THE FOUNDATION

“If individuals be not influenced by moral principles; it is in vain to look for public virtue; it is, therefore, the duty of legislators to enforce, both by precept and example, the utility, as well as the necessity of a strict adherence to the rules of distributive justice.” —James Madison, in response to Washington’s first Inaugural address, 1789

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

The Effect of China’s Hack Could Be Staggering

When the Office of Personnel Management announced that the data of four million past and present federal employees were taken by China, it could have been running damage control. TheAmerican Federation of Government Employees, the largest union for federal employees, accused OPM of being not forthright about the hack. The union believes China targeted the Central Personnel File and is now in possession of the information of every federal employee, including those who retired and left the government’s employ. But it could be much, much worse. An unnamed government official told ABC News China could have targeted the database that stored government employees' SF-86 forms — the 127-page form public workers fill out when they apply for a security clearance. For a malicious government seeking to recruit spies, it’s the Holy Grail, as the form asks the applicant to list the applicant’s network — the people slept with, the foreign nationals in contact with, family members. We don’t yet know what information is in China’s hands. But one thing is clear: Big government stands directly opposed to privacy, and by extension, Liberty. This is why the big data that comes with ObamaCare is so insidious. When it comes to cybersecurity, Liberty is America’s greatest strength.

Comment | Share

It’s Up to Congress to Keep the Internet Tax Free

The Internet Tax Freedom Act passed the House by voice vote this week, and now heads to the Senate. The best news is that it’s a permanent extension. In place since 1998, Harry Reid’s Senate only permitted a one-year extension last year because he wanted a hostage for other negotiations. But the law becomes increasingly important in the age of so-called net neutrality (which takes effect today), because it prevents taxation on Internet and email services in America’s 9,600 tax jurisdictions. House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte warned that the FCC’s decision to regulate the Internet like telecommunications “emboldens states to apply these telecom taxes to Internet access immediately, should ITFA lapse.” Goodlatte also laid bare the problem with Internet taxes, saying that granting states such powers would allow “lawmakers to dodge accountability for the burdens associated with their policy choices by shifting them onto non-residents who cannot hold them accountable at the ballot box.” Furthermore, he said, “[I]f Congress lets ‘economic presence’ rather than ‘physical presence’ become the standard, states will mostly exempt resident companies from tax obligations while imposing them on out-of-state companies.” In other words, taxation without representation. For those with any sense of American history, that phrase should ring loud and clear.

Comment | Share

Lessons on Picking Your Identity

The City of Spokane is investigating a critical matter, and the outcome should be black and white. The president of the city’s NAACP chapter likely violated the city’s code of ethics because she’s actually white. Rachel Dolezal identifies as African-American and has even modified her appearance accordingly. She’s also claimed to be the victim of several “hate” crimes. But public records indicate she and both of her parents are white. The obvious comparison is Bruce Jenner, the former male Olympic decathlon champion who now says he’s a woman. Many leftists gladly accepted him as a her, even giving him awards for “courage.” But while Jenner is affirmed, Dolezal has committed an unforgivable sin by doing pretty much the same thing. Perhaps a less obvious comparison is the example of a prominent man who has a white mother and black father (who abandoned him early on), and yet who identifies solely by the race of his father — well, unless his Irish ancestry happens to be politically beneficial. Any guesses who that might be? Identity sure is an interesting thing with liberal social mores.

Comment | Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

What Exactly Are We Trading in the TPA/TPP?

By Michael Swartz

Port of Oakland

It’s a deal that’s been in the works since before Barack Obama took office, but as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a free trade pact, is being hammered into shape, some members of Congress — especially Democrats — are reluctant to give Obama the same “fast-track” authority other presidents have had over the last few decades. Specifically, that would happen through the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), the full text of which is here. Some conservatives also have a problem with awarding any authority to this particular chief executive, given his track record of abusing his power on immigration and regulation.

There’s an argument to be had, however, from conservatives who remind us that free trade is the bailiwick of the Republican Party. George Will leads the charge:

“It is … unnecessary to defeat fast-track authority (thereby defeating freer trade) in order to restrain this rogue president. The 22nd Amendment guarantees his departure in 19 months. His lawlessness has prompted congressional resistance on multiplying fronts. The judiciary, too, has repeatedly rebuked him for illegal executive overreaches. So, it is neither necessary nor statesmanlike to injure the nation’s future in order to protest Obama’s past.”

There’s also the libertarian free-trade perspective of the Cato Institute:

“Historically, trade agreements have expanded Americans' economic liberties, even though that outcome has never been the principal objective. It happens residually. Trade negotiators prioritize the export-oriented goals of their business interests and, in the process of reaching those objectives, make Americans more economically free.”

In both instances, we’re reminded that the process doesn’t end with congressional passage of the TPA, which, in short, grants Obama negotiating power and provides for Congress to then hold an up-or-down vote on whatever agreement Obama makes — without being able to amend it. While nothing is certain in Congress, the House is slated to vote on the TPA legislation today, following the Senate’s passage of the measure last month.

However, the “sausage-making,” as White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest termed it, has a number of other fillers that could be added to the mix. A previous version of the legislation cuts Medicare to pay for the Trade Adjustment Assistance that Democrats wanted in the bill. However, that particular cut was deleted in favor of measures intended to increase revenue through stricter enforcement of fraudulent claims and enhanced penalties against businesses failing to submit correct 1099 data. It’s also been speculated that the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank — a favorite target of conservatives — may be included with TPA legislation to draw a few additional Democrat votes.

Opponents also have some tricks up their sleeves. While the usual protectionist suspects of Big Labor (and some of the 2016 Democrat presidential hopefuls) continually grouse about being“isolated,” “marginalized,” and otherwise abandoned by their administration allies, immigration hawks are also crying foul about “secret immigration powers” they claim are in the TPP, based on leaked information from Wikileaks. This goes back to the lack of trust many have with this president, length of time left in office notwithstanding.

The obvious question, then, is whether the votes are there. Trade negotiators for the U.S. argue that the other TPP parties won’t put their final offers on the table until Obama is allowed to have TPA, but some conservatives worry about what dangers to our sovereignty lurk in the proposal, which hasn’t been made public except for those provisions that have leaked. While it’s not a complete secret, access to draft copies of the TPP is controlled by the same laws that were placed in effect for NAFTA in the 1990s. Obama must publish the deal 60 days before entering into it, and Congress has final approval.

Opponents are convinced that the TPA is the last best chance to kill the TPP, or at least push it off until the next (hopefully conservative) administration has a chance to negotiate a more favorable pact. But the TPA and the TPP are not the same thing, and support for the former doesn’t necessarily mean support for the latter.

