Random Acts of Jihad? + More – Daily Digest

Posted on Wed 02/11/2015 by

1


The Patriot Post ~

THE FOUNDATION

“[L]iberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have everything to fear from its union with either of the other departments.” –Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 78, 1788

TOP 5 RIGHT HOOKS

Random Acts of Jihad?

In an recent interview with Vox, Barack Obama pontificated on the recent jihadi attacks in Paris, which he said was perpetrated by “a bunch of violent, vicious zealots who … randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris.” It was absurd to say the attack was “random” when the Muslim jihadis’ explicit motive was a killing Jews. Obama mouthpiece Josh Earnest struggled mightily to explain his boss’s comments: “The adverb that the president chose was used to indicate that the individuals who were killed in that terrible, tragic incident were killed not because of who they were but because of where they randomly happened to be.” He then told reporters, “There were people other than just Jews who were in that deli.” Earnest repeatedly denied the kosher status of the market had anything to do with the attack. What utterly asinine horse pucky. American cops are clearly racist, according to Obama, but Muslims couldn’t possibly target Jews on purpose. Obama and his underlings have a serious problem denying the role of Islam in the rise of terrorism on his watch. But perhaps even Obama’s cronies realized how ridiculous the whole episode was, later taking to Twitter to “clarify” things. “Our view has not changed,” Earnest tweeted. “Terror attack at Paris Kosher market was motivated by anti-Semitism. POTUS didn’t intend to suggest otherwise.” Somehow, we’re disinclined to believe that.

In other news, it is confirmed that ISIL’s American hostage Kayla Mueller was killed, though details have not yet been released. Obama swears he tried to rescue her, along with journalist James Foley.

Shock: Obama Lied About Support for Traditional Marriage

According to David Axelrod’s memoir, Barack Obama once told his former adviser, “I’m just not very good at bulls—-ing.” We know; total BS. The subject matter was Obama’s political choice to feign support for traditional marriage during the 2008 campaign. Even Obama’s water carriers at Time magazine were dismayed: “Barack Obama misled Americans for his own political benefit.” Right, this just in. According to Axelrod, “Opposition to gay marriage was particularly strong in the black church, and as [Obama] ran for higher office, he grudgingly accepted the counsel of more pragmatic folks like me, and modified his position to support civil unions rather than marriage, which he would term a ‘sacred union.’” Obama even couched his lie in terms of his faith – “as a Christian…” he said. So he lied about his own faith and principles, but Axelrod says it’s a virtue that he was uncomfortable doing so. Obama then spent the next couple of years “evolving” on the issue so he could appear to have been persuaded by the evidence. Naturally, Obama claims he didn’t mislead voters, he just hadn’t come up with “a sufficient way of squaring the circle” of his personal beliefs and political reality. We don’t buy it. Such deceit on Obama’s part shouldn’t surprise anyone. He knows nothing but politics, and he uses every issue, including family and his supposed Christian faith, for his own political benefit.

Nobody Needs 10 Rounds Unless ‘Arming Against the Government’

Undeterred by their ignominious defeat in the midterm elections, Democrats are bound and determined to keep pushing a losing issue – gun control. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), who so thoroughly politicized the murders at Sandy Hook Elementary School, introduced a bill to ban all magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. He exploited a recent security crisis on Capitol Hill. Capitol Police claim to have foiled a planned mass murder in the halls of Congress. “Think of the damage that someone could do in the U.S. Capitol with 30 rounds,” Murphy warned. Because he says he hasn’t met “a single hunter or a single person who hunts for sport” who needs more than 10 rounds, he thinks none of us need that many. In fact, if we do, we’re “arming against the government.” That’s an interesting thing to say since the final straw for colonists who launched their bid for independence from Great Britain was Redcoats coming to confiscate ammo and arms. Just saying. More…

Is Climate Change Really the Biggest Threat?

