Archive for the 'Political Correctness' Category

Introspection on how ‘Trump Could Win It All’

Saturday, January 16th, 2016

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Editor’s note: This is not an endorsement or a denouncement of Donald Trump. The author is seeking insight into the popularity and success of Trump as a political candidate.

Donald Trump’s ability to draw a crowd has flabbergasted even one of left-leaning MSNBC’s talk-show hosts, Joe Scarborough, who took to national airwaves to say the billionaire is beating all records — that his ability to pack a room with eager listeners exceeds anything even much-loved Ronald Reagan could do. …

“I saw Reagan come to Pensacola twice in 1980. I saw the crowds. I never saw anything like that in my hometown before. …”

Earlier this week, Trump attracted “a capacity crowd of nearly 12,000 at the Pensacola Bay Center on Florida’s panhandle.” Pensacola has a population of about 53,000 souls. Many, many Americans are fed up with, angry at, and/or disillusioned with Washington. It was not surprising to see a U.S. News & World Report story stating that “Trump Could Win It All: A new survey shows a sizable number of Democrats ready to defect from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump.” Another recent study found that “Polls may actually underestimate Trump’s support” among Republican voters, showing that 40% may back The Donald. Whether people like Trump or not, agree with him or disagree, he has been willing to highlight some of this country’s most vexing — and to some, “controversial” — problems, like immigration and terrorism. He has proposed some controversial solutions to this nation’s predicaments. The vocabulary Trump has used in speaking about America’s dilemmas has been, prima facie and at times offensive, vague, and inaccurate. The terminology Trump has used when elucidating his proposals for resolving this country’s crises — and the logic behind his proposals — have also been, at times and prima facie irrational, offensive, vague, and inaccurate. Putting politically correct disclaimers aside, Trump’s rhetoric and platform are likely resonating harmonically with many Americans’ very well-founded concerns about the existential threats to this great republic.

Therein lies the rub: many Americans (71%) are tired of political correctness being shoved down their throats; tired of a narcissistic congress working for lobbyists and ignoring constituents; tired of a megalomaniac president; tired of watching an entitlement-seeking mob drag down a once-great republic; and tired of a mainstream media pumping out propaganda and morally bankrupt “entertainment.” Yes, Virginia, there is a “silent majority” and they don’t want to be betrayed again by some Washington insider(s). They are interested in listening to someone like Trump who isn’t owned by anybody and doesn’t need anyone else’s money. These are qualities that appeal to decent American folks — qualities now abhorrent to many of America’s power-brokers (they have to own their peons).

(more…)


Common sense: good people with guns stop attempted mass shootings

Thursday, December 10th, 2015

(The core events highlighted in this article were reported earlier this year, but are very prescient now. The poll numbers presented herein were released last week and in October.)

A good guy — a law-abiding citizen — with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun. Simple. Two mass shootings were stopped immediately, once in March in Philadelphia and again in April in Chicago. Breitbart compiled a list of 16 incidents “between November 30, 2014, and January 13, 2015″ where “armed citizens [used] guns to defend their lives and the lives of others.”

The Second Amendment ensures that citizens can protect themselves, protect the common good, and protect the rights afforded us by our Constitution. Common sense Americans understand the responsibility that comes with gun ownership — unlike the folks flocking to give up their rights, surrendering their ability to protect their loved ones and their way of life, and looking for a free ride from big government bureaucracy. While the police may be able to rush to the scene of a crime in progress, it may take them (many) minutes to arrive. An armed citizen can react in seconds (and I urge armed citizens to seek training in the use of firearms and to be sure they practice and hone their skills).

The “leaders” of the “gun control” movement want nothing less than completely dis-empowering good people. Many followers of the “gun control” movement leadership are just plain afraid — probably of just about everything — and want someone else to protect them (do they even understand their constitutional rights?). The facts:

Here’s how good citizens with guns protected other citizens:

(more…)


FPM: “Trump is a monster, a madman and a vile racist. He’s just like Hitler. Or Jimmy Carter.”

Thursday, December 10th, 2015

Donald Trump got crucified by the whole left-wing establishment (from media to government to academia) — and by some members of the GOP — for merely suggesting that the U.S. stop all Muslim immigration. But it was a Democratic President — a left-wing icon — who actually did ban Muslim immigration and even deported thousands of Muslims from American soil. From FrontPageMag.com:

Trump is a monster, a madman and a vile racist. He’s just like Hitler. Or Jimmy Carter.

During the Iranian hostage crisis, Carter issued a number of orders to put pressure on Iran. Among these, Iranians were banned from entering the United States unless they oppose the Shiite Islamist regime or had a medical emergency.

Here’s Jimmy “Hitler” Carter saying it back in 1980.

Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.