Comment | Share

Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Obama Puts Immigration Enforcement in Limbo
• Free Trade Pollaganda
• Some Encouraging Social Trends
• Concerns Mount Over Islamic State Creating Dirty Bomb
• Miami Principal Fired for Thoughtcrime Supporting Police

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Mona Charen: Clinton Deploys ‘They Hate You’ Strategy
• Brent Bozell & Tim Graham: When the Media Ignore Domestic Violence in Sports
• Jonah Goldberg: Al-Qaida’s Out, ISIS Is In!
• Charles Krauthammer: The Racing Form, Second Edition

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Mona Charen: “Republicans can deny that voter ID laws are about voter suppression till they bore everyone into a coma. It won’t have an impact. But that doesn’t mean they should surrender. What they should be concerned about is not any particular issue but rather their image as the party of haters. I would love to see all of the Republican candidates staging multiple events in places like Detroit, Baltimore and Cleveland. They should be asking what Hillary Clinton proposes to do about improving the climate for small business. They should demand to know what Democrats have done to improve the schools — or rather, draw attention to the fact that Democrats stand in the way of improving education for poor kids. They should demand accountability for the millions of taxpayer dollars intended for poor families that wind up in the pockets of the well-connected and the well-heeled, while praising the work of churches and other private groups. The shame of the cities belongs squarely in the Democrats' laps. Even if it doesn’t yield a single new African American voter, it’s worth doing for two reasons: 1) because it will improve the image of the Republican Party, and 2) because it’s right.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Upright: “Your petulance is unbecoming, Mr. President, and your criticism of anyone who disagrees with you is downright unmanly. You come off like a spoiled child who has been denied his way. And while you blame your shortcomings on opposing political parties, you have had both houses of Congress and the White House in the first two years of your term. Plus an electoral mandate to do just about anything you wanted to, so the least you can do is cowboy up and take the blame for the messes you’ve made.” —Charlie Daniels

Dezinformatsia: “[I]n a country where the vast majority of police officers patrol with batons and pepper spray, the elite cadre of British cops who are entrusted with guns almost never use them. Police in Britain have fatally shot two people in the past three years. … [E]xperts say the way British bobbies are trained, commanded and vigorously scrutinized may offer U.S. police forces a useful blueprint for bringing down the rate of deadly violence and defusing some of the burning tension felt in cities from coast to coast.” —The Washington Post, simply hoping for disarmament

Demo-gogues: “Elections should be about choices, and my argument is you won’t have a choice if Secretary Clinton is the Democratic nominee because she’s so similar to the Republicans.” —Democrat presidential candidate Lincoln Chafee

Braying Jackass: “I’ve been joking with Lindsey [Graham] … [about] a rotating first lady. He’s a bro with no ho.” —Sen. Mark Kirk

Non Compos Mentis: “Has anybody proved that we did anything objectionable? No.” —Bill Clinton

Late-night humor: “Hillary Clinton joined Instagram … and somehow she’s already deleted thousands of photos.” —Seth Meyers

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

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.

THE FOUNDATION

“The danger is not, that the judges will be too firm in resisting public opinion, and in defense of private rights or public liberties; but, that they will be ready to yield themselves to the passions, and politics, and prejudices of the day.” —Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Obama Unleashes Teleprompter to Defend ObamaCare

In a speech before the Catholic Health Association Tuesday, Barack Obama bent the narrative of history to fit his will. In the days leading up to when the Supreme Court will decide whether it’s legal for the federal government to provide subsidies for health insurance not purchased on a state exchange, Obama is leveraging every rhetorical trick, trying to convince the Court to allow him to rewrite ObamaCare. On Monday, he told a group of reporters that SCOTUS shouldn’t have taken up King v. Burwell. But since it has, he said, “This should be an easy case” because legal scholars side with his interpretation.

The next day, Obama ramped up his attack on the impartiality of the Supreme Court when he used the Bully Pulpit to defend ObamaCare using religious and historical rhetoric, evoking the names of Teddy Roosevelt and Ted Kennedy. In his speech at the Catholic conference, Obama said, “The rugged individualism that defines America has always been bound by a shared set of values, an enduring sense that we’re in this together, that America is not a place where we simply turn away from the sick, or turn our backs on the tired, the poor, the huddled masses. It is a place sustained by the idea: I am my brother’s keeper. I am my sister’s keeper — that we have an obligation to put ourselves in our neighbor’s shoes and see each other’s common humanity.” What Obama left out: This law he says is couched in historical precedent was rammed through Congress with a midnight, party-line vote, and now he’s rewriting it to suit his purposes. As for values, the freedom from coercion is a pretty strong American value, running through the nation since the rebellion against the Stamp Act. More…

Comment | Share

Russia Violates Treaty, State Dept. Shrugs

Is this the Obama administration’s “smart power” and “reset,” not embarrassing Russia as it violates nuclear arms treaties? Every year, the State Department releases a report about how the U.S. and other countries are upholding or violating the various treaties governing arms control, nonproliferation and disarmament. In this year’s report, State discloses, “In 2014, the Russian Federation continued to be in violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty not to possess, produce, or flight-test a ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM) with a range capability of 500 km to 5,500 km.” Disturbing news, right? Not to State, which believes the violation is not a big deal. The report continues: “The Administration believes that it is in the mutual security interests of all the Parties to the INF Treaty that Russia and the other 11 successor states to the Soviet Union remain Parties to the Treaty and comply with their obligations.” Obviously, if Russia believed it was in its best interest to stop development of intermediate-range missiles, it would stop. Furthermore, the government knew of the INF violations for three years before disclosing them publicly. U.S. officials lied about Russia and continue to obfuscate the extent of Russia’s violations. Guess it’s easier than, well, wielding power smartly.

Comment | Share

Eastwood ‘Mocks’ Jenner, Hollywood Uproar Ensues

Iconic actor Clint Eastwood made the terrible mistake of stepping outside the bounds of political correctness during the taping of Spike TV’s Guys Choice Awards. The self-described libertarian, who has been in Hollywood timeout ever since he eviscerated Barack Obama in his illustrious “empty chair” rendition at the 2012 Republican National Convention, was introducing Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson when he made an obscure — or what the Leftmedia is calling “insensitive” — reference to Bruce Caitlyn Jenner. According to HollywoodLife.com, Eastwood “compared the San Andreas star to former athletes who have become actors, like ‘Jim Brown and Caitlyn Somebody.’” The audience didn’t find it very funny, and neither did Spike TV. The network says it “will remove the reference in the version that will air” June 18. Aside from the obvious question — what exactly was so derogatory about Eastwood’s remark? — there lies a double standard. Liberals thought it was hilarious when Barack Obama used the “lipstick on a pig” reference against Team McCain in 2008, and they smirk every time Democrats describe right-wingers as terrorists, to name just a couple. In other words, not only must we call Bruce a girl, but we must not make fun of him or any other protected class; meanwhile, the Right is fair game.

Comment | Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

Can’t We All Just Get Along?

By Nate Jackson

The plural of anecdote is not data. And yet when anecdotes repeatedly fit a narrative, it becomes ever more difficult to separate the two — especially when those pushing the narrative control the media.

The latest story of cops versus minorities comes from McKinney, Texas, where Cpl. Eric Casebolt of the city’s police department took down a black teenage female while being videoed. As the video went viral, the narrative was reinforced: Racist white cops target blacks.

As usual, however, it’s a bit more complicated.

First, a quick rundown of the facts: Residents say a woman invited a group of teens to the neighborhood pool for a birthday party, but the homeowners' associations limits homeowners to two guests. When 130 unruly teens descended on the pool, hopping fences and engaging in fights, concerned residents called the police. Casebolt was among three officers (at least on film) who responded.

A few of the teens bolted from the officers, who gave chase. Several teens ended up in handcuffs, with others trying to explain themselves and still others jawing at the cops. Most of them largely ignored police instructions, though otherwise presented no perceivable threat.

But the real brouhaha centered on Casebolt’s treatment of one bikini-clad girl, whom he pulled from a group and wrestled to the ground while cursing at her. Several teens rushed forward, prompting Casebolt to briefly draw his sidearm and chase off two large boys. He then held the girl down by kneeling on her back while continuing to curse at numerous other teens.

Second, let it be acknowledged that all we see are seven minutes of footage; we don’t know all the details that prompted the police call or their response. The police department issued a statement indicating they responded to a disturbance “involving multiple juveniles at the location, who do not live in the area or have permission to be there, refusing to leave.” Beyond that and the explanations of residents and teenagers, the story is hazy. One resident claimed the kids “assaulted” security guards near the pool, and well as accosted a mom and her kids. The teens in the video claim to merely be there for a birthday party.

Now, the lessons. For all of us citizens, follow (reasonable) instructions and don’t run from the police. Officers don’t take kindly to having to chase down even innocent bystanders — who they don’t know are innocent and must assume, based on the behavior of fleeing, may be guilty of a crime. Or, in the not-so-eloquent phrasing of Cpl. Casebolt, “Don’t make me f—ing run around here with 30 pounds of G—d—ed gear on in the sun!”

For officers, assume you’re always on camera and that your actions will be evaluated based on the footage. Casebolt surely knows the rationale for his actions beyond what we see, but it’s hard to come away from the video sympathizing with his severely agitated and bullying response.

In fact, Casebolt resigned Tuesday evening. Announcing that at a press conference, McKinney Police Chief Greg Conley called Casebolt’s actions “indefensible.”

A pseudonymous California officer pondered, “In watching the video, one can’t help but observe that Casebolt is alone among the officers in being exercised about what is happening. Was he aware of facts his colleagues were not? If so, and if these facts somehow warranted his actions, did he share his knowledge with the other officers? And what of the girl in the bikini? What was it that motivated Casebolt to choose her, among all the others, to be detained?

"And as for Casebolt drawing his pistol, in this — and only this — there appears to be some justification. The two young men who rushed forward were both at least equal in size to the officer, and it isn’t unreasonable to suppose they might have been preparing to attack Casebolt had he not reacted as he did. The brandishing of the weapon had the desired effect of making the young men run away.”

It’s easy to assume Casebolt acted with undue force given that no one (on video) was resisting arrest or behaving violently, and his takedown of a girl was preemptive at best. Then again, cops are facing unusually high tension across the nation, especially when dealing with blacks, and that is arguably due to overheated race-bait rhetoric from those who benefit politically from unrest.

Clearly, we have a deep cultural problem: Many citizens feel entitled and aggrieved, and they have no guiding moral standards for encounters with the law. And many cops feel either under siege or overly powerful — or both. Until these variables shift in a better direction, every law enforcement encounter will be magnified.

Comment | Share

Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Strategy? We Don’t Need No Stinkin' Strategy!
• Baltimore Cops Pay for Mosby’s Orders
• Because of TSA, the Left Wants to Ban Plastic Guns
• Changing Lanes on Transportation Funding
• Sugar Daddy Obama to Forgive Student Loans

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Walter Williams: Improving Black Education
• Tony Perkins: Naturalized Selection: DHS Edits Citizen Test
• Jacob Sullum: SCOTUS Misses an Opportunity to Defend the Second Amendment
• Ben Shapiro: The Right Caves on Social Issues, Then Loses
• Stephen Moore & Joel Griffith: The Myth of the Idle Rich

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Walter Williams: “Politicians who fight against school choice behave the way teachers do. Fifty-two percent of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus who have school-age children have them enrolled in private schools. Thirty-seven percent of members of the House of Representatives and 45 percent of senators who have school-age children have them enrolled in private schools. The education establishment says more money is needed, but more money does not produce higher quality. New York City spent $20,331 per student in fiscal 2013. Washington, D.C., spent $17,953, and Baltimore allocated $15,050. Despite being among the nation’s highest-spending school districts, their education quality is among the lowest. Parents, given vouchers and choice, could do a far superior job in the education of their children — and at a cheaper cost.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Insight: “If we are ever in doubt about what to do, it is a good rule to ask ourselves what we shall wish on the morrow that we had done.” —English statesman John Lubbock (1834-1913)

Demo-gogues: “There’s something deeply cynical about constant efforts to roll back progress. I understand folks being worried before [ObamaCare] was passed and there wasn’t a reality there to examine. But once you see folks having health care, you’d think it’d be time to move on.” —Barack Obama, the ultimate cynic

Race bait: “In 2015 America, African-American parents cannot possibly send their children out to play without genuine fear for their safety and lives, from the very authorities tasked with protecting them. … Being a kid is (or should be) one of our society’s most privileged positions, and there are few privileges of childhood more meaningful than the opportunity to play without worries, to enjoy a summer day on its own relaxed terms. This childhood luxury is becoming painfully, unmistakably intertwined with white privilege.” —Fitchburg State University professor Ben Railton

Turning the narrative inside out: “We have a significant population gap among African-American males because so many of them have spent time in jail and, as such, we can’t hire them.” —New York Police Commissioner Bill Bratton

Friendly fire: “It strikes me that awarding the Arthur Ashe Award to Caitlyn Jenner is just a crass exploitation play — it’s a tabloid play. In the broad world of sports, I’m pretty sure they could’ve found someone … who was much closer actively involved in sports, who would’ve been deserving of what that award represents.” —sportscaster Bob Costas

Late-night humor: “Over the weekend, Hillary Clinton supported raising the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour. She said every American should be able to afford to attend one of her speeches.” —Conan O'Brien

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

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.

THE FOUNDATION

“In vain are schools, academies, and universities instituted, if loose principles and licentious habits are impressed upon children in their earliest years.” —John Adams, Diary, 1778

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

SCOTUS Passes on Chance to Set 2A Ruling Right

Not exactly profiles in courage, but the Supreme Court declined to review two lower court rulings upholding San Francisco’s draconian gun control laws. The Associated Press reports, “The court on Monday let stand court rulings in favor of a city measure that requires handgun owners to secure weapons in their homes by storing them in a locker, keeping them on their bodies or applying trigger locks. A second ordinance bans the sale of ammunition that expands on impact, has ‘no sporting purpose’ and is commonly referred to as hollow-point bullets.” Of course, in DC v. Heller, the Supreme Court struck down a requirement about locking down a firearm in the home, saying the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep a “lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.” So by declining to hear this case, the justices are allowing a patchwork of wrong interpretations of its ruling to stand. As Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, “Despite the clarity with which we described the Second Amendment’s core protection for the right of self-defense, lower courts, including the ones here, have failed to protect it.” Furthermore, they’re passing on an opportunity to clarify the most important point of all: The Second Amendment is not “for sporting purposes.” The ban on hollow-point ammunition is beyond asinine, but the justices can’t be bothered to fire anything but blanks.

Comment | Share

TSA: Terrorists Screening at Airports

Now, after a security breach of its own making, the Transportation Security Agency wants moreof the nation’s data on terrorists to sift through, as if building a bigger haystack will solve the problem. The Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security reports that the TSA let 73 people linked to terrorism work inside the nation’s airports. According to the report, the TSA checks the Consolidated Terrorist Watchlist every time it’s updated. But the DHS inspector general took the list of more than 900,000 airport workers and ran it against the National Counterterrorism Center’s database. “TSA acknowledged that these individuals were cleared for access to secure airport areas despite representing a potential transportation security threat,” the report read. The inspector general also found the TSA works with shoddy data, clearing people with incomplete names and missing passport numbers, for example. Step one for the TSA is to clean up the data. But questions remain: Will more access to the terrorism watchlist help? Who were the people the IG considers to have links to terrorism? Those details were redacted. And without that information, we can only take the TSA’s word that this was a serious breach. On top of recent news of TSA screening failures, this doesn’t increase our faith in bureaucracy.

Comment | Share

‘Independent’ EPA Study Not So Independent After All

In May, a new study commissioned by Harvard and Syracuse University claimed that the EPA’s soon-to-be-released Clean Power Plan will eliminate around 3,500 pollution-related deaths annually. The celebratory reaction quickly went mainstream. The EPA, whose proposal it already posited will save lives, suddenly had the benefit of an independent verification. Or did it? Writing in Breitbart, junkscience.com publisher Steve Milloy found that the researchers of said study had personally partaken in various multi-million dollar EPA-funded studies. Furthermore, one author’s assertion that the agency “did not participate in the study or interact with its authors” was found to be complete hogwash. Says Milloy, “I submitted a request to EPA under the Freedom of Information Act for email between the study authors and EPA staff. Although subsequent wrangling with agency staff gave me doubt that I would ever get anything, I received, much to my surprise, 99 pages of emails after mere weeks. The emails reveal that [the] study co-authors … were definitely in contact with key EPA staff regarding this research.”

“This issue goes deeper than mere truth-telling,” he adds. “The EPA’s controversial Clean Power Plan hinges on the notion that shuttering coal plants will save lives.” In fact, shuttering coal plants may very well cost lives. Yet EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy recently postulated, “We can speak to the science because it’s complicated and we do a lot of research and we do a lot of translation of the science into what it means for people so that the decisions can be made on the basis of real science and on the basis of a real technical understanding.” In other words, “Trust us.” But they keep giving us every reason not to.

Comment | Share

Don’t Miss Patriot Humor

Check out The Sound of Merkel.

If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here.

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

NOAA Lies About the Warming Hiatus

By Lewis Morris

A new report released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the latest issue of the journal “Science” claims the global warming hiatus that began in the late 1990s never actually happened. In fact, according to NOAA, temperatures actually rose twice as high as the previous global scale had predicted or measured. This wouldn’t by any chance be an attempt to influence climate treaty talks in Paris later this year, now would it?

“Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus,’” wroteNOAA scientists, contradicting the work of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The hiatus, which in the scientific community refers to a period in which global surface temperatures appeared to stabilize, has flummoxed climate alarmists. It flies in the face of their exceedingly shrill predictions of extreme global warming — indeed, it’s part of the reason they’veswitched their terminology to “climate change.” If there’s been no warming, it undermines their calls for ever more drastic measures to combat it, like dismantling the U.S. coal industry, heavily regulating fossil fuel production, and financially burdening the citizens of the world’s richest countries.

By many scientific accounts, temperatures rose during the period of 1998-2013 at a much slower rate than the previous bellwether period between 1950-1998, a time frame during which global surface temperatures supposedly significantly spiked. According to satellite measurements, the most accurate tool we have, temperatures have remained flat — an ongoing trend. How is it that NOAA was able to come to its contrary conclusion?

The NOAA study was essentially able to raise the rate of warming during the pause by putting a greater emphasis on data collected from ocean buoy arrays, and slightly raising land-based temperatures that had been previously recorded. NOAA also shifted the time frame of the pause, defining it as 2000-2014 in order to conveniently include two years that supposedly saw the highest recorded temperatures on record. They ridicule skeptics for cherry-picking data, yet that’s exactly what they just did.

“This new analysis exhibits more than twice as much warming as the old analysis at the global scale,” NOAA scientists claim with a straight face. The report goes on to state that the overall warming trend since 1880 has not significantly changed, but the sharp uptick in temperatures in recent decades is cause for concern.

This manufactured spike in global surface temperatures in the NOAA study certainly comes at a convenient time. World leaders will be gathering in Paris at the end of this year to hammer out the details of a global warming treaty that is sure to place harsh restrictions on international commerce and energy production. That treaty is harder to justify if the lull in rising temperatures persists.

Yet the NOAA report has landed with a thud among many in the scientific community. Climate experts Bob Tisdale and Anthony Watts noted that to “manufacture warming during the hiatus, NOAA adjusted the pre-hiatus data downward. It’s the same story all over again; the adjustments go towards cooling the past and thus increasing the slope of temperature rise. Their intent and methods are so obvious they’re laughable.” 
Georgia Tech climate scientists Judith Curry noted, “The global surface temperature datasets are clearly a moving target. So while I’m sure this latest analysis from NOAA will be regarded as politically useful for the Obama administration, I don’t regard it as a particularly useful contribution to our scientific understanding of what is going on.”

In its investigation of the story, the online news site Mashable talked to a dozen top climate scientists not associated with the NOAA report and found that they were nearly unanimous in refuting the conclusion that the warming pause never happened.

“It is clear that [NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information director Thomas] Karl et al. have put a lot of careful work into updating these global products,” said Lisa Goddard, director of Columbia University’s International Research Institute for Climate and Society. “However, they go too far when they conclude that there was no decadal-scale slowdown in the rate of warming globally. This argument seems to rely on choosing the right period — such as including the recent record-breaking 2014.”

NOAA’s data cherry-picking won’t help advance their cause — at least not honestly. But this behavior is typical of the leftist mindset that seeks to bend others to their will by any means necessary.

Comment | Share

Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Chinese Cyberattacks Reveal Obama’s Lack of Leadership
• Clintons Donated to NYT, Paper Endorsed Hillary
• With Social Security Nearing Insolvency, IG Finds Waste
• Abortions Nationwide on the Decline
• GOP May Cave to ObamaCare Subsidies Once SCOTUS Rules
• Hawaii Dumps State ObamaCare Exchange

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Tony Perkins: The CDC’s Abstinence-Minded Professors
• Dennis Prager: Differences Between Left and Right: Part III
• Ed Feulner: Showing the Ex-Im Bank the Exit
• Thomas Sowell: Who Lost Iraq?
• Arnold Ahlert: The TPP Will Destroy America’s National Sovereignty

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Tony Perkins: “In [the CDC’s] 2015 ‘Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines,’ a two-word change made all the difference. Five years ago, the CDC used to say abstinence and monogamy were ‘a reliable way to avoid disease.’ As of last Friday, the agency agrees it’s ‘*the* most reliable way.’ That may not seem like a radical edit to most people, but in this administration, moral purity is as foreign a concept as political transparency. … Somewhere along the way, too many adults started operating from a position of lower expectations, as if teenagers were incapable of exercising any self-restraint. It became assumed, not discouraged, that children would have sex. With or without the government’s help, it’s time for parents to speak up and encourage their teens to do what’s counter-cultural. Too many moms and dads think their kids aren’t listening to what they say about abstinence. Think again. Parents are the single biggest influence on their children’s sexual decisions. If the cultural influences from Hollywood and the media are committed to marketing promiscuity and immodesty at every turn, then as parents, we have to be just as committed to helping our teenagers fight those temptations.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Insight: “One’s first step in wisdom is to question everything — and one’s last is to come to terms with everything.” —German scientist Georg Christoph Lichtenberg (1742-1799)

Upright: “Congress does two things well: nothing and overreact. Well, I have some good news: Doing nothing when it comes to the Ex-Im Bank is exactly what we need right now. That’s because the charter for the Export-Import Bank, which provides taxpayer-backed loans to foreign countries and companies to pay for U.S. products, is set to expire June 30. To get rid of this poster child for crony capitalism, lawmakers don’t have to lift a finger. Imagine: For a change, we’d have good reason to applaud a ‘do-nothing’ Congress.” —Ed Feulner

Non Compos Mentis: “[King v. Burwell] should be an easy case. Frankly, it shouldn’t have even been taken up [by SCOTUS]. … There is no reason why the existing exchanges should be overturned through a court case. … I think it’s important for us to go ahead and assume that the Supreme Court is going to do what most legal scholars who’ve looked at this would expect them to do. … Part of what’s bizarre about this whole thing is, we haven’t had a lot of conversation about the horrors of ObamaCare because none of them have come to pass.” —Barack Obama, politically attacking the Supreme Court yet again, this time for ObamaCare subsidies as outlined by the law itself

Ya think? “We don’t yet have a complete strategy.” —Barack Obama on decimating the Islamic State

Village Idiots: “A new Pew Research Center report states that 52 percent of Americans support gun rights, the highest percentage in the last two decades. Yet the gun rights that they believe are guaranteed by law may very well be an illusion. That’s because we have allowed lawyers instead of language professionals to interpret the Constitution of the United States.” —Chicago Tribune contributor and College of DuPage professor David McGrath

Late-night humor: “The TSA is under fire for major security lapses. Because of the security lapses, the TSA has let through pipe bombs, knives, and the last three Nicolas Cage movies.” —Conan O'Brien

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

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.

THE FOUNDATION

“[T]he opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves, in their, own sphere of action, but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch.” —Thomas Jefferson, letter to Abigail Adams, 1804

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Obama’s Iraq Strategy: Leave It for the Next Prez

“If [the Iraqis] are not willing to fight for the security of their country, we cannot do that for them,” Barack Obama declared again, though he reiterated his commitment to helping train Iraqi troops over a “multi-year” period. According to State Department official and Islamic State expert Brett McGurk, “It’s a three-year campaign to degrade the organization.” And as National Journal puts it, “Three years marked from mid-2014, of course, falls after Jan. 20, 2017, the date Obama leaves office. Translation: The strategy is to avoid sending ground troops for the remainder of his term. So stop asking.” Indeed, Obama campaigned in 2008 on ending the Iraq war. In 2011, having rejected the Bush strategy of establishing a status of forces agreement (SOFA) to secure our hard-won gains in Iraq and the region, Obama declared, “Everything Americans have done in Iraq, all the fighting, all the dying, the bleeding, the building and the training and the partnering, all of it has led to this moment of success. … We’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq.” And a narcissist can’t admit he’s wrong. He’s going to stubbornly stand pat, keep declaring victory, and leave the Islamic State for the next commander in chief to clean up.

Indeed, his spokesman Josh Earnest explicitly said just that: “In 2017, there will be a new commander in chief and someone else who will have a responsibility to evaluate the situation on the ground and determine what steps are necessary to continue to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL. That’s something that we’ll leave to the next president.” But what will the next 18 months bring?

Comment | Share

China Stole Data of Four Million

Now that the NSA is done scraping up the nation’s phone data, it should get on the task of protecting the U.S. from intrusions like the one that happened last December. U.S. investigators said that the personal data of four million current and former federal employees were stolen by hackers — most likely from China. While the Chinese Embassy in DC denied the allegation that the country was responsible for the intrusion, U.S. intelligence says the Chinese military is collecting a massive database on Americans, possibly as a way to find and recruit Americans as spies. “The breach is yet more evidence that Beijing sees the U.S. as an adversary and is unworried about any response aggression will elicit from the White House,” writes National Review’s Michael Auslin. “Whether it’s economic espionage, security challenges, or now hacking U.S. government websites, Beijing is testing, probing, and undermining America in any way that they can.” While the Obama administration’s Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal has some questions and drawbacks, a trade deal with the nations near China is a natural opportunity, a good first step, to diminish China’s influence in the Pacific. More…

Comment | Share

EPA Contradicts Ecofascists on Fracking

For years, environmentalists have seen hydraulic fracturing — also known as fracking — as an insidious threat. Energy companies have used the technique to reach oil and gas deposits previously out of reach of traditional extraction methods. It’s a big reason why the nation has surged forward as one of the top oil producers in the world. After spending years studying fracking’s effect on drinking water, the Environmental Protection Agency released a draft reportconcluding, “We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States. … The number of identified cases [where fracking led to contamination], however, was small compared to the number of hydraulically fractured wells.” This is a fire hose of water on the ecofascists' heated rhetoric. Last year, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, listening to the fear mongering of environmentalists, used an executive order to ban fracking in The Empire State. “EPA’s conclusion really is remarkable,” writes The Wall Street Journal. “The agency has yearned for an excuse to take over fracking regulation from the states, which do the job well. So if there was so much as a sliver of evidence that fracking was dangerous, the EPA would have found it.” More…

Comment | Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

A Tale of Two Crooks and the IRS

By Robin Smith

With her roots in Roman mythology, Lady Justice represents morality and virtue through three symbols. First, she holds a set of scales in her left hand, to weigh evidence with reason and in light of the law. Second, she wields a double-edged sword in her right hand, representing the remedy impartially provided after the facts are laid bare before her. And third, she wears a blindfold, signifying that the law must be applied with objectivity and equality.

Yet too often politicians seek to lift this blindfold, wanting to redefine justice based on the year’s election cycle or to subvert it through delays, denials and tactics that advance their agenda.

Let’s examine two cases in which the Internal Revenue Service has been used as a tool for political revenge and harassment, and how they reflect an assault on justice that should offend all.

Consider the identical approaches of Richard Nixon and Barack Obama. One a Republican and the other a Democrat, both illustrate power’s ability to corrupt to the extreme, instituting a false democracy where disagreement and disloyalty are silenced by heavy-handed tactics.

Nixon’s legacy as the 37th president is often defined by his impeachment. Posterity’s view of Obama is still being penned, but both will be remembered for their unconstitutional misuse of government and for the tenured bureaucrats who willingly complied.

In the Articles of Impeachment adopted by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee in 1974, most remember Article I, which declared Nixon “impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors” committed surrounding the break-in at the Democratic National Headquarters at the Watergate Hotel on June 17, 1972.

The charges leveled by Congress state, “Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his close subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of such illegal entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities.”

The break-in and burglary were indeed illegal and brought disgrace to the office of the president. But the obstruction, delays and attempts to conceal the covert activities all demonstrated an egregiously deliberate abuse of the power afforded the president of the United States.

Yet those same Articles of Impeachment issue a second damning charge, accusing Nixon of “using the powers of the office of President of the United States … in violation of his constitutional oath.” Nixon “repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies.”

Specifically, Nixon, “acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service” information of citizens he had on his “enemies list” who he deemed politically dangerous to his ambitions.

Today’s ongoing IRS scandal involves conservative political groups whose applications for tax-exempt status were deliberately slowed. This similar flagrant abuse of authority commenced during Obama’s first term, helping him win a second, and it features the Nixonian ingredients of willing participants who delay, obstruct and lie to protect the crimes against innocent citizens.

Last week, Mary Howard, the head Freedom of Information Act officer at the IRS, testified to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that the agency set up a secret “special project team” comprised of “hundreds of attorneys,” including the IRS Chief Counsel (one of only two politically appointed positions at the IRS by the president himself). She said her “understanding was that it started soon after the request came from Congress and other investigators asking for documents around this whole issue,” which she surmised meant around spring 2013.

Not only were law-abiding citizens targeted by an agency of the U.S. government for their political and religious views, but Obama’s henchmen implemented a plan to cover up this activity and delay information from getting into the hands of investigators. Key to this malfeasance is IRS Chief Counsel William Wilkins — appointed by Obama — whose office has been directly connected in this harassment and abuse, which includes illegal requests and access to donor information.

Ironically, this unquestionable presidential corruption — the same as the misuse of power that ended in impeachment for Nixon — now leaves Republicans in fear of the political consequences for seeking justice. Democrats simply protect themselves through vindictive attacks and accusations of racism.

There was a day when the law was equally applied regardless of partisan stripe. And history has shown that both Republicans and Democrats can pursue justice for the honor and sake of our nation and Constitution. It’s only a matter of time before future generations declare Obama and his administration as lawless, dishonorable deceivers of the American public, corrupt for the sake of ambition and political power.

Justice may be blind, but she’s not stupid.

Comment | Share

Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Mayhem Rules In St. Paul Schools
• Hawaii Dumps State ObamaCare Exchange
• NJ Woman Stabbed to Death While Waiting for Gun Permit
• NOAA Lies to Justify UN Climate Treaty
• Army Ranger Social Experiment Fails

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Tony Perkins: Air Force Pilots Policy Change on Transgenders
• John Goodman: How Much Does Paul Krugman Want to Tax LeBron James?
• Jeff Jacoby: The Case for Israel Is Rooted in More Than Security
• Stephen Moore: North Carolina Created Jobs and Surpluses Through Tax Cuts
• George Will: The Super PAC Minuet

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Tony Perkins: “‘Gay Pride Month’ is just beginning — but we can’t say the same for the administration’s pandering. … [T]he Air Force is taking its radicalism to new heights — announcing that it was easing the discharge policy on transgenders in advance of the pride event [on] Tuesday. … Going where no branch has gone before, the Air Force will let high-ranking officials decide the fate of known transgenders in their ranks. … ‘There must be a commander determination that the condition interferes with duty requirements,’ the Air Force pointed out. In other words, branch leaders can opt to keep open transgenders in their units — despite the fact that it violates military policy and U.S. law. By putting the decision in commanders' laps, the entire process becomes more politicized — where before, it was a simple medical determination. … [T]ransgenderism is at its root a serious mental disorder (one classified as such — not just by Johns Hopkins — but the military’s own Defense Department!). If these men and women are confused about their gender, what’s to keep them from being confused about their mission? With the world falling to pieces and the margin of error so slight, can we really afford these distractions? By letting people create their own realities, Washington is losing its grip on its own.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

The Gipper: “Public servants say, always with the best of intentions, ‘What greater service we could render if only we had a little more money and a little more power.’ But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector.”

Blame game: “I’m tired of funerals of babies, while [the] NRA, manufacturers, and [gun stores], run to the bank making profits from death. … At the end of the day you can argue with us [and] you can call us names, but you got to deal with God. And the blood of our children is on your hands. And you will pay for the murder of our children.” —Chicago “Reverend” and Obama buddy Michael Pfleger, who did not blame gang culture or the ones actually pulling the trigger

Village Idiots: “[The EPA] will stick with the [oil] industry till all our water is contaminated, our air polluted and climate change has made our planet unlivable. … What the EPA presented to the public [about fracking being harmless for drinking water] was PR, not science and proof of the widespread, systemic contamination of our regulatory bodies by the oil and gas industry.” —documentarian Josh Fox, who thinks the EPA isn’t ecofascist enough

Braying Jackass: “We have a democracy problem in this country. We have declining voter turnout. Secretary Clinton put forward [the] notion [that] we need a national strategy to energize voting again, to get people involved. Obviously, to address the many efforts made by Republicans to repress voter involvement. … Let’s face it, a lot of the people in the political class have tried to discourage voter involvement and a lot of incumbents prefer a very small electorate.” —New York Mayor Bill de Blasio

Friendly fire: “I think [the reason Hillary Clinton] is running so aggressively on policy is because she can’t really run on character.” —The Atlantic’s Molly Ball

“A new poll shows that 53% of Democrats think illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote. I’m guessing the other 47% think it should be a requirement.” —Fred Thompson

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

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.

THE FOUNDATION

“[O]f all the views of this law none is more important, none more legitimate, than that of rendering the people the safe, as they are the ultimate, guardians of their own liberty. … History by apprising them of the past will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views.” —Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 14, 1781

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

U.S. Economy Prepares for Leisurely Summer Months

It’s summer, and college students are putting down their laptops and picking up temporary jobs. And a few days ago, the Commerce Department revised their estimate for the nation’s GDP; from January to March, the nation’s GDP output shrank by 0.7%. These events mean the May jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics is a mixed bag. The headlining numbers look good. In May, the U.S. added 280,000 jobs and the unemployment rate has stayed essentially unchanged since January at 5.5%. The U6 unemployment rate, which also measures the people struggling through long-term unemployment and people stuck in part-time jobs, held at 10.8%. Wages rose, however, as hourly earnings rose eight cents so the average American worker is earning $24.96 an hour. With the numbers comes the greater chance that the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates in September, reports CNBC. But much of the notable job gain comes just ahead of the summer months, a possible sign that Americans have more discretionary spending, notes Market Watch. Leisure and hospitality fields added 57,000 jobs last month, and another 29,000 jobs were added to the field of arts, entertainment and recreation. This raises questions about the kind of industry on which the nation is building the economy.

Comment | Share

Most Americans Want Income Redistribution

A recent poll conducted by The New York Times and CBS News finds that not only are Americans concerned with inequality but they want the government to go after the rich and redistribute their wealth. Paul wants the government to rob Peter. “The poll found that a strong majority say that wealth should be more evenly divided and that it is a problem that should be addressed urgently,” the Times reports. “Nearly six in 10 Americans said government should do more to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, but they split sharply along partisan lines. Only one-third of Republicans supported a more active government role, versus eight in 10 of Democrats.” The report goes on to say inequality of wealth may become a prominent issue in the larger 2016 election. It’s a convenient narrative for Obama. His redistributionist policies — from an ill-conceived and ill-targeted “stimulus” to ObamaCare — have clearly stalled the nation’s economic engine, but he and his acolytes can simply continue to tell the poor and middle class that the deck is stacked against them. The Leftmedia, of course, dutifully parrots this false narrative, and the means to create wealth continue to languish.

Comment | Share

Protecting Nonprofits From SCOTUS Marriage Ruling

The Supreme Court is considering a case that would hand down the definition of marriage nationwide. As U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli told the court, the fact that some religious nonprofits will decide not to hire people due to their beliefs in same-sex marriage is “certainly going to be an issue.” In the possible fallout of the coming ruling, a Christian school could lose its nonprofit status if, say, it refused to hire an openly homosexual man. Rather than waiting for the Court’s decision, Sen. Mike Lee plans to introduce legislation that would protect religious nonprofits. “Discrimination by private parties against private parties — that’s one issue,” he said. “There is a different issue when the government is itself the discriminator. … That’s a problem and that’s what we’re trying to protect here.” The bill Lee would introduce is similar to the 2013 Marriage and Religious Freedom Act. While the courts have tended toward interpreting U.S. law broadly when it comes to religious liberty, the issue has become unnecessarily politicized in legislatures across the country. The First Amendment was drafted to ensure that diverse opinions were never driven from the public square. But that fundamental principle is at odds with the Left’s agenda. More…

Comment | Share

Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

Inevitable Hillary Calls for Universal Vote

By Lewis Morris

The media and the Democrat establishment have done a fine job trying to convince the American people that Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president of the United States. We only need to sit back and accept it like we would the next sunrise. But all isn’t well with the Clinton brand these days. In fact, the case could be made that her road to the White House is not nearly as foregone a conclusion as we’ve been told.

The lengthy list of Clinton scandals hasn’t seemed to stop the Hillary machine just yet, but the Clinton Foundation’s numerous sketchy dealings are beginning to take their toll.

The latest chapter in the Clinton Slush Fund’s ongoing improprieties includes FIFA, the world soccer body whose executives appear to have been engaging in corrupt acts for two decades. It now turns out that Qatar, the host country for the lucrative World Cup in 2022, was a regular donor to the Clinton Foundation and was a sponsor of the 2013 Clinton Global Initiative annual meeting. By that point, there were widespread allegations that the country had bribed its way into hosting the 2022 tournament. There were also accusations that unsafe working conditions in the building of its soccer stadiums for the World Cup led to the deaths of numerous immigrant workers.

Donations to the Foundation from Qatar and FIFA had been ongoing since 2006 and continued through Hillary’s term as secretary of state. In public, Hillary was calling for a stronger stance against Middle Eastern regimes and Bill was decrying the abuse of migrant workers. In private, however, Qatar was donating between $1 million and $5 million to the Clintons.

Bill’s response to all this is to shrug and move on. He told attendees at a Foundation event in March, “My theory about all this is disclose everything and then let people make their judgments.”

Theory and practice are clearly two different things with the Clintons.

Take, for instance, Hillary’s stance against the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling. She claims to want open political discourse, but she is so staunchly opposed to open spending on political activity by corporations and independent groups that she vows to support only those Supreme Court nominees who are sworn to overturn Citizens United. In other words, a litmus test. And let’s not forget that the whole case was about a movie funded by political groups critical of Hillary. She’s all for free speech, so long as she approves of the speech.

Hillary’s assault on voter laws is also motivated by how it will benefit her campaign. She called Thursday for universal and automatic voter registration, a horrible idea to eliminate the most basic requirement of having to register to vote. It’s her plan to counter voter ID laws, which she complains are a nasty invention of Republicans who are “systematically and deliberately trying to stop millions of American citizens from voting.”

Democrats have long attacked voter ID laws, which, of course, are really in place to prevent fraud. But seeing as how Democrats have a tougher time winning elections legitimately, these laws are an impediment to their grand plan. Her strategy includes identifying sympathetic judges and jurisdictions to hear cases against voter ID laws in hopes of at least suspending those laws for the 2016 presidential race.

Interestingly enough, a recent Rasmussen poll shows that 76% of Americans — and 58% of Democrats — support voter ID laws. The Leftmedia predictably labels voter ID laws racist, thereby perpetuating the BIG lie. Yet the Rasmussen report demonstrates that the American public isn’t exactly buying what they’re being sold on this one.

In fact, the American public may not be buying what they’re being sold about Hillary Clinton in general. A recent CNN poll shows that Hillary is in free fall in a number of demographic categories. Her general favorability rating is at 46% for, 50% against. Among men, she has 38% favorability, with 58% not liking her. She has a 54% favorability with women, but a 59% unfavorable opinion among whites. Young people ages 18-34 give her a 55% favorability rating, but they’re traditionally the least informed and least active voting bloc. She’s trending poorly among most other age groups, with older people liking her least. And she also loses points among people in income groups above $50,000.

Meanwhile, her tone-deaf campaign marches merrily along, trampling on a previously scheduled youth event and blood drive to make way for a campaign event at New York City’s Roosevelt Island.

While the 2016 Democrat nomination appears to be earmarked for Hillary, perhaps her inevitable presidency isn’t quite so inevitable. It’s comforting to see after all this time that larger swaths of the electorate are finally getting to know the real Hillary.

Comment | Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Campus Sex: Soon a Thing of the Past?
• ANALYSIS: Facebook Threats Face Off Against Free Speech
• True U.S. Debt Tops $210 Trillion
• Hiding Something? Mosby Blocks Gray Autopsy
• George W. Bush Polling Higher Than Obama

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Jonah Goldberg: Left Plays Fast and Loose With Issue of Gender Identity
• L. Brent Bozell & Tim Graham: Bowing to the Big Lie of Bruce Jenner
• Mona Charen: Outflanking Democrats on College Costs
• David Harsanyi: Only Democrats Are to Blame for ObamaCare Chaos
• Michael Barone: Are We In for Another High-Crime Era?

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Jonah Goldberg: “[T]here’s something gloriously perverse in celebrating someone’s courage to boldly smash sexual categories and then, in the same breath, castigating them for reinforcing gender stereotypes. If men are to be free to become women, surely they get to decide what kind of women they want to be. The first word in Vanity Fair is, after all, ‘Vanity.’ The Sports Illustrated swimsuit models seem very happy to be paid lots of money to be objectified by the male gaze. Who am I to judge? … On most days of the week, liberals are fond of claiming that Republicans are ‘anti-science’ on everything from global warming to evolution. Well, last I checked, biology hadn’t been declared a branch of the humanities. Bruce Jenner was 65 years old when he decided to be a she, but that’s not why Caitlyn can’t have a baby. Figuratively speaking, removing the spigot won’t change the rest of the plumbing. That’s not patriarchal oppression talking. That’s science. And no matter how fluid gender may or may not be, the biological category of ‘female’ isn’t going away anytime soon.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Insight: “A man does what he must — in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers — and this is the basis of all human morality.” —John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)

Upright: “African-Americans have been loyal to the Democratic Party, but there is a group of African-Americans that feel like the Democratic Party has not been loyal to us. … We have a large, disproportionate number of people who are impoverished. We have a disproportionate number of people who are incarcerated, we have a disproportionate number of people who are unemployed, the educational system has totally failed, and all of this primarily has been under Democratic regimes in our neighborhoods. So, the question for me becomes, how can our neighborhoods be doing so awful and so bad when we’re so loyal to this party who is in power? It’s a matter of them taking complete advantage of our vote.” —Chicago pastor Corey Brooks

Village Idiots: “The recent publicity about mistreatment of black people in the judicial and police realm has been a reminder that the dreams of the civil rights movement have not been realized. Many Americans still have racist tendencies or feelings of superiority to people of color.” —Jimmy Carter

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

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.

THE FOUNDATION

“But the mild voice of reason, pleading the cause of an enlarged and permanent interest, is but too often drowned, before public bodies as well as individuals, by the clamors of an impatient avidity for immediate and immoderate gain.” —James Madison, Federalist No. 42, 1788

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Rick Perry Asks for a Second Look

Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry announced his second presidential bid today. Perry’s claim to fame is simple: jobs. Between 2007 and 2013, Texas created 1.5 million jobs while the rest of the nation lost 400,000. (What was that about Barack Obama’s recovery?) In 2014, Texas created a record 457,900 jobs. During his entire tenure, the Lone Star State was responsible for more than a third of America’s jobs. Even so — and with a current downturn in the oil industry slowing Texas' growth — Perry has made a concerted effort to expand his appeal beyond the economy. His generally successful 14-year tenure as governor of a large state should push him toward the top of the field, but he’ll have to overcome two things: A phony indictment that amounts to charges of governing while Republican, and first impressions from the 2012 campaign. The latter could be harder, as his infamous “oops” moment in one of the last cycle’s debates may have defined him too well. Naturally, he’s trying to redeem himself from a bumbling 2012 run, which he blames on ill preparation and the aftereffects of major back surgery. One person who thinks he can do it is Matt Rhoades, Mitt Romney’s campaign manager. “Gov. Perry has worked hard and done the right things to reposition himself for a run in 2016,” Rhoades said. “I believe his candidacy will have a major impact on the primary and voters will give him a second chance.” America is all about second chances, right?