As part of Barack Obama’s new National Security Strategy, the administration identified a bogus threat: “Climate change is an urgent and growing threat to our national security, contributing to increased natural disasters, refugee flows, and conflicts over basic resources like food and water.” Asked about the rationale behind putting such emphasis on global warming while downplaying Islamic terrorism, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, “The point that the president is making is that there are many more people on an annual basis who have to confront the direct impact on their lives of climate change … than on terrorism.” Pressed to explain further, Earnest doubled down, saying, “When you talk about the direct daily impact, on the daily lives of Americans, particularly Americans living in this country … more people are directly affected by [climate change] than by terrorism.” Obama’s priorities are mixed up by design. Expand the government here, diminish U.S. standing abroad. Mission accomplished.

NBC’s Williams Angling for Comedy Job

NBC News anchor Brian Williams lied repeatedly about his experience in Iraq, but also perhaps about other events in his career. Given this unsettling truth, NBC could no longer just ignore the problem. “We have decided today to suspend Brian Williams as Managing Editor and Anchor of NBC Nightly News for six months,” the network wrote Tuesday. “The suspension will be without pay and is effective immediately. … While on Nightly News on Friday, January 30, 2015, Brian misrepresented events which occurred while he was covering the Iraq War in 2003. It then became clear that on other occasions Brian had done the same while telling that story in other venues. This was wrong and completely inappropriate for someone in Brian’s position.” Of course, deceit is nothing new for the Leftmedia, but the Williams episode is really quite astonishing. And it will cost him about $5 million. In related news, Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart announced he will leave the “Daily Show,” so, if things don’t work out for Williams at NBC, maybe the two comics could simply swap roles. More…

For more, visit Right Hooks.

RIGHT ANALYSIS

Education Reform as Envisioned by Bobby Jindal

Some Republican presidential hopefuls are singing songs that are music to conservative ears. The latest comes from Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, who along with Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) has released a research paper entitled “America Next.” The Republican pair promote major reforms to undo the government education catastrophe.

Jindal outlined his three-pronged reform plan beginning with an exquisitely apt analogy: “Would you trade your brand-new car for an Edsel? Or your iPhone for an antiquated mainframe computer the size of your living room?”

“[M]any American children,” says Jindal, “face a similar situation each day when they head to school.” They don’t receive a quality education due to “[a]rchaic obstacles – a tenure system first developed early in the last century, and an education bureaucracy in Washington created as part of the Great Society five decades ago.”

“Reform along the principles outlined in this paper,” reads the introduction, “will restore the balance in education toward parents and teachers, and away from the bureaucracies.”

The first objective is education choice – allowing parents to control their children’s schooling. Schools, most teachers and unions resist this idea with every tool at their disposal. Nevertheless, Jindal says money spent on education should “follow the child” rather than following bureaucrats’ demands. “No one cares more, and knows better, about children than the parents who bore and raised them.”

Put parents in charge, and schools must compete to retain children. Good public schools will become better and bad ones fail, while charter and other non-traditional schools thrive. While vocational courses have largely disappeared, these practical courses appeal to many high school students. The same holds for art and technology. Money directed by the parents will result in its being better spent.

More than 60% of staff in the average school district are not teachers. Though educationists want smaller classes, studies have shown that school size is much more important. With parents in charge, the number of small schools would grow dramatically, causing a proportional decline of non-teaching positions, thereby saving taxpayer money. One of the best-received parts of Jindal’s plan is educational savings accounts that give people with modest incomes a chance to send their kids to the best schools.

The second prong of the plan involves backing Big Government’s big nose out of neighborhood schools. Not so long ago, schools operated on a largely neighborhood model and performed far better. As late as the 1960s, a high school diploma was a ticket to the job market where the vast majority of adults established themselves in careers while their college friends were still in school.

But along came the “Great” Society, introducing frequent and ever deeper intrusions into states’ education systems. Federal dollars became the hook that kept schools on the line, and school quality decreased as spending increased. Now, addicted to federal money, schools are coerced into following federal mandates. “Common Core,” says Jindal, “represents Exhibit A of why federal control needs to revert back to states – and ultimately to local school boards wherever possible.” He also urges the reduction of government data collection, restoring student privacy rights and sharing more information with parents.

