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.

THE FOUNDATION

“In disquisitions of every kind there are certain primary truths, or first principles, upon which all subsequent reasoning must depend.” —Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 31, 1788

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Congress Cuts the Line on NSA Data Collection

The Senate passed the USA Freedom Act Tuesday without amendment, and Barack Obama signed it, curbing the NSA’s mass collection of every American’s phone records. While it’s a victory for privacy advocates, work remains in ensuring that the U.S. government respects the Fourth Amendment. Instead of scraping up records on every call in the U.S., the act dictates that private phone companies will keep the records and the government can request the information. The Senate’s 67-32 vote split the Republican Party between its leadership and the more libertarian-leaning lawmakers. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell complained, “There are a number of us who feel very strongly that this is a significant weakening of the tools that were put in place in the wake of 9/11 to protect the country.” But Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the author of the Patriot Act, said some of those “tools” (i.e., mass data collection) were never meant to be given. Notably, Sen. Rand Paul, perhaps the most prominent advocate for NSA reform, voted against the USA Freedom Act, saying it didn’t go far enough. With Sen. Ron Wyden, Paul proposed nine amendments that would have required the government to offer greater justification before it spied on a citizen. For over a decade, the country has been in a constant state of war, allowing an erosion of Fourth Amendment rights because it feared a “lone-wolf terrorist” attack or another 9/11. But a state of fear is not a mark of a free people.

Comment | Share

The TSA Is Groping for Relevancy

In a recent internal investigation into the TSA’s airport screening process, “red teams” working for the Department of Homeland Security were able to sneak bombs and other weapons through the TSA’s line 95% of the time. In other words, of the 70 times DHS tested the system, the TSA caught only three attempts. For an agency with “security” as its middle name, that’s a dismal and dangerous track record. In a statement, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson tried to downplay the findings. “The numbers in these reports never look good out of context,” he said, “but they are a critical element in the continual evolution of our aviation security. … The Inspector General’s preliminary test results are classified, and it is not appropriate or prudent to publicly describe these results.” But the findings were serious enough for Johnson to order a special briefing on the report. Then the axe fell swiftly, as the acting head of the TSA was reassigned Monday. Acting Deputy Director Mark Hatfield Jr. will take over. As Reason’s J.D. Tuccille notes, the vulnerabilities in TSA’s security net have been “revealed, complained about, and baked in for years.” The Heritage Foundation’s David Inserra argues that perhaps it’s time for the TSA to step aside and let private security firms do the job cheaper, friendlier and better. Clearly, bureaucrats groping grandma didn’t make us more secure.

Comment | Share

Warren Won’t Run, Nobody Hardest Hit

Say it ain’t so! Time magazine reports on the demise of the movement to draft Elizabeth Warren to run for president: “Six months after launching ‘Run Warren Run,’ a quixotic campaign to draft Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren into the 2016 presidential race, the two progressive organizations behind it will call it quits and focus more broadly on a populist agenda in the 2016 presidential race, according to a spokesman.” Warren has long been the great “Native American” hope for leftists who can’t stomach Hillary Clinton, but she’s been pretty consistent in saying she won’t run. Ironically, Warren is more powerful in the Senate and among Democrats in general because of her decision not to run. Had she challenged Hillary and failed, she would’ve quickly been relegated to backbencher status. But now she can benefit from the unquenched thirst of her acolytes. And she didn’t even have to build that.

Comment | Share

Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

Et Tu, Bruce?

By Nate Jackson

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it.’” This isn’t a treatise on faith, but, for Christians, those words are where any discussions of gender and marriage begin. For those who don’t share our faith, we’d simply point to the Declaration of Independence, in which the Founders acknowledged that Liberty comes from our Creator. And family is the third pillar of Liberty.

But Bruce Jenner didn’t start with objective truth. He started with Bruce Jenner.

Before the aptly named Vanity Fair’s upcoming cover story on the former Olympic Decathlon champion’s transition from Bruce to Caitlyn, Jenner described his view of how God created him: “God’s looking down, making little Bruce. … He says, ‘Okay, what are we gonna do with this one? Make him a smart kid, very determined.’ … And then when he’s just finishing he says, ‘Let’s wait a second.’ God looks down and chuckles a little bit and says, ‘Hey, let’s give him the soul of a female.’”

Jenner insists he’s only coming to terms with who God really made him to be: “If I was lying on my deathbed and I had kept this secret and never ever did anything about it, I would be lying there saying, ‘You just blew your entire life. You never dealt with yourself,’ and I don’t want that to happen.”

