Nothing about America’s ever-expanding welfare state has been more egregious than its unflinching cultivation of personal irresponsibility. From able-bodied people getting welfare or disability payments, to single women having illegitimate children, much of what we used to consider unacceptable or immoral behavior has been de-stigmatized.
Our shame-free society must be kept in mind during the GOP’s effort to repeal and replace ObamaCare. That’s because the Left’s greatest weapon—one also embraced by several weak-kneed Republicans—is the idea that if whatever emerges in ObamaCare’s place leaves even one less person without healthcare insurance, America becomes a nation of heartless Cossacks willing to let people “die in the streets.”
In the space of a single day (July12), the following news stories were disseminated:
Police in Washington, DC were shot at by five people riding in a van. Americans will no doubt be “relieved” to know they fired at police to avoid arrest, not to deliberately target cops. The cops themselves? One suspects a more “benign” reason for thugs trying to kill them is of little comfort.
In Detroit, four black Americans were arrested for allegedly using Facebook to threaten police officers with death. “All lives can’t matter until black lives matter. Kill all white cops,” read one of the posts.
This column is for the pearl-clutchers at National Review, Beltway Blowhards George Will, Charles Krauthammer, et al, Billy Kristol and his #NeverTrump choristers, “Mittens” Romney and the similarly loathsome leaders of the GOPe, aka Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell: just who in the world do you think you are?
There were 17—count ‘em 17—candidates vying for the GOP presidential nomination. And due to a series of factors, including a lack of preparation, a lack of charisma, a lack of ideological bona fides and/or the monumental lack of humility that attends a politician utterly immune to his infinitesimal chances for success, that field eventually whittled itself down to three candidates: the Monumental Egotist, the Constitutional Snake Oil Salesman and the Ankle Biter.
Over the weekend, the last remaining pieces of progressive narratives regarding tolerance and democracy exploded. Only a couple of days after the UK voted to free itself from the shackles of it overlords in Brussels, Fox News reported that 2 million Remainers ostensibly signed an online petition calling for another vote—and left-wing Labour party MP David Lammy said Parliament should overturn the result.
This is the true face of progressive ideology: voting and democracy only count when the “right” result is reached.
It began with MIT economics professor Jonathan Gruber in 2014. Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes amplified it a couple of weeks ago. And now, in an equal opportunity bashing from the other side of the political dividing line, The Federalist senior editor David Harsanyi has offered yet another look at one idea that apparently unites America’s elitist class: millions of average Americans are irredeemably, hopelessly and unrelentingly stupid.
Gruber led the elitist charge, revealing the Obama administration’s behind-the-scenes efforts to get the Affordable Healthcare Act passed. “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” he stated. “And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass… “
After the latest atrocity inflicted by ISIS,Belgian Interior Minister Jan Jambon offered the world another look at the utter bankruptcy that informs the progressive mindset. “It was always possible that more attacks could happen,” he explained, “but we never could have imagined something of this scale.”
Never imagine it? The death toll engendered by the attack in Paris last November was more thanthree timesthe total notched by Islamic thugs in Brussels. As for the"possibility” of more attacks, who’s kidding whom? Does anyone, other than the terminally clueless who still buy into such drivel, remotely believe we’ve seen the last attack on a European Union that rolled out the welcome mat tomorethan one million Muslim"refugees” in 2015 alone?
Few things require a more willing suspension of common sense than a single statistic pounded into the heads of the public by corrupt progressives and their equally corrupt media collaborators. The Daily Signal columnist William Campenni gets right to the heart of the matter, explaining that a call to any journalist, pundit, anchor, strategist or lobbyist asking about the total number of illegals in this country and the source for that number yields two identical answers: 11 million illegals, sourced by the Pew Research Center.
