plane or if I sent 1,000 planes.  They were going to crucify me no matter what.  So I went with the 1,000 planes.&#8221;</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s what we need to do.  We need to send the 1,000 planes, because the left, the media, they&#8217;re going to crucify us no matter what.  They already have.  Look at what they have done to the Tea Party &#8212; fringe, nutcases.  Now, I can see why the far left kooks would think that the Constitution and limited government, fiscal responsibility, were radical, because it&#8217;s certainly radical to them.  But these are the very foundational principles of this country.  And we need to figure out new ways of how to do it, how to fight for them.  The old ways don&#8217;t work anymore.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t say I have any easy, quick ideas to give you, because I don&#8217;t.  And I think what we need to do, first and foremost, is take a deep breath.  I think we are all exhausted from this fight, four long, exhausting years of economic destruction and presidential lies and national collapse.  And now we&#8217;re facing four more years of those exact same things.  I think we&#8217;re all tired, so I would recommend first and foremost, take a deep breath, get a little rest.  Because the battles ahead are going to be very intense and a lot tougher than what we just went through over the last four years.</p>
<p>The second thing I would recommend is spending some time thinking.  Thinking, not just running blindly into what we&#8217;ve always done in the past, and are we going to grasp at some candidate or we&#8217;ve got to grasp at something.  Let&#8217;s spend some time thinking.</p>
<p>When President Nixon first came into office, January, 1969, he summoned his chief of staff on day one, Bob Haldeman, and he said, &#8220;Bob, have a seat.  I&#8217;ve got something really important to tell you.&#8221;  And Haldeman said, &#8220;Okay, Mr. President, what?  What is it?&#8221;  And he said, &#8220;I need you to build in one hour into my schedule every day where I have no meetings, no phone calls, nothing.  One hour every afternoon.&#8221;  So Haldeman said, &#8220;Uh, Mr. President, you do realize you&#8217;re the new President, right?  I mean, you do realize you&#8217;re President of the United States and you have stuff to do?&#8221;  And Nixon said, &#8220;Yeah, I know that, Bob.  I know.  I&#8217;m still asking for the hour every day.&#8221;  And so Haldeman said, &#8220;Well, what are you, Churchill now?  You need a nap every day?&#8221;  And Nixon said, &#8220;No, Bob, I don&#8217;t need the hour to sleep.  I need the hour to think.&#8221;</p>
<p>So many of our politicians don&#8217;t spend any time thinking, because they&#8217;re constantly raising money.  They&#8217;re constantly in front of the cameras.  They&#8217;re constantly racing to constituents and taking care of business.  What we need in this country are strategic thinkers in the Conservative movement.  And this doesn&#8217;t just mean folks on Capitol Hill.  This means us.  We need time to think.</p>
<p>Second thing &#8212; or third thing, I should say, is that rather than look to the Republican establishment which is, for all intents and purposes, worthless, pointless, useless, meaningless. (Applause) Forget for a second about the Republican Party.  Focus on the Tea Party.  Focus on the Conservative movement. And focus on groups, groups like the Freedom Center and David Horowitz.  Support them however you can.  Groups like Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, who are all doing great, on-the-ground grassroots.</p>
<p>People talk about how &#8212; what a failure Romney&#8217;s get-out-the-vote operation was, and it was.  So we have a lot of work to do.  But remember, the battle is not just there.  It&#8217;s on all of these other levels &#8212; philosophical, spiritual, the whole thing.  So we need to be looking more toward groups like the Freedom Center.</p>
<p>For example, I&#8217;ll give you another example.  There&#8217;s a group called Ending Spending.  And you probably haven&#8217;t heard of them.  They don&#8217;t &#8212; they sort of fly below the radar.  These are groups that are centered and focused around a single issue.  Okay?  Whether it&#8217;s freedom or ending spending.  Ending Spending went into Nebraska.  They focused on Deb Fischer, a real Tea Party Conservative.  And they got her elected, around one issue, reining in government spending.  These are the kinds of new things that we can be looking at here as we think about how we&#8217;re going to go forward.</p>
<p>I would just leave you with this one final thought.  The conventional wisdom is that the founding fathers who I always hear in my head, that they gave us three branches of government.  And it is true, they gave us the Executive and the Legislative and the Judiciary.  But the founders also anticipated a moment during which all three branches of government would be in the crapper.  And here we are.</p>
<p>The Executive is held by a radical redistributionist, bent on America&#8217;s destruction.  Congress, present company excluded, of course, Congress cannot stop itself from spending us into oblivion and are raising our taxes in order to do it.  And the Judiciary now is full of leftwing judges who are intent on legislating leftwing madness from the bench.  All three branches are in the crapper.</p>
<p>So the founders anticipated this moment.  They did.  And that&#8217;s why they gave us a stealth fourth branch of government &#8212; us. (Applause) They gave America us, the American people, the ultimate lever of power.</p>
<p>Now has this country become so corrupted after the tipping point that we can&#8217;t get it back?  No, I don&#8217;t believe that.  I&#8217;m back to being a Happy Warrior. I&#8217;ve shed enough tears after Tuesday night and I&#8217;m ready to rock and roll.  I&#8217;m ready to take this country back and I think we can still do it.</p>
<p>We don&#8217;t have much time, though, because remember, Obama won by 50.6%, so enough past the tipping point to get him elected, but still not enough to make it permanent.  We have a window of opportunity here to bring America back, but we have to move fast.  We&#8217;ve got to move fast.  And the thing we need to recognize &#8212; we talk about those three branches of government.  America is such a young country, 200-some-odd years old.  We&#8217;re young.  We&#8217;re babies, still.  And therefore, the American mind in so many ways is still very young and naïve and idealistic.</p>
<p>And it&#8217;s okay to be idealistic, that&#8217;s a great strength. But when it lapses into naïveté, we&#8217;ve got to check ourselves here.  We tend to think that there will always be something to stop some craziness, right?  &#8220;Oh, the President&#8217;s not going to let that happen.&#8221;  Or, &#8220;Congress will be there.  Thank God we&#8217;ve got a Republican Congress.&#8221;  And thank God we do, but &#8212; &#8220;Oh, they&#8217;ll stop some craziness.&#8221;  Or, &#8220;Well, we have the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court would never let anything as unconstitutional as socialized medicine go through.&#8221;  Or, &#8220;The courts will stop Sharia law because that&#8217;s a bridge too far in America.&#8221;</p>
<p>Guess what, guys?  None of that holds true.  We now know we cannot count on the Presidency, we cannot count on the Congress, and we cannot count on the Judiciary to stop any of this.  It&#8217;s up to us to do it.  It&#8217;s up to the founders&#8217; fourth branch to do it. And as we navigate this new America in order to try to bring our country back, it is going to be exhausting and it is going to be a long haul.</p>
<p>But think about the generations that came before us that faced huge challenges &#8212; the founding fathers, that revolutionary first generation of Americans, through the Greatest Generation.  And now it&#8217;s our turn.  It&#8217;s our turn to be, in a different way, America&#8217;s Greatest Generation.  And I have faith we can do it because we&#8217;re Americans.  We&#8217;re Americans, baby.  God bless you.  God bless you so much.  Thank you.  (Applause)</p>
<p>Sure.  Yes.  I&#8217;m happy to take some questions.</p>
<p>Unidentified Audience Member:  Right after the election, I read a quote from Valerie Jarrett.</p>
<p>Monica Crowley:  Yes.</p>
<p>Unidentified Audience Member:  And she made two very alarming points.  One of them was she said, &#8220;Now that we&#8217;ve won this election we don&#8217;t have to worry about Congress.&#8221;</p>
<p>Monica Crowley:  Right.</p>
<p>Unidentified Audience Member:  The other one was, &#8220;Now we&#8217;re going to go get our enemies.&#8221;  I&#8217;ve heard a lot of people express more than alarm that we have to go forward to the next election, but alarm as to what&#8217;s going to happen between now and the next election, and even whether there will be a next election.  What do you make of all this?</p>
<p>Monica Crowley:  Okay.  So the question was about Valerie Jarrett, who has no credentials or no portfolio whatsoever except being a friend of Barack Obama and she&#8217;s running the country.  It&#8217;s beyond belief.  She is &#8212; Valerie Jarrett is Iranian born and there was a rumor that she was actually leading secret talks with Iran.  How scary is that?  Okay?  Don&#8217;t know whether or not that&#8217;s true, but it&#8217;s terrifying.</p>