God’s Word actually has a lot to say about the subject, and the voices in Bruce’s head are completely at odds with all of it.

So how does 21st century American pop culture respond to his very public and self-congratulatory — yet still physically incomplete — sexual transition?

Mostly with fawning accolades. Media stories erupted everywhere, giving deference to Bruce’s chosen gender instead of his God-given biological one. His Wikipedia entry has been altered to reflect that “she” won Olympic medals — 40 years before this transition. ESPN will award him the Arthur Ashe Courage Award at the July ESPYs. Even Barack Obama found time between rounds of golf to tweet, “It takes courage to share your story.” Jenner quickly set a Twitter record for reaching one million followers — beating Obama’s record.

And, hey, he’s a Republican!

In short, our world includes an ever-increasing population of broken people who celebrate brokenness, while attacking the broken people (like us) who say there’s a better way and a higher truth.

Which prompts the question: What’s courageous about basking in the glory of the media spotlight?

Based on Jenner’s revelations, he is clearly a troubled soul. Compassion, prayer and treatment are appropriate responses. But affirmation? Few things could be less compassionate or helpful.

The comparisons to other mental illnesses and destructive behaviors are numerous and illustrative, albeit imprecise.

RedState’s Erick Erickson focused on behavior, arguing, “[I]f an alcoholic told you that his authentic self was to drink, you would not encourage that. If a person told you his authentic self was to be attracted to small boys, you would not encourage that. If a person told you that his authentic self was to mutilate his body, you would not encourage that.”

Columnist Ben Shapiro recounted a personal story regarding the mental illness aspect, writing, “My grandfather was deeply mentally ill. He spent nearly a year in a psychiatric institution after being diagnosed with bipolar disorder; he heard the radio talking to him. He became suicidal. He spent years battling the condition, until he was prescribed lithium. For the next several decades, the medication brought his mental illness under control. Nothing would have been crueler to my grandfather than had society told him that his delusions were correct — that the radio was, in fact, talking to him; that the curtains were indeed threatening him; that he was normal, and that it was the stereotypes of the world inducing his paranoia. … It’s cruel to allow a mentally ill person to exploit himself in public, but the political left is happy to do so in order to perpetuate the pseudo-scientific nonsense that a man can magically turn into a woman.”

Also, Canada’s National Post had a story this week about people who become disabled by choice, cutting off limbs they don’t want. These supposed “transabled” people are mentally ill.

These comparisons illustrate a painful truth: Leftists don’t care about Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner; they care about an agenda to remake our culture without good or bad, right or wrong, up or down — and most certainly without God. To them, Jenner is merely a tool who normalizes aberration. Leftists are tired of feeling guilty, so, instead of turning to their Creator, they glory in their brokenness. Dysfunction becomes virtue.

Meanwhile, the Left has duped more than half the American public into thinking homosexuals make up a far bigger part of the population than is true. Therefore, Americans are left to conclude as they checkout at the supermarket next to all those tabloids that Jenner is perfectly normal.

Ironically, while the culture celebrates Jenner’s transition, conversion therapy (which can actually help homosexuals who want to go straight) is illegal in some states. Ponder that one.

Next comes more of the inevitable punishment for those who aren’t sufficiently “tolerant.” Consider Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, the cofounder and CEO of Mozilla (which develops the Firefox web browser), who was forced to resign as CEO of the company he founded for contributing to a lawful ballot initiative that opposed same-sex marriage. Or think of the Christian bakers who were forced to bake the cake for same-sex weddings.

Indeed, The Washington Times reports, “The Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued guidelines Monday suggesting that employers allow transgender employees access to the restroom that corresponds to their gender identity.” Just wait until this is no longer a suggestion.

Jenner’s story is about far more than celebration and tolerance. It’s about coerced compliance and mandated approval. Jenner is merely a pawn in the Left’s ongoing “coexist” game.

In conclusion, let’s consider another passage of Scripture: “God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.” We shouldn’t worship Jenner. We should pray for him, for he needs his Creator’s healing redemption.