Apparently barring people from a terrorist country is not against “our values” after all. It may even be “who we are”. Either that or Carter was a racist monster just like Trump.

Meanwhile here’s how the Iranian students in the US were treated.

Carter orders 50,000 Iranian students in US to report to immigration office with view to deporting those in violation of their visas. On 27 December 1979, US appeals court allows deportation of Iranian students found in violation.

In November 1979, the Attorney General had given all Iranian students one month to report to the local immigration office. Around 7,000 were found in violation of their visas. Around 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the US. …

But it’s “different” when a Democrat does it?


NRO: “discarding the Bill of Rights is part of the Obama administration’s mission statement”

Saturday, December 5th, 2015

In the wake of the savage Islamist-inspired San Bernardino attack, in which two Muslim terrorists murdered 14 innocent U.S. citizens and injured 23, Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s “greatest fear is — not terrorism — but a nonexistent Islamophobic backlash,” according to the National Review Online’s David French. He aptly notes that “Lynch has offered an almost Onion-level self-parody of liberal pieties” and reminds us common non-elist folk that, “Per Obama administration protocol, the attorney general was determined to never let a crisis go to waste. There is now a ‘wonderful opportunity and wonderful moment to really make significant change,’ Lynch declared…” In other words, are Obama et al — in their ineptitude, cowardice, and appeasement of Muslim terror — willing to silence or punish, even arrest, people who speak candidly about issues like terrorism? Why didn’t Lynch emphasize sympathy for the victims and express outrage over Islamist-inspired terror?

Obama and friends are sympathetic to what they see as the “historical” and current “persecution” of Muslims world-wide — even though many Muslims historically and are currently (and mostly) persecuting each other and those they deem as infidels. The President and his followers also suffer from the fallacious belief that if they appease Muslim extremists, they’ll be spared the wrath of Islamist terrorism. The truth is that Islamists disdain those who appease them and consider appeasers weak.

As French correctly notes:

… discarding the Bill of Rights is part of the Obama administration’s mission statement. The First Amendment takes a back seat to the administration’s desire to build a national “safe space” for Muslims. The Second Amendment should be tossed aside (without due process, no less) if a person’s name appears on a bloated bureaucratic watch list — a list so over-inclusive that it has included such nefarious characters as The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes and the late senator Ted Kennedy. …

Remember that Obama belittles us little people as folks who “get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,” when he is possibly one of the most divisive presidents in American history.

French warns us that:

… The First Amendment protects an enormous range of speech — even speech that’s anathema to the Obama administration. Americans are perfectly within their rights to not just condemn jihad but also to make sweeping and angry statements about Islam. If the administration disagrees with this speech, it’s free to make its own statements, but when it starts making up legal categories of problematic speech, it is getting disturbingly close to discarding the Bill of Rights.

He concludes that:

… A competent attorney general shouldn’t even be talking about her ‘greatest fears,’ much less that her greatest fear includes free speech. A competent attorney general should be speaking the language of vigilance, courage, and resolve. We know the Obama administration is capable of resolve. It is resolved to fundamentally transform our nation. It is resolved to advance the sexual-revolution agenda of the radical Left. It is resolved to turn our nation’s military into an engine of social justice. But it is not resolved to defend our nation and Constitution from a vicious enemy who seeks to soak our streets in blood. And that lack of resolve is worse than a shame — it’s a disgrace.


Secretary of State John Kerry excuses Islamist terrorist murder of civilians

Sunday, November 22nd, 2015

It’s hard to believe that an American secretary of state would justify terrorism — well, not so hard to believe considering the depravity of the Obama administration. Regarding the savage murder of 12 journalists by Islamists at the Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris in January, Kerry said:

… “There was a sort of particularized focus and perhaps even a legitimacy in terms of — not a legitimacy, but a rationale that you could attach yourself to somehow and say, ‘OK, they’re really angry because of this and that’” …

“Legitimacy” and “rationale” for the murder of satirical cartoonists drawing and publishing pictures? This is outrageous. John Kerry is despicable, justifying terror meant to silence two of the West’s most hallowed ideals: 1) the practice of free speech and 2) the protection of a free press. Kerry should be fired by President Obama — at least censured — but Obama agrees with Kerry. What a said state of affairs. But such type behavior shall only increase if the American people remain silent.

Stand up for what is right. Remind your elected officials of the ideals enshrined in our nation’s Constitution. Ask that John Kerry step down from his position. Ask your public officials to publicly condemn Kerry and demand that he step down. You can use the following link to contact your elected representatives:

FIND AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL ELECTED OFFICIALS


Book Review – Living History: On the Front Lines for Israel and the Jews 2003-2015

Tuesday, May 19th, 2015

By Fern Sidman

“From 2003 through the early months of 2015, I wrote more than 200,000 words about anti-Semitism/anti-Zionism,” says Prof. Phyllis Chesler in the introduction of her recently released book, Living History: On the Front Lines for Israel and the Jews 2003-2015 (Gefen Publishers).

This admission should come as no surprise to anyone even tangentially familiar with the voluminous amount of essays and articles that Dr. Chesler has written on the subject over the last 13 years, donning an impressive variety of hats. As an astute political analyst, researcher and investigative journalist, she has honed these skills in her quest to offer her reader a meticulous examination of a panoply of hot button geo-political issues pertaining to Israel and the Jewish people.

In this anthology-style compendium that contains the corpus of her work in non-redacted form, Chesler prodigiously confronts the seemingly eternal scourge of global anti-Semitism/anti-Zionism, the pernicious nature of radical Islam, the proliferation of visceral Jew hatred and incessant Israel bashing on university campuses, the exposure of the most egregious forms of propaganda in films and books, the truth about the nefarious agenda of multicultural relativism, and critiques the role of the Left-liberal media in creating the “perfect storm.”

(more…)


The accusation of “Islamophobia” is designed to shut down discussion, debate and criticism of everything Islamic

Saturday, May 2nd, 2015

By Gary Gerofsky

Recently I read an article (“Levelling the playing field for Muslim girls”) in my local newspaper about a “progressive” idea within a high school that the board of education raise funds for Muslim girls to participate in sports events by paying for special “sports hijabs.” On the surface, it sounds like a fair-minded, inexpensive idea to facilitate inclusion and participation in sports. However, in reality, it is a huge step towards sharia law. It would sanction the political symbols of Islam. It would comply with Islamic family and community pressure on girls to wear an article of clothing that is neither mandatory nor necessary for their faith — and is certainly not required attire by religious duty to play sports. It would place a barrier to integration and inclusion into a normal school environment and team sports. It is a way in which the Islamic community can force us to accept their misogyny, their self-perceived exclusivity and superiority, and their attempts to gain special accommodation within Western society. It is a recipe for further separation and insularity. It is the slippery slope to sharia law. It also speaks to Muslim youth of Canada’s support for Islamic values. In a current situation where we have had too many going off to join ISIS to lop off heads, mass murder and enslave girls, it gives the (privileged) Canadian Muslim youth a green light to support jihad both here and abroad. The leftists love it, as they do all initiatives which bring us closer to political Islam as loyal multicultural followers, and, despite my concerns and objections, it is receiving full support and will most likely be approved, implemented and eventually expanded.

(more…)


Why ‘Moderate Islam’ is an Oxymoron

Tuesday, April 1st, 2014

by Raymond Ibrahim*

At a time when terrorism committed in the name of Islam is rampant, we are continuously being assured—especially by three major institutions that play a dominant role in forming the Western mindset, namely, mainstream media, academia, and government—that the sort of Islam embraced by “radicals,” “jihadis,” and so forth, has nothing to do with “real” Islam.

“True” Islam, so the narrative goes, is intrinsically free of anything “bad.” It’s the nut-jobs who hijack it for their own agenda that are to blame.

(more…)


I saw the future — anti-Semitism — at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Friday, March 28th, 2014

By Gary Gerofsky

In a gymnasium on the campus of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, which is used for sports, concerts and normally happy and festive events of student life, I saw the future. It was in the form of a Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) vote that passed overwhelmingly. The vote passed but will not take effect at this time because they did not get quorum (they needed over 600 students but they had a little over 400). I am told that the pending vote will be passed along to senate where its fate will be in the hands of that body. Regardless, one day soon, as on hundreds of campuses throughout the land, these and similar anti-civilization votes are or will be taking place. They are attended by hundreds of students, a good portion dressed in Islamic attire; some older students who do not appear to be students at all, angrier and more determined than your average Canadian student. Also in attendance are many Muslims and other supporters who are often bussed in by various religious and other groups, churches, unions, etc.

(more…)


The JFK Assassination’s Continued Importance

Friday, November 22nd, 2013

by Daniel Pipes*

In three main ways, the JFK murder still has repercussions for Americans and the world. It also has a unique place in my life.

First, had the assassination attempt not succeeded, arguably neither the Vietnam War nor the Great Society expansion of government would have afflicted the United States as they did. The Virtual JFK: Vietnam If Kennedy Had Lived project concludes that “JFK would have continued to resist a US war in Vietnam. Even though the Saigon government, weak and corrupt, was destined for the dustbin of history, he would have resisted those calling on him to send US combat troops to Vietnam. He might have ended all military involvement.”

(more…)


Constitutional amendment to remedy the “Do As I Say (Not As I Do)” syndrome?

Tuesday, October 22nd, 2013

By Andrew L. Jaffee, Captain
New Mexico Conservatives for Freedom
Restoring America Together

Americans have gotten used to, and quite fed up with, many of our elitist politicians who “Do As I Say (Not As I Do).” Isn’t it about time that all Americans live as equals? Have we fought so many great battles — the Revolution, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, the Civil Rights Movement — just to end up with elitist politicians pushing us around, not caring about what we who pay for their cushy jobs believe in? One of our politicians, Rand Paul, is demanding that Americans do live as equals. Now the question is: Can we get enough people in the U.S. together to start the ball rolling to propose Paul’s amendment to the United States Constitution as described in Article Five? (Click here for the process by which we amend our constitution.)

Oct 21, 2013
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Sen. Rand Paul last week introduced S.J. Res. 25, a Constitutional amendment that would hold government officials to the same standard as the American people. The amendment states that “Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.” The amendment also contains two provisions that apply that same principle to the Executive Branch and Judicial Branch of the federal government. The amendment text can be found below:

S.J.RES.25

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government. (Introduced in Senate – IS)

SJ 25 IS

113th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. J. RES. 25

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

October 11, 2013

Mr. PAUL introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

‘Article–

‘Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

‘Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

‘Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

‘Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.’

###

(more…)


Prelude to the Boston Bombings

Thursday, October 3rd, 2013

by Dawn Perlmutter*

On September 11, 2011, three lifelong friends—Brendan Mess, age 25, Erik Weissman, 31, and Raphael Teken, 37—were brutally murdered in Mess’s apartment in Waltham, Massachusetts. The graphic crime scene was discovered in the early afternoon of September 12, 2011, by Mess’s girlfriend, who ran screaming from the apartment. The victims had been dragged to three different rooms and killed there. Their bodies had multiple stab wounds; their throats were slit from ear to ear with such force that they were nearly decapitated, and their mutilated corpses were covered with drugs and money. In addition to the seven pounds of marijuana found on their bodies, $5,000 in cash was left at the scene. Two of the three victims were Jewish, and several sources have identified all three victims as such.[1]

(more…)


I grieve for the Naval Yard victims, but I must act now to protect gun rights

Tuesday, September 17th, 2013

My thoughts and prayers go out to the victims, families and friends of those lost to the senseless mass murder at the Washington Naval Yard on Tuesday. But I must grieve briefly because the power-mongers of our nation will use this tragedy to try to take away our guns even though guns would’ve stopped yesterday’s slaughter. The massacre happened at a military installation. If our good people in the U.S. military were allowed to carry their sidearms, yesterday’s evil murder-spree would’ve been stopped almost instantly. (If you’ve read enough, ACT NOW.) It’s almost incomprehensible, but:

… Among President Clinton’s first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones. …

Do we take away carpenters’ hammers while they’re putting up a new house? Think about this:

(more…)


Middle East and Syria: Obama has forgotten lessons of the recent past

Saturday, September 7th, 2013

by Gary Gerofsky

The Obama administration lies, feigns horror, ignores history (especially recent history), and purposely chooses to make the wrong conclusions. Obama panders to Islamists, nationally and internationally. Mistakes are piling up on other previous mistakes, quickly forgotten, and then repeated with reckless abandon. The theatre of the absurd is taking place before our eyes with implications that have far reaching impact on America for the worse. The Libya and Tunisia debacles have led to Egypt which led to Benghazi which has led to Syria. The common thread is a doctrine that the U.S. president is following to empower Islamists who promise America “democracy” and non-violence. But “Islamist democracy” and “Islamist non-violence” are oxymorons. Obama buys into these contradictions as if they were real possibilities. Following the dictates of Syrian “rebels” and having them direct American policy is like taking advice at face value from those who sent our airliners into the World Trade Center on 9/11. Selective indignation and political correctness have amounted to a complete political and military debacle in the U.S. which also involves and endangers other stakeholders. Every attempt is being made to isolate one act of chemical warfare after a series of chemical attacks in a country (and region) where they have experienced the same for many decades under the Assad family dictatorship — without much objection from the world community or the U.N. Questions need to be asked. There are too many contradictions, inconsistencies, befuddled thinking and lies to enumerate, but here are a few:

Contradictions and inconsistencies:

(more…)


Obama’s Foreign Fiasco

Thursday, August 22nd, 2013

by Daniel Pipes*

It’s a privilege to be an American who works on foreign policy, as I have done since the late 1970s, participating in a small way in the grand project of finding my country’s place in the world. But now, under Barack Obama, decisions made in Washington have dramatically shrunk in importance. It’s unsettling and dismaying. And no longer a privilege.

Whether during the structured Cold War or the chaotic two decades that followed, America’s economic size, technological edge, military prowess, and basic decency meant that even in its inactivity, the U.S. government counted as much or more in world developments than any other state. Sniffles in Washington translated into influenza elsewhere.

(more…)