And where does Pew get its information? “An estimated 11.3 million unauthorized immigrants lived in the U.S. in 2014, according to a new preliminary Pew Research Center estimate based on government data,” their website states. “Government data” is shorthand for the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Census Bureau. In December 2003, DHS estimated between 8 million and 12 million illegal aliens resided in the United States—and that 700,000 more enter each year and remain here. Writing for the Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform, Fred Elbel highlights the absurdity of those stats. “As of 2014, those estimates have not changed for eleven years, even though the official annual increase alone would yield an (sic) corrected estimate of 15.7 million to 19.7 million illegal aliens today (not adjusting for Obama’s unconstitutional 2014 executive amnesty),” he explains.
Unless you’ve has been living in an alternative universe, you’re well aware of the avalanche of criticism directed at Donald Trump from all quarters, liberal and conservative, including the latest hypocritical screed by Mitt Romney. Yet despite that criticism, virtually everyone engaged in it ignores the essential reality that attends every election: context is everything. In other words, whatever one feels about Donald Trump, or any other candidate for that matter, the ultimate question and the answer to it cannot be postponed indefinitely, as in Donald Trump—running against whom?
Like many conservatives who live amongst those who believe they own the franchise on enlightened thinking, I have often been asked how in the world I could have voted for a (fill in the progressive blank) like George W. Bush for president. Remarkably, the answer to that question is one that seems to have eluded most of these deep thinkers. “You mean how could I have voted for George W. Bush—as opposed to a hypocritical scold like Al Gore, or a self-aggrandizing blowhard like John Kerry?” I invariably respond.
There is little doubt this presidential campaign season is unique, at least in one respect: for the first time in a long time, the despicable nature of the mainstream media’s double-standard is as much in focus as the candidates themselves. And perhaps nothing screams double-standard more than the calculated lack of attention on Hillary Clinton’s latest assertion that she never told the families grieving over the loss of their loved ones in Benghazi that an anti-Muslim video was to blame for the attacks.
We begin with where that assertion was made. Clinton floated this latest insult to those families and the American public within the friendly confines of ABC News’ This Week, hosted by pseudo-journalist and former Clinton toady George Stephanopoulos. The would be the same George Stephanopoulos that still passes muster in the corporate suites at ABC, despite having made three separate donations of $25,000 apiece to the Clinton Foundation in 2012, 2013 and 2014 respectively. Those donations remained under the radar, even when Stephanopoulos engaged in a contentious interview with “Clinton Cash” author Peter Schweizer, during which he rose to the Clinton’s defense. After being outed, Stephanopoulos apologized for the oversight, insisting he thought his contributions were “a matter of public record.” “However, in hindsight, I should have taken the extra step of personally disclosing my donations to my employer and to the viewers on air during the recent news stories about the Foundation,” Stephanopoulos confessed.
In a move that reeks of political correctness, Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced Thursday that all combat positions in the U.S. military will now be open to women, with no exceptions. “They’ll be allowed to drive tanks, fire mortars and lead infantry soldiers into combat,” Carter declared. “They’ll be able to serve as Army rangers and green berets, Navy SEALs, Marine Corps infantry, Air Force parajumpers and everything else that was previously open only to men.”
As the Center for Military Readiness (CMR) explains, Carter could only make the change by overruling the best professional advice of the U.S. Marine Corps “in matters involving life, death, and national security,” and “by breaking his own promise” to base his decision on the quality of scientific research behind the military services’ recommendations. The Marine Corps had requested some exceptions to the policy, but Carter declined to honor them. “The important factor in making my decision was to have access to every American who could add strength to the joint force,” he insisted, further stating the decision to do so was based on empirical analysis of the data following a three-year review by all armed services branches.