<p>Two things about what you quoted from Valerie Jarrett.  One is, when she said, &#8220;We don&#8217;t need to worry about Congress,&#8221; this has always been the case.  It was nice when Obama had huge majorities his first year.  That was great, easy for him, a snap.  He doesn&#8217;t need Congress and he has never needed Congress.</p>
<p>Barack Obama set up a network of czars through whom he really exercises power.  And he goes through the czars.  He goes through the bureaucracies and he does it by executive order.  Everything &#8212; there&#8217;s some fiscal issues he needs Congress on, put on a good show.  But he can get around it anytime he wants.  Look at the EPA regulations.  EPA has gone wild, crushing American businesses.</p>
<p>Now you&#8217;ve got Secretary Sebelius about to implement Obamacare, going hog wild through her department.  He doesn&#8217;t need the Congress; he never has.  This man is operating as a dictator.  And still no real resistance, no questioning from the press.  So he&#8217;s never needed Congress; that&#8217;s number one.</p>
<p>Number two, when you use the word &#8220;enemies,&#8221; this is how they view not just the Republicans and the Tea Party and Conservatives.  This is how they view every American who doesn&#8217;t agree with him.  You&#8217;re an enemy.  You&#8217;re an enemy of the state.  You&#8217;re an enemy of him and therefore you must be destroyed.  Because, remember, the ultimate enemy for them is the American system.  The ultimate enemy to be defeated is American capitalism, the free market, and freedom.</p>
<p>So we can expect four more years of this and the amount of destruction that they can inflict on us in four more years is going to be atrocious.  I didn&#8217;t think it could get any worse.  When I wrote my book, I literally &#8212; I wrote the whole book in about four and a half months.  And because I had to write it so fast I was doing sort of day-by-day research, day by day of the Obama presidency, right?  And I would go, &#8220;Oh, my God, I forgot about this.  This is totally crazy.  I have to type out this out for the book.&#8221;  And I&#8217;d write it.</p>
<p>Next day, &#8220;Oh, my God, forgot about this.  This is totally crazy.  I have to write this up.&#8221;  I ended up with a 650 page manuscript because Obama&#8217;s insanity was so prolific.  And I ended up handing it to my editor at Harper Collins whose eyes got huge when I put it on his desk.  And he&#8217;s, like, &#8220;Okay, so I guess I have my weekend reading to do.&#8221;  And we ended up editing it.  But I made sure when I was editing the book that I didn&#8217;t take out any of the substantive madness, but I took out extraneous paragraphs that I had written.  But I wanted all the real policy madness to be in there, so that the American people knew.</p>
<p>And, look, we&#8217;re going to have four more years of this.  Now, when people talk about, people talk about, &#8220;Well, we needed the debacle of 1964 and Barry Goldwater to come back with a Reagan in 1980.&#8221;  Or people will say, &#8220;Well &#8211;&#8221;  Like I heard Ann say last night about the traditional pattern that six years into a presidency you get &#8212; the party out of power gets a huge rebound.</p>
<p>Look, those are historical patterns.  But what we&#8217;ve seen under Barack Obama over the last four years is none of that holds true.  It doesn&#8217;t hold true.  Why?  I think a lot of reasons, namely the changing nature of the country, which he has accelerated.  And also, he is the first black President.  They cannot allow the first black President to fail.  And so they won&#8217;t.  And so whatever he wants to do he will get away with, period.  And that&#8217;s why I am saying it is up to us.  We need to regroup.  We need to rethink our whole approach to this.</p>
<p>Look, the Tea Party had enormous success when we still had the momentum and the energy.  We need to somehow summon that again.  And that&#8217;s why I say I know we&#8217;re all exhausted, so we need a little bit of a rest, maybe just over the holidays, six more weeks of rest.  After that, get ready.</p>
<p>Because the Tea Party had enormous success in bringing pressure to bear on our elected officials on getting candidates to run who really believed in our foundational principles.  That&#8217;s what we&#8217;re going to need again.  We&#8217;re going to need an injection into the American bloodstream by the American people.  Not top down from the Republican establishment, but from the ground up, from us.</p>
<p>Oh, we&#8217;ve got to go.  Okay.  One more?  One more quick one?  Oh, I talked too long.  Thank you guys, so much.  God bless you.  Thank you.  (Applause)</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/2012/frontpagemag-com/monica-crowley-at-restoration-weekend/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Netanyahu Blinked</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/steven-plaut/why-netanyahu-blinked/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-netanyahu-blinked</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/steven-plaut/why-netanyahu-blinked/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2012 04:44:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steven Plaut]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ceasefire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gaza]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hamas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Netanyahu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yasser Arafat]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=166579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How a "ceasefire" empowered the enemies of Israel.   ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/steven-plaut/why-netanyahu-blinked/460x-3/" rel="attachment wp-att-166645"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-166645" title="460x" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/460x1.jpg" alt="" width="277" height="209" /></a>The Hamas terrorists fired over 1,500 rockets into civilian areas of Israel just before and during the recent &#8220;Pillar of Defense&#8221; military operation, rockets that killed at least five Israelis, wounded many others and did loads of damage.  Southern Israel underwent the regional equivalent (and the moral equivalent) to the Londoners of the 1940s who endured the German Blitz.</p>
<p>Israel had learned in its 2006 war with the Hezb&#8217;Allah Islamofascist terrorists in Lebanon that bombing from the air does not achieve very much against entrenched terrorist infrastructure.   Nevertheless, that was essentially the same failed military strategy used against <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/hamas-the-terror-elite">the Hamas savages</a> by the Netanyahu government in the &#8220;Pillar of Defense&#8221; campaign.   Air attacks with conventional weapons not only failed in Lebanon, they also failed to end the aggressions by Germany and Japan in World War II, and they generally failed elsewhere.</p>
<p>Air bombings without ground incursions were tried for well over a decade by Israel against the Gaza terrorists and failed.  In part, this was because of the insane Israeli practice of warning the terrorists which buildings were about to be attacked so that the denizens of those buildings could escape.  While Israel was not officially admitting sending similar sly messages in the &#8220;Pillar of Defense&#8221; operations, I would not rule out the possibility that such messages were sent, no doubt in order to &#8220;reduce the death count.&#8221;   As had become clear in the &#8220;Cast Lead&#8221; military operation back in 2008, terrorists can only be eliminated with ground troop operations.</p>
<p>The pursuit of air war against <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/upload/pamphlets/hamas.pdf">the genocidal terrorists</a> pales into mere silliness when compared with the incomprehensible agreement by Netanyahu to a ceasefire, this before the terrorists and their infrastructure were eliminated, before most of the rockets were destroyed, and in fact only a few hours after a Tel Aviv bus was attacked by a Hamas bomb.  Even worse was the fact that Netanyahu reportedly agreed to halt targeted assassinations against terrorist leaders and partially lift the blockade of the Gaza Strip as conditions for the ceasefire.</p>
<p>Targeted assassinations are the most effective tool in the Israeli arsenal (and of course are also used effectively by the US against al-Qaeda).  They, and not Israel&#8217;s &#8220;security wall,&#8221; are entirely responsible for the end to suicide bombings of Israeli buses and cafes in recent years.  And the blockade of Gaza is motivated by the need to make it more difficult for the savages to import Iranian missiles and other weapons.  True, there is also a political dimension to the blockade, much as there is for the American embargo of trade with Cuba, while the &#8220;human costs&#8221; of the one are no more serious than those of the other.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, by agreeing to the ceasefire even while the wounded and wreckage of the Tel Aviv bus bombing were still being gathered up, Israel sent the signal that it was capitulating to Hamas demands.  The ceasefire allowed the terrorists to claim that their &#8220;victory&#8221; against the children and women riding in that Tel Aviv bus had resulted in the Israeli concessions.   The Hamas handed out celebratory candies in Nazi-like ghoulishness.</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton&#8217;s glowering and threatening presence no doubt contributed to Netanyahu&#8217;s decision to wimp out and call off the ground invasion, even though tens of thousands of reserve troops had already been mobilized in Israel.  (Rumors in Israel also hold that Obama was coercing the ceasefire by threatening to withhold crucial military spare parts.)</p>
<p>But just what did Netanyahu have to show for it all?  The ceasefire will prove to be like all previous &#8220;ceasefires&#8221; with the Gaza savages, where the Hamas and its clones continue to fire rockets at the Jews but the Jews turn the other cheek.  Rockets landed in Israel almost every day during the years <strong><em>before</em></strong> the &#8220;Pillar of Defense&#8221; operation.   They were ignored by the media, which does not consider attempted murder of Jews to be newsworthy.   Israel&#8217;s stance was that as long as these did not cause &#8220;too many&#8221; civilian deaths and damages, they were &#8220;tolerable.&#8221;</p>
<p>The Hamas, as expected, issued its usual &#8220;reports&#8221; about civilian deaths caused by the Israeli operations and these were gobbled up by the Western media, by and large hostile to Israel.  I am convinced that if the current staff at the BBC were reporting about the Battle of the Bulge, they would feature press releases by the German authorities that claim that only babies and women were being targeted by the Americans in their aggression against the German homeland in that battle.  In the &#8220;Cast Lead&#8221; operation in 2008, the same media were filled with reports of hundreds of civilian deaths, while later proofs that almost all those &#8220;civilians&#8221; were in fact armed terrorists were lucky if they made it to page 37 at the bottom in small fonts.</p>
<p>The Israelis <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4310384,00.html">living in Israel&#8217;s Negev south</a> had borne the brunt of the Hamas rocket aggressions, but these were also the most vocal in denouncing the ceasefire that Netanyahu had signed.  In essence they were chanting, &#8220;All We are Saying is Give War a Chance.&#8221;  Countless previous &#8220;ceasefires&#8221; had simply left them abandoned by the Israeli government as sitting-duck targets for Hamas weapons.</p>
<p>Without elimination of the terrorist infrastructure, nothing of significance had been achieved.  A snap poll by Israel’s Channel Two TV station confirmed the impression. The poll found that 70 percent of the Israeli public <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/11/21/175307/many-israelis-denounce-cease-fire.html">opposed signing</a> a cease-fire with Hamas, 24 percent were in favor and 6 percent were undecided.  <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4309702,00.html">Naftali Bennett, the rising star</a> within the Israeli Right, credited with energizing the opposition to Netanyahu from that end of the spectrum, not only denounced the ceasefire but openly called for tearing the Gaza Strip in half and then conducting anti-terror search-and-destroy operations.</p>
<p>And then there was the media&#8217;s use of the term &#8220;militants,&#8221; the code word used by anti-Semites to refer to the Gazan genocidal terrorists and fascists.  Calling them &#8220;militants&#8221; is equivalent to asserting that they are no more murderous or evil than marchers in protests against AIDS and killing of whales, and in fact have legitimate grievances.  The BBC, in particular, took care never to refer to a terrorist act of violence without appending the &#8220;militant&#8221; terminology, even when Hamas terrorists dragged the bodies of still-living &#8220;collaborators&#8221; through the streets of Gaza with their legs tied to the backs of motorcycles.  I personally am of the opinion that any journalist characterizing terrorists as &#8220;militants&#8221; or &#8220;activists&#8221; should be regarded as directly participating in aggression against Israel and treated as an enemy combatant.  During the military operations <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/israel-bombs-media-tower-in-gaza-again-2012-11">Israel repeatedly bombed</a> the &#8220;Media Tower&#8221; in Gaza, which held the communications offices of terrorist organizations, but also housed the crews of reporters for the BBC and other British media.  Israel claimed it bombed the building because of the former terrorists, but I prefer to think it was because of the latter terrorists.</p>