The third proposal involves “liberating teachers” by ending forced union membership, making evaluations more practical, giving principals more autonomy in running their schools, ending tenure and seniority, and restricting collective bargaining to salaries rather than petty complaints.

States generally require two years of education courses at an accredited college to earn a teaching credential. Yet education courses are notoriously easy and so full of socio-babble that many highly qualified individuals are driven away.

Jindal proposes “reforming training, preparation and certification requirements.” Training should be relevant and meaningful and should require fewer courses. Emphasis should be on preparation. “[We] should remove impediments to entry, but make permanent retention a tougher bar to achieve (referring to teacher tenure).” Teaching shouldn’t be a job that someone takes because there’s nothing else to do. Teaching should be a passion.

The plan concludes that we have “a moral imperative to provide a quality education to each child.” Yet as Jindal admits, these reforms face stiff opposition from unions and their alter egos, the Democrats.

Nevertheless, progress is occurring. Jindal highlights improvements in his own state of Louisiana, including the rising graduation rate in New Orleans and the plummeting number of failing schools. There are other positive signs as well: 10 states have no tenure, charter schools and homeschooling outperform public schools and earn more support every year, and parents finally recognize that schools are failing and want them fixed. If 2016 is good to conservatives, including the election of a conservative president, we just might see some of these reforms after all.

Putin Doesn’t Want Peace, He Wants Donetsk

Donetsk International Airport in December

Ukraine is filled with the crack of Kalashnikovs and the roar of artillery, and the time is running out to find a peaceful solution that doesn’t embolden Russia.

Russian-backed rebels have pushed Ukrainian troops further east. Last week, the rebels drove government troops from the ruins that were once called the Donetsk International Airport, and heavy fighting continues.

European nations are working for peace. Germany and France have spearheaded the effort, with U.S. backing, trying to make the guns fall silent – the ones that were supposed to fall silent in September. The leaders of those countries jetted to Russia in the last few days to speak to Russian President Vladimir Putin. The talks will culminate with a meeting in Minsk today involving the leaders of Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine.

A violent game of thrones is not an option for German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who said, “I hope that we shall be able to solve this conflict by diplomatic means because I think by military means it cannot be solved.”

In the midst of it all, the United States is suggesting that, if the peace talks fall through, it will stop sending blankets and beans to the beleaguered Ukraine and start sending weapons, such as anti-tank ordinances. Those will be used against the same Russian tanks the Kremlin denies are even in the country.

Early this week, after meeting with Merkel, Barack Obama suggested a new strategy in dealing with Russia. He said, “If, in fact, diplomacy fails, what I’ve asked my team to do is to look at all options. And the possibility of lethal defensive weapons is one of those options that’s being examined. But I have not made a decision about that yet.”

At first blush, the news sounds promising – as if Obama has gotten his spine back and will finally bop the Great Bear on the nose. But not so fast. This is the same Obama who drew the “red line” for Syria and then backed away from his threat. And it’s the same Obama whom Putin has outmaneuvered for years. In short, Obama doesn’t have the spirit to win this showdown.

While Europe and America decide what to do with Putin, he visited Egypt and blamed NATO for the unrest in Ukraine, saying NATO was backing a “coup d’etat in Kiev.” It was part of a larger effort, he alleged, “to tear states which had been parts of the former USSR off Russia and to prompt them to make an artificial choice ‘between Russia and Europe.’”

Putin insists Ukraine is rightfully Russian territory he must control. An old Soviet propaganda poster shows a picture of the western part of USSR, with arteries stretching to the four corners of the country, all coming together at the heart of Russia’s industrial complex – what is now the Donetsk region of Ukraine.

Furthermore, Putin has rhetorically couched this fight in fascist terms. He isn’t fighting for the well-being of Russia. He’s not fighting for the tattered glory of USSR. No, Putin is fighting for “Novorossiya,” or the new Russia, a Russia that began with the Tsars and was only destroyed by the West and NATO a mere 20 years ago.