Leading from behind, or more accurately, failing to lead at all, has its consequences. Turkish jets shot down a Russian Su-24 fighter jet Turkey claimed was over its airspace, and both pilots were reportedly killed. In addition, American-backed Syrian rebels shot down a Russian rescue helicopter, killing one crew member. Russian guided missile cruiser Moskva will now be deployed off the Syrian coast, with Lieutenant General Sergey Rudskoi warning that “every target posing a potential threat will be destroyed,” and all military contacts with Turkey “will be suspended.” As PJ Media’s Richard Fernandez deftly explains, the latest turn of events is “a clear sign of how dangerous Obama’s Syria policy has become. The vacuum left by his policy has not only engendered a chaos which has destroyed whole countries, but it has drawn in great powers whose armed forces are operating in dangerously close proximity.” In short, this is how wars begin.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned Turkey there will be “significant consequences” for what he characterized as a “stab in the back” committed by “accomplices of terrorists.” The Turkish military insists that two jets approached their border and were warned “10 times” before one of the planes was shot down. Putin disagreed. “The Russian bomber was shot down over Syria by an air-to-air surface fired from a Turkish F-16 plane when the bomber was at an altitude of 6,000 meters at a distance of 1 km from the Turkish bomber,” he stated.
The fecklessness of the Obama administration’s despicable “refugee” agenda can be personified. Last August a federal jury convicted Uzbek refugee Fazliddin Kurbanov of three terror-related charges that included working to support a terrorist organization, and amassing explosive materials in his apartment in Boise, ID.
Kurbanov is a Russian-speaking truck driver originally from Uzbekistan who began his life as a Muslim. When his parents converted to Orthodox Christianity, the family was subjected to government persecution and they fled to nearby Kazakhstan. In 2009 his parents came to the Unites States, followed shortly thereafter by Kurbanov, his wife and his son in August 2009.
Take a good, long, hard look, fellow Americans, at the so-called City of Light—reduced to a blood-stained darkness. Paris was put under its first curfew since 1944, when another group of savages known as the Nazis were inflicting their particular brand of barbarianism on the world. This time, the Islamic State has taken credit for attacks in seven locations, killing at least 129 people and wounding another 180. And make no mistake: While Islamic thugs perpetrated this atrocity, their progressive enablers must be held to account as well. Spare us the criticism of “exploiting” a tragedy for political gain. We will not abide cultural suicide to preserve political correctness.
Timing, as they say, is everything. And the most feckless president in the history of the United States, along with his equally bankrupt administration, did not disappoint. Only hours before the carnage took place, Obama did an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos and gave us an echo of his 2012 campaign “terror is on the run” nonsense. “I don’t think they’re gaining strength,” Obama declared of the Islamic State. “What is true is that from the start, our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them. They have not gained ground in Iraq, and in Syria they’ll come in, they’ll leave, but you don’t see this systemic march by ISIL across the terrain.”
In a scathing column Fox News contributor Andrew Napolitano makes the convincing case that Hillary Clinton sold weapons to Libya in a direction violation of the U.N. arms embargo, and then lied about it under oath during her testimony before the House Select Committee on Benghazi Oct. 22.
“To pursue her goal of a ‘democratic’ government there, Clinton, along with Obama and a dozen or so members of Congress from both houses and both political parties, decided she should break the law by permitting U.S. arms dealers to violate the U.N. arms embargo and arm Libyan rebels whom she hoped would one day run the new government,” Napolitano explains. “So she exercised her authority as secretary of state to authorize the shipment of American-made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood and friendly to the Libyan rebels and a country the U.S. had no business arming—unless the purpose of doing so was for the arms to be transferred to the rebels.”
A newly-leaked memo from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reveals the Obama administration is seeking to sidestep a federal court injunction that suspended portions of the president’s amnesty-based initiatives known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). In short, Obama is determined to impose his transformational agenda on the nation by any means necessary.
According to the Hill, the document outlining the administration’s attempt to thumb its nose at the rule of law was prepared at a DHS “Regulations Retreat” last June, four months after a preliminary injunction was initially imposed by Texas Judge Andrew Hanen and subsequently left in place by a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit’s final ruling on that injunction, either confirming or reversing it, is expected to occur in a matter of days.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement