One Woman Fights Against Radical Islam

from the American Thinker:

Pamela Geller, Heroine

The horrible act in New York on Tuesday reminds us once again we are in a war.   A war with radical Islam.  A war that our prior President and most of his party has tried to lose through their juvenile, silly version of Neville Chamberlain politics.

They prevented anyone in their administration from using the term “radical Islam,” hoping that would make radical Muslims less angry.  Sure, that’ll work.  They asked our media to follow.  And for the most part, they did.  Bleating all the way.

They dismantled surveillance on the centers of Jihadism.  They gutted many of the concrete methods we had to deal with this threat.

They chided those who wanted to fight this ideology as Islamophobes, and racists. read more

The Left Can’t Wait to Confiscate

from the American Thinker:

Democrats Politicize Las Vegas before Blood Even Dry

Before the blood was even dry in Las Vegas, Democrats from coast to coast were pushing gun control. Hillary Clinton led the charge, finding time between fainting spells to tweet “Our grief isn’t enough. We can and must put politics aside, stand up to the NRA, and work together to try to stop this from happening again.” (Translation: “Put your politics aside… and accept my politics! Oh, and my grief is never enough because I don’t feel any.”) But I guess, taking Rahm Emanuel’s counsel, leftists “never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

The waste, though, is that we’re even talking about this in a tragedy’s wake. But since the attacks have been launched, let’s discuss guns.

To use a twist on a Frédéric Bastiat line, the bad social analyst confines himself to the visible effect; the good social analyst considers not just the effects that can be seen, but those largely invisible and those that must be foreseen. Events such as Sunday’s massacre by murderer Stephen Paddock cannot be missed; they’re horrible, headline-making tragedies.

read more

Was a CNN Rescue Staged?

from American Thinker:

In Houston, is CNN that desperate?

After getting egg all over its face from an angry Houston-area flood victim who didn’t like a microphone stuck in her face, CNN

seems to be resorting to increasingly desperate tactics, venturing possibly into fake news.

Wiith suspicious timing, a CNN camera crew team, led by Drew Griffin, rescued a Beaumont-area flood victim from a floating truck, positioned right behind the camera. The reporter and his team dropped their camera stand-up work and apparently ran to rescue the man from the submerged vehicle, making themselves heroes, all the more so because the victim this time explicitly stated that they saved his lives. Business Insider reports: read more

A Federal Judge Actually Understands the Second Amendment

from The American Thinker:

A federal judge in San Diego has issued a temporary stay against a new California law that bans high-capacity magazines.

U.S. district judge Roger Benitez issued the preliminary injunction against the voter-approved law, writing that the law is likely to be unconstitutional because it prevents citizens from purchasing “whatever common magazine size [they judge] best suits the situation.” read more

Obama Continues His Military Social Experiment

from The American Thinker:

Over the last 8 years, in addition to fighting Obama’s numerous wars, the US army has served as a gigantic social sciences lab under this president.

Gays can serve openly, as can transgender people. The government will even pay for some gender reassignment surgeries for trans soldiers. Women are now eligible for some combat roles, including special forces.

It seems that President Obama has cared more about imposing his cultural agenda on the military rather than winning wars.

Now, in the waning days of the administration, the army has decided to take the idea of a “uniform” and turn it on its head. If approved at the brigade level, Muslim and Sikh soldiers can now wear the hijab, as well as grow beards for religious reasons. read more

More Government Please

from: The American Thinker

It is interesting to watch the aftermath of the Eric Garner Grand Jury decision coming so soon after Ferguson.  “White Police Officer Once Again Kills Unarmed Black Man – And Gets Away with It” is already the reaction in many places.  Sides are drawn and the usual suspects race-bait, pontificate, riot and ask for calm, or in Jesse Jackson’s case, donations.

Other than there being a white police officer and a black man dying while resisting arrest, these cases are not similar, no matter what many would like you to believe.  In one instance, the Grand Jury determined that Officer Wilson killed Michael Brown in self-defense.  Although so far we have not been privy to the evidence in the Garner decision, the video is fairly compelling that none of the officers’ lives were in jeopardy.  read more

75 Years is All We Should Get

from The American Thinker: 

Ezekiel Emanuel is one of the architects of Obamacare and the head of the Clinical Bioethics Department at the National Institutes of Health, and he thinks 75 years is about all a human lifespan should be.  In an article titled, Why I hope to die at 75,” he lays out his thinking. Those of us who cling to life are mistaken: read more

Does ‘No Impeachment’ Fulfill Alinsky’s Rule #4?

from the American Thinker:

Lately it’s hard to take John Boehner and his Coppertone tan seriously. However, when it appeared that the House Majority Speaker was proactively taking the wind out of Barack Obama’s ‘they want to impeach me’ sails, there was a glimmer of hope that someone on the right had actually grown a spine.

Republicans reiterating that impeachment was not an option exhibited a rare unified spirit. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) even hobbled up to the mic to reinforce Boehner’s proclamation that impeaching Barack Obama was a talking point that Democrats, not Republicans, were going on about.

Is that a pulse? Could it be that finally, after six long years of waiting, the geriatric wing of the Republican Party had actually mustered the strength to block the president’s desperate effort to divert attention prior to the midterms in November?

Or could it be that Obama’s pathetic attempt to garner sympathy at the expense of Republicans is a Saul Alinsky tactic? read more

The Islamic State Declares War On…Muslims

from The American Thinker:

The new “caliphate” of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi – the Islamic State, formerly ISIS – recently made clear that it means to follow in the footsteps of the original caliphate of Abu Bakr (632-634).  It will do this specifically by directing its jihad against fellow Muslims – in Islamic parlance, the “hypocrites” and “apostates,” or in Western terminology, “moderates.”

This came out in the context of the current conflict between Israel and Hamas, with some Muslims asking the newly formed “caliphate” when it would launch a jihad on the Jewish state.

The Islamic State’s response?  “Allah in the noble Koran does not command us to fight Israel or the Jews until we fight the apostates and hypocrites.” read more

Land of the Free?

from The American Thinker:

John M. Horne was born in 1813 in the Land of the Free, an inheritance from several distant uncles who fought against Cornwallis The home of the brave came before the land of the free. 

Shortly after John and Clarissa Warren married in 1843, they made the long journey from North Carolina to western Kentucky. Their simple farm life was free from any king or tyrant in a distant capital. In the land of the free, no one could tell them what to do with their property or how much of their money they could keep.

John died sometime between 1860 and 1870, perhaps in the Civil War. His teenage son, John C., took the responsibility of caring for Clarissa and his sister, and later had his own family and care for two orphaned grandchildren. Courage to take personal responsibility is required to live in the land of the free. 

An older John C. witnessed the “soak the rich” campaign resulting in the 16th Amendment, the income tax. For the first time in the nation’s history, government was positioned against the individual citizen. How much of that citizen’s property could be confiscated and for what purpose was limited only by the “wisdom” of Congress. Taxpayers later found their funds going to subsidize indolence, to groups with political connections, and for other uses outside the limits on the federal government the Founders clearly wrote into the Constitution. read more