Comment | Share

Texas Campus Carry Ain’t Radical

In yet another advancement for the Second Amendment, the Texas legislature passed a bill May 30 allowing concealed handgun carry on the state’s college and university campuses. The bill has compromises, though, as it allows state schools to create supposed gun-free zones, and it gives private schools the option of forbidding guns on their campuses — like most other private businesses have the right to do. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said he would sign the bill, making Texas one of 10 states that allow firearms on college campuses. But by the way some people are talking, you’d think the Lone Star State proposed some radical idea. Baylor University professor Lynn W. Tatum said, “The perception in academia will be that Texas is a free-fire zone with yokels in the classrooms packing heat.” The underlying assumption is that college students are not mature enough to strap on a gun every morning. It’s part of the condescending attitude that although they are legal adults, old enough to vote and be drafted into the military (where they carry guns, by the way), college students are still not recognized as fully adult. Besides, with all the focus on campus rape, Texas did well to remember that an armed society is a polite society.

Comment | Share

The Farce Is Strong With This One

It’s not just Bruce Jenner the culture wants to validate. The Guardian reports on a girl who wanted to dress up as Darth Vader for her eighth birthday, but “she was devastated to see that the outfit was listed as a ‘boys’ costume.‘” Instead of leaving it alone, the mom and daughter wrote Disney to complain. A week later, they got a reply: “The description for this costume has now been amended as we understand that all our little Jedis enjoy Star Wars.” In fact, all the costumes on the site — from Disney Princess dresses to Iron Man suits — had been modified to read “for kids” instead of boys or girls. The Guardian’s Laura Bates opines, “We can take hope from this and the string of other incidents where companies have listened to young people’s concerns about gender stereotyping.” Yeah, that’s called biology. We all know that sometimes children like to dress up as whatever their favorite character may be, regardless of gender, but that’s all in good fun. This nonsense only solidifies possible gender confusion. And the episode calls to mind one of Darth Vader’s more famous lines: “I am your father.” We suppose Luke only reacted so negatively to the gender stereotyping.

Comment | Share

Don’t Miss Alexander’s Column

Read Baltimore: A Democrat Model of 'American Exceptionalism’, on a look at the decay and corruption of American urban centers under Democrat “leadership.”

If you’d like to receive Alexander’s Column by email, update your subscription here.

Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

Obama’s Perplexing Iran Dealings

By Allyne Caan

Less than one month before the deadline to reach a final nuclear deal with Iran, things are going swimmingly. Or not.

Despite Barack Obama’s announcement that Iran’s nuclear program has been “frozen” during the past 18 months of negotiations, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in its latest report that Iran’s stockpile of nuclear fuel has actually grown by about 20% during that time. And according to the Center for Security Policy’s Fred Fleitz, were Iran to enrich this uranium to weapons grade, it would be enough to make at least nine nuclear weapons. How comforting.

The New York Times reported that two potential reasons for the growth are “technical” difficulties preventing Iran from converting some of the uranium into fuel rods for reactors and attempts to gain an “edge” in the event negotiations fail. According to Fleitz, though, it’s what the Times didn’treport that is more troublesome: namely, “serious concerns … that Tehran may be trying to get the international community to allow it to have more centrifuges in a final nuclear agreement by manipulating the output of centrifuges it is currently operating to make them appear less efficient.”

Responding to the Times article, State Department spokesperson Marie Harf said the administration was “quite frankly perplexed.” Yes, you read that right. Perplexed. For an administration that has a habit of learning about everything from the “same news reports” that inform the rest of America, this is hardly surprising. Still, “perplexed” is not the adjective most Americans want to hear from the commander in chief’s subordinates when it comes to Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. But according to Harf, it’s “absurd” to think the State Department didn’t know about the increase in Iran’s nuclear stockpiles because those numbers go up and down, and, as long as they end up at the right spot, we’re ok. So although reports of the increase are true, they’re “totally inaccurate” Tsk. Tsk. Whatever were we thinking?

Not to worry, though. There is a plan. Six world powers — the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China — have supposedly figured out a way to re-impose sanctions on Iran if the state sponsor of terrorism violates the terms of any agreement, which would be shocking, really, given that Iran never breaks its promises. As Reuters reports, any suspected breaches of the agreement would be considered by these super six, as well as — wait for it — Iran, and the group would come up with a non-binding opinion. Binding or not, does anyone really believe Russia and China would call out their pal Iran on violations? It’s the proverbial fox guarding the henhouse.

So, as the days wind down to the June 30 deadline, Iran has amassed fissile material in its nuclear stockpile, China and Russia are set to help play police, and the administration is “perplexed.”

What could top this except Obama’s declaration that a military option is off the table? “I can, I think, demonstrate, not based on any hope, but on facts and evidence and analysis, that the best way to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon is a verifiable tough agreement,” Obama said. “A military solution will not fix it. Even if the United States participates, it would temporarily slow down an Iranian nuclear program but it will not eliminate it.”

Meanwhile, back in 2013 he had pledged, “I’ve said before and I will repeat that we take no options off the table, including military options, in terms of making sure that we do not have nuclear weapons in Iran that would destabilize the region and potentially threaten the United States of America.” Apparently, sidling up to Iran has weakened Obama’s rhetorical resolve.

Few actually want to invade Iran, of course, but there’s nothing like exchanging “speak softly and carry a big stick” for “here, take my stick, fill it with weapons-grade uranium and launch it back at me while I promise to do nothing but talk loudly.”

With Iran’s sights set on Israel and four Americans hostages still held in Iranian prisons, Obama’s JV leadership is putting America and the world at risk.

Comment | Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• Democrats Introduce Bill to Force Smart Gun Technology
• The Deck Is Stacked Against the Public’s Right to Know
• It’s Not Just America Suffering Through a Bad Economy
• Alabama Shows Why the Marriage Debate Won’t End With SCOTUS

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Victor Davis Hanson: Crossing the Global Border
• Jeff Jacoby: Freedom for Iran’s Hostages Should Trump Any Nuclear Deal
• R. Emmett Tyrrell: The Future of Identity Politics

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Victor Davis Hanson: “Academics in the West may preach past U.S. sins to impressionable 18-year-old students. But refugees from Latin America assume that once they cross the border into the U.S., they will have freedoms, legal protections, compassionate social services — and respect — of the sort that is impossible at home. Millions have decided that it is far better to be immigrants of illegal status in America than native-born citizens inside Mexico. What, then, explains the magnetic attraction of the often-criticized West? Add up the right to free expression, human rights, religious tolerance, constitutional government, an independent judiciary, separation of church and state, free-market economics and the protection of private property — and everyday life becomes simply far better. There is one final irony. The richer, freer and more technologically pampering that life becomes for self-critical native Westerners, the whinier they become — as if their West is not good because it is not perfect.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

“Good government is the most dangerous government, because it deprives people of the need to look after themselves.” —Gandhi (1869-1948)

Demo-gogues: “[Benjamin Netanyahu’s peace proposal] has so many caveats, so many conditions, that it is not realistic to think that those conditions would be met any time in the near future. And so the danger here is that Israel as a whole loses credibility. Already, the international community does not believe that Israel is serious about a two-state solution.” —Barack Obama (With friends like these…)

Village Idiots: “In the last year, the administration processed 647,000 FOIA requests that we received from the public. I would note that that is 647,000 more FOIA requests than were processed by the United States Congress. Those who are genuinely interested in advocating for transparency in government should advocate for Congress being subject to those transparency measures.” —Obama spokesman Josh Earnest, defending the “Most Transparent Administration in History™” from its opaque record

Non Compos Mentis: “[I]f the Supreme Court were to throw the health care system in this country into utter chaos, there would be no easy solution for solving that problem because it would likely require an act of Congress in order to address that situation.” —Josh Earnest (It would have been nice if this administration had thought twice about throwing the system into chaos to begin with.)

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

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.