<p>Ultimately, stability and tranquility will be created only when it is understood that the real cause of terrorist violence in the Middle East these days is not Israeli &#8220;occupation&#8221; but rather the REMOVAL of Israeli &#8220;occupation.&#8221;   Terrorism will continue as long as the world is dangling out &#8220;hopes&#8221; to the Palestinians that they will eventually get their own state, a state they know will serve no other purpose but to escalate the war of Arab aggression against Israel.</p>
<p>The most important lesson of recent years, and it is by now understood by everyone except university leftists and anti-Israel journalists, is that nothing will really put an end to the terror and rockets from Gaza other than some good old-fashioned R&amp;D – Reoccupation and Denazification.  Everything else is a delusion.  Israel must re-occupy the Gaza Strip, subject it to martial law, and carry out a decades-long program of Denazification.</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/2012/steven-plaut/why-netanyahu-blinked/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Libyan Guards Were Protecting an American Ambassador &#8212; on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/sacrificing-american-lives-in-benghazi-on-the-glazov-gang-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=sacrificing-american-lives-in-benghazi-on-the-glazov-gang-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/sacrificing-american-lives-in-benghazi-on-the-glazov-gang-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 04:05:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benghazi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stand Down]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=163082</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The uncomfortable truths about the failure to send U.S. Marines to defend American diplomats in a volatile Muslim city.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/sacrificing-american-lives-in-benghazi-on-the-glazov-gang-2/c_christopher_stevens-2/" rel="attachment wp-att-163744"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-163744" title="C_Christopher_Stevens" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/C_Christopher_Stevens-450x337.jpeg" alt="" width="315" height="236" /></a>On this week’s <em>Glazov Gang</em>, Nonie Darwish, Jacqueline Brandwynne and Susanne Reyto discussed <em>Why Libyan Guards Were Protecting an American Ambassador.</em> The dialogue occurred in <strong>Part II</strong> and focused on the uncomfortable truths about the failure to send U.S. Marines to defend American diplomats in a volatile Muslim city. In <strong>Part I</strong>, the guests shared their immigration experience of coming to the United States and what led them to fall in love with America. Each guest voiced their dread of a potential re-election of Barack Obama, which they see as having catastrophic consequences for the country they have grown to love and cherish. Both parts of the two part series can be seen below:</p>
<p><strong>Part I:</strong></p>
<p><iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/VWQEVEaisbM" frameborder="0" width="400" height="300"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Part II:</strong></p>
<p><iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4bq6UwZcBSU" frameborder="0" width="400" height="300"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>To order Jamie Glazov&#8217;s new book, <em>High Noon For America: The Coming Showdown</em>, <a href="https://secure.donationreport.com/productlist.html?key=YMDV7EBDA7DV">click here</a>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>You can make sure that </strong><a href="https://secure.donationreport.com/donate.html?key=ASY2NUM6OSJ9" target="_blank"><strong><em>Jamie Glazov Productions</em></strong></a><strong> continues to take you where no other media programs dare to go. Help us by </strong><a href="https://secure.donationreport.com/donate.html?key=ASY2NUM6OSJ9" target="_blank"><strong>clicking here</strong></a><strong> and making a tax deductible contribution today. </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/sacrificing-american-lives-in-benghazi-on-the-glazov-gang-2/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 1434/1507 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 13:20:57 by W3 Total Cache -->