The State Department on Friday released its Annual Report on Terrorism, and we can read all about it in the Washington Post. We learn that there was a 35 percent increase in terrorist attacks around the world, “driven by extremist groups in the Middle East and Africa.” In Iraq, these “extremist groups” have declared “a caliphate.” For our State Department—and its propaganda arm—Islam is the religion that dare not speak its name.
A Further Perspective
That Pope: What an environmental radical!
Listen to what that preposterous priest just said. He breathlessly claims he’s “concerned about the negative consequences for humanity and for all creation resulting from the degradation of some basic natural resources such as water, air, and land, brought about by an economic and technological progress which does not recognize and take into account its limits.”
Yes, that John Paul II was quite an eco-leftist, technophobe, and doomsday prophet. No, wait a second. He wasn’t, of course. Yet he published a Common Declaration on Environmental Ethics with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew back on June 10, 2002, just 13 years ago. His successor, Benedict XVI, preached along the same lines. And his successor, Pope Francis, earlier today released his environmental encyclical to great acclaim by the global Left and their acolytes in the mainstream media.
Pope Francis is releasing an encyclical Thursday on climate change — a draft of which was leaked to the Italian magazine l’Espresso on Monday. The New York Times reports that the encyclical is “eagerly awaited, especially by scientists and environmentalists” — because the pope agrees with most of them. On the right, it’s not all love.
A Times front-page headline announced that the “Pope’s Position on the Climate Tests the G.O.P.” because five 2016 GOP White House hopefuls are Catholic — former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal — and climate change skeptics. So you’ve got scientists in the same corner as the Catholic Church — but not GOP presidential prospects.
No surprise, I would say. Climate change alarmism always has had a lot in common with organized religion. What’s the message of hard-core environmentalists? The end is near. Repent.
The political left has come up with a new buzzword: “micro-aggression.”
Professors at the University of California at Berkeley have been officially warned against saying such things as “America is the land of opportunity.” Why? Because this is considered to be an act of “micro-aggression” against minorities and women. Supposedly it shows that you don’t take their grievances seriously and are therefore guilty of being aggressive toward them, even if only on a micro scale.
You might think that this is just another crazy idea from Berkeley. But the same concept appears in a report from the flagship campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana. If you just sit in a room where all the people are white, you are considered to be guilty of “micro-aggression” against people who are not white, who will supposedly feel uncomfortable when they enter such a room.
“There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally,” President Barack Obama proclaimed in a 2009 speech to Congress. It was a memorable event, in part because Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., shouted, “You lie.” Editorial page umbrage followed.
This month, the California Senate proved that, though Wilson was wrong to heckle the president, he had reason to challenge the sincerity of Obama’s pledge. By a 28-11 vote, the Democratic-controlled state Senate became the first U.S. legislative body to vote to expand health care to immigrants who are here illegally. Senate Bill 4, by state Sen. Ricardo Lara, would allow Californians without documentation to buy Affordable Care Act policies (assuming the feds grant a waiver), authorize residents up to age 19 to enroll in Medi-Cal regardless of immigration status and allow some people 19 or older to enroll in Medi-Cal regardless of immigration status.
Hillary Clinton has a new crusade. The Democrats’ only name female candidate for president sees “a sweeping effort to disempower and disenfranchise people of color, poor people and young people from one end of our country to the other.”
In a speech at Texas Southern University, Clinton also charged, “Republicans are systematically and deliberately trying to stop millions of American citizens from voting.” She called on “Republicans at all levels of government with all manner of ambition to stop fearmongering about a phantom epidemic of election fraud and start explaining why they’re so scared of letting citizens have their say.”
Fearmongering? To listen to Clinton’s remarks, you would think that power-drunk authorities are turning away millions of citizens at the voting booth. She even called out GOP presidential hopefuls by name. When Rick Perry was governor of Texas, Clinton charged, he enacted a law “that a federal court said was actually written with the purpose of discriminating against minority voters.” It was a law requiring photo IDs, struck down by one federal judge but stayed by two higher courts.
After the pro-Western government of China was forced to flee to the island of Taiwan in 1949, when the Communists took over mainland China, bitter recriminations in Washington led to the question: “Who lost China?” China was, of course, never ours to lose, though it might be legitimate to ask if a different American policy toward China could have led to a different outcome.
In more recent years, however, Iraq was in fact ours to lose, after U.S. troops vanquished Saddam Hussein’s army and took over the country. Today, we seem to be in the process of losing Iraq, if not to ISIS, then to Iran, whose troops are in Iraq fighting ISIS.
While mistakes were made by both the Bush administration and the Obama administration, those mistakes were of different kinds and of different magnitudes in their consequences, though both sets of mistakes are worth thinking about, so that so much tragic waste of blood and treasure does not happen again.
Do you ever get the surreal feeling you live in a movie? Today feels a bit Some Like It Hot, very Victor Victoria, considerably Juwanna Mann even.
“The Pentagon, shamefully, has yet to rescind anachronistic personnel guidelines that prohibit openly transgender people from joining in the military, labeling their condition a ‘paraphilia,’ or perversion,” the New York Times editorial board informs. “The policy has forced thousands to serve in silence, repressing an essential part of their identity.”
The fog of war is about to get foggier.
The Old Gray Lady (maybe time to administer the Crocodile Dundee Test) cites an “absence of common-sense leadership on this issue by Pentagon leaders” and claims “America’s closest allies have been pragmatic and enlightened” regarding transgenders in uniform.
Look on the bright side, Seattle! If the big-bore tunnel to replace highway 99 has to be scrapped, the cement-reinforced completed remnant may make a perfect bomb shelter should North Korea’s mad dough-boy of a dictator ever act on his threats to bomb the West Coast.
I know it’s not much, but it’s the best I could do.
Seattle’s tunneling project is an arranged marriage for Seattle. Seattle’s voters rejected the project the one time it was on the ballot, but elected officials, playing the parental role, saw what was best, and arranged the union anyway.
The dowry promised was a new waterfront for the core of downtown, a bonanza of development possibilities, with parks, condos and car-free views all in the mix. Sadly, however, the marriage has yet to be consummated. The drill just keeps getting stuck.
Do I trust the federal government? Hell no. President Barack Obama’s Department of Justice is happy to spend years investigating a foreign soccer organization for corruption and former Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert for allegedly paying off a blackmailer — but not the alleged blackmailer — yet ignores big concerns. The feds have done next to nothing about the IRS targeting of conservative political groups, other than to defend IRS official Lois Lerner’s creative use of the Fifth Amendment when she refused to answer questions from House investigators. And when Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., asked in 2013 whether the government was collecting data on millions of Americans, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said no. Shortly thereafter, Edward Snowden leaked information that showed Clapper had lied. The very fact that leaker Snowden had been given top security clearance made the intelligence community appear reckless and incompetent.