Comment | Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Beware Revising American History Education
• Iran’s Latest Violation Is Hardly Surprising
• CT Governor Eroding Home Rule Over Rail Line
• SCOTUS Rules in Favor of Hijab-Wearing Job Applicant

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Ben Shapiro: Left Exploits Mental Illness to Push PC Agenda
• Michelle Malkin: The College Board’s Sabotage of American History
• Tony Perkins: On the Magistrate and Narrow…
• John Stossel: Socialist ‘Justice’
• Walter Williams: Intellectual Dishonesty
• Joe Bastardi: Disaster Du Jour, Part II

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Tony Perkins: “When the courts struck down the Tar Heels' 2012 marriage amendment, North Carolina’s Administrative Office of the Court decided to chuck the First Amendment along with it, issuing a decree that officials would either perform same-sex ‘marriages’ or clean out their offices. … [Gov.] Pat McCrory ® vetoed a perfectly reasonable opt-out for the state’s officials. Under the measure passed by the House and Senate, magistrates could exempt themselves from same-sex ‘weddings’ if they agreed to recuse themselves from all weddings for at least six months. If a judge declined to officiate, another one would be brought in to perform the service — meaning that no harm would be done to the state or the couples by this law. … Unfortunately for America, the Left isn’t satisfied with compromise, even genuinely sensible ones like North Carolina’s. Their goal is to tyrannize and terrorize until the country fully submits. As a result, 2.3% of the population gets 100% of the protection. Once again, liberals want ‘tolerance’ but refuse to give it. It’s like driving around with a ‘coexist’ bumper sticker while you run over people with different beliefs.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Upright, Part I: “I wonder how one goes about determining whether a person is privileged. White privilege can’t be based on median income. Why? It turns out that Asian-American households had the highest median income ($68,636) in 2012. Median income for white households was $57,000. Maybe our academic elite should condemn Asian privilege instead of white privilege. But there’s another problem. My income puts me in America’s top 5 percent. If those who condemn white privilege could not see my dark brown skin color, they would also condemn me for white privilege. The bottom line to this campus nonsense is that ‘privilege’ has become the new word for ‘personal achievement.’” —Walter Williams

Upright, Part II: “A ‘liberal paradise’ would be a place where everybody has guaranteed employment, free comprehensive health care, free education, free food, free housing, free clothing, free utilities and only law enforcement personnel have guns. And, believe it or not, such a liberal utopia does indeed exist. It’s called prison.” —Maricopa County AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio

The BIG Lie: “One of my core principles is that I will never engage in politics in which I’m trying to divide people.” —Barack Obama

Advice from a narcissist: “[W]hen I look at other political careers that I admire, I think the most important thing is to have a sense of principle and why you’re in public service. I think sometimes people want to be in public service just because they like seeing their name up in lights; they like being important. And that’s a bad reason to go into politics.” —Barack Obama

Demo-gogues: “Fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution. … The parallels between what the tobacco industry did and what the fossil fuel industry is doing now are striking.” —Sheldon Whitehouse

And last… “What is it about trains that makes them objects of endless fascination to small children and Democrats?” —Frank Fleming

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

“It should be your care, therefore, and mine, to elevate the minds of our children and exalt their courage; to accelerate and animate their industry and activity; to excite in them an habitual contempt of meanness, abhorrence of injustice and inhumanity, and an ambition to excel in every capacity, faculty, and virtue. If we suffer their minds to grovel and creep in infancy, they will grovel all their lives.” —John Adams, Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, 1756

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Actor Supports Guns in Schools, Hollywood Goes Hysterical

It takes courage to come out conservative in Hollywood. And actor Vince Vaughn, known for his roles in “assembly-line comedies,” has stepped into the political crosshairs. “You think the politicians that run my country and your country don’t have guns in the schools their kids go to? They do,” Vaughn told UK-based Sky News. “And we should be allowed the same rights. Banning guns is like banning forks in an attempt to stop making people fat. Taking away guns, taking away drugs, the booze, it won’t rid the world of criminality. … In all of our schools it is illegal to have guns on campus, so again and again these guys go and shoot up these … schools because they know there are no guns there. They are monsters killing six-year-olds.” Hollywood and UK media quickly labeled Vaughn an idiot. But Charles C. W. Cooke notes that Vaughn’s thinking is correct, if a bit underdeveloped, as Vaughn never specifies how he envisions guns in schools. But Vaughn gets the concept of self-defense: “It’s well known that the greatest defense against an intruder is the sound of a gun hammer being pulled back.” Given that Hollywood hypocrites make so much money from gratuitous violence, it’s refreshing to hear an actor support the Second Amendment.

Comment | Share

May Concludes With 43 Homicides in Baltimore

In recent years, Chicago has been the focal point of attention regarding violence among minorities in large cities, but Baltimore has rocketed up the chain after a record-setting number of homicides in May. Criminal activity jumped following the death of Freddie Gray, and the spree continued on Sunday with three additional felonious deaths. The month ended with a staggering 43 murders, the most of any May and “the deadliest month since the early 1970s, when 44 people were killed in December 1971 and 45 people in August 1972,” USA Today reported. Unsurprisingly, the upward swing in homicides is commensurate with a precipitous drop in the number of suspects being apprehended (32% by one estimate). The city has registered 116 homicides year-to-date. And while that may not sound impressive compared to areas like Chicago, on a per-capita-basis Baltimore in its current climate is actually far more dangerous. As Daily Caller contributor Derek Hunter writes, “The 48 murders in Chicago [in May] are disturbing, but the city has a population of 2.7 million people. In the month of May, there was one murder for every 56,250 Chicagoans. Meanwhile in Baltimore, a city with a population of only 622,000, their 43 murders puts them at a rate of one murder for every 14,465 residents.” In other words, “Residents of Baltimore were 3.8 times more likely to be murdered than residents of Chicago in the month of May,” Hunter concludes. Most alarmingly, imagine the homicide figures in a city like Chicago if it were to experience a Freddie Gray-type incident.

Comment | Share

About MSU’s Study on ‘Far Right’ Groups

This is the key question: How do the National Institute of Justice and Michigan State University define “far right” groups? Through the NIJ, the Department of Justice awarded a $585,719 grantto MSU to study how “extremist groups use web forums, social media, and technology to enculturate and radicalize individuals to violence.” It’s a question worth studying, as the U.S. government currently worries about supposed “lone-wolf” terrorism. While the study aims to analyze extremists' social networks to “identify the hidden networks of individuals who engage in extremist movements based on geographic location and ideological similarities” (which is a good descriptor of Jihadistan), the study will look at three jihadist forums — but four from the “far Right.” There are questions about what the Obama administration considers to be dangerous right-wing groups. MSU could be studying the sovereign citizen movement. But in 2009, Mark Alexander warned that Obama’s government was warily eyeing the Tea Party movement. In that same year, the Department of Homeland Security thought veterans returning from combat could be dangerous. If MSU wants to remain objective, it should also study the communications of far-Left groups. But then again is objectivity the point? More…

Comment | Share

Don’t Miss Patriot Humor

Check out Kerry’s Broken Leg.

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

Share

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS

EPA Proposes More Corn for Fuel, Not Food

By Paul Albaugh

Compared to this time last year, Americans are paying much less at the gas pump. Enjoy it while you can, though, because gas prices are about to rise. The expected price increase isn’t due to chaos in the Middle East or a shortage of fossil fuels. No, it’s due to the Environmental Protection Agency and its newly released proposal to increase ethanol production. By the way, do you like your food bill? Get ready, because that’s about to increase too.

The EPA’s proposed three-year ethanol mandate will increase the amount of biofuel mixed into the gasoline supply. This may sound great to supporters of so-called renewable energy, but it’s actually doubling down on a terrible idea.

Why? Well, there are several problems with requiring more ethanol in America’s fuel.

First, several gasoline refiners have warned that the proposal “moves more quickly than the market can support.” In 2007, when Congress expanded the Renewable Fuel Standard, only half of all gasoline contained 10% ethanol. Right now, nearly all of the gasoline produced and used in the U.S. contains 10% ethanol. However, the decrease in demand for gasoline due to more fuel-efficient vehicles means a corresponding decrease in demand for ethanol. The EPA would rather ignore reality and aims to increase ethanol production anyway.

According to The Hill, the EPA “set its overdue 2014 requirements at the actual level of production — 15.93 billion gallons of biofuel — increasing the total to 16.3 billion gallons this year and 17.4 billion gallons in 2016. The statutory requirement for 2016 is 22.25 billion gallons.” Under the EPA’s new proposal, about 4.7 billion gallons of renewable fuel are expected to come from advanced forms of biofuel such as cellulosic ethanol derived from plant mass material, despite its slower-than-expected development. The remainder will be corn-based ethanol, which brings us to problem number two: increased food costs.

The mandate drives up food prices because corn is a staple food and is also used by livestock for feed. Has anyone noticed the skyrocketing price of beef over the last several years? Furthermore, if more corn is used for ethanol, then there is less food for people in the world who are starving. Quite the double standard for progressives and environmentalists who rage about the human population dying from climate change. No doubt hungry people would love to have some corn to eat, but, nah, let’s burn it for fuel so we can save mankind in the future.

Last year, Mark Alexander noted some staggering statistics that are worth repeating: More than 90% of our nation’s corn crop went toward feeding people and livestock in the year 2000, with less than 5% of the crop going toward ethanol. In 2013, however, a whopping 40% went toward ethanol. To illustrate this grossly inefficient use of our natural resources, the amount of grain required to fill a 25-gallon automotive fuel tank with ethanol is enough grain to feed one person for an entire year.

The third problem with the EPA proposal is that ethanol itself is more costly for drivers and consumers. Despite auto engines being built to better handle ethanol’s corrosive effects, ethanol gasoline causes significant and costly mechanical problems for small boat engines and yard equipment. But auto engines are about to be impacted in the near future, too. How so? It turns out that Barack Obama is set to pledge $100 million to expand the use of ethanol blender pumps to allow drivers to mix more ethanol into their gasoline. Sure, it may work for new flex fuel vehicles, but not so well for older cars. Some people won’t discover that until it’s too late.

This is a pathetic pledge and ultimately pathetic policy, funded by the American taxpayer. People will have to pay a little more in taxes to pay for these pumps, pay a little more for the ethanol that comes out of the pumps and then pay more to fix what the ethanol destroys.

The final problem with the EPA’s proposal — and perhaps one of the primary reasons for it — is that there are subsidy recipients who stand to profit handsomely. In other words, the government is picking winners. While we’re not opposed to people and businesses making profits, we are adamantly opposed to the central planners who by regulations and fiats force products into the market. Some farmers and ecofascists stand to benefit, but when free market principles are cast aside America loses.

In the coming months, we’ll be watching to see where the Republican presidential candidates stand on this issue. So far, most of them are singing praises of the ethanol mandate. It seems they’re more concerned about getting votes in Iowa and bowing to King Corn than they are for standing for free market principles. Note to Republican presidential candidates: Try not to get on board with the ethanol mandate, because it’s ultimately part of Obama’s climate change agenda.

Comment | Share

TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US

• ANALYSIS: Paul and Graham Both Have Something to Learn
• Meme: Obama’s Version of ‘American Exceptionalism’
• Humor: Hush Money

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

• Ed Feulner: Minimum Wage, Maximum Hypocrisy
• Dennis Prager: Differences Between Left and Right, Part II
• Arnold Ahlert: Demoralizing Police Forces Is Insane
• David Limbaugh: Leftist Censors Strike Again
• Thomas Sowell: Paying the Price
• Michael Barone: Is It Time for Civil Disobedience of Kludgeocratic Bureaucracy?

For more, visit Right Opinion.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Dennis Prager: “[C]onservatives believe that good is achieved far more gradually than liberals do. The process of making a better world is largely a one-by-one-by-one effort. And it must be redone in every single generation. The noblest generation ever born still has to teach its children how to battle their natures. If it doesn’t, even the best society will begin to rapidly devolve, which is exactly what conservatives believe has been happening to America since the end of World War II. The Left does not focus on individual character development. Rather, it has always and everywhere focused on social revolution. … The Founders all understood that the transformation that every generation must work on is the moral transformation of each citizen. Thus, character development was at the core of both childrearing and of young people’s education at school. … [F]reedom requires self-control. Otherwise, external controls — which means an ever more powerful government — would have to be imposed. The more that Leftist ideas influence society the less character education there is. … [T]he age-old wisdom embraced by conservatives remains as true as ever: Before you fix society, you must first fix yourself.”

Comment | Share

SHORT CUTS

Insight: “Another flaw in the human character is that everybody wants to build
and nobody wants to do maintenance.” —author Kurt Vonnegut Jr. (1922-2007)

Non Compos Mentis, Part I: “[T]he best way to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon is a verifiable, tough agreement. 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.” —Barack Obama, taking options off the table when he promised not to do so

Non Compos Mentis, Part II: “People don’t remember, but when I came into office, the Untied States in world opinion ranked below China and just barley above Russia, and today once again, the Untied States is the most respected country on earth.” —Barack Obama

Non Compos Mentis, Part III: “As I always point out, democracy is hard. I think many of the things said about me are terribly unfair. But the reason American democracy has survived so long is because people, even if they are wrong, have the right to say what they think.” —Barack Obama

Village Idiots: “We must find a formula which is valuable for everybody and valuable for the U.S. without going to the Congress.” —French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius on reaching a climate accord in Paris later this year

Woman of the people: “Go to the end of the line.” —Hillary Clinton to supporters wanting a photograph with her

And last… “Hillary Clinton’s campaign revealed she’ll announce for president at a rally next week in New York. She’ll kick off the day by giving an interview to George Stephanopoulos of ABC News. The announcement was made by Hillary Clinton’s press spokesman, George Stephanopoulos of ABC News.” —Argus Hamilton

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.