As for Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner just wants the two nations to stop fighting since Russia is, as he likes to say, on the wrong side of history.

In a phone call Tuesday, Obama demanded Putin agree to peace talks, or else more sanctions will come and eventually the U.S. might start funneling weapons to the conflict.

This is probably just a bluff, for Obama would have to show actual resolve if he starts giving RPGs to the Ukrainians. First, Putin and his thugs would be incensed. They would use the developments as a propaganda glut, which would likely escalate the violence in Ukraine. Second, the Ukrainian government is notoriously corrupt and security cannot come to that country without major reforms, reforms that are almost unfathomable in the face of Russian aggression.

But the results of this conflict will have far-reaching consequences for U.S. foreign policy and the relationship Russia has with the rest of the world. “This conflict will determine the future character of Russia – whether Moscow goes into a full revisionist swing or understands that the post-1991 order isn’t going to be reversed,” writes Ulrich Speck, visiting scholar at Carnegie Europe. “In other words, whether Russia will be a nation-state with borders or will aspire to be an empire with a center and a periphery, starting endless conflicts with its neighbors.”

In the end, Obama must decide what stand to take. He may talk tough, but his National Security Strategy is to achieve peace through weakness. That will fail – especially when the man fomenting the violence is one such as Putin.

For more, visit Right Analysis.

TOP 5 RIGHT OPINION COLUMNS

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Author Martin H. Fischer (1879-1962): “A machine has value only as it produces more than it consumes – so check your value to the community. ”

Columnist Michelle Malkin: “Before the nation’s Food Nanny guilt-trips you into ditching boxed dinners on a frazzled night, know this: The first lady profited from cheese dust before she was against it. … In June 2005, a few months after her husband was elected to the U.S. Senate, Mrs. Obama snagged a seat on the corporate board of directors of TreeHouse Foods Inc. Currying favor, the food-processing company put her on its audit and nominating and corporate governance committees despite her complete lack of experience or expertise. For her on-the-job training and the privilege of putting her name and face on their literature, the company forked over $45,000 in 2005 and $51,200 in 2006 to Mrs. Obama – as well as 7,500 TreeHouse stock options worth more than $72,000 for each year. Mrs. Obama raked in that easy money thanks to the worldwide conglomerate’s popular product line of powdered non-dairy creamers and sweeteners, hot and cold cereals, evil macaroni and cheese, skillet dinners, powdered gravy and sauce mixes, powdered drink mixes, powdered soup, and puddings. She certainly didn’t look down her nose at milk dust, cheese dust, juice dust, oatmeal dust or broth dust when it came mixed with a healthy paycheck..”

Economist Stephen Moore: “Mr. Obama proposed no funding next year for private school scholarship vouchers in the District of Columbia. The $20 million annual program, which began under George W. Bush, has proven extremely effective. Thousands of kids have benefited from these scholarships – which typically amount to about $8,000 to $10,000 a year. That’s still about one-third lower than what it costs to ‘educate’ students in the district’s public schools. Almost all students who get the money are blacks and Latinos. … Several years ago, when President Obama tried to shut down the program, black and Hispanic parents locked arms with Republicans in Congress who support the program and marched in front of the Capitol. That was an amazing optic. In the 1960s and 1970s, civil rights leaders and ‘community activists’ fought against laws that prevent blacks from getting in to the public schools. Now, liberals refuse to let them out. … Republicans must go on the offensive on school choice. A quality education is the best anti-poverty program ever invented. This is the best path to reducing income inequality. … Democrats are on the wrong side on this issue. They put unions ahead of kids. Let’s hope Republicans in Congress not only restore funding of this program but expand its budget so that every poor child in Washington, D.C., can get the education that Barack Obama’s daughters do.”

Comedian Jimmy Fallon: “According to a recent survey, 12 percent of Americans say that it’s fine to cheat a little on your taxes. While the other 88 percent know not to talk to a guy with a clipboard asking them if they cheat on their taxes.”

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform – Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen – standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.

Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post